* '*
HC
<< >
'.- '.. «
THE PESTICIDE ACTIVE
PRODUCTION NESHM1 -
63, SUBPART MMM)
-------
DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT
Implementation Document for the
Pesticide Active Ingredient Production
NESHAP
(40 CFR 63, Subpart MMM)
Prepared for:
Information Transfer and Program Integration Division (ITPID)
Program Implementation and Review Group (PIRG)
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared by:
Midwest Research Institute
5520 Dillard Road
Suite 100
Gary, North Carolina 27511-9232
October 2000 (Draft)
U.S. Environmental Protection
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
12th
-------
What is the legal status of this guide?
The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) and the Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assistance (OECA) of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have reviewed this
document and approved it for publication.
When using this document, remember that it isn't legally binding and doesn't replace the final rule -
"National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production"
(published in the Federal Register, 6/23/99,64 FR 33550) or any State, local or tribal rules that may
apply to your facility.
This document isn't intended, nor can you rely on it, to create any rights enforceable by any party in
litigation with the United States. The EPA may change this document at any time without public notice.
This document includes only requirements from the final rule published in the Federal Register 6/23/99,
64 FR 33550.
-------
Thank You
This draft document was prepared by a joint partnership among the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA, or we), State and local agencies for air pollution control, trade associations, and
organizations who produce pesticide active ingredients. At the time of publication, the
development team had the following members:
Alfred Azevedo, WV Office of Air Quality
Lalit Banker, EPA, OAQPS, ESD
John A. Dege, DuPont Environmental Center for Excellence
Richard A. DiMenna, Rohm and Haas Company
Mary E. Rice, EPA, OAQPS, ITPID
Dianne J. Walker, EPA, PTAB, Region m
Ingrid Ward, EPA, OAQPS, ITPID
We thank these people for their participation. Their technical insights, experiences, and
suggestions were essential to this guide's development.
11
I5RAR'
-------
Table of Contents
Page
What is the legal status of this guide? i
List of Figures vi
List of Tables vi
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1
Why should I use this implementation document? 1
Is there anything I should know before using this document? 1
How do I get copies of this document? 1
We want your feedback 2
Survey on the Implementation Document for the Pesticide Active Ingredient Production
NESHAP 3
Chapter 2 - What this Pesticide Active Ingredient rule covers - An Overview 5
Why was this Pesticide Active Ingredient (PAI) rule written? 5
How do I know if I'm subject to this rule? 5
What is an affected source? 6
When do I need to comply? 7
What pesticide active ingredients are subject to the rule? 11
How does "primary use" differ from "primary product"? 11
How do I determine the primary use of a product? 11
What is a pesticide active ingredient (PAI) process unit? 12
What is an integral intermediate? 13
How is "nondedicated" equipment regulated? 14
How do I know if a storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit? 15
What requirements apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction? 15
What provisions in this rule overlap provisions in other rules? 16
What is exempt from the rule? 17
Chapter 3 - Complying with requirements for process vents 18
What process vents are covered? 18
What process vents are exempt? 18
What compliance options do I have for my Group 1 process vents? 19
How do I show initial compliance with the process vent requirements? 25
What monitoring must I do for my process vents? 28
What parameters must I monitor? 28
How do I set monitoring parameter limits? 33
How may I average my monitoring parameter values? 34
ill
-------
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Page
What records must I keep for my process vents? 34
What reports must I submit for my process vents? 34
Checklists for Process Vent Inspections 35
Chapter 4 - Complying with requirements for storage vessels 56
What storage vessels are covered? 56
What storage vessels are exempt? 56
What is a "Group 1" storage vessel? 57
How do I know if a storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit? 57
What compliance options do I have for my storage vessels? 58
How do I show initial compliance with the storage vessel requirements? 59
How do I comply when my control device needs repairs [options 4 (A, B, C, and E)]? .... 65
What monitoring must I do for my storage vessels? 65
What records must I keep for my storage vessels? 71
What reports must I submit for my storage vessels? 71
Checklists for Inspection of Storage Vessels 73
Chapter 5 - Complying with requirements for wastewater systems 92
' What wastewater streams are covered? 92
What waste management units are covered? 93
What wastewater streams are exempt? 93
What compliance options do I have for my treatment processes? 96
How do I show initial compliance with the wastewater system requirements? 97
What monitoring must I do for my wastewater systems? 97
What records must I keep for my wastewater systems? 98
What reports must I submit for my wastewater systems? 98
Checklists for Wastewater System Inspections 99
Chapter 6 - Complying with requirements for equipment leaks 114
What equipment leaks are covered? 114
How do I identify equipment subject to the equipment leak provisions? 114
What equipment is exempt? 115
What compliance options do I have for my equipment leaks? 115
How do I implement a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program under Option 1? 116
What are the LDAR requirements for Pumps in Light Liquid Service and Agitators in
Gas/Vapor Service and Light Liquid Service (Option 1)? 120
What are the LDAR requirements for open-ended valves or lines (Option 1)? 122
What LDAR requirements apply to valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service
(Option 1)? 123
What LDAR requirements apply for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service
(Option 1)? 127
What LDAR requirements apply for sampling connection systems? 128
iv
-------
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Page
What LDAR requirements apply for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators
in heavy liquid service; instrumentation systems: and pressure relief devices
in liquid service? 128
What LDAR requirements apply for connectors in gas/vapor or light liquid service
(Option 1)? 129
What is required for an alternative standard (Option 3)? 134
What are my leak repair requirements? 137
What if equipment is unsafe or difficult to monitor? 139
What records must I keep for my equipment leaks? 140
What reports must I submit? 146
Checklists for Equipment Leak Inspections 147
Chapter 7 - Calculations and procedures 184
Chapter currently not available
Chapter 8 - Recordkeeping and Reporting 186
Chapter not complete
What records must I keep? 186
. What do I have to report and when? 186
How can I change the date my reports are due? 186
Where do I send my reports? 186
Chapter 9 - Other requirements and information 195
Who administers this regulation? 195
Do I need a title V permit? 195
How do I change my permit to include this rule? 196
What portions of the General Provisions apply? 196
Chapter 10 - Getting additional help 197
Whom can I ask for help? 197
Can I get more information on the Web? 198
Is there a list of commonly asked questions? 200
Chapter 11 - Supplemental information for State and local agencies and Tribes 201
How many plants may need to meet emission limits? 201
Are plants in Indian country regulated by the State? 201
How much HAP emissions will the rule reduce? 201
Appendix A - Subpart MMM. final rule 204
Not available in electronic version of this document, download final rule at
www.eDa.gov/ttn/uatw/Dest/DestDg.html
-------
List of Figures
Page
Figure 2-1. Compliance Timeline and Reporting Requirements for Existing
Affected Sources 9
Figure 2-2. Compliance Timeline and Reporting Requirements for New and
Reconstructed Sources • 10
List of Tables
TABLE 3-1. Compliance Options for Process Vents 20
TABLE 3-2. Monitoring Requirements for Air Pollution Control Devices 30
TABLE 4-1. Design and Operating Requirements for Storage Vessels Equipped with a Floating
Roof 61
TABLE 5-1. Container Emissions Control Requirements 95
TABLE 6-1. General Requirements and Exceptions of the Equipment Leak Provisions .... 118
TABLE 8-1. Report Due Dates 187
TABLE 8-2. Reporting Requirements 189
TABLE 10-1. EPA Regional Air Division Offices 199
VI
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Why should I use this implementation document?
This document can help plant owners and operators understand foe Pesticide Active Ingredient (PAI)
Production NESHAP (also known as Subpart MMM) by helping you determine four main things:
• if the rule applies to your plant and process
• what compliance options are available
• what to monitor, record, and report
• dates by which you must meet requirements
Is there anything I should know before using this document?
When using this document, remember that it doesn't replace the final rule but summarizes the requirements
published in the final rule. You should keep up with
new requirements printed after this date by periodically
checking the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Keep informed of rule changes, if any, by
Regulations (CFR). You can download Federal checking the Federal Register.
Register notices by going to the Government Printing
Office (GPO) website at
www. access, gpo. gov/su_docs/aces/acesJ 40. html.
We've included a copy of the final rule in Appendix A (as published in the Federal Register, 6/23/99,64
FR 33550), so you can reference the rule while using this document.
How do I get copies of this document?
You can get copies of this document in four ways:
• EPA's Unified Air Toxics Website (www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw). Look under Rules and
Implementation, pesticide active ingredient, or www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/pest/pestpg.html
• Library Services Office, (MD-35), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, or
www.epa.gov/natlibra/ols.html (limited supply)
-------
We want your feedback
To serve you better, we've included a survey on the usefulness of this document. If you'd like to
participate, please fill out the survey on page 3 and return it to the address indicated. We'll keep your
responses confidential if you desire, but use them to help us improve future documents.
Help us publish better documents by
filling out our survey
-------
Survey on the Implementation Document for the
Pesticide Active Ingredient Production NESHAP
Please help us gauge this document's usefulness by completing this short form. We'll keep your responses confidential if you desire,
but use them to help improve future documents. Check this box if you would like us to keep your responses confidential D
1. What type of business do you work for? (check one of the following)
Manufacturing c Contractor D Tribe D Government (specify Federal, State, local)
Other
2. What are your job responsibilities? (check any that apply)
Plant Operator D Maintenance D Plant Manager O Environmental Staff b
Regulator D Other:
3. How did you hear about this implementation document? (check any that apply)
Co-worker n EPA TTN via dial up modern n EPA TIN via the Web n Other
Please check the box under the number that most closely shows your agreement with the following statements
1= Strongly Agree to 5 = Strongly Disagree
Statement
The document was timely.
The document provides a good overview of the rule.
The document provides the type of infonnation my organization needs to comply.
The document helped us achieve compliance more quickly than if we had developed our
own.
We have -incorporated parts of this document into our own policy documents.
The format of this document was well organized and easy to understand.
1
. 2 .
3
4
5
N/A
4. What did you like about this document or what helped you the most? (be as specific as you can)
5. What did you not like about this document or what helped you the least? (be as specific as you can)
6. What would you change about this document (e.g. formats; excluding infonnation or including things that you didn't
see in the document)? __^__
7. Overall, did you find this document to be:
extremely useful D very useful n
somewhat useful o not useful at all D
8. Other comments:
Provide additional comment on the back of this form or on a separate sheet of paper.
Return survey to: ATTN: Pesticide Active Ingredient Implementation Contact, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Research Triangle Park (RTP) MD-12, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, or fax (919) 541-2664
-------
Chapter 2 - What this Pesticide Active Ingredient rule covers -
An Overview
Why was this Pesticide Active Ingredient (PAI) rule written?
The PAI rule was written to reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions and achieve the
environmental benefits intended by the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1990.
The rule applies to all organic HAP emissions. It also applies to chlorine and hydrogen chloride
emissions. Our research indicates that the primary organic HAP emissions from PAI production
include all of the following:
• toluene
• methanol
• xylene
• methyl chloride
• methylene chloride
• ethylene dichloride
• carbon tetrachloride
• acetonitrile
How do I know if I'm subject to this rule?
You're subject to this rule if your plant meets all of the following:
• is a major source of HAP emissions
• manufactures at least one PAI
• is not exempt
Definition. Pesticide Active Ingredient means any material that
is an active ingredient within the meaning of FIFRA section 2 (a);
is used to produce an insecticide, herbicide, or fungicide end use
pesticide, consists of one or more organic compounds; and that
must be labeled in accordance with 40 CFR part 156.
-------
Note: PAls are typically described by North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes 325199
and 32532; these materials are identified by product classification codes 01, 21, 02, 04, 44, 07, 08, and 16 in
block 19 on EPA form 3540-16, the Pesticides Report for Pesticide-Producing Establishments.
You're not subject to this rule if you have an enforceable limit on your facility by the compliance
, date of Subpart MMM that restricts your emissions to
< 10 tons/yr of any single HAP and <25 tons/yr of all
combined HAPs (i.e, in such cases, your facility Your facility is a major source if it can
wouldn't be classified as a major source under §63.2 of potentially emit *10 tons/yr of a single
the General Provisions). HAP or *25 tons/yr of all HAPs.
If your facility is major source, some PAI operations at your facility may still be exempt from the
rule. These exemptions are listed at the end of this chapter.
For a list of regulated HAPs, check our Unified Air Toxics Website (UATW) at:
htttr. ''\vw\v. eva. eov 'itn 'uatw '188w>tts. txt
What is an affected source?
Under Subpart MMM, an affected source includes all of the following [§63.1360(a)]:
• the facility-wide collection of pesticide active ingredient manufacturing process units (PAI
process units) that process, use, or produce HAP
Definition. Process unit means the equipment assembled and connected by pipes or
ducts to process raw materials and to manufacture an intended product.
• waste management units, heat exchange systems, and cooling towers associated with the
PAI process units described above
An affected source includes all of the following types of emission points [§63.1360(a)]:
process vents
• storage vessels ^e ckaPters 3 **«* 6f°r de^ls
about your compliance options for
• wastewater systems these emission points.
• equipment leaks
A new affected source includes either of the following [§63.1360(b)]:
• an affected source, as described above, for which construction or reconstruction started
after November 10, 1997, or
• any single PAI process unit that meets all of the following criteria:
-------
isn't part of a process unit group
Definition. Process unit group means a group of process units that manufacture
PAIs and products other than PAIs by alternating raw materials or operating
conditions, or by reconfiguring process equipment Only process equipment that has
been or could be part of a PAI process unit, because of its function or capacity, is
included in a process unit group.
•• has the potential to emit 10 tons/yr of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr of combined HAP
*• construction started on the unit after November 10, 1997
Four examples of changes to a facility and the type of standards that would apply are as follows:
• If you add a single PAI process unit at an existing major source and the potential to emit
for that process unit (with or without enforceable limits) is less than the 10 and 25 tons/yr
thresholds, your process unit becomes part of the existing source and is subject to existing
source standards. See the Summary of Public Comments and Responses (EPA-453/R-98-
011), Section 3.6, for more information [available for download on the UATW Pesticide
Active Ingredient Page].
• If you add a PAI process unit to a facility that did not previously contain a PAI process
unit and you create a process unit group, then your PAI process unit is subject to the
existing source standards of the MACT rule that applies to the primary product of the
process unit group if construction of the equipment in the process unit group started prior
to November 10, 1997 and it has not been reconstructed. See "How is nondedicated
equipment regulated?" for more information.
• If you add equipment to an existing PAI process unit, the PAI process unit remains
subject to the existing source standards.
If you replace equipment in an existing affected source, the affected source remains
subject to the existing source standards unless the replacements meet the definition of
reconstruction.
When do I need to comply?
If your facility is an existing affected source, you must comply by 6/23/02, which is three years
after the rule's efifective date of'6/23/99 [§63.1364(a)]. The efifective date is the date the final rule
was published in the Federal Register. An extension of up to 1 additional year may be requested if
time is needed to install controls, and it must be submitted 120 days before compliance date.
-------
If your affected source is new or reconstructed, you &me additions to an existing source may
must comply upon Startup of your operations or 6n be subject to existing source standards and
si~~>inn , . , . , , rc,0 ,-,^/T.M c others may be subject to new source
6/23/99, whichever u later. [§63.1364(b>] See *„**/ ^ .fmatisan affected
Figures 2-1 and 2-2 for detailed compliance timelines. source? "for more information.
If your affected source is subject to more than one
standard and you choose to comply with the other standard as allowed by Subpart MMM, your
affected source will need to comply by the compliance date of that standard. See "What provisions
in this rule overlap provisions in other rules?" for more information.
-------
Existing Affected Sources
Initial Startup before November 10. 1997 (Rule proposal date)
Pesticide Active Ingredient (PAI) Rule
Effective Date June 23,1999
If you ai
Initial No
Rep.
Rete>
(§63.13
(§63.9
77»en ...
Sub
101
orwt
days at
bacon*
to
•e submitting a(n) ... \
Site-Specific Test \
itffication Plan and \
»tof Notification of Initial Notification Startup. \
«ncy Precomplance Compliance Planned of Compliance Shutdown, \
68(b))& - Plan Extension Request Compliance Date Performance Test Status (NOCS) Periodic Report Malfunction Report \
mXby Sut
23*9 12rt
mkby Subml
3HM or than 2
ter source compRance date. complij
>s subject
rule.
t no later Must comply by Submit 60 days Submit by Submit by 7/20/03 Submt by TOO/03 /
f23/02or 6/23/02 before 11. 120102 or 150 or 240 days after or 240 days after /
ys before Performance Test* days after initial NOCS1 due initial NOGS' due /
incedate. compliance date date and every 6 date and •very 6 /
or initial startup months thereafter. months /
thereafter. /
• ResuKs of performance tests must be Included Irt the Notification of Compllano Status Report Therefore, performance tests must be conducted prior to
the submittal date of the NotHlcatlon of Compliance Status Report, or vvrtWn 180 days after startup of an erfstinfl affected source if the source begins
operation after the effective date of the rule. (§63.7(a)(2)(iii))
" Reports ant only required If a startup, shutdown, or malfunction occurred during the reporting period. (§63.1368(1))
Figure 2-1. Compliance Timeline and Reporting Requirements for Existing Affected Sources.
DRAFT
-------
New and Reconstructed Affected Sources
Initial Startup after November 10,1997 (Rule proposal date)
Pesticide Active Ingredient (PA!) Rule
Effective Date June 23,1999
If you are submitting a(n)...
IntttaINo
Report of I
(§63.13
(§63.9(b)
(§63.5
...
Sub
10/23f9
120 d
source
subjec
Sfte^pedfic Test \
tlflcatlon Plan and \
Relevancy Notification of InRial Notification Startup, \
68(b)), PrecompRance Planned of Compliance Shutdown, \
(2)), and Plan Compliance Date Performance Test Status (NCCS) Periodic Report Malfunction Report \
(d)(1) (§63.1368(e)) (§63.1364(b)) (§63.1368(m)) (§63.1368(f)) (§63.1368(g)) (§63.1368(1)) \
wnkby Submit with the Comply on 8X3/99 Submit SO days Submit f 50 days Subm» 240 duys Submit 240 rf«y» /
9 or within application for or upon startup, before after effective date after initial NCCS1 ' after Initial NCCS' /
lys after approval of whichever is later. Performance or initial startup. due date and due data and /
becomes construction or Tests* every 6 months every 6 morths /
* to rule. reconstruction. thereafter. thereafter." /
• Performance teats shall be conducted wthln 180 days after the effective date, or v
-------
What pesticide active ingredients are subject to the rule?
Subpart MMM applies to only a fraction of all materials that are registered as active ingredients
within the meaning of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) section 2(a).
The materials subject to this rule depend on how they are used. You're subject to Subpart MMM
if your material is all of the following:
• meets all of the conditions in the definition of PAI in §63.1361 of Subpart MMM (see page
5 for the definition of PAI)
Procedures to determine primary use
• is "primarily used" as a PAI «* described below.
Your materials aren't subject to Subpart MMM if they meet any of the following criteria:
• inorganic compounds
• used to produce disinfectants, rodenticides, water purifiers, or any other end-use pesticide
product that's not also used to produce an insecticide, herbicide, or fungicide end-use
pesticide product
How does "primary use" differ from "primary product"?
The concepts of primary use and primary product serve the following purposes:
• Primary use refers to the predominant end-use application of each material that may be
used for both PAI and non-PAI purposes. Your primary use will determine if the material
is a PAI that's subject to this rule.
• Primary product refers to the predominant product produced in a process unit group, and
is used to determine the applicable requirements for all PAI process units in the group.
How do I determine the primary use of a product?
Your product is "primarily used" as a PAI if more than 50 percent of the projected annual
production of the product in the 3 years after June 23, 1999, or startup, whichever is later, will be
used as a PAI [§63.1361].
If the initial primary use of your product is for non-PAI purposes, you must re-evaluate the
primary use if there is reason to believe it has changed.
11
-------
If the primary use changes from non-PAI to PAI, then the process unit producing that material
becomes a PAI process unit and is subject to Subpart MMM,
unless it is already subject to 40 CFR part 63, Subpart F (HON). Recordkeeping ofthe PAIand
If your process unit is subject to Subpart F, you must follow the non-PAI uses is required if
Subpart F requirements, not those in Subpart MMM. non-PAI uses are the primary
use.
What is a pesticide active ingredient (PAI)
process unit?
A PAI process unit produces either ofthe following [§63.1361]:
- aPAI
• an integral intermediate
Note: Integral intermediate is defined on page 13. You may designate as a PAI process unit any process unit
that produces an intermediate that is not an integral intermediate [§63.I360(g)J
Typically, each integral intermediate process and the associated PAI process are separate PAI process units.
However, if 100 percent of an integral intermediate is used in the production of a single PAI, you may consider
the entire system to be one PAI process unit [from the definition of process in §63.1361].
A PAI process unit isn't linked to any specific piece of equipment. Rather, it applies to whatever
equipment is being used to produce a particular product. For example, if you have two distinct
process "lines," both producing the same product, they
constitute one PAI process unit. Alternatively, you may have ^e «now is nondediCated
"nondedicated" equipment that can be configured in different equipment regulated, "for more
ways to make different products as needed. In this case, each information.
time you make a particular PAI, you may use a different
reactor, centrifuge, or other equipment, but it's the same PAI
process unit. Similarly, if the same equipment is used to produce different PAIs at different times,
it constitutes a different PAI process while it is used to make each ofthe products. When you use
the equipment (in the same configuration or a different one) to produce a non-PAI, the equipment
does not constitute a PAI process unit.
A PAI process unit can include any ofthe following [§63.1361]:
• the PAI process (i.e., the processing equipment such as mixing vessels, reactors, and
distillation units)
• associated storage vessels, as determined under §63.1360(f)
• connected piping and ducts
• open equipment used to convey and store liquids, as defined under §63.1362(k)
DRAFT
12
-------
• associated components such as:
*• pumps
»• compressors
*• agitators
»• pressure relief devices
>• sampling connection systems
> open-ended valves or lines (process fluid on only one side)
*• valves with process fluid on both sides
*• connectors
*• instrumentation systems
What is an integral intermediate?
An integral intermediate is a compound that meets all of the following criteria [§63.1361]:
• it's further processed or modified in one or more additional chemical reaction steps to
produce a PAI
• 50 percent or more of the annual production is used in on-site production of one or more
PAIs
• it's not stored before the next reaction step (see next paragraph)
• it's not already subject to 40 CFR 63, Subpart F
An intermediate is stored if it's discharged to a storage vessel, and it meets any of the following
conditions [§63.1361]:
• you shutdown the processing equipment that discharges the intermediate to the storage
vessel before you start up the processing equipment that withdraws the intermediate from
the storage vessel
• you store the intermediate in the vessel for at least 30 days before it's used to make a PAI
• the equipment that produces the intermediate is located in a separate building (or
processing area) than the equipment that uses the intermediate as a feedstock. The control
equipment can't be shared by the two processing areas
13
-------
How is "n on dedicated" equipment regulated?
The discussion under "What is a PAI process unit," explained that a PAI process unit is defined
based on the product being produced, regardless of the equipment.
However, you may use the same equipment to produce different products (both PAIs and other
types of compounds) at different times, or there may be overlap of at least some of the equipment
used to make different products. For this document, this equipment is referred to as
"nondedicated" equipment, and in some cases Subpart MMM allows you to comply with a
different MACT rule when you use such equipment to produce a PAI.
Typically, you must comply with the requirements of Subpart MMM for each PAI process unit.
However, for PAI process units that are comprised of nondedicated equipment, you may
determine applicability based on the
following alternative procedure The ^^ ofthis aitemative for nondedicated equipment is to
[§63.1360(h)]: minimize the possibility for overlap between Subpart MMM and
other MACT standards (e.g., pharmaceuticals, polymers and
resins, etc.) for equipment used in multiple process units.
® First, categorize the
nondedicated equipment
into one or more process unit groups (see the definition of process unit group)
© Then, determine the primary product for each process unit group (see note below)
@ Finally, for each PAI process unit within a process unit group, you may elect to comply
with either Subpart MMM or another applicable MACT rule under either of the
following conditions:
> if any product produced in the process unit group is subject to the pharmaceuticals
MACT rule (Subpart GGG of 40 CFR part 63), you may elect to comply with
Subpart GGG [§63.1360(h)(l)]
»• if the primary product of a process unit group is a material that's subject to another
MACT rule on June 23,1999, or date of startup, whichever is later, you may elect to
comply with that other subpart [§63.1360(h)(2)].
Note: Your primary product is the product you expect to produce for the greatest operating time in the 5-year
period following the compliance date or the initial startup of the process unit group, whichever is later.
Alternatively, if you expect the operating time to be the same for two or more process units, your primary
product is the product that you expect to produce the greatest amount of on a mass basis [§63.1360(h)(3)J.
14
-------
This alternative does not address situations in -which the primary product of a process unit group is a PAI, and
the other product(s) are not limited to
Pharmaceuticals. In these situations, you must -^
consult the rule(s) that apply to any other products to Exceptions to the Subpart GGG provision
determine the requirements that apply when you use m listed'"
the equipment to produce those products.
How do I know if a storage vessel is
part of a PAI process unit?
In general, your storage vessel is considered part of the process unit that either supplies the
greatest input to the storage vessel or uses the greatest output from the storage vessel. If this
process unit is a PAI process unit, the storage vessel is subject to Subpart MMM [§63.1360(f)(2)].
Exceptions to this general rule are described in Chapter 4 for all of the following types of storage
vessels:
• storage vessels in tank farms
• storage vessels that have equal input to (and/or output These procedures are
~ ,. ^ r essentially the same as those
from) two or more processes in the HQN
storage vessels for which the use varies or changes
storage vessels that are subject to existing MACT standards
If the storage vessel is already subject to another 40 CFR part 63 rule on June 23, 1999, the
storage vessel will belong to the process unit subject to the other rule [§63.1360(f)(l)].
What requirements apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction?
You must comply with the emission limits in Subpart MMM at all times, except during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction if all of the following apply [§63.1360(e)(l)]:
• the startup, shutdown, or malfunction prevents you from complying with any limit that
otherwise applies
• you follow the procedures in your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan as specified in
§63.1367(a)(3)
• you submit reports of periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction as specified in
§63.1368(i)
You may not shut down equipment used to control emissions if the shutdown would cause
emission limits to be exceeded, except in either of the following circumstances [§63.1363(e)(3)]:
• the control equipment is malfunctioning
15
-------
• the control equipment, would be damaged as a result of a malfunction in the PAI process
unit.
Note: During a startup, shutdown, or malfunction, you are required to implement, to the extent reasonably
available, means to prevent or minimize excess emissions. You must describe the measures you 'II take to
minimize emissions (e.g., identify control devices, work practices, pollution prevention measures, etc.) in your
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan [§63.1363(e)(4)].
What provisions in this rule overlap provisions in other rules?
Your options in the event that, for a given PAI process unit, the applicability of Subpart MMM
overlaps with another regulation after the compliance date of Subpart MMM are as follows:
If, for the following emission Subpart MMM overlaps with the
point... following rule...
Then ...§
All emission points
Other MACT rules in 40 CFR
part 63 (e.g., the RON,
Pharmaceuticals, etc.)
• Choose, to the extent the subparts are
consistent, under which subpart you'll
maintain your records and reports
• For 40 CFR 63, Subpart A (General
Provisions) check Table 1 of Subpart
MMM final rule to determine which
Subpart A requirements apply to your
emission pouit
Equipment leaks
Subpart I in 40 CFR part 63
Comply with either the provisions of
Subpart MMM or the provisions of
Subpart H of 40 CFR part 63
Storage vessels
(Group 1 and 2)
Subpart Kb of 40 CFR part 60
fNSPS]
Comply only with the provisions of
Subpart MMM
Process vents
Subparts ffl, NNN, or RRR of
40CFRpart60[NSPS]
Comply only with Subpart MMM if the
process vent subject to the other subpart is
controlled to 98 percent.
Otherwise, comply with both Subpart
MMM and Subparts HI, NNN and RRR as
applicable.
Process vents, equipment
leaks, waste management
units
Subparts AA, BB, and CC of
40 CFR parts 264 and 265
[RCRA]
Comply either with the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements
in Subpart MMM, or the other subparts.
However, you must report all excursions as
required in §63.1368(g) of Subpart MMM
Wastewater streams
40 CFR parts 260 through 272
[RCRA]
Comply with whichever rule has the more
stringent control, testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements
DRAFT
16
-------
• Identify which subpart you've chosen to comply with in your Notification of Compliance Status Report as required
under Subpart MMM. For wastewater streams, keep records of the information used to determine which
requirements were the most stringent and submit the information to the Administrator if requested to do so.
Note: The applicability requirements described in the section "How is nondedicated equipment regulated? " do
not constitute overlap because no other rule applies to the PAI process units within the process unit group.
However, for some PAI process units in a process unit group, Subpart MMM specifies that compliance with
, provisions in another MA CT rule may be used to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Subpart
MMM.
What is exempt from the rule?
Section 63.1360(d) specifies that the rule doesn't apply to any of the following:
• research and development facilities
• PAI process units that are subject to 40 CFR 63, Subpart F
• ethylene production
• stormwater from segregated sewers
• water from fire-fighting and deluge systems, including testing of such systems
• spills
• water from safety showers
• noncontact steam boiler blowdown and condensate
• laundry water
• vessels storing materials that contain no organic HAP or contain organic HAP as impurities
only
• equipment (e.g., flanges, valves, pumps, etc.) intended to operate in organic HAP service
for less than 300 hours during the calendar year. (However, you must keep a list of such
equipment.)
In addition, under §63.1361, the following aren't considered to be part of the PAI process unit:
• formulation of pesticide products
• QA/QC laboratories
17
-------
Chapter 3 - Complying with requirements for process vents
What process vents are covered?
Subpart MMM covers all process vents that:
• are part of processes at an affected source
• emit organic HAP and/or chlorine (Clj) and hydrochloric acid (HCl)
• are not exempt
All covered process vents (new or existing) are called either "Group 1" process vents or
"Group 2" process vents.
Covered process vents are in Group 1 and are subject to controls if any of the following apply
[§63.1362(b)(2)(i),
• the collective uncontrolled organic HAP emissions from all of the vents in the process are
greater than 0.15 Mg/yr
• the collective uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all of the vents in the process are
greater than 6.8 Mg/yr.
Covered process vents that do not meet the definition of Group 1 process vents are called
Group 2 process vents. Group 2 process vents do not require controls, but you must calculate the
uncontrolled emissions for these processes and monitor either the number of batches per year (for
batch processes) or the operating hours per year (for continuous processes) to demonstrate that
annual emissions are below the limit for Group 2 processes.
What process vents are exempt?
A vent isn't considered to be either a Group 1 or Group 2 process vent if the undiluted and
uncontrolled emission stream released through the vent contains less than 20 ppmv HAP.
If your Group 1 process vents discharge to any of the The definition of process vent in
following control devices, they're exempt from the initial §63-136* describes ways to determine
compliance demonstrations, monitoring provisions, and ffte HAP concentration..
associated recordkeeping and reporting requirements
under Subpart MMM [§§63.1362(1), 63.1365(a)(4), and 63.1366(b)(l)(ix)(B)]. However, all
18
-------
other Subpart MMM provisions apply for these processes (e.g., requirements to determine
applicability and standards for storage tanks, wastewater, and equipment leaks).
• A boiler or process heater burning hazardous waste for which you've:
•• been issued a final permit for the boiler or process heater under 40 CFR part 270 and
are complying with the requirements of Subpart H in 40 CFR part 266
*• certified compliance with the interim status requirements of Subpart H in 40 CFR part
266.
• A hazardous waste incinerator for which you've:
* been issued a final permit for the incinerator under 40 CFR part 270 and you're
complying with the requirements of Subpart O in 40 CFR part 264
* certified compliance with the interim status requirements of Subpart O in 40 CFR
part 265.
• A boiler or process heater with a design heat input ^44 MW
• A boiler or process heater for which the emission stream is introduced with the primary fuel
What compliance options do I have for my Group 1 process vents?
At existing sources, compliance options are categorized by organic HAP emissions and HC1/C12
emissions. One set of standards applies to individual process
vents that meet certain criteria, and another set of standards ~~~ !
,. . „ r.^, .. .... ., Pollution prevention is another
applies to all of the other process vents within the process. option for process vents at
Standards for new sources apply only to the sum of all process existing sources.
vents within a process.
Compliance options are explained in greater detail below. A summary is available in Table 3-1.
DRAFT
19
-------
TABLE 3-1. Compliance Options for Process Vents
If you have And your process
vents are...
Then, for...
Your compliance options are...
Existing Group 1 for
source organic HAP
(X).15Mg/yr)
each "large" vent
reduce organic HAP emissions by
i 98 percent (Option 1)
reduce emissions to £20 ppmv as
TOC (Option 2)
use a flare that meets the
requirements of §63.11 (b)
(Option 3)
use the alternative standard
(Option 4)
continue reducing HAP emissions
by percentage achieved on or
before 11/10/97, if that amount is
2 90 percent (Option 5)
any individual vent or any
combination of vents, excluding large
vents
reduce emissions to £20 ppmv as
TOC (Option 2)
use a flare that meets the
requirements of §63.1 l(b)
(Option 3)
use the alternative standard
(Option 4)
the collective emissions from all
vents, excluding large vents, not
controlled by Option 2, Option 3, or
Option 4
reduce HAP emissions by > 90 percent
(Option 6)
Group 1 for
HC1/C12
(>6.8 Mg/yr)
any individual vent or any
combination of vents
reduce emissions to £20 ppmv
(Option 7)
use the alternative standard
(Option 8)
the collective emissions from all vents
not controlled by Option 7 or
Options
reduce HC1/C12 emissions by
294 percent (Option 9)
New source Group 1 for
organic HAP
(X). 15 Mg/yr)
any individual vent or any
combination of vents
reduce emissions to £20 ppmv as
TOC (Option 2)
use a flare that meets the
requirements of §63.1 l(b)
(Option 3)
use the alternative standard
(Option 4)
the collective emissions from all vents
not controlled by Option 2, Option 3,
or Option 4
20
reduce organic HAP emissions by
i 98 percent (Option 1)
-------
TABLE 3-1. (cont'd)
If you have And your process
vents are...
Then, for...
Your compliance options are...
Group 1 for
HC1/C12
(>6.8 Mg/yr and
<;191Mg/yr)
any individual vent or any
combination of vents
reduce emissions to <.20 ppmv
(Option 7)
use the alternative standard
(Option 8)
the collective emissions from all vents
not controlled by Option 7 or
Option 8
reduce HC1/C12 emissions by
i 94 percent (Option 9)
Group 1 for
HC1/C12
(>191 Mg/yr)
any individual vent or any
combination or vents
reduce emissions to £20 ppmv
(Option 7)
use the alternative standard
(Option 8)
the collective emissions from all vents
not controlled by Option 7 or
Options
reduce HC1/C1Z emissions by
percent (Option 10)
New or
existing
source
Group 2
the process
no control required, but recordkeeping
is required to demonstrate compliance
with the 0.15 Mg/yr threshold for
organic HAP emissions and the 6.8
Mg/yr threshold for HC1/C12 emissions
21
-------
Organic HAP emissions for "large" vents - Existing Sources
Each process vent that meets both of the following conditions is subject to more stringent organic
HAP controls than other vents:
Uncontrolled organic HAP emissions are >22.68 Mg/yr Procedures to calculate
„ „ . . ... , „ '. , , - uncontrolled emissions are
Low flow1 emission stream [i.e., the flow-weighted specified in §63.136S(c)(2).
average flow rate of the vent as calculated using equation
1 in §63.1362(b)(2)(ii) is less than or equal to the flow
rate index calculated using equation 2 in §63.1362(b)(2)(ii)]
For ease of discussion in this document, we refer to vents that meet these conditions as "large"
vents, although subpart MMM does not use this or any other term to describe these vents. For
these large vents, you have the following five control options for the organic HAP emissions:
Option 1: 98% reduction [§63.1362(b)(2)(ii)]
Reduce total organic HAP emissions by at least 98 weight percent
Option 2: reduce outlet concentration [§63.1362(b)(2)(iv)(A)]
Reduce organic HAP emissions to an outlet concentration of ^20 ppmv as total organic
compounds (TOC)
Option 3: use a Hare [§63.1362(b)(2)(iv)(B)]
Use a flare that meets the requirements of §63.1 l(b) (Subpart A General Provisions) to control
total organic HAP emissions
Option 4: use alternative standard [§63.1362(b)(6)]
Reduce total organic HAP emissions to an outlet concentration of s20 ppmv as TOC in
accordance with the alternative standard
Note: The outlet concentration is the same as for Option 2, but the alternative standard requires monitoring
•with CEMS, whereas Option 2 requires monitoring of control device operating parameters.
Option 5: current % reduction [§63.1362(b)(2)(ii)(B)]
Reduce uncontrolled total organic HAP emissions by at least 90 weight percent if the emissions
were already reduced by at least 90 weight percent by a control device installed on or before
November 10, 1997
Organic HAP emissions for "all" process vents - Existing Sources
For all process vents within a process that don't fit the definition of a "large" vent, you have four
compliance options available. For any individual vent or any combination of vents you mav
D^APV
22
-------
comply using Option 2, Option 3, or Option 4 as described above. For the collective emissions
from all vents not controlled by one of these three options, you must use:
Option 6: 90 % reduction [§63.1362(b)(2)(ii)]
Reduce uncontrolled organic HAP emissions by at least 90 weight percent
HCI/Ci? emissions - Existing Sources .
For uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions, you have three compliance options available. You may
control any individual process vent or any combination of process vents using:
Option 7: reduce outlet concentration [§63.1362(b)(3)(ii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to an outlet concentration of £20 ppmv
Option 8: use alternative standard [§63.1362(b)(6)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to an outlet concentration of i20 ppmv in accordance
with the alternative standard.
Note: The outlet concentration is the same as for Option 7, but the alternative standard requires monitoring
•with CEMS, whereas Option 7 requires monitoring of control device operating parameters.
You must control collective uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all Group 1 process vents that
are not controlled by Option 7 or Option 8 using:
Option 9: 94% reduction [§63.1362(b)(3)(ii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions by at least 94 weight percent
Organic HAP emissions - New Sources
For the organic HAP emissions, you have four compliance options available. You may control
organic HAP emissions from any individual vent or any combination of vents within a process
using Option 2, Option 3, or Option 4 as described above. You must use Option 1 as described
above to control the collective emissions from all Group 1 process vents that are not controlled
using Option 2, Option 3, or Option 4.
HCI/CI? emissions - New Sources
Your compliance options for your new uncontrolled HC1/CI2 sources depends on the amount of
your uncontrolled emissions. The two categories are: (1) *6.8 Mg/yr but <191 Mg/yr and (2)
;»191 Mg/yr.
If the collective uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all of the process vents within a process are
*6.8 Mg/yr and <191 Mg/yr, you have three compliance options for the collective HC1/C12
DRAFT
23
-------
emissions from all Group 1 process vents. You may control any individual process vent or any
combination of process vents using:
Option 7: reduce outlet concentration [§63.1362(b)(5)(ii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to outlet concentrations of <;20 ppmv
Option 8: use alternative standard [§63.1362(b)(6>]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to an outlet concentration of *20 ppmv in accordance
with the alternative standard.
Note: The outlet concentration is the same as for Option 7, but the alternative standard requires monitoring
with CEMS, whereas Option 7 requires monitoring of control device operating parameters.
You must control collective uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all Group 1 process vents that
are not controlled by Option 7 or Option 8 using:
Option 9: 94% reduction [§63.1362(b)(5)(ii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions by at least 94 weight percent
If, however, your uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from the sum of all process vents within a
process are ^ 191 Mg/yr, you have three different compliance options. You may control any
individual process vent or any combination of process vents using:
Option 7: reduce outlet concentration [§63.1362(b)(5)(iii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to outlet concentrations of ^20 ppmv
Option 8: use alternative standard [§63.1362(b)(6)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions to an outlet concentration of ^20 ppmv in accordance
with the alternative standard.
Note: The outlet concentration is the same as for Option 7, but the alternative standard requires monitoring
with CEMS, whereas Option 7 requires monitoring of control device operating parameters.
You must control collective uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all Group 1 process vents that
are not controlled by Option 7 or Option 8 using:
Option 10: 99% reduction [§63.1362(b)(5)(iii)]
Reduce uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions by at least 99 weight percent
24
-------
How do I show initial compliance with the process vent requirements?
How you show initial compliance depends on which options you choose and which types of
activities generate emissions from your processes.
Typically, to demonstrate initial compliance, you will need to calculate the uncontrolled emissions
from each activity in you process that generates emissions. The emissions for these activities are
also called "emission episodes." You will need the uncontrolled emissions to determine whether
the process has Group 1 or Group 2 process vents. You also may need uncontrolled emissions to:
• determine conditions under which the performance test or design evaluation must be
performed
determine whether a control device is "large" or "small"
• use in calculations of the percent reduction for a process
For batch processes, you sum the emissions from all of the emission episodes to calculate the mass
emitted per batch. For continuous processes, you sum the emissions from all of the emission
episodes to calculate the mass emitted per unit time (you may select any time period; 1 hour would
be reasonable).
Equations for calculating emissions from the following activities are included in
§63.1365(c)(2)(i)(B) of the rule:
• filling
purging Most of the calculations require you to estimate the HAP
partial pressure. Section 63.1365(c)(2)fl)(A) describes
heating options for estimating partial pressure.
depressurization
vacuum systems
gas evolution
air drying
If your emissions are due to activities other than listed information and procedures that may be
above, you must conduct an engineering assessment to used in an engineering assessment are
determine your emissions [§63.1365(c)(2)(ii)]. described in §63.1365(c)(2)C»)-
You may also request approval from the Administrator
to determine emissions from any .of the listed activities based on an engineering assessment.
25
-------
Compliance with Group 2 emission limits
You demonstrate initial compliance with the Group 2 cutoffs for uncontrolled organic HAP and
HC1/C12 mass emission limits by projecting the annual uncontrolled emissions for the process. You
do this by calculating the uncontrolled emissions for each emission episode within the process,
summing the emissions for all emission episodes in the process, and multiplying by either of the
following: [§63.1365(c)(l)(i), (ii)]
• the estimated annual number of batches for batch processes
• the estimated operating hours per year for continuous processes
Options 1. 5. 6. 9. or 10: Compliance with percent reduction options
You demonstrate initial compliance with the percent reduction options by doing all of the
following:
determine uncontrolled emissions for all emission episodes that are part of the analysis
• determine controlled emissions for these emission episodes
sum the uncontrolled and controlled emissions and calculate the overall percent reduction
. r§63.1365(c)(l)(iii),(iv)]
Note: If all emissions are controlled using a single control device, calculating the controlled emissions for
each emission episode is not necessary.
You determine uncontrolled emissions as described above. The procedures to determine controlled
emissions vary depending on whether you use a condenser, a "large" control device, or a "small"
control device.
Definition: Large control device means a device that
controls process vents, and the combined inlet HAP emissions
into the control device from all sources are i 10 tons/yr.
Definition: Small control device means a device that
controls process vents, and the combined HAP emissions into
the control device from all sources are <10 tons/yr.
For condensers, you calculate controlled emissions for each emission episode by doing both of the
following:
measure the outlet gas temperature from the condenser [§63.1365(c)(3)(iii)]
calculate controlled emissions using the measured temperature in the appropriate equation
in§63.1365(c)(3)(iii)
26
-------
For control devices other than a condenser, you calculate controlled emissions based on the
following steps:
determine whether you have a large control device or a small control device based on the
total annual inlet uncontrolled HAP emissions
for a large control device, calculate the control
efficiency using a performance test „ „ ....
rRAi n*<;/' V7VYI • If a small control device becomes a large
190.5.1 JttlcXJXUJJ control device, you must then recalculate
• for a small control device, calculate the control *' co^°l *ffi™»™s ™»g the results of
c~ . ., _~ . . a performance test.
efficiency using either a performance test or a
design evaluation [§63.1365(c)(3)(i)]
• calculate controlled emissions using the uncontrolled emissions and the calculated control
efficiency
Note: Both design evaluations and performance tests must be conducted under the most challenging conditions
for the device. The rule defines the most challenging conditions as either absolute or hypothetical peak-case
conditions. The procedures for determining the absolute or hypothetical peak-case conditions are described in
§63.1365(b)(ii).
The parameters to consider in design evaluations for different types of control devices are described in
§63.1365(a)(l).
Options 2 or 7; Compliance with outlet concentration options
You determine initial compliance with the 20 ppmv outlet concentration limits by testing using an
applicable EPA method (e.g., Ml 8 or M25A for TOC or M26 for HC1) under the most challenging
conditions for the device [§63.1365(c)(l)(v)].
If you combine supplemental gases with the emission stream, you must correct the measured
concentrations as follows:
• To 3 percent oxygen, if you use a combustion control device [§63.1365(a)(7)(i)].
• By the ratio of the total flow to the flow without supplemental gases, if you use a
noncombustion control device [§63.1365(a)(7)(ii)]
Definition: Supplemental gases means any nonaffected gaseous streams (streams that are not
from process vents, storage vessels, equipment or waste management units) that contain less than
20 ppmv TOC and less than 20 ppmv total HCL and chlorine, as determined through process
knowledge, and are combined with an affected vent stream. Air required to operate combustion
device burners) is not considered a supplemental gas.
27
-------
Option 3; Compliance using a flare
When you use a flare as your control device, demonstrate initial compliance by doing all of the
following:
• determine visible emissions using Method 22 of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A, as described
in §63.1 l(b)(4) of the General Provisions
determine under absolute or hypothetical peak-case conditions, the net heating value of gas
being combusted and its exit velocity as specified in §63.1 l(b)(6) through (8) of the
General Provisions [§63.1365(a)(3), (c)(l)(vii)]
Option 4 or 8: Compliance with the alternative standard
You demonstrate initial compliance with the alternative standard by having the monitoring
equipment operational on the compliance date (see the discussion of monitoring requirements for
the alternative standard).
In addition, if you intend to calibrate the monitor using the predominant HAP, you'll have to use
Method 18 to determine the predominant HAP [§63.1365(a)(5), (c)(l)(vi)].
What monitoring must I do for my process vents?
To demonstrate ongoing compliance with the option you selected, you must monitor one or more
parameters. Typically, your monitoring requirements consist of all of the following:
• Identifying the parameter(s) to monitor
• Setting site-specific limits for the parameters)
• Averaging the measured values for comparison with the limits
Each of these steps is discussed in more detail below.
What parameters must I monitor?
The specific parameters that you must monitor, and the required frequency of monitoring, will
depend on the type of control device that you use and if the total inlet HAP emissions going into
your control device is <0.91 Mg/yr or *0.91 Mg/yr.
If the total inlet HAP emissions to your control device is <0.91 Mg/yr, you're required to conduct
a periodic verification that the device is operating properly.
28
-------
To provide the verification you must demonstrate on a daily, or more frequent, basis that the
control device is working as designed.
One example of an acceptable periodic verification demonstration is to conduct a daily
measurement of the same parameters) that must
be monitored for larger control devices, as
• described below [§63.1366(b)(l)(i)]. • You d^crtbe the verification procedure you
\.-s \ /\ >\/i intend to use in your Precompliance Plan.
Note: The periodic verification doesn 't apply for the alternative standard (Option 4 or 8); you must always
continuously monitor the outlet concentration^) using a CEMS.
If the total inlet HAP emissions to your control device are £ 0.91 Mg/yr, you must monitor either
the outlet emission concentration or various operating parameters as described in
§63.1366(b)(l)(ii) through (x). These monitoring requirements are summarized in Table 3-2.
Note: Each monitoring device must be calibrated annually, and the required accuracy of each device is
specified in §63.1366(b)(l) of the rule.
DRAFT
29
-------
TABLE 3-2. Monitoring Requirements for Air Pollution Control Devices
If you're
complying with
the following
compliance
options...
And the total inlet
HAP emissions to
your control
device are...
And you're using
the following
control device...
Then you must monitor this
parameter. . .' At this frequency. . .
According to these
sections of the rule...
Options 1,2,5-7,
9, and 10
<0.91 Mg/yr
any control device
parameters) specified in your
approved precompliance plan that
demonstrate the control device is
operating as designed
at least once per day
63.1366(b)(l)(i)
Options 1,2,5-7,
9, and 10
(e.g., any %
reduction or
outlet
concentration
option, except the
alternative
standard6, Option
4 or 8)
iO.91 Mg/yr
Scrubber
liquid flow rate into scrubber or
pressure drop across the scrubber
every 15 minutes
63.1366(b)(l)(ii)
also monitor the pH if the scrubber
uses a caustic solution to remove
acid gases
once per day
63.1366(b)(l)(ii)
Condenser
condenser outlet gas temperature
Regenerative
carbon adsorber
regeneration frequency (time
since the end of the last
regeneration), and
temperature to which the bed
is heated during regeneration,
and
temperature to which the bed
is cooled, and
regeneration stream flow, and
every 15 minutes
• each regeneration cycle
• each regeneration cycle
within 15 minutes of
completing the cooling
phase of each
regeneration cycle
each regeneration cycle
63.1366(bXl)(iii)
63.1366(b)(l)(iv)
-------
TABLE 3-2. (cont'd)
If you're
complying with
the following
compliance
options...
And the total inlet
HAP emissions to And you're using
your control the following
device are... control device...
Then you must monitor this
parameter...*
At this frequency...
According to these
sections of the rule.
• check for bed poisoning • once per year
following manufacturer's
specifications
Nonregenerative • operating time since last • n/a
carbon adsorber replacement, or
• monitor TOC concentration in • daily, or at an interval no 63.1366(b)(l)(v)(A)
exhaust vent stream for greater than 20 percent of
breakthrough the time needed to
consume the total
working capacity of the
carbon under peak-case
conditions
Thermal temperature of gases exiting the every 15 minutes 63.1366(b)(l)(vii)
incinerator combustion chamber
Catalytic temperature difference across the every 15 minutes 63.1366(b)(l)(viii)
incinerator catalyst bed
Process heater temperature of gases exiting the every 15 minutes 63.1366(b)(l)(ix)(A)
and boiler (except combustion chamber
those covered by
Option 4)
any other device identify applicable parameters and part of the request for 63.1366(b)(4)
request approval to use approval
Options i0.91Mg/yr Flare presence of pilot flame every 15 minutes 63.1366(b)(l)(vi)
(e.g., using a
flare)
-------
TABLE 3-2. (cont'd)
If you're
complying with
the following
compliance
options...
Option 4 or 8
(e.g., alternative
standard)
And the total inlet
HAP emissions to
your control
device are...
All
And you're using
the following
control device...
Any control
device
Then you must monitor this
parameter...* At this frequency...
outlet TOC concentration and/or every 1 5 minutes
outlet HCl/CLj concentration
using CEM meeting PS 8 or 9 of
Appendix B of Part 60
According to these
sections of the rule...
63.1366(b)(5)
UJ
to
1 Note that for all control devices, a closed vent system that contains a bypass line that could divert a vent stream away from the control device must be
monitored for flow in the bypass line every 15 minutes, or the bypass line valve must be secured in the closed position with a car seal or lock and key type
configuration, and the seal or closure mechanism must be visually inspected once per month [§63.1366(b)(l)(xiii) arid 63.1362(j)].
b As an alternative to the specified operating parameters for control devices used to comply with any of the percent reduction or outlet concentration options
you may use a continuous emission monitor (CEM) meeting the requirements of Performance Specifications (PS) 8 or 9 of Appendix B of Part 60 to
monitor TOC and/or HC1/C12 every 15 minutes [§63.1366(b)(l)(x)].
-------
How do I set monitoring parameter limits?
You establish the limit against which your monitored values for a control device operating
parameter is compared during the initial compliance
demonstration [§63.1366(b)(3)(i) and (ii)]. This limit will
be associated with the most challenging conditions for the The monitoring parameter limits and your
control device, and meeting it will demonstrate ongoing rationale for these limits are subject to
compliance at all times. ' review and approval by the
Administrator.
If you demonstrate initial compliance by conducting a
performance test, you establish minimum or maximum monitoring limits based on the average of
the average values from each of the three test runs [§63.1366(b)(3)(ii)(A)].
In addition to setting monitoring limits for the most challenging conditions, you also may set
additional monitoring limits for less challenging conditions.
For example, if you use a scrubber to control several process vents within a batch process, you
must set at least one scrubber liquid flow rate limit, and this limit must be associated with the most
challenging operating conditions under which the
initial compliance determination is conducted.
i* • . • • .% •. j i_. a 1. You must record in a daily schedule or log the
Maintaining the monitored scrubber flow above at ^ (hg parametef ^ chmjes
this limit at all times demonstrates that the required at least one reading must be taken after each
percent reduction is being met at all times. change, even if the duration associated -with that
However, if the HAP emitted from one vent is limit is less than 15 minutes.
more soluble than the HAP emitted from other
vents (i.e., it is a period that doesn't constitute the
most challenging conditions for the control device), you may decide to set a lower flow rate limit
for the time that vent is being controlled. But you must demonstrate that the required level would
still achieve the required control level.
To establish monitoring levels for the less challenging conditions, you may supplement the
performance test results with an engineering
assessment and/or manufacturers
recommendations. Your rationale for the specific The Precompliance Plan must be submitted for
level(s) must be provided in your Precompliance aPProval at least 6 months bef°re the ComPlia"ce
pi date. See Chapter 8.
Note: Limits are not applicable for flares (option 3) because the monitored parameter, the presence or absence
of a pilot flame, can not vary over a range.
Monitoring limits for the alternative standard are defined in the standard itself, and you may not set multiple
limits when complying with the alternative standard.
33
-------
How may I average my monitoring parameter values?
Typically, monitored parameter values must be averaged over either a day or a block. A daily
average is any continuous 24-hour period of your choice - it doesn't have to be from midnight to
midnight.
"A block average is only for vents from batch operations, and it's limited to the period of time that
is, at a maximum, equal to the time from the beginning to the end of a series of consecutive batch
operations [§63.1366(b)(2)(i) and (ii)].
Monitoring values taken during periods of no flow or when streams that aren't subject to the rule
shouldn't be considered in either the daily or block averages. To identify periods of no flow you
must use a flow indicator at the inlet (or outlet) of the control device [§63.1366(b)(2)(iii)].
Note: Averaging is not applicable for carbon adsorbers (except under option 4, the alternative standard) and
for flares (option 3).
What records must I keep for my process vents?
To avoid repetition, all of your recordkeeping requirements are presented in Chapter 8.
What reports must I submit for my process vents?
To avoid repetition, all of your reporting requirements are presented in Chapter 8. Requirements
specific to storage vessels are also shown in this section.
34
-------
Checklists for Process Vent Inspections
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date: '
The table below explains which inspection checklists you should use for determining compliance
with the process vent requirements.
And the total inlet HAP And the process vent emission Then use the
If you
follow...
any option,
except 3, 4,
and 8
3
4
any option,
except 4 and
8
emissions to the control streams are conveyed by a closed-
device are ... vent system to ...
> 0.91 Mg/yr a scrubber
a condenser
a regenerative carbon adsorber
a nonregenerative carbon adsorber
a thermal incinerator
a catalytic incinerator
a boiler or process heater with a
design heat input of < 44
megawatts and for which the
emission stream is not introduced
with the primary fuel
* 0.91 Mg/yr a flare
all any control device
< 0.91 Mg/yr any control device
following
checklists':
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Starting on
page ...
6
8
9
11
12
13
15
16
17
19
* Checklists 1 and 2 apply for all options.
35
-------
Checklist 1: Applicability (All Options)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: If you answer "yes" to either question 1 or question 2, don't continue; your process
vent isn't covered. If you answer "yes" to using any of the control devices in question 3,
don't continue; you are exempt from the monitoring and associated recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. §63.1362(b)(2)0), (3)0), (4)0), (5)0), and (I), §63.1365(a)(4),
§63.1366(b)(l)Ox)(B)
Comments
1. Are the total uncontrolled organic HAP emissions from all D Yes D No
process vents in the process <, 0.15 Mg/yr, and are the total
uncontrolled HC1/C12 emissions from all process vents in the
process <, 6.8 Mg/yr?
2. Is the HAP content of your emission stream < 20 ppmv? DYes DNo
3. Does your process vent discharge to any of the following
control devices:
a boiler or process heater burning hazardous waste for
which you've:
» been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and D Yes D No
are complying with requirements of 40 CFR part 266,
subpart H; or
»• certified compliance with the interim status D Yes D No
requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H?
• a hazardous waste incinerator for which you've:
>• have been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part D Yes D No
270 and are complying with the requirements of 40
CFR part 264, subpart O; or
» have certified compliance with the interim status D Yes D No
requirements of 40 CFR part 265, subpart O?
a boiler or process heater with a design heat input DYes DNo
*44 megawatts?
a boiler or process heater for which the emission stream is D Yes D No
introduced with the primary fuel?
36
-------
Checklist 2: Requirements for closed-vent systems (All Options)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements
Comments
1. If your closed-vent system has bypass lines that could divert a vent
stream away from the control device and to the atmosphere, have
you done one of the following:
• used a flow indicator that takes a reading at least once every
15 minutes at the entrance of the bypass line? §63.1362(j)(l)
• secured the bypass line valve in the closed position with a
car-seal or a lock-and-key type configuration? §63.1362(j)(2)
Note: Low leg drains, high point bleeds, analyzer vents, open-ended
valves or lines, rupture disks, and pressure relief valves needed for
safety purposes ore not subject to the monitoring requirements for
bypass lines. §63.1362(j)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
2. If you secure the bypass line valve in the closed position as
specified in question 6, do you visually inspect the seal or closure
mechanism monthly to ensure the valve is maintained in the closed
position? §63.1362(j)(2)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
If you use a flow indicator to monitor your closed-vent system
bypass line, do you have all of the following records:
§63.1367(f)(l)
hourly flow indicator readings? DYes DNo
times and durations of periods when the flow indicator is not D Yes D No
operating?
• times and durations of periods when the vent stream is diverted D Yes D No
from the control device?
37
-------
Checklist 2: (cont'd)
Requirements for closed-vent systems (AH Options)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Reqnirements Comments
2. If you use a seal mechanism to prevent diversion of emission streams
through a bypass line, do you have all of the following
records: §63.l367(f)(2)
records that the monthly visual inspections of the seal or closure DYes DNo
mechanism have been done?
records of all periods when the seal mechanism is broken, the D Yes D No
bypass line valve position has changed, or the key for a lock-and-
key type lock has been checked out?
• records of any car-seal that has broken? DYes DNo
3. Are records retained for at least 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) D Yes D No
4. Did you submit all of the following in your Periodic Report:
§63.1368(g)(2)(iii)
records of all periods when the vent stream is diverted from the D Yes D No
control device?
records of all periods when the seal mechanism is broken, the D Yes D No
bypass valve position has changed, or the key to unlock the bypass
line valve was checked out?
38
-------
Checklist 3: Requirements for scrubbers (All options except 3,4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366(b)(l)Cn) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you monitor scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop at least
once every IS minutes during the period in which the scrubber is
controlling HAP from an emission stream?
D Yes D No
2. Is the monitoring device used to determine the pressure drop
certified by the manufacturer to be accurate to within a gage pressure
of ± 10 percent of the maximum pressure drop measured?
D Yes D No
3. Is the monitoring device used for measurement of scrubber liquid
flow rate certified by the manufacturer to be accurate to within ± 10
percent of the design scrubber liquid flow rate?
D Yes D No
4.
5.
6.
7.
Is the monitoring device calibrated annually?
Do you monitor the pH of the effluent scrubber liquid at least once a
day if the scrubber uses a caustic solution to remove acid emissions?
Do you average the continuous readings over the operating day or
operating block?
If flow to the scrubber can be intermittent, did you install a flow
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
indicator at the inlet or outlet of the scrubber and do you use it to
identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
2.
3.
results of the initial performance test or design evaluation?
§63.1368(f)(2)
• documentation to establish a miniitmm scrubber liquid flow
rate or pressure drop as a site-specific operating parameter?
§63.1368(0(3}
Do you keep daily (or more frequent) records of the pH of the
scrubber effluent if necessary? §63.1 367 (b)(l)
Do you keep continuous records of the scrubber inlet flow rate or
pressure drop? §63.1 367 (b)(l)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
39
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for scrubbers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
4. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are * 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period:
§63.1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the D Yes O No
average scrubber inlet flow rate or pressure drop is lower than
the minimum established in your NOCSR or operating permit?
all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the OYes DNo
average pH value of the scrubber effluent is lower than the
minimum established in your NOCSR or operating permit?
• identification of all operating days when insufficient DYes DNo
monitoring data are collected?
5. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) U Yes D No
40
-------
Checklist 4: Requirements for condensers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A Monitoring Requirements §63.1366{b)(l)(iii) and &)
Comments
1. Do you measure the condenser outlet gas temperature at least once
every 15 minutes during the period in which the condenser is
controlling HAP from an emission stream?
DYes
DNo
2. Is the temperature monitoring device accurate to within ±2 percent
of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius or ± 2.5°C,
whichever is greater?
DYes
DNo
3. Is the temperature monitoring device calibrated annually?
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
4. Do you average the temperature readings over the operating day or
operating block?
5. If flow to the condenser can be intermittent, did you install a flow
indicator at the inlet or outlet of the condenser and do you use it to
identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
DYes
DNo
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
results of the calculations to demonstrate initial compliance?
§63.1368(0(2)
documentation to establish the maximum condenser outlet gas
temperature as a site-specific operating parameter?
§63.1368(0(3)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
2. Do you keep continuous records of the condenser outlet temperature?
§63.1367(b)(l)
DYes
DNo
3. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are i 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63.1368(g)(2)ftO
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the
condenser average outlet temperatures that are higher than the
maximum established in your NOCSR or operating permit?
• identification of all operating days when insufficient monitoring
data are collected?
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l)
DYes
41
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for condensers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
42
-------
Checklist 5: Requirements for regenerative carbon adsorbers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366(b)(l)fiv)and{2)
minutes of completing the cooling phase?
regeneration stream flow?
D Yes D No
Comments
1.
For each regenerative cycle, do you monitor all of the following:
• operating time since last regeneration?
temperature to which the bed is heated during regeneration?
temperature to which the bed is cooled, measured within 1 5
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
2. Is the temperature monitoring device accurate to within ± 2 percent
of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius or ± 2.5°C,
whichever is greater?
D Yes D No
3. Is the regeneration stream flow monitoring device capable of
recording the total regeneration stream flow to within ± 10 percent
of the established value (i.e., accurate to within ± 10 percent of the
reading)?
D Yes D No
4. Are the temperature and flow monitoring devices calibrated
annually?
D Yes D No
5. Do you conduct an annual check for bed poisoning in accordance
with manufacturer's specifications?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
• results of the initial performance test or design evaluation?
§63.1368(f)(2)
documentation to establish the regeneration stream flow, the
minimum carbon bed regeneration temperature, and the
maximum cooling phase temperature as site-specific operating
parameters? §63.13680(3)
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
2. Do you keep records of the total regeneration stream mass or
volumetric flow for each carbon bed regeneration cycle?
§63.1367 (b)(l)
DYes DNo
43
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for regenerative carbon adsorbers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements _ Comments
3. Do you keep records of the temperature to which the carbon bed is DYes CD No
heated during each carbon bed regeneration? §63.1367(b)(l)
4. Do you keep records of the temperature to which the carbon bed is DYes DNo
cooled after each carbon bed regeneration? §63. 1367(b)(l)
5. Do you keep records of the operating time between regeneration? DYes DNo
6 . Do you identify all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are i 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63. 1368(g)(2)
all regeneration cycles when the total regeneration stream mass DYes DNo
or volumetric flow is lower than the minimum flow
established during your initial compliance demonstration?
all regeneration cycles during which the temperature to which D Yes D No
the carbon bed is heated during regeneration is lower than the
minimum temperature established during your initial
compliance demonstration?
• all regeneration cycles during which the temperature to which D Yes D No
the carbon bed is cooled after regeneration is higher than the
maximum temperature established during your initial
compliance demonstration?
all instances when the operating time between regeneration D Yes D No
exceeds the time interval established during your initial
compliance demonstration?
7. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63. 1367(a)(l) D Yes D No
44
-------
Checklist 6: Requirements for nonregenerative carbon adsorbers (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366{b)(l)(v) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you replace the carbon bed in the nonregenerative carbon
adsorption system with fresh carbon on a regular schedule based on
either of the following:
monitor the outlet TOC concentration that indicates
breakthrough?
2.
time interval established in your NOCS?
If you monitor the TOC concentration, do you t
ake readings
DYes
DYes
i daily or D Yes
DNo
DNo
DNo
at an interval no greater than 20 percent of the time required to
consume the total carbon working capacity under peak-case
conditions?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Comments
1. Did you submit the results of the initial design evaluation in your
Notification of Compliance Status Report? 63.1368(f)(2)
DYes
2. Do you identify in your Periodic Reports all instances when the DYes
carbon bed is not replaced within the required time interval based on
either the outlet TOC concentration or the time period established in
your NOCSR or operating permit? §63.1368(g)(2)
3. If you monitor the outlet TOC concentration, do you maintain
records of readings? §63.1367(b)(l)
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l)
DYes
45
-------
Checklist 7: Requirements for thermal incinerators (All options except options 3,4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366(b)(l)fvit) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you measure the outlet gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during the period in which the thermal incinerator is
controlling HAP from an emission stream?
D Yes D No
2. Is the temperature monitoring device accurate to within
± 0.75 percent of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius
or ± 2.5°C, whichever is greater?
D Yes D No
3. Is the temperature monitoring device calibrated annually?
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
4. Do you average the temperature readings over the operating day or
operating block?
5. If flow to the thermal incinerator can be intermittent, did you install
a flow indicator at the inlet or outlet of the thermal incinerator and
do you use it to identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
2.
results of the initial performance test or design evaluation?
§63.1368(0(2)
documentation to establish the minimum outlet gas temperature
as a site-specific operating parameter? §63. 1368(f)(3)
Do you keep continuous records of the outlet temperature?
§63.1367(b)(l)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
3. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are i 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63.1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the
average outlet temperature is lower than the minimum
temperature specified in your NOCSR or operating permit?
• identification of all operating days or blocks when insufficient
monitoring data are collected?
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
46
-------
Checklist?: (cont'd)
Requirements for thermal incinerators (All options except options 3,4, and 8)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) D Yes D No
47
-------
Checklist 8: Requirements for catalytic incinerators (All options except 3, 4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366(b)(l)(\mi) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you measure the temperature of the gas stream immediately before
and after the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes during the
period in which the catalytic incinerator is controlling HAP form an
emission stream?
D Yes D No
2. Do you calculate the temperature difference across the catalyst bed at
least once every IS minutes during the period in which the catalytic
incinerator is controlling HAP form an emission stream?
O Yes D No
3. Is the temperature monitoring device accurate to within ± 0.75 percent D Yes D No
of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius or ± 2.5°C, whichever
is greater?
4. Is the temperature monitoring device calibrated annually? DYes DNo
5. Do you average the temperature readings over the operating day or DYes DNo
operating block?
6. If flow to the catalytic incinerator can be intermittent, did you install a
flow indicator at the inlet or outlet of the catalytic incinerator and do
you use it to identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of Compliance
Status Report:
results of the initial performance test or design evaluation?
$63.1368(0(2)
documentation to establish the minimum temperature of the gas
stream immediately before the catalyst bed and the minimum
temperature difference across the catalyst bed as site-specific
operating parameters? §63.13680(3)
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
2. Do you keep continuous records of the temperature of the gas stream
upstream of the catalyst bed and the temperature difference across the
catalyst bed? §63.1367(b)(l)
D Yes D No
48
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for catalytic incinerators (All options except 3,4, and 8)
B. Recordkeeptng and Reporting Requirements Comments
3. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are z 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63.1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the D Yes D No
average upstream temperature is lower than the minimum
temperature specified in your NOCSR or operating permit, or the
average temperature difference across the catalyst bed is lower
than the minimum temperature difference specified in your
NOCSR or operating permit?
identification of all operating days or blocks when insufficient D Yes D No
monitoring data are collected?
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) D Yes D.No .
49
-------
Checklist 9: Requirements for a boiler or process heater (All options, except 3,4, and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63J366(b)(l)$x)ftnd&)
Comments
1. Do you monitor the temperature of the gases exiting the combustion
chamber at least every 15 minutes during the period in which the
boiler or process heater is controlling HAP from an emission stream?
D Yes D No
2. Is the temperature monitoring device accurate to within
± 0.75 percent of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius
or ± 2.5°C, whichever is greater?
D Yes D No
3. Is the temperature monitoring device calibrated annually?
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
4. Do you average the temperature readings over the operating day or
operating block?
5. If flow to the boiler or process heater can be intermittent, did you
install a flow indicator at the inlet or outlet of the boiler or process
heater and do you use it to identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
results of the initial performance test or design evaluation?
§63.1368(f)(2)
• documentation to establish the minimum combustion zone
temperature? §63.1368(f)(3)
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
2. Do you have continuous records of the combustion zone temperature?
§63.l367(b)(l)
3. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are i 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63.1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the
average combustion zone temperature is lower than the minimum
temperature specified in ypurNOCSR or operating permit? .
identification of all operating days or blocks when insufficient
monitoring data are collected?
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
O Yes D No
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l)
50
-------
Checklist 10: Requirements for flares (Option 3)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
1. Monitoring Requirements $63.1366(b)(J)fvi) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you monitor for the presence of the flare pilot flame at least once
every 15 minutes?
D Yes D No
2.
B.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Is the monitoring device calibrated annually?
Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Did you submit all of the following in your Notification of
Compliance Status Report:
results of the initial visible emissions test? §63.1368(j)(2)
• the net heating value of gas being combusted and its exit velocity?
§63.1368(f)(3)
Do you maintain records of the continuously monitored data?
§63.1 367 (b) (1)
Do you identify all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are > I percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63. J368(g)(2)
all periods when the flare pilot flame was absent?
• all periods when the monitor was not working?
Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
Comments
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
51
-------
Checklist 11: Requirements for alternative standard (Option 4 and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements £63 J366(b)(2)and{5)
Comments
1. Have you installed a CEMS to monitor the outlet TOC concentration DYes DNo
and/or outlet HC1 and chlorine concentration at least once every IS
minutes during the period in which the control device is controlling
HAP from an emission stream?
2. Is the TOC monitor installed, calibrated, and maintained to meet the Q Yes D No
requirements of Performance Specifications 8 or 9 of appendix B of
part 60?
3. Is the monitoring device calibrated at a minimum with quarterly DYes DNo
cylinder gas audits?
4. If supplemental gases are introduced before the control device, is the D Yes D No
monitored concentration corrected?
5. Is the CEMS data reduced to operating day or operating block D Yes D No
averages?
6. If flow to the control device can be intermittent, did you install a flow D Yes D No
indicator at the inlet or outlet of the control device, and do you use it
to identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do your records show that you calibrate your monitor in accordance DYes DNo
with your quality control program?
§§63.1366(b)(3) and 63.8(d)
2. Have your recorded all maintenance and calibration checks performed DYes DNo
on the CEMS? §63.1367(b)(3)
52
-------
Checklist 11: (cont'd)
Requirements for alternative standard (Option 4 and 8)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
3. Do you have all of the following records: §63.1367(a)(4)
all required CEMS measurements (including monitoring data DYes DNo
recorded during unavoidable CEMS breakdowns and
out-of-control periods)?
the date and time of each period when the CEMS is inoperative DYes DNo
except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks?
• the date and time of each period when the CEMS is out of control
(e.g., calibration drift exceeds specification, CEMS fails cylinder
gas audit)?
the date and start and end time of each period of excess emissions D Yes D No
and parameter monitoring exceedances occurring during startups,
shutdowns, malfunctions, and at other times?
the nature and cause of any malfunction of your monitor (if .., Yes rj No
known), and corrective actions taken?
the total process operating time during the reporting period? .-, y .-, ~
all procedures, including calibrations, that are part of your .-, v ,-, M
... . n LJ iCS LJINO
quality control program?
4. Do you have records indicating that you notified the Administrator at DYes DNo
least 60 days before conducting a performance evaluation of your
CEMS? §63.1368(d)
5. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if
exceedances or excursions are £ 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period: §63.1368(g)(2)
all monitoring data for all operating days or operating blocks when D Yes D No
the average TOC or HC1/C12 concentrations exceed 20 ppmv?
identification of all operating days when insufficient monitoring DYes DNo
data are collected?
6. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) DYes DNo
53
-------
Checklist 12: Requirements for any control devices that control vent streams containing total HAP
emissions less than 0.91 Mg/yr (All options except 4 and 8)
Facility Name:
Facility, Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date: ————————^———————————————————-
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance. If your approved monitoring procedures are the same as those specified in the rule for a larger
control device, also fill out the appropriate checklist from among checklists 3 through 10.
A. Monitoring Requirements §63.1366{b)(l)(i) and (2)
Comments
1. Do you periodically verify that the control device is operating properly DYes DNo
by following the procedures specified in your approved Precompliance
Plan?
2. If the verification procedure includes monitoring a parameter more (3 Yes DNo
than one time per day, do you average the daily readings?
3. Do you calibrate any monitoring instruments according to procedures D Yes D No
in your approved Precompliance Plan?
4. If flow to the control device can be intermittent, did you install a flow D Yes D No
indicator at the inlet or outlet of the control device and do you use it to
identify periods of no flow?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Did you submit a description of your daily or per batch verification D Yes D No
procedures in your Precompliance Plan? §63.1368(e)
2. Do you submit all of the following in your Periodic Reports if the
exceedances or excursions are ^ 1 percent of the total operating time
during the reporting period:
§63.1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or blocks when the data DYes DNo
show the control device is not operating as designed?
identification of all operating days or blocks when insufficient D Yes D No
monitoring data are collected?
3. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) D Yes D No
54
-------
Chapter 4 - Complying with requirements for storage vessels
What storage vessels are covered?
Storage vessels that meet all of the following criteria are covered under Subpart MMM:
• meet the definition of a "Group 1" storage vessel [§63.1361]
• are determined to be part of a PAI process unit [§63.1360(f)]
• aren't exempt under the definition of storage vessel [§63.1361]
What storage vessels are exempt?
Any storage vessels meeting either of the following conditions aren't subject to Subpart MMM:
• Group 2 storage vessels
• Vessels that aren't part of a PAI process unit
Note: A Group 2 storage vessel is any vessel that doesn 't meet the definition of a Group 1 storage vessel.
In addition, your tank or other vessel isn't considered to be a storage vessel (Group 1 or 2) if any
of the following apply [§63.1361]:
• it's permanently attached to a motor vehicle, such as a truck, railcar, barge, or ship
• it's designed to operate with a pressure in excess of 204.9 kilopascals and without
emissions to the atmosphere
• material stored in the vessel contains no organic HAP or contains organic HAP only as
impurities
Definition: Impurity means a substance that is produced coincidentally with the
product(s), or is present in a raw material. An impurity does not serve a useful purpose
in the production or use of the product(s) and is not isolated.
• it's a wastewater storage tank
• it's a non-wastewater waste tank
• it's a process tank
: V.> ". ':'•'":"
: .s .'. .-""s ': \
56
-------
What is a "Group 1" storage vessel?
If your storage vessel meets any of the following criteria, it's considered a "Group 1" storage
vessel: [§63.1361]
Your storage vessel is
at... And has a capacity of..
And stores material with a maximum true
vapor pressure of...
an existing source ;> 75 m3
a new source * 40 m3
;> 75m3
*3.45kPa
* 16.5 kPa
i 3.45 kPa
Note: If you don't wish to determine the maximum true vapor pressure of the material in a storage vessel,
then you must designate it as a Group 1 storage vessel [§63.1362(c)(l)].
How do I know if a storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit?
Your storage vessel isn't part of a PAI process unit (and is not part of the affected source) if it's
subject to another MACT standard on June 23, 1999 [§63.1360(f)(l)].
Your storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit if either of the following apply:
• the input to the vessel from the PAI process unit is greater than or equal to the input from
any other PAI or non-PAI process unit
• the output from the vessel to the PAI process unit is greater than or equal to the output to
any other PAI or non-PAI process unit
Note: If the greatest input to (or output from) a shared storage vessel is the same for two or more process
units, including at least one PAI process unit, you may assign the storage vessel to any one of the PAI process
units. [§63.1360(f)(2)]
If the process unit(s) the storage vessel is used with varies from year to year, then you determine
the greatest input or output on either of the following:
• what you actually used the vessel for during the year preceding June 23, 1999 (i.e., for
existing sources)
• what you expect to use the vessel for in the 5 years after startup (i.e., for new storage
vessels or existing vessels that were not in operation for the year preceding June 23, 1999).
For storage vessels in tank farms, you use the same procedures described above to determine if
the storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit, except your analysis is limited to the process units
57
-------
for which there is no storage vessel in-between the storage vessel in the tank farm and the
associated processes.
You must reevaluate if your storage vessel is part of a PAI process unit after any of the following
occur:
• the storage vessel begins receiving material from (or sending material to) another process
unit
• the storage vessel ceases to receive material from (or send material to) a PAI process unit
• there is a significant change in the use of the storage vessel
What compliance options do I have for my storage vessels?
For any storage vessel covered under Subpart MMM, you have four compliance options:
Note: Compliance options for storage vessels are the same for new and existing sources.
Option 1: Use a fixed roof tank with an internal floating roof (EFR) [§63.1362(c)(2)(i)]
Equip the storage vessel with a fixed roof and internal floating roof
Option 2: Install an external floating roof (EFR) [§63.1362(c)(2)(ii)]
Equip the storage vessel with an external floating roof
Option 3: Convert your external floating roof to an internal floating roof
[§63.1362(c)(2)(iii)]
Equip the storage vessel with an external floating roof converted to an internal floating roof
(i.e., install a fixed roof above an external floating roof)
Option 4: Use a control device that meets any of the following conditions:
[§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)]:
(A) Percent reduction [§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)(A)]
Equip the storage vessel with a closed vent system and a control device that reduces organic
HAP emissions by ^95 percent (by weight)
58
-------
(B) Reduce outlet concentration to s20 ppmv TOC [§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)(B)]
Equip the storage vessel with a closed vent system and a control device that reduces organic
HAP emissions to outlet concentrations of *20 ppmv as TOC
(C) A flare [§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)(C)]
Equip the storage vessel with a flare that meets-the requirements of §63.1 l(b) (see the
Subpart A General Provisions)
(D) Use one of the following as a control device:
• A boiler or process heater with a design heat input of
,,, „ . These control devices are
44 megawatts or greater ., ..... ,.
° & exempt from initial compliance
• A boiler or process heater into which the emission demonstrations and monitoring
stream is introduced with the primary fuel 7^7^?' ^
r J [§63.1362(1) and
• An incinerator, boiler, or process heater that is §63.1365(a)(4)ft)fii)]
permitted under RCRA
(E) Use the alternative standard [§63.1362(c)(4)]
Use the alternative standard under §63.1362(c)(4), and route emissions from storage vessels
to a control device or series of control devices that achieve all of the following outlet
concentrations:
• ^20 ppmv TOC (as calibrated on methane or the predominant HAP)
• ^20 ppmv total HC1 and C12
Note: The outlet concentration limits are the same for options 4B and 4E, but the alternative standard
requires monitoring with CEMS, -whereas Option 4B requires monitoring of control device operating
parameters.
For option 4, you 're exempt from specification requirements during periods of planned routine maintenance
of the control device that don't exceed 240 hr/yr [§63.1362(c)(5)J.
How do I show initial compliance with the storage vessel requirements?
Subpart MMM contains different initial compliance requirements based on the compliance options
you choose.
59
-------
Options 1. 2 or 3: Compliance using internal or external floating roofs
You demonstrate initial compliance when you use a floating roof by determining if you're in
compliance with all of the following:
• floating roof design features
• operating requirements
• inspection and measurement requirements
Initial compliance and monitoring requirements for storage vessels equipped with a floating roof
are specified in §63.119 and §63.120 of Subpart G of the HON as referenced from §63.1365(d)
and §63.1366. However, Subpart MMM designates different definitions and compliance dates as
follows:
• the definition in §63.1361 applies when the term "storage vessel" is used in §§63.119 and
63.120.
• November 10, 1997 applies instead of December 31, 1992.
• June 23, 1999 applies instead of April 22, 1994.
• The compliance date specified in §63.1364 of Subpart MMM applies instead of the
compliance date in §63.100 of Subpart F
See Table 4-1 (page x) for your floating roof design and operating requirements You may be
subject to one or more of the requirements listed depending on the compliance options you choose.
Initial inspections and measurements are discussed in the section "What monitoring must I do?"
later in this chapter.
60
-------
If you're
complying with..
TABLE 4-1. Design and Operating Requirements for Storage Vessels Equipped with a Floating Roof
And also meet these operating requirements...
And your roof has the following
features...
Then you must meet these design
requirements...
Option 1,2, or 3 the floating roof itself be floating on the liquid surface except when
being supported by the leg supports is allowed
(Please note that
you have more be supported by leg supports only under the the process of filling, emptying, or refilling
requirements for following conditions: must be continuous and be as soon as possible
these options . during inhial m
further in this
table) * after the vessel has been completely
emptied and degassed
• before refilling
automatic bleeder vents have gaskets be closed at all times except when the roof is
being floated off or landed on the leg supports
openings not in contact with IFRs or project below the liquid surface
EFRs (except for automatic bleeder
vents and rim space vents)
rim space vents have gaskets set to open only in the following conditions:
• when the roof is being floated off the roof
leg supports
• when the pressure beneath the rim seal
exceeds manufacturer's specifications
access hatches and gauge floats have a gasketed cover be closed at all times except for access
Option 1 openings in the IFR (except for leg have a cover or lid with a gasket be closed at all times except for access
sleeves, automatic bleeder vents, rim
space vents, column wells, ladder
wells, sample wells, and stub drains)
sample wells have a slit fabric cover over at least
90 percent of the opening
-------
TABLE 4-1. (cont'd)
If you're
complying with.
And your roof has the following
features...
Then you must meet these design
requirements...
And also meet these operating requirements.,
ladder wells
have a gasketed sliding cover
penetrations in the EFR for fixed roof
columns
have either of the following:
• a flexible fabric sleeve seal
• a gasketed sliding cover
have all of the following:
• there must be two seals
• the primary seal must be a metallic shoe
or liquid-mounted seal
• both seals must completely cover the
space between the EFR and the vessel
wall
Option 2
to
closure device between the vessel wall
and roof edge
Option 1 or 3 closure device between the vessel wall
and the roof edge
any one of the following:
• a liquid-mounted seal
• a metallic shoe seal
• a double seal
-------
If you're
complying with...
And your roof has the following
features...
TABLE 4-1. (cont'd)
Then you must meet these design
requirements...
And also meet these operating requirements.
Option 2 or 3 openings in the roof except for the
following:
• automatic bleeder vents
• rim space vents
• roof drains
• leg sleeves
be equipped with a gasketed cover or lid
both of the following:
• keep the cover or lid closed except for
access
• cover on each access hatch and each gauge
float well must be bolted or fastened to be
air tight when closed
roof drains that empty into the stored have a slotted membrane fabric cover over at
liquid least 90 percent of the drain opening area
guide pole wells
unslotted guide poles
slotted guide poles
have either of the following:
• a gasketed sliding cover
• a flexible fabric sleeve seal
have a gasketed cap on the end of the pole
keep the cap closed except when gauging the
liquid level or taking liquid samples
have a gasketed float or other device to close
off the liquid surface from the atmosphere
IFR = internal floating roof EFR = external floating roof
Rule references for the information in Table 4-1 are: §63.119(b) for option 1, §63.119(c) for option 2, and §63.119(d) for option 3.
-------
Option 4: Compliance using a control device
(A) Percent reduction
If you use the percent reduction option to comply vnth Subpart MMM, you must demonstrate
initial compliance by determining the efficiency of the control device based on either of the
'following:
• performance test data [§63.1365(d)(l)(i)] ^^ 6U365(b)(1) through (11) specify
• design evaluation [§63.1365(d)(l)(ii)] test methods and procedures.
Performance test procedures:
If you send emissions from both a storage vessel and process vents to the same control device, you
may demonstrate initial compliance for the storage vessel using the results of the test you
conducted to show compliance with the process vent standards, provided that the test showed a
percent reduction *95 percent [§63.1365(d)(l)(i)(C)].
If you elect to conduct a test specifically for the emissions from the storage vessel, the test must be
conducted at the reasonably expected maximum filling rate [§63.1365(d)(l)(i)(A)].
Design evaluation procedures:
If you choose to demonstrate initial compliance by conducting a design evaluation, you must
document how you demonstrate that your control device achieves the required control efficiency
when the storage vessel is filled at the reasonably expected maximum filling rate. The parameters
to consider in design evaluations for different types of control devices are described in
§63.1365(a)(l).
(B) Outlet concentration
If you're complying with Subpart MMM using the outlet concentration option, you demonstrate
initial compliance by conducting a performance test to _
show the outlet TOC concentration is ^20 ppmv c H „ ,„,,. >,,,., ..... .,
FK^ 1 lACS.Vftt o^ (A\o\-\ Sections 63.136S(b)(l) through (11) specify
1 lACS.Vftt o^ (A\o\-\ . roug
. 1365(a)(6) and (d)(2)]. test methods and procedures.
(C) Flare
When a flare is the control device, you demonstrate initial compliance by doing all of the
following:
64
-------
determining visible emissions using EPA Method 22 of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A, for a
2-hour observation period [§63.1365(a)(3) and (d)(4)]. Flares must produce no visible
emissions, except for a period of 5 minutes during any 2 consecutive hours [§63.1 l(b)(4)
of subpart A]
determining under absolute or hypothetical peak-case conditions, the net heating value of
gas being combusted and its exit velocity as specified in §63.1 l(b)(6) through (8) of the
General Provisions [§63.1365(a)(3) and (d)(4)]
(£) The alternative standard
When using the alternative standard in §63.1362(c)(4), your outlet TOC concentration must be
^20 ppmv, and the outlet HC1 and C12 concentration must be s20 ppmv.
You demonstrate initial compliance with these values by having the monitoring equipment
operational on the compliance date (see the discussion of monitoring requirements for the
alternative standard later in this chapter, [page x]. In addition, if you intend to calibrate the
monitor using the predominant HAP, you will have to use EPA Method 18 to determine the
predominant HAP [§63.1365(a)(5) and (d)(6)].
How do I comply when my control device needs repairs [options 4 (A,
B, C, and E)]?
Your storage vessel is exempt from Subpart MMM during periods of routine maintenance on the
storage vessel control device, provided that the routine maintenance does not exceed 240 hr/yr
[§63.1365(d)(7)].
You demonstrate initial compliance with the provisions by including anticipated periods of planned
routine maintenance for the first reporting period in the Notification of Compliance Status report
as discussed in "What reports must I submit"of this chapter.
What monitoring must I do for my storage vessels?
Your monitoring requirements depend on the compliance option you select. A summary of the
monitoring requirements for each compliance option follows:
65
-------
If you're complying
using...
Then your monitoring requirements
include ...
You must monitor at this frequency.
Option 1,2 or 3
various inspections and measurements
typically annually and every time the
storage vessel is emptied and
degassed
Option 4 (A or B)
monitor one or more control device every 15 minutes
operating parameters such as temperature
and flow rate
Option 4 (C)
Option 4 (E)
monitor presence of pilot flame
every 15 minutes
every 15 minutes
monitor outlet TOC and, if appropriate,
HC1/C12 concentrations
Additional details for each option are provided below.
Options 1 or 3: Monitoring for internal floating roofs (IFRs)
If you comply with option 1 or 3, your monitoring requirements are as follows [§63.120(a) as
cross-referenced from §63.1365(d)(3)]:
If your IFR has And you visually
a...
inspect the...
Then monitor...
For...
According to these
sections of the rule...
Double-seal
system
(Option A)
IFR, the primary
and secondary seal,
gaskets, slotted
membranes, and
sleeve seals (if any)
each time the vessel
is emptied and
degassed,
and at least once
every 5 years after
the compliance date
• defects in the IFR
• holes, tears, or other
openings in the seal
or seal fabric
• gaskets that no
longer close off the
liquid surface to the
atmosphere
• slotted membranes
with more than
10 percent open area
§63.120(a)(3)(i)and
66
-------
If your IFR has
a...
And you visually
inspect the...
Then monitor...
For...
According to these
sections of the rule...
Double-seal
system (option
B)
secondary seal
through manholes
and roof hatches on
the fixed roof.
at least once every
12 months after
initial fill, or at least
once every 12
months after the
compliance date
IFR, the primary
and secondary seal,
gaskets, slotted
membranes, and
sleeve seals (if any)
each time the vessel
is emptied and
degassed, and at
least once every 10
years after the
compliance date, the
primary and
secondary seals,
gaskets, slotted
IFRs that aren't
resting on the surface
of the liquid or the
leg supports
liquid on the IFR
detached seal
holes or tears in the
seal fabric
visible gaps between
the seal and the wall
of the storage vessel
defects in the IFR
holes, tears, or other
openings in the seal
or seal fabric
gaskets that no
longer close off the
liquid surface to the
atmosphere
§63.120(a)(3)(ii)
and (a)(4)
§63.120(a)(3)(iii)
and (a)(7)
a single-seal
system
IFR and the seal
through manholes
and roof hatches on
the fixed roof
sleeve seals (if any)
at least once every
12 months after
initial fill, or at least
once every 12
months after
compliance date
• slotted membranes
with more than
10 percent open area
• IFRs that aren't
resting on the
surface of the liquid
or the leg supports
• liquid on the IFR
• detached seal
§63.120(a)(2)(i)and
(a)(4)
holes or tears in the
seal fabric
visible gaps between
the seal and the wall
67
-------
If your IFR has And you visually
a... inspect the ...
Then monitor...
For...
According to these
sections of the rule...
IFR, the seal,
gaskets, slotted
membranes, and
sleeve seals (if any)
each time the
storage vessel is
emptied and
degassed, ana at
least once every 10
years after
compliance date
defects in the IFR
holes, tears, or other
openings in the seal
or seal fabric
gaskets that no
longer close off the
liquid surface to the
atmosphere
slotted membranes
with more than
10 percent open area
§63.120(a)(2)(ii)and
Note: Subpart MMM designates some different definitions and compliance dates than are used in §63.120 of
subpart G. These differences are noted in §63.1362(d)(2)(i), (iv), and (v).
Conditions found during annual inspections must be repaired-within 45 days after performing the inspection
(unless you get an extension) [§63.120(a)(4)]. Conditions found in the inspection after emptying and degassing
the storage vessel must be repaired before refilling the storage vessel with organic HAP [§63.120(a)(7)].
Option 2: Monitoring for external floating roofs (EFRs)
If you comply with option 2, your monitoring requirements are as follows [§63.120(b) as cross-
referenced from §63.1365(d)(3)]:
For EFRs with the
following features...
Monitor the following...
At this frequency..."
According to this section
of the rule...
All EFRs
visually inspect the roof,
seals, and fittings
each time the vessel is
emptied and degassed
§63.120(b)(10)
EFR with primary and measure6 gap between vessel
secondary seals wall and primary seal
during the hydrostatic
testing of the vessel or
by the compliance date,
whichever occurs last,
and at least every 5
years thereafter
§63.120(b)(l)(i)
measureb gap between vessel
wall and secondary seal
annually
inspect integrity of primary
seal
eveiySyears
inspect integrity of secondary annually
seal and inspect for proper fit
§63.120(b)(5)
§63.120(b)(6)
68
-------
For EFRs with the
following features...
Monitor the following...
At this frequency ...*
According to this section
of the rule...
EFR with liquid-
mounted or metallic
shoe primary seal and
no secondary seal*
measure*1 gap between vessel annually
wall and primary seal
§63.120(b)(l)(ii)
inspect integrity of primary
seal
if a metallic shoe seal is
annually
annually
§63.120(b)(5)(ii)
§63.120(b)(5)(i)
used, measure vertical
distance that one end of the
metallic shoe extends above
the liquid surface
* All measurements and inspections that must be performed annually or every 5 years must also be performed
before the compliance date.
b Seal gap measurements are made according to the method described in §63.120(b)(2) through (b)(4) of subpart
G.
c When secondary seal is added, both the primary and secondary seals must be measured within 90 days and at
the frequency specified for EFRs with primary and secondary seals [§63.120(b)(l)(iv)].
Note; Subpart MMM designates some different definitions and compliance dates than those used in §63.120 of
subpart G. These differences are noted in §63:i362(d)(2)(i), (iv), and (v).
If you think performing seal gap measurements and inspection of a vessel may be unsafe, then you may get an
extension to perform the measurements and inspection or empty and remove the storage vessel from service
[§63.120(b)(7)].
Subpart MMM also requires that you repair defects identified during inspections if you're using
option 2. The types of conditions that you must repair and the time allowed for the repairs are as
follows:
When you're performing ...
And you find that-
Then, repair the condition
visual inspection of the roof,
seals, and fittings after
emptying and degassing the
storage vessel
the external floating roof has defects before refilling the storage
tears, or other openings i
seal fabric
gaskets no longer close off the liquid
surface from the atmosphere
the slotted membrane has more than
10 percent open area
69
-------
When you're performing...
And you find that...
Then, repair the condition...
seal gap measurement and
visual inspection for all
primary seals
the total area of gaps between the vessel
wall and primary seal exceeds
212 cmVmeter of vessel diameter
there are gaps between the vessel wall
and primary seal wider than 3.81 cm
.there are holes-in the mechanical shoe
(if used), seal fabric, or seal envelope
within 45 days from the
measurement or inspection
(unless you get an extension)
[§63.120(b)(8)]
additional measurement for
metallic shoe primary seals
the metallic shoe seal doesn't have one
end in the stored liquid and the other end
extending at least 61 cm above the stored
liquid surface
within 45 days from the
measurement or inspection
(unless you get an extension)
[§63.120(b)(8)]
seal gap measurement and
visual inspection for all
secondary seals
the total area of gaps between the vessel
wall and secondary seal exceeds
21.2 cmVmeter of vessel diameter
there are gaps between the vessel wall
and secondary seal wider than 1.27 cm
the secondary seal does not completely
cover the space between the roof edge
and the space between the vessel wall
there are holes, tears, or other openings
in the secondary seal or seal fabric
within 45 days from the
measurement or inspection
(unless you get an extension)
[§63.120(b)(8)]
Option 4: Control Devices
(A&B) Monitoring for percent reduction or outlet concentration
The monitoring requirements for your storage vessel percent reduction and outlet concentration
options are the same as the monitoring requirements for the process vent percent reduction and
outlet concentration options and vary depending on the control device that you use. Table 3-2 in
Chapter 3 summarizes the monitoring requirements for the percent reduction and outlet
concentration options for various control devices [§63.1366(b)(l)].
(C) Monitoring for flares
If you control storage vessel emissions with a flare, you must monitor the presence of the flame.
Monitoring must be conducted at least once every 15 minutes. You must calibrate the monitoring
device used to detect the presence of the pilot flame annually [§63.1366(b)(l)(vi)].
(£) Monitoring for the alternative standard
70
-------
If you choose to comply with the alternative standard, your monitoring requirements include all of
the following:
• monitor the outlet TOC and HC1/C12 concentration at least once every 15 minutes
• adjust the monitored concentrations to account for supplemental gases, if any
use a TOC monitor that meets the requirements of Performance Specification 8 or 9 of
appendix B of 40 CFR part 60
install, calibrate, maintain, and operate the monitors in accordance with §63.8 of the
General Provisions
Note: You don't have to monitor the total HCl and C13 concentration if you know that the control device does not
generate HCI/Cl, [§63.1366(b)(5)].
Procedures for correcting the outlet concentrations to account for supplemental gases are specified in
§63.1365(a)(7).
(D) Monitoring for boilers or process heaters
You're not required to do any monitoring if you route storage vessel emissions through a process
heater or boiler that meets the criteria for compliance option 4 (D).
What records must I keep for my storage vessels?
To avoid repetition, all of your recordkeeping requirements are presented in Chapter 8.
What reports must I submit for my storage vessels?
To avoid repetition, all of your reporting requirements are presented in Chapter 8. Requirements
specific to storage vessels are also shown in this section.
Depending on the compliance option you choose, the following notifications may be required:
If you're complying You must notify the According to this section
with... And you do the following... Administrator... of subpart G...
Option 1,2 or 3 refill your storage vessels after visual 30 days'before §§63.120(a)(5)and
inspection of the roof, seals, and refilling your vessel (b)(10)(ii)
fittings each time the vessel is
emptied and degassed
71
-------
If you're complying
with...
And you do the following ...
You must notify the
Administrator...
According to this section
of subpart G...
perform seal gap measurements
30 days before
performing the
measurements
§63.120(b)(9)
a If the inspection prior to refilling is unplanned, the notification may be made at least 7 days before refilling
For Options 4 (A, B, C and £), you must also report the following:
When submitting your... Include information on the...
According to the following
section of the rule...
Notification of Compliance
Status report
anticipated periods of planned routine
maintenance
§63.1368(f)(7)
Periodic reports
actual periods of planned routine maintenance §63.1368(g)(2)(v)
during the reporting period
and
anticipated periods of planned routine
maintenance for the next reporting period
Note: §63.122 of subpart G contains additional reporting requirements for storage vessels. These reporting
requirements -were inadvertently omitted from the text of Subpart MMM published on June 23, 1999. However,
Subpart MMM will be revised before the compliance date to include the §63.122 reporting requirements for
storage vessels.
72
-------
Checklists for Inspection of Storage Vessels
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
There are five checklists for storage vessels. The table below explains which inspection
checklists you should use for storage vessels.
If you follow ...
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
For a storage vessel with. . .
a fixed roof and an internal floating
roof
an external floating roof
an external floating roof converted to an
internal floating roof
Then use the
following Starting on
checklists2 ... page ...
2
3
4
Option 4(A or B) a closed-vent system and control device
that reduces emissions *95% by weight
or reduces outlet concentrations <;20
ppmv as TOC
Chapter 3,
checklists 3 through
9, as applicable
Option 4(C)
Option 4(£)
a flare
emissions routed to a control device to
meet the alternative standard
Chapter 3,
checklist 10
5
* Checklist 1 applies for all options.
73
-------
Checklist 1: Applicability (All Options)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance. If the requirement is not applicable (N/A), leave blank.
Comments
1. Does your tank or vessel meet the definition of a storage DYes DNo
vessel? §63.1361
2. Is your storage vessel part of a PAI process unit? §63.1360(f) DYes DNo
3. Did you designate the storage vessel as a Group 1 vessel, or D Yes D No
did your determine that the vessel meets Group 1 criteria?
§63.1362(c)(l) ' '
74
-------
Checklist 2: Requirements for a storage vessel with an internal floating roof (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance. If the requirement is not applicable (N/A), leave blank.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63.120(a) as cross-referenced from
§63.1363(${3) . Comments
Note: The monitoring requirements include visual inspections and measurements. Questions 3-5 apply for all
visual inspections. Questions 5-15 apply only for visual inspections performed each time the vessel is
emptied and degassed.
1. If the storage vessel is equipped with a single-seal system:
§63.120(a)(2)
• Do you visually inspect the IFR and seal at least once every D Yes D No
12 months?
• Do you visually inspect the IFR, the seal, gaskets, slotted DYes DNo
membranes, and sleeve seals (if any) each time the storage
vessel is emptied and degassed, and at least once every 10
years?
2. If the storage vessel is equipped with a double-seal system, do
either of the following apply: £63.120(a)(3)
• Do you visually inspect the IFR, the primary seal, the DYes DNo
secondary seal, gaskets, slotted membranes, and sleeve seals
(if any) each time the storage vessel is emptied and
degassed, and at least once every 5 years?
• Do you visually inspect the IFR and the secondary seal at ED Yes DNo
least once every 12 months, and do you visually inspect the
IFR, the primary seal, the secondary seal, gaskets, slotted
membranes, and sleeve seals (if any) each time the vessel is
emptied and degassed, and at least once every 10 years?
3. Does the floating roof float on the liquid surface? DYes DNo
§63.120(a)(4) and (7)
Note: The roof is not required to be floating on the liquid
surface during initial filling, after the vessel has been
completely emptied and degassed, and-when completely
emptied before being refilled.
4. Is the IFR in good condition (i.e., free of defects such as DYes DNo
corrosion or pools of standing liquid)? §63.120(a)(4) and (7)
75
-------
Checklist 2: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an internal floating roof (Option 1)
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63. 120(a) as cross-referenced from
. Comments
5. Inspect the seal(s) §63.120(a)(4) and (7)
• Is the seal attached to the IFR? DYes DNo
• Is the seal or seal fabric free of holes, tears, or other D Yes D No
openings?
• Does the seal make continuous contact with the wall of the DYes DNo
storage vessel (i.e., no visible gaps between the seal and
wall)?
6. Is the IFR equipped with a liquid-mounted seal, metallic shoe D Yes D No
seal, or a double seal? §63.119(b)(3)
1. Inspect deck openings
• If the IFR is non-contact, do the openings in the IFR project D Yes D No
below the stored liquid surface (except automatic bleeder
and rim space vents)? §63.119(a)(5)(i)
• Is each opening in the IFR equipped with a gasketed cover DYes DNo
(except automatic bleeder vents, rim space vents, column
wells, ladder wells, sample wells, and stub drains)?
§63.119(a)(5)(ii)
• Is each cover on an IFR opening closed (unless open for rj yes D No
access)? §63.119(a)(6)
• Are covers on each access hatch and automatic gauge float DYes DNo
fastened air-tight when closed? §63.119(a)(6)
• Do gaskets on IFR opening covers close off the liquid D Yes D No
surface from the atmosphere? §63. 120(a)(7)
8 . Inspect automatic bleeder vents
• Are the automatic bleeder vents closed (unless the roof is DYes DNo
being floated off or landed on the roof leg supports)?
§63.119(a)(4)
• Are the automatic bleeder vents gasketed? DYes DNo
§63.119(a)(5)(iv)
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the DYes DNo
atmosphere? §63.120(a)(7)
76
-------
Checklist 2: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an internal floating roof (Option 1)
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63,. J20(a) as cross-referenced from
Comments
9. Inspect rim space vents
• Are the rim space vents closed except when either:
§63.119(a)(6)
» the roof is being floated off the roof leg supports ?
*• the pressure beneath the rim seal exceeds the
manufacturer's recommended setting?
• Are the rim space vents gasketed? §63. H9(a)(5)(v)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DYes DNo
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the DYes DNo
atmosphere? §63.120(a)(7)
10. Does each sample well have a slit fabric cover over at least DYes DNo
90 percent of the opening? §63.119(a)(5)(iii) and
§te:120(a)(7)
11. Does each ladder well have a gasketed sliding cover? D Yes D No
^.119(a)(5)^i)
12. Does each column well supporting the fixed roof have either a D Yes D No
flexible fabric sleeve seal or gasketed sliding cover?
S63:n9Ja)(S)jfni) _
13. Do ladder and column well gaskets close off the liquid surface D Yes D No
to the atmosphere? §63.120(a)(7)
14. If flexible fabric sleeve seals are used for column wells, are the D Yes D No
fabric sleeves free of defects such as holes, tears, or gaps?
$63:120(a)(7)
15. If repairs were needed, did you complete them before refilling D Yes D No
the storage vessel?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements £f <55.122 and 63.123 sat cross
referenced by §$ 63 J 367(7?) and 63,1368(g)(2)(??) Comments
Note: There are reporting and recordkeeping requirements for visual inspections.
1. Did you record the occurrence of each visual inspection? DYes DNo
&3.123Q
2. Do you maintain all records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) DYes DNo
77
-------
Checklist 2: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an internal floating roof (Option 1)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirement* §§ 63. 122 and 63. 123 as cross
referenced by §$ 63,U67(??) and 63.1 $&(&&)$?) _ Comments
3 . If you detected a failure during an inspection, did you submit
all of the following information in your periodic report:
§63.122(d)(l)0i)
• date of the inspection? DYes DNo
• identification of all storage vessels with failures? DYes DNo
• description of the failures? DYes DNo
• either the date and nature of repairs made or the date the DYes DNo
vessel was emptied (if the vessel was not already empty)?
4. If your periodic report in "3" shows that you made a repair
more than 45 days after the failure was found, does your next
periodic report include documentation of the use of up to two
30-day extensions and the following information:
• identification of the storage vessel? D Yes D No
• description of the failure? DYes DNo
• documentation that alternate storage capacity was D Yes D No
unavailable?
• schedule of actions taken to make repairs or empty the DYes DNo
vessel as soon as possible?
• date the storage vessel was emptied and nature of and date DYes DNo
repair was made?
5. If you refilled a storage vessel after it was emptied and DYes DNo
degassed, did you submit a report notifying the Administrator
at least 30 days before the vessel was refilled? §63. 120(a)(5)
78
-------
Checklist 3: Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
Facility Name: _
Facility Location: _
Facility TRI ID #: _
Inspector: _
Date; _ =================================^
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements $63. 120(b) as cross-referenced from
..... Comments
Note: The monitoring requirements include visual inspections and seal gap measurements.
1 . Do you measure the seal gap between the vessel wall and the D Yes D No
primary seal at least every 5 years? § 63. 120(b)(l)(i)
2. Do you measure the seal gap between the vessel wall and the D Yes D No
secondary seal at least once per year? § 63. 120(b)(l)(iii)
Note: If your EFR does not have a secondary seal,
§63. I20(b)(l)fti) specifies the seal gap measurements for the
primary seal must be once per year.
3 . • Do you measure the seal gaps, if any, when the EFR is not D Yes D No
resting on the roof leg supports? §63. 120(b)(2)(i)
4. Do you measure the seal gaps, if any, around the entire D Yes D No
circumference of the vessel in each place where a
0.32 centimeter (Vb inch) diameter uniform probe passes freely
between the wall and the seal? §63. 120(b)(2)(ii)
5. Do you determine the total surface area of each gap using D Yes D No
probes of various widths to measure the gap accurately?
6 . If you determine that it is unsafe to perform the seal gap
measurements, do either of the following apply: § 63. 120(b)(7)
• Do you measure the gaps no later than 30 days after the
determination? D Yes D No
or
• Do you remove the vessel from service within 45 days after
the determination? D Yes D No
Note: You may use up to 2 extensions of the 45-day limit
provided you explain why it was unsafe to perform the seal gap
measurement or inspection, document that alternate storage
capacity is unavailable, and specify a schedule to ensure that
the vessel is emptied as soon as practical.
79
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
A, Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63. 120(b) ay cross-referenced from
$63.136S(%(3) _ . _ Comments
7. Do you repair the seals no later than 45 days after the seal gap D Yes D No
measurements indicate a failure (or empty the storage vessel)?
8. Do you visually inspect the EFR, the primary seal, the D Yes D No
secondary seal, and fittings each time the vessel is emptied and
degassed? §63.120(b)(10)
9. Does the EFR rest on the surface of the stored liquid? DYes DNo
§63.120(c)(3)
Note: The roof is not required to be floating on the liquid
surface during initial filling, after the vessel has been
completely emptied and degassed, and -when completely
emptied before being refilled.
10. Is the EFR in good condition (i.e., free of defects such as DYes DNo
corrosion and pools of standing liquid)? §63.120(b)(10)(i)
11. Is there a secondary seal installed above the primary seal? DYes DNo
12. Inspect deck openings.
• If the EFR is non-contact, do the openings in the EFR D Yes D No
project below the stored liquid surface (except automatic
bleeder and rim space vents)? §63. 119(c)(2)(i)
• Is each opening in the EFR equipped with a gasketed cover rjYes DNo
that forms a vapor-tight seal (except automatic bleeder
vents, rim space vents, roof drains, and leg sleeves)?
§63.119(c)(2)(ii)
• Is each gasketed cover on any EFR opening closed (unless QYes DNo
open for access)?
• Are covers on each access hatch and gauge float well DYes DNo
fastened air-tight when closed? §63.119(c)(2)Ciii)
• Do gaskets on EFR opening covers close off the liquid DYes DNo
surface from the atmosphere? §63. 120(b)(10)Q)
80
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63. t2Q(b) as cross-referenced from
- : Comments
1 3 . Inspect automatic bleeder vents.
• Are the automatic bleedei vents closed (unless the roof is DYes DNo
being floated off or landed on the roof leg supports)?
§63.n9(c)(2)(iii)
• Are the automatic bleeder vents gasketed? D Yes D No
§63.119(c)(2)(v)
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the D Yes D No
atmosphere? §63.120(b)(10)ft)
14.
15.
Inspect rim space vents.
• Are the rim space vents closed except when:
§63.119(c)(2)(iv)
» the roof is being floated off the roof leg supports?
•• the pressure beneath the rim seal exceeds the
manufacturer's recommending setting?
• Are the rim space vents gasketed? §63.119(c)(2)(v)
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the
atmosphere? §63.120(b)(10)(i)
Is each roof drain covered with a slotted membrane fabric that
covers at least 90 percent of the opening area?
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
16. Is each unslotted guide pole well equipped with either a DYes DNo
gasketed sliding cover or a flexible fabric sleeve seal that closes
off the liquid surface from the atmosphere? §63. 119(c)(2)(vii)
17. Does each unslotted guide pole have on it's end a closed DYes DNo
gasketed cap that closes off the liquid surface from the
atmosphere (except when gauging the liquid level or taking
liquid samples)? §63.119(c)(2)(viii)
IS. Does each gauge hatch and sample well have a closed gasketed DYes DNo
cover that closes off the liquid surface from the atmosphere
(except when open for access)? §63.119(c)(2)(xi)
81
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
A, Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63.120$) as cross-referenced from
§63.136S(d)p) : ,___ Comments
19. Inspect the secondary seal and perform seal gap measurements.
• Is the seal continuous and completely covering the space D Yes D No
between the EFR and vessel wall? §63.120(b)(6)0)
• Are there no holes, tears, or other openings in the seal or D Yes D No
sealfebric? §63.120(b)(6)fli)
• Are there no visible gaps between the seal and the wall of
the storage vessel such that: §63.120(b)(4)
> The total area of the gaps is less than 21.2 cm2 per meter D Yes D No
of vessel diameter?
» The maximum gap width between the vessel wall and D Yes D No
the seal does not exceed 1.27 cm?
20. Inspect the primary seal and perform seal gap measurements.
• Is the primary seal either a metallic shoe or liquid-mounted DYes DNo
seal? §63.119(c)(l)(ii)
• Does the primary seal form a continuous closure that
completely covers the space between the vessel wall and
EFR such that: §63.120(b)(3)
» The total area of the gaps is less than 212 cm2 per meter ._.„ _.T
of vessel diameter? DYes DN°
» The maximum gap width between the vessel wall and nv
the seal does not exceed 3.81 cm? D Yes ° No
• Is the seal fabric, seal envelope, or shoe (if a metallic shoe n Y n M
seal is used) free of holes, tears, or other openings?
§63.120(b)(5)(ii)
• If the primary seal is a metallic shoe seal:
»• Does the lower end of the metallic shoe extend into the -.v
stored liquid? §63.120(b)(5)ft) DYes DNo
» Does the upper end of the metallic shoe seal extend a
minimum vertical distance of 61 cm above the liquid
surface? §63.120(b)(5)0)
»• Is there a flexible coated fabric that spans the space n
between the metal shoe and the vessel wall? U Yes DNo
If the primary seal is a liquid-mounted seal, is the seal in
conta<
EFR?
contact with the liquid between the storage vessel wall and DYes aNo
82
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
B. Recordkecpiag and Reporting BeqHirementjr §§63.122 and 63.123 as cross
referenced by §§ 63.U67(??) md63.im{g)$)(??) Comments
1. Do your records indicate that you made seal gap measurements OYes DNo
annually for the secondary seal and every 5 years for the
primary seal? §63.120(b)(l)fl) and fin)
2. Did you record the date of the seal gap measurement, the raw DYes DNo
data obtained, and calculations performed? §63.123(d)
3. Did you record the occurrence of each visual inspection after a DYes DNo
storage vessel was emptied and degassed?
4. Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) D Yes D No
5. If you detected a failure in the seals, did you include the
following in your periodic report: §63.122(e)(l) and (e)(3)fti)
• the date and results of the inspection? DYes DNo
• the date and results of seal gap measurements? DYes DNo
• the date and nature of the repair or the date the vessel was DYes DNo
emptied?
6. If your periodic report in "5" shows that you made a repair
more than 45 days after the failure was found, does your next
periodic report include documentation of the use of up to two
30-day extensions and the following information:
§63.120(b)(8) and§63.123(e)(2)
• identification of the storage vessel? DYes DNo
• description of the failure? DYes DNo
• documentation that alternate storage capacity was DYes DNo
unavailable?
• schedule of actions taken to make repairs or empty the DYes DNo
vessel as soon as possible?
• date the storage vessel was emptied and nature of and date D Yes D No
repair was made?
7. If you detected a failure during a visual inspection, did you
submit the following information about your visual inspection
in your periodic report: §63. ]23(e)(3)fii)
• date of the inspection? DYes DNo
• identification of all storage vessels with failures? DYes DNo
• description of the failures? DYes DNo
• date and nature of repair ro date when the vessel was DYes DNo
emptied?
83
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof (Option 2)
B. Recordkeepiag and Reporting Requirements §$63.122 and 63.12$ as crass
referencedby§§63.1367(??)md63.U68(^)(??) Comment*
8. If you refilled a storage vessel after it was emptied and DYes DNo
degassed, did you submit a report showing that you notified the
Administrator at least 30 days before the vessel was refilled?
§63.120(b)(10)0i)
84
-------
Checklist 4: Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof converted to an
internal floating roof (Option 3)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date; .
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63.12Q(a) as cross-referenced from
§63.136$(d)(3) Comments
Note: The monitoring requirements include visual inspections and measurements.
Questions 3-5 apply to all inspecdons. Questions 6-14 apply only for visual inspections performed each
time the vessel is emptied and degassed.
1. If the storage vessel is equipped with a single-seal system:
§63.120(a)(2)
• Do you visually inspect the floating deck and seal at least D Yes ID No
once every 12 months?
• • Do you visually inspect the floating deck, the seal, gaskets, D Yes D No
slotted membranes, and sleeve seals (if any) each time the
storage vessel is emptied and degassed, and at least once
every 10 years?
2. If the storage vessel is equipped with a double-seal system, do
either of the following apply: §63.120(a)(3)
• Do you visually inspect the floating deck, the primary seal, DYes DNo
the secondary seal, gaskets, slotted membranes, and sleeve
seals (if any) each time the storage vessel is emptied and
degassed, and at least once every 5 years?
• Do you visually inspect the floating deck and the secondary DYes DNo
seal at least once every 12 months, and do you visually
inspect the floating deck, the primary seal, the secondary
seal, gaskets, slotted membranes, and sleeve seals (if any)
each time the vessel is emptied and degassed, and at least
once every 10 years?
3. Does the floating deck rest on the liquid surface? DYes DNo
§63.120(a)(4)and(7)
Note: The roof is not required to be floating on the liquid
surface during initial filling, after the vessel has been
completely emptied and degassed, and when completely
emptied before being refilled.
85
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof converted to an internal floating roof
(Option 3)
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63. 12Q(q) as cross-referenced from
Comments
4. Is the floating deck in good condition (i.e., free of defects such OYes DNo
as corrosion or pools of standing liquid)? §63.120(a)(4) and
(7) .
5. Inspect the seal(s). §63.120(a)(4) and (7)
• Is the seal attached to the floating deck? DYes DNo
• Is the seal or seal fabric free of holes, tears, or other D Yes D No
openings?
• Does the seal make continuous contact with the wall of the DYes DNo
storage vessel (i.e., no visible gaps between the seal and
wall)?
6. Is the floating deck equipped with a liquid-mounted seal, DYes DNo
metallic shoe seal, or a double seal? § 63. 119(b)(3)
7. Inspect deck openings.
• If the floating deck is non-contact, do the openings in the DYes DNo
floating deck project below the stored liquid surface (except
automatic bleeder and rim space vents)? §63. 119(c)(2)fi)
• Is each opening in the floating deck equipped with a
gasketed cover that forms a vapor-tight seal (except D Yes D No
automatic bleeder vents, rim space vents, roof drains, and
leg sleeves)? § 63. 119(c)(2)Cii)
• Is each gasketed cover on any deck opening closed (unless
open for access)? §63.119(c)(2)(ii) DYes DNo
• Are covers on each access hatch and gauge float well
fastened air-tight when closed? §63.119(c)(2)fli)
I— I YCS LJ .NO
• Do gaskets on deck opening covers close off the liquid
surface from the atmosphere? §63. 120(a)(7)
DYes DNo
8. Inspect automatic bleeder vents.
• Are the automatic bleeder vents closed (unless the roof is DYes DNo
being floated off or landed on the roof leg supports)?
§63.119(c)(2)ftii)
• Are the automatic bleeder vents gasketed?
§63.119(c)(2)(v)
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the
atmosphere? §63.120(a)(7)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
86
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof converted to an internal floating roof
(Option 3)
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements §63.120(a) as cross-referenced from
Comments
9. Inspect rim space vents.
• Are the rim space vents closed except when either:
§63.119(c)(2)(iv)
» the roof is being floated off the roof leg supports? DYes DNo
* the pressure beneath the rim seal exceeds the D Yes D No
manufacturer's recommending setting?
• Are the rim space vents gasketed? §63.119(c)(2)(v) DYes DNo
• Do the gaskets close off the liquid surface from the DYes DNo
atmosphere? §63.120(a)(7)
10. Is each roof drain covered with a slotted membrane fabric that D Yes D No
covers at least 90 percent of the opening area?
§ttJW$G)W
11. Is each unslotted guide pole well equipped with either a DYes DNo
gasketed sliding cover or a flexible fabric sleeve seal that closes
off the liquid surface from the atmosphere? -§63.119(c)(2)(vii)
12. Does each unslotted guide pole have on it's end a closed DYes DNo
gasketed cap that closes off the liquid surface from the
atmosphere (except when gauging the liquid level or taking
liquid samples)? §63.U9(c)(2)(viii)
13. Does each gauge hatch and sample well have a closed gasketed D Yes D No
cover that closes off the liquid surface from the atmosphere
(except when open for access)? §63.119(c)(2)(ix)
14. Did you complete any repairs of failures detected during DYes DNo
inspections before refilling the storage vessel?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements §§ 63,122 and 63.123 as cross
referenced by§§ 63J367{??)<»ut1>U3$8(g>0{??) = Comments
Note: There are reporting and recordkeeping requirements for visual inspections.
1. Did you record the occurrence of each visual inspection? DYes DNo
S&.123Q
2. Do you maintain all records for 5 years? §63.1367(a)(l) DYes DNo
87
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessel with an external floating roof converted to an internal floating roof
(Option 3)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements $§ <& 122 and 63.123 as cross
referenced by §§ $3.m7(??) tttd<&t$&®GWn) . Comments
3. If you detected a failure during an inspection, did you submit
the following information in your periodic report:
§63.122(d)(l)fii)
• date of the inspection? DYes DNo
• identification of all storage vessels with failures? DYes DNo
• description of the failures? DYes DNo
• either the date and nature of repairs made or the date the DYes DNo
vessel was emptied (if the vessel was not already empty)?
4. If your periodic report in "3" shows that you made a repair
more than 45 days after the failure was found, does your next
periodic report include documentation of the use of up to two
30-day extensions and the following information:
§63.122(d)(l)OH)
• identification of the storage vessel? D Yes D No
• description of the failure? DYes DNo
• documentation that alternate storage capacity was DYes DNo
unavailable?
• schedule of actions taken to make repairs or empty the D Yes D No
vessel as soon as possible?
• date the storage vessel was emptied and nature of and date D Yes D No
repair was made?
5. If you refilled a storage vessel after it was emptied and DYes DNo
degassed, did you submit a report notifying the Administrator
at least 30 days before the vessel was refilled? §63.120(a)(5)
88
-------
Checklist 5: Requirements for a storage vessels meeting the alternative standard (Option 4E)
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
L Comments
noncompliance
A. Monitoring Requirements
1. Did you install a CEMS to monitor and record the outlet TOC DYes DNo
concentration at least once every 15 minutes? §63.1366(b)(S)
2. If you are using a combustion control device that generates O Yes D No
HC1, did you install a CMS to monitor and record the outlet
HC1 concentration at least once every IS minutes?
3. Is the monitoring device calibrated at a minimum with D Yes D No
quarterly cylinder gas audits? §63.1366(b)(5)
4. If supplemental gases are introduced before the control device, D Yes D No
is the monitored concentration corrected? §63.1366(b)(5)
5. Is the CEMS data reduced to operating day or operating block D Yes D No
averages? §63.1366(b)(2)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do your records show that you calibrate your monitor in D Yes D No
accordance with your quality control program?
§§63.1366(b)(3) and 63.8(d)
1. Have your recorded any maintenance performed on the DYes DNo
CEMS1§63.1367(b)(3)
89
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessels meeting the alternative standard (Option 4E)
B. Recordteeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
3. Do you have records of: §§63.1367(a)(4) and 63.10(c)(l)-(14)
• All required CEMS measurements (including monitoring ID Yes DNo
data recorded during unavoidable CEMS breakdowns and
out-of-control periods)?
• The date and time of each period when the CEMS is DYes DNo
inoperative except for zero (low-level) and high-level
checks?
• The date and time of each period when the CEMS is out of DYes DNo
control (e.g., calibration drift exceeds specification, CEMS
fails cylinder gas audit)?
• The date and start and end time of each period of excess DYes DNo
emissions and parameter monitoring exceedances occurring
during startups, shutdowns, malfunctions, and at other
times?
4.
5.
6.
• The nature and cause of any malfunction of your monitor (if
known), and corrective actions taken?
• The total process operating time during the reporting
period?
• All procedures, including calibrations, that are part of your
quality control program?
Have you recorded all maintenance and calibration checks
performed on the CEMS? §63. 1367(b)(3)
Do you maintain records for 5 years? §63. 1367 (a) (1)
Did you notify the Administrator at least 60 days before
conducting a performance evaluation of your CEMS?
§§63.1368(d) and 63.8(e)(2)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
7. Did you include in your periodic report a description of the DYes DNo
routine maintenance planned for the control device for the next
reporting period and actually performed in the last reporting
period? §§63. ^67(b)(6)(viii) and 63. 1368(g)(2)(v)
8. Do you submit all of the following in your periodic reports if
exceedances or excursions are * 1 percent of the total operating
time during the reporting period: §63. 1368(g)(2)
• all monitoring data for all operating days or operating DYes DNo
blocks when the average TOC or HC1/C12 concentration
exceeds 20 ppmv?
• identification of all operating days when insufficient DYes DNo
monitoring data are collected?
90
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for a storage vessels meeting the alternative standard (Option 4E)
91
-------
Chapter 5 - Complying with requirements for wastewater systems
What wastewater streams are covered?
Subpart MMM covers "Group 1" wastewater streams that are discarded from a PAI process unit
that is at an affected source. A "Group 1" wastewater stream is any wastewater stream that meets
either of the following conditions: [§63.1361]
• Is generated from a PAI process and contains either:
*• contains an annual average concentration of Table 9 compounds of at least 5 ppmw and has an
average flow rate of 0.02 L/min or greater; or
Note: Table 9 compounds are those compounds listed on Table 9 ofsubpart G of the HON.
> contains a total concentration of Table 9 compounds of at least 10,000 ppmw at any flow rate.
• Is generated from a PAI process unit as a result of maintenance activities and contains at least
5.3 Mg of HAP per individual discharge event.
Subpart MMM also covers residuals removed from a Group 1 wastewater stream.
Definition. Residual means any liquid or solid material containing Table 9
compounds that is removed from a wastewater stream by a waste management
unit or treatment process that does not destroy organics.
What types of wastewater components are covered?
Wastewater systems consist of the following three types of components, each with specific compliance
requirements:
Waste management units
Definition. Waste management unit means the equipment, structures), and/or
device(s) used to convey, store, treat, or dispose of wastewater streams or residuals.
• Treatment processes
Note: treatment processes are a -subset of waste management units that remove or destroy the organics in a
wastewater.
• Air pollution control devices
92
-------
What waste management units are covered?
Subpart MMM covers all of the following waste management units:
• wastewater tanks
• surface impoundments
• containers
• individual drain systems
• oil-water separators
What wastewater streams are exempt?
Any wastewater stream that meets any of the following conditions is not subject to Subpart MMM:
[§§63.132(a)(3) and 63.1360(d)(4)]
• Group 2 wastewater streams
• wastewater streams that are not part of a PAI process unit
• laundry water
• storwater from segregated sewers
• water from fire-fighting and deluge systems, including testing of such systems
• spills
• water from safety showers
• noncontact steam boiler blowdown and condensate
Note: A Group 2 wastewater stream is any wastewater stream that does not meet the definition of a Group 1
wastewater stream.
What are my compliance options for waste management units?
You have several emission suppression compliance options for the different types of waste
management units.
Wastewater tanks
Definition. Wastewater tank means a stationary waste management unit that is
designed to contain an accumulation of wastewater and residuals and is
constructed primarily of nonearthen materials which provide structural support
Wastewater tanks used for flow equalization are included in this definition.
DRAFT
93
-------
If your wastewater tank receives, manages, or treats a Group 1 wastewater stream or residual, you
have three compliance options if your wastewater tank meets either of the following: [§63. 133(a)]
• tank size * 15 1 m3 storing wastewater with maximum true vapor pressure * 5.2 kPa
• tank size ^75 m3 and <1 5 1 m3 storing wastewater with maximum true vapor pressure
• tanks of any size storing any Group 1 wastewater stream or residual if the tank is used for
any of the following:
»• heating wastewater
»• treating by means of an exothermic reaction
»• sparging
Your three compliance options for these wastewater tanks are:
Option 1: Use a fixed roof and control device [§63.133(a)(2)(i)].
Use a fixed roof and a closed-vent system that routes HAP vapors to control device.
Option 2: Use a fixed roof and an internal floating roof [§63 . 133(a)(2)(ii)]
Option 3: Use an external floating roof [§63 . 1 33(a)(2)(iii)]
For all other wastewater tanks that receive, manage, or treat a Group 1 wastewater system, you
must use a fixed roof tank (or any of the above options). [§63. 133(a)(l)].
Surface impoundments
A waste management unit which is a natural topographic depression, manmade excavation, or
diked area formed primarily of earthen materials (although it may be lined with manmade
materials), which is designed to hold an accumulation of liquid wastes or waste containing free
liquids. A surface impoundment is used for the treatment, storing, or disposing of wastewater or
residuals, and is not an injection well. Examples of surface impoundments are equalization,
settling, and aeration pits, ponds, and lagoons. The control requirements of wastewater tanks
holding Group 1 process wastewater include the following:
1 . Use a cover and a closed-vent system that routes organic HAP vapors to a control device.
2. Use a floating flexible membrane which must float on the surface of the liquid and form a
continuous barrier over the entire surface area of the liquid. Requirements are given for the
fabrication of the membrane material. The flexible floating membrane must be installed
properly, have a closure device, and emergency cover drains. The closure device must
94
-------
minimize exposure of HAP's to the atmosphere, and be operated according to specified work
practices.
Containers
Any portable waste management unit that has a capacity greater than or equal to 0.1 cubic meters
in which a material is stored, transported, treated, or .otherwise handled. Examples of containers
are drums, barrels, tank trucks, barges, dumpsters, tank cars, dump trucks, and ships. The control
requirements of containers holding Group 1 process wastewater are dependent on container
capacity. Table X provides the container capacity with a corresponding summary of control
requirements.
TABLE 5-1. Container Emissions Control Requirements
Capacity (m3)
Control Requirements
0.1 s capacity < 0.42
Container must meet DOT specifications and testing requirements
under 49 CFR Part 178; or
The cover and all openings must be maintained without leaks as
specified in §63.148 of subpart G
£0.42
The cover and all openings must be maintained without leaks as
specified in §63.148 of subpart G; and
Submerged fill pipes which meet specifications (e.g., fill pipe outlet
can extend no more than six inches or within two fill pipe diameters
of the bottom of the container) must be used; and
Emissions of organic HAP's must be reduced using an enclosure.
The enclosure must be operated with a closed-vent system routed to
a control device.
Individual drain systems
Stationary waste management units used to convey wastewater streams or residuals to a waste
management unit or to discharge or disposal. The term includes: hard piping; all process drains
and junction boxes; and associated sewer lines, other junction boxes, manholes, sumps, and lift
stations conveying wastewater streams or residuals. The control requirements of individual drain
systems holding Group 1 process wastewater include the following:
1. Reduce emissions of organic HAP's using a cover on each opening in the individual drain
system and, if vented, a closed vent system that routes organic HAP vapors to a process or
control device.
2. Reduce emissions of organic HAP's using drains equipped with water seal controls or a tightly
fitting cap or plug which are operated according to specified work practices; and junction
boxes equipped with a cover and, if vented, a closed-vent system that routes organic HAP
vapors to a process or a control device. Junction boxes that are fed by gravity or are operated
95
-------
with slight fluctuations in the liquid level are not required to use a closed-vent system routing
emissions to a process or control device. Instead the vent pipe is to be operated according to
specified equipment standards and work practices.
Oil-water separators
A waste management unit that separates and removes oils, scum, and solids from the wastewater
by gravity. Most of the separation occurs as the wastewater stream passes through a quiescent
zone in the unit where oils and scum with specific gravities less than water float to the top of the
aqueous phase, while heavier solids sink to the bottom. Some of the organic compounds contained
in the wastewater will partition to the oil phase and then can be removed with the skimmed oil,
leaving the separated water. The control requirements of oil-water separators holding Group 1
process wastewater include the following:
1. Reduce emissions of organic HAP's using a fixed roof and a closed-vent system that routes
organic HAP vapors to a process or control device.
2. Reduce emissions of organic HAP's using a floating roof. Where a floating roof is infeasible,
such as over a weir mechanism, a fixed roof and closed-vent system routed to a control device
may be used
3. Use an equivalent means of approved emission limitation.
What compliance options do I have for my treatment processes?
Treatment processes are techniques that remove or destroy the organics in a wastewater stream.
Subpart MMM includes several compliance options and specifies how treatment processes may be
used to achieve compliance with one or more of the compliance options. The compliance options
may be used individually or in combination to achieve the required emission control.
For any new or existing sources, you have seven compliance options for wastewater streams:
Option 1: Reduce, by removal or destruction, the total concentration of Table 9 compounds
to less than 50 ppmw. [Note: cannot use biological treatment processes or dilution
with this option]
Option 2: Use a design steam stripper with specific design and operating requirements.
Option 3: Use a waste management unit or treatment process to reduce, by removal or
destruction, the total mass flow rate of Table 9 compounds by at least 99 percent.
96
-------
Option 4: Use a waste management unit or treatment process to reduce, by removal or
destruction, the mass flow rate of each Table 9 compounds by at least the fraction
removal (Fr) values specified in Table 9.
Option 5: Use a waste management unit or treatment process to achieve the required mass
removal (RMR) of Table 9 compounds.
Option 6: Use a biological treatment unit that achieves a RMR of at least 95 percent for all
compounds listed on Table 9. [Note: all Group 1 and Group 2 wastewater streams
entering the biological treatment unit that are subject to subpart F must be included
in the demonstration of 95 percent removal]
Option 7: Treat the wastewater in a permitted Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) hazardous waste incinerator, a RCRA permitted process heater or boiler,
or discharge to a properly permitted underground injection well.
For new sources, you have the following compliance option in addition to the six compliance
options identified above:
Option 8: Reduce the mass flow rate of Table 9 compounds from all wastewater streams by
99 percent if the total mass flow rate from the source is 2,100 Mg/yr or more.
How do I show initial compliance with the wastewater system
requirements?
What monitoring must I do for my wastewater systems?
Your monitoring requirements depend on the compliance option you select. Details for each
options are provided later in this chapter. A summary of the monitoring requirements for each
compliance option is as follows:
If you comply with... your monitoring requirements include... at this frequency...
options 1, 2 or 3 various inspections and measurements
option 4 no monitoring required
97
-------
Note 1: The PAI rule designates some different definitions and compliance dates than are used in
§63.120 ofsubpart G. These differences are noted in §63.1362(d)(2)(i), (iv), and (v).
Note 2: Conditions found during annual inspections must be repaired within 45 days after
performing the inspection (unless you get an extension) §63.120(a)(4)]. Conditions found in the
inspection after emptying and degassing the storage vessel must be repaired before refilling the
storage vessel -with organic HAP {§63.120(a)(7)].
Note 2: If you think performing seal gap measurements and inspection of a vessel may be unsafet
then you may get an extension to perform the measurements and inspection or empty and remove
the storage vessel from service [§63.120(b)(7)J.
What records must I keep for my wastewater systems?
To avoid repetition in every chapter, all of your recordkeeping requirements are presented in
Chapter 8.
What reports must I submit for my wastewater systems?
To avoid repetition in every chapter, all of your reporting requirements are presented in Chapter 8.
;..;
98
-------
Checklists for Wastewater System Inspections
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
The table below explains which inspection checklists you should use for waste management
systems.
If you use a ...
That is controlled using...
Then use these checklists ...
Starting on
page...
wastewater tank a cover with a closed-vent system routed Chapter 3, checklist 2 (see
to a control device (see next table) next table)
an external floating roof Chapter 4, checklist 3
a fixed roof with an internal floating roof Chapter 4, checklist 2
an external floating roof converted to an Chapter 4, checklist 4
internal floating roof
surface a cover with a closed-vent system routed 2 and Chapter 3, checklist 2
impoundments to a control device (see next table) (see next table) and
checklists 3 through 9 as
applicable
a floating flexible membrane cover 2
containers a cover 3
individual drains a cover and, if vented, routed to a process 4 and Chapter 3, checklist 2
or through a closed-vent system to a (see next table) and
control device(see next table) checklists 3 through 9 as
applicable
water seal controls or a tightly fitting cap 4
or plug for drains, tightly fitting solid
covers for junction boxes, and covers or
enclosures for sewer lines
oil-water a fixed roof and closed-vent system 5 and Chapter 3, checklist 2
separators routed to a control device (see next table) (see next table) and
checklists 3 through 9 as
applicable
a floating roof 5
99
-------
The table below explains which checklists you should use for control devices.
The wastewater system emission streams are conveyed by a closed- Then use the following checklists from
vent system to the following control device... Chapter 3:
a scrubber 3
• a condenser • . 4
a regenerative carbon adsorber ' 5
a nonregenerative carbon adsorber 6
a thermal incinerator 7
a catalytic incinerator 8
a boiler or process heater with a design heat input of at least 9
44 megawatts or for which the emission stream is introduced with
the primary fuel
a flare 10
For the following compliance options... Then use these checklists:
Reduce the concentration of Table 9 compounds to less than SO ppmw 1 and 2
Use a steam stripper with specific design and operating requirements 1 and 3
Reduce the mass flow rate of Table 9 compounds by at least 99 percent 1 and 4
Reduce the mass flow rate of Table 9 compounds by an amount equal to or 1 and 5
greater thant he fraction removed (Fr) value in Table 9
If a source using biotreatment for at least one wastewater stream that is 1 and 6
Group 1 for Table 9 compounds, achieve a required mass removal greater
than or equal to 95 percent for Table 9 compounds
Treat with permitted Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 1 and 11
units or by discharging to a permitted underground injection well
DRAFT
100
-------
Checklist 1: Requirements for all wastewater tanks
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements Comments
1. Do you inspect all openings (e.g., access hatches, sampling ports, and O Yes O No
gauge wells) to make sure they are maintained in a closed position
(e.g., covered by a lid) when not in use (e.g., during sampling,
equipment maintenance, inspection, or repair)?
B, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comment*
1. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection DYes DNo
for improper work practices?
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection
for control equipment failures?
DYes
DNo
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the
Periodic Report:
• Date of the inspection
Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment,
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having
the failure?
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
• Description of the failure?
• Description of the nature of the repair?
Date the repair was made?
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
101
-------
Checklist 2: Requirements for all surface impoundments
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
1. Do you inspect all access hatches and all other openings to make sure DYes DNo
they are closed when not in use?
2. Do you inspect all control equipment to make sure it is DYes ONo
functioning properly (e.g., seals, joints, lids, covers, and doors are not
cracked, gapped, or broken)?
3. For surface impoundments with floating flexible membrane covers, is D Yes D No
the floating flexible membrane cover made out of one of the
following:
• high density polyethylene with a thickness of no less
than 2.5 millimeters; or
a material that has an equivalent organic permeability
and integrity for the intended service life of the floating cover
3. For surface impoundments with floating flexible membrane covers, DYes DNo
are all openings equipped with closure devices such that there are no
visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces between the
perimeter of the cover opening and the closure device when it is
closed?
B. Recordkeep ing and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection DYes DNo
for improper work practices?
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection DYes DNo
for control equipment failures?
DRAFT
102
-------
Checklist!: (cont'd)
Requirements for all surface impoundments
B. Recorolceeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the next
Periodic Report:
Date of the inspection DYes DNo
Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment, D Yes D No
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having
the failure?
• Description of the failure? DYes DNo
Description of the nature of the repair? DYes DNo
Date the repair was made? DYes DNo
103
-------
Checklist 3: Requirements for all containers
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements Comments
1. For containers with capacity greater than or equal to 0.1 but less
than or equal to 0.42 cubic meters, do you meet all of the following
requirements:
the container meets existing DOT specifications and D Yes D No
testing requirements or the requirements of § 63.148 of
subpart G?
• the cover and all openings are maintained in a closed D Yes D No
position (e.g., covered by a lid) when not in use (e.g.,
during filling)?
2. For containers with capacity greater than 0.42 cubic meters, do you
meet all of the following requirements:
• the container is equipped with a submerged fill pipe that does not D Yes D No
extend more than 6 inches or within two fill pipe diameters of
the bottom of the container while the container is being filled?
• the cover and all openings are maintained in a closed position
(e.g., covered by a lid) whe,n not in use (e.g., during filling)? DYes DNo
2. Whenever a container with capacity greater than or equal to 0.1 cubic D Yes D No
meters is open, is it located within an enclosure that is routed by a
closed-vent system to a control device?
3. Is all control equipment functioning properly (e.g., covers and doors D Yes D No
are not cracked, gapped, or broken)?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements : Comments
1. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection DYes DNo
for improper work practices?
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection DYes DNo
for control equipment failures?
104
-------
Checklist 3: (cont'd)
Requirements for all containers
8. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements * Comments
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the next Periodic
report:
• Date of the inspection
• Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment, es °
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having D Yes D No
the failure?
Description of the failure?
• Description of the nature of the repair?
• Date the repair was made?
D Yes D No
4. Do you keep a record of the capacity of each container maintained at D Yes D No
your facility if applicable?
DRAFT
105
-------
Checklist 4: Requirements for all individual drain systems
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements . Comments
1. For individual drain systems with control equipment including a
cover with or without a closed-vent system routed to a control device
or to a process, do you meet all of the following requirements:
• the individual drain system is designed and operated to segregate D Yes D No
the vapors within the system from other drain systems and the
atmosphere?
the cover and all openings (e.g., access hatches, sampling ports, D Yes D No
and gauge wells) are maintained in a closed position when not in
use (e.g., during sampling, equipment maintenance, inspection,
or repair)?
the cover and all openings are maintained in good D Yes D No
condition?
5. Do you meet all of the following requirements for drains:
each drain is equipped with either water seal controls D Yes D No
(e.g., p-trap, s-trap) or a tightly-fitting cap or plug?
for each drain equipped with a water seal, there is water in the D Yes D No
water seal?
if a water seal is used on a drain receiving a Group 1 process D Yes D No
wastewater stream, then do you meet one of the following
requirements:
•• the drain pipe discharging the wastewater extends below the D Yes D No
liquid surface in the water seal; or
»• a flexible shield (or other enclosure which restricts wind D Yes D No
motion) is installed that encloses the space between the pipe
discharging the wastewater and the drain receiving the
wastewater?
106
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for all individual drain systems
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
3. Do you keep junction boxes equipped with tightly fitting solid covers,
and, if vented, equipped with a vent pipe meeting all of the following
requirements if applicable:
the vent pipe is connected to a closed vent system that is routed
to a process or control device?
if the junction box is filled and emptied by gravity flow or is
operated with no more than slight fluctuations in the liquid level
and you vent the junction box to the atmosphere, do you meet all
of the following requirements:
» the vent pipe is at least 90 centimeters in length?
» the vent pipe does not exceed 10.2 centimeters in diameter?
" a water seal is installed at the entrance or exit of the junction
box that restricts ventilation in the individual drain system
and between components in the individual drain system?
Comments
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
4. Do you meet all of the following requirements for sewer lines if
applicable:
• sewer lines covered or enclosed so that no visible
gaps or cracks in joints, seals, or other emission interfaces
exist?
• sewer lines are not open to the atmosphere?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
1. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection
for improper work practices?
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
Comments
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection
for control equipment failures?
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the next Periodic
Report:
• Date of the inspection
Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment,
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having
the failure?
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
Description of the failure?
• Description of the nature of the repair?
• Date the repair was made?
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
107
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for all individual drain systems
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
4. If you use a drain, junction box, or sewer line as an alternative,
do you keep all of the following records:
documentation of the occurrence of each semiannual inspection DYes DNo
of drains to ensure that caps dr plugs are in place and properly
installed; or
documentation of the occurrence of each semiannual verification DYes DNo
of water supply to the drain?
documentation of the occurrence of each semiannual inspection D Yes D No
of junction boxes to ensure that there are no gaps, cracks, or
other holes in the cover?
documentation of the occurrence of each semiannual inspection D Yes D No
of the unburied portion of each sewer line to ensure that there are
no cracks or gaps that could result in air emissions?
108
-------
Checklist 5: Requirements for all oil-water separators
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
1. Is the floating roof is resting on the liquid surface of the stored
material, unless the floating roof is resting on the roof leg supports
because the oil-water separator has just been emptied and degassed or
the tank is partially or completely emptied before being subsequently
refilled or degassed?
Comments
DYes
DNo
2. Is the floating roof is in good condition (i.e., free of defects such as
corrosion and pools of standing liquid)?
3 . Is a secondary seal installed above the primary seal?
DYes
DYes
DNo '
DNo
4. If a secondary seal is installed, do you inspect the secondary seal
. according to all of the following requirements:
• the secondary seal is continuous and completely covers the D Yes D No
annular space between the floating roof and the separator wall?
• there are no holes, tears, or other openings in the seal or seal D Yes D No
fabric?
• the seal is not detached from the floating deck? D Yes D No
there are no visible gaps between the seal and the wall of the oil- DYes DNo
water separator except as specified below?
• perform seal gap measurement of the secondary seal according to D Yes D No
the following requirements:
»• the total gap area between the separator wall and the
secondary seal does not exceed 6.7 square centimeters per
meter of the separator wall perimeter?
» the maximum gap width between the separator wall and the
seal does not exceed 1.3 centimeters at any point?
109
-------
Checklist 5: (cont'd)
Requirements for all oil-water separators
1. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements Comments
5. Do you inspect the primary seal according to the following
requirements:
• the primary seal is a liquid-mounted seal? D Yes D No
there are no holes, tears, or other openings in the seal fabric, seal D Yes D No
envelope, or shoe (if a metallic shoe seal is used)?
if the primary seal is a liquid-mounted seal (e.g., foam or liquid- DYes DNo
filled seal), the seal is in contact with the liquid between the wall
of the oil-water separator and the floating roof?
the seal is not detached from the floating roof? D Yes D No
• the primary seal forms a continuous closure that completely D Yes D No
covers the annular space between the wall of the oil-water
separator and the edge of the floating roof, except as described
below?
perform seal gap measurements of the primary seal according to DYes DNo
the following requirements:
» the total gap area between the separator wall and the
secondary seal does not exceed 67 square centimeters per
meter of the separator wall perimeter?
«• the maximum gap width between the separator wall and the
seal does not exceed 3.8 centimeters at any point?
6. If the floating roof is equipped with one or more emergency roof DYes DNo
drains for removal of stormwater, is each emergency roof drain fitted
with a slotted membrane fabric cover that covers at least 90 percent
of the drain opening area or a flexible fabric sleeve seal?
7. Are all openings in the floating roof equipped with a gasketed cover, D Yes D No
seal, or lid, which is maintained in a closed position at all times,
except during inspections and maintenance?
8. Are no gaskets, joints, lids, covers, or doors cracked, gapped, or D Yes D No
broken?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection D Yes D No
for improper work practices?
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection D Yes D No
for control equipment failures?
110
-------
Checklist 5: (cont'd)
Requirements for all oil-water separators
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the next Periodic
report:
Date of the inspection DYes DNo
Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment, D Yes D No
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having
the failure?
• Description of the failure? DYes DNo
Description of the nature of the repair? DYes DNo
Date the repair was made? DYes DNo
111
-------
Checklist 6: Requirements for design steam strippers
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
1. Is the minimum active column height at least 5 meters?
D Yes D No
2. Does the countercurrent flow configuration have a minimum of 10 DYes DNo
actual trays?
3. Is the minimum steam flow rate 0.04 kilograms of steam per liter of D Yes D No
wastewater feed?
4. Is the minimum wastewater feed temperature tot he steam
stripper 95 degrees Celsius?
5. Is the maximum liquid loading 67,100 liters per hour per square
meter?
6. Does the design steam stripper operate at nominal atmospheric
pressure?
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
1. Do you keep records of the steam flow rate, wastewater feed mass
flow rate, and wastewater feed temperature?
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
D Yes D No
Comments
Comments
2. Do you record the occurrence of each semiannual visual inspection
for control equipment failures?
D Yes D No
3. For each inspection during which a control equipment failure was
identified, do you record and report the following in the Periodic
report:
• Date of the inspection D Yes DNo
Identification of the wastewater tank, surface impoundment, D Yes D No
container, individual drain system, or oil-water separator having
the failure?
Description of the failure? D Yes D No
• Description of the nature of the repair? DYes DNo
• Date the repair was made? - DYes DNo
112
-------
113
-------
Chapter 6 - Complying with requirements for equipment leaks
What equipment leaks are covered?
Subpart MMM regulates equipment leaks from equipment in "organic HAP service." The
equipment leak provisions apply to all of the following types of equipment [§63.1363(a)(l)]:
pumps
compressors Definition: "In organic HAP service" means that the
equipment component either contains or contacts a
agitators fluid that's at least 5 percent HAP by weight.
• pressure relief devices
• sampling connection systems
• open-ended valves or lines
• valves
• connectors
• instrumentation systems
If you have equipment subject to both Subpart MMM and other air regulations under 40 CFR
parts 60 or 61, you're only required to comply with Subpart MMM [§63.1362(a)(2)].
Equipment leak provisions apply at all times except when the lines of a non-operating PAI process
unit are drained and depressurized [§63.1360(e)(2)].
How do I identify equipment subject to the equipment leak provisions?
You must identify each piece of equipment covered by the equipment leak provisions so it can be
distinguished from equipment not subject to the provisions. You do not have to physically tag the
equipment unless you wish to do so. Instead, you can mark the equipment on a plant site plan, in
log entries, or by designating process boundaries with waterproof identification.[§63.1363(a)(7)]
Note: If you make changes to the process or equipment subject to the leak detection
requirements, you must update the equipment identification, if needed, within 15 calendar
days of the end of each monitoring period for that component.
114
-------
Leaks are detected by sight, sound, odor, or monitoring. When a leak is detected, you must attach
a visible, weatherproof identification to the leaking equipment. The identification may be removed
under either of the following circumstances:
• after the leak has been repaired if the equipment is not a valve or connector in light liquid
or gas/vapor service
• when no leak is detected by follow-up monitoring on a valve or connector in light liquid or
gas/vapor service [§63.1363(a)(10)]
Follow-up monitoring is described in §63.1363 (e)(7)(iii) ofsubpart
MMMfor valves and §63.174(e) ofsubpart Hfor connectors.
What equipment is exempt?
AH of the following are exempt from the equipment leak provisions [§63.1363(a)(5) through (9)]:
• lines and equipment that don't contain process fluids
. • utilities and other nonprocess lines that don't combine their materials with process fluids
they serve
• bench-scale processes
• equipment in vacuum service
• equipment in organic HAP service less than 300 hours per year
What compliance options do I have for my equipment leaks?
For equipment in organic HAP service, you have the following two compliance options.
Option 1: Use a leak detection/repair program [§63.1363(b), (c), (d), and (e); and sections
of Subpart H referenced from §63.1363(b)]
Implement a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program.
Option 2: Use enclosed equipment [§63.1363(b)(3)(ii), §63.172, and §63.179]
Enclose the equipment and transport emissions through a closed vent system to a control
device.
Option 3: Use pressure testing [§63.1363(b)(3)(iv), §63.178]
DRAFT'
115
-------
The requirements and exceptions for all of the options as applied to different types of equipment
are summarized in Table 6-1 (page x). Additional details are also provided later in this chapter.
How do I implement a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program under
Option 1?
Your requirements under an LDAR program depend on what type of equipment you're using. The
LDAR program is broken down into the following eleven categories:
• pumps in light liquid service
• agitators in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
Definition. In gas/vapor service means that a piece of equipment in organic HAP service
contains a gas or vapor at operating conditions.
Definition. In light liquid service means that a piece of equipment in organic HAP service
contains a liquid that meets all of the following conditions:
(1) ' The vapor pressure of one or more of the organic compounds is greater than 0.3 kPa at
20 °C;
(2) The total concentration of the pure organic compounds constituents having a vapor
pressure greater than 0.3 kPa at 20 °C is equal to or greater than 20 percent by weight
of the total process stream; and
(3) The fluid is a liquid at operating conditions.
• open-ended valves or lines
• valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service
• compressors
• pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service
• sampling collection systems
• pump, valves, connectors and agitators in heavy liquid service
Definition. In heavy liquid service means that the
piece of equipment in organic HAP service isn't in
gas/vapor or light liquid service.
116
-------
• instrumentation systems
• pressure relief devices in liquid service
• connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
Note: Equipment in gas/vapor and light liquid service are subject to different requirements than equipment in
heavy liquid service.
For most equipment, you implement an LDAR program by monitoring using Method 21 in
accordance with one or both of the following procedures:
• the procedures specified in §63.1363(b)(3)(v) and §63.180 of the HON
• by visual or other sensory means of detection
For other equipment, your LDAR program consists of work practice procedures or equipment
design requirements.
Additional details of LDAR programs for each of the eleven categories of equipment are provided
later in this chapter.
117
-------
TABLE 6-1. General Requirements and Exceptions of the Equipment Leak Provisions
For the following equipment...
Your equipment leak requirements are... Except for...
According to this
section of the rule.,
Pumps in light liquid service and
agitators in gas/vapor service and in
light liquid service
(Option 1)
quarterly monitoring for leaks
monthly monitoring based on
calculation of percent leaking pumps
weekly visual inspections
repair of leaks
unsafe to monitor or inaccessible
equipment
pumps/agitators with dual mechanical
seal system with barrier fluid
pumps/agitators with no externally
actuated shaft
pumps/agitators with closed-vent
systems and control devices
pumps/agitators at unmanned sites
§63.1363(c)
oo
Open-ended valves or lines
(Option 1)
seal valves or lines with a cap, blind
flange, plug, or a second valve
valves/lines designed to open
automatically in emergency
valves/lines containing materials
which would autocatalytically
polymerize
valves/lines that would be hazardous if
capped or equipped with a double
block and bleed system
§63.1363(d)
Valves in gas/vapor service and light
liquid service
(Option 1)
initial monitoring for leaks
repeat monitoring based on calculation
of percent leaking valves
repair of leaks
unsafe and difficult to monitor valves §63.1363(e)
inaccessible valves
Compressors
(Option 1)
Pressure relief devices in gas/vapor
service
(Option 1)
equip compressors with a seal system
that includes barrier fluid system
repair of leaks
leak detection instrument reading of <500
ppm (except during pressure releases)
compressors with closed-vent systems §63.164
and control devices
compressors with leak detection
instrument reading of <500 ppm
pressure relief devices with closed-vent §63.165
systems and control devices
pressure relief devices with upstream
rupture disks
-------
TABLE 6-1. (cont'd)
For the following equipment...
Your equipment leak requirements are... Except for..
According to this
section of the rule.
Sampling connection systems
(Option 1)
a closed-purge, closed-loop, or closed-
vent system
in-situ sampling systems and sampling §63.166
systems without purge
Pumps, valves, connectors, and
agitators in heavy liquid service;
instrumentation systems; and pressure
relief devices in liquid service
(Option 1)
monitoring of equipment with potential potential leaks that are repaired before
leaks monitoring
repair of leaks
§63.169
Connectors in gas/vapor service and in
light liquid service
(Option 1)
initial monitoring for leaks
repeat monitoring based on calculation
of percent leaking connectors
repair of leaks
connectors that have been opened or
have a broken seal
screwed connectors with a small inside
diameter
ceramic or ceramic-lined connectors
unsafe and difficult to monitor
connectors
inaccessible connectors
credits for removed connectors
§63.174 with changes
described in
§63.1363(b)(3)(iii)
Closed-vent systems and
control devices
(Option 2)
percent reduction, outlet concentration,
or equipment operating requirements
monitoring for use of bypass lines
inspections
repair of leaks
control devices subject to monitoring,
reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements in 40 CFR part 264, subpart
BB, or in 40 CFR part 265, subpart BB
§63.172 with changes
described in
§63.1363(b)(3)(ii)
-------
What are the LDAR requirements for Pumps in Light Liquid Service and
Agitators in Gas/Vapor Service and Light Liquid Service (Option 1)?
Requirements for pumps and agitators under Option 1 include all of the following [§63.1363(c)]:
• monitor equipment for leaks using Method 21
• perform visual inspections
• repair leaks
In addition, there are exemptions to these requirements for specific types of equipment. All
requirements and exemptions are detailed below.
Monitoring for leaks;
You must monitor for leaks each quarter using the monitoring method described in §63.180(b) of
subpart H [§63.1363(c)(2)(i)]. This method requires you to use a leak detection instrument. Your
equipment is considered leaking if you get any of the following instrument readings:
[§63.1363(c)(2)(ii)]
• ^ 10,000 ppm for agitators
• ^2,000 ppm for pumps
You must calculate the percentage of pumps that leak using the procedure outlined in
§63.1363(c)(4). This percentage is based on the groups of processes that you develop before the
first monitoring period. You must monitor each pump monthly if (based on a 1-year rolling
average) any of the following apply:
10 percent or more of the pumps in a group of processes leak
• three or more pumps in a group of processes leak
All pumps in organic HAP service, except those in compliance under option 2, must be included in
the percent leaking calculation
However, you don't have to determine the percent leaking pumps for a process if more than
90 percent of the pumps in a group of processes are either of the following: [§63.1363(c)(9)]
> equipped with a dual mechanical seal system that includes a barrier fluid system
»• designed with no externally actuated shaft penetrating the pump/agitator housing .
Note. You do not have to calculate the percentage of agitators that are leaking.
120
-------
Visual inspections:
Each pump and agitator must be checked weekly by visual inspection for signs of liquids dripping
from the pump or agitator seal. A leak is detected if you notice signs of liquids dripping from the
seal. [§63.1363(c)(2)(iii)]
Repair of leaks:
You must repair leaks as soon as possible after they are detected. See "What are the leak repair
requirements?" for more information.
Exceptions.
There are several exemptions to the requirements for implementing an LDAR for Pumps in Light
Liquid Service and Agitators in Gas/Vapor Service and Light Liquid Service. Exemptions include
all of the following:
Pumps that are unsafe or difficult to monitor -
• You aren't required to monitor equipment that's unsafe or difficult to monitor or is
inaccessible. See "What if equipment is unsafe or difficult to monitor?" for more
information.
Pumps or agitators with special design features -
• Pumps or agitators equipped with a dual mechanical seal system that includes a barrier
fluid system are exempt from the monitoring, visual inspection, and repair provisions in
§63.1363(c)(2) and (3) provided that all of the following are performed: [§63.1363(c)(5)]
*• your dual mechanical seals meet be one of the following criteria:
<• are operated with a barrier fluid pressure that is always greater than the
pump/agitator stuffing box pressure
* are equipped with a barrier fluid degassing reservoir connected by a closed-vent
system to a control device
<• are equipped with a closed-loop system that purges the barrier fluid into a process
stream
*• the barrier fluid isn't in light liquid service
> each barrier fluid system has a sensor that will detect failure of the seal system, the
barrier fluid system, or both. The sensor must be observed daily or have an alarm
(unless the pump is at an unmanned plant site).
121
-------
* each pump/agitator must be visually inspected each week to see if liquids are dripping
from the pump/agitator seal. If liquids are dripping, the seal must be monitored with a
leak detection instrument to determine if there's a leak of organic HAP in the barrier
fluid. A leak is detected if the instrument reads * 10,000 ppm for agitators or
^ 2,000 ppm for pumps.
* you've determined the criteria that you'll use to indicate failure of the seal system, the
barrier fluid system, or both. If a leak is detected based on your criteria then you must
repair the leak as described in "What are the leak repair requirements?" of Chapter 6.
Any pump or agitator designed with no externally actuated shaft penetrating the
pump/agitator housing is exempt from the monitoring and repair provisions. However, the
weekly visual inspection requirements apply for these pumps/agitators. [§63.1363(c)(6)]
Pumps and agitators in compliance under option 2 are exempt from the monitoring, visual
inspection, repair, and calculation of percent leaking pumps provisions. [§63.1363(c)(7)j
Pumps and agitators at unmanned plant sites are exempt from weekly visual inspections
and daily sensor observations (for pumps/agitators with dual mechanical seal and barrier
fluid systems). However, each pump/agitator must be visually inspected at least monthly or
more frequently if possible. [§63.1363(c)(8)]
What are the LDAR requirements for open-ended valves or lines
(Option 1)?
You comply with the LDAR requirements for open-ended valves or lines under Option 1 by
sealing the open end using any of the following devices: [§63.1363(d)(l)(i)]
• a cap
a blind flange
• a plug
• a second valve
The mechanism you use to seal the open end must meet both of the following:
[§63.1363(d)(l)(ii)]
• it must be in use at all times except:
»• during operations requiring process fluid flow through the valve or line
»> during maintenance
*• during repair
• it must be in place within 1 hour after any of the excepted periods listed above
122
-------
Note: If you use a second valve, you must close the valve on the process fluid end before closing the second
valve [§63.1363(d)(2)].
If you use a double block and bleed system, you may leave the bleed valve or line open during operations that
require venting the line between the block valves.
Exemptions:.
You don't have to comply with the requirements to seal the open-ended valve or line if any of the
following situations apply to the open-ended valve or line: [§63.1363(d)(4) through (6)]
• it contains material which would autocatalytically polymerize
• it contains material which could cause a safety hazard if capped or equipped with a double
block and bleed system
• it's designed to open automatically as part of an emergency shutdown system in the event of
a process upset
What LDAR requirements apply to valves in gas/vapor or light liquid
service (Option 1)?
For valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service you must implement an LDAR program by doing of
all of the following steps:
Step 1: Identify your valves:
• identify all valves in PAI process units [§63.1363(a)(7)]
Step 2: Identify valves subject to special monitoring requirements:
• identify each valve that meets one of the following conditions: [§63.1363(f)]
*• is unsafe to monitor
For more information, see "What are the LDAR
*• is difficult to monitor requirements for unsafe to monitor, difficult to
. . ., , monitor, and inaccessible equipment?"
»• is inaccessible
Step 3: Perform initial monitoring:
• monitor all valves (except those identified in Step 2) within 1 year after the compliance date
(e.g., by 6/23/03). [§63.1363(e)(2) and (e)(3)(i)]
Step 4: Repair all leaks
• if you find a leaky valve, do all three of the following:
Note: A leak exists if the instrument reading is 500 ppm or greater [§63.I363(e)(3)fti)J.
123
-------
repair the leaking valve no later than 15 calendar days after you identify the leak
[§63.1363(e)(7)(i)]
attempt to repair the leaking valve no later than 5 calendar days after detecting the leak
[§63.1363(e)(7)(ii)]. Examples of first attempts at repair include all of the following:
l§63.1363(e)(?)]
<• tightening of bonnet bolts v . , .
^ • You may delay repair under certain
« replacement of bonnet bolts ' situations [§63.1363(b)(3)ft) and §63.171].
For more information, see "When may I
<• tightening of packing gland nuts delay repair?"
<• injection of lubricant into lubricated
packing
*• re-monitor the valve within 3 months of repair, but you don't need to include these
monitoring results in the calculation of percent leakers described in Step 5
[§63.1363(e)(7)(iii) and (e)(6)(ii)]
Step 5: Calculate your percentage of leaking valves
• calculate the percentage of leaking valves in a group of valves, excluding nonrepairables
[§63.1363(e)(6)(ii)]. You may define groups
that are most appropriate for your site-specific ne results ofthese calculations are used
circumstances. Your choices for groups consist to determine the frequency of subsequent
of any combination of the following: monitoring, as described in Step 6.
[§63.1363(b) and (e)(6)(i)]
»• create group of all the valves from a single process
*• create a group of all the valves from multiple processes
* create multiple subgroups of all the valves from multiple processes
Note: You may not create subgroups of valves from a single process. Procedures for subgroups are described
on page x. To create or revise groups or subgroups after the implementation date, you must revise your permit
[§63.1363(e)(6)(i)].
To calculate the percentage of leaking valves in a group or subgroup, you may exclude
nonrepairable valves (up to 1 percent of the total number of valves in the group or subgroup)
[§63.1363(e)(6)(iv)].
Step 6: Continuous monitoring for leaks
• After your initial round of monitoring, you must monitor for leaks as follows:
124
-------
If the total
number of valves
you have for all
groups is...
And the percentage of
leaking valves in the
group or subgroup isa...
Then you must monitor at least
onceeveryb...
According to
§63.1363(e)(6)(iii) and this
section of the rule...
*250 2 2 percent
<2 percent
<1 percent
<0.5 percent
<0.25 percent
<250 no determination
required
<1 percent
<0.5 percent
month
3 months
6 months
12 months
2 years
3 months
6 months
12 months
§63.1363(e)(4)(i)
§63.1363(e)(4)(ii)
§63.1363(e)(4)(iii)
§63.1363(eX4)(iv)
§63.1363(e)(4)(v)
§63.1363(e)(9)
§63.1363(e)(4)(iii),
(e)(4)(iv),and(e)(9)
' Percentages are averaged from the data collected during the previous two monitoring periods if the group or
subgroup was monitored every year or every 2 years, and percentages are averaged from the previous three
monitoring periods if the group or subgroup was monitored every 1 month, 3 months, or 6 months.
b All valves that you find to be leaking must be repaired and remonitored
Your requirements for subgrouping valves include all of the following:
• you may subgroup valves within a group of processes if less than 2 percent of the valves in
the group leaked in the last monitoring period [§63.1363(e)((5)(i)]
• you must check for compliance with the 2 percent cutoff for the group every 6 months
[§63.1363(e)((5)(iii)]
• anytime you find more than 2 percent in the group to be leaking, you must revert to
monitoring the group as a whole (i.e., monitor all of the valves in the group monthly)
[§63.1363(e)(5)(iii)]
• when you create subgroups, you must include in the most frequently monitored subgroup all
valves that meet either of the following conditions [§63.1363(e)(5)(ii)(A)]:
»• those with less than 1 year of monitoring data
*• those that haven't been monitored in the last 12 months
• you may move any valve from a less frequently monitored subgroup to a more frequently
monitored subgroup if you take all of the following actions before and after the move
[§63.1363(e)(5)(ii)(B)]:
> before the move: monitor the valve during the most recent monitoring period for the
less frequently monitored subgroup
> after the move: include the first monitoring results in your next calculation of the
percentage leaking valves for the less frequently monitored subgroup (as well as in the
calculation for the more frequently monitored subgroup)
125
-------
you may move a valve from a more frequently monitored subgroup to a less frequently
monitored subgroup if the valve has not leaked for the
period of the less frequently monitored subgroup
TK£i- i i£-3/-oV<;v;;vryi Nonrepayable valves may not
[§63.1363(e)(5)(u)(C)] be moved to a less frequently
monitored subgroup.
Note: You must conduct more recordkeeping and reporting for
subgroups than for groups of processes f§63.1363(e)(5)fiv), (v), and(vi)].
See for more information.
What LDAR requirements apply to compressors (Option 1)?
To comply with the LDAR requirements for compressors (option 1), you must do all of the
following:
• equip your compressors with a seal system that includes a barrier fluid system and meets
any one of the following [§63.164(a) and (b)]:
*• it's operated with the barrier fluid pressure greater than the compressor stuffing box
pressure
*• it's equipped with a barrier fluid system degassing reservoir that's routed to a process or
connected by a closed-vent system to a control device
*• it's equipped with a closed-loop system that purges the barrier fluid directly into a
process stream
Note: the barrier fluid must not be in light liquid service.
• equip the barrier fluid system with a sensor that will detect a system failure [§63.164(d)]
• determine a criterion for the sensor that indicates the failure [§63.164(e)(2)]
• observe the sensor daily or equip it with an alarm (this requirement does not apply if the
compressor is located at an unmanned plant site)[§63.164(e)(l)]
Note: you have a leak if the sensor detects a failure [§63.164(flJ
• repair leaks within the following timeframe [§63.164(g)]:
>• your first attempt at repair must occur within 5 working days after you detect a leak
+ you must complete the repair within 15 calendar days after you detect a leak, unless a
delay of repair is allowed
126
-------
Exceptions:
The LDAR requirements don't apply to compressors in organic HAP service if you do any of the
following:
• equip the compressor with a closed vent system to capture and transport leaks back to a
process or to a control device [§63.164(h)]
• designate that the compressor operates with an instrument reading of less than 500 ppm
above background based on monitoring using Method 21 at all of the following times
[§63.1640)]:
* when you make the designation
»• annually
*• any other time requested by the Administrator
What LDAR requirements apply for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor
service (Option 1)?
To comply with the LDAR requirements for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service (option 1),
you check your devices for leaks after each pressure release. Your pressure relief devices must
have a leak detection instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background, except during
pressure releases.
Section 63.180(c) of subpart H specifies how to measure for leaks [§63.165(a)]. After each
pressure release [§63.165(b)]:
• the pressure relief device must be returned to less than 500 ppm as soon as possible
• you must monitor the relief device within 5 days of the pressure release and return of the
relief device to organic HAP service to ensure an instrument reading of less than 500 ppm
Exceptions:
You are exempt from the LDAR requirements for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service if
either of the following apply:
• you comply with Option 2 [§63.165(c)].
• if your pressure relief device is equipped with a rupture disk upstream of the pressure relief
device, and you replace the rupture disk as soon as possible (but no more than 5 days) after
a pressure release [§63.165(d)].
DF< APT
127
-------
What LDAR requirements apply for sampling connection systems?
(Option 1)
To comply with the LDAR requirements for sampling connection systems (option 1), you must
meet certain design requirements. Your sampling connection systems must have a closed-purge,
closed-loop, or closed-vent system. You aren't required to capture gases displaced during filling
of sample containers[§63.166(a)]. Closed-purge, closed-loop, or closed-vent systems must do one
of the following: [§63.166(b)J:
• return purged process fluid directly to the process line
• collect and recycle purged process fluid to a process
• capture and transport purged process fluid to a control device
• collect, store, and transport purged process fluid to a waste management unit, TSDF, or
permitted waste management facility
Exceptions:
In-situ sampling systems and sampling systems without purges are exempt from the LDAR
requirements for sampling connection systems..
What LDAR requirements apply for pumps, valves, connectors, and
agitators in heavy liquid service; instrumentation systems: and
pressure relief devices in liquid service? (Option 1)
To comply with the LDAR requirements for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy
liquid service; instrumentation systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service under Option 1
you must do all of the following [§§63.1363(b)(2) and 63.169]:
• monitor equipment for leaks
• repair leaks
In addition, there are exemptions to these requirements for specific types of equipment. All
requirements and exemptions are detailed below.
Monitoring for leaks;
If you see, hear, notice an odor, or otherwise detect a potential leak, then you must monitor for
leaks within 5 days using the method described in §63.180(b). This method requires use of a leak
detection instrument to monitor the potential leak. The following table summarizes what is
considered to be a leak:
128
-------
A leak is detected for... If the instrument reading is
agitators 10,000 ppm
pumps handling polymerizing monomers 5,000 ppm
pumps in food or medical service 2,000 ppm
valves 500 ppm
connectors 500 ppm
instrumentation systems 500 ppm
pressure relief devices 500 ppm
Repair of leaks:
You must repair leaks as soon as possible after they are detected. See "What are the leak repair
requirements?" for additional details.
Exceptions:
You are not required to monitor for leaks if you repair potential leaks. Repair of potential leaks
means any of the following:
• you can no longer see, hear, smell, or otherwise detect the potential leak
• you see no bubbles at potential leak sites during a leak check with soap solution
• the system will hold a test pressure
What LDAR requirements apply for connectors in gas/vapor or light
liquid service (Option 1)?
To comply with the LDAR requirements for connectors (option 1), you must do all of the
following:
Step 1: Identify your connector
• identify all connectors in PAI process units [§63.1363(a)(7)]
129
-------
Step 2: Identify connectors subject to special monitoring requirements
• identify each connector that meets one of the following conditions [§63.1363(f) and
§63.174(0, (g), and (h)]:
unsafe to monitor
For more information, see "What are the LDAR
difficult to monitor requirements for unsafe to monitor, difficult to
monitor, and inaccessible equipment?"
inaccessible '. :
Step 3: Perform initial monitoring
• Monitor all connectors (except those designated in Step 2 ) [§63.174(b)]:
*• by June 23, 2003 for existing sources
> within 12 months after initial startup or by June 23, 2003, whichever is later, for new
sources
Step 4: Repair the leak
• Repair leaks within the following timeframe [§63.174(d)]:
*• you must complete the repair no later than 15 calendar days after you identify a leak,
unless a delay of repair is allowed.
> your first attempt at repair must be no later than 5 calendar days after you detect the
leak
Step 5: Calculate your percentage of leaky connectors
• Calculate the percentage of leaking connectors in a group of processes using the procedures
specified in §63.174(i)
Step 6: Continuous monitoring for leaks
• After the first year of monitoring, determine your required monitoring frequency as follows:
130
-------
If, during the last
monitoring period,
the percentage of
connectors that
leak is...
^ 0.5 percent
^0.25 percent to
<0.5 percent
Then your
required
monitoring
frequency for
the next period
must be no less
than...
once per year
once every 4
years
And you must
monitor...
all
connectors
during the
year
40 percent in
the first
2 years
However, if the
percentage leaking
is...
^0.5 and
<1.0 percent in the
first 2-year period
or the full 4-year
period
Then you must
increase the
monitoring
frequency for the
group to1...
once every
2 years
According to this
section of the
rule...
§63.1363(b)(3)
(ill) and
§63.174(b)(3)(i)
§63.1363(b)(3)
(iii)(C) and (D)
i 1.0 percent in the
first 2-year period
once per year
§63.1363(b)(3)
O.25 percent once every 8 50 percent in ^0.35 and
years the first <0.5 percent in the
4 years first 4-year period
*0.5 and
<1.0 percent in the
first 4-year period
i 1 .0 percent in the
first 4-year period
once every
4 years (with
40 percent
monitored in the
first 2 years)b
once every
2 years
once per year
§63.1363(b)(3)
(iii)(C)and(F)
§63.1363(b)(3)
(iii)(D) and (F)
§63.1363(b)(3)
(iii)(E) and (F)
* You may return to the 4-year and 8-year monitoring frequencies if less than 0.5 percent and 0.25 percent,
respectively, are leaking in this monitoring period [§63.1363(b)(3)(iii)(D) and (E)]. However, except as
specified in footnote b, if * 0.5 percent are leaking, you must monitor once per year [§63.174(b)(3)(i)].
b If > 0.5 percent and less than 1.0 percent are leaking in the full 4-year period, your next monitoring period
must be 2 years [§63.1363(b)(3)(iii)(C)].
Exceptions to the above LDAR requirements for connectors apply for the following connectors:
Monitoring connectors that have been opened;
You have two options for monitoring of connectors that have been opened or have a broken
seal[§63.174(c)]:
• Monitor the connector for leaks when it is reconnected or within the first 3 months after it is
returned to organic HAP service. If a leak is detected, it must be repaired (unless it is
determined to be nonrepairable).
131
-------
• Choose not to monitor the connector. If you choose not to monitor the connector, then you
cannot count nonrepairables in your calculation of the percentage that are leaking.
Note: You may switch between the two monitoring alternatives for connectors that have been opened or
have a broken seal, provided the switch is at the end of the current monitoring period, and that it's
reported You must complete initial monitoring in the new alternative no later than 12 months after you
report the switch.
Monitoring for screwed connectors;
For screwed connectors with an inside diameter of 2 inches or less installed before November 10,
1997, you may do all of of the following as an alternative to the procedure described above
[§63.174(c)(2)]:
• Comply with the requirements for connectors in heavy liquid service in §63.169 of the HON
(i.e., if you detect evidence of a leak by visual, audible, olfactory, or other means, then
either repair the connector or monitor to determine if repair is needed).
• Monitor for leaks within the first 3 months after the screwed connector is returned to
organic HAP service after having been opened or having the seal broken. Leaks must be
repaired as described in "What are the leak repair requirements?"
Monitoring for connectors you eliminate:
If you eliminate a connector subject to repeat monitoring, you may take credit for elimination of
the connector if all of the following requirements are met [§63.174(j)]:
• The connector was welded after November 10, 1997
• The integrity of the weld is demonstrated by monitoring, X-ray testing, acoustic monitoring,
hydrotesting, or other method
• Welds created after November 10, 1997 but before June 23, 1999 are monitored or tested
by 3 months after the compliance date
• Welds created after June 23, 1999 are monitored or tested within 3 months after being
welded
• If an inadequate weld is found or the connector is not welded completely around the
circumference, the connector is not exempt from the monitoring requirements
What are my compliance requirements for closed-vent systems and
control devices (Option 2)?
Requirements for closed vent systems and control devices under Option 2 include all of the
following [§§63.1363(b)(3)(ii), 63.172, and 63.179]:
• operating requirements
• inspections
132
-------
• monitoring of bypass lines
In addition, there are exemptions to these requirements for specific types of equipment. All
requirements and exemptions are detailed below.
Operating requirements.
Closed-vent systems or control devices must be operating whenever organic HAP emissions are
being vented [§63.172(m)]. The table below summarizes the standards for closed-vent systems
and control devices:
If you operate a...
Recovery or recapture
device
(e.g., condenser,
absorber, etc.)
Then meet...
*95 percent reduction
Or meet...
20 ppmv*
Or meet...
Enclosed combustion
device
percent reduction
20 ppmv (dry basis, 3
percent Oj)
minimum residence time
of 0.5 sec. At 1400°F
(760°C)
Flare
the requirements of
§63.11(b)
•"The 20 ppmv standard is not applicable if you meet the alternative standards for enclosed-vent process units.
Inspections:
If the closed-vent system is made of hard-piping you must perform an initial inspection and annual
visual inspections for visible, audible, or olfactory
indications of leaks.
If your vapor collection system or closed-vent
system is made of duct work, your must conduct
an initial inspection and annual inspections
[§63.172(f)and(g)].
Monitoring of bypass lines:
§63.180(b) of subpart H specifies how you must
conduct initial inspections for hard-piping and
duct work and annual inspections for duct work.
If your closed-vent system has bypass lines that could divert a vent stream away from the control
device and to the atmosphere, you must do one of the following [§63.172(j)]:
• Use a flow indicator at the entrance of the bypass line. The flow indicator must take a
reading at least once every 15 minutes and you must keep records of the readings. Records
shall be generated as specified in §63.118(a)(3) of subpart G
133
-------
• Secure the bypass line valve in the non-diverting position with a car-seal or a lock-and-key
type configuration. You must visually inspect the seal or closure mechanism monthly to
ensure the valve is maintained in the non-diverting position
Exceptions:
If your control device is subject to monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in 40
CFR part 264, subpart BB, or in 40 CFR part 265, subpart BB, then you may choose whether to
comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of this rule or the
requirements in 40 CFR parts 264 or 265. You must identify which option you choose in your
periodic report [§63.172(n)].
Instead of the completing the initial and annual inspections, you may design a closed-vent system
to operate below atmospheric pressure. The system must be equipped with a pressure
measurement device that can be read from a readily accessible location to verify that negative
pressure is maintained in the closed-vent system when the control device is operating
[§63.1363(b)(3)(ii)(B)].
You aren't required to inspect equipment that is unsafe or difficult to monitor or is inaccessible.
(See "What if equipment is unsafe or difficult to monitor?" for additional information).
Low leg drains, high point bleeds, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, and pressure relief
valves needed for safety purposes aren't subject to the monitoring requirements for bypass lines
[§63.1720X3)].
What is required for an alternative standard (Option 3)?
You may apply for permission to use alternative emission limit (e.g., alternative standard) to meet
compliance with 3.
An "Alternative emission limit " is a way of reducing emissions other than the equipment,
design, or operational requirements or work practice standards in Subpart MMM's equipment
leak provisions. Some general conditions must be met when you apply for alternative means of
emission limitation, these include all of the following: [§63.177(b) and (c)]:
• you're responsible for collecting and verifying emission performance test data for an
alternative limit
• the Administrator will compare test data or the demonstrated emission reduction for the
alternative means of emission limitation to test data or emission reduction for the required
PAI equipment leak standards
• if the PAI standard is a work practice, you must commit in writing to work practices that
provide the same or better emission reductions than required by Subpart MMM and you
must demonstrate the that you're meeting the emission reduction standard for at least a
1-year period.
134
-------
• the Administrator may condition the permission on requirements that may be necessary to
ensure operation and maintenance to achieve the same or greater emission reduction as the
Subpart MMM equipment leak standards
You (or your leak control equipment manufacturer - why just the manufacturer, why not
consultants, etc.?) may offer a unique approach to demonstrate the alternative emission limit
[§63.177(d) through (e)].
You may do all of the following under the alternative standards:
• conduct pressure testing for leaks on batch or non-batch equipment [§63.178 with
changes described in §63.1363(b)(3)(iv)]
• monitor batch equipment for leaks [§63.178 with changes described in §63.1363(b)(3)(iv)]
• enclosure of process units so that all emissions from equipment leaks are vented through a
closed-vent system to a control device [§63.179]
Pressure testing:
If you comply with the requirements for pressure testing in the section, you're exempt from the
monitoring provisions for all of the following [§63.178(b)J:
• pumps in light liquid service
• valves in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
• pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service; instrumentation systems;
and pressure relief devices in liquid service
• agitators in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
• connectors in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
For non-exempt process equipment, you must pressure test the equipment train for leaks each
time the equipment is reconfigured for
production of a different product. D . , iL * , j • «-t f*i.
r r Process equipment must be tested using either of the
Pressure testing isn't required for routine seal procedures specified in:
breaks, such as changing hoses or filters. You _„ ,onM. .
, • §63.180(0 for pressure or vacuum loss
must pressure test at lest once per year
[§63.178(b)(l)]. ' §63.180(g)for a test using a liquid
Leaks are detected if [§63.178(b)(3)]:
DRAFT
135
-------
For pressure or vacuum tests... For pressure tests using a liquid...
The pressure changes at a rate greater than 6.9 there are indications of liquids dripping
kilopascals (1 psig) in 1 hour or
or if there's other evidence of fluid loss.
if there's visible, audible, or olfactory evidence of
fluid loss
If you detect a leak, you must repair it and retest the equipment before start-up of the process.
See "What are the leak repair requirements?" (page x) for more information.
Monitoring batch equipment for leaks:
If you elect to monitor batch equipment for leaks to show compliance, you must comply with the
requirements specified in "How do I comply" [§63.178(c)(l)]. You must monitor the batch
equipment for leaks when equipment is in use with any
of the following [§63.178(c)(2)]:
§63.180(b)ofsubpartHspetiJieshowto
• Organic HAP monitor for equipment leaks.
• an acceptable surrogate volatile organic
compound which is not an organic HAP
. • any other detectable gas or vapor
Each time the equipment is reconfigured for the production of a new product, you must monitor
the equipment for leaks within 30 days of process start-up. Initial monitoring can't be used in
determining percent leaking equipment [§63.178(c)(3)(i)].
Connectors must be monitored in accordance with the requirements in §63. 174 of Subpart H
[§63.178(c)(3)(ii)].
Batch equipment other than connectors must be monitored at the following frequencies
If the equipment is operated . . . And the monitoring frequency required for a continuous process is. . .
monthly quarterly semiannuaUy
Then you must monitor your batch process. . .
0 to <25 percent of the year quarterly annually annually
25 to <50 percent of the year quarterly semiannually annually
50 to <75 percent of the year bimonthly three times semiannuaUy
75 to 100 percent of the year _ monthly quarterly semiannuaUy
136
-------
The monitoring frequencies specified in the table above can be adjusted to accommodate your
process operations. You may monitor anytime during the monitoring period (e.g., month, quarter,
year), provided the monitoring is conducted within a reasonable time after monitoring was last
completed. For example, if the equipment is not operating during the scheduled monitoring
period, the monitoring can be done during the next period when the process is operating
[§63.178(c)(3)(iv)].
Enclosed-vented process units.
Process units enclosed so that all emissions from equipment leaks are vented through a closed-vent
system to a control device are exempt from Subpart MMM equipment leak requirements.
However, you must maintain the enclosure under a negative pressure at all times while the process
unit is in operation to ensure that all emissions are routed to a control device [§63.179].
What are my leak repair requirements?
You must repair leaking equipment as soon as possible after leaks are detected. A first attempt to
repair the leak must be made within 5 days after the leak is detected. Activities listed in Subpart
MMM as first attempts to repair leaks from certain equipment are summarized as follows.
For the following equipment-
First attempts to repair leaks include...
According to...
pumps/agitators in light liquid
service
tightening of packing gland nuts
ensuring the seal flush is operating at design
pressure and temperature
§63.1363(c)(3)
valves in gas/vapor or light liquid
service
tightening of bonnet bolts
replacement of bonnet bolts
tightening of packing gland nuts
injection of lubricant into lubricated packing
§63.1363(e)(8)
pumps, valves, connectors, and
agitators in heavy liquid service;
instrumentation systems; and
pressure relief devices in liquid
service
tightening of the packing gland nuts
ensuring that the seal flush is operating at
design pressure and temperature
tightening or replacement of valve bonnet bolts
injection of lubricant into lubricated packing
§63.169(d)
Leaks must be fully repaired within 15 days after detection. However, you may delay repair of
leaking equipment under any of the following circumstances [§63.171].
137
-------
• If the repair is technically infeasible without a process unit shutdown. You may delay
repair until the end of the next process unit shutdown [§63.171(a)].
• If equipment is isolated from the process and doesn't remain in organic HAP service
[§63.171(b)]
• If emissions of material purged from valves, connectors, or agitators during immediate
repair would be greater than the fugitive emissions likely to result from delay of repair.
When the repair is performed the purged material must be collected and destroyed or
recovered in a control device [§63.171(c)].
• If pump repair requires replacing the existing seal with a new system that will better meet
the requirements of Subpart MMM. The repair must be completed as soon as possible but
not more than 6 months from the time when the leak was detected [§63.175(d)].
• If valve assembly replacement is necessary during a process unit shutdown, but valve
assembly supplies aren't on hand. You may not delay repairs beyond the next process unit
shutdown, unless a third shutdown will occur within 6 months from the first process unit
shutdown [§63.171(e)].
Valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service must be monitored at least once within the first
3 months after repairs are made. Days when a valve isn't in organic HAP service aren't included
as part of this 3-month period [§63.1363(e)(7)].
Option 2:
You may delay a repair of leaks in closed-vent systems and control devices only if either of the
following applies: [§63.172(h)]
• the repair is technically infeasible without a process unit shutdown
• if you determine that emissions resulting from immediate repair would be greater than the
fugitive emissions likely to result from delaying the repair
The repair must be completed by the end of the next process unit shutdown [§63.172(i)].
Option 3:
If you detect a leak when monitoring batch processes under the alternative standard, you must
repair the leak within no more than 15 days after it is detected [§63.178(c)(4)]. If you detect a
leak during pressure testing under the alternative standard, you must repair the leak and retest the
equipment before start-up of the process. If the equipment fails the retest or the second of two
consecutive pressure tests, it must be repaired as soon as possible, but no longer than 30 days after
the second pressure test.
Delay of leaking equipment repair is allowed under the alternative standard, if the replacement
equipment is not available and both of the following conditions are met [§63.178(d)]:
138
-------
• Equipment supplies (which were sufficiently stocked) have been depleted
• The repair is made no later than 10 days after delivery of the replacement equipment
What if equipment is unsafe or difficult to monitor?
Rule references for the leak repair provisions are:
§63.1363(c)(3) for pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor or light
liquid service
§63.1363(e)(7)for valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service
§63.164(g)for compressors
§63.169(c) and (d) for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service;
instrumentation systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service
§63.172(h) and (i)for closed-vent systems and control devices
§63.174(d) and (h)(2) and (3) for connectors in gas/vapor of light liquid service
§63.178 for alternative means of emission limitation
If you designate the following equipment as unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible,
the equipment is exempt from the general equipment leak requirements listed in Table 6-1 in
"How do I comply?": [§63.1363(f)]
• pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
• valves in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
• closed-vent systems and control devices
• connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
Equipment that's unsafe to monitor:
Equipment may be designated as unsafe to monitor if you determine that monitoring personnel
would be exposed to an immediate danger if you comply with the equipment leak monitoring
requirements. If you designate equipment as unsafe to monitor, then you must have a written plan
that requires monitoring of the equipment as frequently as possible during safe-to-monitor times.
You do not have to monitor more frequently than the periodic monitoring schedule that would
apply of the equipment were not unsafe to monitor [§63.1363(f)(2)].
Equipment that is difficult to monitor:
Equipment may be designated as difficult to monitor if you determine that either of the following
are true: [§63.1363(f)(3)(i)] '
• the equipment can't be monitored without elevating the monitoring personnel more than
2 meters above a support surface
• the equipment isn't accessible at anytime in a safe manner
DRAFT
139
-------
If you designate equipment as difficult to monitor, then you must follow a written plan that
requires monitoring of the equipment at least once per calendar year [§63.1363(f)(3)(iii)]. Any
equipment may be designated as difficult to monitor at an existing source At a new source, you
may designate no more than 3 percent of each type of equipment as difficult to monitor
[§63.1363(f)(3)(ii)].
Inaccessible equipment and ceramic or ceramic-lined connectors.
You may designate a connector, agitator, or valve as inaccessible if it's any of the following
[§63.1363(f)(4)(i)]:
• buried
• insulated in a manner that prevents access to the equipment by a monitor probe
• obstructed by equipment or piping that prevents access to the equipment by a monitor
probe
• unable to be reached from a wheeled scissor-lift or hydraulic-type scaffold which would
allow access to equipment up to 7.6 meters above the ground
• not able to be accessed at any time in a safe manner to perform monitoring. Examples of
unsafe access are:
* access requiring a wheeled scissor-lift on unstable or uneven terrain
*• access requiring a motorized man-lift basket in areas where an ignition potential exists
*• access near hazards such as electrical lines
»• access that would risk damage to equipment
Ceramic or ceramic-lined connectors may be treated as inaccessible connectors [§63.1363(f)(l)].
At an existing source, you may designate any connector, agitator, or valve as inaccessible if it
meets the applicable criteria. At a new source, you may designate no more than 3 percent of each
type of equipment as inaccessible [§63.1363(f)(4)(ii)].
Inaccessible equipment observed by sight, sound, odor, or other means to be leaking must be
repaired as soon as possible. See "What are the leak repair requirements?" [§63.1363(f)(4Xiii)].
What records must I keep for my equipment leaks?
i
You must keep the following types of records depending on the type of equipment you use:
[§63.1363(g)]
• general records (identification of equipment, records of exemptions, etc.)
• records of visual inspections
140
-------
• monitoring records
• records of pressure tests
• records of compressor and pressure relief valve compliance tests
• records for closed-vent systems
• records for components in heavy liquid service
• records of exempt components
• records of alternative means of compliance determination
You must also keep records pertaining to the division of valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid
service into process subgroups. Specific recordkeeping procedures are identified below [Need to
convert the info below to a table]
You only need one recordkeeping system, even you have more than one group of processes
subject to the equipment leak requirements. Keep records at the plant site in hard copy or
electronic form [§63.1363(g)(l)].
General recordkeeping;
Except for records of pressure tests, the following information pertaining to all equipment subject
to the equipment leak requirements must be recorded [§63.1363(g)(2)J:
• identification numbers for equipment (except instrumentation systems) subject to the
equipment leak requirements [§63.1363(g)(2)(i)]
Note : Connectors (except inaccessible connectors) do not need to be individually identified if all the
connectors in an area are identified as a group and the number of connectors is indicated.
You must complete the list for each type of equipment by the time you complete the initial survey required
for that component. The list of identification numbers must be updated within 12 days after each
monitoring survey to incorporate any equipment changes.
• a schedule for monitoring connectors and valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service
[§63.1363(g)(2)(i)]
• identification numbers for equipment with a closed-vent system and control device that
isn't subject to the equipment leak monitoring requirements [§63.1363(g)(2)(ii)]
• identification numbers for compressors that you designate as operating with an instrument
reading of less than 500 ppm above background (these compressors are exempt from the
monitoring requirements) [§63.1363(gX2)0i)]
• identification numbers for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service subject to the
equipment leak provisions and pressure relief devices with rupture disks
[§63.1363(g)(2)(iii)]
DRAM
141
-------
• identification of instrumentation systems subject to the equipment leak provisions
[§63.1363(g)(2)(iv)]
• the following information for each dual mechanical seal system installed on a pump in light
liquid service, agitator in gas/vapor or light liquid service, or compressor
[§63.1363(g)(2)(v)]:
>• design criteria that indicates failure of the seal system, the barrier fluid system, or both
»• your explanation of the design criteria
> any changes to the design criteria and the reasons for the changes
• a list of equipment designated as unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible and
a copy of the plan for monitoring or inspecting this equipment [§63.1363(g)(2)(vi)]
• a list of connectors removed from and added to the process if you plan to use the net
credits for removed connectors when calculating the percent leaking connectors
[§63.1363(g)(2)(vii)]
• documentation of the integrity of the weld for any removed connectors if you use the credit
for removed connectors [§63.1363(g)(2)(vii)]
• a list of equipment added to batch processes since the last monitoring period if elect to
monitor batch processes using alternative means of emission limitation
[§63.1363(g)(2)(viii)]
Records of visual inspections:
You must document that visual inspections for leaks from pumps in light liquid service and
agitators in gas/vapor and light liquid service were conducted [§63.1363(g)(3)]. Visual inspection
records must contain the date and document monitoring of leaking equipment identified during the
visual inspections (except for records of pressure tests). Keep these records for 5 years.
Monitoring records:
When each leak is detected you must record all of the following: [§63.1363(g)(4)]
• the instrument and the equipment identification number and the operator name, initials, or
identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair the leak, and date of
successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument reading measured by Method 21
of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or determined to be non-
repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after leak discovery and the reason for
the delay
142
-------
Note: You may develop a written procedure that identifies the conditions that justify' a delay of repair. The
written procedures may be included as part of you startup/shutdown/malfunction plan (required by
§63.1367 (a)) or may be part of a separate document maintained at the plant site. Reasons for delay of
repair may be documented by citing the relevant sections of the written procedure. If delay of repair was
caused by depletion of stocked parts, you must have documentation that the spare parts were sufficiently
stocked onsite before depletion and the reason for depletion.
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that occur while the equipment is
unrepaired
• identification of connectors in gas/vapor and light liquid service disturbed since the last
monitoring period (unless you use the option for not monitoring open connectors during
the monitoring period). Connector identification may be maintained either by list, location,
or tagging.
• date and results of follow-up monitoring for open or disturbed connectors. If identification
of disturbed connectors is made by location, then all connectors within the designated
location must be monitored
• date and results of monitoring done when using alternative means of emission limitation for
batch processes for equipment added to a batch process since the last monitoring period. If
no leaking equipment is found, you must record that the inspection was performed.
Records of the actual monitoring results are not required
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a computerized data base
capable of generating summary reports from the records
Keep all records for 5 years. At a minimum, the most recent 2 years of records must be retained
onsite. The remaining 3 years of records may be retained off site. You may keep the records on
microfilm, a computer, computer disks, magnetic tape disks, or on microfiche. [§63.10(b)(l) of
subpart A]
Records of pressure tests:
If you show compliance with the equipment leak provisions by pressure testing process equipment
and supply lines between storage and processing areas, then you're exempt from the requirements
to keep all of the following: [§63.1363(g)(5)]
• general records
• records of visual inspections
• monitoring records
• records of compressor and pressure relief valve compliance tests
Instead, you must maintain records of all of the following information:
• identification of each product, or product code, produced during the calendar year. It is
not necessary to identify individual items of equipment in the process equipment train.
143
-------
• records of the portion of time during the year the equipment is in use in the PAI process
(e.g., records of time in use for individual pieces of equipment or average time in use for
the process unit). These records aren't required if you don't adjust monitoring frequency
by the time in use.
• identification of equipment. Physical tagging of the equipment is not required. Equipment
in a process subject to recordkeeping provisions may be identified on a plant site plan, in
log entries, or by other appropriate methods.
• the dates of each pressure test, the test pressure, and the pressure drop observed during the
test.
• records of any evidence of fluid loss detected by sight, sound, or odor.
• when a process equipment train does not pass two consecutive pressure tests, all of the
following information must be recorded in a log and kept for 2 years:
> the dates of each pressure test and leak repair attempt
»• repair methods applied in each attempt to repair the leak
•• the reason for the delay of repair
*• the expected date for delivery of the replacement equipment and the actual date of
delivery of the replacement equipment
»• the date of successful repair
Records of compressor and pressure relief valve compliance tests:
You must record the dates and results of all of the following [§63.1363(g)(6)J
• each compliance test required for compressors
• the monitoring after a pressure release for each pressure relief device in gas/vapor service.
The results you record must include the measured background level and maximum instrument
reading at each piece of equipment during each compliance test.
Records for closed-vent systems.
You must keep records, for the life of the equipment, of the design specifications and performance
demonstrations, including all of the following: [§63.1363(g)(7)(i)j
• detailed schematics, design specifications of the control device, and piping and
instrumentation diagrams
• the dates and descriptions of any changes in the design specifications
• the flare design (i.e., steam assisted, air assisted, or nonassisted) and the results of the
compliance demonstration
144
-------
• a description of the parameter or parameters monitored to ensure that control devices are
operated and maintained as designed and an explanation of why each parameter was
selected for the monitoring
You must keep all of the following operational records of closed-vent systems and control devices
for 5 years: [§63.1363(g)(7)(ii)]
• dates and durations when the closed-vent systems and control devices are not operated as
designed, as indicated by the monitored parameters. Include periods when a flare pilot
light system does not have a flame
• dates and durations when the monitor is not operating
• dates and durations of startups and shutdowns of control devices
You must keep for 5 years all of the following records of inspections of closed-vent systems:
[§63.1363(g)(7)(m)]
• if no leaks are detected during the inspection, a record that the inspection was performed,
the date of the inspection, and a statement that no leaks were detected
• if leaks are detected during the inspection, the information specified in the above section on
"monitoring records" must be recorded
Records for components in heavy liquid service:
You must record information and analyses used to determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy
liquid service. The determination must include an analysis or demonstration that the process fluids
do not meet the criteria of "in light liquid or gas/vapor service."
Examples of information that could document that a fluid is not "in light liquid or gas/vapor
service" include records of chemicals purchased for the process, analyses of process stream
composition, engineering calculations, or process knowledge [§63.1363(g)(8)].
Records of exempt components:
You must record identification of equipment that is in organic HAP service less than 300 hr/yr.
Equipment may be identified by list, location, or other method [§63.1363(g)(9)].
Records of alternative means of compliance determination:
If you choose to comply with the alternative emission limit for enclosed-vent process units, you
must maintain all of the following records: [§63.1363(g)(10)]
• identification of the processes and the organic HAP they handle
• a schematic of the process, enclosure, and closed-vent system.
145
-------
• a description of the system used to create a negative pressure in the enclosure to ensure
that all emissions are routed to the control device
Records for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service.
If you divide your valves by process subgroups, then you must keep records of all of the
following: [§63.1363(e)(5)(iv)]
• which valves are assigned to each subgroup
• monitoring results and calculations made for each subgroup for each monitoring period
• which valves are reassigned and when they were reassigned
• results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
You must notify the Administrator of the decision to subgroup valves no later than 30 days before
the beginning of the next monitoring period. In the notification, you must identify the participating
processes and the valves assigned to each subgroup.[§63.1363(e)(5)(v)]
What reports must I submit?
To avoid repetition, all of your reporting requirements are presented in Chapter 8.
146
-------
Checklists for Equipment Leak Inspections
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
The table below explains which inspection checklists you should use for determining compliance
with the equipment leak requirements.
For the following equipment...
Pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor service and in light
liquid service
Open-ended valves or lines
Valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
Compressors
Pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service
Sampling connection systems
Pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service;
instrumentation systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service
Closed-vent systems and control devices
Connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
Equipment meeting alternative means of emission limitation
Then use these checklists:
land 2
lands
1 and 4
Iand5
1 and 6
land?
landS
land 9
land 10
land 11
147
-------
Checklist 1:
Identification of Equipment
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
1. Did you label each piece of equipment covered by the
equipment leak provisions using any of the following methods:
• physically tagging the equipment
• marking the equipment on a plant site plan
• marking the equipment in log entries
• designating process boundaries with waterproof
identification
• another appropriate method for identifying equipment
§63.1363(a)(7)
DYes
DYes
nYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
2. If you made changes to equipment subject to the leak detection
requirements, did you update the equipment identification in
question 1 (if needed) within 15 calendar days of the end of the
monitoring period for the component? §63.1363(a)(7)
3. If a leak was detected, did you attach a visible, weatherproof
identification to the leaking equipment? §63.1363(a)(10)
D Yes D No
4. Did the identification in question 4 remain on the equipment
until either:
• after the leak was repaired for equipment other than valves DYes DNo
or connectors in light liquid or gas/vapor service
• no leak was detected by follow-up monitoring for valves or
connectors in light liquid or gas/vapor service D Yes D No
§63.1363(a)(10)
148
-------
Checklist 2: Requirements for pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor and in light
liquid service (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements Comments
1. Did you monitor for leaks using the method in §63.180(b)? DYes DNo
2. Did you calculate the percent of leaking pumps using the D Yes D No
procedure outlined in §63.1363(c)(4)?
3. Did you monitor each pump monthly if (based on a 1-year D Yes D No
rolling average) the greater of either:
• 10 percent of the pumps in a group of processes leak
• three pumps in a group of processes leak £63.1363(c)(4)
4. Have you performed weekly visual inspections of each pump DYes DNo
and agitator for indications of liquids dripping from the pump
or agitator seal? §63.1363(c)(2)(iii)
5. Have you done the following for each pump or agitator
equipped with a dual mechanical seal:
• ensured that the dual mechanical seal has either: DYes DNo
* a barrier fluid pressure that is always greater than the
pump/agitator stuffing box pressure
* a barrier fluid degassing reservoir connected by a
closed-vent system to a control device
> a closed-loop system that purges the barrier fluid into a
process stream
• observed the barrier fluid system failure sensor daily DYes DNo
(unless the sensor has an alarm or the equipment is at an
unmanned plant site)
• visually inspected each pump/agitator weekly and DYes DNo
monitored for leaks if liquids are dripping from the seal
• repaired any leaks
• included the pump in the calculation of percent leaking
pumps §63. 1363(c)(5)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
149
-------
Checklist!: (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor and in light liquid service
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
6.
7.
Have you done the following for each pump or agitator
designed with no externally actuated shaft penetrating the
pump/agitator housing:
• performed weekly visual inspections for indications of
liquids dripping from the pump or agitator seal
• included the pumps in the calculation of percent leaking
pumps §63.1363(c)(6)
Have you visually inspected each pump or agitator at
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
unmanned plant sites at least once per month? §63.1363(c)(8)
B. Leak Repair Requirements
Comments
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? First attempts to repair leaks include:
• tightening of packing gland nuts
• ensuring the seal flush is operating at design pressure and
temperature §63.1363(c)(3)
DYes
DNo
2. Did you fully repair the leak within 15 days after it was
detected, unless any of the following circumstances applied:
• the repair was technically unfeasible without a process unit
shutdown
• the equipment was isolated from the process and did not
remain in organic HAP service
• emissions purged from the equipment during immediate
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from
delaying the repair and using a control device to reduce the
emissions
• pump repair requires replacement of the existing seal with
a new system that will better meet the PAI rule
requirements §63.1363(c)(3)
DYes
DNo
3. If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown?
§63.1363(b)(3)fl)(A) as cross referenced by §63.1363(c)(3)
DYes
DNo
4. Use of a control device is necessary if you determined that
emissions purged from equipment during immediate leak
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from delaying
the repair. Did you use a control device to reduce emissions
generated during leak repair? §63.171(c) as cross referenced
by §63.1363(c)(3)
DYes
DNo
150
-------
Checklist!: (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps in Ught Uquid service and agitators in gas/vapor and in light Uquid service
B. Leak Repair Requirements Comment*
5. If you determined that pump repair required replacement of the DYes DNo
existing seal with a new system to better meet the PAI rule
requirements, did you repair the leak less than 6 months from •
the time when the leak was detected? §63.171 (it) as cross
referenced by §63.1363(c)(3)
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for pumps and D Yes D No
agitators subject to the equipment leak requirements?
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question D Yes D No
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)fi)(A)
3. Do your records include identification numbers for pumps and DYes DNo
agitators with a closed-vent system and control device that are
not subject to the equipment leak monitoring requirements?
4 . Do your records include the following information for each
dual mechanical seal system installed on a pump or agitator:
• design criteria that indicates failure of the seal system, the D Yes D No
barrier fluid system, or both
• your explanation of the design criteria DYes DNo
• any changes to the design criteria and the reasons for the D Yes D No
changes §63.1363(g)(2)(v)
5. Do your records include a list of equipment designated as DYes DNo
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible and a
plan for monitoring or inspecting this equipment?
6. Do your records include documentation that visual inspection D Yes D No
for leaks in pumps and agitators were conducted, including
both:
• the date if the inspection
• documentation of monitoring performed on leaking
equipment identified during the inspection §63. 1 363 (g) (3)
151
-------
Checklist 2: (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor and in light liquid service
C. Recordkeepiag and Reporting Requirements - Comments
.7. If you detected a leak, have you recorded:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number DYes DNo
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair DYes DNo
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument D Yes D No
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that DYes DNo
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a D Yes D No
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records §63.1363(g)(4)
8. Do your records include information and analyses used to DYes DNo
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy liquid service
(i.e., not "in light liquid or gas/vapor service" and therefore not
subject to equipment leak requirements)? §63.1363(g)(8)
9. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
10. Did you include the following in your periodic report for each
monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?
• the number of pumps and agitators for which leaks were nY _-.
detected, the percent leakers, and the total number of
pumps and agitators monitored
• the number of pumps and agitators for which leaks were DYes DNo
not repaired
• the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where nY nN
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically ^
infeasible
• if applicable, the initiation of a monthly monitoring DYes DNo
program if more than 10 percent of pumps in light liquid
service (or three pumps if three is greater than 10 percent)
l&k§63.1363(h)(3)(ii)
11. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
Status report in your periodic report? § 63.1363(h)(3)ftv)
152
-------
Checklist!: (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps in light liquid service and agitators in gas/vapor and in light liquid service
153
-------
Checklist 3: Requirements for open-ended valves or lines (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
•Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Operating Requirements
Comments
1. Have you equipped open-ended valves or lines with a cap, DYes DNo
blind flange, plug, or a second valve? §63.1363(d)(l)(i)
1. Does the open end remain sealed at all times except when D Yes D No
either:
• operations require flow of process fluid through the
open-ended valve or line
• maintenance or repair is being conducted §63.1363(d)(l)(ii)
3. Did you replace the seal within 1 hour after completion of the D Yes D No
activities in question 2? §63.1363(d)(l)(ii)
4.' If you equipped open-ended valves or lines with a second OYes DNo
valve, have you ensured that the valve on the process fluid end
is closed before the second valve is closed? §63.1363(d)(2)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for open-ended DYes DNo
valves or lines subject to the equipment leak requirements?
§?3^363M2MV.
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question DYes DNo
1 as needed to incorporate any equipment changes?
§6H3.63J&V).VQ).
3. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
4. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)Qv)
154
-------
Checklist 4: Requirements for valves in gas/vapor service and light Uquid service (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements
Comments
1. Did you perform initial monitoring for leaks using the method DYes DNo
in §63.180(b) by no later than 1 year after the compliance date
(e.g., by June 23, 2003 for existing sources)? §63.1363(e)(2)
2. Have you assigned valves to process groups or subgroups
according to the procedures outlined in §§63.1363(e)(5) and
(6)?
DYes
DNo
3. Have you determined the overall performance of valves in each D Yes D No
group every 6 months according to the procedures in
§§63.1363(e)(5)(iii) and (e)(6)(ii)?
4. If your overall performance is * 2 percent leaking valves, have D Yes
you performed monitoring at the appropriate.frequency
(frequencies are specified in §63.1363(e)(5)(vii) and
D No
B. Leak Repair Requirements
Comments
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? First attempts to repair leaks include:
• tightening or replacement of bonnet bolts
• tightening of packing gland nuts
• injection of lubricant into lubricated packing
§63.1363(e)(7)(ii) and (e)(8)
DYes
DNo
155
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
B. Leak Repair Requirements Commaartg
2. Did you fully repair the leak within 15 days after it was DYes DNo
detected, unless any of the following circumstances applied:
• the repair was technically infeasible without a process unit
shutdown
* the equipment was isolated from the process and did not
remain in organic HAP service
• emissions purged from the equipment during immediate
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from
delaying the repair and using a control device to reduce the
emissions
• valve assembly supplies are not on hand and valve
replacement is needed during a process unit shutdown
§§63.1363(b)(3)fi) and63.171(b) through (e) as cross
referenced by §63. ^63(e)(7)fi)
3. If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible D Yes D No
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown?
§63.1363(b)(3)0)(A) as cross referenced by §63.1363(e)(7)(i)
4. Use of a control device is necessary if you determined that DYes DNo
emissions purged from equipment during immediate leak
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from delaying
the repair. Did you use a control device to reduce emissions
generated during leak repair? §63.171(c) as cross referenced
_byJ^.1363(e)(7)(i)
5. If valve assembly supplies were not on hand during a process DYes DNo
unit shutdown when valve replacement was needed, did you
replace the valve assembly during the next process unit
shutdown (unless a third shutdown occurred within 6 months
from the first process unit shutdown)? §63.171(e) as cross
referenced by §63.1363(e)(7)(i)
6. If you made repairs to valves, did you monitor the valves at D Yes D No
least once while the valves were in organic HAP service within
the first 3 months after the repairs were made?
§63.1363(e)(7)ftii)
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Reqnirementa
1. Do your records include identification numbers for valves DYes DNo
subject to the equipment leak requirements?
§63.1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
156
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Comments
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)0)(A)
DYes DNo
3. Do your records include a valve monitoring schedule?
§63.1363(g)(2)fi)(B)
DYes
DNo
4. Do your records include all of the following information
pertaining to assignment of valves to process subgroups:
5.
• which valves are assigned to each subgroup
• monitoring results and calculations made for each subgroup
for each monitoring period
• which valves are reassigned and when they were reassigned
• results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
§63.1363(e)(5)(iv)
Did you notify the Administrator of the decision to subgroup
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
valves earlier than 30 days before the beginning of the
monitoring period? (The notification must identify the
participating processes and the valves assigned to each
subgroup.) §63.1363(e)(5)(v)
Do your records include a list of equipment designated as
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible and a
plan for monitoring or inspecting this equipment?
§63.1363(g)(2)(vi)
DYes
DNo
7. If you detected a leak, have you recorded:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number D Yes D No
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair D Yes D No
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument D Yes D No
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that DYes DNo
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a D Yes DNo
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records §63.1363(g)(4)
DRAFT
157
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
C. Recordkeeptflg and Reporting HegBirementa Comments
8. Do your records include information and analyses used to OYes DNo
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy liquid service
(i.e., not "in light liquid or gas/vapor service" and therefore not
subject to equipment leak requirements)? §63.1363(g)(8)
9 Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
158
-------
Checklist 4: (cont'd)
Requirements for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting ReqaJrements j Comments
10. Did you include the following in your periodic report for each
monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?
• the number of valves with leaks detected, the percent DYes DNo
leakers, and the total number of valves monitored
• the number of valves with leaks that were not repaired and DYes DNo
the number of those valves that are non-repairable
• the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where D Yes D No
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically
infeasible
• if applicable, the initiation of a monthly monitoring D Yes D No
program if 2 percent or more valves leak §63.1363(h)(3)(ii)
11. Did you include the following information in your periodic
report:
• valve reassignments occurring during the reporting period DYes DNo
• results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
§63.1363(e)(5)(vi) DYes DNo
12. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)(iv)
159
-------
Checklist 5: Requirements for compressors (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Tacility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
.Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Design Requirements : Comments
1. Are your compressors equipped with a seal system that OYes DNo
includes a barrier fluid system to prevent leaks of process fluid
to the atmosphere? §63.164(a)
2. Is the compressor seal system:
• operated with the barrier fluid pressure greater than the DYes DNo .
compressor stuffing box pressure
• equipped with a barrier fluid system degassing reservoir Q Yes D No
that is routed to a process or fuel gas system or connected
by a closed-vent system to a control device
• equipped with a closed-loop system that purges the barrier DYes DNo
fluid directly into a process stream §63.164(b)
3. Is the barrier fluid in heavy liquid service? §63.164(c) DYes DNo
4. Is the barrier fluid system equipped with a sensor that will DYes DNo
detect failure of the seal system, barrier fluid system, or both
the seal and barrier fluid system? §63.164(d)
5. Have you observed the barrier fluid system failure sensor daily DYes DNo
(unless the sensor has an alarm or the equipment is at an
unmanned plant site) §63.164(e)
6. Have you tested compressors designated to operate with an DYes DNo
instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background to
ensure compliance with the 500 ppm limit upon designation
and annually. §63.164ft)
160
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for compressors
8, Leak Repair Requirements
Comments
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? §63.164(g)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
2. Did you fully repair the leak within IS days after it was
detected, unless any of the following circumstances appb'ed:
• the repair was technically infeasible without a process unit
shutdown §63.1363(b)(3)fi)(A) as cross referenced by
§63.164(g)(l) - '
• the equipment was isolated from the process and did not
remain in organic HAP service §63.171(b) as cross
referenced by §63.164(g)(l)
3. If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown?
§63.1363(b)(3)ft)(A) as cross referenced by §63.164(g)(l)
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for
compressors subject to the equipment leak requirements?
§63.1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
DYes
DNo
2.
3.
Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question
1 to incorporate any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)Ci)(A)
Do your records include identification numbers for
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
compressors with a closed-vent system and control device that
are not subject to the equipment leak monitoring requirements?
§63.1363(g)(2)(ii)(A)
4. Do your records include identification numbers for
compressors that you designate as operating with an
instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background
(these compressors are exempt from the monitoring
requirements) §63.1363(g)(2)Cii)(B)
DYes
DNo
5. Do your records include the following information for each
compressor:
• design criteria that indicates failure of the seal system, the DYes DNo
barrier fluid system, or both
• your explanation of the design criteria OYes DNo
• any changes to the design criteria and the reasons for the DYes DNo
changes § 63.1363(g)(2)(v)
161
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for compressors
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
6. If you detected a leak, did you record:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number DYes DNo
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair DYes DNo
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument D Yes D No
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that D Yes D No
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a D Yes D No
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records §63.1363(g)(4)
7. Did you record the dates and results (including the measured DYes DNo
background level and maximum instrument reading for each
compressor) of each test to demonstrate compliance with the
500 ppm limit for designated compressors? §63.1363(g)(6)
8. Do your records include information and analyses used to DYes DNo
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy Liquid service
(i.e., not "in light liquid or gas/vapor service" and therefore not
subject to equipment leak requirements)? §63.1363(g)(8)
9. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
10. Did you include the following in your periodic report for each
monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?
• the number of compressors for which leaks were detected DYes DNo
• the number of compressors for which leaks were not DYes DNo
repaired
• the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where DYes DNo
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically
unfeasible
• the results of all monitoring to show compliance with the DYes DNo
500 ppm limit for compressors designated to operate below
500 ppm §63.1363(h)(3)(ri)
162
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for compressors
C. Recordkeepingaad Reporting Reqairementg ; ; : ' Comments
11. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance D Yes D No
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)Qv)
163
-------
Checklist 6: Requirements for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date: :
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirements
Note: You are exempt from the requirements for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service if your pressure
relief device is routed to a combustion unit or is equipped with a closed-vent system and control device.
§ 63.1 65 (c) _
1 . Do your pressure relief devices have a leak detection D Yes D No
instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background
(except during pressure releases) when monitored using the
method in §63.180(c)? §63.165(a)
2. Following a pressure release:
• Did you return the pressure relief device to less than 500 D Yes D No
ppm above background as soon as possible? §63. 165(b)
• Did you either: DYes DNo
* monitor your pressure relief device within 5 days after
a pressure release and return of the pressure relief
device to organic HAP service to ensure a reading of
less than 500 ppm above background §63. 165(b)
* place a rupture disk upstream of your pressure relief
device within 5 days following the pressure release
§63.165(d)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
1 . Do your records include identification numbers for pressure D Yes D No
relief devices subject to the equipment leak requirements?
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question D Yes D No
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)fi)(A)
3. Do your records include identification numbers for pressure DYes DNo
relief devices with a closed-vent system and control device that
are not subject to the equipment leak monitoring requirements?
4. Do your records include identification numbers for pressure DYes DNo
relief devices subject to the equipment leak provisions and
pressure relief devices with rupture disks? §63.1363(g)(2)(iii)
164
-------
Checklist 6: (cont'd)
Requirements for pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service
B. Recordkeepiag and Reporting IteqrireBieots _ ^ _ . €^»amient»
5. Do your records include the dates and results (including DYes DNo
measured background concentration and maximum instrument
reading) of monitoring after pressure releases at each pressure
relief device? §63. 1363(g)(6) '
6. Do your records include information and analyses used to DYes DNo
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy liquid service
(i.e., not "in light liquid or gas/vapor service" and therefore not
subject to equipment leak requirements)? §63.1363(g)(8)
1. Do your records include identification (by list location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63. 1 363 (g) (9)
8. Did you include the results of all monitoring to show DYes DNo
compliance with the 500 ppm limit in your periodic report for
each monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?
9. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
Status report in your periodic report? §63. 1363(h)(3)ftv)
165
-------
Checklist 7: Requirements for sampling connection systems (Option 1)
Facility Name: ______
Facility Location: .
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Design Requirements _ \ _ Comments
Note: In-situ sampling systems and sampling systems without purges are exempt firom the above requirements
for sampling connection systems. _
1. Do each of your sampling connection systems have a closed- DYes DNo
purge, closed-loop, or closed-vent system? §63.166(a)
2. Do the closed-purge, closed-loop, or closed-vent systems do D Yes D No
one of the following:
• collect and recycle purged process fluid to a process
• capture and transport purged process fluid to a control
device
• collect, store, and transport purged process fluid to a waste
management unit, TSDF, or permitted waste management
facility §63.166(b)
B. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements _ Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for sampling DYes DNo
connection systems subject to the equipment leak
requirements? §63.1363(g)(2)0)(A)
2. If necessary, have you updated the list of identification D Yes D No
numbers in question 1 to incorporate any equipment changes?
3. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or DYes DNo
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
4. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
Status report in your periodic report? §63. 1363(h)(3)Qv)
166
-------
Checklist 8: Requirements for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service;
instrumentation systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service (Option 1)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring Requirement
Comments
1. After detecting a potential leak, did you either:
• monitor for leaks using the method in § 63.180(b) within
5 days after the potential leak is detected
• repair the leak such that any of the following are true:
» you can no longer see, hear, smell, or otherwise detect
the potential leak
» you see no bubbles at potential leak sites during a leak
check with soap solution
» the system will hold a test pressure
§63.169(a) and (c)(3)
B. Leak Repair Requirements
DYes
DNo
Comments
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? First attempts to repair leaks include:
• tightening of packing gland nuts
• ensuring the seal flush is operating at design pressure and
temperature
• tightening or replacement of valve bonnet bolts
• injection of lubricant into lubricated packing §63.169(c)(2)
and (d)
DYes
DNo
DRAFT
167
-------
Checklists.- (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service; instrumentation
systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service
B. Leak Repair Requirements Comments
2. Did you fully repair the leak within 15 days after it was D Yes D No
detected, unless any of the following circumstances applied:
• the repair was technically infeasible without a process unit
shutdown
• the equipment was isolated from the process and did not
remain in organic HAP service
• emissions purged from the equipment during immediate
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from
delaying the repair and using a control device to reduce the
emissions
• pump repair requires replacement of the existing seal with
a new system that will better meet the PAI rule
requirements
• valve assembly supplies are not on hand and valve
replacement is needed during a process unit shutdown
§§ 63.1363(b)(3)(i)(A) and 63.171 as cross referenced by
3 . If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible D Yes D No
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown? §63. 1 71 (a) as
cross referenced by § 63. 169(c)(2)
4. Use of a control device is necessary if you determined that EH Yes DNo
emissions purged from equipment during immediate leak
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from delaying
the repair. Did you use a control device to reduce emissions
generated during leak repair? §63.171(c) as cross referenced
byJ63.169(c)(2)
5. If you determined that pump repair required replacement of the DYes DNo
existing seal with a new system to better meet the PAI rule
requirements, did you repair the leak less than 6 months from
the time when the leak was detected? §63. 1 75(d) as cross
referenced by §63. 169(c)(2)
6. If valve assembly supplies were not on hand during a process DYes DNo
unit shutdown when valve replacement was needed, did you
replace the valve assembly during the next process unit
shutdown (unless a third shutdown occurred within 6 months
from the first process unit shutdown)? §63. 1 71(e) as cross
referenced by §63. 169(c)(2)
168
-------
Checklists: (cont'd)
Requirements for pumps, valves, connectors, and agitators in heavy liquid service; instrumentation
systems; and pressure relief devices in liquid service
C. Recordkeepiag and Reporting Requirements _ _ Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for equipment DYes DNo
(except instrumentation systems) subject to the equipment leak
requirements? (Note that connectors do not need to be
individually identified if all the connectors in an area are
identified as a group and the number of connectors is
indicated.) £53. 1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question D Yes D No
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
3 . Do your records include identification of instrumentation D Yes D No
systems subject to the equipment leak requirements?
4. If you detected a leak, have you recorded:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number DYes DNo
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• • date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair DYes DNo
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument DYes DNo
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that D Yes D No
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a DYes DNo
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records § 63. 1363(g)(4)
5. Do your records include information and analyses used to D Yes D No
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy liquid service?
§63.1363(g)(8)
6. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
[[[ v...........................*................ .....................................
7. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance DYes DNo
-------
Checklist 9: Requirements for closed-vent systems and control devices (Option 2)
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Operating Requirements
Comments
1. Have you operated your closed-vent system and control device
at all times when organic HAP emissions are being vented?
§63.172(m)
DYes
DNo
2. If you operate a recovery or capture device (e.g., condenser,
absorber, etc.), have you met either *95 percent reduction or
20 ppmv? (The 20 ppmv standard is not applicable if you meet
the alternative standards for enclosed-vent process units.)
§63.172(b)
DYes
DNo
3. If you operate an enclosed combustion device, have you met
either ^95 percent reduction, 20 ppmv (dry basis, 3 percent
oxygen), or a minimum residence time of 0.5 sec. At 1400°?
(760°C)? §63.172(c)
DYes
DNo
4 . If you operate a flare, have you met the requirements of
DYes
DNo
B. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
1. If your closed-vent system is made of hard-piping, did you
perform an annual visual inspection for visible, audible, or
olfactory indications of leaks? §63.172(f)(l)(ii)
DYes
DNo
2. If your vapor collection system or closed-vent system is made
of duct work, did you conduct an annual inspection according
to the procedures in §63.180(b)? §63.172(f)(2)(ii) and (g)
DYes
DNo
If your closed-vent system has bypass lines that could divert a
vent stream away from the control device and to the
atmosphere, have you done one of the following:
• Used a flow indicator that takes a reading at least once
every 15 minutes at the entrance of the bypass line.
• Secured the bypass line valve in the non-diverting position
with a car-seal or a lock-and-key type configuration.
§63.1720)
Note: Low leg drains, high point bleeds, analyzer vents,
open-ended valves or lines, and pressure relief valves needed
for safety purposes are not subject to the monitoring
requirements for bypass lines. §63.172(j)(3)
DYes
DNo
170
-------
Checklist 9: (cont'd)
Requirements for closed-vent systems and control devices
B. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
If you secured the bypass line valve in the non-diverting
position as specified in question 3, did you visually inspect the
seal or closure mechanism monthly to ensure the valve is
maintained in the non-diverting position? §63.172(j)(2)
DYes DNo
5 If you design a closed-vent system to operate below
atmospheric pressure (instead of completing inspections), have
you equipped the system with a pressure measurement device
that can be read from a readily accessible location to verify that
negative pressure is maintained when the control device is
operating? §63.1363(b)(3)pi)(B)
C. Leak Repair Requirements
D Yes D No
Comments
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? §63.172(h)(l)
DYes
DNo
DNo
2. Did you fully repair the leak within 15 days after it was
detected, unless any of the following circumstances applied:
• the repair was technically infeasible without a process unit
shutdown
• emissions resulting from immediate repair of the leak
would be greater than the fugitive emissions likely to result
from delay of repair §63.172(h)(2)(i)
DYes
3. If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown? §63.172(i)
D. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
DYes
DNo
Comments
1. Do your records include identification numbers for closed-vent
systems and control devices subject to the equipment leak
requirements? §63.1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
DYes
DNo
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question
1 within IS days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)Ci)(A)
DYes
DNo
3. Do your records include a list of equipment designated as
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible and a
plan for monitoring or inspecting this equipment?
§63.1363(g)(2)(vi)
DYes
DNo
171
-------
Checklist 9: (cont'd)
Requirements for closed-vent systems and control devices
P. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements _ Comments
4. If you detected a leak, have you recorded:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number DYes DNo
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair DYes DNo
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument D Yes D No
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that D Yes D No
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a D Yes D No
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records §63. 1363(g)(4)
5. If you use a flow meter to monitor your closed-vent system DYes DNo
bypass line, do your records include the flow meter readings?
6. Do your records include all of the following design and
performance documentation:
• detailed schematics, design specifications of the control DYes DNo
device, and piping and instrumentation diagrams
• the dates and descriptions of any changes in the design
specifications D Yes D No
• the flare design (i.e., steam assisted, air assisted, or
nonassisted) and the results of the compliance DYes DNo
demonstration
• a description of the parameter or parameters monitored to
ensure that control devices are operated and maintained as D Yes D No
designed and an explanation of why each parameter was
selected for the monitoring §63. 1363(g)(7)ft)
172
-------
Checklist 9: (cont'd)
Requirements for closed-vent systems and control devices
D. Recordkeepiag aad Reporting Requirements
Comments
7. Do your records include all of the following operational
information:
• dates and durations when the closed-vent systems and DYes DNo
control devices are not operated as designed, as indicated
by the monitored parameters. Include periods when a flare
pilot light system does not have a flame
• dates and durations when the monitor is not operating DYes DNo
• dates and durations of startups and shutdowns of control D Yes D No
devices §63.1363(g)(7)fti)
Do your records include all of the following inspection
information:
• if no leaks are detected during the inspection, a record that
the inspection was performed, the date of the inspection,
and a statement that no leaks were detected
• if leaks are detected during the inspection, the information
specified in question 4 must be recorded §63.1363(g)(7)(iii)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
9. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
10. Did you include the following in your periodic report for each
monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?
• the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically
infeasible
• the results of all monitoring to show compliance with the
provisions for inspections of closed vent systems
§63.1363(h)(3)(ii)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
11. Have you identified in your periodic report whether you are
complying with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements in either:
• 40CFRpart264,subpartBB, or in 40 CFR part 265,
subpartBB
• the PAI rule §63.172(j)
DYes
DNo
12. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)fiv)
D Yes D No
173
-------
Checklist 10: Requirements for connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service (Option
J) _
Facility Name: _
Facility Location: __
Facility TRI ID #: _
Inspector: _
Date: _
•
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements _ _ Comments
1. Did you monitor for leaks using the method in §63. 180(b)? DYes DNo
2. Did you perform initial monitoring of all connectors either: D Yes D No
• within 12 months after the compliance date at existing
sa\u
-------
Checklist 10: (cont'd)
Requirements for connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
A. Monitoring and Inspection Requirements
Comments
6. If you switched between the two monitoring alternatives in
question 5, did you do both of the following:
• Make the switch at the end of the current monitoring
period (if the switch is reported)
• Complete initial monitoring in the new alternative no later
than 12 months after you reported the switch
§63.174(c)(l)flii)
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
7. For each screwed connector with an inside diameter of 2 inches
or less installed before November 10, 1997, have you done one
of the following
• performed repeat monitoring as described in question 4
• complied with the requirements of §63.169 of subpart H
• monitored for leaks within the first 3 months after the
screwed connector is returned to organic HAP service after
having been opened or having the seal broken and making
necessary repairs §63.174(c)(2)
DYes
DNo
8. If you took credit for elimination of a connector, were all of the
following requirements are met:
• The connector was welded after November 10,1997 DYes DNo
• The integrity of the weld was demonstrated by monitoring, DYes DNo
X-ray testing, acoustic monitoring, hydrotesting, or other
method
• Welds created after November 10,1997 but before June 23, D Yes D No
1999 were monitored or tested by 3 months after the
compliance date
• Welds created after June 23, 1999 were monitored or tested DYes DNo
within 3 months after being welded
• If an inadequate weld was found or the connector was not DYes DNo
welded completely around the circumference, the connector
was not exempted from the monitoring requirements
§63.1740)
B. Leak Repair Requirements i
1. Was a first attempt to repair the leak made within 5 days after
the leak was detected? §63.174(d)
DYes
DNo
175
-------
Checklist 10: (cont'd)
Requirements for connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
B; Leak Repair Requirements
Comments
2. Did you fully repair the leak within 15 days after it was
detected, unless any of the following circumstances applied:
• the repair was technically infeasible without a process unit
shutdown
• the equipment was isolated from the process and did not
remain in organic HAP service
• emissions purged from the equipment during immediate
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from
delaying the repair and using a control device to reduce the
emissions §§63.1363(b)(3)(i) and 63.171 as cross
referenced by §63.174(d)
DYes
Ohio
3. If you determined that a repair was technically infeasible
without a process unit shutdown, did you complete the repair
by the end of the next process unit shutdown?
§63.1363(b)(3)ft)(A) as cross referenced by §63.174(d)
DYes
DNo
4. Use of a control device is necessary if you determined that
emissions purged from equipment during immediate leak
repair would be greater than emissions resulting from delaying
the repair. Did you use a control device to reduce emissions
generated during leak repair? §63.171 (c) as cross referenced
by§63.174(d)
C. Reeordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
DYes
DNo
Comments
1. Do your records include either:
• identification numbers of connectors subject to the
equipment leak requirements
• identification of groups of connectors and the number of
connectors in each group §63.J363(g)(2)(i)(A)
DYes
DNo
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question DYes DNo
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)Q)(A)
3. Do your records include a schedule for monitoring connectors? D Yes
§63.1363(^(2)0)0)
4. Do your records include a list of equipment designated as
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor, or inaccessible and a
plan for monitoring or inspecting this equipment?
§63.1363(g)(2)(vi)
DYes
DNo
DNo
176
-------
Checklist 10: (cont'd)
Requirements for connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
C. Recordkeepiflg and Reporting Bequiraacnta _ Comments
5. Do your records include a list of connectors removed from or QYes DNo
added to the process if you used credits for removed connectors
when calculating the percent leaking connectors?
6. Do your records include documentation of the integrity of the DYes DNo
weld for any removed connectors if you use the credit for
removed connectors? $ 63.1363(g)(2)(vii)
1. If you detected a leak, have you recorded:
• the instrument and the equipment identification number DYes DNo
and the operator name, initials, or identification number
• date the leak was detected, date of the first attempt to repair DYes DNo
the leak, and date of successful leak repair
• if post-repair monitoring is required, maximum instrument DYes DNo
reading measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, after leak is successfully repaired or
determined to be non-repairable
• whether the repair is delayed for more than 15 days after D Yes D No
leak discovery and the reason for the delay
• if repairs were delayed, dates of process shutdowns that D Yes D No
occur while the equipment is unrepaired
• identification of connectors in gas/vapor and light liquid DYes DNo
service disturbed since the last monitoring period (unless
you use the option for not monitoring open connectors
during the monitoring period). Connector identification
may be maintained either by list, location, or tagging.
• date and results of follow-up monitoring for open or DYes DNo
disturbed connectors. If identification of disturbed
connectors is made by location, then all connectors within
the designated location must be monitored
• copies of periodic reports if records are not maintained on a D Yes DNo
computerized data base capable of generating summary
reports from the records § 63. 1363(g)(4)
8. Do your records include information and analyses used to DYes DNo
determine that a piece of equipment is in heavy liquid service
(i.e., not "in light liquid or gas/vapor service" and therefore not
subject to equipment leak requirements)? §63. 1363(g)(8)
9. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or DYes DNo
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 nr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
177
-------
Checklist 10: (cont'd)
Requirements for connectors in gas/vapor service and in light liquid service
. Recordkeepiag and Reporting Requirements
Comments
10. Did you include the following in your periodic report for each
monitoring period during the 6-month reporting period?.
• the number of connectors in gas/vapor or light liquid DYes DNo
service for which leaks were detected as described, the
percent of connectors leaking, and the total number of
connectors monitored
• the number of connectors in gas/vapor or light liquid DYes DNo
service for which leaks were not repaired, identifying the
number of those that are determined non-repairable
• the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where D Yes D No
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically
infeasible
• if applicable, notification of a change in connector D Yes D No
monitoring alternatives for connectors that have been
opened or have broken seals §63.1363(h)(3) fit)
11. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)(iv)
DYes
DNo
DRAFT
178
-------
Checklist 11: Requirements for equipment meeting alternative means of emission limitation
Facility Name:
Facility Location:
Facility TRI ID #:
Inspector:
Date:
Note: A "yes" response to all questions in this checklist means compliance, and a "no" response means
noncompliance.
A. Monitoring and Impecfion Requirements Commeat$
Note: There are three types of alternative standards for equipment leaks: (1) pressure testing of batch or non-
batch equipment [§63.178 with changes described in §63.1363(b)(3)(iv>], monitoring of batch equipment for
leaks [§63.178 with changes described in §63.1363(b)(3)(iv)], or (3) enclosure of process units so that all
emissions from equipment leaks are vented through a closed-vent system to a control device [§63.179]. Question
1 applies for pressure testing, question 2 applies for monitoring batch equipment for leaks, and question 3 applies
for enclosure of process units.
1. Did you perform pressure testing at the following intervals
using the procedures in § 63.180(f) for pressure or vacuum loss
or § 63.180(g) for a test using liquid?
• each time the equipment is reconfigured for production of a D Yes D No
different product
• at lest once per year § 63.178(b)(l) DYes DNo
2. Did you monitor batch equipment for leaks when equipment is
in organic HAP use or use with an acceptable surrogate or
detectable gas or vapor and at the following intervals:
• within 30 days of process start-up each time the equipment DYes DNo
is reconfigured for production of a new product
• at the frequencies specified in § 63.178(c)(3)(iii)
§63.178(c) (3) DYes DNo
3. For process units enclosed so that all emissions from D Yes D No
equipment leaks are vented through a closed system and
control device, did you maintain the process unit enclosure
under negative pressure at all times? §63.179
B. Leak Repair Requirements ; : ; ' J '" ' ' : Coauutate ^
Note: Questions 1 and 3 apply for pressure testing and questions 2 and 3 apply for monitoring of batch
equipment for leaks.
1. If you detected a leak during pressure testing under the DYes DNo
alternative standard, did you do one of the following:
• repair the leak and retest the equipment before process
start-up
• repair the leak within 30 days after the second pressure test
if the equipment failed the second test §63.178(b)(4)
•'\'Q A jp'jj"
179
-------
Checklist 11: (cont'd)
Requirements for equipment meeting alternative means of emission limitation
B. Leak Repair Requirements
Comments
2. If you detected a leak when monitoring batch processes under
the alternative standard, did you repair the leak within no more
than 15 days after the leak was detected (unless you met the
delay of repair provisions)? §63.178(c)(4)
DYes DNo
3. If you delayed repair of leaks under the alternative standard,
did all the following circumstances apply:
• replacement equipment was not available
• equipment supplies (which were sufficiently stocked) have
been depleted
• the repair is made no later than 10 days after delivery of the
replacement equipment §63.178(d)
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DYes DNo
Comments
Note: Questions 1, 2, 3,4, 8, and 9 apply for monitoring of batch equipment for leaks, questions 5,6,8, and 9
apply for pressure testing, and questions 7,8, and 9 apply for enclosed vent processes.
1. Do your records include identification numbers for equipment
• subject to the equipment leak requirements?
§63.1363(g)(2)(i)(A)
DYes
DNo
2. Have you updated the list of identification numbers in question DYes DNo
1 within 15 days after each monitoring survey to incorporate
any equipment changes? §63.1363(g)(2)fi)(A)
3 Do your records include a list of equipment added to batch DYes DNo
processes since the last monitoring period? §63.1363(g)(2)(viii)
Do your records include the monitoring date and results for
equipment added to a batch process since the last monitoring
period? §63.1363(g)(4)(viii)
DYes
DNo
180
-------
Checklist 11: (cont'd)
Requirements for equipment meeting alternative means of emission limitation
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Comraentt
5. If you show compliance with the equipment leak provisions by
pressure testing equipment, have you maintained records of all
of the following:
• identification of each product, or product code, produced
during the calendar year
• the portion of time during the year the equipment is in use
in the PAI process. (These records are not required if you
do not adjust monitoring frequency by the time in use.)
• identification of equipment on a plant site plan, in log
entries, or by other appropriate methods.
• the dates of each pressure test, the test pressure, and the
pressure drop observed during the test
• records of any evidence of fluid loss detected by sight,
sound, or odor
• all of the following information if a process equipment
train failed two consecutive pressure tests (this information
must be kept for 2 years):
» The dates of each pressure test and leak repair attempt
» Repair methods applied in each attempt to repair the
leak
» The reason for the delay of repair
> The expected date for deb very of the replacement
equipment and the actual date of delivery of the
replacement equipment
•• The date of successful repair §63.1363(g)(5)
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
6. Does your periodic report include all of the following
information:
• product process equipment train identification D Yes D No
• the number of pressure tests conducted DYes DNo
• the number of pressure tests where the equipment train DYes DNo
failed either the retest or two consecutive pressure tests
• explanation for any delay of repair DYes DNo
• the results of all monitoring to determine compliance with DYes DNo
the standards for inspection of closed-vent systems
§63.1363(h)(3)Ciii)
181
-------
Checklist 11: (cont'd)
Requirements for equipment meeting alternative means of emission limitation
C. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Comments
7. If you comply with the alternative means of emission limitation
for enclosed-vent processes, have you maintained records of all
of the following:
• identification of the processes and the organic HAP they DYes DNo
handle
• a schematic of the process, enclosure, and closed-vent D Yes D No
system.
• a description of the system used to create a negative DYes DNo
pressure in the enclosure to ensure that all emissions are
routed to the control temsȤ63.1363(g)(10)
8. Do your records include identification (by list, location, or D Yes D No
other method) of equipment that is in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr? §63.1363(g)(9)
9. Did you include any change in the Notification of Compliance D Yes D No
Status report in your periodic report? §63.1363(h)(3)(iv)
182
-------
183
-------
Chapter 7 - Calculations and procedures
NOT AVAILABLE
184
-------
185
-------
Chapter 8 - Recordkeeping and Reporting
NOT COMPLETE
'What records must I keep?
What do I have to report and when?
You will need to complete several different notifications and reports based on the types of
emission points at your facility and the compliance options you choose. The term "reports" is used
in this section to include both notifications and reports. Table 8-1 (page 187) shows what reports
you must submit and when they are due. Table 8-2 (page 189) gives you details about what should
be included in these reports.
How can I change the date my reports are due?
Where do I send my reports?
186
-------
TABLE 8-1. Report Due Dates
If you have ...
And need to submit a(n)...
Tben submit the report
before...
An existing affected source
Initial Notification Report [§63.1368(b)] 10/23/99
(120 days after the effective date)
Application for Approval of Construction or
Reconstruction if reconstructing after 6/23/02
(effective date) [§§63.1368(c) and 63.5(d)]
PrecompliancePlan[§63.1368(e)] 12/23/01
(6 months before the compliance
date)
Compliance Extension Request 2/23/02
[§§63.1368(n) and 63.1364(a)(2)] (120 days before the compliance
date)
Notification of continuous monitoring system
performance evaluation [§63.1368(d)J
Notification of Performance Test and Test 60 days before the test
Plan [§63.1368(m>]
Notification of Compliance Status Report 11/20/02
[§63.1368(f)] (150 days after the compliance
date)
Initial Semi-annual Periodic Report 7/20/03 (include information
[§63.1368(g)] from 11/20/02 - 5/20/03)
Note: Quarterly reporting is required if you (240 days after the Notification
comply with the alternative standard and you of Compliance Status Report)
have excess emissions [§63.1368(g)(l)(ii)]
Subsequent Semi-annual Periodic Reports 1/20/04 (include information
[§63.1368(g)] from 5/21/03 -11/19/03)
7/20/04 (include information
from 11/20/03-5/20/04)
(60 days after each 6-month
period)
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Reports Semi-annually - can submit with
[§63.13680*)] the Periodic reports
Equipment Leak Reports [§63.1368(j)J Semi-annually - submit with the
Periodic reports
Reports of Heat Exchange Systems Semi-annually - submit with the
[§63.1368(e)] Periodic reports
187
-------
If you have... And need to submit a(n)... Then submit the report
before...
Reports of Emissions Averaging Not clear - should be with each
[§63.1368(k)] Periodic report
Notification of Process Change [§63.1368(h)] Quarterly - submit with the
Periodic report or on 4/20 or
10/20
A new affected source Initial Notification Report
Application for Approval of Construction or
Reconstruction
Precompliance plan
Notification of continuous monitoring system
performance evaluation
Notification of Perfonnance Test and Test
Plan
Notification of Compliance Status Report
Initial Semi-annual Periodic Report
Subsequent Semi-annual Periodic Reports
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Reports
Equipment Leak Reports
Reports of Heat Exchange Systems
Notification of Process Change
188
-------
TABLE 8-2. Reporting Requirements
If you are submitting
a(n)...
then submit buy...
and include the following information ...
according to these sections
of the rule...
Initial Notification
Report
120 days after the effective
date or 120 days after rule
applies to your facility
Name and address of owner or operator.
Address (physical location) of the facility.
Compliance date.
Brief description of nature, size, design, and method of operation.
Identify each point of emission for each hazardous air pollutant.
Statement of whether you're a major or area source.
§63.1368(b);§63.9(b)
oo
Application for
Approval of
Construction or
Reconstruction
Before construction or
reconstruction
Applicant's name and address.
Notification of intent to construct or reconstruct.
Address (physical location) of the facility.
Identify the standard you're subject to.
Date that you expect to start construction or reconstruction.
Date that you expect to finish construction or reconstruction.
Type and amount of HAP you're emitting or expect to emit.
For construction, description of proposed nature, size, design,
method of operation and emission controls and other information
under §63.5(d)(2).
For reconstruction, brief description of the facility, parts to be
replaced and emission controls and other information under
§63.S(d)(3).
§63.1368(c);§63.5(d)
-------
TABLE 8-2. (cont'd)
If you are submitting
then submit buy.
and include the following information ...
according to these sections
of the rule...
Precompliance Plan
6 months before
compliance data
Requests for approval to use alternative monitoring parameters. §63.1368(e)
Description of your daily or per batch demonstrations to verify
that control devices with inlet HAP emissions <1 ton/yr are
operating as designed.
Data and rationale used to set monitoring parameter levels for
conditions other than the peak case.
Your Pollution Prevention Demonstration Summary.
Data and rationale for engineering assessments.
Your Operation and Maintenance Plan for fabric filters that are
monitored with bag leak detectors.
Notification of
Compliance Status
Report
150 days after the
compliance date
Results of applicability determinations
Results of emission profiles, performance tests, engineering
analyses, design evaluations or other calculations used to
demonstrate compliance
Anticipated periods of planned routine maintenance for control
devices used to comply with Option 4A, B, C, or E for storage
vessels
Provide the following information for each group of processes
subject to the equipment leak provisions: [§63.1363(h)(2)(i)]
• identification of the group of processes.
• approximate number of each equipment type (e.g., valves,
pumps) in organic HAP service, excluding equipment in
vacuum service.
• method of compliance with the standard (e.g., "monthly leak
detection and repair" or "equipped with dual mechanical
seals").
Provide the following information for each process subject to the
equipment leak requirements for pressure testing:
§63.1368(1)
-------
TABLE 8-2. (cont'd)
If you are submitting
a(n)...
then submit buy ...
and include the following information ...
according to these sections
of the rule...
[§63.1363(h)(2)(ii)J
• products or product codes subject to the equipment leak
provisions
• planned schedule for pressure testing when equipment is
configured for production of products subject to the equipment
leak provisions
Provide the following information for each process subject to the
equipment leak requirements for enclosed-vent process units:
[§63.1363(h)(2)(iii)]
• process identification
• a description of the system used to create a negative pressure
in the enclosure and the control device used to comply with the
requirements for closed-vent systems and control devices
Semi-annual Periodic
Reports
Semi-annually no later
than 60 days after the end
of the 6-month reporting
period
§63.1368(g)
Startup, Shutdown, and
Malfunction Reports
§63.1368(i)
Equipment Leak
Reports
Semi-annually—submit
with the Periodic reports
the number of valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service for
which leaks were detected, the percent leakers, and the total
number of valves monitored
the number of valves in gas/vapor or light liquid service for
which leaks were not repaired and the number of those valves
that are non-repairable
the number of pumps in light liquid service and agitators in
gas/vapor or light liquid service for which leaks were detected,
§63.1363(h)(3)(ii)
-------
TABLE 8-2. (cont'd)
If you are submitting
a(n)...
then submit buy.
and include the following information...
according to these sections
of the rule...
N)
the percent leakers, and'the total number of pumps and
agitators monitored
the number of pumps in light liquid service and agitators in
gas/vapor or light liquid service for which leaks were not
repaired
the number of compressors for which leaks were detected
the number of compressors for which leaks were not repaired
the number of connectors in gas/vapor or light liquid service
for which leaks were detected as described in §63.174(a), the
percent of connectors leaking, and the total number of
connectors monitored
the number of connectors in gas/vapor or light liquid service
for which leaks were not repaired, identifying the number of
those that are determined non-repairable
the facts that explain any delay of repairs and, where
appropriate, why a process shutdown was technically
infeasible.
the results of all monitoring to show compliance with the
provisions for:
» compressors designated to operate with an instrument
reading on less than 500 ppm [§63.164(i)]
» pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service operated with
an instrument reading of less than 500 ppm [§63.165(a)]
> inspections of closed vent systems [§63.172(f)]
if applicable, the initiation of a monthly monitoring program if
more than 10 percent of pumps in light liquid service (or three
pumps if three is greater than 10 percent) leak or if 2 percent
or more valves leak.
-------
TABLE 8-2. (cont'd)
If you are submitting
a(n)...
then submit buy,
and include the following information ...
according to these sections
of the rule...
vo
u>
if applicable, notification of a change in connector monitoring
alternatives for connectors that have been opened or have
broken seals.
You must submit the following information in your periodic
reports for valves in gas/vapor service and light liquid service:
• valve reassignments occurring during the reporting period
• results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
If you elect to conduct pressure tests according to §63.178(b),
your Periodic report must include all of the following
information:
• product process equipment train identification
• the number of pressure tests conducted
• the number of pressure tests where the equipment train failed
either the retest or two consecutive pressure tests
• explanation for any delay of repair
• the results of all monitoring to determine compliance with the
standards for inspection of closed-vent systems
If any of the information you submitted in the Notification of
Compliance Status report changes, you must describe the change
in the next Periodic report.
§63.1363(e)(5)(vi)
§63.1363(h)(3)(iii)
§63.1363(h)(3)(iv)
Reports of Emissions
Averaging
§63.1368(k)
Notification of Process
Change
§63.1368(h)
-------
194
-------
Chapter 9 - Other requirements and information
Who administers this regulation?
Your State or local agency for air pollution control, or your EPA Regional Office, will regulate
you. If your plant is in Indian Country, and your eligible Tribe or your EPA Regional Office will
regulate you. You may be regulated by one or more agencies depending on whether they've been
granted delegation of this rule.
Definition. An eligible Tribe means "a Tribe that has been
determined by the EPA to meet criteria for being treated in
the same manner as a State, pursuant to the regulations
implementing section 301(d)(2) of the Act"
Not all States have been granted delegation, or, if they have been granted delegation, they may not
have been delegated all portions of the rule. Our EPA Regional Offices may also have retained
certain rights even after delegation (for example, you may continue to have dual reporting
requirements as explained in Chapter 8). You should check with your EPA Regional Office or
State for the latest information.
Do I need a title V permit?
You'll need a title V permit if you're subject to the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP since,
under title V, you must get a permit if your facility is a major source. The Pesticide Active
Ingredient NESHAP applies to major sources.
To determine if your facility is a major source, you'll need to calculate your HAP emissions from
your entire facility, not just your foam operations. If you don't have federally enforceable limits in
a State permit, you must calculate your emissions by determining your potential emissions. If you
need help determining if your facility is a major source or what your potential emissions are, see
the definitions in the Operating Permits Rule §70.2, or visit our title V policy and guidance page at
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5main.html.
195
-------
How do I change my permit to include this rule?
If you've already been issued a final title V permit and you have three or more years left on your
permit, your permitting authority will reopen your permit within 18 months of the publication date
of the final rule or final amendments. If you have less than three years left on your permit, update
your permit during your renewal period. If your permit hasn't been issued in final form, update
your application or draft permit.
To summarize, your options are as follows:
If a new rule is effective1-1 Then...
and you have...
not been issued a final title V permit
less than three years left on your permit
three or more years left on your permit
update your permit application or draft permit
update your title V permit during renewal
your permitting authority will reopen your permit within 18
months after the publication date of the final rule or final
amendments
1 The rule's effective date is the date the final rule is published in the Federal Register (which is 6/23/99 for this
rule).
1 This also applies if existing rules are modified and final amendments are published in the Federal Register.
Title V permitting rules may change after the publication of this document. Keep abreast of any
changes by checking the Federal Register or visit our title V websites at
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5main.html and www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/permits/.
What portions of the General Provisions apply?
The General Provisions were published in the Federal Register on March 16, 1994 (Volume 59,
page 12408) and apply to all NESHAPs, including the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP.
This means that when you became subject to this rule, you also became subject to the General
Provisions. Some sections in this rule override the General Provisions. You'll find that Table 1 of
the final rule shows you which sections of the General Provisions apply to this rule and which
don't. General Provision requirements, except for notification and reporting are not addressed in
this document.
196
-------
Chapter 10 - Getting additional help
Whom can I ask for help?
You can go to a lot of places for help, including all of the following:
• your State, local or Tribal agency for air pollution control
• your State's Small Business Assistance Program (SBAP)
• local, regional, or National Trade Associations
• your EPA Regional Office
State and local contacts can change frequently. To get the most current contact information, go
to the STAPPA/ALAPCO website (www.4cleanair.org) and then the membership directory. The
directory will give you the latest contact points for major air programs (that is, emission standards
for toxic air pollutants, ozone, etc.) at the State and local level.
If you have questions about this rule, you should
contact your State, local or Tribal agency before
calling the EPA. Their rules may be more
stringent than Federal requirements.
Many States have a Small Business Assistance Program. If you're a small business and don't
know who your SBAP is, you can call EPA's Control Technology Center Hotline at (919)541-
0800 or visit EPA's SBAP at www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/sbap for help.
Contact numbers for EPA's Regional Air Division Offices may also change frequently. To obtain
the most up-to-date information, you may want to visit your Regional Office's website. Table
10.1 lists each of our Regional Offices, the Air Toxics Division Phone and Address, and the
Regions Internet home page. Make all written inquiries to the attention of "NESHAP (insert rule
name) Contact."
197
-------
Can I get more information on the Web?
You can get a wealth of information on the World Wide Web (WWW). Some of the more popular
ways to get information on this rule include:
• EPA's Unified Air Toxics Website (www. epa. gov/ttn/uatw}
You can download copies of preambles, regulations, background information documents,
policy memos, and other guidance materials here. All rule pages can be found under the
Rules and Implementation page. Pesticide active ingredient can be found under
www. epa. gov 'ttn ''ualw pest jjesfpg. html.
• EPA's Applicability Determination Index (ADI)
(http://es. epa. gov/oeca/eptdd/fuli. html)
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) posts memos dealing
with applicability and compliance at this site.
• OECA Compliance Assistance Centers (http://www. epa. pov/epahome/business. htm)
You can find information on compliance with federal regulations at this site. There are
centers for printing, automotive services and repair, agriculture, and metal finishing
industries. We plan to add centers for the chemical industry, printed wiring board
manufacture, transportation, and local governments.
• STAPPA/ALAPCO home page (http:/Avww. 4deanair. or?)
STAPPA/ALAPCO is the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators
(STAPPA) and Local Air pollution Control Officials (ALAPCO) organization.
STAPPA/ALAPCO has members representing each State and local agency for air pollution
control.
You can get air pollution information at this site, including a document entitled
"Communicating Air Quality: A Compendium of Resources." It lists educational
materials on air pollution that State and local agencies have created.
198
-------
TABLE 10-1. EPA Regional Air Division Offices
EPA Regional Office - MACT Implementation Contact
Division Information*
EPA Region
Region I
Region H
Region in
Region IV
Region V
Region VI
Region VH
Region VHI
Region IX
Region X
States
Covered
CT, ME, MA,
NH.RI&VT
NJ, NY, Puerto
Rico & Virgin
Islands
DE, MD, PA,
VA.WV&DC
AL,FL,GA,KY,
MS, NC, SC &
TN
IL, IN, MI, WI,
MN&OH
AR.LA.NM,
OK&TX
IA, KS, MO &
NE
CO, MT, ND,
SD, UT & WY
AZ, CA, HI, NV,
American Samoa,
&Guam
AK,K),WA&
OR
Division Phone and
Address
Office of Environmental Stewardship (SEA) or
Office of Ecosystem Protection (CAP)
1 Congress Street, Suite 1 100
Boston, MA 02114-2023
Attention: NESHAP (MACT) Contact
Division of Environmental Planning and Protection
290 Broadway
2 1st Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
Air Protection Division, 3AP1 1 1
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Air and Radiation Division
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division (6PD)
or Compliance Assurance & Enforcement
Division (6EN)
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Air, RCRA and Toxics Division
901 Norths"1 Street
Kansas City, KS 66101
Office of Enforcement, Compliance and
Environmental Justice (ECEJ) or
Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance
(OPRA)
999 18th Street
1 Denver Place, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Air Division
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Office of Air Quality
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Division Phone /
RO Home Page
(617) 918-1510
www. epa-eov/reeionl
(212) 637-3735
WW.ePfl.gQV/frggKMl2
(215)814-2056
www. epa.eov/reeionJ
(404) 562-9077
www. gpa.gov/frggioH 4
(312)353-2212
www. epa.eov/reeionS
(214) 665-7250/
(214) 665-7220
www.epa.eov/reeion6
(913) 551-7020
www.epa.eov/feeion 7
(303)312-70287
(303) 312-6294
wtvw.epa.eov/reeioH8
(415)744-1219
www.ena.eov/reeion9
(206) 553-1505
www.eoa.eov/reeioiilO
* Information subject to change without notice. For the latest information, please visit the Regional Office Website.
199
-------
Is there a list of commonly asked questions?
For a list of questions and answers about the final rule, you'll find EPA's "National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production:
Summary of Public Comments and Responses, May, 1999 (EPA-453/R-98-011) useful. You can
download the document by going to our UATW Pesticide Active Ingredient page at
1. eva. sov'ttn
-------
Chapter 11 - Supplemental information for State and
local agencies and Tribes
How many plants may need to meet emission limits?
According to information we collected in 1995, we estimated that approximately 78 pesticide
active ingredient production plants might be affected by this rule.
You will find a list of the facilities that may be affected by the rule on the following page. We've
included the list as a reference for you, not as an official or complete list of regulated plants.
EPA's "Enabling Document: Source Identification Procedures for
Sources Subject to Regulations Under Section 112(d) of the Clean Air
Act as Amended in 1990", September 20,1996 (otherwise known as
the "Cookbook"), can help you identify the steps you can take to locate
more sources.
You can download the cookbook by going to
www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/eparules.html, scroll down until you see "MACT
Implementation Strategy." The cookbook is in Appendix G of this
document.
Are plants in Indian country regulated by the State?
Generally, State rules aren't enforceable in Indian country. When we delegate authority to States
under section 112(d), the authority to regulate doesn't extend to Indian country unless the
delegation agreement says so.
We encourage tribes to develop the capacity to administer section 112(d) programs and to request
delegation. If we don't delegate the authority to carry out section 112(d) rules to an eligible Tribe,
the EPA Regional Office will be the regulatory authority.
How much HAP emissions will the rule reduce?
We estimate that full implementation of the rule will reduce HAP emissions by about 2,760 tons
annually.
201
-------
SUBSET OF MAJOR SOURCES INCLUDED IN THE PESTICIDE
ACTIVE INGREDIENT MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
[excerpted from Proposed BPD]
Below is a list of potential sources that manufacture pesticide active ingredients and
which may be subject to this subpart. This list should not be considered all inclusive as
sources who are not on this list may also be subject to the NESHAP. In addition,
sources identified in list may no longer be subject to the NESHAP.
Company name
Ciba Geigy
Du Pont
Zeneca Inc.
Arkansas Eastman
Division
Ethyl Corporation
Great Lakes
Chemical Corp.
Dow Chemical
Zeneca Inc.
Uniroyal Chemical
Monsanto Co.
Abbott Labs
Lonza Inc.
Monsanto Co.
Morton
International
Riverdale Chemical
Co.
Vulcan Chemicals
Elf AtochemN.A.,
Inc.
Ciba Geigy
Uniroyal
FMC Corp. Ag.
Chem. Group
Anderson
Development
Company
Dow Chemical
Elf AtochemN.A.,
Inc.
City
Mclntosh
Axis
Bucks
Magness
Magnolia
El Dorado
Pittsburg
Richmond
Naugatuck
Muscatine
North Chicago
Mapleton
Sauget
Ringwood
Chicago
Heights
Wichita
Carroll ton
St. Gabriel
Geismar
Baltimore
Adrian
Midland
Riverview
State
AL
AL
AL
AR
AR
AR
CA
CA
CT
IA
EL
EL
EL
EL
EL
KS
KY
LA
LA
MD
MI
MI
MI
Company name
American Cynanrid Co.
Buckman Laboratories
Inc.
Farmland Industries
FMC Corporation
Occidental Chemical
Zeneca Inc.
Du Pont
Eastman Kodak-
Tennessee Eastman
Great Lakes Chemical
Corp.
OlinCorp.
Zeneca Inc.
Dow Chemical
Du Pont
ISK Biotech Corp.
Sandoz Agro Inc.
Schenectady International
Zeneca Inc.
Cytec Industries
DuPont
PPG Industries
Rhone-Poulenc Ag. Co.
Union Carbide
City
Hamribal
Cadet
St. Joseph
Bessemer City
Castle Hayne
Perry
Manati
Kingsport
Newport
Charleston
Mt Pleasant
Freeport
LaPorte
Houston
Beaumont
Freeport
Pasadena
Willow Island
Belle
New
Martinsville
In«ritiitf.
South
Charleston
State
MO
MO
MO
NC
NC
OH
PR
TN
TN
TN
TN
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
DRAFT
202
-------
Estimated National HAP Emission Reductions
203
-------
Appendix A- Subpart MMM, final rule
(Copy of rule can be found at www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/pest/pestpg.htmn
204
-------
Wednesday
June 23, 1999
Part II
Environmental Protection
Agency
40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Pesticide
Active Ingredient Production; Final Rule
-------
33550 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
[AD-FRL-6345-5]
RIN-2060-AE83
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Pesticide
. Active Ingredient Production
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This action promulgates
national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for
the pesticide active ingredient (PAI)
production source category under
section 112 of the Clean Air Act as
amended (CAA or Act). The intent of
the standards is to reduce emissions of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from
existing and new facilities that
manufacture organic PAI used in
herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides.
The standards protect human health and
the environment by reducing HAP
emissions to the level corresponding to
the maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) through the use of
pollution prevention measures and
control strategies. The major HAP
emitted by facilities covered by this rule
include toluene, methanol, methyl
chloride, and hydrogen chloride (HC1).
All of these pollutants can cause
reversible or irreversible toxic effects
following exposure. The rule is
estimated to reduce total HAP emissions
from existing facilities by 2,500
megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (2,755 tons
per year (tons/yr)), a reduction of 65
percent from the baseline emission
level. Because many of these pollutants
are also volatile organic compounds
(VOC), which are precursors to ambient
ozone, the rule will aid in the reduction
of tropospheric ozone. The emission
reductions achieved by these standards,
when combined with the emission
reductions achieved by other similar
standards, will achieve the primary goal
of the CAA, which is to "enhance the
quality of the Nation's air resources so
as to promote the public health and
welfare and the productive capacity of
its population."
The July 16,1992 source category list
included an agricultural chemicals
industry group that contained 10 source
categories. Today's final rule groups
these 10 agricultural chemicals source
categories into one source category,
renames the source category, and adds
additional chemical production
processes to the source category.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-95-
20, containing supporting information
considered by the EPA in developing
the promulgated standards, is available
for public inspection and copying
between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, at EPA's Air
and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, Waterside Mall, Room 1500, 1st
Floor, 401 M Street SW. Washington,
DC 20460. A reasonable fee may be
charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER MFORMATON CONTACT: For
information concerning this final rule,
contact Mr. Lalit Banker at (919) 541-
5420, Organic Chemicals Group,
Emission Standards Division (MD-13),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711. For information concerning
applicability and rule determinations,
contact your State or local
representative or the appropriate EPA
regional representatives. For a list of
regional representatives, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated
entities. Entities potentially regulated
are those which produce PAI's and
integral intermediates that are used in
herbicides, insecticides, or fungicides
and are located at facilities that are
major sources as defined in section 112
of the CAA. Regulated categories and
entities include:
Category
Industry
NAICS codes
Typically, 325199
and 32532.
SIC codes
Typically, 2869 and
2879.
Examples of potentially regulated entities
• Producers of pesticide active ingredients that contain organic compounds
and are used in herbicides, insecticides, or fungicides.
• Producers of any integral intermediate used in the onsite production of an
active ingredient used in an herbicide, insecticide, or fungicide.
The foregoing table is not intended to
be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities
likely to be regulated by this action.
This table lists the types of entities that
EPA is now aware could potentially be
regulated by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table could also
be affected. To determine whether your
facility, company, business
organization, etc., is regulated by this
action, you should carefully examine
the applicability criteria in § 63.1360 of
the rule. If you have questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person(s)
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
Regional Representatives. The EPA
regional representatives are:
Region I
NESHAP (MACT) Coordinator, U.S.
EPA Region I, John F. Kennedy
Federal Building, One Congress
Street, Boston, MA 02114-2023, (617)
918-1111
Region II
Umesh Dholakia, U.S. EPA Region II,
290 Broadway Street, New York, NY
10007-1866, (212) 637-4023 (Umesh)
Region III
Bernard Turlinski. U.S. EPA Region ID,
841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia,
PA 19107, (215) 566-2150
Region IV
Lee Page, U.S. EPA Region IV. Atlanta
Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW.
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104. (404) 562-
9131
Region V
Bruce Varner, U.S. EPA Region V. 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL
60604-3507, (312) 886-6793
Region VI
Robert Todd, U.S. EPA Region VI, First
Interstate Bank Tower @ Fountain
Place, 1445 Ross Avenue, 12th Floor,
Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202-2733
(214) 665-2156
Region VII
Richard Tripp, U.S. EPA Region VD, Air
Toxics Coordinator, 726 Minnesota
Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101, (913)
551-7566
Region VIE
Ann Marie Patrie, U.S. EPA Region VJH,
Air Toxics Coordinator, 999 18th
Street, Suite 500. Denver, CO 80202-
2466. (303) 312-6524
Region IX
Nahid Zoueshtiagh, U.S. EPA Region IX
Air Division-6,75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco. CA 94105, (415) 744-
1261
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23. 1999/Rules and Regulations 33551
Region X
Andrea Wullenweber, U.S. EPA Region
X, Air Toxics Coordinator, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, (206)
553-8760
Background Documentation. The
following is a listing of background
documents pertaining to this
rulemaking. The complete title, EPA
, publication number, publication date,
docket item number, and the
abbreviated descriptive title used to
refer to the document throughout this
notice are included.
(1) National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
the Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production Industry: Summary of Public
Comments and Responses. EPA-453/R-
98-011. April 1999. Docket item No. IV-
B-1. Response to Comment Document
for Promulgated Standards.
(2) Pesticide Active Ingredient
NESHAP—Basis and Purpose
document. July 1997. Docket item No.
III-B-1. Basis and Purpose Document.
(3) Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions
From the Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production Industry—Supplementary
Information Document for Proposed
Standards. July 1997. Docket item No.
II-B-21. Supplementary Information
Document.
The response to comment document
for the promulgated standards contains:
(1) a summary of all the public
comments made on the proposed rule
and the Administrator's response to the
comments; and (2) a summary of the
changes made to the rule since proposal.
The basis and purpose document
contains much of the rationale for the
standards. The supplementary
information document contains a
compilation of technical memoranda.
Electronic Versions of Documents.
Electronic versions of documents from
the Office of Air and Radiation (OAR)
are available for downloading from
EPA's OAR Technology Transfer
Network Web site (TTNWeb). The
TTNWeb is a collection of related Web
sites containing information about many
areas of air pollution science,
technology, regulation, measurement,
and prevention. The TTNWeb is directly
accessible from the Internet via the
World Wide Web at the following
address: "http://www.epa.gov/ttn." This
preamble and rule are located under the
OAR Policy and Guidance Information
Web site, "http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
oarpg/tSmain.html," under the Federal
Register Notices section. The
background documents are located at
the same web site, under the Reports
section. If more information on the
TTNWeb is needed, contact the Systems
Operator at (919) 541-5384.
Judicial review. Under section
307(b)(l) of the CAA. judicial review of
NESHAP is available only by filing a
petition for review in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit within 60 days of today's
publication of this final rule. Under
section 307 (b) (2) of the CAA, the
requirements that are the subject of
today's final rule may not be challenged
later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by the EPA to enforce these
requirements.
The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
I. List of Source Categories
A. Initial Source Categories
B. Addition of Other Pesticide Active
Ingredients
C. Single Source Category
D. Change of the Source Category Name
II. Background
A. Summary of Considerations Made in
Developing this Rule
B. Regulatory Background
ffl. Authority for NESHAP Decision Process
A. Source of Authority for NESHAP
Development
B. Criteria for Development of NESHAP
IV. Summary of Promulgated Standards
A. Source Categories to be Regulated
B. Pollutants to be Regulated and
Associated Environmental and Health
Benefits
C. Affected Sources
D. Compliance Dates
E. Process Vent Provisions
F. Storage Vessel Provisions
G. Wastewater Provisions
H. Equipment Leak Provisions
I. Bag Dump and Product Dryer Provisions
J. Heat Exchanger System Provisions
K. Alternative Standard
L. Pollution Prevention Alternative
M. Emissions Averaging Provisions
N. Initial Compliance and Performance
Test Provisions
O. Monitoring Requirements
P. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
V. Summary Of Nationwide Impacts
A. Air Impacts
B. Water and Solid Waste Impacts
C. Energy Impacts
D. Cost Impacts
E. Economic Impacts
VI. Major Comments and Changes to the
Proposed Standards
A. Applicability Provisions
B. Compliance Dates for New Sources
C. Process Vents Provisions
D. Storage Vessel Provisions
E. Equipment Leak Provisions
F. Wastewater Provisions
G. Bag Dump and Product Dryer Provisions
H. Heat Exchanger Provisions
I. Alternative Standard
J. Pollution Prevention Alternative
K. Emissions Averaging
L. Testing Provisions and Initial
Compliance Demonstration
M. Monitoring
N. Recordkeeping and Reporting
O. Miscellaneous
VII. Technical Amendment to 40 CFR Part 9
Vffl. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Executive Order 12866
C. Executive Order 12875
D. Executive Order 13084
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. Regulatory Flexibility
G. Unfunded Mandates
H. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General Office
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 13045
I. List of Source Categories
Section 112 of the CAA requires that
EPA evaluate and control emissions of
HAP. The control of HAP is achieved
through promulgation of emission
standards under section 112 (d) and (f)
and work practice and equipment
standards under section 112(h) for
categories of sources that emit HAP. On
July 16,1992, EPA published an initial
list of major and area source categories
to be regulated (57 FR 31576). Today's
final rule adds additional chemical
production processes to the agricultural
chemicals industry group, groups the
initial and additional source categories
into a single source category, and
renames the source category.
A. Initial Source Categories
Included on the initial source
category list were major sources
emitting HAP from 10 categories of
agricultural chemicals production; in
addition to being an agricultural
chemical, each of these compounds is
also a PAL One source category on the
initial source category list, butadiene
furfural cotrimer (R-l 1) production, was
moved from the polymers and resins
industry group to this industry group on
June 4, 1996 (61 FR 28197). The EPA
decided it was appropriate to move
butadiene furfural cotrimer (R-l 1) to the
agricultural chemicals industry group
because it is an insecticide commonly
used for delousing cows.
B. Addition of Other Pesticide Active
Ingredients
In developing the rule, the EPA
Identified a number of other P AI
production operations that were not on
the initial source category list. It was
determined that production of these
compounds Is similar to the production
of the compounds in the 11 initial
agricultural chemical source categories.
Production of these other PAI's are
being added to the source category list
under section 112{c) of the CAA based
on information obtained during the
gathering of HAP emission data for this
proposed rule. From this information, it
-------
33552 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
was determined that: (1) there are
similarities in process operations,
emission characteristics, control device
applicability and costs, and
opportunities for pollution prevention
of these PAl's with the listed
agricultural chemicals; and (2) the
production of these PAI's occurs at
facilities that are major sources. Like the
initial agricultural chemicals, these
PAI's are those that are used in
herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides
that are registered as end-use products
under section 3 of Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA).
C. Single Source Category
In developing the proposed rule, EPA
decided not to set MACT for each
individual PAI chemical but, rather, to
aggregate all PAI's together under the
same source category. The PAI's that
EPA proposes to include in this source
category are all organic PAI's that are
used to produce insecticide, herbicide,
or fungicide products. Data gathered
from the PAI production industry
indicate that the process equipment,
emission characteristics, and applicable
control technologies are sufficiently
similar for the broad group of sources
that EPA. intends to regulate under a
single set of standards. There are no
significant differences in the types of
control technologies applicable to
controlling emissions from the various
PAI processes. Common HAP control
technologies are applicable to the
production operations at all of the
facilities. Based on these factors, EPA
concluded that determining MACT for
each individual PAI is not warranted.
The EPA believes it is technically
feasible to regulate emissions from a
variety of PAI processes by a single set
of emission standards. Similar to the
Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) for
the Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI),
separate requirements are proposed for
process vents, storage vessels,
equipment leaks, and wastewater HAP
emission points (often referred to as
planks). The set of standards also
establishes different control
requirements based on distinctions in
the size of the emission points.
Variability in the characteristics of the
production processes for each
individual PAI chemical may affect the
quantity of HAP emissions. This
variability has been addressed by
incorporating cutoffs for uncontrolled
emissions in the standards for
individual planks.
Several other reasons support the
development of a single set of emission
standards for a group of PAI processes.
Many of these PAI's are only produced
at a single facility or by a single
company. In addition, data indicate that
many of the PAI processes that EPA is
proposing to regulate by this set of
standards are collocated within
individual facilities; at some facilities,
multiple PAI's are also produced in the
same equipment (i.e., flexible operating
equipment). Facilities with collocated
PAI manufacturing could more easily
comply with a single set of emission
standards than with individual
standards for each of the collocated
processes. Several industry
representatives also expressed interest
in a generic regulation that would
specify consistent requirements for a
wide range of processes.
Another justification for developing a
single set of emission standards to
regulate production of a variety of PAI's
is that it is more efficient and less costly
for EPA to develop a single standard
than to develop separate standards for
several individually listed source
categories which have similar emission
characteristics and applicable control
technologies. A single set of standards
for PAI manufacturing will ensure that
process equipment with comparable
HAP emissions and control technologies
are subject to consistent emission
control requirements. In addition,
compliance and enforcement activities
would be more efficient and less costly.
D. Change of the Source Category Name
Under today's final rule, EPA is
revising the source category list
published under section 112(c) of the
CAA to add a source category called
"Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production" and to subsume the 11
initial, separate source categories into
that category, as well as to include other
identified chemical production
processes which are major sources of
HAP. All 11 agricultural chemicals on
the initial source category list are PAI's;
all of the other chemicals identified
during data gathering that have been
added to the list are also PAI's. Because
these other PAI's have been added to the
source category list and because they
have been grouped with the initial 11
agricultural chemicals, which are also
PAI's, the EPA decided that It is
.appropriate to change the title of this
NESHAP source category. Effective by
this notice, EPA is changing the title of
the source category to "pesticide active
ingredient production." This change is
appropriate to avoid confusion
regarding the definition of the source
category and to aid in distinguishing the
types of air emission sources addressed
by this source category.
II. Background
A. Summary of Considerations Made in
Developing This Rule
The CAA was created in part "to
protect and enhance the quality of the
Nation's air resources so as to promote
the public health and welfare and the
productive capacity of its population"
(CAA section 101(b)(l)). Section 112(b)
of the CAA lists 189 HAP believed to
cause adverse health or environmental
effects. (Through rulemaking, EPA
subsequently delisted caprolactam).
Section 112(d) of the CAA requires that
emission standards be promulgated for
all categories and subcategories of major
sources of these HAP and for many
smaller "area" sources listed for
regulation under section 112(c) In
accordance with the schedules listed
under section 112(c). Major sources are
defined as those that emit or have the
potential to emit at least 10 tons/yr of
any single HAP or 25 tons/yr of any
combination of HAP.
On July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576), EPA
published the initial list of categories of
sources slated for regulation. As noted
above, this list included 10 categories of
Agricultural Chemicals Production;
with today's final rule, these source
categories are combined into a single
category called Pesticide Active
Ingredient Production, and additional
PAI processes are added to the source .
category. The statute requires emissions
standards for the listed source categories
to be promulgated between November
1992 and November 2000. On December
3, 1993, the EPA published a schedule
for promulgating these standards (58 FR
83841).
In the CAA, Congress specified that
each standard for major sources must
require the maximum reduction in
emissions of HAP that EPA determines
Is achievable considering cost, health
and environmental impacts, and energy
requirements. In essence, these MACT
standards would ensure that all major
sources of air toxic emissions achieve
the level of control already being
achieved by the better controlled and
lower emitting sources In each category.
This approach provides assurance to
citizens that each major source of toxic
air pollution will be required to
effectively control its emissions.
Available emissions data show that
pollutants that are listed in section
112(b) (1) of the CAA and are emitted in
substantial amounts by the PAI
production source category include
toluene, methanol, methyl chloride, and
HC1. The PAI production source
category also emits small amounts of
other listed pollutants including
benzene, benzyl chloride, 1,3-fautadiene,
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33553
carbon tetrachloride, chloroform,
ethylbenzene, ethyl chloride, ethylene
dichloride, hexachlorobenzene,
hexachlorocyclopentadiene, hexachloro
ethane, hexane, methylene chloride,
tetrachloroethylene, trichlorobenzene,
trichloroethylene, xylenes, acetonitrile,
Captan®, formaldehyde, glycol ethers,
hydroquinone, methyl ethyl ketone,
methyl Isobutyl ketone, methyl
isocyanate, napthalene, phosgene,
chlorine, and hydrogen cyanide. Some
of these pollutants have been classified
as known, probable, or possible human
carcinogens when inhaled, and all can
cause reversible and irreversible toxic
effects following sufficient exposure.
These effects include respiratory and
skin irritation, neurological disorders
(e.g., dizziness, headache, and narcosis),
effects upon the eye (including
blindness), damage to organs (e.g., liver,
kidney, and testes), and in extreme
cases, death. Emissions of these
pollutants will be reduced by
implementation of today's final rule.
The list of HAP in section 112(b) of
the CAA includes 22 HAP compounds
(or classes of compounds) that have
been reported to be possible endocrine
disrupters. Many of these 22 HAP are
PAI's, or are used in the production of
PAl's, and, thus, could possibly be
emitted from PAI manufacturing plants.
In a survey of 20 plants producing
PAI's, EPA found only one of these 22
HAP in the actual emissions of these
plants. The quantity of this one
potential endocrine disruptor was very
low relative to the total HAP emissions
reported at the 20 surveyed plants.
Based on published chemical
property data, the vapor pressures of the
possible endocrine disrupters tend to be
low relative to the solvents and raw
materials used in the PAI manufacturing
processes (the lower the vapor pressure,
the less material that will volatilize). In
addition, based on a PAI industry
buyer's guide, the possible endocrine
disrupters that are also PAI's are each
produced by only one or a small number
of companies. As a result, the HAP that
are possible endocrine disrupters are
likely emitted in small quantities, if at
all, relative to the HAP listed above. The
EPA is implementing a program under
the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act
and Safe Drinking Water Act to screen
pesticides and other chemicals for their
potential to disrupt the endocrine
system of humans and wildlife. The
EPA will assess the risk to humans and
wildlife of chemicals identified in this
program as endocrine disrupters and
take appropriate risk management
action. The EPA's risk management
strategy could include the development
of risk based emission standards under
the CAA.
The alternatives considered in the
development of this regulation,
including those alternatives selected as
standards for new and existing sources,
are based on process and emissions data
received from 20 of the estimated 78
existing facilities that are subject to
today's final rule. Regulatory
alternatives more stringent than the
MACT floor (the minimum control level
required by the CAA) were selected
when they were judged to be reasonable,
considering cost, non-air quality health
and environmental impacts, and energy
requirements.
Included in today's final rule are
methods for determining initial
compliance as well as monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. All of these components
are necessary to ensure that affected
sources will comply with the standards
both initially and over time. However,
the EPA has made every effort to
simplify the requirements in the rule.
The EPA has also attempted to maintain
consistency with existing regulations by
either incorporating text from existing
regulations or referencing the applicable
sections.
Representatives from other Interested
EPA offices and programs, State
environmental agency personnel, and
Industry participated in the regulatory
development process as MACT
partnership members. The partnership
members were given opportunities to
review and comment on the regulation
prior to proposal. Industry, regulatory
authorities, environ mental groups, and
other interested parties provided
comment on drafts of the proposed
standards and provided additional
information during the public comment
period.
B. Regulatory Background
Today's final rule implements section
112(d) of the CAA, which requires the
Administrator to regulate emissions of
HAP listed In section 112(b) of the CAA.
The intent of this rule is to protect the
public health and the environment by
requiring new and existing major
sources to reduce generation of
emissions by using pollution prevention
strategies or to control emissions to the
' level achievable by the MACT.
In 1994, EPA promulgated National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject
to the Negotiated Regulation for
Equipment Leaks (59 FR 19587).
Processes producing Captafol*.
Captan*. Chlorothalonil, Dacthal, and
Tordon™ acid that use butadiene,
carbon tetrachloride, methylene
chloride, or ethylene dichloride as a
reactant or process solvent, are subject
to the Negotiated Regulation for
Equipment Leaks. Today's final rule
requires control of leaking components
that are currently not subject to the
Negotiated Regulation for Equipment
Leaks, but that contain and/or transport
HAP and are associated with processes
in this source category. Today's final
rule also allows sources subject to the
Negotiated Regulation to comply with
the leak detection and repair (LD AR)
provisions of this rule.
HI. Authority for NESHAP Decision
Process
A. Source of Authority for NESHAP
Development
Section 112 of the CAA gives the EPA
the authority to establish national
standards to reduce air emissions from
sources that emit one or more HAP.
Section 112(b) contains a list of HAP to
be regulated by NESHAP. Section 112(c)
directs the Agency to use this pollutant
list to develop and publish a list of
source categories for which NESHAP
will be developed; this list was
published in the Federal Register on
July 16.1992 (57 FR 31576). The
Agency must list all known categories
and subcategories of "major sources"
that emit one or more of the listed HAP.
A major source is defined in section
112 (a) as any stationary source or group
of stationary sources located within a
contiguous area and under common
control that emits or has the potential to
emit in the aggregate, considering
controls, 10 tons/yr or more of any one
HAP or 25 tons/yr or more of any
combination of HAP.
Under section 112(c)(l) of the CAA,
the Administrator has the authority to
establish additional source categories as
appropriate. Ten (revised to 11)
categories of agricultural chemicals
were included on the initial list.
Because the processes, HAP emissions,
control technologies, and control costs
for these 11 agricultural chemicals are
similar to the processes, HAP emissions,
control technologies, and control costs
for other PAI's, the Administrator
included other PAI's on the source
category list and grouped the
agricultural chemicals and the PAI's
together into one source category.
B. Criteria for Development of NESHAP
The NESHAP are to be developed to
control HAP emissions from both new
and existing sources according to the
statutory directives set out in section
112(d) of the CAA. The statute requires
the standards to reflect the maximum
degree of reduction in emissions of HAP
-------
33554 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
that is achievable for new or existing
sources. This control level is based on
the MACT. The selection of MACT must
reflect consideration of the cost of
achieving the emission reduction, any
non-air quality health and
environmental impacts, and energy
requirements for control levels more
stringerft than the floor (described
below).
The MACT floor is the least stringent
level for MACT standards. For new
sources; the standards for a source
category or subcategory "shall not be
less stringent than the emission control
that is achieved in practice by the best
controlled similar source, as determined
by the Administrator" (CAA section
112(d)(3)). Existing source standards can
be no less stringent than the average
emission limitation achieved by the best
performing 12 percent of the existing
sources for categories and subcategories
with 30 or more sources, or the average
emission limitation achieved by the best
performing 5 sources for categories or
subcate gorles with fewer than 30
sources (CAA section 112(d)(3)). The
average emission limitation achieved by
the best performing sources is termed
the "MACT floor," and the "average" is
based on a measure of central tendency
such as the arithmetic mean, median, or
mode.
In establishing the floors for this
rulemaking, EPA designed its
information collection approach to
reduce die paperwork burden on the
industry. Rather than collect detailed
information from all 78 existing sources,
EPA narrowed its detailed collection
request. Through literature reviews,
State contacts, and plant visits, EPA
Identified companies which appeared to
have the best controlled plants and sent
data collection requests only to those
companies. In identifying those
companies, EPA also considered the
need to Include a variety of process and
product types in the survey. Data for the
PAI production industry were collected
from 20 facilities that are major sources.
In addition, many of those facilities
achieve high emissions reductions,
produce a variety of PAI's, and use a
variety of production processes. As the
standards for existing sources are based
on the best-performing 12 percent of
sources, the number of best-performing
sources for this source category is nine
facilities (i.e., 12 percent of 78
facilities). The best-performing nine
facilities are included in the 20 facilities
surveyed.
After the nine best performing sources
in the source category were identified,
the "average emission limitation
achieved" was determined for each of
the four types of emission points at
these sources. The arithmetic mean was
evaluated first for each type of emission
point. If this value corresponded with
the level of control achieved by a known
technology, It was selected as the MACT
floor. If the value did not correspond
with the level of control achieved by a
known technology, the median was
evaluated. In all cases where the median
was evaluated, it was selected as the
MACT floor because it either
corresponded with the level of control
achieved by a known technology, or it
was no control.
IV. Summary of Promulgated Standards
This section describes the source
category and pollutants that are
regulated, defines an affected source,
and summarizes the final standards for
each type of emission point. A pollution
prevention alternative is also
summarized in this section.
A. Source Categories to be Regulated
The final standards regulate HAP
emissions from facilities that are major
sources and produce PAI's for use In
insecticide, herbicide, or fungicide
products. These standards apply to
existing sources as well as new sources.
The final standards for existing and new
sources are summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1 .—STANDARDS FOR NEW AND EXISTING PAI SOURCES
Emission source
Applicability
Requirement
Process vents
Storage vessels
Wastewater-
Equipment leaks
Existing:
Processes having uncontrolled organic HAP emis-
sions SO.15 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine
emissions 26.8 Mg/yr.
Individual process vents meeting flow and mass
emissions criteria that have gaseous organic HAP
emissions controlled to less than 90% on or after No-
vember 10, 1997.
New:
Processes having uncontrolled organic HAP emis-
sions 20.15 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine emis-
sions 26.8 Mg/yr and <191 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine emis-
sions 2191 Mg/yr.
Existing: 275 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 23.45
kPa.
New: 238 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 216.5 kPa ...
275 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 23.45 kPa
Existing: Process waslewater with 210,000 ppmw Table
9 compounds at any flowrate or 21,000 ppmw Table
9 compounds at 210 L/min, and maintenance waste-
water with HAP load 25.3 Mg per discharge event.
New:
Same criteria as for existing sources
Total HAP load in wastewater POD streams 22,100
Mg/yr.
Subpart H
90% for organic HAP per process or to outlet con-
centration of £20 ppmv TOC.
94% for HCI and chlorine per process or to outlet HCI
and chlorine concentration of £20 ppmv.
98% gaseous organic HAP control per vent or £20
ppmv TOC outlet limit.
98% for organic HAP per process or £20 ppmv TOC.
94% for HCI and chlorine per process or to outlet con-
centration of £20 ppmv HCI and chlorine.
99% for HCI and chlorine per process or to outlet con-
centration of £20 ppmv HCI and chlorine.
Install a floating roof, reduce HAP by 95% per vessel,
or to outlet concentration of £20 ppmv TOC.
Same as for existing sources.
Reduce concentration of total Table 9 compounds to
<50 ppmw (or other options).
Reduce concentration of total Table 9 compounds to
<50 ppmw (or other options).
99% reduction of Table 9 compounds from all streams.
Subpart H with minor changes, Including monitoring fre-
quencies consistent with the proposed CAR.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33555
TABLE 1.—STANDARDS FOR NEW AND EXISTING PAI SOURCES—Continued
Emission source
Product dryers and bag
dumps.
Heat exchange systems
Applicability
Dryers used to dry PAI that is also a HAP, and bag
dumps used to introduce feedstock that is a solid and
a HAP.
Each heat exchange system used to cool process
equipment in PAI manufacturing operations.
Requirement
Particulate matter concentration not to exceed 0.01
dscf.
Monitoring and leak repair program as in HON.
VI
•Table 9 is listed in the appendix to subpart G of 40 CFR part 63.
B. Pollutants to be Regulated and
Associated Environmental and Health
Benefits
Pesticide Active Ingredients
production facilities emit an estimated
3,850 Mg/yr of organic and Inorganic
HAP. Organic HAP include methyl
chloride, methanol, and toluene as well
as other compounds. Hydrogen chloride
is the inorganic HAP emitted in the
greatest quantities by this industry. The
final rule reduces overall HAP
emissions from PAI facilities by 65
percent.
Some of these pollutants are
considered to be carcinogenic, and all
can cause toxic health effects following
exposure, including nausea, headaches,
and possible reproductive effects. The
extent and degree to which the human
health effects may be experienced is
dependent upon (1) the ambient
concentration observed in the area (e.g.,
as influenced by emission rates,
meteorological conditions, and terrain);
(2) the frequency of and duration of
exposures; (3) characteristics of exposed
individuals (e.g., genetics, age,
preexisting health conditions, and
lifestyle) which vary significantly with
the population; and (4) pollutant
specific characteristics (toxicity, half-
life in the environment,
bioaccumulation, and persistence).
Most of the organic HAP emitted from
this industry are classified as VOC. The
emission controls for HAP will reduce
non-HAP VOC emissions as well.
Emissions of VOC have been associated
with a variety of health and welfare
impacts. Volatile organic compound
emissions, together with nitrogen
oxides, are precursors to the formation
of tropospheric ozone. Exposure to
ambient ozone is responsible for a series
of public health impacts, such as
alterations in lung function, changes in
lung structure, and aggravation of
existing respiratory disease. Welfare
impacts from exposure to ambient ozone
include damage to selected commercial
timber species and economic losses for
commercially valuable crops such as
soybeans and cotton.
In addition to being listed under
section 112(b)(l) for the purposes of this
rulemaking, HC1 is listed under section
.112(r) of the CAA. The intent of Section
112(r), Prevention of Accidental
Releases, is to focus on chemicals that
pose a significant hazard to the
community should an accident occur, to
prevent their accidental release, and to
minimize consequences should a release
occur. Hydrogen chloride, along with
the other substances listed under
section 112(r)(3), is listed because it is
known to cause, or may be reasonably
anticipated to cause death, injury, or
serious adverse effects to human health
or the environment (59 FR 4478, January
31,1994). Sources that handle hydrogen
chloride in greater quantities than the
established threshold quantity under
section 112(r)(5) will be subject to the
risk management program requirements
under section 112(r)(7) (58 FR 54190,
October 20, 1993).
In essence, the MACT standards
mandated by the CAA will ensure that
all major sources of air toxic emissions
achieve the level of control already
being achieved by the better controlled
and lower emitting sources in each
category. This approach provides
assurance to citizens that each major
source of toxic air pollution will be
required to effectively control its
emissions. In addition, the emission
reductions achieved by today's final
standards, when combined with the
reductions achieved by other MACT
standards, will contribute to achieving
the primary goal of the CAA, which is
to "protect and enhance the quality of
the Nation's air resources so as to
promote the public health and welfare
and the productive capacity of its
population" (CAA section 101(b)(l)).
C. Affected Sources
The affected source for the purpose of
this regulation is the facility-wide
collection of PAI manufacturing process
units (PAI process units) that process,
use, or produce HAP. and are located at
a plant site that is a major source, as
defined in section 112(a) of the CAA.
An affected source also includes waste
management units, heat exchange
systems, and cooling towers that are
associated with the PAI process units. A
PAI process unit includes: the
processing equipment; connected piping
and ducts; associated storage vessels;
and components such as pumps,
compressors, agitators, pressure relief
devices, sampling connection systems,
open-ended valves or lines, valves,
connectors, and instrumentation
systems that are assembled at a facility
for the purpose of manufacturing a PAI
or Integral intermediate.
The final rule specifies that new
source requirements apply to an affected
source for which construction or
reconstruction commenced after
November 10, 1997, or to any single PAI
process unit that meets the following
conditions: (1) It is not part of a process
unit group; (2) construction commenced
after November 10, 1997; and (3) it has
the potential to emit 10 tons/yr of any
one HAP or 25 tons/yr of combined
HAP. The EPA expects that
reconfiguration of processing equipment
in a process unit group at an existing
source generally will not meet the
definition of construction or
reconstruction. Therefore,
reconfiguration generally will not trigger
new source requirements.
D. Compliance Dates
Existing sources must comply within
3 years after June 23,1999. New or
reconstructed affected sources must
comply on June 23, 1999 or startup,
whichever is later.
E. Process Vent Provisions
The final standards require existing
sources to reduce organic HAP
emissions from each process with
uncontrolled organic HAP emissions
greater than or equal to 0.15 Mg/yr. The
reduction may be either 90 percent from
the sum of all vents within the process
or to a total organic carbon (TOC) outlet
concentration of 20 parts per million by
volume (ppmv). If some vents within a
process are controlled to the outlet
concentration limits, the 90 percent
reduction requirement applies to the
sum of uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions from all other vents in the
process. Additionally, the final rule
requires organic HAP emissions from
any individual vent that meets certain
annual emissions and flowrate criteria
to be reduced by 98 weight percent or
-------
33556 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
to outlet concentrations of 20 ppmv as
TOC: the 90 percent requirement would
apply to the sum of organic HAP
emissions from all other vents in the
process. (Those process vents achieving
90 percent control prior to November
10, 1997 are not required to meet the 98
percent control requirement.)
The final standards also require
existing sources to reduce HC1 and
t chlorine emissions by 94 percent from
' each process or to an outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv if the sum of
uncontrolled HC1 and chlorine
emissions from all vents in the process
is greater than or equal to 6.8 Mg/yr.
New sources are required to meet
various process-based control levels.
Specifically, for each process where the
sum of the uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions from all vents in the process
is greater than or equal to 0.15 Mg/yr,
the final standards require an overall 98
percent reduction in the organic HAP
emissions per process. Alternatively, the
final standards require that control
devices meet outlet concentrations of 20
ppmv as TOC, and the 98 percent
reduction requirement applies to the
sum of uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions from all other vents in the
process.
The final standards also require new
sources to reduce HC1 and chlorine
emissions by either a specified
percentage or to an outlet concentration
not to exceed 20 ppmv. If the
uncontrolled HC1 and chlorine
emissions from the sum of all vents
within a process are greater than or
equal to 6.8 Mg/yr and less than 191
Mg/yr, the final standards require a
reduction of at least 94 percent from the
sum of all vents that are not controlled
to 20 ppmv. If the uncontrolled HC1 and
chlorine emissions from the sum of all
vents within a process are greater than
191 Mg/yr, the final standards require a
reduction of at least 99 percent from the
sum of all vents that are not controlled
to 20 ppmv.
The final rule also contains an
alternative standard for process vents
that is similar to the outlet
concentration options described above.
The initial compliance determination
and the monitoring provisions differ
from the above outlet concentration
options. See section IV.K for additional
details regarding the alternative
standard.
F. Storage Vessel Provisions
The final standards require both
existing and new sources to control
organic HAP emissions from storage
vessels that have a capacity greater than
or equal to 75 cubic meters (m3) and
HAP vapor pressure greater than or
equal to 3.45 Kilopascals (kPa). New
sources are also required to control
organic HAP emissions from storage
vessels with capacities greater than or
equal to 38 m3 and less than 75 m3 and
vapor pressure greater than or equal to
16.5 kPa. For all of the affected storage
vessels, emissions must be controlled by
one of the following methods:
(1) An internal floating roof with
proper seals and fittings;
(2) An external floating roof with
proper seals and fittings;
(3) An external floating roof converted
to an internal floating roof with proper
seals and fittings; or
(4) A closed vent system with a
control device that is 95 percent
efficient or reduces organic HAP to
outlet concentrations of less than or
equal to 20 ppmv as TOC.
Following comments received on the
proposed storage vessel standards, the
MACT floor for storage vessels was
revised. For the final standards, the
storage vessel cutoffs are based on the
vessel capacity and the vapor pressure
of the stored material rather than the
capacity and uncontrolled emissions.
See section Vl.D for additional
information on the changes made to the
storage vessel standard.
The final rule also contains an
alternative standard for storage vessels
that is similar to the outlet
concentration options described above.
The initial compliance determination
and the monitoring provisions differ
from the above outlet concentration
options. See section IV.K for additional
details regarding the alternative
standard.
G. Wastewater Provisions
The wastewater provisions are similar
to the HON wastewater provisions
(subpart G of 40 CFR part 63), except for
maintenance wastewater and new
source requirements. The final
standards require existing and new
sources to control Group 1 wastewater
streams. Under the final standards,
existing and new sources are required to
determine Group 1 status for both
process wastewater streams and
maintenance wastewater streams. A
process wastewater stream is a Group 1
stream for compounds listed in Table 9
of the appendix to subpart G of 40 CFR
part 63 ("Table 9 compounds") if:
(1) The total annual average
concentration of Table 9 compounds is
greater than or equal to 10,000 ppmw at
any flowrate; or
(2) The total annual average
concentration of Table 9 compounds is
greater than or equal to 1,000 ppmw and
the annual average flow rate is greater
than or equal to 10 liters per minute (L/
min).
A maintenance wastewater stream is a
Group 1 stream if the mass of Table 9
compounds in an individual
maintenance wastewater discharge
exceeds 5.3 Mg.
The final standards require existing
sources with Group 1 process and
maintenance wastewater streams for
Table 9 compounds to do one of the
following:
(1) Reduce the concentration of Tabk
9 compounds to less than 50 ppmw;
(2) Use a steam stripper with specific
design and operating requirements;
(3) Reduce the mass flow rate of Table
9 compounds by at least 99 percent;
(4) Reduce the mass flow rate of Table
9 compounds by an amount equal to or
greater than the fraction removed (Fr)
value in Table 9;
(5) If a source using biotreatment for
at least one wastewater stream that is
Group 1 for Table 9 compounds, achieve
a required mass removal greater than or
equal to 95 percent for Table 9
compounds; or
(6) Treat wldi permitted Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
units or by discharging to a permitted
underground injection well.
The final standards require new
sources with Group 1 wastewater
streams for Table 9 compounds to
control Table 9 compounds to the same
level required for existing sources. In
addition, new sources with a total mass
flow rate from the source of 2,100 Mg/
yr or more of Table 9 compounds would
be required to reduce the mass flow rate
of Table 9 compounds from all
wastewater streams by 99 percent. This
difference from the HON was needed
because the MACT floor for new sources
is more stringent than the provisions in
the HON for facilities that exceed this
mass flow rate cutoff.
A source is exempted from the
wastewater standards if:
(1) The total mass flow rate of Table
9 compounds in Group 1 streams is less
than 1 Mg/yr; or
(2) If the total mass flow rate of Table
9 compounds in untreated Group 1
wastewater streams and in Group I
wastewater streams that are treated to
levels less stringent than the levels
required by the standard is less than 1
Mg/yr.
H. Equipment Leak Provisions
Today's final rule contains revisions
to the proposed equipment leak
requirements that were based on subpart
H (of the HON rule). The final rule
contains changes to the standards for
valves and connectors in gas/vapor
service and light liquid service as
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33557
follows: the requirement to implement a
quality Improvement program and all
references to 40 CFR §63.175 have been
removed; an allowance for monitoring
every 2 years for those processes with
less than 0.25 percent leaking valves has
been added; an allowance for valve
subgrouping was also added; the
equation used to determine the percent
of leaking valves in a process was
changed to eliminate the optional credit
for valves removed, and, the rolling
average of leaking valves was revised so
that it is calculated as an average of the
last three monitoring periods for annual
or biannual monitoring programs. The
monitoring schedule for connectors in
gas/ vapor service and light liquid
service was also revised to allow for
decreased monitoring for those
components with the lowest leak rates.
If less than 0.25 percent of the
connectors in a group of processes are
leaking, the monitoring frequency is
now once every 8 years. These changes,
which are consistent with the proposed
consolidated air rule (CAR), are
designed to reduce the recordkeeping
requirements while achieving the same
level of control as under subpart H. The
standard for existing sources is based on
a regulatory alternative more stringent
than the floor, and the'standard for new
sources is based on the MACT floor for
new sources.
/. Bag Dump and Product Dryer
Provisions
Under the final standards, paniculate
matter emissions are not allowed to
exceed 0.01 grains per dry standard
cubic foot (gr/dscf) from both (1)
product dryers that are used to dry a
PAI (or integral intermediate) that is
also a HAP, and (2) bag dumps that are
used to introduce a feedstock that is a
solid material and a HAP. The standard
applies to both existing and new
sources.
J. Heat Exchanger System Provisions
The final standards apply to each heat
exchange system that is associated with
the affected source. The standards
require a monitoring program to detect
leakage of organic HAP from the process
into the cooling water. The final
standards refer to the monitoring
program in the HON (§63.104 of subpart
F).
K. Alternative Standard
As an alternative to the requirements
for process vents and storage vessels
that are discussed in sections IV.E and
F, respectively, the emissions from any
process vent may be routed to a control
device achieving outlet concentrations
of less than or equal to 20 ppmv TOC
(calibrated on methane or the
predominant HAP) and less than or
equal to 20 ppmv HC1 and chlorine.
Initial compliance with the alternative
standard is achieved when the outlet
concentrations for TOC are
demonstrated using a TOC monitor that
meets the requirements of Performance
Specification 8 or 9 of appendix B of 40
CFR part 60. Monitoring to demonstrate
ongoing compliance is also conducted
with the TOC monitor. Initial and
ongoing compliance with the alternative
standard for HC1 and chlorine is
achieved when the outlet concentrations
are demonstrated using Method 26.
L. Pollution Prevention Alternative
For existing sources, the promulgated
rule also includes a pollution
prevention (P2) alternative standard that
meets the requirements of the MACT
standards and can be implemented in
lieu of the requirements described
above. The P2 alternative standard
provides a way for facilities to comply
with the MACT standards by reducing
overall consumption of HAP from their
processes. The two options that were
developed are described in Table 2 and
are discussed below.
TABLE 2.—ALTERNATIVE P2
STANDARD
Option
Description of P2 option
Demonstrate an 85% reduction in
the production-indexed HAP
consumption factor (kg HAP
consumed/kg product produced)
from a baseline period.
Demonstrate at least a 50% reduc-
tion in the production-indexed
HAP consumption factor and ad-
ditional reduction from add-on
control to yield overall reduction
equivalent to an 85% reduction
in the production-indexed HAP
consumption factor from a base-
line period.
In the first option, an owner or
operator can satisfy the MACT
requirements for all process vents,
storage vessels, equipment leaks,
wastewater, and heat exchange systems
associated with an existing process by
demonstrating that the production-
indexed consumption of HAP has
decreased by 85 percent from a baseline
(certain restrictions are discussed
below). The baseline comprises the
average consumption and production
values averaged over the first 3-year
period in which the process was
operational, beginning no earlier than
the period consisting of the 1987 to
1989 calendar years. Alternatively, for a
process that has been operational for
less than 3 years, but more than 1 year,
the baseline may be established for the
time period from startup of the process
until the present The production-
indexed HAP consumption factor (HAP
factor) is expressed as kilograms (kg)
HAP consumed per kg product
produced. The numerator in the HAP
factor is the total consumption of
material, which describes all the
different areas where material can be
consumed, either through losses to the
environment, consumption in the
process as a reactant, or some other form
of destruction. Consumption, rather
than emissions, is tracked because it can
be used as a true measure of pollution
prevention; any decrease in
consumption for the same unit of
product generated must involve some
type of increase in process efficiency,
including reduction of waste, increased
product yield, and in-process recycling.
Because HAP are used generally as raw
materials and solvents in this industry,
reductions in consumption can be
generally associated with reductions in
emissions to air, water, or solid waste.
The second option also uses the
production-indexed HAP consumption
factor and is also applied to existing
processes. This option allows an owner
or operator to supplement reductions
achieved with P2 with add-on controls.
The EPA believes that such an option
will provide greater flexibility and cost
efficiency to the operators who already
may have some add-on controls. Under
this option, an owner or operator must
demonstrate reductions in the HAP
factor of at least 50 percent via P2
measures. In addition, the mass of HAP
emissions must be reduced by an
amount that, when divided by the
production rate and added to the
reduction in the HAP factor, yields a
reduction equivalent to at least 85
percent of the baseline HAP factor.
Thus, the total reduction required by
option 2 would be equivalent to or
greater than an 85 percent reduction in
the HAP factor, the same as in option 1.
The following restrictions also apply
to the pollution prevention standards in
today's final rule. First, for any
reduction in the production-indexed
HAP consumption factor that is
achieved by reducing a HAP that is also
a VOC, an equivalent reduction in the
production-indexed VOC consumption
factor is required. Second, for any
reduction in the production-indexed
HAP consumption factor that is
achieved by reducing a HAP that is not
a VOC, the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor may not be
increased. Third, paniculate matter
emissions from product dryers are
excluded from the P2 option because
-------
33558 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
the product is not consumed in the
process. Fourth, processes that began
operation after November 10, 1997 are
not eligible for the P2 alternative. Fifth,
the P2 alternative does not apply to
HAP that are generated in the process if
they are not also added as a raw
material or solvent; emissions of these
generater1 HAP must be controlled as
specified in the standards for process
vents, storage vessels, equipment leaks,
and wastewater systems.
Today's final rule also require owners
and operators complying with the P2
standard to submit a P2 Demonstration
Summary as part of the Precompliance
plan that describes how the P2
alternative will be applied at their
facilities. The minimum data
requirements for the P2 Demonstration
Summary are listed in §63.1364(g)(3) of
today's final rule.
M Emissions Averaging Provisions
Today's final rule includes emissions
averaging provisions that are essentially
unchanged from the proposed
provisions that would allow emissions
averaging among process vent, storage
vessel, and wastewater emission points
within an existing affected source.
Under emissions averaging, a system of
"credits'1 and "debits" is used to
determine whether an affected source is
achieving the required emissions
reductions. Emissions averaging allows
existing sources the flexibility to
achieve compliance at diverse points
with varying degrees of control already
in place in the most economically and
technically reasonable fashion. This
flexibility to account for controls
already in place is not as justified for
new sources because they can and
should be designed and constructed
with compliance in mind. Therefore,
new sources are not allowed to use
emission averaging.
N. Initial Compliance and Performance
Test Provisions
1. Promulgated Standards
a. Process Vents. To determine
compliance with the percent reduction
requirements for gaseous HAP and HC1
emissions from PAI process vents, the
owner or operator is required to
quantify the uncontrolled and
controlled gaseous emissions from all
process vents to demonstrate the
appropriate overall reduction
requirements. For process vents
controlled by a device with an inlet of
less than 9.1 Mg/yr of HAP, the owner
or operator can either test or use
mathematical methodologies to
determine the uncontrolled and
controlled emission rates from
individual process vents. For process
vents controlled by a device with an
inlet of 9.1 Mg/yr or more of HAP.
performance tests are required to
determine the reduction efficiency of
each device.
Performance test provisions were
structured to account for the peak-case
emissions. The EPA adopted this
approach primarily for batch operations,
which, because of their cyclic nature,
tend to have variable emissions.
Continuous processes tend to have more
consistent emissions, but for simplicity,
the same performance test provisions
are applied to controls for continuous
processes. This approach essentially
considers emissions from continuous
processes to be peak-case at all times.
Control devices, that have previously
been tested under conditions required
by this standard, and condensers are
exempt from performance testing.
To determine compliance with the
outlet concentration standards, the final
rule requires the owner or operator to
conduct a performance test using the
EPA methods specified in the rule
under the same peak-case conditions.
Today's final rule also specifies
procedures to demonstrate initial
compliance when using flares.
b. Storage Vessels. For demonstrating
compliance with the percent reduction
requirements for storage vessel
emissions, today's final rule requires
that the owner or operator conduct
either a performance test or a design
evaluation. To demonstrate compliance
with the 20 ppmv outlet concentration,
the final rule requires the owner or
operator to conduct a performance test.
However, If a control device is shared
by storage vessels and process vents, the
results of a performance test conducted
to demonstrate compliance with the
process vent standards may also be used
to demonstrate initial compliance with
storage vessel standards. For
demonstrating compliance with the
floating roof equipment standards, the
final rule refers to the compliance
provisions in the HON. Today's final
rule also specifies procedures to
demonstrate initial compliance when
using flares.
c. Wastewater. The wastewater
provisions in the final rule remain
essentially unchanged from those of the
.proposed rule. For demonstrating
compliance with the various wastewater
requirements, owners and operators
have a choice of using a specified
design, conducting performance tests, or
documenting engineering calculations,
consistent with the wastewater
provisions in the HON. Appropriate
inspection, monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements are
included in the regulation via cross-
references to the HON.
d. Equipment Leaks. To determine
compliance with the standard for
equipment leaks, facilities must
demonstrate that an LDAR program
meeting the requirements of the final
rule is in use.
e. Bag Dumps and Product Dryers. To
demonstrate initial compliance with, the
paniculate matter emission limit of 0.01
gr/dscf, the owner or operator is
required to conduct a performance test.
2. Pollution Prevention Alternative
Standard
To demonstrate initial compliance
with the pollution prevention
alternative standard, the final rule
requires the owner or operator to
document yearly quantities of HAP raw
materials and products using
preapproved material tracking records,
including standard purchasing and
accounting records, and calculating the
baseline HAP and VOC factors. Prior to
the compliance date, the final rule
requires owners and operators to submit
a pollution prevention Demonstration
Summary that describes how the
pollution prevention alternative will be
applied at the facility. The pollution
prevention Demonstration Summary
provides the regulatory agency an
opportunity to review and approve the
proposed material tracking procedures. -
Procedures are also specified In the final
rule to demonstrate that the required
reductions are achieved by the control
devices used to meet option 2.
O. Monitoring Requirements
1. MACT Emission Standards
The final rule requires monitoring to
demonstrate compliance on an ongoing
basis. This monitoring is done either by
(1) continuously measuring emission
reductions directly, or (2) continuously
measuring a site-specific operating
parameter, the value of which is
established by the owner or operator
during the initial compliance
determination. The operating parameter
value is defined as the minimum or
maximum value established for a
control device or process parameter
that, if achieved on a daily average by
itself or in combination with one or
more other operating parameter values,
determines that the owner or operator is
complying with the applicable emission
standards. Except for the bag leak
detectors, these parameters are required
to be monitored at 15-minute intervals
throughout the operation of the control
device. For a device controlling streams
that, in aggregate, contain less than 0.91
Mg/yr of HAP, only a site-specific
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33559
periodic verification that the device is
operating as designed is required to
demonstrate continuous compliance.
Owners and operators must determine
the most appropriate method of
verification and propose this method to
the Agency for approval in the
Precompliance plan, which is due 6
months prior to the compliance date of
the standard.
Under the final rule, each fabric filter
that is used to control paniculate matter
emissions from a bag dump or product
dryer that is subject to the particulate
matter standard must be equipped with
a bag leak detection system with an
alarm to indicate bag leaks or other
causes of increased emissions. In
addition, the owner or operator must
prepare a written operation and
maintenance manual that describes
inspection and maintenance procedures
for these fabric filters. The manual must
also include a corrective action plan
that describes procedures to diagnose
the cause of any alarm as well as
corrective actions to be taken to correct
malfunctions or minimize emissions.
The manual must be submitted to EPA
for approval in the Precompliance
report. Not initiating the corrective
action plan within 1 hour of an alarm
is a violation of an operating
requirement.
2. Pollution Prevention Alternative
Standard
An owner or operator electing to use
the pollution prevention alternative can
demonstrate ongoing compliance by
calculating the rolling average of the
HAP and VOC factors for each
applicable process or portions of the
process. For continuous processes, the
rolling average is calculated every 30
days, and for batch processes, the
rolling average is calculated every 10
batches. In both cases, the rolling
average is based on data from the
previous 12 months. In addition, an
owner or operator electing to use
pollution prevention Option 2 is
required to monitor the emission
reduction obtained through the use of
traditional controls using the methods
described above.
P. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
The owner or operator of any PAI
production facility subject to these
standards is required to fulfill reporting
requirements specified in the final rule,
as well as requirements outlined in the
General Provisions of subpart A to 40
CFR part 63. Table 1 following the
regulatory text of today's final rule
designates which sections of subpart A
apply to the rule. Generally, the
recordkeeping provisions require the
owner or operator to maintain all
records documenting the applicability
determinations and indicating that the
source is in compliance with the
applicable requirements. Required
reports under this standard include the
Initial Notification of applicability to
the standards, the Precompliance report,
the Notification of Compliance Status
report, and the Periodic reports required
after the date of compliance.
V. Summary of Nationwide Impacts
The emission reductions that are
required by this regulation could be met
by regulated sources using one or more
of several different techniques. Impacts
were estimated for control scenarios
based on traditional control techniques
that were judged to be the most feasible
for meeting the requirements of the final
standards from a technical and cost
standpoint. Energy, cost, and economic
impacts of the pollution prevention
alternative would be equivalent to or
lower than the estimated impacts for
traditional controls because it is likely
that an owner or operator would elect to
implement only those pollution
prevention techniques that have lower
impacts than traditional controls.
A. Air Impacts
The standards are estimated to reduce
HAP emissions from existing sources by
2,500 Mg/yr from the baseline level, a
reduction of 65 percent from the
baseline (i.e., current) emissions level,
• and 93 percent from the uncontrolled
emissions level. These reductions
would also occur if facilities elect to
implement the alternative pollution
prevention standard. In addition to
reducing HAP emissions, VOC will also
be reduced. This reduction includes
both VOC that are HAP and other VOC
that are not HAP. Volatile organic
compounds are precursors in the
atmospheric reaction with oxides of
nitrogen that generates tropospheric
ozone. The amount of VOC reduction
(beyond the HAP portion of the VOC)
due to implementation of the PAI
standards has not been quantified for
this rulemaking. The basis for the
estimated emissions reductions is
discussed in Chapter 5 of the Basis and
Purpose Document and in memoranda
'in the docket (Docket A-95-20, Docket
Item numbers HI-B-1, IV-B-2, IV-B-3,
andIV-B-4).
B. Water and Solid Waste Impacts
With the assumption that overheads
from steam stripping will be recoverable
as material or fuel, no solid waste is
expected to be generated from steam
stripping wastewater streams.
Additionally, no solid waste is expected
to be generated from controls of other
emission points.
Under the final standards, wastewater
generated from water scrubbers used to
control HC1 emissions is expected to
increase by an estimated 10.8 million
liters per year. The volume of
wastewater generated would also
increase at plants that choose a water
scrubber to control certain water soluble
organic HAP; however, the increase Is
expected to be minimal because the use
of water scrubbers for this purpose is
expected to be uncommon. The basis for
the water and solid waste impacts is
discussed in the Environmental Impacts
memorandum in the Supplementary
Information Document in the docket
(Docket A-95-20, Docket item number
II-B-21).
C. Energy Impacts
Under the final standards, energy use
is expected to increase by an estimated
4,880 x 109 British thermal units per
year (Btu/yr). The basis for the
estimated energy use is discussed in the
Environmental Impacts memorandum in
the Supplementary Information
Document in the docket (Docket A-95-
20, Docket item number II-B-21).
D. Cost Impacts
The total control cost includes the
capital cost to install control devices
(including floating roofs), the costs
involved in operating control devices
(energy and operating and maintenance
costs), costs associated widi monitoring
control devices to ensure compliance,
costs associated with implementing
work practices, and the cost savings
generated by reducing the loss of
valuable product in the form of
emissions. Monitoring costs include the
cost to purchase and operate monitoring
devices, as well as reporting and
recordkeeping costs required to
demonstrate compliance. Average cost
effectiveness, dollars per megaram ($/
Mg) of HAP removed, is also presented
as part of cost impacts and is
determined by dividing the annual cost
by the annual emission reduction. The
basis for the cost impacts is discussed
in the Cost Impacts memorandum in die
Supplementary Information Document
and in subsequent memoranda in the
docket (Docket A-95-20, Docket item
numbers II-B-21. IV-B-2, IV-B-3, and
IV-B-5).
Under the final standards, EPA
estimates that the total capital costs for
existing and new sources will be $71.6
million and $10.3 million, respectively
(June 1998 dollars). The total annual
costs for control at existing and new
sources are estimated to be
-------
33560 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
approximately $39.4 million and $5.47
million, respectively (June 1998
dollars). The average cost effectiveness
of the standards is estimated to be about
$15,800/Mg for existing sources and
$13,400/Mg for new sources.
The EPA estimates that in the first
three years following promulgation
industry's nationwide annual cost
burden will average $304,000/yr for
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements. Most of these
costs are for new and reconstructed
sources that must be in compliance
upon startup; other costs are for existing
sources to prepare initial notifications
and plans. In the fourth year after
promulgation, existing facilities must
begin to record monitoring data and
prepare periodic reports, which will
significantly increase the nationwide
annual burden.
It is expected that the actual
compliance cost impacts of the final
rule will be less than described above
because of the potential to use common
control devices, upgrade existing
control devices, use other less expensive
control technologies, implement
pollution prevention technologies, or
use emissions averaging. Because the
effect of such practices is highly site-
specific and data were unavailable to
estimate how often the lower cost
compliance practices could be utilized,
it is not possible to quantify the amount
by which actual compliance costs will
be reduced. The EPA believes that the
overall control costs and the monitoring,
reporting, and recordkeeping costs will
be substantially reduced for the
facilities opting to comply via the
pollution prevention option.
E. Economic Impacts
The control costs imposed on
producers in the PAI production
industry will increase their cost of
production. The effects of the changes
in production costs are evaluated in the
"Economic Impact Analysis of the
Proposed NESHAP for the Production of
Pesticide Active Ingredients" (Docket
A-95-20, Docket item No. II-A-20).
This report was not changed as a result
of public comments and will serve as
documentation for the final rule. The
resulting increase in production costs
will increase the market price by less
than 1 percent and decrease market
output by less than 1 percent. In
addition, the regulation's impact on
foreign competition is relatively small.
Social cost incorporates the changes in
welfare to consumers, unaffected
producers, and foreign producers and
consumers to the cost of the regulation.
These costs were determined to be
negligible for the PAI production
industry; therefore, the total social cost
is estimated to be equal to the total
control cost. No plant closures are
expected from compliance with this set
of alternatives.
VI. Major Comments and Changes to
the Proposed Standards
A. Applicability Provisions
1. Selection of Source Category
The initial list of categories of major
and area sources included 10 source
categories in the agricultural chemicals
industry group. In June 1996, butadiene
furfural cotrimer was moved from the
polymers and resins industry group to
the agricultural chemicals industry
group (61 FR 28197). In the notice of
proposed rulemaking, EPA made the
following additional changes: (1) All
active ingredients within the meaning of
FIFRA section 2 (a) that are used in
herbicide, insecticide, or fungicide
pesticide end-use products were added
to the agricultural chemicals industry
group; (2) the individual initial and new
source categories in the agricultural
chemicals industry group were
combined into a single source category;
and (3) the new source category was
named "pesticide active ingredient
production."
The EPA received numerous
comments on the change in the source
category. Many of the commenters
requested exemptions for specific
processes or classes of processes.
Examples include: antimicrobials;
chromic acid and sodium bichromate;
' chlorine; sodium hypochlorite; kaolin'
(aluminum silicate); sulfuric acid,
particularly from copper smelters; and
copper sulfate, from copper refineries
and rod mills. The commenters contend
that these processes should be exempt
because the production processes are
significantly different than organic PAI
production processes. In addition to
differences in the production processes,
each commenter cited one or more of
the following reasons to support their
requests for exemptions: (1) Minimal
toxicity of some of the products
themselves; (2) the HAP emitted are not
organic compounds or HC1, or they are
impurities introduced with feedstocks;
(3) regulation would achieve minimal
environmental benefit but impose
significant burden, especially to
demonstrate that equipment does not
emit HAP; (4) the product is not
primarily sold for use as PAI; and (5) the
production process is part of another
source category that will be regulated by
another MACT standard, is part of a
delisted source category, or, if not
currently listed, would be more
logically listed among the categories of
inorganic chemicals. Some of the
commenters also indicated that sulfuric
acid plants will be MACT for copper
and lead smelter furnaces.
Some commenters opposed the
expansion of the source category
because some products are produced
synthetically and others are derived
from naturally occurring materials.
These commenters are also concerned
that the proposal did not identify either
the number of processes that would be
covered or examples of the processes,
and that EPA has not ensured that
process operation, emission
characteristics, control device
applicability, and costs are similar. As
a result, they contend that the proposed
regulation is arbitrary and capricious, is
inconsistent with the Clean Air Act and
EPA's procedures for developing MACT
standards, and defeats the purpose of
creating source categories. The
commenters suggested limiting the
regulation to synthetically produced
materials because this would be
consistent with the process descriptions
presented in the Basis and Purpose
document and with the definition of
intermediate (i.e., a compound
produced in a chemical reaction). These
commenters explained that other
regulations (e.g., the HON) have
recognized this distinction, and many of
the compounds derived from naturally
occurring materials are not used
primarily as PAI's.
One commenter stated that EPA
should not further expand the source
category beyond that covered by the
proposed rule because owners and
operators of other processes may not
have read the proposal preamble closely
enough to realize that EPA was
requesting comment on such action.
Two commenters supported the scope of
the applicability and the definition of
PAI.
The reasons for expanding the source
category to include PAI's other than
those on the initial source category list.
and for aggregating them all together in
a single source category, are
summarized in section I of this
preamble. Since proposal, however,
EPA reexamined the scope of the source
category and determined that the
proposed rule included some processes
that are not similar to the others. For the
final rule, changes were made to narrow
the scope of the source category; in
addition, for processes that remain in
the source category, changes have been
made to exempt some processes and to
clarify requirements for others. These
changes are: (1) A statement has been
added to specify that the provisions of
the rule apply only to PAI process units
that "process, use, or produce HAP"; (2)
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33561
the definition of PAI has been changed
to mean any organic material that is an
active ingredient within the meaning of
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) section 2(a);
and (3) a statement has been added to
specify that the provisions of the rule do
not apply to the production of ethylene
(processes subject to the HON are also
exempted, as they were in the proposed
rule). Finally, EPA decided not to limit
the source category only to production
of compounds by chemical synthesis.
Each of these decisions is discussed in
more detail later in this section. The
provision specifying that the rule
applies only to PAI process units that
"process, use, or produce HAP" has
been added to the final rule because
EPA did not intend for owners and
operators to demonstrate compliance for
processes that do not meet this
condition. Note, however, that this
provision does not automatically
exempt process units that do not "emit"
HAP; for emission points in such
process units, an owner or operator
must demonstrate that emissions are
less than the applicability thresholds.
The EPA decided to exclude
production of inorganic compounds
from the source category because: (1)
Inorganic PAI's comprise only a small
percentage of the total PAI production;
(2) many of the inorganic PAI
production processes do not use or emit
HAP; (3) data are unavailable on the
use, emissions, and control of HAP
compounds other than organics and
HC1; (4) some of the inorganic PAI's are
included in other active or delisted
source categories; and (5) most of the
inorganic PAI's are used primarily for
non-pesticidal purposes. In this context,
"organic" means any compound that
contains carbon and hydrogen with or
without other elements. Based on a
review of pesticide registration data in
1996, less than 10 percent of the PAI's
in pesticide products that are registered
as insecticides, herbicides, or fungicides
are inorganic compounds. Inorganic
compounds comprise a similar
percentage by weight based on 1993
consumption data; the top 25
compounds account for nearly half of
the total PAI production, and the two
inorganic compounds in the group
(sulfur and copper hydroxide) account
for less than 10 percent of the total.
Of the inorganic PAI processes, only
those producing HC1, chlorine, and
compounds containing arsenic and
chromium are known to use and emit
HAP. Both HC1 and chlorine production
precesses are part of source categories
that will be addressed by other MACT
standards that are under development.
Chromium-based compounds are part of
the delisted chrome chemicals source
category and thus, EPA agrees with the
commenter that they should not also be
part of the PAI source category. Data on
the existing control levels for arsenic-
based compounds are unavailable. In
the absence of such data, EPA has
decided that production of such
compounds should not be part of the
PAI source category.
The commenters cited examples of
some inorganic .compounds that* are
primarily used for nonpesticidal
purposes. The EPA believes there are
other inorganic compounds that could
be added to this list of compounds used
only in minor amounts as pesticides.
Conversely, most of the organic
compounds are specifically designed as
PAI's. Exceptions include ethylene,
which has been specifically exempted
in the final rule because it is the subject
of a MACT standard that is under
development, and several compounds
covered by the HON such as acrolein,
ethylene oxide, napthalene, and
propylene glycol.
Production of organic PAI compounds
that are derived from natural materials
is retained in the source category.
Natural materials used as PAI's fall into
one of two categories. One category
includes materials such as herbs,
tobacco dust, dried blood, chitin,
putrescent whole egg solids, pyrethrum
flowers, cinnamon, sawdust, and
ground sesame plant. These compounds
are simply harvested or collected and
the only processing involves mechanical
action. None of these compounds is a
HAP. As a result, these processes are not
subject to the final rule because the
production processes do not process,
use, or produce HAP. The second
category includes compounds like
turpentine that are extracted from
natural materials. Extraction processes
are not exempted from the final rule
because they tend to use large amounts
of solvent and have a high potential for
emissions. Emissions from extraction
processes tend to be more concentrated
than emissions from many of the
operations in chemical synthesis
processes, and they tend to be larger
scale operations than extraction
operations that are part of a chemical
synthesis process. These characteristics
make control of extraction processes
more cost effective than control of many
chemical synthesis processes. However,
because the final rule includes a
primary use criterion for determining
applicability (see section VI.A.2),
extraction processes are only subject to
the final rule if the product is primarily
used as a PAI.
One commenter believes the Captan*
process (one of the 10 initial source
categories) should not be combined with
other PAI processes because it differs
from the other processes in a number of
ways. According to the commenter,
some of the differences are: (1) The
process vent flow rate for production of
the intermediate is much lower than the
process vent flow rate for the active
ingredient production, which leads to
differences in the complexity and cost
of the control devices; (2) the Captan*
process has both volatile organic HAP
and paniculate HAP emissions; and (3)
the cost to control carbon disulfide
emissions would be much higher than
the modeled costs.
The EPA disagrees with the
commenter's assertion that the Captan®
process (and the associated Intermediate
process) should be considered
separately from other PAI processes.
The EPA assumed the intermediate is an
integral intermediate. As a result, the
intermediate process and the Captan®
process are separate processes, both of
which are subject to the final rule.
Although the flow rates of the
intermediate and Captan® process vent
streams differ, the flow rates and other
process vent stream characteristics for
both processes are well within the range
of characteristics for process vent
streams at other surveyed PAI facilities.
These differences were accounted for in
EPA's impact analysis by using different
models to represent the two processes.
In addition, although the Captan®
process itself emits both particulate
HAP (i.e., the Captan® product) and a
gaseous organic HAP, carbon disulfide,
the two pollutants are emitted from
different vents. The particulate
emissions from product dryers also are
considered to be a separate type of
emission point like process vents or
storage vessels. The fact that this facility
is the only one of the MACT floor
facilities to have HAP emissions from
product dryers is not considered a
significantly unique characteristic. It is
analogous to the fact that some of the
other plants have HAP storage vessel
emissions or wastewater discharges and
are subject to the specific standards for
these emission points, where other
plants are not Finally, EPA believes the
cost impacts analysis is correct. Carbon
disulfide can be controlled with many
of the same control devices that are used
to control other organic HAP. If
incinerated, the resulting sulfur dioxide
(SOj) emissions can be controlled using
scrubbers comparable to those used to
control HC1 emissions. A detailed
discussion of the cost analysis is
provided in section VI.O.2. Therefore,
EPA believes the Captan® process is not
sufficiently different from other PAI
processes to warrant development of a
-------
33562 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
subcategory or a separate source
category.
2. Designation of Affected Source
At proposal, the affected source was
defined as the facility-wide collection of
process vents, storage tanks, waste
management units, heat exchange
systems, cooling towers, equipment
identified in §63.149 of subpart G, and
equipment components (pumps,
compressors, agitators, pressure release
devices, sampling connection systems,
open-ended valves or lines, valves,
connectors, and instrumentation
systems) in PAI manufacturing
operations at a major source of HAP
emissions. The EPA received several
comments on the affected source. The
comments focused on the following
issues: (1) Definition of terms, (2)
limiting applicability to processes
where the primary product is a PAI, and
(3) limiting applicability to processes
where the product is primarily used as
a PAI.
a. Definitions. Two commenters
requested changes in the definition of
the affected source and in the terms
used to describe the affected source.
One commenter requested that the
definition of "pesticide active
ingredient manufacturing operations"
exclude waste management units
because these units are not subject to
the standards but instead are used to
comply with the standards, and
typically they are not dedicated to a
particular production process. In
addition, the commenter expressed
concern that the proposed definition
could be interpreted to require
compliance with new source standards
at an existing waste management unit
simply because a new and major PAI
manufacturing operation is built that
will contribute wastewater to the unit.
The second commenter believes the
definition of affected source needs to be
revised to include not only the emission
points, but also the process unit and
emission control technologies. The
commenter recognizes that the
definition in the proposed rule is
similar to the definitions in other MACT
standards, but the commenter has
recently realized that it is too narrow.
For example, in determining whether
changes constitute "reconstruction," the
changes must cost more than half as
much as building a new similar affected
source. However, under the proposed
rule, the affected source included only
process vents, not the reactors,
distillation units, or other process
equipment of which the vent is a part.
Similarly, it included valves and
connectors on process piping, but not
the piping itself. The commenter also
contended that the cost of installing
emission controls is a legitimate part of
the cost of building a new affected
source, but to consider that cost in the
reconstruction analysis, emission
control technologies must be included
in the definition of the affected source.
The EPA made several changes to the
definition of affected sourc_ and related
terms to respond to the comments and
to clarify the terms. One change was to
remove much of the language from
§63.1360(a) because it is included in
the definition of other terms in
§ 63.1361. Another change was to
eliminate the term "PAI manufacturing
operations" because it is redundant
with the definition of the affected
source. In its place, the term "PAI
process unit" is used to describe the
process and all related equipment used
to produce a single PAI or integral
intermediate. The EPA agrees with the
commenter that the equipment and
piping within a process are components
of an affected source that should be
considered in the fixed capital cost
analysis for determining whether
changes constitute reconstruction. For
the final rule, these items have been
included, along with most of the items
on the list of equipment in the proposed
definition of the affected source, in the
definition of the "PAI process unit."
The EPA also agrees with the
commenter that waste management
units should not be considered part of
the PAI manufacturing operations or, in
the final rule, part of the PAI process
unit. However, waste management units
are not used to comply with the
standards; they are a type of emission
point for which standards are
developed. Therefore, waste
management units are considered part
of the affected source in the final rule.
This change makes the final rule
consistent with other MACT standards
and allows the waste management units
to be considered in reconstruction
analyses.
Finally, the commenter's conclusion
regarding the application of new source
requirements is correct If a new PAI
process unit meets the requirements for
new source applicability, then the waste
management units associated with that
new PAI process unit would have to
meet the requirements for new sources.
If the owner or operator wants to
discharge to existing waste management
units, they must meet the requirements
for new sources. The practical Impact of
this requirement, however, is expected
to be minimal because the requirements
for new sources and existing sources are
identical except when the HAP load to
the waste management units exceeds
2,100 Mg/yr. Based on survey data from
the industry, no single existing PAI
process unit discharges wastewater with
such a high load (and only one facility
discharges wastewater containing that
much HAP).
The EPA disagrees with the
commenter's assertion that control
devices should be a component of an
affected source for the purposes of
determining reconstruction costs. The
preamble to the General Provisions cites
EPA's policy on this issue, which was
originally stated in the preamble to a
December 16,1975 regulation that deals
with modification, notification, and
reconstruction requirements under 40
CFR part 60. That preamble states,
"Costs associated with the purchase and
installation of air pollution control
equipment (e.g., baghouses, electrostatic
precipitators, scrubbers, etc.) are not
considered in estimating the fixed
capital cost of a comparable entirely
new facility unless that control
equipment is required as part of the
process (e.g., product recovery)" (40 FR
58416, December 16,1975).
b. Primary Product. Two commenters
urged EPA to specify, as in other MACT
standards, that a process (or process
unit) is subject to the rule only if its
primary product is a PAI. Both
commenters believe this determination
is needed when processing equipment
periodically is reconfigured to produce
different products. In addition, one of
the commenters believes it is needed
when multiple products are produced
by a given process unit. This commenter
also believes it is needed when a facility
makes a change that is intended to be
permanent because the commenter
could not find any provision in the
proposed rule that would allow such a
process unit to be exempt from the rule
if they stop making a PAI. The
commenters believe the primary
product determination would help
manufacturers determine which rules
apply and would result in regulation of
processes that produce a given product
under only one, most appropriate
MACT standard. One commenter
suggested that the primary product be.
defined as the one with the greatest
annual design capacity on a mass basis.
The other commenter noted that a
simple way to define applicability is to
specify that if a process unit stops
making a PAI, the PAI rule no longer
applies.
Another commenter interpreted the
proposed rule to mean that the rule
would apply whenever a PAI is
produced. If a facility uses non-
dedicated equipment, the commenter
realized that this could mean that other
rules would apply when the equipment
was reconfigured to produce a different
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33563
product (e.g., the proposed
Pharmaceuticals rule used the same
language). The commenter believes that
complying with two standards for the
same equipment would be confusing.
Therefore, the commenter suggested that
the PAI rule apply only when 50
percent or more of the annual
production from the equipment is a PAI,
or that EPA allow a facility to comply
only with the most stringent rule that
would apply to the equipment,
regardless of the configuration or the
product being produced.
In response to the comments EPA
evaluated several options for including
a primary product determination. The
analysis considered two types of
situations. The first situation consists of
processing equipment that produces
only one PAI, produces different PAI's
at different times, or simultaneously
produces coproducts (one of which is a
PAI). The second situation involves
processing equipment that produces
different products periodically, and
some of the products are not PAI's.
For the first situation, EPA
determined that a primary product
determination is not needed. This
conclusion is obvious for equipment
that only produces PAI's because no
other rule could apply (because
compounds subject to the HON are
exempted from today's final rule). The
analysis is more complicated if a PAI is
produced as a byproduct or is produced
in minor quantities relative to some
other product of the process. The EPA
is not aware of any such situations.
However, if such processes exist, they
may already be subject to the HON, in
which case they are exempted under
§63.1360(d) of today's final rule. The
only other standard that might apply to
such a process in the future is the
Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON).
The MON will cover a wide variety of
compounds in many different
industries. Thus, EPA believes that a
process unit producing a PAI, even if
the PAI is not the primary product, has
more in common with other PAI process
units than with process units that will
be subject to the MON. Therefore, EPA
also believes it is more appropriate to
regulate all such process units under
today's rule rather than the MON.
The EPA considered four options for
defining the applicability of the rule to
equipment periodically used to produce
chemicals other than PAI's. The first
option is no change from proposal (i.e.,
no primary product determination). The
second option is to include all
equipment used to produce different
products in a "process unit group," and
always comply with the regulation that
applies to the primary product for the
group, regardless of what product is
being produced. The third option is to
define applicability of the rule based on
the primary product of the process unit
The fourth option is similar to Option
2, except that the applicable rule for the
process unit group could, under certain
circumstances, be a rule other than the
one for the primary product of the
group.
Under option 1, a PAI process unit
exists whenever a PAI is being
produced, when there is no primary
product determination, and when the
owner or operator must comply with the
PAI standard for each PAI process unit.
This option was rejected because, as the
commenters noted, it has the
undesirable effect of requiring an owner
or operator to comply with a different
regulation each time the feedstock
changes or the equipment is
reconfigured to make a different type of
product
The second option is to lump all non-
dedicated equipment into one or more
"process unit groups" and require the
owner or operator to comply with the
rule that applies to the primary product
within the group. A variation on this
option would be to require compliance
at all times with the most stringent rule
that would apply to any of the
individual process units within the
group. This option was rejected because
the promulgated pharmaceuticals
standard does not Include a provision
that would allow an owner or operator
to elect to comply with today's final rule
when a pharmaceutical is produced in
a process unit group that has a PAI for
the primary product. The variation also
was rejected because it would be
difficult to implement; the most
stringent regulation would vary
depending on the mix of different types
of emission points at a given facility and
could require mixing and matching
different requirements from different
rules that apply to the various emission
points.
The third option would specify that
the rule apply only if the primary
product of the process unit is a PAI.
This option was rejected because it does
not solve the problem of equipment
being subject to multiple regulations. A
process unit is defined only by the
product It makes. If the raw materials
are changed or the equipment is
reconfigured to make a different
product, the result is a different process
unit. An exemption for a process unit
when it no longer produces a PAI would
be meaningless because, by definition, a
change in product creates a different
process unit In other words, It is not
possible to make a permanent change in
the primary product of a process unit
because a given process unit cannot
have more than one primary product.
The fourth option, like the second
option, includes the concept of process
unit groups. This option requires
compliance with today's final rule for
all PAI process units within the group,
except for the following situations. One
exception is that the owner or operator
may elect to comply with another
existing MACT standard for any PAI
process unit(s) if the primary product of
the process unit group is subject to the
other standard on June 23, 1999 or the
date of startup of the process unit group,
whichever is later. Thus, PAI process
units within a group, even if the PAI is
not the primary product for the group,
are subject to this standard unless and
until the process unit group is subject to
another MACT standard that covers the
primary product of the group. This
option also allows the owner or operator
to elect to comply with the
Pharmaceuticals standard for any PAI
process unit(s) if any of the products
produced in the process unit group are
subject to the pharmaceuticals standard.
Thus, pharmaceutical manufacturing
process units within a group that are
covered by the pharmaceuticals MACT
may comply with those standards even
if a PAI is the primary product of the
group. This provision is included
because the pharmaceuticals rule does
not have a provision that would allow
an owner or operator to comply with the
PAI rule while producing a
pharmaceutical product when the
primary product of the group is a PAI.
However, two provisions in the
pharmaceuticals rule are not applicable
when producing a PAI. First, the
process vent emission limit of 0.15 Mg/
yr in the PAI rule applies instead of the
2,000 Ib/yr limit in the pharmaceuticals
rule because the 2,000 Ib/yr cutoff
would not be consistent with the MACT
floor for PAI process vents. Second, the
owner or operator of a new source that
will produce PAI's as well as
pharmaceuticals must comply with all
of the requirements regarding
application for approval of construction
or reconstruction In § 63.5 of the
General Provisions; the exclusions in
§63.1259(a)(5) of the pharmaceuticals
rule do not apply. Again, EPA believes
this change is necessary to avoid
disparate treatment of PAI producers.
The fourth option was selected because
It simplifies compliance by allowing an
owner or operator to comply with only
one regulation for a process unit group.
It accomplishes this goal without
sacrificing emission reductions because
the requirements of the rules are similar.
-------
33564 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
It also does not require that an existing
regulation be amended.
Under the fourth option, the primary
product of a group is defined as the
product (e.g., a PA1, pharmaceutical,
HON chemical, or currently unregulated
chemical) with the highest estimated
operating time or total production rate
for the 5 years after the compliance date
for today's final rule or after startup of
the process unit group, whichever is
later. The owner or operator proposes
the number of groups and the
boundaries of each group based on site-
specific operation, but a group may only
include equipment that is or may be
used with equipment that is used to
produce a PAI (i.e., some equipment
must overlap between the PAI process
unit and some other process unit for all
equipment in both process units to be
part of the same group).
c. Primary Use. Two commenters
believe the rule should only apply to
production of materials that are
primarily intended to be used as PAl's.
One of the commenters noted that for
some chemicals registered as PAI's, only
a small percentage of the total product
is sold for use as a PAI.
Since proposal, EPA has evaluated
four options for determining
applicability of process units that
produce a product for use both as a PAI
and other purposes. Option 1 is to
require no primary use determination
(i.e., no change from proposal). Option
2 is to list, in the rule, compounds that
are registered as PAI's but that would
not be subject to the rule based on
determinations that their primary use
nationwide is not as a PAI. Option 3 is
to require site-specific determinations of
primary use. Option 4 is to list, in the
rule, all PAI's that are subject to the
rule.
Option 1 would encompass the most
process units and would therefore
achieve the greatest environmental
benefit. The EPA rejected this option,
however, because it could result in
inequitable regulatory treatment of a
given type of process unit. For example,
one facility might produce a compound
for multiple purposes, including a small
amount for use as a PAI, but other
facilities produce the same compound
exclusively for other purposes. Under
this option, only the facility producing
a small amount of the compound for use
as a PAI would be subject to the rule
even though otherwise identical to the
other facility.
Under option 4, a list of PAI's subject
to the regulation would be included in
the regulation. Compounds for which
the primary use is the collective non-
PAI purposes would be excluded from
the list. This option was rejected
because it would not accommodate
changes in the industry. This is a
dynamic industry with new compounds
being developed and registered as PAI's
every year. Between 1984 and 1995, the
industry added an average of 14 new
compounds per year, although not all of
these new compounds would meet the
definition of organic PAI subject to
regulation under this rule. As a result,
updating the list every year would be
impractical. Another disadvantage to
this option is that EPA's pesticide
reregistration process Is not yet
complete. Presumably, compounds with
incomplete evaluations would be
included on the list. The list then would
have to be amended periodically to
delete compounds whose registrations
are canceled.
Option 2 was rejected because, like
option 4, it would not automatically
accommodate changes in the industry;
the rule might have to be amended
periodically to exempt new compounds
that are primarily used for non-PAI
purposes. Another concern with option
2 is that it would be difficult to ensure
that the list is accurate and complete.
The final rule adopts option 3, which
requires site-specific determinations of
primary use. This option was selected
for several reasons. First, this approach
is likely to result in a given process
being subject to only one, most
appropriate regulation because EPA is
not aware of any compounds for which
the primary use is as a PAI for one
facility but not others. Furthermore,
EPA does not expect the primary use at
a given facility to vary. However, if the
primary use changes to non-PAI
purposes, today's final rule will still
apply to the process unit (based on
EPA's "once-in, always-in" policy); if
the primary use changes to a PAI,
today's final rule will apply only if the
process unit is not already subject to the
HON. A second advantage of this option
is that it automatically accommodates
new compounds that are developed in
the future, and existing compounds that
are found to have a pesticidal
application. A third advantage is that
minimal additional recordkeeping and
reporting is required. Manufacturers are
required under FIFRA to record and
report the annual production of each
PAI that they produce; today's final rule
•requires that they also record and report
the total production to demonstrate that
the compound is produced primarily for
non-PAI purposes. Finally, the
Pharmaceuticals rule provides a recent
precedent for including a primary use
provision.
The final rule incorporates the
primary use concept in the definition of
PAI process unit. Specifically, a process
unit is considered to be a PAI process
unit if more than 50 percent of the
material produced is used as a PAI or
integral intermediate. The primary use
is determined based on the projected
annual production from the process unit
In die 3 years after June 23, 1999 or
startup, whichever is later.
3. Recovery Devices
One commenter requested that EPA
clarify the applicability of recovery
devices that are used for multiple
processes when the recovered material
from a PAI process Is used in a non-PAI
process. In the .proposed rule, die term
recovery device had die same meaning
as in die HON, but it should have been
used only in connection with the
wastewater provisions. The MACT floor
for process vents is based on the
concept that certain condensers are part
of die process (i.e., process condensers)
and any other add-on devices are
considered to be-control devices; the
concept of recovery devices as in the
HON does not apply to process vents.
For die final rule, die term recovery
device has been revised to include only
devices used with water streams, and to
specify that equipment based on gravity
separation may be a recovery device
only if all of the inlet streams are two-
phase liquid streams. The material
recovered in a recovery device may be
used in any process, including non-PAI
processes.
4. Intermediates
Under die proposed rule, the affected
source would include manufacturing of
any intermediate diat is integral to a PAI
production process and for which more
than 50 percent of the annual
production of die intermediate is used
in die on-site production of PAI's. An
integral intermediate process was
defined as a process manufacturing an
intermediate diat is used in die onsite
production of PAl's and is not removed
to storage before being used to produce
die PAI(s). An intermediate was defined
as a compound produced in a chemical
reaction diat is further processed or
modified in one or more additional
chemical reactions to produce a PAI.
The proposed rule would also allow an
owner or operator to elect to include
production of die following
intermediate processes in die affected
source: (1) Integral intermediates for
which less tiian 50 percent of die
intermediate is used in the onsite
production of PAI's and (2) isolated
intermediates. "Isolated intermediates"
were defined as intermediates diat are
removed to storage before being used in
die on-site production of PAI's.
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33565
Several commenters addressed the
definitions of different types of
intermediates and their inclusion in the
definition of affected source. One
commenter recommended editorial
changes to clarify the meaning of
affected source. Another commenter
stated that the term "isolated
intermediate" should not be used
because it has a different meaning under
Toxic Substances and Control Act
CTSCA), and different definitions for the
same term would cause confusion.
Another commenter stated that the rule
needs to include a definition for
"storage" to clarify which intermediate
processes are integral. Other
commenters believe the proposed rule
combined integral intermediate
production with PAI production in a
single process, which, as described
further in section VI.C.l, differs from
the approach used to develop the MACT
floor.
The intent of the proposed rule was
to consider each integral intermediate
process to be a separate process within
the affected source, and to allow the
owner or operator to elect to include
any other intermediate process in the
affected source. To improve the clarity
of these provisions, EPA made several
changes in the final rule. The first
change was to include the production of
integral intermediates in the definition
of the new term "PAI process unit," as
described in section VI.A.2.a. This
change clarifies that production of each
integral intermediate is a separate
process unit. The second change was to
delete the term "isolated intermediate"
to eliminate possible confusion with the
term as it is defined under TSCA. The
impact of this change was minimal
because the term was only used in the
proposed rule to describe intermediates
that are not integral intermediates. The
third change was to replace the term
"integral intermediate process" with the
term "integral intermediate" and change
the definition to mean an intermediate
for which 50 percent or more of the
annual production is used in the onsite
production of one or more PAl's and is
not stored before being used in the
production of another integral
intermediate or the PAI(s). For the
purposes of this definition, an
intermediate is stored if It is discharged
to a storage vessel and at least one of the
following conditions is met: (1) The
processing equipment that discharges to
the storage vessel is shutdown before
the processing equipment that
withdraws from the vessel is started up;
(2) on average, the material is stored in
the storage vessel for at least 30 days
before being used to make a PAI; or (3)
the processing equipment that
discharges to the storage vessel is
located in a separate building or
processing area of the plant than the
processing equipment that uses material
from the storage vessel as a feedstock,
and control equipment is not shared by
the two processing areas. Processes that
satisfy any of these conditions are
considered to be significantly distinct
and separate. The fourth change was to
clarify the provisions allowing the
owner or operator to elect to include
any intermediate process in the affected
source. The final rule specifies that an
owner or operator may elect to designate
production of any intermediate that
does not meet the definition of integral
intermediate (and is not otherwise
exempted) as a PAI process unit in the
affected source. See section VI.C.l for a
discussion of integral intermediates in
the development of the MACT floor.
5. Determining New Source Status
Under the proposed rule, an addition
of PAI manufacturing operations at an
existing plant site would be subject to
the requirements for a new source if it
had the potential to emit 10 tons/yr or
more of any HAP or 25 tons/yr or more
of any combination of HAP, unless the
Administrator establishes a lesser
quantity at a plant that currently is an
affected source. Two commenters
questioned whether this meant that a
source with minor actual emissions but
major potential to emit could elect to
accept a federally enforceable "synthetic
• minor" operating permit with an
emission limit below the 10 and 25
tons/yr cutoffs, and thereby avoid the
new source requirements for process
vents, storage vessels, and wastewater.
The new affected source provisions
have been revised for the final rule. As
noted above, the term "PAI
manufacturing operations" has been
removed from the final rule. The phrase
"unless the Administrator establishes a
lesser quantity at a plant that currently
is an affected source" is not included in
the final rule because this statement is
redundant with section 112(c)(l) of the
CAA, and the term "addition" was
determined to be ambiguous. To address
these concerns, the final rule specifies
that new source requirements apply to
an affected source for which
construction or reconstruction
commenced after November 10,1997, or
to any single PAI process unit that
meets the following conditions: (1) It is
not part of a process unit group; (2)
construction commenced after
November 10,1997; and (3) It has the
potential to emit 10 tons/yr of any one
HAP or 25 tons/yr of combined HAP.
Thus, if an owner or operator elects to
accept federally enforceable conditions
that limit the potential to emit for a
single PAI process unit that is added to
an existing facility to levels below these
thresholds, the PAI process unit would
be subject to existing source standards,
not new source standards.
6. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction
For batch processes, the proposed rule
would require an owner or operator to
comply with the provisions in the rule
during periods of startup and shutdown;
periods of malfunction would be
regulated according to § 63.6 of the
General Provisions. For continuous
processes, the proposed rule specified
that only § 63.6 of the General
Provisions would apply during periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
One commenter agrees that routine
startups and shutdowns between
batches should be covered by the rule,
but stated that it should not apply
during other startups and shutdowns
because normal emission control
techniques may be inappropriate or
ineffective during those times.
According to the commenter, some of
the other situations include (1) initial
startup of a process unit, (2) startup after
a malfunction or an extended period of
nonoperation, and (3) shutdowns due to
a malfunction. The commenter
explained that during initial startup,
control devices and monitoring systems
need to undergo "shakedown" and
debugging, and may need time to reach
their full efficiency. After an extended
downtime, process equipment also will
need time to get back to normal
operating conditions, and control
devices will need to reach operating
temperatures or equilibrium. Although
the commenter understands that the
proposed rule would not apply during
malfunctions, the requirements during a
shutdown associated with the
malfunction were not clear.
The commenter also stated that the
final PAI MACT standards should not
incorporate §63.6(e) of the General
Provisions for four reasons. First, the
requirement In §63.6(e)(3)(i)(A) to
minimize emissions "at least to the
levels required by all relevant
standards" is ambiguous. Second, the
General Provisions do not address
shutdowns of compliance equipment
such as control devices. Third, the
General Provisions do not address
startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions
that affect only a portion of the process.
Fourth, the General Provisions do not
say how to deal with periods of
nonoperation. To address these
concerns, the commenter recommended
that the rule have self-contained startup,
-------
33566 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
shutdown, and malfunction provisions
patterned after those In the HON.
Another commenter recommended
that EPA consider revising the rule to
allow batch processes with air pollution
control equipment to comply with the
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
requirements in §63.6(e) of the General
Provisions. The commenter explained
that operating practices for controls
used with batch processes are the same
as those for controls used with
continuous processes; for both types of
processes, operators verify that all
control equipment is on-line and
functioning properly to minimize
emissions at all times (consistent with
§63.6(e)(l)(i) of the General Provisions).
Furthermore, the commenter stated that
maintenance and corrective actions after
a malfunction of a control device are the
same for both batch and continuous
processes. Therefore, the commenter
recommended that EPA consider
revising the rule to include the
following language: "For batch
processes with air pollution control
equipment, startup, shutdown, and
malfunction shall be regulated
according to § 63.6 of subpart A of this
part. For batch processes without air
pollution control equipment, the
provisions of this subpart shall apply
during startup and shutdown, and
periods of malfunction shall be
regulated according to § 63.6 of subpart
A of this part."
The EPA has reconsidered the
applicability of the rule during periods
of startup and shutdown and
determined that the requirements of the
rule should not be applied under certain
situations for batch processes as well as
for continuous processes. For batch
processes, these situations include
initial startups of new or reconstructed
processes, and shutdowns that are not
part of intended operation (e.g., for
maintenance, replacement of
equipment, or other repair, possibly as
a result of a malfunction). These are
times when the operators may be
unfamiliar with the equipment
operation or it may not be possible to
follow standard operating procedures.
However, a startup after maintenance,
after switching to a product that has
been produced in the past, or the
startups between batches during a
campaign are all routine, normal
operating conditions that should result
in the same emissions profile. Similarly,
shutdown at the end of a campaign,
between batches, or for planned,
preventive maintenance are all normal
operations with the same emissions
profile. Conversely, for continuous
processes, startup and shutdown for any
reason results in operation under
conditions different from the normal
steady-state operation. To account for
these differences between batch and
continuous processes, the final rule
provides definitions for startup and
shutdown that differ from the
definitions in the General Provisions.
Specifically, the following definitions
have been added to the rule:
Startup means the setting in operation
of a continuous PAI process unit for any
purpose, the first time a new or
reconstructed batch PAI process unit
begins production, or, for new
equipment added, including equipment
used to comply with this subpart, the
first time the equipment is put into
operation. For batch process units,
startup does not apply to the first time
the equipment is put into operation at
the start of a campaign to produce a
product that has been produced in the
past, after a shutdown for maintenance,
or when the equipment is put into
operation as part of a batch within a
campaign. As used in §63.1363, startup
means the setting in operation of a piece
of equipment or a control device that is
subject to this subpart.
Shutdown means the cessation of
operation of a continuous PAI process
unit for any purpose. Shutdown also
means the cessation of a batch PAI
process unit or any related individual
piece of equipment required or used to
comply with this part or for emptying
and degassing storage vessels for
periodic maintenance, replacement of
equipment, repair, or any other purpose
• not excluded from this definition.
Shutdown does not apply to cessation of
a batch PAI process unit at the end of
a campaign or between batches (e.g., for
rinsing or washing of equipment), for
routine maintenance, or for other
routine operations.
The EPA has also clarified in the final
rule that the provisions can apply to
processing equipment, as well as
control, monitoring, and recordkeeping
equipment Additionally, in response to
the commenter's concerns regarding
ambiguity of the General Provisions,
EPA has replaced the reference to the
General Provisions with language from
the HON that specifically clarifies
applicability of provisions during
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
events.
7. Overlap With Other Standards
Several commenters stated that, in
addition to the exemptions provided in
the proposed rule, the rule must also
address overlap with other regulations.
Commenters identified potential overlap
with new source performance standards
(NSPS) in 40 CFR part 60 (e.g., subparts
Kb, HI, NNN, and RRR), NESHAP in 40
CFR part 61 (e.g., subparts BB, FF, and
G), and RCRA equipment leak
requirements. The commenters
suggested using language similar to that
in § 63.110 of the HON for previsions
dealing with process vents, storage
vessels, and wastewater and language
from § 63.160(b) through (d) to address
overlapping provisions that deal with
equipment leaks.
The EPA agrees with the commenters
that the rule must address overlap with
other regulations. The final rule
includes language similar to that in
§ 63.110 of the HON, thus addressing
the overlap with NSPS requirements for
storage vessels in subpart Kb of 40 CFR
part 60 and RCRA requirements in 40
CFR parts 260 through 272. The EPA
also added a provision specifying that
an owner or operator subject to both this
rule and the equipment leak
requirements in subpart I of 40 CFR part
63 may elect to comply with the
requirements of either rule.
The requirements in NSPS subparts
HI, NNN, and RRR apply to individual
vents, whereas the process vent
standards In today's final rule apply to
the sum of all process vents within a
process. As a result, a facility generally
must comply with both today's final
rule and any applicable NSPS. One
exception is provided in the final rule.
If an owner or operator elects to reduce
emissions from a process vent by 98
percent (or Implement an equivalent
control option), then the owner or
operator Is required to comply only with
the provisions of today's final rule.
The final rule does not address
overlap with NESHAP in 40 CFR part
61. Subparts BB and FF regulate
emissions from benzene production,
which, because it is subject to the HON,
is not subject to today's rule. Subpart G
Is reserved and also Is not covered in •
§63.110 of the HON.
B. Compliance Dates for New Sources
Several commenters addressed the
provision In the proposed rule that
would require new sources to be in
compliance upon startup. One
commenter believes the provision
should be revised to require compliance
by initial startup or the promulgation
date of the rule, whichever is later.
Other commenters believe EPA should
either allow new sources a period of up
to 6 months to complete any required
testing after startup, or change the
definition of startup to stipulate that
startup is not complete until all required
performance testing is complete, and
that this testing must be completed no
later than 6 months after steady state
production for continuous processes, or
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33567
until 6 months after a successful batch
production run has been completed.
A provision requiring that new
sources be in compliance by initial
startup or the promulgation date,
whichever is later, is consistent with
other MACT standards and has been
added to the final rule.
The EPA does not believe that the
compliance date needs to be changed to
accommodate required emissions
testing. Under the proposed rule, an
owner or operator would be required to
submit the Notification of Compliance
Status report no later than 150 days after
the compliance date (i.e., startup for a
new source). This requirement is
consistent with other MACT standards
(e.g., the HON, Polymers and Resins
(P&R) I, and P&R IV), and it is nearly the
requested 6 months after the compliance
date. Furthermore, much of the required
work (e.g., the emissions profile) may be
completed before the compliance date.
The amount of time needed to reach
steady state production or to complete
a successful batch production run
should not be greater in this industry
than in other chemical production
industries. Therefore, the final rule
retains the provision to submit the
Notification of Compliance Status report
no later than 150 days after the
compliance date.
C. Process Vent Provisions
1. MACT and MACT Floor
Several commenters requested that
sources be able to use process vents
meeting the criteria for 98 percent
control in determining 90 percent
overall process control requirements.
Commenters stated that the EPA
determined that the MACT floor was 90
percent on a processwide basis and
excluding these vents increases the
stringency of the floor.
The MACT floor was determined to be
90 percent control for process vents at
existing sources. In addition to the
MACT floor, the EPA is required to
develop regulatory alternatives beyond
the floor and to select MACT based on
the cost effectiveness of these
alternatives. A regulatory alternative
was developed that would require 98
percent control efficiency for specific
vents that meet the flow and annual
uncontrolled emissions criteria
described in §63.1362(b)(2)(iii); and
would require 90 percent control
efficiency for the sum of emissions from
all other vents within the process. The
cost of the regulatory alternative was
judged to be acceptable, and this
alternative was selected as MACT. The
EPA agrees that this requirement is
more stringent than the floor. If a vent
that must be controlled to 98 percent is
included in determining 90 percent
control for all process vents within the
process, the owner or operator would
only be complying with the MACT
floor, not the more stringent regulatory
alternative. Thus, the final rule does not
allow an owner or operator to use
process vents that are subject to the 98
percent control requirement when
determining compliance with the 90
percent overall control level.
Two commenters perceived an
inconsistency that they believe should
be resolved. The commenters pointed
out that in the proposed standards,
integral intermediate processes are
combined with PAI processes to define
a single "process," but they were
evaluated separately in the MACT floor
analysis. One commenter further noted
that this change would result in an
increase in the applicability cutoff of the
MACT floor because part of the
emissions from an intermediate process
should be combined with the active
ingredient process with the lowest
uncontrolled emissions that were used
to establish the applicability cutoff of
0.15Mg/yr.
The discussion in section VI.A.4
explains that the intent in the proposed
rule was to consider production of
integral intermediates and active
ingredients to be separate processes. As
the commenters noted, this is also the
approach used to develop the MACT
floor. However, in reexamining this
approach since proposal, EPA realized
that some of the active ingredient
processes at the surveyed facilities
included production of intermediates;
in addition, some of the reported
intermediate processes may satisfy one
of the criteria for storage and thus not
be integral intermediates. If all of the
intermediates are integral intermediates,
the floor would increase to 92 percent.
If none of the intermediates are integral
intermediates, the floor would decrease
to 88 percent. Thus, EPA considers the
proposed floor of 90 percent control to
be appropriate. The applicability cutoff
also is unchanged because the active
ingredient production and intermediate
production are not combined into a
single PAI process unit
Several commenters requested that
the definition of a Group 1 process vent
be revised to include an uncontrolled
emissions concentration cutoff of 50
ppmv and a flow rate cutoff of 0.005
standard cubic meters per minute.
Several commenters also requested
changing the applicability cutoff in this
definition. Some commenters suggested
the applicability cutoff should be based
on "total resource effectiveness," as in
the HON. The commenters asserted that
these changes would provide incentives
for sources to implement pollution
prevention practices.
Some commenters suggested raising
the applicability cutoff to 2,000 Ib/yr to
be consistent with the cutoff in the
proposed pharmaceuticals rule; the
commenters asserted this change was
needed because the amount of available
data on PAI processes was limited.
Another commenter suggested raising
the applicability cutoff to 10,000 Ib/yr
because this is the minimum value that
was determined to be cost effective in
the Batch Processes Alternative Control
Techniques (Batch ACT) document. One
commenter requested either a higher
threshold for a process as a whole or for
the individual process entities that
comprise the Captan* process.
One commenter also noted that in
many cases, controls on processes with
small HAP emissions were added to
control odors or VOC. The commenter
disagreed with EPA's assertion during
Partnership Group meetings that the
CAA does not allow the Agency to
consider the reason controls were
added. The commenter states that there
is no statutory limitation on how EPA
defines "affected source"; for example,
EPA has already provided exclusions in
§63.1360, and a higher applicability
cutoff could be another.
The EPA disagrees with the
suggestions to change the definition of
"Group 1 process vent" because these
changes would be inconsistent with the
MACT floor. The suggested
concentration and flow rate cutoffs are
inconsistent because the MACT floor
was based on the sum of emissions from
all vents within a process, not the
characteristics of an individual vent.
However, for the final rule, EPA did
change the definition of "process vent"
to exclude streams with HAP
concentrations less than 20 ppmv.
Although concentration data are not
available from the surveyed plants,
streams with such low concentrations
are likely to be uncontrolled because 20
ppmv is considered to be the practical
limit of control (Docket No. A-79-32,
Docket item No. II-B-31). Furthermore,
such streams are likely to have low
annual emissions and, thus, have little
impact on the applicability
determination for a process.
The EPA attempted to collect
information on the best controlled
facilities in the PAI industry; EPA
believes that the best controlled
facilities are contained in its PAI data
base and that the processes contained in
the data base are representative of the
industry. Based on the PAI data base,
many processes with uncontrolled
emissions that were significantly less
-------
33568 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
than the cutoffs mentioned by the
commenters were controlled to levels of
90 percent or greater. Because the
emission cutoffs mentioned by the
commenters were not supported by the
process vent data, these cutoffs would
not have been defensible because they
would have been less stringent than the
cutoff prescribed by the MACT floor.
Regarding the comment that the cutoff
_ for processes is not cost effective and
' that other cutoffs that nave been
demonstrated as cost effective should be
provided, EPA notes that there is no
provision in the amended CAA for
consideration of cost-effectiveness in
setting the MACT floor. Therefore, it is
conceivable that the standards, which
are set based on the practices of the
industry, will require a level of control
that is greater than what was
determined to be cost-effective for other
CAA programs. For example, the 10,000
Ib/yr cutoff contained in the draft Batch
ACT that was referenced by the
commenters was intended to simplify
applicability of presumptive reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
control measures, which are applied to
the reduction of criteria pollutants (in
this case, VOC) and can include the
consideration of cost effectiveness.
Finally, the amended CAA contains
no provisions for considering reasons
why certain processes are controlled
and others are not when determining
the group of sources that will make up
the best 12 percent of the source
category. Therefore, the issue of
facilities controlling HAP for odor
control or other purposes is not a
consideration in setting the floors.
One commenter asserted that the
applicability equation used to determine
which vents must be controlled to 98
percent is inappropriately applied to
batch processes. The commenter
explained that the flow rate used in the
computer model to develop the 98
percent applicability regulatory
alternative in the Batch ACT is a
constant flow rate, which is inconsistent
with batch processing.
In the Batch ACT, EPA developed
costs for an incinerator to estimate the
cost effectiveness of controlling
emissions from batch process vents.
Although flow rates from batch
processes vary, the control device must
be capable of handling the maximum
flow rate possible. Therefore, the
incinerator was sized and costed for the
maximum flow rate, even though
venting from batch processes will
include periods of lower flow rates.
2. HC1 Standards
Two commenters expressed concern
that EPA's approach to determining the
MACT floor for the HC1 emission limit
criteria (e.g., the 6.8 Mg/yr cutoff) in the
proposed rule considers only a limited
number of process vents emitting HC1
which may not be representative of the
entire source category. The commenters
recommend that EPA consider setting
the HC1 cutoff for existing sources at
least as high as the average of the two
lowest HC1 emission rates from
controlled processes at the MACT floor
facilities (i.e., (6.8 Mg/yr +11.0 Mg/yr)/
2 = 9.0 Mg/yr), or that the control device
for the process vent emitting HC1 meet
a minimum 90 percent efficiency if
installed and in operation before
November 7, 1997. (Note: EPA assumes
the commenter meant the proposal date
of November 10,1997.) The commenters
believe these changes will improve
incentives for pollution prevention, and
that allowing 90 percent control would
reduce the cost burden on existing
facilities because retrofitting to achieve
an incremental improvement in control
is very expensive.
The EPA disagrees with the
commenters that the proposed cutoff for
HC1 emissions is inappropriate. As
described in the Basis and Purpose
document and summarized below, EPA
believes the cutoff of 6.8 Mg/yr is a very
clear and obvious breakpoint. Also,
even though the MACT floor plants
have fewer processes with HC1
emissions than organic HAP emissions,
this is representative of the industry as
a whole. Thus, one would expect that
the HC1 floor would be based on less
data than the floor for organic HAP
emissions. The EPA also notes that if
the floor were determined by evaluating
the best controlled processes throughout
the industry rather than the processes at
the best performing 12 percent of
existing facilities, that the applicability
cutoff might be lower than 6.8 Mg/yr. It
certainly would not be higher.
To develop the MACT floor for the
proposed rule, all of the processes at the
nine MACT floor facilities were ranked
by uncontrolled HC1 emissions. All
processes with uncontrolled emissions
below 6.8 Mg/yr were uncontrolled, and
processes with higher emissions were
controlled to various levels. Therefore,
the MACT floor was determined to be
no control for processes below this
threshold and 94 percent for processes
above it.
The EPA believes there is no basis for
setting a cutoff at 9.0 Mg/yr or for
setting a control level of 90 percent for
control devices installed before
November 10,1997, Because the MACT
floor consists of both a control
efficiency and a cutoff, the cutoff cannot
be changed independently of the control
efficiency. A cutoff of 9.0 Mg/yr would
be inappropriate because it is not
associated with the determined MACT
floor control efficiencies. Furthermore,
it would not make sense to include one
controlled process (i.e., the process with
emissions of 6.8 Mg/yr) with all of the
uncontrolled processes; this is a very
clear and natural cutoff. If the standard
were based on an alternative more
stringent than the floor, the rule might
allow emission points that are already
controlled to the level of the MACT
floor to comply with that level (as was
done for organic emissions from process
vents). However, there is no basis for a
90 percent control level, regardless of
the installation date, because the 94
percent control level for HC1 is the
MACT floor. Finally, the EPA
recognizes that the incremental cost
effectiveness will be high for a facility
with control just below the required
level. However, this would be true no
matter where the level was set.
-Other commenters stated that the HC1
standards for new sources should be set
at 99 percent removal for consistency
with the HON requirements. One
commenter stated that since there is no
actual test data from the pesticide
manufacturing industry demonstrating a
99.9 percent removal of HC1, a change
to 99 percent would provide
consistency with HON rule
requirements.
The EPA agrees with the commenters.
The proposed control level was based
on a value reported by a surveyed
facility. This value was not supported
by test data or other documentation.
However, a control level of at least 99
percent is likely for this scrubber
because HCI control levels of 99 percent
are widely accepted as achievable by
scrubbers, and several other facilities
reported this level. Therefore, for the
final rule, the required control level for
new sources has been changed to 99
percent. Although being consistent with
the HON is not a priority, this change,
as one commenter observed, does make
the two rules consistent.
3. Surge Control Vessels and Bottoms
Receivers
One commenter opposes the proposed
requirement to regulate surge control
vessels and bottoms receivers as process
vents because it introduces a third way
to regulate such emissions under the
MACT standards. The commenter
would prefer that these emissions be
regulated as equipment leaks, as under
the HON. If that is not acceptable, the
commenter's second choice is to
regulate the emissions as storage
vessels, as under Polymers & Resins IV.
The commenter believes that additional
inconsistency is confusing and likely to
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 33569
lead to inadvertent compliance
mistakes.
The EPA notes that there is essentially
no difference between regulating
emissions from these equipment as
"equipment leaks" (as in subpart H)
versus as "storage vessels" (as in
subpart G). Both the applicability and
control requirements for these sources
in the RON are identical. The reason
EPA departed from this approach in the
proposed (as well as the
Pharmaceuticals rule) rule is that surge
control vessels and bottoms receivers
typify the processing equipment, in
capacity and function, found in the PAI
and pharmaceuticals industries.
Especially in the case of batch
processing (where the HON does not
regulate process vents), the
characteristics of emission streams from
these equipment are not significantly
different than any other equipment.
Emission streams from bottoms
receivers and surge control vessels
result from the displacement of
saturated gases from incoming
materials. Displacement emissions are
very common in both the
Pharmaceuticals and PAI industries.
Therefore, EPA decided to regulate them
in a manner consistent with the
remainder of processing equipment
found in these industries.
In response to the commenter's
concern about possible confusion from
the inconsistent application of
requirements across different source
categories, EPA believes that the
consistent treatment described above
will actually eliminate a great deal of
confusion in the implementation of the
rule, because all equipment associated
with a process will be treated in the
same manner, and the control
requirements, which are process based,
can be evaluated over all equipment in
the process. Additionally, because of the
similarities of these equipment with
other process vessels, the confusion
related to defining a surge control vessel
or bottoms receiver from another
process vessel will also be averted.
D. Storage Vessel Provisions
l.MACT Floor
Under the proposed rule, the MACT
floor for storage tanks consisted of
applicability cutoffs and a control
efficiency for tanks that exceeded the
cutoffs. To develop the floor, the storage
tanks at the best performing 12 percent
of facilities (the "MACT floor facilities")
were ranked by decreasing uncontrolled
emissions. The tanks were divided into
two groups based on an uncontrolled
emissions cutoff below which the
median control efficiency was no
control. The median control efficiency
below 108 kg/yr was no control; the
median control above the cutoff was 41
percent. A tank size cutoff was
established at 38 cubic meters (m3)
based on the smallest tank with
uncontrolled emissions greater than 108
kg/yr that was controlled at least to 41
percent For new sources, the smallest
tank with the best level of control was
determined. The floor for new sources
was determined to be 98 percent control
efficiency for storage vessels with
capacity of 26 m3 or greater and
uncontrolled emissions of at least 0.45
kg/yr.
One commenter stated that the control
levels originally provided by the
commenter for two storage vessels are
inaccurate due to incorrect coolant
temperatures used by the commenter.
The commenter stated that the impact of
this change is that the existing source
MACT floor based on the median
control level for tanks with uncontrolled
emissions greater than 108 kg/yr
becomes 21 percent, instead of 41
percent. Another commenter stated that
MACT floor should be revised to
include consideration of vapor pressure
of the stored HAP to be a primary
parameter.
The EPA has corrected the control
efficiencies for each of the storage
vessels mentioned by the commenter.
The EPA also reexamined the data base
since proposal and removed several
vessels that should not have been
included because they do not meet the
definition of storage vessel. Changes to
the storage vessel data base, and
changes to the MACT floor and the final
standard that are summarized below are
discussed in the memorandum
"Explanation of Options for
Reevaluating the Storage Tank MACT
Floor for the Production of Pesticide
Active Ingredients NESHAP," (Docket
A-95-20, Docket item No. IV-B-2).
The proposed approach to developing
the MACT floor for storage vessels was
significantly different than the approach
used to develop the floor for other rules
(e.g., the HON, polymers & resins, and
Pharmaceuticals). Since proposal, EPA
has reevaluated the revised data base
and determined that an approach
consistent with that used for the other
rules is feasible and appropriate for this
rule. One of the commenters also
recommended that the floor include
vapor pressure cutoffs as in other rules.
As a result, EPA decided to revise the
MACT floor. The revised approach
established vapor pressure cutoffs at the
same storage vessel capacity cutoffs and
control efficiency cutoffs as were used
in the previous rules. Specifically, the
approach examined storage vessel
cutoffs at 38 m3, 75 m3, and 151m3. (In
English units, these capacities
correspond with 10,000 gallons [gal],
20,000 gal, and 40,000 gal, respectively,
and the data base includes at least one
storage vessel at each of these sizes.)
Within these size ranges, the vapor
pressure cutoff at which the majority of
storage vessels were controlled to 95
percent or more was determined; the 95
percent level is consistent with the
efficiency of floating roofs, which are
the most cost effective controls.
Under the revised approach, at liquid
vapor pressures of 3.45 kPa and higher,
the median control efficiency was found
to be at least 95 percent in both the 75
m3 and larger range and the 151 m3 and
larger range; at all vapor pressures, the
majority of storage vessels with
capacities smaller than 75 m3 were
found to be uncontrolled. The vapor
pressure of 3.45 kPa is the vapor
pressure of toluene, which is the
predominant HAP in the industry and
the most common organic HAP stored in
storage vessels. Therefore, the revised
MACT floor for storage vessels at
existing sources was determined to be
95 percent control for storage vessels
with a capacity greater than or equal to
75 m3 that store material with a vapor
pressure greater than or equal to 3.45
kPa. In addition, the MACT floor was
determined to be no control for all
storage vessels with a capacity less than
75m3.
The MACT floor for storage vessels at
new sources is based on the best
controlled storage vessel. As discussed
above, the best level of control for
storage vessels is considered to be 95
percent The capacity of the smallest
vessel controlled to 95 percent was
determined to be 40 m3, and the vapor
pressure of the compound stored in this
vessel was 16.5 kPa. The MACT floor for
new sources must be at least as stringent
as the floor for existing sources.
Therefore, the MACT floor for new
sources is 95 percent control for storage
vessels with (1) a capacity of 40 m3 or
greater that store material with a vapor
pressure of 16.5 kPa or greater and (2)
a capacity of 75 m3 or greater that store
material with a vapor pressure of 3.45
kPa or greater.
2. Standard
Under the proposed rule, one
regulatory alternative more stringent
than the floor was developed. The
regulatory alternative would require 95
percent control of storage vessels with
capacity of 75 m3 or greater that have
uncontrolled emissions of 108 kg/yr or
greater. Storage vessels smaller than 75
m3 (and greater than 38 m3) that have
uncontrolled emissions of 108 kg/yr or
-------
33570 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
greater would require control to the
floor level (41 percent). This regulatory
alternative was determined to be cost
effective. Therefore, the proposed
standard for storage vessels at existing
sources was established at 95 percent
control for vessels with a capacity
greater than or equal to 75 m3 that have
uncontrolled emissions greater than or
equal to 108 kg/yr. No regulatory
alternatives more stringent than the
MACT floor were developed for storage
vessels at new sources. Therefore, the
proposed standard for storage vessels at
new sources was determined to be 98
percent control efficiency for storage
vessels with a capacity of 26 m3 or
greater with uncontrolled HAP
emissions of at least 0.45 kg/yr.
Several commenters requested that
EPA increase the lower emission cutoff
for existing and new storage vessels.
Most commenters recommended
increasing it to at least 227 kg/yr; this
level corresponds to the level in the
Batch Processes ACT document for
which manifolding to an existing
control device was shown to be cost
effective. One commenter suggested
adding an exemption in §63.1360(d)(4)
for such storage vessels. Several of the
commenters also noted that combustion
would be the only feasible means of
controlling HAP emissions of only 0.45
kg/yr, and that secondary emissions
would increase significantly as a result.
The Agency has determined that
including the higher cutoff suggested by
the commenter would have been less
stringent than the cutoff prescribed by
the MACT floor. The emission cutoffs
mentioned by the commenters are not
supported by the storage vessel data
base.
Since proposal, a different method for
estimating the MACT floor has been
incorporated (as discussed above). The
revised MACT floor uses storage vessel
capacity and the vapor pressure of
stored material as the parameters for
determining applicability for storage
vessels, and no uncontrolled emissions
cutoff is included in the floor. The
Agency expects that implementing
standards based on this format will be
considerably easier than implementing
the proposed standards, because no
ongoing emission tracking will be
required to demonstrate compliance
with the standard. Use of these
parameters is consistent with
requirements for storage vessels in other
rules.
Two commenters stated that the
minimum applicability size cutoff for
existing Group 1 storage vessels should
be changed to correlate with the NSPS
subpart Kb size cutoff to simplify
compliance. The commenters stated that
the cutoff for storage vessels at existing
sources would change from 38 m3 to 40
m3. In addition, the commenters pointed
out that the 38 m3 cutoff is below the
smallest storage vessel controlled to the
median control efficiency in the study
(i.e., 39 m3).
For the final rule, EPA based the
standards for new and existing sources
on the MACT floor because the cost to
go beyond the floor was determined to
be unreasonable. As a result of the
changes to the database discussed
above, the capacity cutoffs in the final
rule are higher than the cutoffs
suggested by the commenters. For
existing sources, the cutoff is 75 m3
instead of the 40 m3 suggested by the
commenters. For new sources, the cutoff
is 40 m3 instead of the 39 m3 suggested
by the commenters.
One commenter pointed out that in
both the definitions of Group 1 Storage
Vessel (§ 63.1361) and the standard
(§ 63.1362), the conversion from metric
units to English units are rounded off.
The commenter requests that EPA
provide a more precise conversion to
English units. In an effort to reduce
confusion over the conversion from
English to metric units (or vice versa),
only metric units have been included in
the final rule.
One commenter requested that EPA
keep the existing source standard for
storage vessels with capacities greater
than 75 m3 the same as that for smaller
storage vessels, unless floating roof
technology is already in-place. The
commenter asserted that the EPA's
"beyond the floor" standard of 95
percent organic HAP control for existing
"large" storage vessels is not justified
for storage vessels that were not already
equipped with floating roof technology.
The commenter stated that EPA's
assumption that any existing storage
vessel larger than 75 m3 can be cost-
effectively retrofitted with a floating
roof is unrealistic.
For the proposed rule, the MACT
floor was based on a control efficiency
of 41 percent. As discussed above, the
revised MACT floor is based on 95
percent control. The final standards also
are based on a control of 95 percent
because the cost to control to a higher
level was determined to be
unreasonable. Now that both the MACT
•floor and the standard are based on the
same control efficiency, the
commenter's concern about going
beyond the floor is no longer relevant.
Several commenters stated that EPA
should allow floating roofs as a control
option for storage vessels at new
sources. Some of the commenters stated
that it is possible to reduce emissions of
some HAP by 98 percent using a floating
roof, with the efficiency calculated
using TANKS3, EPA's computer
program to calculate VOC emissions
from storage tanks.
As noted above, the control level for
storage vessels at new sources is 95
percent under the final rule. Floating
roof technology is allowed to meet this
limit, just as it is for existing sources.
3. Routine Maintenance
Several commenters requested either
an extension in the 240 hours per year
(hr/yr) allowance for routine
maintenance or greater flexibility in Its
application. One commenter suggested
that EPA allow up to a 30-day extension
for control devices (like RCRA
incinerators) that require more than 10
days of maintenance per year, or allow
a facility to compensate for longer
downtime by overcontrolling at other
times (this would also require a change
in the compliance averaging period—see
section Vl.M.l). Other commenters
recommended that the 240 hr/yr be
allowed for each PAI process unit that
is created using the non-dedicated
equipment because maintenance may be
required prior to each campaign.
Alternatively, one commenter suggested
that, based on standard maintenance
work practices, the startup, shutdown,
and malfunction requirements in
subpart A of part 63 should be allowed
in lieu of the proposed 240 hr/yr
allowance. The commenter stated that
the standard work practice for many
companies is to isolate all equipment
upstream of control devices where
planned maintenance will occur to
eliminate all safety hazards to personnel
and minimize any impact to the
environment. One commenter
supported the provision, but suggested
it be expanded to cover controls for
waste management units, controls used
on equipment leaks, and recovery
devices (if applicable).
The proposed 240 hr/yr for planned
routine maintenance was mistakenly
applied to all control devices in the
proposed rule; it should only have been
applied to storage vessels. The startup,
shutdown, and malfunction provisions
prohibit the shutdown of control
devices during operation; however, EPA
recognizes that for storage vessels, it is
impossible to "not operate" (i.e., not
have breathing losses) during a period of
time in which an add-on control device
would be undergoing planned
maintenance. Therefore, EPA has in the
final rule allowed an amount of time in
which the control devices for storage
tanks only can be nonoperational due to
planned routine maintenance. All other
situations (i.e., those that require
unplanned, emergency maintenance)
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33571
should be addressed through the
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
provisions. This change makes the final
rule consistent with other MACT
standards. The rationale for the 240 hr/
yr allowance is that EPA determined
that routine maintenance for certain
control devices may require up to 10
days to complete, and because this
timeframe is consistent with State
permitting activities (see 59 FR 19441
for a more detailed discussion of this
time allowance).
E. Equipment Leak Provisions
The proposed rule would have
required compliance with the
provisions of subpartH; this
requirement was based on a regulatory
alternative more stringent than the
MACT floor. However, commenters
contended that the data used to justify
the program (e.g., the leak rates) were
not representative of the PAI industry,
and they supplied data which contain a
sampling of LDAR program results from
numerous types of facilities, including
SOCMI and polymer and resins
manufacturing facilities. These data
indicate that initial equipment leak
frequencies and, thus, the potential for
emissions from leaking components,
may be significantly lower than those
assumed in the original development of
subpart H. The commenters also
contend that the monitoring costs were
underestimated. One commenter cited
the following specific examples based
on a quote from a monitoring contractor:
(1) initial and annual monitoring costs
should be at least $4.50/component and
$2.95/component, respectively, instead
of $2.50/component and $2.007
component; and (2) labor costs should
be at least $30.00/hr, not $22.50/hr.
In recent regulatory development
efforts involving similar industries, EPA
has generally found equipment leaks to
be a significant source of emissions. In
general, EPA's approach has been to
require industries to identify leaks and
fix them as soon as possible. The EPA
is sensitive to the recordkeeping burden
associated with an LDAR program for
this Industry and has strived to
minimize the number of activities that
have to be conducted and documented
while still requiring sources to identify
and eliminate equipment leaks. Relative
to earlier rules, the Agency developed
the HON to focus most of the
recordkeeping and reporting burden on
those processes and types of equipment
that have the most significant leaks, in
terms of HAP emissions. Since the
development of the HON, the Agency
has proposed the CAR that is designed
to minimize the reporting and
recordkeeping burden even further (63
FR 57748, October 28,1998). The EPA
believes that, in addition to
consolidating many LDAR programs, the
CAR addresses many concerns regarding
the burden placed on industry to
implement LDAR programs with little
environmental benefit. The proposed
CAR is specifically focused on
identifying and fixing leaking
components, and leaves out many of the
recordkeeping requirements that are
focused on nonleakers. Therefore, EPA
decided to determine the impacts of a
standard consistent with the LDAR
program in the proposed CAR.
The EPA does not consider the
emission estimates in the original
analysis to be.invalid. However, for the
revised analysis, EPA used the leak rate
data provided by the commenters and
other recently obtained data to
determine a lower bound on the
baseline emissions (and a corresponding
upper bound on cost effectiveness for a
given set of assumptions regarding
subsequent leak frequencies and the
number of monitoring instruments that
are needed). Most of the data provided
by the commenters were from facilities
in the SOCMI or polymers and resins
industry. The EPA also combined
recently obtained initial leak rate data
for components in pharmaceuticals
processes with the data provided by the
commenters. These data were combined
because EPA believes pharmaceuticals
processes are at least as representative
of PAI processes as are SOCMI or
polymers and resins processes due to
• the prevalence of batch processing,
similar process equipment, and similar
HAP in the pharmaceuticals and PAI
industries.
For the revised analysis, emissions
and costs were estimated for the same
two model PAI processes that were
developed for the original analysis.
Uncontrolled emissions for the model
processes were estimated based on
averages of the initial leak rates that
were obtained from the commenters and
for pharmaceuticals processes.
Controlled emissions were estimated
based on assumed average leak rates
over a monitoring cycle after
implementation of the provisions in the
proposed CAR. For valves and
connectors, the average leak rates were
assumed to be equal to one-half of the
performance level (i.e., one-half of 0.25
percent); for pumps, average leak rates
were assumed to be equal to one quarter
of the initial leak rates (i.e., one-half of
the occurrence rate, where the
occurrence rate is assumed to be equal
to one-half of the initial leak rate).
Since proposal, EPA has reviewed the
cost analysis and updated costs for the
monitoring instrument. The original
analysis was based on costs for a
monitor that is no longer available.
Capital costs for a currently available
monitor that is widely used are higher
than the capital costs in the original
analysis, but maintenance costs are
lower. As a result, the new monitor has
a lower total annual cost. The EPA also
reviewed the monitoring costs, repair
costs, and other factors used in the
costing methodology and determined
that no changes were warranted. The
EPA believes the contractor costs cited
by a commenter are higher than the
values used in the EPA analysis because
they include overhead and capital
recovery costs, whereas these are all
separate cost items in the EPA analysis.
Two approaches were evaluated in
the revised cost analysis. The first
approach pro-rated the cost of the
monitoring instrument based on the
ratio of the number of components in
the model processes to the number of
components that a fully utilized
instrument could be used to monitor
(i.e., about 9,000 components). This
approach assumes facilities will use a
given instrument to monitor multiple
PAI processes or PAI processes as well
as other processes that also are, or will
be, subject to similar LDAR
requirements. The cost-effectiveness of
the revised analysis was determined to
be $l,400/Mg of HAP removed. A
second, more conservative approach is
to assume monitoring instruments are
dedicated to the PAI process (es) at each
facility. Thus, one instrument was
assumed for facilities with less than
9,000 components, and two or more
were assumed for surveyed facilities
that have more than 9,000 components.
This approach raises the cost-
effectiveness to $l,800/Mg. Additional
information about the revised cost
analysis is provided in the docket
(Docket A-95-20, Docket Item No. IV-
B-3).
Because both of these cost
effectiveness values are considered to be
reasonable, EPA revised today's final
rule to make it consistent with the CAR.
This change makes the final rule
consistent with the Agency's recent
efforts toward consolidation of
equipment leak requirements for air
regulations. It also increases the focus
on processes with leaking components
by reducing the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements for processes with
nonleaking components.
Most of the changes since proposal
involve the requirements for valves and
connectors. These changes include:
extending the monitoring period from
once every four quarters to once every
2 years for process units with less than
-------
33572 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
0.25 percent leaking valves, adding
provisions for valve subgrouping,
extending the monitoring period for
connectors with low leak rates, deleting
both the quality improvement program
implementation requirement and the
credit for valves removed, and revising
the calculations for determining the
percentage of leaking valves. The
Agency believes that the equipment leak
requirements included in today's final
rule greatly reduce the administrative
burden associated with LDAR
recordkeeping and reporting, and at the
same time, result in a significant
reduction in emissions. Based on the
leak rates reported by the commenters,
EPA believes the affected sources will
be able to take advantage of the
provisions extending the monitoring
periods.
F. Wastewater Provisions
1. Maintenance Wastewater
Several commenters stated that
maintenance wastewater streams should
either be excluded from the regulation
or subject to the same requirements as
in §63.105(b)(2) of the HON. All of the
commenters cited the variability and
unpredictable nature of maintenance
wastewater streams (which makes it
difficult to determine whether a stream
is Group 1 or Group 2) and the low
potential for substantial emissions
(because such streams are typically due
to rinsing or flushing equipment) as
reasons to regulate maintenance
wastewater differently. One commenter
added that maintenance wastewater
streams cannot be controlled like
process wastewater streams. For
example, the commenter explained that
trying to pump the small amount of
water generated when bleed lines or
pumps are drained would cause
equipment problems if there was not
enough flow to keep material running
through the pump itself. This
commenter also stated that the cost to
comply with conveyance requirements
would be enormous, especially if an
enclosed system has to be connected to
every piece of equipment because a
maintenance wastewater stream might
be generated there.
The EPA considered the comments
and is persuaded by the commenters'
arguments that the variability of
maintenance activities makes
characterization of these wastewater
streams difficult, and that there is fairly
low potential for substantial emissions
from most of these wastewater streams.
However, EPA has no data on typical
quantities of maintenance wastewater
generated, or the characteristics of these
wastewater streams. Therefore, EPA's
approach in resolving this issue was to
specify characteristics of maintenance
wastewater streams that have significant
emission potential. The EPA also sought
to minimize the burden of
characterization of all maintenance
wastewater streams. Based on this
approach, EPA evaluated three possible
options for regulating maintenance
wastewater. The first option was to
adopt the same requirements as in
§ 63.105 of the HON, which Is the
option suggested by the commenters.
The EPA believes that maintenance
wastewater streams may warrant a
different treatment In this industry than
what was done under the HON because
the PAI industry is expected to generate
process wastewater streams in discrete
batches, due to the batch nature of the
industry. These process wastewater
streams are expected to have properties
similar to those for maintenance
wastewater streams in terms of the
quantities generated, the frequency of
generation, and the options for
management, suppression, and
treatment. Therefore, for streams with
significant emissions potential, whether
generated because of maintenance
activities or by the process operations,
EPA believes that proper management
and treatment is warranted.
The second option evaluated was to
require the same management and
treatment for both maintenance and
process wastewater, as in the proposed
rule. Under this option, the applicability
thresholds are the same as in the HON
for both types of streams. However,
because information on maintenance
wastewater streams is unavailable, it is
not clear how many such streams would
be subject to management and treatment
requirements. In addition, it is possible
that industry would be required to
characterize numerous maintenance
wastewater streams with no
environmental benefit Another concern
with this option is the extent of
dedicated maintenance wastewater
conveyance systems that will need to
meet emission suppression
requirements on the chance that a
Group 1 maintenance wastewater stream
might be discharged in the processing
area served by that part of die
conveyance system. Because one of the
applicability thresholds for Group 1
streams is 10,000 ppmw at any flow-
rate, it is possible that there is a high
potential for many maintenance
wastewater streams to meet Group 1
applicability criteria. However, even
though streams may be concentrated
(e.g., greater than 10,000 ppmw HAP),
the emission potential also depends on
the quantity of water generated. Because
the flow rate applicability criterion for
10,000 ppmw streams is unlimited, this
option does not consider emission
potential.
The third option considered and
incorporated into the final rule is a
modification of option 2 that does not
require characterization, suppression,
and treatment of amall maintenance
wastewater streams with low emission
potential. The HON includes two
thresholds for triggering Group 1
applicability: the first, which has
already been discussed, captures any
streams with greater than 10,000 ppmw
HAP load and does not consider
emissions potential; the second
applicability threshold, however,
considers emission potential by adding
a quantity (greater than 10 L/min) in
addition to the HAP concentration
(1,000 ppmw HAP). When converted to
a HAP load, the second applicability
threshold is equivalent to approximately
5.3 Mg of HAP. This load was used as
the applicability threshold in the
definition of maintenance wastewater in
the final rule. The wastewater definition
in the final rule also applies to
individual discharge events resulting
from maintenance activities, not the
sum of all events occurring from a single
point of determination (POD) over the
course of a year. By defining wastewater
in this manner, only the largest, most
significant maintenance wastewater
streams would be subject to suppression
and treatment These large streams
should be easier to identify and may
occur only at certain POD's. The
definition of Group 1 wastewater also
includes maintenance wastewater
streams with this same load; thus, there
are no Group 2 maintenance wastewater
streams, and there is no burden to
characterize and track any maintenance
wastewater streams other than Group 1
streams.
It is conceivable that there are no
maintenance wastewater streams in the
Industry with characteristics
approaching this definition. However,
because EPA has no data on the
quantities or characteristics of these
maintenance wastewater streams, EPA
believes the best approach is to define
a threshold of concern rather than to
exempt from suppression and treatment
all maintenance wastewater streams.
2. Treatment Options
Several commenters requested that
the enhanced biological treatment
option in the proposed Pharmaceuticals
MACT standard be included in this rule
(i.e., for wastewater that contains
soluble HAP and less than 50 ppmw of
partially soluble HAP) for discharges to
a privately owned treatment works
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33573
(POTW). According to one commenter,
the HON provisions essentially preclude
discharge to POTW's because owners or
operators of POTW's could not
reasonably be expected to understand,
implement, and certify compliance with
this regulation. Furthermore, the
commenter stated that the detailed
analysis performed for the proposed
Pharmaceuticals rule indicated that air
emissions for certain wastewater
streams would be negligible; thus, there
is no need to "ban" discharge to
POTW's.
Except for minor differences in
applicability cutoffs, one of the
treatment options in the HON (and thus
in the proposed rule) is similar to the
enhanced biotreatment option under the
proposed Pharmaceuticals rule. Both the
HON and the proposed pharmaceuticals
rule regulate two groups of HAP
compounds in wastewater. For the
HON, the groups are called "list 1" and
"list 2" compounds. For the proposed
Pharmaceuticals rule, they are called
"partially soluble HAP" and "soluble
HAP." All 52 of the compounds on list
2 are also classified as partially soluble
HAP. List 1 contains all 14 soluble HAP
as well as the 10 remaining partially
soluble HAP. (Note that for the final
Pharmaceuticals rule, epichlorhydrin
has been moved from the solubles list to
the partially solubles list.) Under the
HON, an owner or operator is exempt
from the performance test requirement if
wastewater is treated in an enhanced
biological treatment process, and
compounds on list 1 comprise at least
99 percent by weight of the HAP
compounds (list 1 plus list 2) in the
wastewater. Under the proposed
Pharmaceuticals rule, an owner or
operator would be exempt from the
performance test requirement if
wastewater containing soluble HAP and
less than 50 ppmw of partially soluble
HAP is treated in an enhanced
biological treatment unit, and the owner
or operator demonstrates that less than
5 percent of the soluble HAP is emitted
from the municipal sewer system. The
definition of an enhanced biotreatment
unit also is the same under both rules,
and waste treatment units that qualify as
enhanced biotreatment units are subject
to the same compliance requirements
under both rules. Therefore, EPA
disagrees with the commenter's
assertion that the treatment provisions
in the proposed pharmaceuticals rule
reduce the burden on POTW's, and EPA
has not revised the treatment provisions
for today's final rule.
One commenter cited the results of a
study conducted by the Pharmaceutical
Research and Manufacturers of America
(PhRMA) (and discussed in detail in
PhRMA's comments on the proposed
pharmaceuticals rule) showing that
streams discharged to POTW's have the
potential for significant emissions only
from "totally open" collection and
municipal sewer systems. Therefore, if
the collection and municipal sewer
system is totally open, the commenter
recommended adding a provision that
would allow an owner or operator to use
the enhanced biotreatment option only
if the owner or operator demonstrates,
as specified in the proposed
pharmaceuticals rule, that less than 5
percent of the soluble HAP is emitted
from the system.
Under the proposed rule, an off-site
facility that treats wastewater would be
required to comply with the same
requirements as an affected source,
including the emission suppression
requirements from the collection
system. The EPA has reexamined
municipal sewer systems and
determined that the primary potential
for emissions from the collection system
is from the head works at the POTW.
Thus, the final rule specifies that either
the waste management units up to the
activated sludge unit must be covered,
or the owner or operator must
demonstrate that less than 5 percent of
the total list 1 HAP is emitted from
these units.
3. Standards for New Sources
Several commenters consider the
proposed wastewater standards for new
sources with HAP loading greater than
2,100 Mg/yr to be too restrictive. One
commenter believes only Group 1
wastewater, not all wastewater, should
be subject to the standards. The
commenter claims that requiring control
of all wastewater will result in
negligible additional environmental
benefits, and would likely cause greater
secondary air and resource impacts (e.g.,
from fuel usage and emissions of
combustion products).
All of the commenters requested that
additional treatment options be allowed.
One commenter requested that EPA add
a treatment option that allows an owner
or operator to reduce the mass flow rate
by the Fr values; the commenter stated
that a 99 percent reduction might be
achievable for an individual facility
with a certain combination of HAP, but
it would not be achievable by all
facilities. Other commenters
recommended adding at least an
enhanced biotreatment option. One
commenter believes all of the treatment
options for existing sources should be
allowed for new sources. Commenters
requested the additional options
because they believe that limiting
treatment options significantly impacts
compliance flexibility with little, or no,
environmental benefit. For example, one
commenter realizes that a steam stripper
would not meet the standard for
compounds that have Fr values less
than 0.99, but believes that because the
remaining HAP in the treated streams
are less volatile, they would have
negligible air impacts. Other
commenters stated that EPA had agreed
during the development of revised
wastewater provisions for the HON that
the various treatment options under the
HON are equivalent from an air
emissions standpoint (e.g., 95 percent
reduction in a biological treatment unit
is equivalent to 99 percent reduction in
a non-biological treatment unit).
According to the CAA, the MACT
floor for new sources is to be based on
the emission control that is achieved by
the best controlled similar source. In the
PAI production industry, the best
controlled source is achieving 99
percent control. This source also is
treating all of its wastewater from PAI
processes, the HAP load in this
wastewater is 2,100 Mg/yr, and this
wastewater contains a mixture of
compounds with a range of Henry's law
constants. Thus, the proposed MACT
floor for new sources with a HAP load
exceeding 2,100 Mg/yr consisted of the
requirements to treat ail wastewater and
to achieve a 99 percent reduction in the
HAP content in the wastewater; for new
sources with lower HAP loadings, the
MACT floor is no control, as for existing
sources. The EPA continues to stress
that the proposed MACT floor is
consistent with the CAA, and it is
retained in the final rule.
If a facility has a HAP load that
exceeds the cutoff, the enhanced
biotreatment option (i.e., the option that
exempts an owner or operator from
initial compliance demonstrations) is
not allowed because EPA does not have
information showing that enhanced
biotreatment units achieve 99 percent
removal for mixtures of compounds
with low Fr values. Otherwise, the final
rule allows any treatment option
(including enhanced biotreatment) for
such affected sources, provided the
owner or operator demonstrates that it
achieves 99 percent removal of all HAP
in the wastewater. The EPA also points
out that the requirement to achieve 99
percent removals applies only to
facilities that have extremely high HAP
loads and thus, high potential for
emissions. Few new sources are likely
to exceed the applicability cutoffs for
the MACT floor because 2,100 Mg/yr
was more than three times higher than
the load at any other surveyed facility.
Finally, the commenter's statement
about the equivalence of treatment
-------
33574 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
options needs clarification. Under the
HON, the 95 percent option for
biological treatment units requires that
the reduction be achieved from all
wastewater sent to the treatment unit,
not just the Group 1 wastewater. The 95
percent reduction also applies to all
Table 9 compounds in the wastewater,
not just compounds with high Fr values.
Thus, on average, this option is
( considered equivalent to other treatment
options in the HON. This option is not
considered equivalent to the 99 percent
option for new sources described above
because the 99 percent reduction is
required for all wastewater and all
compounds.
G. Bag Dump and Product Dryer
Provisions
Numerous commenters opposed the
development of standards for bag
dumps, and many of these commenters
also opposed the development of
standards for product dryers. The
commenters believe the MACT floor
was not established properly per EPA
protocol and that the level of the
standard (0.01 gr/dscf) is not readily
achievable and is not typical of fabric
filter control. Pointing to the decision in
Ponland Cement Association v.
Ruckleshaus, 486 F. 2d 375, 396 (D.C.
Cir. 1973), the commenters stated that
the test method used to demonstrate
compliance must be closely linked to
the test method used as the basis for the
standard. The commenters expressed
concern that the standard was based on
data for only one source. Some of the
commenters stated that the standard
should not cover bag dumps because no
data on bag dumps were used to
develop the MACT floor, and bag
dumps are sources of fugitive emissions
that are difficult to capture and route to
a control device. One commenter also
stated that regulating bag dumps would
not result in any meaningful emission
reductions because the use of bag
dumps is avoided for ergonomic and
workplace exposure reasons, and any
particulate matter emissions are small
and already controlled to reduce
workplace exposure. Some of the
commenters stated that if standards are
promulgated for these emission points,
the standard should include an
applicability cutoff as well as the
concentration limit, and the terms
"particulate HAP" and "bag dump"
should be defined in the final rule.
Standards for product dryers and bag
dumps were included in the proposed
rule because these emission points can
be a source of HAP emissions,
specifically particulate matter HAP
emissions. The MACT floor for these
emission points was developed for
equipment that emits particulate matter
HAP; this equipment was limited to
product dryers and bag dumps because
these are the only known sources of
particulate matter HAP emissions at PAI
facilities. The MACT floor also was
based on the level of control for these
emission points at the MACT floor
facilities (i.e., the nine facilities with the
best overall control of PAI process
units). One of the MACT floor facilities
dried a PAI that is also a HAP. •
Emissions from this product dryer were
controlled with a fabric filter, and
emissions tests showed the outlet PM
concentration was less than 0.01 gr/dscf.
The floor for particulate matter HAP
emission sources was based on this
value because both product dryers and
bag dumps are controlled with fabric
filters, and 0.01 gr/dscf is a typical level
for fabric filters.
The EPA is not persuaded by the
commenter's argument that bag dumps
should not be regulated because they are
(or may be) sources of fugitive emissions
and are thus not comparable to product
dryers. The EPA knows of two bag
dumps where a HAP raw material is
added to a PAI process, and both are
controlled with fabric filters. At a
minimum, a hood or partial enclosure
can be placed above or around a bag
dump to capture the emissions and
route them to the control device.
Furthermore, one of the commenters
stated that particulate emissions would
be controlled to reduce workplace
exposure. Uncontrolled emissions (i.e.,
the pre-control emissions) from one of
the two known bag dumps exceed 1.6
Mg/yr. The EPA considers this to be a
significant source, and the required
emission reduction to be meaningful.
The fact that some facilities may have
found more desirable alternatives to the
use of bag dumps does not justify
exempting facilities that still use them
from regulation.
No mass emission rate cutoff was
established because all known bag
dumps that are used to add a HAP raw
material to a PAI process unit, and all
product dryers that dry a product that
is a HAP, are controlled with fabric
filters, and EPA believes 0.01 gr/dscf is
a reasonable level for all fabric filters in
such applications. An emissions test for
the fabric filter used to control the
product dryer at the MACT floor facility
provides evidence that this
concentration is achievable. The outlet
concentration was less than 0.01 gr/dscf
for each of the 12 runs in the test The
EPA expects that the existing fabric
filters were designed to meet this outlet
concentration, but the standards and
associated monitoring requirements are
included in the rule to provide
assurance that they will continue to
perform at this level. As a result, EPA
did not change the level of the standard,
or add an applicability cutoff, for the
final rule.
In summary, EPA maintains that
standards are appropriate for bag dumps
and product dryers that emit HAP, that
the MACT floor is valid, and that the
standard should be based on the MACT
floor. However, EPA has decided to
make one change for the final rule. At
proposal, the standard was for
"particulate matter HAP." For the final
rule, the standard is for "particulate
matter" because the material captured
in the fabric Alters is essentially all
HAP, and test methods are for
"particulate matter," not "particulate
matter HAP." (The EPA assumes this is
why the commenters mentioned linking
the test method used as the basis of the
standard with the method used to
demonstrate compliance.) The final rule
also specifies that the particulate matter
standards are for product dryers that dry
a PAI or integral intermediate that is a
HAP, and for bag dumps that introduce
a HAP to a PAI process unit The final
rule also defines "bag dump" as
equipment into which bags or other
containers containing a powdered,
granular, or other solid feedstock
material are emptied.
H. Heat Exchanger Provisions
One commenter stated that the
requirements for heat exchange systems
should be deleted because EPA has not
Justified the high costs of sampling that
would be required by the proposed rule.
The EPA disagrees with the
commenter's assertion that the heat
exchanger provisions impose a high cost
for sampling. The rule allows
considerable flexibility in the type of
sampling or other monitoring that an
owner or operator may perform, and the
amount of required sampling or
monitoring is minimal. The owner or
operator may elect to sample for one or
more HAP or other substances whose
presence in the cooling water indicates
a leak. Alternatively, the owner or
operator may elect to monitor for any'
surrogate indicator that reliably
identifies the presence of a leak. If the
owner or operator elects to comply by
monitoring for a surrogate indicator, the
owner or operator must develop a plan
that specifies what parameter or
condition will be monitored, the level
that constitutes a leak, and an
explanation of how the selected
parameter or condition will reliably
identify a leak. In the first year,
sampling or monitoring is required eight
times; in subsequent years, sampling or
monitoring is required only four times
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33575
per year. If the heat exchangers are all
part of a single system, only one set of
inlet and outlet samples is required.
These requirements also are not
considered burdensome because many
facilities in the chemical processing
industry, and presumably the PAI
production industry as well, conduct
such sampling or monitoring as a
common maintenance practice.
Furthermore, sampling for the detection
of heat exchanger system leaks is a
general requirement of some State
permits (e.g., Texas Natural Resources
Conservation Commission).
One commenter supports the decision
to use the HON requirements for heat
exchangers, but believes the rule should
simply cross-reference the HON, not
modify and spread out the requirements
among the standards, compliance,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting sections of this rule.
The EPA agrees with the comment
that cross-referencing the heat
exchanger provisions in subpart F of the
HON would simplify the rule.
Therefore, the final rule cross-references
all of the provisions in subpart F rather
than incorporating some of the
provisions in the rule and cross-
referencing others. However, the heat
exchanger system provisions are
contained in more than one section in
the PAI rule because the two rules have
different structures. In the HON, all of
the requirements for a specific type of
emission point were presented In a
single section or in consecutive
sections. In the PAI rule, the standards
for all types of emission points are
presented in one section, the initial
compliance provisions for all types of
emission points are presented in the
next section, and so on. Therefore, each
section in today's final rule cross-
references the appropriate heat
exchanger system provisions from
subpart F.
I. Alternative Standard
Since proposal, EPA has received
comments on another proposed
regulation requesting the inclusion of an
alternative standard for facilities that
treat HAP emissions, especially from
aggregated streams, with add-on control
devices. The commenters contended
that the use of such control devices
should be encouraged because (1)
greater emission reduction would occur
by controlling processes that are not
subject to a rule as well as those that are,
(2) it may facilitate the streamlining of
compliance requirements and thus
reduce the resource burdens on both
industry and the enforcement agencies,
(3) it may be easier to assure and assess
compliance, and (4) it may be more
energy efficient and result in lower
secondary emissions if fewer control
devices are used.
The EPA agrees with the commenters
and therefore decided to include an
alternative in today's final rule. The
alternative standard can be applied to
individual process vents and storage
vessels or to process vents and/or
storage vessels that are manifolded
together (with or without emissions
from other sources) for control In an
end-of-line control device (or series of
control devices). The control device (or
last control device In a series) must
achieve an outlet, undiluted TOC
concentration of 20 ppmv or less, as
calibrated on methane or the
predominant HAP. The control device
must also achieve an outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv or less as HC1
and chlorine. Any other process vents
within a process are regulated under the
rule as otherwise specified without
taking credit for the vents that are
controlled under the alternative
standard.
To simplify applicability of the
alternative, all process vent and storage
vessel emissions that are manifolded to
a control device are considered as one
regulated entity. As a result, an
exceedance under the alternative
standard results in only a single
violation for a given control device,
whereas an exceedance under the
regular standard results in separate
violations for each process using the
control device.
/. Pollution Prevention Alternative
Comments relating to the proposed
pollution prevention alternative
included objections to the high
numerical reduc tion target of 85
percent, and to the lack of specific
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for demonstrating
compliance. Commenters also objected
to the proposed restriction on the use of
the alternative for processes that
generate HAP, and to the requirement
that most of the reductions be achieved
through pollution prevention
techniques and not add-on controls. The
following sections summarize major
comments on the proposed pollution
prevention alternative, EPA's response
to these concerns, and subsequent
changes made in today's final rule.
1. Objection to the High Removal Target
for the Pollution Prevention Alternative
Two commenters asserted that the 85
percent reduction in HAP consumption
factor should be changed to 75 percent
for both pollution prevention options to
be consistent with the Pharmaceutical
MACT proposal.
The 85 percent reduction was not
changed in the final rule to be
consistent with the value specified in
the Pharmaceutical MACT standard
because both values were developed
using industry-specific data. The basis
for the 85 percent reduction is the
overall nationwide reduction from
uncontrolled emissions that is estimated
as a result of the implementation of the
standards in this industry. Although the
required reduction "target" was
calculated using the same methodology
as that in the Pharmaceuticals MACT
standard, the difference in numerical
value is simply due to differences in the
impact of the two rules on each
respective industry. For the PAI
production industry, the standards
achieve slightly greater reductions
relative to the uncontrolled baseline,
which is carried forward to the
reduction target for the pollution
prevention alternative. See the pollution
.prevention memorandum in the
Supplementary Information Document
for details of this analysis.
2. Data Management for Compliance
Demonstrations
One commenter stated that the
mechanism to realize pollution
prevention reductions must be
maintained in a system that can be
managed and provide data that
regulated entities and EPA can use. The
commenter asserted that States may not
be prepared to support this regulation
with the training requirements of their
already overworked staffs.
The Agency agrees with the
commenter that the information
necessary to demonstrate compliance
with the pollution prevention
alternative should be identified,
collected, and managed in a way that
minimizes burdens on both the industry
and the regulatory agencies charged
with enforcement. Therefore, the final
rule requires sources seeking to comply
with the pollution prevention
alternative to submit, as part of the
Precompliance plan, a pollution
prevention demonstration summary that
describes how the pollution prevention
alternative will be applied at the
facilities, and what tracking
mechanisms will be used to
demonstrate compliance with the
alternatives. This summary should
include descriptions of how the facility
will measure and record HAP
consumption and production on a daily,
monthly, and annual basis. The
summary should also include
appropriate documentation of how
consumption will be tracked such as,
but not limited to, operator log sheets,
daily, monthly, and annual inventories
-------
33576 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
of materials and products, and shipment
and purchasing records. The pollution
prevention demonstration summary
report allows the owner or operator
some flexibility in deciding the most
reasonable and efficient way to
demonstrate compliance, while
incorporating the regulatory agency's
review and approval prerogative.
Regarding the agency burden, EPA
believes that compliance with the
pollution prevention alternative may
actually reduce much of the burden on
the enforcement agency, in that the
monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping burden will be reduced
to a material tracking effort, potentially
minimizing the amount of data needed
to demonstrate continuous compliance
(e.g., monitoring data) for an entire
process.
3. Pollution Prevention for Reactant and
Generated HAP
The EPA received several comments
on the proposed rule's restriction
against using the pollution prevention
option in situations where HAP are
generated in the process. One
commenter specifically stated that
pollution prevention should be allowed
for HAP generated in a process. Another
commenter indicated that the rule was
not clear on how to comply when the
HAP generated in the process is the
same as that introduced. A third
commenter noted that these exclusions
would prevent them from using
pollution prevention and suggested that
the rule include calculations based on
total resource effectiveness (TRE)
equations like in the HON as a way to
provide more cost-effective alternatives
for processes that are prohibitively
expensive to control (i.e., that would
exclude such processes from the
requirements of the conventional
standards).
The Agency reviewed the language
contained in the proposed standard and
has revised it to capture the Agency's
intent in restricting the use of the
alternative in situations where HAP are
generated, without prohibiting its use
altogether. The Agency's concern, in
adding the restriction to the proposed
standard, was that HAP generated in a
process would not be addressed through
the pollution prevention alternative
because it requires only a reduction in
the consumption of HAP that are
actually brought into the process.
Therefore, a situation could exist in
which a process could be exempted
from control because the production-
indexed consumption factors were
reduced by adequate amounts (85
percent), while a potentially significant
amount of HAP, which happened to be
generated in the process, could still be
emitted. The EPA agrees with the
commenter that sources that generate
HAP should be eligible for the pollution
prevention standard, provided the HAP
generated by the sources are included in
the analysis. Therefore, the final rule
allows owners and operators to use the
pollution prevention alternative for
processes that generate HAP that are not
part of the production-Indexed
consumption factor (e.g., the HAP
generated are different from the HAP
brought into the process), provided the
following conditions are met: (1)
emissions of generated HAP are
controlled to the levels required by the
applicable provisions for storage
vessels, process vents, wastewater, and
equipment leaks; and (2) the pollution
prevention requirements are applied to
the HAP that are added to the process.
For HAP that are generated in the
process, as well as brought into the
process (consumed), the definition of
consumption has been revised in the
final rule to consider quantities of HAP
that are generated by the process.
A related issue is the tracking of the
VOC consumption-indexed production
factor and the proposed rule's
requirement that this factor should not
be increased as a result of pollution
prevention. Although this issue was not
specifically commented on, EPA also
revised the language of the final rule
regarding the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor. In developing the
pollution prevention alternative, EPA's
intention was to recognize those
processes that have reduced or will
reduce the amount of HAP solvents
used in the manufacture of PAI's as
viable alternatives to add-on controls.
By preventing affected sources from
increasing the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor, EPA intended to
prevent solvent substitutions that
merely replaced HAP with VOC. After
reviewing the proposed pollution
prevention standard, EPA realized that
the proposed standard gave an unfair
advantage to affected sources that use
VOC-HAP solvents as opposed to non-
VOC HAP solvents. As proposed, the
rule did not allow affected sources using
non-VOC HAP solvents to switch to
low-VOC solvents and still qualify
-under the pollution prevention
alternative because such a switch would
increase the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor. However, affected
sources that use VOC-HAP solvents
could switch to low-VOC solvents as
long as the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor did not increase.
The EPA's intention in the final rule is
that pollution prevention be
accomplished through reductions in
solvent usage as opposed to solvent
substitution. After consideration, EPA
changed the final rule to require an
equivalent reduction In the production-
indexed VOC consumption factor, if the
reduction in the production-indexed
HAP consumption factor Js achieved by
reducing a HAP that is also a VOC. If the
reduction in the production-indexed"
HAP consumption factor is achieved by
reducing HAP that is not a VOC, the
consumption-indexed VOC factor may
not be increased. In making these
changes to the final rule, EPA
essentially eliminated the possibility of
receiving credit, through the pollution
prevention alternative, for substituting
VOC for HAP.
4. Restrictions on Reductions Achieved
Through End of Pipe Controls (Option 2
of the Pollution Prevention Alternative
Standard)
As proposed, option 2 limited
reductions in the HAP factor to exactly
50 percent of the baseline factor, even
if actual reductions exceeded dils kvel.
Several commenters recommended
revising option 2 to allow any
combination of pollution prevention
and end-of-pipe controls to meet the 85
percent reduction requirement. Some of
die commenters explained that not
allowing credit for higher reductions
makes the option unworkable under
certain conditions, and it provides
incentives for destruction of recovered
material instead of reuse. Some
commenters also stated that allowing
credit for reductions less than 50
percent would be beneficial, in that
such combinations of pollution
prevention and emission control would
bring overall removals to levels equal to
or greater than those required by the
standards. As an alternative to option 2,
one commenter suggested allowing
sources to comply with 90 percent of
any applicable standard if at least 50
percent of the reductions are the result
of pollution prevention. Finally, the
commenters believe option 2 places
"unnecessary" constraints on the type
of control devices that can be used to
obtain the required reductions.
In response to die comments, EPA
stresses that the pollution prevention
alternative is an alternative to the
standards in die rule. As such, the
Agency has flexibility in developing
requirements that may provide
alternative approaches for compliance,
but is charged with preserving the
reductions that would have been
achieved through compliance with the
standards themselves. Under option 2,
EPA required that a significant portion
(50 percent) of the reductions be
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33577
achieved using pollution prevention
techniques, not add-on controls.
Without such a restriction, owners and
operators could attempt to use add-on
controls entirely in meeting the
pollution prevention target reductions,
which might result In reductions that
are less than those required by the
standards. For example, the process
vent standard requires a 90 percent
reduction in the HAP emissions from
affected processes, not an 85 percent
reduction.
In an effort to ensure the emission
reductions from the pollution
prevention alternative are at least
equivalent to the emission reductions
achieved by the standards, the reduction
target for the pollution prevention
consumption factor was linked to the
predicted reductions from the
nationwide uncontrolled emissions
through implementation of the
standards. It was always the Agency's
intent that these reductions would be
achieved primarily through pollution
prevention techniques. In recognition of
the difficulties associated with
achieving such high consumption
reduction targets (85 percent), however,
the Agency developed option 2 to allow
some of the reductions to be achieved
using add-on controls. For these
reasons, the Agency disagrees, in
general, with the comments suggesting
lesser reductions in both the overall
target of 85 percent and the requirement
that at least 50 percent of the reductions
be attributed to the pollution prevention
alternative. However, the Agency agrees
with the comments that option 2 as
proposed is unworkable if the reduction
achieved by pollution prevention
exceeds 50 percent of the required
amount. For the final rule, option 2 was
revised to require that at least 50
percent of the reductions be achieved
using pollution prevention and that the
remainder of the 85 percent, however
much is needed, be achieved using
conventional controls.
The Agency stresses that the
restrictions on the types of add-on
controls allowed to be considered in
addition to the pollution prevention
reductions in meeting the overall target,
are in place to guard against double-
counting of emission reductions; for
example, control via a technique that
recycles HAP material back to the
process is an environmentally beneficial
technique and is encouraged. However,
the recycling effect will also reduce the
consumption of HAP; therefore, the
recycling is inherently considered. To
further reduce the consumption factor
by the control achieved by the
condenser would result in double
counting of emissions reductions.
K. Emissions Averaging
1. Complexity of the Methodology
One commenter supported the
concept of emissions averaging, but
noted that the provisions are so complex
and burdensome that many owners and
operators may be deterred from using
this option.
The emissions averaging provisions
provided in the proposed rule are
identical to those included in the HON.
Further, the requirements are
necessarily complex because of the
increased flexibility of the compliance
approach provided by the provisions.
As stated in the HON promulgation
preamble discussion, the EPA's goal in
crafting the emissions averaging
provisions was to make emissions
averaging available to sources faced
with controlling emission points that
are particularly difficult or costly to
control, while maintaining the ability to
demonstrate compliance with the
standard.
2. Nominal Efficiencies for Control
Devices
Two commenters suggested that EPA
set a nominal control efficiency for
combustion devices used for air
emission control for storage tanks and/
or wastewater at 98 percent One of the
commenters asserted that EPA's
wording in §63.1362 (k) (2) of the
proposed rule inappropriately restricts
sources equipped with controls listed in
that section from generating emissions
averaging credits.
The EPA believes that the
commenters would like to equate 98
percent control to the performance
specifications provided in the proposed
rule for combustion devices used for air
emission control for storage tanks and/
or wastewater sources. The EPA does
not agree that a nominal 98 percent
should be assigned to these devices.
Although EPA did establish these
performance specifications, EPA
maintains that testing is important to
ensure that a control device can achieve
the reported efficiency. For these
reasons, EPA has required performance
testing on combustion devices that
control greater than 10 tons/yr of HAP.
Therefore, EPA will not allow credits
based on a control efficiency that has
-not been demonstrated. Secondly, the
provisions of §63.1362 (k) (2) incorrectly
referred to the 98 percent and 95
percent control levels as "nominal"
control efficiencies. These efficiencies
must be demonstrated via performance
testing and therefore should not be
restricted from obtaining credits in
emissions averaging. The final rule has
been changed to reflect this correction.
3. Restrictions on Calculation of Credits
Commenters believe EPA should
delete the restrictions that prohibit a
source from calculating emission
averaging credits for emission
reductions achieved prior to November
15, 1990 or with equipment installed to
comply with other State/Federal rules.
The commenters believe these
restrictions (1) are arbitrary, (2) are not
dictated by the CAA, (3) unfairly limit
economic incentives and thus impose
unreasonable costs, (4) penalize
progressive companies, and (5) are
inconsistent with procedures to develop
the floor (i.e., emission points that
would be excluded from emissions
averaging are used in setting the
standard). In addition, one commenter
believes EPA's response to comments in
the April 22, 1994 Federal Register
notice on the HON are inadequate to
Justify the restriction.
The EPA's policy on not allowing
averaging of emission reductions for
controls in place prior to the passage of
the 1990 CAA Amendments was
explained in die April 22, 1994 Federal
Register notice for the promulgated
HON (59 FR 19426), and this rationale
is still applicable. In general, the
emissions averaging provisions are
designed to provide an owner or
operator with flexibility in designing a
compliance strategy that optimizes the
use of existing controls, rather than
replacing them. However, the final rule
does not allow credit for emissions
reductions achieved by control devices
installed before November 15, 1990
because EPA policy is that regulations
must achieve additional reductions
beyond what would have occurred in
die absence of the amended CAA.
Emission reductions achieved by
controls that were in place prior to
November 15, 1990 would have
occurred regardless of whedier or not
die CAA was amended. If the rule
allowed a source to take credit for these
preexisting emission reductions, the
source could increase its emissions
above the 1990 baseline levels.
Regarding the commenter's view that
the restrictions penalize progressive
companies, EPA notes that, at least for
process vents that meet die applicability
criteria for 98 percent control, owners
and operators who can demonstrate that
controls achieving the MACT floor level
of control (90 percent) were in place
prior to the proposal date of these
standards are not required to achieve
die higher efficiency requirement of 98
percent In this manner, companies who
have taken proactive measures to
control emissions are actually rewarded.
Additionally, the pollution prevention
-------
33578 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
alternative standard also rewards
facilities which have demonstrated
significant reductions in their
production-indexed consumption
factors. Finally, these provisions have
been included in numerous regulations
beginning with the HON, and they have
been reviewed and approved by Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
4. Emissions Averaging for New Sources
Commenters objected to restrictions
on emissions averaging for "new
sources." The commenters disagreed
with EPA's rationale In the preamble
that this approach holds new sources to
a stricter standard and that flexibility is
unnecessary for new sources. The
commenters argued that using emissions
averaging is the more stringent approach
because of the 10 percent discount
factor that is applied to credits.
Furthermore, the commenters stated
that new sources also need flexibility to
comply with the standard in the most
economical and efficient manner; for
example, if a new source is added to an
existing facility there may be
opportunities to route emissions from
the new source to existing controls, or
to over control certain existing or new
emission points to provide equal or
greater environmental benefit at lower
cost. Also, commenters believe this
restriction unfairly limits economic
incentives and imposes unreasonable
costs.
The EPA's policy on not allowing
averaging of emission reductions for
new sources was explained In the April
22, 1994 Federal Register notice for the
promulgated HON (59 FR 19427). and
this rationale is still applicable. As
noted above, EPA designed emissions
averaging provisions to provide existing
sources with flexibility in achieving
compliance. Instead of requiring the
replacement of all existing controls that
do not meet the level of the standard,
the emissions averaging provisions
allow an existing source to optimize the
use of existing controls in the most
economical and technically feasible
fashion. The EPA maintains that this
concern does not apply to new sources
because the owner or operator of a new
source would be able to Integrate state-
of-the-art controls Into the design of the
new source. However, nothing In the
rule prevents an owner or operator from
routing emissions from a new PAI
process unit to an existing control that
meets the required control levels.
Finally, these provisions have been
included in numerous regulations,
beginning with the HON. and they have
been reviewed and approved
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33579
features that limit the maximum hourly
emissions that can be routed to the
control device. For example, a fan may
limit the flowrate, and the concentration
may be limited to a certain percentage
of the lower explosive limit before a
bypass valve opens.
The Agency does not believe that the
testing provisions in the final rule
require operation in a manner that could
damage equipment, because the testing
is only required for conditions that have
some reasonable likelihood of occurring.
Thus, the design of the system should
have considered the possibility of
operating under these conditions.
Regarding the comment that the
testing provisions should not require
operation in a manner that produces
excess or unmarketable products, or in
a manner that will not occur within the
time frame allotted prior to the
compliance date, the Agency concedes
that some inconvenience to the source
may occur, but believes that in most
situations, facilities will be able to work
within the confines of the definitions to
arrive at a set of testing conditions that
minimize production disruptions. The
Agency also notes that the requirement
for submittal of the site-specific test
plan is also an opportunity for the
facility to present site-specific
information that may influence the
selection of testing conditions. The EPA
encourages owners and operators to
work with the permitting agencies to
arrive at solutions that meet the intent
of this regulation.
2. Emission Estimation Procedures
One commenter stated that facilities
should be allowed to calculate
emissions based on all available
information, including, but not limited
to, the equations in the proposed rule,
and that they should not have to
demonstrate that the equations in the
rule are inappropriate. According to the
commenter, it is not logical to require
facilities that produce a variety of
products, only a small portion of which
are PAl's, to modify their calculation
methodology; nor is it logical to require
recalculation on a large scale when the
existing emissions estimates are based
on fundamentally sound principles. The
commenter also noted that facilities
already may have invested significant
resources to develop methodologies for
calculating emissions. Another
commenter requested that the rule
specify when the emission estimation
procedures are not considered
appropriate.
For the final rule, EPA did not change
the requirement to use equations to
estimate emissions when the emission
episodes fit the descriptions provided in
the rule. The EPA believes that the
equations in the rule are the most
appropriate methods to estimate
emissions from seven specific types of
emission episodes. The requirement to
use the equations, when appropriate,
also is important in standardizing
compliance procedures for the industry
and in providing replicable procedures
which the regulated community and the
Administrator can follow to assure
compliance. Ho.wever, die rule also
allows owners or operators to request
approval to use alternatives for
estimating emissions. The EPA believes
it is important that the owner or
operator be able to make a case for any
alternative approach. The final rule
clarifies the language describing when
an engineering assessment must be
conducted and when it may be
conducted.
3. Compliance with the Outlet TOC
Limit
Several commenters believe EPA
should justify why a performance test to
demonstrate compliance with the outlet
TOC concentration under
§ 63.1364(c)(l)(viii) of the proposed rule
must be conducted only under absolute
peak-case conditions. Other commenters
also stated that this section of the
proposed regulation unnecessarily
restricts the choice of test methods to
demonstrate compliance with the outlet
TOC concentration. Commenters
requested that this section be modified
to allow combinations of test methods to
measure TOC, and to allow
measurement of total organic HAP using
Method 18.
The EPA reviewed the language in the
proposed rule and decided to include
two options for demonstrating
compliance with the outlet TOC
concentration. The source must choose
one of the following compliance
methods: (1) continuously monitor
outlet concentration using a flame
ionization detector (FID) or other
devices, or (2) perform an initial
performance test at absolute or
hypothetical peak-case conditions and
continuously monitor operating
parameter levels. Initial testing at
absolute or hypothetical peak-case
conditions is not necessary for option 1
because continuous compliance is
determined through the use of an FID or
other device that continuously monitors
outlet concentration (however, if the
monitor is to be calibrated on the
predominant HAP, it may be necessary
to perform an initial test to identify die
HAP). Conversely, EPA believes testing
under absolute or hypothetical peak-
case conditions is necessary for the
second option to ensure that operating
parameter levels are established that
will ensure compliance under all
operating conditions. The monitoring
requirements for option 2 are die same
as die monitoring requirements for
complying widi die percentage
reduction format of die standard.
Therefore, EPA believes die initial
testing dial is used to establish die
monitoring parameters should also be
die same in both cases.
Finally, EPA has modified die final
rule so as not to restrict die choice of
methods that the owner or operator may
use to determine TOC (i.e.. Method 18
is allowed for special!on). However,
EPA emphasizes tiiat die concentration
limit is based only on TOC, not total
organic HAP.
Commenters also objected to die
requirement to correct outlet TOC
emissions to 3 percent oxygen for the 20
ppmv outlet standard. Commenters
oppose this provision because many
thermal and catalytic incinerators
normally operate with higher oxygen
levels in the exhaust stream.
Commenters suggested that a more
reasonable requirement would be to
correct die outlet TOC concentration to
die design outlet oxygen concentration
for each particular device. One
commenter noted tiiat the requirement
should only apply when the control
device is an incinerator.
The General Provisions prohibit the
use of dilution as a means of achieving
compliance with a standard (see 40 CFR
63.4(b), Circumvention). However, EPA
also recognizes dial there are valid
reasons for introducing air or inert gases
into manifolds for safety or design
considerations. For example,
supplemental combustion air may be
required for proper operation of an
incinerator. The intent of the proposed
requirement for correction to 3 percent
oxygen was to allow an owner or
operator to add supplemental
combustion air, but only take credit for
die amount that is needed for proper
operation. As one commenter noted,
this correction was not intended to
apply to other types of control devices.
The correction to 3 percent oxygen
concentrations was drawn from die
HON and die earlier SOCMINSPS.
Under these rules, this correction is
required for purposes of demonstrating
compliance with a 20 ppmv oudet
concentration standard. The value of 3
percent originates from good
engineering practices. For oxygen
deficient streams, if the proper amount
of supplemental combustion air is
added, die outlet stream would contain
approximately 3 percent oxygen.
Typically, SOCMI facilities have low
oxygen, high VOC/HAP concentration
-------
33580 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
streams that generally require
supplemental combustion air when they
are combusted. Therefore, a correction
to prevent dilution was needed in rules
for the SOCM1 industry.
A similar requirement to correct the
outlet concentration was included in the
Polymer Manufacturing NSPS.
Commenters on the proposed NSPS
asserted that an oxygen correction may
be appropriate for oxygen deficient
' streams to which supplemental
combustion air is added to ensure
combustion of the emissions, but it is
not appropriate for high oxygen, low
VOC concentration streams. The
commenters on the proposed NSPS
further stated that requiring an oxygen
correction for processes with inherently
high oxygen concentrations would
prevent facilities from being able to use
the 20 ppmv outlet concentration
compliance option. Because at some
point the combination of low VOC/H AP
concentration and technology
limitations of control devices makes it
impossible to achieve a high percentage
reduction (98 percent in the case of the
Polymers NSPS), the 20 ppmv outlet
concentration may be the only
compliance option for some streams. As
a result of considering these comments,
the final rule for the Pplymer NSPS was
changed to require a correction to 3
percent oxygen only if supplemental air
was used to combust emissions.
Other available information indicates
that for some Pharmaceuticals
processes, dilution is needed for safety
or design considerations other than for
use as supplemental combustion air.
Typically, this dilution occurs in
manifolds conveying emission streams
from unit operations that already have
high oxygen concentrations, and it
occurs for control devices other than
incinerators. Although EPA does not
have similar information for the PAI
production industry, the information
from the surveyed plants supports the
commenters contention that there are
process vent streams with high oxygen
concentrations. It is also possible that
some of these streams are diluted for
reasons other than to supply
supplemental combustion air.
It is not EPA's intent to prohibit the
introduction of dilution air or other
gases, only to ensure that outlet
concentrations are corrected for such
dilution. As a result, EPA made a
number of changes in the requirement to
correct outlet concentrations to prevent
dilution. First, a definition of
"supplemental gases" has been added to
the final rule; this term includes
supplemental combustion air-as well as
any other nonaffected streams with TOC
and total HC1/C12 concentrations less
than 20 ppmv that are combined with
affected streams. Second, the final rule
clarifies that the correction to 3 percent
oxygen applies only for incinerators,
and only if supplemental gases are
added. Third, the final rule explicitly
describes procedures to correct for
dilution in noncombustion devices.
4, Exemptions From Performance
Testing
Several commenters requested -that
EPA change the cutoff that defines the
minimum size of a control device for
which a performance test must be
conducted to demonstrate compliance.
The proposed rule required performance
testing of devices receiving at least 10
tons/yr of HAP emissions. Additionally,
other commenters stated that the
exemption to the performance test
requirement for sources that have
conducted a previous test using the
same procedures as those required by
the rule is basically useless because it is
unlikely that a previous performance
test would have been conducted using
the same procedures and under the
same peak-case conditions as those
required by the rule. The commenters
added that any test on the control
device to demonstrate compliance
under any EPA-supervised program
(e.g., NSPS, NESHAP, RCRA, NSR)
should be sufficient to demonstrate
compliance with this regulation.
The EPA continues to believe that the
testing cutoff for control devices is
proper. In developing the regulation,
EPA could have required testing of all
devices. The EPA proposed the testing
cutoff to decrease the burden of testing
on the industry. For devices handling
lesser loads, EPA believes that the
design evaluation will be adequate to
demonstrate compliance.
The EPA also continues to believe
that the conditions for exempting
certain sources from performance
testing are proper. As described
previously, EPA believes compliance
must be demonstrated under the most
challenging conditions for the control
device to ensure compliance over a
range of conditions, especially when
variability in emission stream
characteristics cannot be predetermined.
Therefore, only performance tests that
have been conducted at conditions that
represent the absolute or hypothetical
peak-case conditions are considered
valid for demonstrating compliance
with this rule.
5, Initial Compliance for Condensers
Under the proposed rule, EPA
included three options for sources to
determine emissions and control
efficiencies for condensers: (1)
Performance testing including
measurement of HAP concentration and
flowrate under peak-case conditions, (2)
direct measurement of temperature of
the outlet gas under peak-case
conditions, or (3) emission estimation.
Since proposal, EPA Identified the
following problems with the proposed
options: (1) Direct measurement of
temperature is a procedure to
demonstrate ongoing compliance, not
Initial compliance; (2) for condensers,
determining the control efficiency
during the peak-case conditions does
not ensure that the same or higher
control efficiencies will be achieved
under other conditions, (3) options 2
and 3 are not independent because the
outlet temperature is needed to estimate
emissions from a condenser, and (4)
performance testing is not a replicable
procedure for batch processing
operations and is unnecessary for
establishing the control efficiency. To
address these concerns, the final rule
was revised to include only one
procedure for demonstrating initial
compliance when using a condenser.
This procedure requires calculation of
the outlet temperature that is needed to
achieve the required control efficiency
for an emission episode (or group of
episodes).
Determining the control efficiency for
condensers under the peak-case
conditions does not ensure that the
control efficiency under other
conditions will be the same or higher.
Under the proposed rule, the peak-case
conditions were defined based on the
stream from which the maximum
amount of heat must be removed over a
specified time period to achieve the
required emissions reduction. However,
to achieve the required control
efficiency for another emission stream
with a different pollutant and/or
temperature may require a significantly
lower outlet temperature, even though
less heat is removed. Basing the
monitoring on the temperature for the
stream with the maximum heat removal
requirement would not ensure that the
lower outlet temperature could be
achieved for the other stream.
The revised procedure for the final
rule is a replicable protocol In that for
identical Inlet conditions, every source
will estimate the same controlled
emissions and control efficiency when
using the same outlet temperature.
Performance testing for batch processing
operations, on the other hand, can be
difficult and can lead to considerable
variability in results. In addition to
concerns about replicable results, the
performance testing provisions in the
proposed rule were not structured to
properly account for control efficiency
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33581
of condensers under all conditions.
Under the performance testing option in
the proposed rule, the control efficiency
would be determined for the peak-case
conditions. Then, using the heat
removal rate that occurred during the
test, the outlet temperatures, and thus
control efficiencies, could be calculated
for other inlet conditions. However, a
performance test is not needed because
these temperatures can be calculated
based on the properties of the emission
streams. For these reasons, the final rule
does not specifically require testing of
condensers (e.g., measurement of
flowrate and concentration to generate a
mass rate) as a means of compliance
with the standards. However, as with
other practices, owners and operators
can propose alternative means of
demonstrating compliance with the
standards for approval on a case-by-case
basis.
M. Monitoring
1. Establishing Parameter Levels
Several commenters suggested that
testing under peak-case conditions and
establishing parameter levels for the
continuous compliance demonstration
results in overcontrol during most of the
operations and therefore increases the
stringency of the standards. The
commenters also believe the
requirements to use the average of the
three test runs to set the parameter level
and to determine compliance on a daily
basis, as opposed to a yearly basis,
increase the stringency of the standards.
One commenter believes that a source
should be able to establish parameter
ranges other than those measured
during a performance test.
In the final rule, EPA requires that
testing be conducted under absolute or
hypothetical peak-case conditions if all
control device inlet stream conditions
cannot be predetermined. If inlet stream
conditions can be predetermined, the
owner or operator has the option of
setting different monitoring levels for
different operating conditions. This
option was provided in the proposed
rule and has been retained in the final
rule. Therefore, EPA does not believe
the requirement results in over control.
Regarding averaging periods, EPA has
modified the compliance period of the
standard to allow averaging on either a
24-hour basis or a "block" basis, where
the block may be any length of time less
than the time from the beginning to the
end of a batch process. For batch
operations, an annual compliance
period was determined by EPA to be too
difficult to implement and therefore not
practical. The annual compliance period
implies that owners and operators could
control a process to varying degrees
during the course of a year, as long as
the yearly percent reduction target
would be met. Although this format
would offer flexibility to owners and
operators who want to change control
strategies to accommodate production
scheduling and operational changes,
EPA believes that the demonstration of
compliance over such an extended time
period would result in delayed
determination of exceedances and the
possibility for extended periods of
violations. The EPA notes that the final
rule offers numerous compliance
options to provide flexibility for owners
and operators to address variability
within their processes.
Regarding the setting of parameter
levels, the purpose of monitoring
operating parameters is to provide
evidence of continued compliance with
the rule. Monitoring parameters are set
based on test data, calculations, or
information from the evaluation of die
control device design. The final rule
requires sources to establish maximum
or minimum operating parameter levels
based on the average of the average
parameter values for each of the three
test runs (i.e., average values are to be
determined for each of die three test
runs, and the monitoring parameter
level is to be based on the average of
these three values). The Agency believes
dial setting monitoring levels based on
the average of diree test runs is
necessary because die control efficiency
is also based on the average from die
diree test runs. Basing the monitoring
parameter on die results of only one of
die test runs would be inconsistent with
the average control level.
2. Monitoring With Bag Leak Detectors
Two commenters believe the
requirement to initiate corrective acdon
within 1 hour of a bag dump alarm is
unnecessarily rigid or unnecessary
because other situations may require
priority attention, replacement parts
may not be readily obtainable after
normal business hours, or it could trip
accidentally. One commenter suggested
changing die 1 hour time period to 3
hours. Commenters also believe it is
both unnecessary and inconsistent with
other aspects of die rule to require
written approval before adjusting die
range, averaging period, alarm setpolnts
or alarm delay time contained in die
Notification of Compliance Status
report. The commenter suggested
requiring changes to be reported in die
next periodic report, and, if prior
approval is needed, it could be handled
under the Operating Permit program.
The intent of die requirement to
initiate corrective action procedures
within 1 hour is to ensure the prompt
Investigation of the cause of an alarm
and resolution of the underlying
problem. The corrective action does not
necessarily have to be completed within
die hour, but die owner or operator
should follow predetermined
procedures that are to be described in a
written corrective acdon plan. These
procedures may vary depending on die
dme of day, what was determined to
cause die alarm, other priorities in an
emergency, and other factors. Timing is
one aspect of die procedures that die
owner or operator should address in die
corrective acdon plan. For die final rule,
diese provisions have been edited to
clarify intent. One substantive change
since proposal is d\at the corrective
action plan is to be submitted with the
Precompliance plan rather than the
Notification of Compliance Status
report. This change will allow the
implemendng agency to review and
approve the procedures.
The intended use of the bag leak
detector is to idendfy upset conditions
in the baghouse operadon. The EPA is
concerned that unrestricted adjustment
of die bag leak detector could result in
improper use, possibly resulting in the
alarm and sensitivity settings being set
such that leaks or malfunctions could
occur undetected. Based on further
review, EPA has determined that
periodic adjustment may be necessary.
Therefore, EPA has revised the bag leak
system adjustment requirements to: (1)
Allow for routine minor adjustments to
die detector system, (2) require owners
and operators to identify all routine
adjustments in an operating and
maintenance plan that is to be
submitted with die Precompliance plan,
and (3) require that owners and
operators perform complete baghouse
Inspection to ensure proper operation of
die baghouse prior to any significant
adjustments to die sensldvity or range.
3. Monitoring Frequency
One commenter believes two aspects
of die proposed monitoring frequency
are excessive: (1) The requirement in
§63.1365(b)(3) of die proposed rule to
monitor batch episodes less than 15
minutes in duradon, and (2) die
requirement to monitor control devices
controlling less dian 10 ton/yr of an
individual HAP or 25 ton/yr of aggregate
HAP. For the control devices, die
commenter believes "periodic"
monitoring would be sufficient because
many parameters do not vary frequently,
and it would allow for the use of
simpler monitoring systems that are less
prone to design and maintenance
problems.
-------
33582 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
When only one monitoring level is
established for a parameter, the EPA
agrees with the commenter that
monitoring of batch episodes less than
15 minutes in duration should not be
required because the practical limit of
monitoring frequency is one reading per
15 minutes. Instead of requiring that
each batch episode be monitored at least
once, the final rule requires an owner or
operator to measure and record the
parameter level at least once every 15
minutes during the period In which the
control device "is functioning in
achieving the HAP removal required"
by the rule. This means that one reading
must be taken for every 15-minute
period of continuous venting from any
combination of emission episodes
manifolded to the control device. Thus,
even when individual emission
episodes are shorter than 15 minutes,
one reading is required if venting occurs
for at least 15 minutes due to
overlapping or "contiguous" episodes.
On the other hand, if short emission
episodes are separated by periods of no
flow or venting from vents that are not
subject to control, the owner or operator
does not need to monitor during each
episode. In this case, monitoring every
15 minutes will result in some readings
that correspond with an emission
episode of an affected stream. Only
these readings must be included in the
daily (or batch) average. For storage
vessels, a control device is considered to
be functioning in achieving the HAP
removal required at all times material is
stored in the vessel. Although working
losses occur only during relatively short
periods when the tank is being filled,
breathing losses may occur at any time.
To identify periods of no flow, a flow
indicator (not necessarily a flow
monitor) would be required.
An exception to the procedures
described above exists if the owner or
operator establishes separate monitoring
levels for different emission episodes. In
this case, at least one reading must be
taken each time the level changes, even
if episode lasts less than 15 minutes.
This exception is included to counteract
the possibility of setting multiple levels
in order to avoid monitoring.
As a result of the change in
monitoring frequency, the definition of
a valid hour of data as used in the
definition of an excursion also has been
modified in the final rule. At proposal,
monitoring data would not constitute a
valid hour of data if measured values
are unavailable for any of the 15-minute
periods within the hour. For the final
rule, the word required has been added
before the phrase "15-minute period" to
address the fact that less than four data
points per hour may be allowed in some
situations.
The EPA believes that the
requirement to take 15-minute readings
for devices controlling more than 0.91
Mg/yr of HAP is reasonable. The cutoff
for continuous monitoring was set
because EPA wanted to reduce the
compliance burden on facilities with
smaller control devices. The EPA also
notes that "periodic" monitoring could
increase the potential for being out of
compliance with the standard, because
a reduction in the number of data points
places a significantly higher emphasis
on each reading for compliance
determination. Additionally, because
emission stream characteristics in this
industry are variable, the use of
"periodic" readings may not represent
true conditions over the monitoring
period.
4. Monitoring for Storage Vessel
Controls
One commenter believes the proposed
rule lacks appropriate monitoring
provisions for control devices that are
used to control emissions from storage
vessels. According to the commenter,
the proposed provisions address only
continuous monitoring, which often
will not be appropriate for storage
vessels because the emissions occur
primarily during filling. Furthermore, if
emissions are controlled using a
disposable carbon canister, the
monitoring may consist only of
replacing the canister before the end of
its rated life, not periodically checking
a parameter. Therefore, the commenter
recommended that EPA include some of
the concepts from the storage tank
monitoring provisions in § 63.120(d) of
the HON. For example, these provisions
specify that the owner or operator must
prepare a monitoring plan that describes
how the monitoring will be done. In
addition, the commenter indicated that
the rule needs to define "excursion" for
situations where monitoring is not
continuous (e.g., the rule should specify
that the monitoring plan "shall define
an excursion in terms of the relevant
operating parameter").
The monitoring provisions in
§ 63.1365 (a) of the proposed rule were
Intended to apply to control devices
used for continuous processes, and the
-provisions in § 63.1365(b) were
Intended to apply to control devices for
all other emission streams. In the final
rule, the provisions from §63.1365(a)
and (b) have been consolidated into one
section that specifies monitoring
provisions for all control devices
(§ 63.1366(b)). The final rule also
includes monitoring provisions for
nonregenerative carbon canisters; the
owner Or operator is required to
determine the maximum time interval
between replacement based on
operation under absolute or
hypothetical peak-case conditions and
to replace the canister before this time
elapses.
Unlike the HON, the final PAI rule
requires the same type of monitoring
regardless of the purpose for which the
control device is used. The EPA does
not believe it is necessary to have
different procedures for storage vessel
control devices because the types of
emission episodes from storage vessels
are comparable to those from batch
process vents. Furthermore, most
storage vessels at the surveyed PAI
plants emit less than 0.91 Mg/yr. Under
the final rule, if the total uncontrolled
HAP emissions entering a control device
are less than 0.91 Mg/yr, the owner or
operator may elect to conduct a periodic
(at least daily) verification that the
control device is. operating properly.
The verification procedures are to be
described in the Precompliance plan.
This provision is comparable to the
monitoring plan concept described in
§63.120(d)(2) of the HON. On the other
hand, if the total uncontrolled HAP
emissions entering the control device
exceed 0.91 Mg/yr, the owner operator
must monitor the appropriate
parameter^) every 15 minutes during
which the control device is functioning -
in achieving the HAP removal required
by the rule. Based on Information from
the surveyed PAI facilities, this
situation would apply to very few
storage vessels in the PAI industry. Most
of the few storage vessels with
emissions greater than 0.91 Mg/yr are
vented to the same control device that
is used to control process vent
emissions. Thus, a separate set of
monitoring requirements for storage
vessel control devices is not needed.
For devices that control more than
0.91 Mg/yr of HAP, the definition of
excursion in the final rule is the same
as that in the proposed rule, and it is
applicable to all control devices.
Specifically, a valid hour of monitoring
data must be obtained for 75 percent of
the hours that a control device operates
during a day (or, if the control device
operates less than 4 hours, at least 3
hours of valid data must be obtained).
As noted above, the control device
operation Is based on the time when the
control device is functioning In
achieving the HAP reduction required
by the rule. For storage tanks, this '
means all of the time that the storage
tank contains material. When
compliance for small control devices is
demonstrated by conducting a periodic
verification, the final rule has been
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33583
revised to clarify that not conducting
the verification is an excursion.
The final rule also clarifies that
exceedances of operating parameters are
those times when (1) the parameter
level, averaged over the operating day,
is above a maximum or below a
minimum established during the initial
compliance demonstration, or (2) the
required operating characteristic is not
met (e.g., loss of all pilot flames for a
flare). If compliance is demonstrated by
conducting a periodic verification, an
exceedance occurs any time the daily, or
more frequent, demonstration does not
confirm that the control device is
operating properly.
5. Violations
Several commenters asserted that
excursions or exceedances of an
operating parameter should not be
violations of the emission standard.
Another commenter also stated that
failure to take corrective action after a
bag dump alarm should be a violation
of a work practice requirement, not the
emission standard. The commenters
stated that such incidents should not be
violations of an emission limit because
the parameters are only indicators of
proper operation, they do not prove
compliarice with an emission standard.
Another commenter stated that the
proposed provision conflicts with the
basis of the compliance assurance
monitoring (CAM) regulation. Two
commenters also stated that the
requirement in §63.1365(a) to "operate
processes and control devices within
the parameters" must be revised. Both
commenters interpreted this statement
to mean that each data point must be
within the established limit. One
commenter indicated that the source
must be allowed to demonstrate
continued compliance with the
emission standard despite exceedance
of a monitoring parameter. Another
commenter stated that (1) monitoring
data collected during any startup,
shutdown, or malfunction should be
excluded from daily averages; (2) the
rule should specify that there is no
violation if an event such as a
malfunction results in insufficient data
or an exceedance of a parameter; and (3)
the statement that an excursion is not a
violation if it happens during a startup,
shutdown, or malfunction and the
facility follows it startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan is a concern
because it could be interpreted to mean
that EPA could assess two penalties if
the plan is not followed.
The EPA's policy is that new part 63
rules, in particular those that require the
use of a control device to reduce
pollutant emissions, will include
compliance determinations on two
levels. The first level is the "traditional"
performance test requirement that is
based on the use of a specific test
method over a set period of time and
operating conditions. A performance
test is generally conducted at the time
the rule is first effective (e.g., at facility
startup or after an effective date for an
existing facility) and may be repeated
periodically thereafter. The results of
the performance test are compared with
an emission limitation (e.g.,
concentration, control efficiency, or
mass rate). The second level of the
compliance determination in part 63
rules is the continuous compliance
obligation, which is implemented
through monitoring.
In general, EPA recognizes two basic
approaches to monitoring. One method
is to establish monitoring as a direct
measure of continuous compliance.
Under this continuous compliance
monitoring approach, an enforceable
value of the monitored parameters is
defined and measured. The Agency has
adopted this approach in part 63
standards and is committed to following
this approach whenever appropriate in
future rulemakings. Another approach is
to establish monitoring to provide a
reasonable assurance of compliance by
documenting continued proper
operation of the control devices,
indicating excursions from proper
operating conditions, and correcting the
problems that cause excursions. This
second approach is the basis of the CAM
rule, which applies to sources that are
not currently subject to part 63
standards.
Some part 63 rules specify that
compliance be demonstrated
continuously using either a continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS)
for a surrogate pollutant or parameter
monitoring. In these situations, the rule
includes specific limitations and
averaging times. The surrogate pollutant
or operating parameter limit becomes an
enforceable limit for the rule. There is
no requirement that an alternative limit,
whether a surrogate pollutant or an
operational parameter, be statistically
correlated with emissions or the
compliance level of the regulated
pollutant(s). The alternative limit is a
separately enforceable requirement of
the rule. The alternative is not
secondary to the emission limit; rather,
it is applied in lieu of a continuous
emission limit obligation.
The enforceable level for the surrogate
pollutant or operating parameter may be
based on measurements made during a
performance test or other conditions
specified by the part 63 rule. In any
case, the alternative limit becomes the
continuous compliance obligation and
fulfills the second level of compliance
for the rule.
The EPA has considered the
commenters1 argument that an
exceedance of a monitoring parameter is
not necessarily an exceedance of an
emission limit. The Agency
acknowledges that a parameter
exceedance does not necessarily mean
that the source has exceeded the
emission limit. However, as discussed
above, under the EPA's approach to
continuous compliance in part 63 rules,
the continuous parameter monitoring
limit is a separate requirement that is
not rebuttable through contrast with
actual or estimated HAP emission
values. In addition, EPA believes that
given the flexibility the owner or
operator has to select operating
parameters, including the option that
allows the owner or operator to set
different parameter levels for different
operating conditions, the burden is on
the source to remain within the
operating limit defined for the
parameter or parameters.
To address the potential disparity
between parameter limit exceedances
and emission limit exceedances, the
final rule contains two different types of
continuous compliance violations.
When a source is using a CEMS to
monitor compliance with the 20 ppmv
alternative standard, an exceedance is
defined as a violation of the emission
limit. Similarly, because the exit gas
temperature of a condenser is so closely
correlated with emissions, a condenser
temperature exceedance is considered a
violation of the emission limit.
Exceedances of other types of parameter
limits are defined as violations of an
operating limit Failure to initiate the
corrective action plan after a bag leak
detector alarm also is a violation of an
operating limit
If monitoring data obtained during a
startup, shutdown, or malfunction result
in an exceedance, the exceedance is not
a violation as long as the facility follows
the startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plan. If the facility does not follow the
plan, an exceedance would be a
violation, but It would not be two
violations. Thus, the final rule retains
the requirement to use data obtained
during any startup, shutdown, and
malfunction in daily averages.
Similarly, if a startup, shutdown, or
malfunction results in the inability to
collect monitoring data, it may cause an
excursion. This excursion would not be
a violation if the facility followed its
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plan, but it would be a violation if they
did not follow the plan.
-------
33584 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
As noted above, the final rule requires
monitoring when the control device is
functioning in achieving the HAP
removal required by the rule. Thus, data
obtained during time when the process
is not operating are not to be used in
determining the daily average of the
parameter level.
Finally, EPA believes that the
language in the final rule is clear
regarding the determination of a
violation. The final rule no longer
contains language specifying that
owners and operators "shall operate
within established parameter levels."
Additionally, EPA believes that the final
rule clearly identifies averaging periods
for reducing monitoring data and
comparing against established
parameter levels.
N. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Comments received relating to
recordkeeping generally focused on the
burden of the extensive recordkeeping
required by the regulation. Comments
related to reporting focused on dates for
submittal of reports, and the burden of
submitting all the reports required by
the regulation. These comments are
discussed below.
1. Recordkeeping Burden
Several commenters took issue with
the amount of recordkeeping required
by the rule and requested that EPA
review the recordkeeping requirements
to ensure that the amount of
reoordkeeping is really necessary. One
commenter supports the provisions in
§63.1366 (a) and (a) (3) that would
require an owner or operator to
maintain records of only the daily
average of the parameter values not each
datapoint, because this reduces the
recordkeeping burden. This commenter
also stated that the rule should contain
a provision similar to the provision in
§ 63.152(g) of the HON, which allows
for retention of only average parameter
values, rather than each individual data
point.
Detailed records are needed to
demonstrate compliance with the
regulation. However, prior to proposal,
EPA made a concerted effort to
eliminate duplicative and unnecessary
recordkeeping requirements because
EPA recognizes that these requirements
would burden both the affected sources
and EPA enforcement agencies. Since
proposal, EPA has reviewed the
recordkeeping provisions and made a
number of changes. Many of the changes
are editorial revisions designed to
clarify the requirements. Some of these
clarifications are discussed in more
detail in other responses in this chapter.
Other clarifications explicitly state
recordkeeping requirements that were
merely implied in the proposed rule
(e.g., records of planned routine
maintenance and records of the absolute
or hypothetical peak-case conditions for
process vent testing).
The final rule also includes additional
recordkeeping requirements to
document compliance with new or
revised provisions in the rule. For
example, the final rule includes
recordkeeping to document the primary
use for material produced by PA1
process units if the primary use is not
as a PA1 (see section 3.2 for a discussion
of the new primary use provisions).
Another example in the final rule
includes procedures to demonstrate
ongoing compliance with the annual
emission limit for process vents by
calculating an annual rolling summation
every day, and records of these
calculations must be maintained.
Finally, §63.1362(j) was added to the
final rule to specify that bypass lines
that could divert a vent stream away
from a control device must be
monitored either with a flow indicator
or by visual inspection of the seal or
closure mechanism that secures the
valve in the closed position; records of
any flow or the results of inspections
must also be maintained.
One additional change involves the
parameter monitoring records in
§ 63.1366 (a) and (a) (3) that were cited by
the commenter. After reviewing these
requirements, EPA now believes that,
even when the daily average is in
compliance, it is necessary to maintain
all parameter readings, not just the daily
averages. This rule requires that owners
and operators select only parameter
readings that are taken when the control
device is controlling HAP emissions
from affected emission streams.
Emission episodes from batch processes,
which predominate in the PAI
production industry, are discontinuous.
As a result, some monitoring readings
may occur during periods of no flow for
affected streams (although there may be
flow of nonaffected streams). Readings
taken during these periods must be
excluded from the daily averages. In
order to verify that the daily average
values were calculated correctly, the
rule requires owners and operators to
keep all data. The EPA also does not
believe that the approach in § 63.152 (g)
of the HON would be appropriate for
this rule because, unlike this rule, the
HON regulates emission streams with
continuous flow.
2. Reporting Burden
Some commenters stated that the
requirement in the proposed rule to
submit a Precompliance report should
be deleted. Additionally, some
commenters requested that the proposed
frequency for submitting periodic
reports should be changed from
quarterly to semiannually to be
consistent with other MACT standards.
The final rule retains the requirement
to submit a Precompliance report (or
Precompliance plan in the final rule).
The EPA believes the Precompliance
plan is a valuable tool for the regulatory
agency that will be making compliance
determinations for the affected source. It
provides an enforcement official or
inspector with some initial background
information about the process being
controlled, die types of emissions
associated with the process,
corresponding control equipment, and
the monitoring parameters that have
been or will be correlated to the process
conditions. The Precompliance plan is
also the mechanism by which the
affected source requests approval to use
alternative monitoring parameters and
to use calculations or other compliance
procedures that differ from those
prescribed in the rule. Because many of
the compliance procedures for this rule
are more complicated than those for the
HON, EPA believes the Precompliance
plan requirement is warranted for tills
industry and has retained the provision
in the final rule.
The EPA has also reevaluated the
overall reporting requirements in the
proposed rule and compared the
proposed reporting requirements with
requirements in rules for similar
industries. As a result, die Agency
decided to change the periodic reporting
from quarterly to semiannually. In those
cases where continuous emission
monitoring data are used to demonstrate
compliance with the 20ppmv alternative
standards, and the source experiences
excess emissions, quarterly reporting is
required until a request to reduce
reporting frequency is approved.
Section 63.1368(g) in die final rule is
now titled "Periodic reports" and
details die submittal schedule and
content of the required Periodic reports.
Also, as a result of comments, the final
rule now requires that equipment leak
reports be included with the
Notification of Compliance Status report
and die Periodic reports. The'final rule
requires that the Periodic reports be
submitted within 60 operating days after
die end of the applicable reporting
period.
Otiier changes made to the final rule
as a result of comments include die
addition of a new section to address the
submittal of information describing
process changes or changes made in the
information submitted as part of die
Notification of Compliance Status
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33585
report. This information must be
submitted within 90 days after the
changes are made. The information may
be included as part of a Periodic report,
if one is to be submitted within the 90-
day period. The information to be
reported is to include: a brief
description of the process change, a
description of any modifications to
standard procedures or quality
assurance procedures, revisions to any
of the information reported in the
original Notification of Compliance
Status Report, and information required
by the Notification of Compliance Status
report for changes involving the
addition of processes or equipment.
3. Date for Submlttal of Notification of
Compliance Status Report
One commenter stated that the
Notification of Compliance Status report
submittal date in the proposed rule
conflicts with the requirements of the
General Provisions in §63.7(a)(2) to
complete performance testing within
180 days and §63.10(d)(2) to submit
performance test reports within 60 days
after tests.
The submittal date for the Notification
of Compliance Status report in
§ 63.1368(f) of the final rule does not
conflict with the General Provisions
requirements in §§63.7(a)(2) and
63.10(d)(2), it supersedes it. As noted in
Table 1 to Subpart MMM—General
Provisions Applicability to Subpart
MMM, "(TJest results must be submitted
in the Notification of Compliance Status
report due 150 days after the
compliance date." This means that the
performance testing and the compilation
of the test results must be completed
and submitted as part of the Notification
of Compliance Status report which is
due within 150 days after the
compliance date. Additional language
was added to the final rule under
§ 63.1368(a) to clarify which of the
reporting requirements of subpart A
(General Provisions) remain in effect for
this rule and which requirements have
been superseded.
O. Miscellaneous
1. Environmental Impacts
One commenter believes EPA did not
adequately consider the secondary air
impacts of nitrogen oxide (NOX)
formation caused by combusting
nitrogen-bearing HAP (and non-HAP
VOC that may also be present) in
process vent streams and wastewater.
The impacts analysis was based on a
small number of model streams with
characteristics that represent typical or
average characteristics of streams at the
surveyed facilities. Very little nitrogen-
bearing HAP is emitted from the
surveyed facilities (less than 5 percent
of both the total uncontrolled organic
HAP emissions from process vents and
the HAP load In wastewater streams),
and most of these HAP are controlled to
the level of the standard. Therefore, the
model emission streams that were used
to estimate secondary air impacts did
not include nitrogen-bearing HAP. In
addition, any small underestimate In the
NOX emissions from nitrogen-bearing
HAP is likely more than offset by the
use of conservative estimates in the
original analysis. For example, the
estimated increase in NOx emissions
were based solely on the emissions
associated with operation of the more
efficient controls needed to achieve the
level of the standards; emissions from
existing controls that would be replaced
were assumed to be negligible.
2. Cost Impacts
Two commenters believe EPA
underestimated the costs to comply
with the proposed rule. Based on recent
experience installing some of the
control devices that are used in the cost
analysis, one commenter believes the
costs are "significantly"
underestimated, especially when the
standard Is more stringent than the
floor. This commenter also indicated
that, based on the additional secondary
air impact described in the comment
above, the cost analysis should consider
the need to Install best available control
technology (BACT) or RACT to control
NOx emissions.
The other commenter believes none of
the models used in the cost analysis
adequately address the situation at the
commenter's facility. This commenter
operates an affected source that emits
carbon disulfide, which, when burned,
generates a significant amount of sulfur
oxides (SOX). The SOX Is not an issue
under the MACT standard, but it is a
criteria pollutant that would have to be
controlled under State regulations. As a
result, the commenter believes EPA's
cost analysis underestimates the cost the
commenter would face for two reasons.
First, the model Is based on a thermal
incinerator with 70 percent recuperative
heat recovery, but the commenter could
not use this control device because
carbon disulfide has a low auto-ignition
temperature: they would have to use
either a thermal incinerator with no heat
recovery or a regenerative thermal
oxldlzer with 85 percent heat recovery.
Second, the scrubber that follows the
incinerator would need to be able to
control the SOX emissions as well as
HC1 emissions.
The cost impacts were based on
models that represent a range of
characteristics at actual facilities. The
models are expected to overestimate
costs at some facilities and to
underestimate costs at others.
It is possible that installing a control
device could trigger the requirement for
a BACT or RACT analysis. Typically, to
trigger BACT analysis, the control
device would have to cause a net
increase in NOx emissions of 40 tons/
yr (or any amount that has an impact of
1 microgram per cubic meter within 10
kilometers of a class I area). To increase
emissions by 40 tons/yr would require
a very large incinerator; the incinerator
to control the largest model process was
estimated to increase NOx emissions by
only about 11 tons/yr. Typically, a
facility has only two PAI processes.
Thus, even if all emission streams are
routed to the incinerator and the
emission stream contains nitrogen-
bearing HAP, it will be a very unusual
situation for NOX emissions to increase
by 40 tons/yr. Typically, RACT is
applied only to existing sources; thus, a
new incinerator installed to comply
with today's final rule would not trigger
RACT. As a result. EPA did not include
BACT or RACT technology in the
models used in the impacts analyses.
The SOx control also was not
included In the cost analysis because it
is not a typical requirement, the amount
of SO2 control that would be needed is
unknown, and the cost is not expected
to be significantly different from that for
an HC1 scrubber. The total annual cost
of a thermal incinerator with no heat
recovery is approximately equal to that
for a thermal incinerator with 70
percent recuperative heat recovery. The
annual auxiliary fuel costs would be
higher for the Incinerator without heat
recovery, but these costs are nearly
offset by lower capital costs, which
' would result in lower capital recovery
costs. Although the performance of a
given scrubber will be better for HC1
than for SOz. a scrubber can easily be
designed to obtain excellent SO2
removal efficiencies.
3. Economic Impacts
One commenter believes EPA has not
adequately evaluated the impact of the
proposed rule on small businesses. The
commenter notes that the regulatory
flexibility analysis finds minimal
impact on small businesses, but the
docket states that the two known small
firms for which data were available
were not surveyed to find the impact of
the regulation on them. The commenter
believes a survey of small businesses is
needed; otherwise the Impact on them
is unknown. This issue is important to
the commenter because at the time
facilities responded to the section 114
-------
33586 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
information request, the commenter's
plant was part of a large business, but
it has since been sold and is now
classified as a small business.
The EPA reevaluated the economic
impact using revenue data for the
commenter's facility. Using Dun &
Bradstreet data, EPA estimates that the
cost-to-revenue ratio for this small
business is approximately 2.3 percent
As noted at proposal, the control costs
' for model small businesses were also
estimated to be less than 3 percent of
revenue for model plants. This
percentage suggests that the final rule
will not significantly impact small firms
in the PAI manufacturing industry.
4. Standards for Possible Endocrine
Disrupters
In the preamble to the proposed rule,
EPA solicited comment on whether the
risk posed by possible endocrine
disrupters warrants more stringent
requirements than those proposed.
Numerous commenters opposed the
development of more stringent
requirements; none supported the idea.
The commenters cited the following
reasons for not developing more
stringent requirements: (1) The science
for determining disrupting properties of
chemicals and their risks is still under
development; (2) technology-based
standards are not appropriate to address
endocrine disruption; (3) endocrine
disruption is not an adverse endpoint,
but a mechanism of action; (4) the
compounds are emitted in small
quantities; and (5) this has not been an
issue under other MACT standards that
address essentially the same materials.
In the proposal preamble, EPA
indicated that available information
shows emissions of possible endocrine
disrupters is very low relative to other
HAP emissions. Based on these data and
the comments, EPA has decided not to
include more stringent requirements for
possible endocrine disrupters in today's
final rule. Today's final rule does not
preclude the possibility that EPA may
take action on endocrine disrupters in
the future as new information becomes
available.
5. Risk-Based Standards for HC1
The preamble to the proposed rule
explained that section 112(d)(4) of the
CAA provides EPA with authority, at Its
discretion, to develop risk-based
standards for HAP "for which a health
threshold has been established,"
provided that the standard achieves an
"ample margin of safety." Because HC1
is a threshold pollutant that Is emitted
from PAI manufacturing facilities, EPA
solicited comment on the adequacy,
desirability, and feasibility of
developing a risk-based standard
instead of a MACT standard for HC1
emissions from PAI manufacturing
facilities. One commenter opposed the
development of a risk-based standard
for HC1 emissions because It would
delay promulgation of the rule. Another
commenter opposed development of a
risk-based standard because the
commenter believes the proposed
requirements, In conjunction with
permit limitations based on ambient
concentrations, are protective of the
environment and human health.
Another commenter supported EPA's
determination of HC1 as a threshold
pollutant.
The EPA agrees with the commenter
that a risk-based approach would delay
promulgation of the rule. Given the
relatively small potential difference
between a MACT-based standard and a
risk-based standard, EPA believes that
the small benefits are substantially
outweighed by the burden to EPA and
the industry of collecting and analyzing
the data needed for a risk-based
standard.
VII. Technical Amendment to 40 CFR
Part 9
In compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), this technical
correction amends the table that lists the
OMB control numbers issued under the
PRA for this final rule.
The EPA is today amending the table
in 40 CFR part 9 (section 9.1) of
currently approved information
collection request (ICR) control numbers
issued by OMB for various regulations.
The affected regulations are codified at
40 CFR part 63 subpart MMM,
§§63.1366 and 63.1367 (recordkeeping
and reporting requirements,
respectively). The OMB control
(tracking) number for this final rule is
2060-0370. The EPA will continue to
present OMB control numbers in a
consolidated table format to be codified
In 40 CFR part 9 of the Agency's
regulations and In each CFR volume
containing EPA regulations. The table
lists the section numbers with reporting
and recordkeeping requirements and the
current OMB control numbers. The
listing of the OMB control numbers and
their subsequent codification In the CFR
satisfies the requirements of the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3501 etseq.) and OMB's
Implementing regulations at 5 CFR part
1320.
This ICR was previously subject to
public notice and comment prior to
OMB approval. As a result, EPA finds
that there is "good cause" under section
553(b)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)) to
amend this table without prior notice
and comment Due to the technical
nature of the table, further notice and
comment would be unnecessary.
Yin. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The docket is an organized and
complete file of all the information
submitted to or otherwise considered by
EPA in the development of the final
standards. The principal purposes of the
docket are:
(1) To allow interested parties to
readily identify and locate documents
so that they can intelligently and
effectively participate in the rulemaking
process; and
(2) To serve as the record in case of
judicial review (except for interagency
review materials (section 307(d)(7)(A))).
B. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993). the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action Is "significant" and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of this Executive Order.
The Executive Order defines
"significant regulatory action" as one
that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect In a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise Interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
<3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth In this Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, the OMB has notified EPA
that it considers this a "significant
regulatory action" under criterion
number four of the Executive Order. The
EPA submitted this action for OMB
review. The OMB cleared this action
without any comments.
C. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA
may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute that creates a
mandate upon a State, local, or tribal
government, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by those governments, or
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23. 1999/Rules and Regulations 33587
EPA consults with those governments. If
EPA complies by consulting, Executive
Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to
the Office of Management and Budget a
description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of
affected State, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their
concerns, any written communication
from the governments, and a statement
supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order
12875 requires EPA to develop an
effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of
State, local, and tribal governments "to
provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory proposals
containing significant unfunded
mandates."
Today's rule does not create a
mandate on State, local, or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose
any enforceable duties on these entities
because they do not own or operate
sources subject to this rule and therefore
are not required to purchase control
systems to meet the requirements of this
rule. Accordingly, the requirements of
section l(a) of Executive Order 12875 do
not apply to this rule.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA
may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute that significantly or
uniquely affects the communities of
Indian tribal governments, and that
imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal
governments, or EPA consults with
those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of
Management and Budget in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the
rule, a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with representatives
of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns,
and a statement supporting the need to
issue the regulation. In addition,
Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to
develop an effective process permitting
elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal
governments "to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of
regulatory policies on matters that
significantly or uniquely affect their
communities."
Today's rule does not significantly or
uniquely affect the communities of
Indian tribal governments. The rule
does not affect these entities because
they do not own or operate sources
subject to this rule and therefore are not
required to purchase control systems to
meet the requirements of this rule.
Accordingly, the requirements of
section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084
do not apply to this rule.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The OMB has approved the
information collection requirements
contained in this rule under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq. and has
assigned OMB Control Number 2060-
0370.
The EPA is required under section
112(d) of the CAA to regulate emissions
of HAP listed in section 112(b). The
requested information is needed as part
of the overall compliance and
enforcement program. The ICR requires
that pesticide active ingredient
production facilities retain records of
control device monitoring and records
of HAP emissions calculations at
facilities for a period of 5 years, which
is consistent with the General
Provisions to 40 CFR part 63 and the
operating permit requirements under 40
CFR part 70. All sources subject to this
rule will be required to obtain operating
permits either through the State-
approved permitting program or, if one
does not exist, in accordance with the
provisions of 40 CFR part 71, when
promulgated.
The public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to
average 289 hours per respondent for
each of the first 3 years following
promulgation. Beginning in the fourth
year after promulgation, existing
facilities must comply with the
monitoring requirements, which will
result in a significant increase in the
burden to the industry. It is also
estimated that there are approximately
82 facilities that are likely respondents.
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. The EPA Is amending Table 9.1 in
40 CFR part 9 of currently approved ICR
control numbers Issued by OMB for
various regulations to list the
information collection requirements
contained in this final rule.
F. Regulatory Flexibility
The EPA has determined that it is not
necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with
this final rule. The EPA has also
determined that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
In screening the potential impacts on
small entities, the EPA found that there
are three companies operating in the
PAI production Industry that will be
subject to the final rule that are
considered "small" businesses as
defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). The SB A defines
small businesses in SIC 2879 as a firm
with fewer than 500 employees. The
majority of facilities are owned fay large
chemical manufacturers having greater
than 500 employees. In all instances, the
average total annual cost for each of the'
affected small firms is less than 3
percent of company-wide sales
revenues. The screening analysis for this
rule is detailed in the Economic Impact
Analysis and a subsequent
memorandum (see Docket No. A-95-20,
Docket item no. H-A-20 and IV-B-7).
C. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L.
104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments, and the private
sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures by State, local,
and tribal governments, in 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
-------
33588 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
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 regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that the final
standards do not include a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more by either State,
local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, in
any 1 year. The rule does not impose
any enforceable duties on State, local, or
tribal governments because they do not
own or operate sources subject to this
rule and therefore are not required to
purchase control systems to meet the
requirements of this rule. The annual
economic impact on the private sector
will be far less than $100 million—the
estimated cost impact is $39.4 million/
yr, as discussed in section IV.D. of
today's final rule. The rule also contains
no requirements that will significantly
or uniquely impact small governments;
the rule contains no requirements that
apply to such governments or impose
obligations upon them. Therefore, the
requirements of the UMRA do not apply
to this final rule.
H. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General Office
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 etseq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a "major rule"
as defined by 5 U.S.C, §804(2).
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113 (March
7, 1996), directs all Federal agencies to
use voluntary consensus standards in
regulatory and procurement activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impracticable. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) developed or adopted by one
or more voluntary consensus bodies.
The NTTAA requires Federal agencies
to provide Congress, through annual
reports to OMB, with explanations
when an agency does not use available
and applicable voluntary consensus
standards. This section summarizes the
EPA's response to the requirements of
the NTTAA for the analytical and test
methods to be required by today's final
rule.
Consistent with the NTTAA, the EPA
conducted a search to identify voluntary
consensus standards. The search
identified 22 voluntary consensus
standards that appeared to have possible
use in lieu of EPA standard reference
methods in this rule. However, after
reviewing available standards, EPA
determined that 14 of the candidate
consensus standards identified for
measuring emissions of the HAP or
surrogates subject to emission standards
In the rule would not be practical due
to lack of equivalency, documentation,
validation data or other important
technical and policy considerations.
Eight of the remaining candidate
consensus standards are new standards
under development that EPA plans to
follow, review, and consider adopting at
a later date.
One consensus standard, ASTM
Z7420Z, is potentially practical for EPA
use in lieu of EPA Method 18 (See 40
CFR Part 60, Appendix A). At the time
of EPA's search, the ASTM standard
was still under development and EPA
had provided comments on the method.
The EPA also compared a draft of this
ASTM standard to methods previously
•approved as alternatives to EPA Method
18 with specific applicability
limitations. These methods, designated
as ALT-017 and CTM-028. are available
through EPA's Emission Measurement
Center Internet site at www.epa.gov/ttn/
emc/tmethods.html. The proposed
ASTM Z7420Z standard is very similar
to these approved alternative methods.
When finalized and adopted by ASTM,
the standard may be equally suitable for
specific applications. However, this rule
does not adopt the ASTM standard as it
is not practical to do so until the
potential candidate is final and EPA has
reviewed the final standard. The EPA
plans to continue to follow the progress
of the standard and will consider
adopting the ASTM standard at a later
date.
This final rule requires standard EPA
methods known to the industry and
States. Approved alternative methods
also may be used with prior EPA
approval.
/ Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, "Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885,
April 23,1997), applies to any rule that:
(1) is determined to be "economically
significant" as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children, and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
The EPA interprets Executive Order .
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. Today's final
rule falls into that category only in part:
the minimum rule stringency is set
according to a congressionally-
mandated, technology-based lower limit
called the "floor," while a decision to
increase the stringency beyond this floor
can be based on risk considerations only
to the extent that the Agency may
consider the inherent toxicity of a
regulated pollutant, and any differential
impact such a pollutant may have on
children's health. In deciding whether
to adopt control requirements more
stringent than floor level.
Today's final rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866. No children's
risk analysis was performed for this
rulemaking because no alternative
technologies exist that would provide
greater stringency at a reasonable cost,
and therefore the results of any such
analysis would have no impact on the
stringency decision. The MACT floor
and regulatory alternatives more
stringent than the floor for process
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33589
vents, storage vessels, equipment leaks,
and wastewater systems are presented
in Chapters 6 and 8 of the Basis and
Purpose Document and related
memoranda (Docket A-95-20, Docket
items H-B-21, ID-B-1, IV-B-2, and IV-
B-3). For each of the four types of
emission points, the standards are based
on the most stringent alternative for
which the cost was determined to be
reasonable.
List of Subjects
40CFRPart9
Environmental protection, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 13, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, parts 9 and 63 of title 40,
chapter I, of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PARTS—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 etseq., 136-136y;
15U.S.C. 2001. 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601-2671;
21 U.S.C. 331J, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 etseq., 1311. 1313d, 1314, 1318,
1321. 1326. 1330. 1342. 1344. 1345 (d) and
(e). 1361; E.O. 11735. 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,
242b. 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-l, 300g-2.
300g-3. 300g-4. 300g-5. 300g-6. 300J-1.
300J-2. 300J-3, 30QJ-4,300J-9, 1857 etseq..
6901-6992k, 7401-767Ig, 7542. 9601-9657,
11023,11048.
2. Section 9.1 is amended by adding
in numerical order a new entry to the
table under the indicated heading to
read as follows:
% 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
40 CFR citation
OMB Control
No.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories.3
63.1367-63.1368
2060-0370
3The ICR's referenced in this section of the table encompass the applicable General Provisions contained in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, which
are not independent information collection requirements.
PART 63—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
2. Part 63 is amended by adding a
new subpart MMM to read as follows:
Subpart MMM—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production
Sec.
63.1360 Applicability.
63.1361 Definitions.
63.1362 Standards.
63.1363 Standards for equipment leaks.
63.1364 Compliance dates.
63.1365 Test methods and initial
compliance procedures.
63.1366 Monitoring and Inspection
requirements.
63.1367 Recordkeeping requirements.
63.1368 Reporting requirements.
63.1369 Delegation of authority.
Table 1 to Subpart MMM of part 63—
General Provisions Applicability to Subpart
MMM.
Table 2 to Subpart MMM of part 63—
Standards for New and Existing PAI
Production.
Table 3 to Subpart MMM of Part 63—
Monitoring Requirements for Control
Devices.
Table 4 to Subpart MMM of Part 63—
Control Requirements for Items of Equipment
that Meet the Criteria of §63.1362 (k).
Subpart MMM—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production
§63.1360 Applicability.
(a) Definition of affected source. The
affected source subject to this subpart is
the facility-wide collection of pesticide
active ingredient manufacturing process
units (PAI process units) that process,
use, or produce HAP, and are located at
a plant site that is a major source, as
defined in section 112(a) of the CAA.
An affected source also includes waste
management units, heat exchange
systems, and cooling towers that are
associated with the PAI process units.
Exemptions from an affected source are
specified in paragraph (d) of this
section.
- (b) New source applicability. A new
affected source subject to this subpart
and to which the requirements for new
sources apply is defined according to
the criteria in either paragraph (b)(l) or
(2) of this section.
(1) An affected source for which
construction or reconstruction
commenced after November 10,1997.
(2) Any single PAI process unit that
(i) Is not part of a process unit group;
and
(ii) For which construction, as defined
in § 63.1361, commenced after
November 10, 1997; and
(ill) Has the potential to emit 10 tons/
yr of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr of
combined HAP.
(c) General provisions. Table 1 of this
subpart specifies the provisions of
subpart A of this part that apply to an
owner or operator of an affected source
subject to this subpart, and clarifies
specific provisions in subpart A of this
part as necessary for this subpart.
(d) Exemptions from the requirements
of this subpart. The provisions of this
subpart do not apply to:
(1) Research and development
facilities;
(2) PAI process units that are subject
to subpart F of this part;
(3) Production of ethylene; and
(4) The following emission points
listed:
(i) Storm water from segregated
sewers;
(ii) Water from fire-fighting and
deluge systems, including testing of
such systems;
(ill) Spills;
(iv) Water from safety showers;
(v) Noncontact steam boiler
blowdown and condensate;
(vl) Laundry water;
-------
33590 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
(vii) Vessels storing material that
contains no organic HAP or contains
organic HAP as impurities only; and
(viii) Equipment, as defined in
§ 63.1363, that is intended to operate in
organic HAP service for less than 300
hours during the calendar year.
(e) Applicability of this subpart except
during periods of startup, shutdown,
and malfunction. (1) Each provision set
forth in this subpart shall apply at all
times except that emission limitations
shall not apply during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction, as
defined in §63.1361, if:
(i) The startup, shutdown, or
malfunction precludes the ability of the
owner or operator of an affected source
to comply with one or more specific
emission limitations to which a
particular emission point is subject; and
(ii) The owner or operator follows the
provisions for periods of startup,
shutdown, and malfunction, as
specified in §§63.1367 (a) (3) and
63.1368(1).
(2) The provisions set forth in
§ 63.1363 shall apply at all times except
during periods of nonoperation of the
PAI process unit (or specific portion
thereof) in which the lines are drained
and depressurized resulting in the
cessation of the emissions to which
§63.1363 applies.
(3) The owner or operator shall not
shut down items of equipment that are
required or utilized for compliance with
the emissions limitations of this subpart
during times when emissions (or, where
applicable, wastewater streams or
residuals) are being routed to such items
of equipment, if the shutdown would
contravene emissions limitations of this
subpart applicable to such items of
equipment. This paragraph does not
apply if the item of equipment is
malfunctioning, or if the owner or
operator must shut down the equipment
to avoid damage due to a malfunction of
the PAI process unit or portion thereof.
(4) During startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions when the emissions
limitations of this subpart do not apply
pursuant to paragraphs (e)(l) through (3)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall implement, to the extent
reasonably available, measures to
prevent or minimize excess emissions.
For purposes of this paragraph, "excess
emissions" means emissions in excess
of those that would have occurred if
there were no startup, shutdown, or
malfunction and the owner or operator
complied with the relevant provisions
of this subpart. The measures to be
taken shall be identified in the
applicable startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan, and may include, but
are not limited to, air pollution control
technologies, work practices, pollution
prevention, monitoring, and/or changes
in the manner of operation of the
source. Back-up control devices are not
required, but may be used if available.
(f) Storage vessel applicability
determination. An owner or operator
shall follow the procedures specified in
paragraphs (f)(l) through (4) of this
section to determine whether a storage
vessel is part of the affected source to
which this subpart applies.
. (1) If a storage vessel is already
subject to another subpart of 40 CFR
part 63 on June 23,1999, the storage
vessel shall belong to the process unit
subject to the other subpart
(2) Unless otherwise excluded under
paragraph (f)(l-) of this section, the
storage vessel is part of a PAI process
unit if either the input to the vessel from
the PAI process unit is greater than or
equal to the input from any other PAI
or non-PAI process unit, or the output
from the vessel to the PAI process unit
is greater than or equal to the output to
any other PAI or non-PAI process unit.
If the greatest input to and/or output
from a shared storage vessel is the same
for two or more process units, including
at least one PAI process unit, the owner
or operator may assign the storage vessel
to any one of the PAI process units that
meet this condition. If the use varies
from year to year, then the use for
purposes of this subpart for existing
sources shall be based on the utilization
that occurred during the year preceding
June 23, 1999 or, if the storage vessel
was not in operation during that year,
the use shall be based on the expected
use in the 5 years after startup. This
determination shall be reported as part
of an operating permit application or as
otherwise specified by the permitting
authority.
(3) Unless otherwise excluded under
paragraph (f)(l) of this section, where a
storage vessel is located in a tank farm
(including a marine tank farm), the
applicability of this subpart shall be
determined according to the provisions
in paragraphs (f)(3)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(i) The storage vessel may only be
assigned to a process unit that utilizes
the storage vessel and does not have an
intervening storage vessel for that
product (or raw material, as
appropriate). With respect to a process
unit, an intervening storage vessel
means a storage vessel connected by
hard-piping to the process unit and to
the storage vessel in the tank farm so
that product or raw material entering or
leaving the process unit flows into (or
from) the intervening storage vessel and
does not flow directly into (or from) the
storage vessel in the tank farm.
(ii) If no PAI process unit meets the
criteria of paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section with respect to a storage vessel,
this subpart does not apply to the
storage vessel.
(ill) If only one PAI process unit, and
no non-PAI process unit, meets the
criteria of paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section with respect to a storage vessel,
the storage vessel shall be assigned to
that PAI process unit.
(iv) If two or more process units,
including at least one PAI process unit,
meet the criteria of paragraph (f)(3)(l) of
this section with respect to a storage
vessel, the storage vessel shall be
assigned to one of those process units
according to the provisions of paragraph
(f)(2) of this section. The input and
output shall be determined among only
those process units that meet the criteria
of paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this section. If
the storage vessel is not assigned to a
PAI process unit according to the
provisions of paragraph (f)(2) of this
section, this subpart does not apply to
the storage vessel.
(4) If the storage vessel begins
receiving material from (or sending
material to) another process unit, or
ceasing to receive material from (or send
material to) a PAI process unit, or if the
applicability of this subpart has been
determined according to the provisions
of paragraph (f)(2) of this section, and
there is a significant change in the use
of the storage vessel, the owner or
operator shall reevaluate the ownership
determination for the storage vessel.
(g) Designating production of an
intermediate as a PAI process unit.
Except as specified in paragraph (d) of
this section, an owner or operator may
elect to designate production of any
intermediate that does not meet the
definition of Integral intermediate as a
PAI process unit subject to this subpart.
Any storage vessel containing the
intermediate is assigned to a PAI
process unit according to the procedures
in paragraph (f) of this section. Any
process tank containing the
Intermediate is part of the process unit
used to produce the intermediate.
(h) Applicability of process units
included in a process unit group. (1) If
any of the products produced in the
process unit group are subject to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart GGG (Pharmaceuticals
MACT), the owner or operator may elect
to comply wtdi the requirements of
subpart GGG for the PAI process unit(s)
within the process unit group, except
for die following:
(i) The emission limit standard for
process vents in § 63.1362(b)(2)(i) shall
apply in place of § 63.1254(a)(l) of
subpart GGG of this part;
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33591
(ii) When the date of April 2, 1997 Is
provided in §63.1254 (a) (iii) of subpart
GGG of this part, the date of June 23,
1999 shall apply for purposes of this
subpart; and
(iii) Requirements in § 63.1367(a)(5)
regarding application for approval of
construction or reconstruction shall
apply in place of the provisions in
§63.1259(a)(5) of subpart GGG of this
part.
(2) If the primary product of a process
unit group is determined to be a
material that is subject to another
subpart of 40 CFR part 63 on June 23,
1999 or startup of the process unit
group, whichever is later, the owner or
operator may elect to comply with the
other subpart for any PAI process unit
within the process unit group.
(3) The primary product of the
process unit group shall be determined
according to paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(i) The primary product is the product
that is produced for the greatest
operating time over a 5 year period,
based on expected utilization for the 5
years following the compliance date or
following initial startup of the process
unit group, whichever is later; or
(ii) If the process unit group produces
multiple products equally based on
operating time, then the product with
the greatest production on a mass basis
over 5 years shall represent the primary
product of the process unit, based on
expected utilization for the 5 years
following the compliance date or
following initial startup of the unit or
unit group, whichever is later.
(i) Overlap with other regulations. (I)
Overlap with other MACTstandards.
After the compliance dates specified in
§ 63.1364, an affected source subject to
the provisions of this subpart that is also
subject to the provisions of any other
subpart of 40 CFR part 63 may elect, to
the extent the subparts are consistent,
under which subpart to maintain
records and report to EPA. The affected
source shall identify in the Notification
of Compliance Status report required by
§ 63.1368(f) under which authority such
records will be maintained.
(2) Overlap with RCRA subparts AA,
BB, and/or CC. After the compliance
dates specified in §63.1364, if any
affected source subject to this subpart is
also subject to monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements in 40 CFR part 264,
subpart AA, BB, or CC, or is subject to
monitoring and recordkeeping
requirements in 40 CFR part 265,
subpart AA, BB, or CC, and the owner
or operator complies with the periodic
reporting requirements under 40 CFR
part 264, subpart AA, BB, or CC that
would apply to the device if the facility
had final-permitted status, the owner or
operator may elect to comply either
with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements of this subpart,
or with the monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements in 40 CFR
parts 264 and/or 265, as described in
this paragraph, which shall constitute
compliance with the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements of this subpart. If the
owner or operator elects to comply with
the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in 40 CFR parts
264 and/or 265, the owner or operator
shall report all excursions as required
by § 63.1368(g). The owner or operator
shall identify in the Notification of
Compliance Status report required by
§ 63.1368(f) the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting authority
under which the owner or operator will
comply.
(3) Overlap with NSPS subpart Kb.
After the compliance dates specified in
§ 63.1364, a Group 1 or Group 2 storage
vessel that is also subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart
Kb, is required to comply only with the
provisions of this subpart MMM.
(4) Overlap with subpart I. After the
compliance dates specified in § 63.1364,
for all equipment within a process unit
that contains equipment subject to
subpart I of this part, an owner or
operator may elect to comply with
either the provisions of this subpart
MMM or the provisions of subpart H of
this part. The owner or operator shall
identify in the Notification of
Compliance Status report required by
§ 63.1368(f) the provisions with which
the owner or operator elects to comply.
(5) Overlap with RCRA regulations for
wastewater. After the compliance dates
specified in § 63.1364, the owner or
operator of an affected wastewater
stream that is also subject to provisions
in 40 CFR parts 260 through 272 shall
comply with the more stringent control
requirements (e.g., waste management
units, numerical treatment standards,
etc.) and the more stringent testing.
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements that overlap
between the provisions of this subpart
and the provisions of 40 CFR parts 260
through 272. The owner or operator
shall keep a record of the information
used to determine which requirements
were the most stringent and shall
submit this information if requested by
the Administrator.
(6) Overlap with NSPS subparts III.
NNN, and RRR. After the compliance
dates specified In § 63.1364, If an owner
or operator of a process vent subject to
this subpart MMM that is also subject to
the provisions of 40 CFR part 60,
subpart in, or subpart NNN, or subpart
RRR, elects to reduce organic HAP
emissions from the process vent by 98
percent as specified in
§63.1362(b)(2)(iii)(A), then the owner or
operator is required to comply only with
the provisions of this subpart MMM.
Otherwise, the owner or operator shall
comply with the provisions in both this
subpart MMM and the provisions in 40
CFR part 60, subparts m, NNN, and
RRR, as applicable.
(j) Meaning of periods of time. All
terms in this sabpart MMM that define
a period of time for completion of
required tasks (e.g., weekly, monthly,
quarterly, annual), unless specified
otherwise in the section or subsection
that imposes the requirement, refer to
the standard calendar periods.
(1) Notwithstanding time periods
specified in the subpart MMM for
completion of required tasks, such time
periods may be changed by mutual
agreement between the owner and
operator and the Administrator, as
specified in subpart A of this part (e.g.,
a period could begin on the compliance
date or another date, rather than on the
first day of the standard period). For
each time period that is changed by
agreement, the revised period shall
remain in effect until ii is changed. A
new request is not necessary for each
recurring period.
(2) Where the period specified for
compliance is a standard calendar
period, if the initial compliance date
occurs after the beginning of the period,
compliance shall be required according
to the schedule specified in paragraph
(j)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section, as
appropriate.
(i) Compliance shall be required
before the end of the standard calendar
period within which the compliance
deadline occurs, if there remain at least
3 days for tasks that must be performed
weekly, at least 2 weeks for tasks that
must be performed monthly, at least 1
month for tasks that must be performed
each quarter, or at least 3 months for
tasks that must be performed annually;
or
(11) In all other cases, compliance
shall be required before the end of the
first full standard calendar period
within which the initial compliance
deadline occurs.
(3) In all instances where a provision
of this subpart MMM requires
completion of a task during each of
multiple successive periods, an owner
or operator may perform the required
task at any time during the specified
period, provided the task is conducted
at a reasonable interval after completion
of the task in the previous period.
-------
33592 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
§63.1361 Definitions.
Terms used in this subpart are
defined in the CAA, in subpart A of this
part, or in this section. If the same term
is defined in subpart A of this part and
in this section, it shall have the meaning
given in this section for the purposes of
this subpart MMM.
Air pollution control device or control
device means equipment installed on a
process vent, storage vessel, wastewater
treatment exhaust stack, or combination
thereof that reduces the mass of HAP
emitted to the air. The equipment may
consist of an individual device or a
series of devices. Examples include
incinerators, carbon adsorption units,
condensers, flares, boilers, process
heaters, and gas absorbers. Process
condensers are not considered air
pollution control devices or control
devices.
Bag dump means equipment into
which bags or other containers
containing a powdered, granular, or
other solid feedstock material are
emptied. A bag dump is part of the
process.
Batch emission episode means a
discrete venting episode that is
associated with a single unit operation.
A unit operation may have more than
one batch emission episode. For
example, a batch distillation unit
operation may consist of batch emission
episodes associated with charging and
heating. Charging the vessel with HAP
will result in one discrete batch
emission episode that will last through
the duration of the charge and will have
an average flowrate equal to the rate of
the charge. Another discrete batch
emission episode will result from the
expulsion of expanded vapor as the
contents of the vessel are heated.
Batch operation means a
noncontinuous operation involving
intermittent or discontinuous feed into
PAI or integral intermediate
manufacturing equipment, and, in
general, involves the emptying of the
equipment after the batch operation
ceases and prior to beginning a new
operation. Addition of raw material and
withdrawal of product do not occur
simultaneously in a batch operation. A
batch process consists of a series of
batch operations.
Bench-scale batch process means a
batch process (other than a research and
development facility) that is capable of
being located on a laboratory bench top.
This bench-scale equipment will
typically include reagent feed vessels, a
small reactor and associated product
separator, recovery and holding
equipment. These processes are only
capable of producing small quantities of
product.
Block means a time period equal to,
at a maximum, the duration of a single
batch.
Car seal means a seal that is placed
on a device that is used to change the
position of a valve (e.g., from opened to
closed) in such a way that the position
of the valve cannot be changed without
breaking the seal.
Cleaning operation means routine
rinsing, washing, or boil-off of
equipment in batch operations between
batches.
Closed-loop system means an
enclosed system that returns process
fluid to the process and is not vented to
the atmosphere except through a closed-
vent system.
Closed-purge system means a system
or combination of system and portable
containers, to capture purged liquids.
Containers must be covered or closed
when not being filled or emptied.
Closed-vent system means a system
that is not open to the atmosphere and
is composed of piping, ductwork,
connections, and, if necessary, flow
inducing devices that transport gas or
vapor from an emission point to a
control device.
Combustion device means an
individual unit of equipment, such as a
flare, incinerator, process heater, or
boiler, used for the combustion of
organic HAP vapors.
Connector means flanged, screwed, or
other joined fittings used to connect two
pipe lines or a pipe line and a piece of
equipment. A common connector is a
flange. Joined fittings welded
completely around the circumference of
the interface are not considered
connectors for the purpose of this
regulation. For the purpose of reporting
and record keeping, connector means
joined fittings that are not inaccessible,
ceramic, or ceramic-lined as described
in §63.1255(b)(l)(vil) and 63.1255(0(3).
Construction means the onsite
fabrication, erection, or installation of
an affected source or PAI process unit.
Addition of new equipment to an
existing PAI process unit does not
constitute construction.
Consumption means the makeup
quantity of HAP entering a process that
is not used as reactant. The quantity of
material used as reactant Is the
theoretical amount needed assuming a
.100 percent stoichiometric conversion.
Makeup is the net amount of material
that must be added to the process to
replenish losses.
Container, as used in the wastewater
provisions, means any portable waste
management unit that has a capacity
greater dian or equal to 0.1 m3 in which
a material is stored, transported, treated,
or otherwise handled. Examples of
containers are drums, barrels, tank
trucks, barges, dumpsters, tank cars,
dump trucks, and ships.
Continuous process means a process
where the inputs and outputs flow
continuously throughout the duration of
the process. Continuous processes
typically approach steady state.
Continuous seal means a seal that
forms a continuous closure that
completely covers the space between
the wall of the storage vessel and the
edge of the floating roof. A continuous
seal may be a vapor-mounted, liquid-
mounted, or metallic shoe seal.
Controlled HAP emissions means the
quantity of HAP components discharged
to the atmosphere from an air pollution
control device.
Cover, as used in the wastewater
provisions, means a device or system
which is placed on or over a waste
management unit containing wastewater
or residuals so that the entire surface
area is enclosed to minimize air
emissions. A cover may have openings
necessary for operation, inspection, and
maintenance of die waste management
unit such as access hatches, sampling
ports, and gauge wells provided that
each opening is closed when not in use.
Examples of covers include a fixed roof
installed on a wastewater tank, a lid
installed on a containei, and an air-
supported enclosure installed over a
waste management unit.
Double block and bleed system means
two block valves connected in series
with a bleed valve or line that can vent
the line between the two block valves.
Duct work means a conveyance
system such as those commonly used
for heating and ventilation systems. It Is
often made of sheet metal and often has
sections connected by screws or
crimping. Hard-piping is not ductwork.
Equipment, for purposes of § 63.1363,
means each pump, compressor, agitator,
pressure relief device, sampling
connection system, open-ended valve or
line, valve, connector, and
instrumentation system in organic
hazardous air pollutant service.
External floating roof means a
pontoon-type or double-deck type cover
that rests on the liquid surface in a
storage tank or waste management unit
wldi no fixed roof.
FBFRA means die Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Fill or filling means die introduction
of organic HAP into a storage tank or the
introduction of a wastewater stream or
residual into a waste management unit,
but not necessarily to complete
capacity.
First attempt at repair means to take
action for the purpose of stopping or
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33593
reducing leakage of organic material to
the atmosphere.
Fixed roo/means a cover that is
mounted on a waste management unit
or storage tank in a stationary manner
and that does not move with
fluctuations in liquid level.
Flame ionization detector (FID) means
a device in which the measured change
in conductivity of a standard flame
• (usually hydrogen) due to the insertion
of another gas or vapor is used to detect
the gas or vapor.
Floating roof means a cover consisting
of a double deck, pontoon single deck,
internal floating cover or covered
floating roof, which rests upon and is
supported by the liquid being
contained, and is equipped with a
continuous seal or seals to close the
space between the roof edge and waste
management unit or storage vessel wall.
Flow indicator means a device that
indicates whether gas flow is, or
whether the valve position would allow
gas flow to be, present in a line.
Group 1 process vent means any
process vent from a process at an
existing or new affected source for
which the uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions from the sum of all process
vents are greater than or equal to 0.15
Mg/yr and/or the uncontrolled hydogen
chloride (HC1) and chlorine emissions
from the sum of all process vents are
greater than or equal to 6.8 Mg/yr.
Croup 2 process vent means any
process vent that does not meet the
definition of a Group 1 process vent.
Group 1 storage vessel means a
storage vessel at an existing affected
source with a capacity equal to or
greater than 75 m3 and storing material
with a maximum true vapor pressure
greater than or equal to 3.45 kPa, or a
storage vessel at a new affected source
with a capacity equal to or greater than
40 m3 and storing material with a
maximum true vapor pressure greater
than or equal to 16.5 kPa and with a
capacity greater than or equal to 75 m3
and storing material with a maximum
true vapor pressure greater than or equal
to 3.45 kPa.
Group 2 storage vessel means a
storage vessel that does not meet the
definition of a Group 1 storage vessel.
Group 1 wastewater stream means
process wastewater at an existing or
new source that meets the criteria for
Group 1 status in §63.132(c) of subpart
G of this part for compounds in Table
9 of subpart G of this part or a
maintenance wastewater stream that
contains 5.3 Mg of HAP per discharge
event.
Group 2 wastewater stream means any
wastewater stream that does not meet
the definition of a Group 1 wastewater
stream.
Group of processes means all of the
equipment associated with processes in
a building, processing area, or facility-
wide. A group of processes may consist
of a single process.
Halogenated compounds means
organic compounds that contain
chlorine atoms.
Halogenated vent stream means a
process, storage vessel, or waste
management unit vent stream
determined to have a concentration of
halogenated compounds of greater than
20 ppmv, as determined through
process knowledge, test results using
Method 18 of-40 CFR part 60, appendix
A, or test results using any other test
method that has been validated
according to the procedures in Method
301 of appendix A of this part.
Hard-piping means piping or tubing
that is manufactured and properly
installed using good engineering
judgment and standards, such as ANSI
B31-3.
Impurity means a substance that is
produced coincidentally with the
product(s), or is present in a raw
material. An impurity does not serve a
useful purpose in the production or use
of the product(s) and is not isolated.
In gas/vapor service means that a
piece of equipment in organic HAP
service contains a gas or vapor at
operating conditions.
In heavy liquid service means that a
piece of equipment in organic HAP
service is not in gas/vapor service or in
light liquid service.
In light liquid service means that a
piece of equipment in organic HAP
service contains a liquid that meets the
following conditions:
(1) The vapor pressure of one or more
of the organic compounds is greater
than 0.3 kPa at 20° C;
(2) The total concentration of the pure
organic compounds constituents having
a vapor pressure greater than 0.3 kPa at
20° C is equal to or greater than 20
percent by weight of the total process
stream; and
(3) The fluid is a liquid at operating
conditions.
Note: To definition of "In light liquid
service: Vapor pressures may be determined
by the methods described in 40 CFR •
60.485(e)(l).
In liquid service means that a piece of
equipment in organic HAP service is not
in gas/vapor service.
In organic hazardous air pollutant or
in organic HAP service means that a
piece of equipment either contains or
contacts a fluid (liquid or gas) that Is at
least 5 percent by weight of total organic
HAP as determined according to the
provisions of §63.180(d) of subpart H of
this part. The provisions of §63.180(d)
of subpart H of this part also specify
how to determine that a piece of
equipment is not in organic HAP
service.
In vacuum service means that
equipment is operating at an internal
pressure which is at least 5 kPa below
ambient pressure.
In-situ sampling systems means
nonextractive samplers or in-line
samplers.
Individual drain system means the
stationary system used to convey
wastewater streams or residuals to a
waste management unit or to discharge
or disposal. The term includes: hard
piping; all process drains and Junction
boxes; and associated sewer lines, other
junction boxes, manholes, sumps, and
lift stations conveying wastewater
streams or residuals. A segregated
stormwater sewer system, which is a
drain and collection system designed
and operated for the sole purpose of
collecting rainfall-runoff at a facility,
and which is segregated from all other
individual drain systems, is excluded
from this definition.
Instrumentation system means a
group of equipment components used to
condition and convey a sample of the
process fluid to analyzers and
instruments for the purpose of
determining process operating
conditions (e.g., composition, pressure,
flow, etc.). Valves and connectors are
the predominant type of equipment
used in instrumentation systems;
however, other types of equipment may
also be included in these systems. Only
valves nominally 0.5 inches and smaller
and connectors nominally 0.75 inches
and smaller in diameter are considered
instrumentation systems for the
purposes of this subpart. Valves greater
than nominally 0.5 inches and
connectors greater than nominally 0.75
inches associated with instrumentation
systems are not considered part of
instrumentation systems and must be
monitored individually.
Integral intermediate means an
intermediate for which 50 percent or
more of the annual production is used
in on-site production of any PAI(s) and
that is not stored before being used in
the production of another integral
intermediate or the PAI(s). For the
purposes of this definition, an
intermediate is stored if it is discharged
to a storage vessel and at least one of the
following conditions is met: the
processing equipment that discharges to
the storage vessel is shutdown before
the processing equipment that
withdraws from the storage vessel is
-------
33594 Federal Register/VoI. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
started up; during an annual period, the
material must be stored in the vessel for
at least 30 days before being used to
make a PAJ; or the processing
equipment that discharges to the storage
vessel is located in a separate building
(or processing area) of the plant than the
processing equipment that uses material
from the storage vessel as a feedstock,
and control equipment is not shared by
the two processing areas. Any process
unit that produces an intermediate and
is subject to subpart F of this part is not
an integral intermediate.
Intermediate means an organic
compound that is produced by chemical
reaction and that is further processed or
modified in one or more additional
chemical reaction steps to produce
another intermediate or a PAL
Internal floating roofmeans a cover
that rests or floats on the liquid surface
(but not necessarily in complete contact
with it) inside a storage tank or waste
management unit that has a
permanently affixed roof.
Junction box means a manhole or
access point to a wastewater sewer
system line or a lift station.
Large control device means a control
device that controls process vents, and
the total HAP emissions into the control
device from all sources are greater than
or equal to 10 tons/yr.
Liquid-mounted seal means a foam- or
liquid-filled seal mounted in contact
with the liquid between the wall of the
storage vessel or waste management unit
and the floating roof. The seal is
mounted continuously around the tank
or unit.
Liquids dripping means any visible
leakage from the seal including
dripping, spraying, misting, clouding,
and ice formation. Indications of liquid
dripping include puddling or new stains
that are indicative of an existing
evaporated drip.
Maintenance wastewater means
wastewater generated by the draining of
process fluid from components in the
PAI process unit into an individual
drain system prior to or during
maintenance activities. Maintenance
wastewater can be generated through
planned or unplanned shutdowns and
during periods not associated with a
shutdown. Examples of activities that
can generate maintenance wastewaters
include descaling of heat exchanger
tubing bundles, cleaning of distillation
column traps, draining of low legs and
high point bleeds, draining of pumps
into an individual drain system, and
draining of portions of the PAI process
unit for repair.
Malfunction means any sudden,
infrequent, and not reasonably
preventable failure of air pollution
control equipment, emissions
monitoring equipment, process
equipment, or a process to operate in a
normal or usual manner. Failures that
are caused all or in part by poor
maintenance or careless operation are
not malfunctions.
Maximum true vapor pressure means
the equilibrium partial pressure exerted
by the total organic HAP in the stored
or transferred liquid at the temperature
equal to the highest calendar-month
average of the liquid storage or
transferred temperature for liquids
stored or transferred above or below the
ambient temperature or at the local
maximum monthly average temperature
as reported by the National Weather
Service for liquids stored or transferred
at the ambient temperature, as
determined:
(1) In accordance with methods
described in Chapter 19.2 of the
American Petroleum Institute's Manual
of Petroleum Measurement Standards,
Evaporative Loss From Floating-Roof
Tanks (incorporated by reference as
specified in § 63.14 in subpart A of this
part); or
(2) As obtained from standard
reference texts; or
(3) As determined by the American
Society for Testing and Materials
Method D2879-97, Test Method for
Vapor Pressure-Temperature
Relationship and Initial Decomposition
Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope
(incorporated by reference as specified
in § 63.14 of subpart A of this part); or
(4) Any other method approved by the
Administrator.
Metallic shoe seal or mechanical shoe
seal means metal sheets that are held
vertically against the wall of the storage
tank by springs, weighted levers, or
other mechanisms and connected to the
floating roof by braces or other means.
A flexible coated fabric (envelope) spans
the annular space between the metal
sheet and the floating roof.
Nonrepairable means that it is
technically infeasible to repair a piece of
equipment from which a leak has been
detected without a process shutdown.
Open-ended valve or line means any
valve, except pressure relief valves,
having one side of the valve seat in
contact with process fluid and one side
open to atmosphere, either directly or
through open piping.
Operating scenario, for the purposes
of reporting and recordkeeping, means a
description of a PAI process unit,
including: identification of each
wastewater point of determination
(POD) and process vent, their associated
emissions episodes and durations, and
their associated level of control and
control devices, as applicable;
calculations and engineering analyses
required to demonstrate compliance;
and a description of operating and/or
testing conditions for any associated
control device.
Organic compound, as used in the
definitions of intermediate and PAI,
means any compound that contains both
carbon and hydrogen with or without
other elements.
Organic HAP means those HAP listed
in section 112(b) of the CAA that are
measured according to die procedures of
Method 18 or Method 25A, 40 CFR pan
60, appendix A.
Pesticide active ingredient or PAI
means any material that is an active
ingredient within the meaning of FIFRA
section 2(a); that is used to produce an
insecticide, herbicide, or fungicide end
use pesticide product; that consists of
one or more organic compounds; and
that must be labeled in accordance with
40 CFR part 156 for transfer, sale, or
distribution. These materials are
typically described by North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) Codes 325199 and 32532 (i.e.,
previously known as Standard
Industrial Classification System Codes
2869 and 2879). These materials are
identified by product classification
codes 01, 21, 02, 04, 44, 07,08, and 16
in block 19 on EPA form 3540-16, die
Pesticides Report for Pesticide-
Producing Establishments.
Pesticide active ingredient
manufacturing process unit (PAI
process unit) means a process unit that
is used to produce a material that is
primarily used as a PAI or integral
intermediate. A PAI process unit
consists of: the process, as defined in
this subpart; associated storage vessels,
as determined by the procedures in
§ 63.1360(f); equipment identified in
§63.1362(1); connected piping and
ducts; and components such as pumps,
compressors, agitators, pressure relief
devices, sampling connection systems,
open-ended valves or lines, valves,
connectors, and instrumentation
systems. A material is primarily used as
a PAI or integral intermediate if more
than 50 percent of the projected annual
production from a process unit in the 3
years after June 23,1999 or startup,
whichever is later, is used as a PAI or
integral intermediate; recordkeeping is
required if die material is used as a PAI
or Integral Intermediate, but not as die
primary use. If die primary use changes
to a PAI or integral intermediate, die
process unit becomes a PAI process unit
unless it is already subject to die HON.
If the primary use changes from a PAI
or integral intermediate to another use,
die process unit remains a PAI process
unit. Any process tank containing an
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33595
integral intermediate is part of the PAI
process unit used to produce the
integral intermediate. A process unit
that produces an intermediate that is not
an integral intermediate may be
designated as a PAI process unit
according to the procedures of
§63.1360(g). Formulation of pesticide
products is not considered part of a PAI
process unit. Quality assurance and
quality control laboratories are not
considered part of a PAI process unit.
Plant site means all contiguous or
adjoining property that is under
common control, including properties
that are separated only by a road or
other public right-of-way. Common
control includes properties that are
owned, leased, or operated by the same
entity, parent entity, subsidiary, or any
combination thereof.
Point of determination (POD) means
each point where a wastewater stream
exits the PAI process unit.
Note to definition of "point of .
determination": The regulation allows
determination of the characteristics of a
wastewater stream: at the point of
determination; or downstream of the point of
determination if corrections are made for
changes in flow rate and annual average
concentration of Table 9 compounds as
determined in §63.144 of subpart G of this
part. Such changes include: losses by air
emissions, reduction of annual average
concentration or changes in flow rate by
mixing with other water or wastewater
streams, and reduction in flow rate or annual
average concentration by treating or
otherwise handling the wastewater stream to
remove or destroy HAP.
Pressure release means the emission
of materials resulting from the system
pressure being greater than the set
pressure of the pressure relief device.
This release can be one release or a
series of releases over a short time
period due to a malfunction in the
process.
Pressure relief device or valve means
a safety device used to prevent
operating pressures from exceeding the
maximum allowable working pressure
of the process equipment. A common
pressure relief device is a spring-loaded
pressure relief valve. Devices that are
actuated either by a pressure of less than
or equal to 2.5 pounds per square inch
gauge or by a vacuum are not pressure
relief devices.
Process means a logical grouping of
processing equipment which
collectively function to produce a
product. For the purpose of this subpart,
a PAI process includes all, or a
combination of, reaction, recovery,
separation, purification, treatment,
cleaning, and other activities or unit
operations, which are used to produce
a PAI or integral intermediate. A PAI
process and all integral Intermediate
processes for which 100 percent of the
annual production is used in the
production of the PAI may be linked
together and defined as a single PAI
process unit.
Process condenser means a condenser
whose primary purpose is to recover
material as an integral part of a unit
operation. The condenser must cause a
vapor-to-liquid phase change for periods
during which the temperature of liquid
in the process equipment is at or above
its boiling or bubble point Examples of
process condensers include distillation
condensers, reflux condensers, and
condensers used in stripping or flashing
operation. In a series of condensers, all
condensers up to and including the first
condenser with an exit gas temperature
below the boiling or bubble point of the
liquid in the process equipment are
considered to be process condensers.
All condensers in line prior to the
vacuum source are included in this
definition.
Process shutdown means a work
practice or operational procedure that
stops production from a process or part
of a process during which it is
technically feasible to clear process
material from a process or part of a
process consistent with safety
constraints and during which repairs
can be effected. An unscheduled work
practice or operational procedure that
stops production from a process or part
of a process for less than 24 hours is not
a process shutdown. An unscheduled
work practice or operational procedure
that would stop production from a
process or part of a process for a shorter
period of time than would be required
to clear the process or part of the
process of materials and start up the
process, and would result in greater
emissions than delay of repair of leaking
components until the next scheduled
process shutdown, is not a process
shutdown. The use of spare equipment
and technically feasible bypassing of
equipment without stopping production
are not process shutdowns.
Process tank means a tank that is used
to collect material discharged from a
feedstock storage vessel or equipment
within the process and transfer of this
material to other equipment within the
process or a product storage vessel.
Processing steps occur both upstream
and downstream of the tank within a
given process unit. Surge control vessels
and bottoms receivers that fit these
conditions are considered process tanks.
Process unit means the equipment
assembled and connected by pipes or
ducts to process raw materials and to
manufacture an intended product.
Process unit group means a group of
process units that manufacture PAI's
and products other than PAI's by
alternating raw materials or operating
conditions, or by reconfiguring process
equipment Only process equipment
that has been or could be part of a PAI
process unit, because of its function or
capacity, is included in a process unit
group.
Process vent means a point of
emission from processing equipment to
the atmosphere or a control device. The
vent may be the release point for an
emission stream associated with an
individual unit operation, or It may be
the release point for emission streams
from multiple unit operations that have
been manifolded together into a
common header. Examples of process
vents include, but are not limited to,
vents on condensers used for product
recovery, bottom receivers, surge control
vessels, reactors, filters, centrifuges,
process tanks, and product dryers. A
vent is not considered to be a process
vent for a given emission episode if the
undiluted and uncontrolled emission
stream that is released through the vent
contains less than 20 ppmv HAP, as
determined through process knowledge
that no HAP are present in the emission
stream; using an engineering assessment
as discussed in §63.1365 (b) (2) (ii); from
test data collected using Method 1818 of
40 CFR part 60, appendix A; 6r from test
data collected using any other test
method that has been validated
according to the procedures in Method
301 of appendix A of this part. Process
vents do not include vents on storage
vessels regulated under §63.1362(c),
vents on wastewater emission sources
regulated under §63.1362(d), or pieces
of equipment regulated under § 63.1363.
Process wastewater means wastewater
which, during manufacturing or
processing, comes into direct contact
with, or results from, the production or
use of any raw material, intermediate
product, finished product, by-product,
or waste product Examples include:
product tank drawdown or feed tank .
drawdown; water formed during a
chemical reaction or used as a reactant;
water used to wash impurities from
organic products or reactants; water
used to clean process equipment; water
used to cool or quench organic vapor
streams through direct contact; and
condensed steam from jet ejector
systems pulling vacuum on vessels
containing organics.
Product means the compound (s) or
chemical(s) that are produced or
manufactured as the intended output of
a process unit Impurities and wastes
are not considered products.
-------
33596 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Product dryer means equipment that
is used to remove moisture or other
liquid from granular, powdered, or other
solid PAI or integral intermediate
products prior to storage, formulation,
shipment, or other uses. The product
dryer is part of the process.
Product dryer vent means a process
vent from a product dryer through
which a gas stream containing gaseous
. pollutants (i.e., organic HAP, HC1, or
' chlorine), paniculate matter, or both are
released to the atmosphere or are routed
to a control device.
Production-indexed HAP
consumption factor (HAP factor) is the
result of dividing the annual
consumption of total HAP by the annual
production rate, per process.
Production-indexed VOC
consumption factor (VOC factor) is the
result of dividing the annual
consumption of total VOC by the annual
production rate, per process.
Publicly owned treatment works
(POTW) is defined at 40 CFR part
403.3(0).
Reactor means a device or vessel in
which one or more chemicals or
reactants, other than air, are combined
or decomposed in such a way that their
molecular structures are altered and one
or more new organic compounds are
formed.
Recovery device, as used in the
wastewater provisions, means an
individual unit of equipment capable of,
and normally used for the purpose of,
recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e.,
net positive heating value), use, reuse,
or for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse.
Examples of equipment that may be
recovery devices include organic
removal devices such as decanters,
strippers, or thin-film evaporation units.
To be a recovery device, a decanter and
any other equipment based on the
operating principle of gravity separation
must receive only two-phase liquid
streams.
Repaired means that equipment is
adjusted, or otherwise altered, to
eliminate a leak as defined in the
applicable paragraphs of §63.1363.
Research and development facility
means any stationary source whose
primary purpose is to conduct research
and development, where the operations
are under the close supervision of
technically trained personnel, and is not
engaged in the manufacture of products
for commercial sale, except in a de
minimis manner.
Residual means any liquid or solid
material containing Table 9 compounds
(as defined in § 63.111 of subpart G of
this part) that is removed from a
wastewater stream by a waste
management unit or treatment process
that does not destroy organics
(nondestructive unit). Examples of
residuals from nondestructive
wastewater management units include
the organic layer and bottom residue
removed by a decanter or organic-water
separator and the overheads from a
steam stripper or air stripper. Examples
of materials which are not residuals
include: silt; mud; leaves; bottoms from
a steam stripper or air stripper; and
sludges, ash, or other materials removed
from wastewater being treated by
destructive devices such as biological
treatment units and incinerators.
Safety device means a closure device
such as a pressure relief valve, frangible
disc, fusible plug, or any other type of
device which functions exclusively to
prevent physical damage or permanent
deformation to a unit or its air emission
control equipment by venting gases or
vapors directly to the atmosphere
during unsafe conditions resulting from
an unplanned, accidental, or emergency
event. For the purposes of this subpart,
a safety device is not used for routine
venting of gases or vapors from the
vapor headspace underneath a cover
such as during filling of the unit or to
adjust the pressure in this vapor
headspace in response to normal daily
diurnal ambient temperature
fluctuations. A safety device is designed
to remain in a closed position during
normal operations and open only when
the internal pressure, or another
relevant parameter, exceeds the device
threshold setting applicable to the air
emission control equipment as
determined by the owner or operator
based on manufacturer
recommendations, applicable
regulations, fire protection and
prevention codes, standard engineering
codes and practices, or other
requirements for the safe handling of
flammable, combustible, explosive,
reactive, or hazardous materials.
Sampling connection system means
an assembly of equipment within a
process unit used during periods of
representative operation to take samples
of the process fluid. Equipment used to
take nonroutine grab samples is not
considered a sampling connection
system.
Sensor means a device that measures
a physical quantity or the change in a
physical quantity, such as temperature,
pressure, flow rate, pH, or liquid level.
Set pressure means the pressure at
which a properly operating pressure
relief device begins to open to relieve
atypical process system operating
pressure.
Sewer line means a lateral, trunk line,
branch line, or other conduit including,
but not limited to, grates, trenches, etc.,
used to convey wastewater streams or
residuals to a downstream waste
management unit.
Shutdown means the cessation of
operation of a continuous PAI process
unit for any purpose. Shutdown also
means the cessation of a batch PAI
process unit or any related individual
piece of equipment required or used to
comply with this pan or for emptying
and degassing storage vessels for
periodic maintenance, replacement of
equipment, repair, or any other purpose
not excluded from this definition.
Shutdown does not apply to cessation of
a batch PAI process unit at the end of
a campaign or between batches (e.g., for
rinsing or washing equipment), for
routine maintenance, or for other
routine operations.
Small control device means a control
device that controls process vents, and
the total HAP emissions into the control
device from all sources are less than 10
tons of HAP per year.
Startup means the setting in operation
of a continuous PAI process unit for any
purpose, the first time a new or
reconstructed batch PAI process unit
begins production, or, for new
equipment added, including equipment
used to comply with this subpart, the
first time the equipment is put into
operation. For batch process units,
startup does not apply to the first time
the equipment is put into operation at
the start of a campaign to produce a
product that has been produced in the
past, after a shutdown for maintenance,
or when the equipment is put into
operation as part of a batch within a
campaign. As used in § 63.1363, startup
means the setting in operation of a piece
of equipment or a control device that is
subject to this subpart.
Storage vessel means a tank or other
vessel that is used to store organic
liquids that contain one or more HAP
and that has been assigned, according to
the procedures in §63.1360(f) or (g), to
a PAI process unit that is subject to this
subpart MMM. The following are not
considered storage vessels for the
purposes of this subpart'
(1) Vessels permanently attached to
motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars,
barges, or ships;
(2) Pressure vessels designed to
operate in excess of 204.9 kilopascals
and without emissions to the
atmosphere;
(3) Vessels storing material that
contains no organic HAP or contains
organic HAP only as impurities;
(4) Wastewater storage tanks;
(5) Process tanks; and
(6) Nonwastewater waste tanks.
Supplemental gases means any
nonaffected gaseous streams (streams
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33597
that are not from process vents, storage
vessels, equipment or waste
management units) that contain less
than 20 ppmv TOC and less than 20
ppmv total HC1 and chlorine, as
determined through process knowledge,
and are combined with an affected vent
stream. Supplemental gases are often
used to maintain pressures in manifolds
or for fire and explosion protection and
prevention. Air required to operate
combustion device bumer(s) is not
considered a supplemental gas.
Surface impoundment means a waste
management unit which is a natural
topographic depression, manmade
excavation, or diked area formed
primarily of earthen materials (although
it may be lined with manmade
materials), which is designed to hold an
accumulation of liquid wastes or waste
containing free liquids. A surface
impoundment is used for the purpose of
treating, storing, or disposing of
wastewater or residuals, and is not an
injection well. Examples of surface
impoundments are equalization,
settling, and aeration pits, ponds, and
lagoons.
TotaJ organic compounds (TOC)
means those compounds measured
according to the procedures of Method
18 or Method 25A, 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A.
Treatment process means a specific
technique that removes or destroys the
organics in a wastewater or residual
stream such as a steam stripping unit,
thin-film evaporation unit, waste
incinerator, biological treatment unit, or
any other process applied to wastewater
streams or residuals to comply with
§63.138 of subpart G of this part. Most
treatment processes are conducted in
tanks. Treatment processes are a subset
of waste management units.
Uncontrolled HAP emissions means a
gas stream containing HAP which has
exited the process (or process
condenser, if any), but which has not
yet been introduced into an air
pollution control device to reduce the
mass of HAP in the stream. If the
process vent is not routed to an air
pollution control device, uncontrolled
• emissions are those HAP emissions
released to the atmosphere.
Unit operation means those
processing steps that occur within
distinct equipment that are used, among
other things, to prepare reactants,
facilitate reactions, separate and purify
products, and recycle materials.
Equipment used for these purposes
includes, but is not limited to, reactors,
distillation units, extraction columns,
absorbers, decanters, dryers,
condensers, and filtration equipment.
Vapor-mounted seal means a
continuous seal that completely covers
the annular space between the wall of
the storage tank or waste management
unit and the edge of the floating roof,
and is mounted such that there is a
vapor space between the stored liquid
and the bottom of the seal.
Volatile organic compounds are
defined in 40 CFR 51.100.
Waste management unit means the
equipment, structure^), and/or
device(s) used to convey, store, treat, or
dispose of wastewater streams or
residuals. Examples of waste
management units include wastewater
tanks, surface impoundments,
individual drain systems, and biological
wastewater treatment units. Examples of
equipment that may be waste
management units include containers,
air flotation units, oil-water separators
or organic-water separators, or organic
removal devices such as decanters,
strippers, or thin-film evaporation units.
If such equipment is a recovery device,
then it is part of a PAI process unit and
is not a waste management unit.
Wastewater means water dial meets
either of the conditions described in
paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition
and is discarded from a PAI process unit
that is at an affected source:
(1) Is generated from a PAI process
and contains either:
(i) An annual average concentration of
compounds in Table 9 of subpart G of
this part of at least 5 ppmw and has an
average flow rate of 0.02 L/min or
greater; or
(ii) An annual average concentration
of compounds in Table 9 of subpart G
of this part of at least 10,000 ppmw at
any flow rate;
(2) Is generated from a PAI process
unit as a result of maintenance activities
and contains at least 5.3 Mg of HAP per
individual discharge event.
Wastewater tank means a stationary
waste management unit that is designed
to contain an accumulation of
wastewater or residuals and is
constructed primarily of nonearthen
materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel,
plastic) which provide structural
support Wastewater tanks used for flow
equalization are included in this
definition.
Water seal controls means a seal pot,
p-leg trap, or otiier type of trap filled
with water (e.g., flooded sewers that
maintain water levels adequate to
prevent air flow through the system)
that creates a water barrier between the
sewer line and the atmosphere. The
water level of the seal must be
maintained in the vertical leg of a drain
in order to be considered a water seal.
§63.1362 Standards.
(a) On and after the compliance dates
specified in § 63.1364, each owner or
operator of an affected source subject to
die provisions of this subpart shall
control HAP emissions to the levels
specified in uiis section and in
§ 63.1363, as summarized in Table 2. of
this subpart.
(b) Process vents. (1) The owner or
operator of an existing source shall
comply widi the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section.
The owner or operator of a new source
shall comply widi the requirements of
paragraphs (b) (4) and (5) of this section.
Compliance with paragraphs (b) (2)
dirough (b)(5) of this section shall be
demonstrated dirough the applicable
test methods and initial compliance
procedures in §63.1365 and the
monitoring requirements in §63.1366.
(2) Organic HAP emissions from
existing sources. The owner or operator
of an existing affected source must
comply with die requirements in either
paragraph (b) (2) (i) of this section or with
die requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)
dirough (iv) of this secdon.
(i) The uncontrolled organic HAP
emission rate shall not exceed 0.15 Mg/
yr from the sum of all process vents
within a process.
(ii) (A) Except as provided in
paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B) of diis section,
uncontrolled organic HAP emissions
from a process vent shall be reduced by
98 percent by weight or greater if the
flow-weighted average flowrate for the
vent as calculated using Equation 1 of
diis subpart is less than or equal to the
flowrate calculated using Equation 2 of
this subpart.
(Eq. 1)
i-l
FR = 0.02*(HL)-1,000 (Eq. 2)
Where:
FR.=flow-welghted average flowrate for
die vent, scfm
Dj=duration of each emission event, min
FRi»flowrate of each emission event,
scfm
n=number of emission events
FR=flowrate, scfm
HL-=annual uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions, Ib/yr, as defined in
§63.1361
(B) If the owner or operator can
demonstrate dial a control device,
installed on or before November 10,
1997 on a process vent odierwise
-------
33598 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
subject to the requirements of paragraph
(b)(2)(ii)(A) of this section, reduces inlet
emissions of total organic HAP by
greater than or equal to 90 percent by
weight but less than 98 percent by
weight, then the control device must be
operated to reduce inlet emissions of
total organic HAP by 90 percent by
weight or greater.
(iii) Excluding process vents that are
subject to the requirements in paragraph
(b)(2)(ii) of this section, uncontrolled
organic HAP emissions from the sum of
all process vents within a process shall
be reduced by 90 percent or greater by
weight.
(iv) As an alternative to the
requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and
(iii) of this section, uncontrolled organic
HAP emissions from any process vent
may be reduced in accordance with any
of the provisions in paragraphs
(b)(2)(iv)(A) through (D) of this section.
All remaining process vents within a
process must be controlled in
accordance with paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)
and (iii) of this section.
(A) To outlet concentrations less than
or equal to 20 ppmv as TOC; or
(B) By a flare that meets the
requirements of § 63.11 (b); or
(C) By a control device specified in
§63.1365(a)(4);or
(D) In accordance with the alternative
standard specified in paragraph (b)(6) of
this section.
(3) HC1 and Ch emissions from
existing sources. For each process, the
owner or operator of an existing source
shall comply with the requirements of
either paragraph (b)(3)(i) or (ii) of this
section.
(i) The uncontrolled HCl and C12
emissions, including HCl generated
from the combustion of halogenated
process vent emissions, from the sum of
all process vents within a process shall
not exceed 6.8 Mg/yr.
(ii) HCl and C12 emissions, including
HCl generated from combustion of
halogenated process vent emissions,
from the sum of all process vents within
a process shall be reduced by 94 percent
or greater or to outlet concentrations
less than or equal to 20 ppmv.
(4) Organic HAP emissions from new
sources. For each process, the owner or
operator of a new source shall comply
with the requirements of either
paragraph (b)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) The uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions shall not exceed 0.15 Mg/yr
from the sum of all process vents within
a process.
(ii) The uncontrolled organic HAP
emissions from the sum of all process
vents within a process at a new affected
source that are not controlled according
to any of the requirements of paragraphs
(b)(4){ii)(A) through (C) or (b)(6) of this
section shall be reduced by 98 weight
percent or greater.
(A) To outlet concentrations less than
or equal to 20 ppmv as TOC; or
(B) By a flare that meets the
requirements of § 63.11 (b); or
(C) By a control device specified in
§63.1365(a)(4).
(5) HCl and C12 emissions from new
sources. For each process, the owner or
operator of a new source shall comply
with the requirements of either
paragraph (b)(5)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this
section.
(i) The uncontrolled HCl and C12
emissions, including HCl generated
from combustion of halogenated process
vent emissions, from the sum of all
process vents within a process shall not
exceed 6.8 Mg/yr.
(ii) If HCl and C12 emissions,
including HCl generated from
combustion of halogenated process vent
emissions, from the sum of all process
vents within a process are greater than
or equal to 6.8 Mg/yr and less than 191
Mg/yr, these HCl and C12 emissions
shall be reduced by 94 percent or to an
outlet concentration less than or equal
to 20 ppmv.
(iii) If HCl and C12 emissions,
including HCl generated from
combustion of halogenated process vent
emissions, from the sum of all process
vents within a process are greater than
191 Mg/yr, these HCl and C12 emissions
shall be reduced by 99 percent or greater
or to an outlet concentration less than
or equal to 20 ppmv.
(6) Alternative standard. As an
alternative to the provisions in
paragraphs (b) (2) through (5) of this
section, the owner or operator may route
emissions from a process vent to a
control device or series of .control
devices achieving an outlet TOC
concentration, as calibrated on methane
or the predominant HAP, of 20 ppmv or
less, and an outlet concentration of HCl
and C12 of 20 ppmv or less. Any process
vents within a process that are not
routed to such a control device or series
of control devices must be controlled in
accordance with the provisions of
paragraphs (b)(2)(il), (b)(2)(iii), (b)(2)(iv),
(b)(3)(ii), (b)(3)(iii), (b)(4)(ii). (b)(5)(ii). or
(b) (5) (iii) of this section, as applicable.
s (c) Storage vessels. (1) The owner or
operator shall either determine the
group status of a storage vessel or
designate it as a Group 1 storage vessel.
If the owner or operator elects to
designate the storage vessel as a Group
1 storage vessel, the owner or operator
is not required to determine the
maximum true vapor pressure of the
material stored in the storage vessel.
(2) Standard for existing sources.
Except as specified in paragraphs (c) (4)
and (5) of this section, the owner or
operator of a Group 1 storage vessel at
an existing affected source, as defined in
§ 63.1361, shall equip the affected
storage vessel with one of the following:
(i) A fixed roof and internal floating
roof, or
(ii) An external floating roof, or
(iii) An external floating roof
converted to an internal floating roof, or
(iv) A closed vent system meeting the
conditions of paragraph (k) of this
section and a control device that meets
any of the following conditions:
(A) Reduces organic HAP emissions
by 95 percent by weight or greater; or
(B) Reduces organic HAP emissions to
outlet concentrations of 20 ppmv or less
as TOC; or
(C) Is a flare that meets the
requirements of § 63.11 (b); or
(D) Is a control device specified in
§63.1365(a)(4). ..
(3) Standard for new sources. Except
as specified in paragraphs (c)(4) and (5)
of this section, the owner or operator of
a Group 1 storage vessel at a new
source, as defined in §63.1361, shall
equip the affected storage vessel in
accordance with any one of paragraphs
(c)(2)(l) through (iv) of this section.
(4) Alternative standard. As an
alternative to the provisions in
paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section,
the owner or operator of an existing or
new affected source may route
emissions from storage vessels to a
control device or series of control
devices achieving an outlet TOC
concentration, as calibrated on methane
or the predominant HAP, of 20 ppmv or
less, and an outlet concentration of
hydrogen chloride and chlorine of 20
ppmv or less.
(5) Planned routine maintenance. The
owner or operator is exempt from the
specifications in paragraphs (c) (2)
through (4) of this section during
periods of planned routine maintenance
of the control device that do not exceed
240 hr/yr.
(6) Compliance with the provisions of
paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section
is demonstrated using the initial
compliance procedures in § 63.1365(d)
and the monitoring requirements in
§ 63.1366. Compliance with the outlet
concentrations in paragraph (c)(4) of
this section shall be determined by the -
initial compliance provisions in
§63.1365 (a) (5) and the continuous
emission monitoring requirements of
§63.1366(b)(5).
(d) Wastewater. The owner or
operator of each affected source shall
comply with the requirements of
§§63.131 through 63.147 of subpart G of
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33599
this part, with the differences noted in
paragraphs (d)(l) through (13) of this
section for the purposes of this subpart.
(1) When the determination of
equivalence criteria in §63.102(b) is
referred to in §§63.132, 63.133, and
63.137 of subpart G of this part, the
provisions in §63.6(g) of subpart A of
this part shall apply.
(2) When the storage tank
requirements contained in §§ 63.119
through 63.123 of subpart G of this part
are referred to in §§ 63.132 through
63.148 of subpart G of this part,
§§63.119 through 63.123 of subpart G of
this part are applicable, with the
exception of the differences noted in
paragraphs (d)(2)(l) through (v) of this
section.
(i) When the term "storage vessel" is
used in §§63.119 through 63.123 of
subpart G of this part, the definition of
the term "storage vessel" in §63.1361
shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(ii) When December 31, 1992, is
referred to in § 63.119 of subpart G of
this part, November 10, 1997 shall apply
for the purposes of this subpart.
(iii) When April 22, 1994 is referred
to in §63.119 of subpart G of this part,
June 23, 1999 shall apply for the
purposes of this subpart.
(iv) When the phrase "the compliance
date specified In § 63.100 of subpart F
of this part" is referred to in § 63.120 of
subpart G of this part, the phrase "the
compliance date specified in §63.1364"
shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(v) When the phrase "the maximum
true vapor pressure of the total organic
HAP in the stored liquid falls below the
values defining Group 1 storage vessels
specified in Table 5 or Table 6 of this
subpart" is referred to in
§63.120(b)(l)(iv) of subpart G of this
part, the phrase, "the maximum true
vapor pressure of the total organic HAP
in the stored liquid falls below the
values defining Group 1 storage vessels
specified In §63.1361" shall apply for
the purposes of this subpart.
(3) To request approval to monitor
alternative parameters, as referred to in
§63.146(a) of subpart G of this part, the
owner or operator shall comply with the
procedures in §63.8(f) of subpart A of
this part, as referred to in
§63.1366(b}(4), instead of the
procedures in §63.151 (f) or (g) of
subpart G of this part.
(4) When the Notification of
Compliance Status report requirements
contained in § 63.152(b) of subpart G of
this part are referred to In § 63.146 of
subpart G of this part, the Notification
of Compliance Status report
requirements in § 63.1368(f) shall apply
for the purposes of this subpart.
(5) When the recordkeeping
requirements contained in § 63.152(f) of
subpart G of this part are referred to in
§63.147(d) of subpart G of this part, the
recordkeeping requirements in
§ 63.1367 shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(6) When the Periodic report
requirements contained In §63.152 (c) of
subpart G of this part are referred to In
§§ 63.146 and 63.147 of subpart G of
this part, the Periodic report
requirements contained in § 63.1368(g)
shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(7) When the term "process
wastewater" Is referred to In §§ 63.132
through 63.147 of subpart G of this part,
the term "wastewater" as defined in
§ 63.1361 shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(8) When the term "Group 1
wastewater stream" is used in §§ 63.132
through 63.147 of subpart G of this part,
the definition of the term "Group 1
wastewater stream" In § 63.1361 shall
apply for both new sources and existing
sources for the purposes of this subpart.
(9) The requirements in §§ 63.132
through 63.147 for compounds listed on
Table 8 of subpart G of this part shall
not apply for'the purposes of this
subpart.
(10) When the total load of Table 9
compounds in the sum of all process
wastewater from PAI process units at a
new affected source is 2,100 Mg/yr
. (2,300 tons/yr) or more, the owner or
operator shall reduce, by removal or
destruction, the mass flow rate of all
compounds in Table 9 of subpart G of
this part In all wastewater (process and
maintenance wastewater) by 99 percent
or more. Alternatively, the owner or
operator may treat the wastewater In a
unit identified in and complying with
§ 63.138(h) of subpart G of this part. The
removal/destruction efficiency shall be
determined by the procedures specified
in § 63.145(c) of subpart G of this part,
for noncombustion processes, or
§ 63.145(d) of subpart G of this part, for
combustion processes.
(11) The compliance date for the
affected source subject to the provisions
of this section is specified in § 63.1364.
(12) The option in § 63.139 of subpart
G of this part to reduce emissions from
a control device to an outlet HAP
concentration of 20 ppmv shall not
apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(13) The requirement to correct outlet
concentrations from combustion devices
to 3 percent oxygen in §63.139(c)(l)(ii)
of subpart H of this part shall apply only
if supplemental gases are combined
with affected vent streams. If emissions
are controlled with a vapor recovery
system as specified in §63.139(c)(2) of
subpart H of this part, the owner or
operator must correct for supplemental
gases as specified in § 63.1365 (a) (7) (11).
(14) If wastewater is sent offsite for
biological treatment, the waste
management units up to the activated
sludge unit must be covered, or the
owner or operator must demonstrate
that less than 5 percent of the total HAP
on list 1 in §63.145 (h) of subpart H of
this part is emitted from these units.
(e) Bag dumps and product dryers. (1)
The owner or operator shall reduce
paniculate matter emissions to a
concentration not to exceed 0.01 gr/dscf
from product dryers that dry a PAI or
integral intermediate that is a HAP.
(2) The owner or operator shall reduce
paniculate matter emissions to a
concentration not to exceed 0.01 gr/dscf
from bag dumps that introduce to a PAI
process unit a feedstock that is a solid
material and a HAP, excluding bag
dumps where the feedstock contains
HAP only as impurities.
(3) Gaseous HAP emissions from
product dryers and bag dumps shall be
controlled in accordance with the
provisions for process vent emissions in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(f) Heat exchange systems. Unless one
or more of the conditions specified in
§63.104(a)(l) through (6) of subpart F of
this part are met, an owner or operator
shall monitor each heat exchange
system that is used to cool process
equipment in PAI process units that are
part of an affected source as defined in
§63.1360(a) according to the provisions
In either §63.104 (b) or (c) of subpart F
of this part. When the term "chemical
manufacturing process unit" Is used in
§63.104(c) of subpart F of this part, the
term "PAI process unit" shall apply for
the purposes of this subpart. Whenever
a leak is detected, the owner or operator
shall comply with the requirements in
§ 63.104 (d) of subpart F of this part.
Delay of repair of heat exchange systems
for which leaks have been detected is
allowed in accordance with the
provisions of § 63.104(e) of subpart F of
this part.
(g) Pollution prevention alternative.
Except as provided in paragraph (g)(l)
of this section, for a process that has an
initial startup before November 10,
1997, an owner or operator may choose
to meet the pollution prevendon
alternative requirement specified in
either paragraph (g)(2) or (3) of tills
section for any PAI process unit, in lieu
of the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this
section and in § 63.1363. Compliance
with the requirements of paragraphs
(g)(2) and (3) of this section shall be
-------
33600 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
demonstrated through the procedures in
§§63.1365(g)and63.1366(f).
(1) A HAP must be controlled
according to the requirements of
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this
section and §63.1363 if it is generated
in the PAI process unit or an associated
control device and it is not part of the
production-indexed HAP consumption
factor (HAP factor).
(2) The HAP factor shall be reduced
by at least 85 percent from a 3-year
average baseline beginning no earlier
than the 1987 through 1989 calendar
years. Alternatively, for a process that
has been operating for less than 3 years
but more than 1 year, the baseline factor
may be calculated for the time period
from startup of the process until the
present. For any reduction in the HAP
factor achieved by reducing a HAP that
is also a VOC, an equivalent reduction
in the production-indexed VOC
consumption factor (VOC factor) is also
required (the equivalence is determined
on a mass basis, not a percentage basis).
For any reduction in the HAP factor that
is achieved by reducing a HAP that is
not a VOC, the VOC factor may not be
increased.
(3) As an alternative to the provisions
in paragraph (g) (2) of this section, the
owner or operator may combine
pollution prevention with emissions
control as specified in paragraphs
(g) (3) (i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) The HAP factor shall be reduced as
specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section except that a reduction of at
least 50 percent shall apply for the
purposes of this paragraph.
(ii) The total annual HAP emissions
from the PAI process unit shall be
reduced by an amount that, when
divided by the annual production rate
and added to the reduction of the HAP
factor yields a value of at least 85
percent of the baseline HAP factor. The
total annual VOC emissions from the
process unit must be reduced by an
amount equivalent to the reduction in
HAP emissions for each HAP that is a
VOC (the equivalence is determined on
a mass basis). For HAP emissions
reductions that are achieved by
reducing a HAP that is not a VOC, the
total annual VOC emissions may not be
increased. The reduction in HAP air
emissions must be achieved using one
of the following control devices:
(A) Combustion control devices such
as incinerators, flares, or process
heaters.
(B) Control devices such as
condensers and carbon adsorbers whose
recovered product is destroyed or
shipped offsite for destruction.
(C) Any control device that does not
ultimately allow for recycling of
material back to the PAI process unit.
(D) Any control device for which the
owner or operator can demonstrate that
the use of the device in controlling HAP
emissions will have no effect on the
HAP factor for the PAI process unit
(h) Emissions averaging provisions..
Except as provided in paragraphs (h)(l)
through (7) of this section, the owner or
operator of an existing affected facility
may choose to comply with the
emission standards in paragraphs (b),
(c), and (d) of this section by using
emissions averaging procedures
specified in § 63.1365 (h) for organic
HAP emissions from any storage vessel,
process, or waste management unit that
is part of an affected source subject to
this subpart.
(1) A State may restrict the owner or
operator of an existing source to use
only the procedures in paragraphs (b),
(c), and (d) of this section to comply
with the emission standards where State
authorities prohibit averaging of HAP
emissions.
(2) Emission points that are controlled
as specified in paragraphs (h) (E) (i)
through (iii) may not be used to
calculate emissions averaging credits,
unless a nominal efficiency has been
assigned according to the procedures in
§ 63.150(1) of subpart G of this part. The
nominal efficiency must exceed the
percent reduction required by
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section for
process vents and storage vessels,
respectively, and exceed the percent
reduction required in §63.138(e) or (f)
of subpart G of this part for wastewater
streams.
(i) Group 1 storage vessels controlled
with an internal floating roof meeting
the specifications of § 63.119(b) of
subpart G of this part, an external
floating roof meeting the specifications
of § 63.119 (c) of subpart G of this part,
or an external floating roof converted to
an internal floating meeting the
specifications of §63.119(d) of subpart
G of this part.
(ii) Emission points controlled with a
flare.
(Iii) Wastewater controlled as
specified in paragraphs (h) (2) (iii) (A) or
(B) of this section.
(A) With controls specified in
§63.133 through § 63.137 of subpart G
of this part;
(B) With a steam stripper meeting the
specifications of §63.138(d) of subpart
G of this part.
(3) Process vents and storage vessels
controlled with a control device to an
outlet concentration of 20 ppmv and
wastewater streams controlled in a
treatment unit to an outlet concentration
of 50 ppmw may not be used in any
averaging group.
(4) Maintenance wastewater streams
and wastewater streams treated in
biological treatment units may not be
included in any averaging group.
(5) Processes which have been
permanently shut down and storage
vessels permanently taken out of HAP
service may not be included in any
averaging group.
(6) Emission points already controlled
on or before November 15,1990 may not
be used to generate emissions averaging
credits, unless the level of control has
been increased after November 15,1990.
In these cases, credit will be allowed
only for the increase in control after
November 15, 1990.
(7) Emission points controlled to
comply with a State or Federal rule
other than this subpart may not be
included in an emissions averaging
group, unless the level of control has
been increased after November 15,1990,
above what is required by the other
State or Federal rule. Only the control
above what is required by the other
State or Federal rule will be credited.
However, if an emission point has been
used to generate emissions averaging
credit in an approved emissions
average, and the point is subsequently
made subject to a State or Federal rule
other than this subpart, the point can
continue to generate emissions
averaging credit for the purpose of
complying with the previously
approved average.
(i) Opening of a safety device.
Opening of a safety device, as defined
in § 63.1361, is allowed at any time
conditions require it to avoid unsafe
conditions.
(j) Closed-vent systems. The owner or
operator of a closed-vent system that
contains bypass lines that could divert
a vent stream away from a control
device used to comply with the
requirements in paragraphs (b) through
(d) of this section shall comply with the
requirements of Table 3 of this subpart
and paragraph (j)(l) or (2) of this
section. Equipment such as low leg
drains, high point bleeds, analyzer
vents, open-ended valves or lines,
rupture disks and pressure relief valves
needed for safety purposes are not
subject to this paragraph.
(1) Install, calibrate, maintain, and
operate a flow indicator that determines
whether vent stream flow is present at
least once every 15 minutes. Records
shall be maintained as specified in
§63.1367(f)(l). The flow indicator shall
be installed at the entrance to any
bypass line that could divert the vent
stream away from the control device to
the atmosphere; or
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33601
(2) Secure the bypass line valve In the
closed position with a car seal or lock
and key type configuration. A visual
inspection of the seal or closure
mechanism shall be performed at least
once every month to ensure that the
valve is maintained in the closed
position and the vent stream is not
diverted through the bypass line.
Records shall be maintained as specified
in §63.1367(f)(2).
(k) Control requirements for certain
liquid streams in open systems within a
PAI process unit. (I) The owner or
operator shall comply with the
provisions of Table 4 of this subpart, for
each item of equipment meeting all the
criteria specified in paragraphs (k) (2)
through (4) of this section and either
paragraph (k)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(2) The item of equipment is of a type
identified in Table 4 of this subpart;
(3) The item of equipment is part of
a PAI process unit as defined in
§63.1361;
(4) The item of equipment is
controlled less stringently than in Table
4 of this subpart, and the item of
equipment is not otherwise exempt from
controls by the provisions of this
subpart or subpart A of this part;
(5) The item of equipment:
(i) Is a drain, drain hub, manhole, lift
station, trench, pipe, or oil/water
separator that conveys water with a total
annual average concentration greater
than or equal to 10,000 ppm by weight
of compounds in Table 9 of subpart G
of this part at any flowrate; or a total
annual average concentration greater
than or equal to 1,000 ppm by weight
of compounds in Table 9 of subpart G
of this part at an annual average flow
rate greater than or equal to 10 liters per
minute; or
(ii) Is a tank that receives one or more
streams that contain water with a total
annual average concentration greater
than or equal to 1,000 ppm by weight
of compounds in Table 9 of subpart G
of this part at an annual average
flowrate greater than or equal to 10 liters
per minute. The owner or operator of
the source shall determine the
characteristics of the stream as specified
in paragraphs (k)(5)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) The characteristics of the stream
being received shall be determined at
the inlet to the tank.
(B) The characteristics shall be
determined according to the procedures
in §63.144(b) and (c) of subpart G of
this part.
(1) Exemption for RCRA treatment
units. An owner or operator shall be
exempt from the initial compliance
demonstrations and monitoring
provisions in §§ 63.1365 and 63.1366
and the associated recordkeeping and
reporting requirements in §§ 63.1367
and 63.1368 for emissions from process
vents, storage vessels, and waste
management units that are discharged to
the following devices:
(1) A boiler or process heater burning
hazardous waste for which the owner or
operator:
(i) Has been issued a final permit
under 40 CFR part 270 and complies
with the requirements of 40 CFR part
266, subpart H; or
(ii) Has certified compliance with the
interim status requirements of 40 CFR
part 266, subpart H.
(2) A hazardous waste incinerator for
which the owner or operator has been
issued a final permit under 40 CFR part
270 and complies with the requirements
of 40 CFR part 264, subpart O, or has
certified compliance with the interim
status requirements of 40 CFR part 265,
subpart O.
§ 63.1363 Standards for equipment leaks.
(a) General equipment leak
requirements. (I) The provisions of this
section apply to "equipment" as defined
in § 63.1361 and any closed-vent
systems and control devices required by
this subpart.
(2) Consistency with other regulations.
After the compliance date for a process,
equipment subject to both this section
and either of the following will be
required to comply only with the
provisions of this subpart:
(i) 40 CFR part 60.
(ii) 40 CFR part 61.
(3) [Reserved].
(4) The provisions in §63.1 (a) (3) of
subpart A of this part do not alter the
provisions in paragraph (a) (2) of this
section.
(5) Lines and equipment not
containing process fluids are not subject
to the provisions of this section.
Utilities, and other nonprocess lines,
such as heating and cooling systems
which do not combine their materials
with those in the processes they serve,
are not considered to be part of a
process.
(6) The provisions of this section do
not apply to bench-scale processes,
regardless of whether the processes are
located at the same plant site as a
process subject to the provisions of this
subpart MMM.
(7) Each piece of equipment to which
this section applies shall be identified
such that it can be distinguished readily
from equipment that is not subject to
this section. Identification of the
equipment does not require physical
tagging of the equipment. For example,
the equipment may be identified on a
plant site plan, in log entries, or by
designation of process boundaries by
some form of weatherproof
identification. If changes are made to
the affected source subject to the leak
detection requirements, equipment
identification for each type of
component shall be updated, if needed,
within 15 calendar days of the end of
each monitoring period for that
component.
(8) Equipment that is in vacuum
service is excluded from the
requirements of this section.
(9) Equipment that is in organic HAP
service, but is in such service less than
300 hours per calendar year, is excluded
from the requirements of this section if
it is identified as required in paragraph
(g)(9) of this section.
(10) When each leak is detected by
visual, audible, or olfactory means, or
by monitoring as described in
§63.180(b) or (c) of subpart H of this
part, the following requirements apply:
(i) A weatherproof and readily visible
identification, marked with the
equipment identification number, shall
be attached to the leaking equipment.
(ii) The identification on a valve or
connector in light liquid or gas/vapor
service may be removed after it has been
monitored as specified in paragraph
(e)(7)(iii) of this section and §63.174(e)
of subpart H of this pai t, and no leak has
been detected during the follow-up
monitoring.
(iii) The identification on equipment,
except on a valve or connector in light
liquid or gas/vapor service, may be
removed after it has been repaired.
(b) References. The owner or operator
shall comply with the provisions of
subpart H of this part as specified in
paragraphs (b)(l) through (3) of this
section. When the term "process unit"
is used in subpart H of this part, it shall
mean any group of processes for the
purposes of this subpart Groups of
processes as used in this subpart may be
any individual process or combination
of processes.
(1) Sections 63.160, 63.161, 63.162,
63.163,63.167, 63.168. 63.170, 63.173,
63.175,63.176, 63.181, and 63.182 of
subpart H of this part shall not apply for
the purposes of this subpart MMM. The
owner or operator shall comply with the
provisions specified in paragraphs
(b)(l)(i) through (viii) of this section.
(i) Sections 63.160 and 63.162 of
subpart H of this part shall not apply,
instead the owner or operator shall
comply with paragraph (a) of this
section;
(ii) Section 63.161 of subpart H of this
part shall not apply, instead the owner
or operator shall comply with § 63.1361;
(iii) Sections 63.163 and 63.173 of
subpart H of this part shall not apply,
-------
33602 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
instead the owner or operator shall
comply with paragraph (c) of this
section;
(iv) Section 63.167 of subpart H of
this part shall not apply, instead the
owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (d) of this section;
(v) Section 63.168 of subpart H of this
part shall not apply, instead the owner
or operator shall comply with paragraph
(e) of this section;
'' (vi) Section 63.170 of subpart H of
this part shall not apply, Instead the
owner or operator shall comply with
§63.1362(b);
(vii) Section 63.181 of subpart H of
this part shall not apply, instead the
owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (g) of this section; and
(viii) Section 63.182 of subpart H of
this part shall not apply, instead the
owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (h) of this section.
(2) The owner or operator shall
comply with §§ 63.164, 63.165, 63.166,
63.169, 63.177, and 63.179 of subpart H
of this part in their entirety, except that
when these sections reference other
sections of subpart H of this part, the
owner or operator shall comply with the
revised sections as specified in
paragraphs (b) (1) and (3) of this section.
Section 63.164 of subpart H of this part
applies to compressors. Section 63.165
of subpart H of this part applies to
pressure relief devices in gas/vapor
service. Section 63.166 of subpart H of
this part applies to sampling connection
systems. Section 63.169 of subpart H of
this part applies to: pumps, valves,
connectors, and agitators in heavy
liquid service; instrumentation systems;
and pressure relief devices in liquid
service. Section 63.177 of subpart H of
this subpart applies to general
alternative means of emission
limitation. Section 63.179 of subpart H
of this part applies to alternative means
of emission limitation for enclosed-
vented process units.
(3) The owner or operator shall
comply with §§63.171, 63.172. 63.174,
63.178, and 63.180 of subpart H of this
part with the differences specified in
paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (v) of this
section.
(i) Section 63.171, Delay of repair,
shall apply except § 63.171 (a) shall not
apply. Delay of repair of equipment for
which leaks have been detected is
allowed if one of the following
conditions exist:
(A) The repair is technically infeasible
without a process shutdown. Repair of
this equipment shall occur by the end
of the next scheduled process
shutdown.
(B) The owner or operator determines
that repair personnel would be exposed
to an immediate danger if attempting to
repair without a process shutdown.
Repair of this equipment shall occur by
the end of the next scheduled process
shutdown.
(ii) Section 63.172, Closed-vent
systems and control devices, shall apply
for closed-vent systems used to comply
with this section, and for control
devices used to comply with this
section only, except:
(A) Section 63.172(k) and (1) shall not
apply. The owner or operator shall
instead comply with paragraph (f) of
(his section.
(B) Owners or operators may, instead
of complying with the provisions of
§ 63.172(f), design a closed-vent system
to operate at a pressure below
atmospheric pressure. The system shall
be equipped with at least one pressure
gauge or other pressure measurement
device that can be read from a readily
accessible location to verify that
negative pressure is being maintained in
the closed-vent system when the
associated control device is operating.
(iii) Section 63.174, Connectors, shall
apply except:
(A) Section 63.174(f) and (g) shall not
apply. Instead of §63.174(f) and (g), the
owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (f) of this section.
(B) Days that the connectors are not in
organic HAP service shall not be
considered part of the 3-month period
in§63.!74(e).
(C) Section 63.174(b)(3)(ii) of subpart
H of this part shall not apply. Instead,
if the percent leaking connectors in the
group of process units was less than 0.5
percent, but equal to or greater than 0.25
percent, during the last required
monitoring period, monitoring shall be
performed once every 4 years. An owner
or operator may comply with the
requirements of this paragraph by
monitoring at least 40 percent of the
connectors in the first 2 years and the
remainder of the connectors within the
next 2 years. The percent leaking
connectors will be calculated for the
total of all monitoring performed during
the 4-year period.
(D) Section 63.174(b)(3)(iv) of subpart
H of this part shall not apply. Instead,
the owner or operator shall Increase the
monitoring frequency to once every 2
years for the next monitoring period if
leaking connectors comprise at least 0.5
percent but less than 1.0 percent of the
connectors monitored within the 4 years
specified in paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(C) of
this section, or the first 4 years specified
In § 63.174(b)(3)(iii) of subpart H of this
part. At the end of that 2-year
monitoring period, the owner or
operator shall monitor once per year
while the percent leaking connectors is
greater than or equal to 0.5 percent; If
the percent leaking connectors is less
than 0.5 percent, the owner or operator
may return to monitoring once every 4
years or may monitor in accordance
•with §63.174(b)(3)(iii) of subpart H of
this part, if appropriate.
(E) Section 63.174(b)(3)(v) of subpart
H of this part shall not apply. Instead,
if an owner or operator complying with
the requirements of paragraph
(b)(3)(iii)(C) and (D) of this section or
§ 63.174(b)(3)(iii) of subpart H of this
part for a group of process units
determines that 1 percent or greater of
the connectors are leaking, the owner or
operator shall Increase the monitoring
frequency to one time per year. The
owner or operator may again elect to use
the provisions of paragraphs
(b)(3)(iii)(C) or (D) of this section after
a monitoring period In which less than
0.5 percent of the connectors are
determined to be leaking.
(F) Section 63.174(b)(3)(iii) of subpart
H of this part shall not apply. Instead,
monitoring shall be required once every
8 years, if the percent leaking
connectors in the group of process units
was less than 0.25 percent during the
last required monitoring period. An
owner or operator shall monitor at least
50 percent of the connectors in the first
4 years and the remainder of the
connectors within the next 4 years. If
the percent leaking connectors In the
first 4 years is equal to or greater than
0.35 percent, the monitoring program
shall revert at that time to the
appropriate monitoring frequency
specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(C), (D),
or (E) of this section.
(iv) Section 63.178 of subpart H of
this part, Alternative means of emission
limitation: Batch processes, shall apply
except that §63.178(b) of subpart H of
this part, requirements for pressure
testing, shall apply to all processes, not
just batch processes;
(v) Section 63.180 of subpart H of this
part. Test methods and procedures,
shall apply except § 63.180(b)(4)(li)(A)
through (C) of subpart H of this part
shall not apply. Calibration gases shall
be a mixture of methane and air at a
concentration of approximately, but less
than, 10,000 parts per million methane
for agitators, 2.000 parts per million for
pumps, and 500 parts per million for all
other equipment, except as provided in
§63.180(b)(4)(iii) of subpart H of this
part.
(c) standards for pumps in light liquid
service and agitators in gas/vapor
service and in light liquid service. (1)
The provisions of this section apply to
each pump that Is In light liquid service,
and to each agitator in gas/vapor service
or in light liquid service.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33603
(2) (i) Monitoring. Each pump and
agitator subject to this section shall be
monitored quarterly to detect leaks by
the method specified in §63.180(b) of
subpart H of this part, except as
provided in §63.177 of subpart H of this
part, paragraph (f) of this section, and
paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(9) of this
section.
(ii) Leak definition. The instrument
reading, as determined by the method as
specified in § 63.180(b) of subpart H of
this part, that defines a leak is:
(A) For agitators, an instrument
reading of 10,000 parts per million or
greater.
(B) For pumps, an instrument reading
of 2,000 parts per million or greater.
(iii) Visual inspections. Each pump
and agitator shall be checked by visual
inspection each calendar week for
indications of liquids dripping from the
pump or agitator seal. If there are
indications of liquids dripping from the
seal, a leak is detected.
(3) Repair provisions, (i) When a leak
is detected, it shall be repaired as soon
as practicable, but not later than 15
calendar days after it is detected, except
as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this
section.
(ii) A first attempt at repair shall be
made no later than 5 calendar days after
the leak is detected. First attempts at
repair include, but are not limited to,
the following practices where
practicable:
(A) Tightening of packing gland nuts.
(B) Ensuring mat the seal flush is
operating at design pressure and
temperature.
(4) Calculation of percent leakers, (i)
The owner or operator shall decide no
later than the end of the first monitoring
period what groups of processes will be
developed. Once the owner or operator
has decided, all subsequent percent
calculations shall be made on the same
basis.
(ii) If, calculated on a 1 year rolling
average, the greater of either 10 percent
or three of the pumps in a group of
processes leak, the owner or operator
shall monitor each pump once per
month.
(iii) The number of pumps in a group
of processes shall be the sum of all the
pumps in organic HAP service, except
that pumps found leaking in a
continuous process within 1 quarter
after startup of the pump shall not count
in the percent leaking pumps
calculation for that one monitoring
period only.
(iv) Percent leaking pumps shall be
determined using Equation 3 of this
subpart:
%PL =[(PL -PS)/(PT -Ps)]xlOO (Eq. 3)
where:
%PL = percent leaking pumps
PL = number of pumps found leaking as
determined through quarterly
monitoring as required in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
PT = total pumps in organic HAP
service, including those meeting the
criteria in paragraphs (c) (5) and (6)
of this section
PS = number of pumps in a continuous
process leaking within 1 quarter of
startup during the current
monitoring period
(5) Exemptions. Each pump or agitator
equipped with a dual mechanical seal
system that includes a barrier fluid
system is exempt from the requirements
of paragraphs (c)(l) through (c)(4)(iii) of
this section, provided the following
requirements are met:
(i) Each dual mechanical seal system
is:
(A) Operated with the barrier fluid at
a pressure that is at all times greater
than the pump/agitator stuffing box
pressure; or
(B) Equipped with a barrier fluid
degassing reservoir that is connected by
a closed-vent system to a control device
that complies with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section: or
(C) Equipped with a closed-loop
system that purges the barrier fluid into
a process stream.
(ii) The barrier fluid is not in light
liquid service.
(iii) Each barrier fluid system is
equipped with a sensor that will detect
failure of the seal system, the barrier
fluid system, or both.
(iv) Each pump/agitator is checked by
visual inspection each calendar week
for indications of liquids dripping from
the pump/agitator seal.
(A) If there are indications of liquids
dripping from the pump/agitator seal at
the time of the weekly inspection, the
pump/agitator shall be monitored as
specified in §63.180(b) of subpart H of
this part to determine If there is a leak
of organic HAP in the barrier fluid.
(B) If an instrument reading of 2,000
parts per million or greater is measured
for pumps, or 10,000 parts per million
or greater is measured for agitators, a
leak is detected.
(v) Each sensor as described in
paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this section is
observed daily or is equipped with an
alarm unless the pump is located within
the boundary of an unmanned plant
site.
(vi)(A) The owner or operator
determines, based on design
considerations and operating
experience, criteria applicable to the
presence and frequency of drips and to
the sensor that indicate failure of the
seal system, the barrier fluid system, or
both.
(B) If indications of liquids dripping
from the pump/agitator seal exceed the
criteria established in paragraph
(c)(5)(vi)(A) of this section, or If, based
on the criteria established in paragraph
(c) (5) (vl) (A) of this section, the sensor
indicates failure of the seal system, the
barrier fluid system, or both, a leak is
detected.
(C) When a leak is detected, it shall
be repaired as soon as practicable, but
not later than 15 calendar days after it
is detected, except as provided in
paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(D) A first attempt at repair shall be
made no later than 5 calendar days after
each leak is detected.
(6) Any pump/agitator that is
designed with no externally actuated
shaft penetrating the pump/agitator
housing is exempt from the
requirements of paragraphs (c)(l)
through (4) of this section, except for the
requirements of paragraph (c) (2) (iii) of
this section and. for pumps, paragraph
(c)(4)(iv) of this section.
(7) Any pump/agitator equipped with
a closed-vent system capable of
capturing and transporting any leakage
from the seal or seals back to the process
or to a control device that complies with
the requirements of paragraph (b)(3)(ii)
of this section is exempt from the
requirements of paragraphs (c)(2)
through (5) of this section.
(8) Any pump/agitator that is located
within the boundary of an unmanned
plant site is exempt from the weekly
visual inspection requirement of
paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) and (c)(5)(iv) of
this section, and the daily requirements
of paragraph (c)(5)(v) of this section,
provided that each pump/agitator is
visually inspected as often as
practicable and at least monthly.
(9) If more than 90 percent of the
pumps in a group of processes meet the
criteria in either paragraph (c)(5) or (6)
of this section, the process is exempt
-------
33604 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23. 1999/Rules and Regulations
from the requirements of paragraph
(c)(4) of this section.
(d) Standards: open-ended valves or
lines. (l)(i) Each open-ended valve or
line shall be equipped with a cap, blind
flange, plug, or a second valve, except
as provided in §63.177 of subpart H of
this part and paragraphs (d)(4) through
(6) of this section.
(ii) The cap, blind flange, plug, or
second valve shall seal the open end at
all times except during operations
requiring process fluid flow through the
open-ended valve or line, or during
maintenance or repair. The cap, blind
flange, plug, or second valve shall be in
place within 1 hour of cessation of
operations requiring process fluid flow
through the open-ended valve or line, or
within 1 hour of cessation of
maintenance or repair.
(2) Each open-ended valve or line
equipped with a second valve shall be
operated in a manner such that the
valve on the process fluid end is closed
before the second valve is closed.
(3) When a double block and bleed
system is being used, the bleed valve or
line may remain open during operations
that require venting the line between the
block valves but shall comply with
paragraph (d)(l) of this section at all
other times.
(4) Open-ended valves or lines in an
emergency shutdown system which are
designed to open automatically in the
event of a process upset are exempt
from the requirements of paragraphs
(d)(l) through (3) of this section.
(5) Open-ended valves or lines
containing materials which would
autocatalytically polymerize are exempt
from the requirements of paragraphs
(d)(l) through (3) of this section.
(6) Open-ended valves or lines
containing materials which could cause
an explosion, serious overpressure, or
other safety hazard if capped or
equipped with a double block and bleed
system as specified in paragraphs (d)(l)
through (3) of this section are exempt
from the requirements of paragraphs
(d)(l) through (3) of this section.
(e) Standards: valves in gas/vapor
service and in light liquid service. (1)
The provisions of this section apply to
valves that are either in gas/vapor
service or in light liquid service.
(2) For existing and new affected
sources, all valves subject to this section
shall be monitored, except as provided
in paragraph (f) of this section and in
§ 63.177 of subpart H of this part, by no
later than 1 year after the compliance
date.
(3) Monitoring. The owner or operator
of a source subject to this section shall
monitor all valves, except as provided
in paragraph (f) of this section and in
§ 63.177 of subpart H of this part, at the
intervals specified in paragraph (e)(4) of
this section and shall comply with all
other provisions of this section, except
as provided in paragraph (b) (3) (i) of this
section and §§63.178 and 63.179 of
subpart H of this part.
(i) The valves shall be monitored to
detect leaks by the method specified in
§ 63.180(b) of subpart H of this part
(ii) An instrument reading of 500
parts per million or greater defines a
leak.
(4) Subsequent monitoring
frequencies. After conducting the initial
survey required in paragraph (e)(2) of
this section, the owner or operator shall
monitor valves for leaks at the intervals
specified below:
(i) For a group of processes with 2
percent or greater leaking valves,
calculated according to paragraph (e) (6)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall monitor each valve once per
month, except as specified in paragraph
(e)(9) of this section.
(il) For a group of processes with less
than 2 percent leaking valves, the owner
or operator shall monitor each valve
once each quarter, except as provided in
paragraphs (e)(4)(iii) through (v) of this
section.
(iii) For a group of processes with less
than 1 percent leaking valves, the owner
or operator may elect to monitor each
valve once every 2 quarters.
(iv) For a group of processes with less
than 0.5 percent leaking valves, the
owner or operator may elect to monitor
each valve once every 4 quarters.
(v) For a group of processes with less
than 0.25 percent leaking valves, the
owner or operator may elect to monitor
each valve once every 2 years.
(5) Calculation of percent leakers. For
a group of processes to which this
subpart applies, the owner or operator
may choose to subdivide the valves in
the applicable group of processes and
apply the provisions of paragraph (e)(4)
of this section to each subgroup. If the
owner or operator elects to subdivide
the valves in the applicable group of
processes, then the provisions of
paragraphs (e)(5)(l) through (viii) of this
section apply.
(i) The overall performance of total
valves in the applicable group of
processes must be less than 2 percent
•leaking valves, as detected according to
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section and as calculated according to
paragraphs (e)(6)(ii) and (iii) of this
section.
(ii) The initial assignment or
subsequent reassignment of valves to
subgroups shall be governed by the
provisions of paragraphs (e)(5)(ii) (A)
through (C) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator shall
determine which valves are assigned to
each subgroup. Valves with less than 1
year of monitoring data or valves not
monitored within the last 12 months
must be placed initially into the most
frequently monitored subgroup until at
least 1 year of monitoring data have
been obtained.
(B) Any valve or group of valves can
be reassigned from a less frequently
monitored subgroup to a more
frequently monitored subgroup
provided that the valves to be
reassigned were monitored during the
most recent monitoring period for the
less frequently monitored subgroup. The
monitoring results must be included
with the less frequently monitored
subgroup's monitoring event and
associated next percent leaking valves
calculation for that group.
(C) Any valve or group of valves can
be reassigned from a more frequently
monitored subgroup to a less frequently
monitored subgroup provided that the
valves to be reassigned have not leaked
for the period of the less frequently
monitored subgroup (e.g., for the last 12
months, if the valve or group of valves
is to be reassigned to a subgroup being
monitored annually). Nonrepairable
valves may not be reassigned to a less
frequently monitored subgroup.
(iii) The owner or operator shall
determine every 6 months if the overall
performance of total valves in the
applicable group of processes is less
than 2 percent leaking valves and so
indicate the performance in the next
Periodic report. If the overall
performance of total valves in the
applicable group of processes is 2
percent leaking valves or greater, the
owner or operator shall revert to the
program required in paragraphs (e)(2)
through (4) of this section. The overall
performance of total valves in the
applicable group of processes shall be
calculated as a weighted average of the
percent leaking valves of each subgroup
according to Equation 4 of this subpart:
'LO
(Eq.4)
i=l
where:
%VLO - overall performance of total
valves in the applicable group of
processes
%Vu = percent leaking valves in
subgroup i, most recent value
calculated according to the
procedures in paragraphs (e)(6)(ii)
and (iii) of this section
Vj = number of valves in subgroup i
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33605
n = number of subgroups
(iv) Records. In addition to records
required by paragraph (g) of this section,
the owner or operator shall maintain
records specified in paragraphs
(e)(5)(iv)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Which valves are assigned to each
subgroup,
(B) Monitoring results and
calculations made for each subgroup for
each monitoring period,
(C) Which valves are reassigned and
when they were reassigned, and
(D) The results of the semiannual
overall performance calculation
required in paragraph (e)(5)(iii) of this
section.
(v) The owner or operator shall notify
the Administrator no later than 30 days
prior to the beginning of the next
monitoring period of the decision to
subgroup valves. The notification shall
identify the participating processes and
the valves assigned to each subgroup.
(vi) Semiannual reports. In addition
to the information required by
paragraph (h)(3) of this section, the
owner or operator shall submit in the
Periodic reports the information
specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(vi)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) Valve reassignments occurring
during the reporting period, and
(B) Results of the semiannual overall
performance calculation required by
paragraph (e)(5)(iii) of this section.
(vii) To determine the monitoring
frequency for each subgroup, the
calculation procedures of paragraph
(e) (6) (iii) of this section shall be used.
(viii) Except for the overall
performance calculations required by
paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (iii) of this
section, each subgroup shall be treated
as if it were a process for the purposes
of applying the provisions of this
section.
(6)(i) The owner or operator shall
decide no later than the implementation
date of this subpart or upon revision of
an operating permit how to group the
processes. Once the owner or operator
has decided, all subsequent percentage
calculations shall be made on the same
basis.
(ii) Percent leaking valves for each
group of processes or subgroup shall be
determined using Equation 5 of this
subpart:
%VL=[VL/VT]xlOO (Eq. 5)
Where:
%VL = percent leaking valves
VL = number of valves found leaking
excluding nonrepairables as
provided in paragraph (e) (6) (iv) (A)
of this section
VT = total valves monitored, in a
monitoring period excluding valves
monitored as required by paragraph
(e) (7) (iii) of this section
(iii) When determining monitoring
frequency for each group of processes or
subgroup subject to monthly, quarterly,
or semiannual monitoring frequencies,
the percent leaking valves shall be the
arithmetic average of the percent leaking
valves from the last two monitoring
periods. When determining monitoring
frequency for each group of processes or
subgroup subject to annual or biennial
(once every 2 years) monitoring
frequencies, the percent leaking valves
shall be the arithmetic average of the
percent leaking valves from the last
three monitoring periods.
(iv) (A) Nonrepairable valves shall be
included in the calculation of percent
leaking valves the first time the valve is
identified as leaking and nonrepalrable
and as required to comply with
paragraph (e) (6) (iv) (B) of this section.
Otherwise, a number of nonrepairable
valves (identified and included in the
percent leaking calculation in a
previous period) up to a maximum of 1
percent of the total number of valves in
organic HAP service at a process may be
excluded from calculation of percent
leaking valves for subsequent
monitoring periods.
(B) If the number of nonrepairable
valves exceeds 1 percent of the total
number of valves in organic HAP
service at a process, the number of
nonrepairable valves exceeding 1
percent of the total number of valves in
; organic HAP service shall be included
in the calculation of percent leaking
valves.
(7) .Repair provisions, (i) When a leak
is detected, it shall be repaired as soon
as practicable, but no later than 15
calendar days after the leak is detected,
except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(i)
of this section.
(ii) A first attempt at repair shall be
made no later than 5 calendar days after
each leak is detected.
(iii) When a leak is repaired, the valve
shall be monitored at least once within
the first 3 months after its repair. Days
that the valve is not in organic HAP
service shall not be considered part of
this 3-month period.
(8) First attempts at repair include,
but are not limited to, the following
practices where practicable:
(i) Tightening of bonnet bolts,
(ii) Replacement of bonnet bolts,
(iii) Tightening of packing gland nuts,
and
(iv) Injection of lubricant into
lubricated packing.
(9) Any equipment located at a plant
site with fewer than 250 valves in
organic HAP service in the affected
source is exempt from the requirements
for monthly monitoring specified in
paragraph (e) (4)(i) of this section.
Instead, the owner or operator shall
monitor each valve in organic HAP
service for leaks once each quarter, or
comply with paragraphs (e)(4)(iii) or (iv)
of this section.
(f) Unsafe to monitor, difficult to
monitor, and inaccessible equipment.
(1) Equipment that is designated as
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor,
or inaccessible is exempt from the
requirements as specified in paragraphs
(f)(l) (i) through (iv) of this section
provided the owner or operator meets
the requirements specified in paragraph
(f) (2), (3), or (4) of this section, as
applicable. Ceramic or ceramic-lined
connectors are subject to the same
requirements as inaccessible connectors.
(i) For pumps and agitators,
paragraphs (c) (2), (3), and (4) of this
section do not apply.
(ii) For valves, paragraphs (e)(2)
through (7) of this section do not apply.
(iii) For closed-vent systems,
§63.172(0(1), (f)(2), and (g) of subpartH
of this part do not apply.
(iv) For connectors, §63.174(b)
through (e) of subpart H of this part do
not apply.
(2) Equipment that is unsafe to
monitor, (i) Equipment may be
designated as unsafe to monitor if the
owner or operator determines that
monitoring personnel would be exposed
to an immediate danger as a
consequence of complying with the
monitoring requirements identified in
paragraphs (f)(l)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(ii) The owner or operator of
equipment that is designated as unsafe-
to-monitor must have a written plan that
requires monitoring of the equipment as
frequently as practicable during safe-to-
monitor times, but not more frequently
than the periodic monitoring schedule
otherwise applicable.
(3) Equipment that is difficult to
monitor, (I) Equipment may be
designated as difficult to monitor if the
owner or operator determines that the
equipment cannot be monitored without
elevating the monitoring personnel
more than 2 meters above a support
surface or the equipment is not
accessible at anytime in a safe manner;
(ii) At an existing source, any
equipment within a group of processes
that meets the criteria of paragraph
(f)(3)(i) of this section may be
designated as difficult to monitor. At a
new affected source, an owner or
operator may designate no more than 3
percent of each type of equipment as
difficult to monitor.
-------
33606 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
(iii) The owner or operator of
equipment designated as difficult to
monitor must follow a written plan that
requires monitoring of the equipment at
least once per calendar year.
(4) Inaccessible equipment and
ceramic or ceramic-lined connectors, (i)
A connector, agitator, or valve may be
designated as inaccessible if it is:
(A) Buried;
(B) Insulated in a manner that
prevents access to the equipment by a
monitor probe;
(C) Obstructed by equipment or
piping that prevents access to the
equipment by a monitor probe;
(D) Unable to be reached from a
wheeled scissor-lift or hydraulic-type
scaffold which would allow access to
equipment up to 7.6 meters above the
ground; or
(E) Not able to be accessed at any time
in a safe manner to perform monitoring.
Unsafe access includes, but is not
limited to, the use of a wheeled scissor-
lift on unstable or uneven terrain, the
use of a motorized man-lift basket in
areas where an ignition potential exists,
or access would require near proximity
to hazards such as electrical lines, or
would risk damage to equipment.
(ii) At an existing source, any
connector, agitator, or valve that meets
the criteria of paragraph (f) (4) (i) of this
section may be designated as
inaccessible. At a new affected source,
an owner or operator may designate no
more than 3 percent of each type of
equipment as inaccessible.
(iii) If any inaccessible equipment or
ceramic or ceramic-lined connector is
observed by visual, audible, olfactory, or
other means to be leaking, the leak shall
be repaired as soon as practicable, but
no later than 15 calendar days after the
leak is detected, except as provided in
paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(g) Recordkeeping requirements. (1)
An owner or operator of more than one
group of processes subject to the
provisions of this section may comply
with the recordkeeping requirements for
the groups of processes In one
recordkeeping system if the system
identifies with each record the program
being implemented (e.g., quarterly
monitoring) for each type of equipment.
All records and information required by
this section shall be maintained in a
manner that can be readily accessed at
the plant site. This could include
physically locating the records at the
plant site or accessing the records from
a central location by computer at the
plant site.
(2) General recordkeeping. Except as
provided in paragraph (g)(5) of this
section, the following Information
pertaining to all equipment subject to
the requirements in this section shall be
recorded;
(i)(A) A list of identification numbers
for equipment (except instrumentation
systems) subject to the requirements of
this section. Connectors, except those
subject to paragraph (f) of this section,
need not be individually identified if all
connectors in a designated area or
length of pipe subject to the provisions
of this section are identified as a group,
and the number of subject connectors is
indicated. The list for each type of
equipment shall be completed no later
than the completion of the initial survey
required for that component. The list of
identification numbers shall be updated,
if needed, to incorporate equipment
changes within 15 calendar days of the
completion of each monitoring survey
for the type of equipment component
monitored.
(B) A schedule for monitoring
connectors subject to the provisions of
§ 63.174 (a) of subpart H of this part and
valves subject to the provisions of
paragraph (e)(4) of this section.
(C) Physical tagging of the equipment
is not required to indicate that it is in
organic HAP service. Equipment subject
to the provisions of this section may be
identified on a plant site plan, in log
entries, or by other appropriate
methods.
(ii)(A) A list of identification numbers
for equipment that the owner or
operator elects to equip with a closed-
vent system and control device, under
the provisions of paragraph (c)(7) of this
section or §§63.164(h) or 63.165(c) of
subpart H of this part.
(B) A list of identification numbers for
compressors that the owner or operator
elects to designate as operating with an
instrument reading of less than 500
parts per million above background,
under the provisions of §63.164(1) of
subpart H of this part.
(iii) (A) A list of identification
numbers for pressure relief devices
subject to the provisions in § 63.165 (a)
of subpart H of this part.
(B) A list of identification numbers for
pressure relief devices equipped with
rupture disks, under the provisions of
§ 63.165(d) of subpart H of this part.
(iv) Identification of instrumentation
systems subject to the provisions of this
section. Individual components in an
instrumentation system need not be
identified.
(v) The following information shall be
recorded for each dual mechanical seal
system:
(A) Design criteria required by
paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(A) of this section
and §63.164(e)(2) of subpart H of this
part, and an explanation of the design
criteria; and
(B) Any changes to these criteria and
the reasons for the changes.
(vi) A list of equipment designated as
unsafe to monitor, difficult to monitor,
or inaccessible under paragraphs (f) or
(b)(3)(i)(B) of this section and a copy of
the plan for monitoring or inspecting
this equipment.
(vii) A list of connectors removed
from and added to the process, as
described in §63.174(i)(l) of subpart H
of this part, and documentation of the
integrity of the weld for any removed
connectors, as required in §63.174 (J) of
subpart H of this part. This is not
required unless the net credits for
removed connectors is expected to be
used.
(viii) For batch processes that the
owner or operator elects to monitor as
provided under §63.178(c) of subpart H
of this part, a list of equipment added
to batch product processes since the last
monitoring period required in
§63.178(c)(3)(ii) and (iii) of subpart H of
this part. This list must be completed
for each type of equipment within 15
calendar days of the completion of the
each monitoring survey for the type of
equipment monitored.
(3) Records of visual inspections. For
visual inspections of equipment subject
to the provisions of paragraphs (c)(2)(iii)
and (c)(5)(iv) of this section, the owner
or operator shall document that the
inspection was conducted and the date
of the inspection. The owner or operator
shall maintain records as specified in
paragraph (g) (4) of this section for
leaking equipment identified in this
inspection, except as provided in
paragraph (g)(5) of this section. These
records shall be retained for 5 years.
(4) Monitoring records. When each
leak is detected as specified in
paragraphs (c) and (e) of this section and
§§63.164, 63.169, 63.172, and 63.174 of
subpart H of this part, the owner or
operator shall record the information
specified in paragraphs (g)(4)(l) through
(ix) of this section. All records shall be
retained for 5 years, in accordance with
the requirements of §63.10(b)(l) of
subpart A of this part.
(i) The instrument and the equipment
identification number and the operator
name, initials, or identification number.
(ii) The date the leak was detected
and the date of first attempt to repair the
leak.
(ill) The date of successful repair of
the leak.
(iv) If postrepair monitoring is
required, maximum instrument reading
measured by Method 21 of 40 CFR part
60, appendix A, after it is successfully
repaired or determined to be
nonrepairable.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33607
(v) "Repair delayed" and the reason
for the delay if a leak is not repaired
within 15 calendar days after discovery
of the leak.
(A) The owner or operator may
develop a written procedure that
identifies the conditions that justify a
delay of repair. The written procedures
may be included as part of the startup/
shutdown/malfunction plan, required
by §,63.1367(a), for the source or may be
part of a separate document that is
maintained at the plant site. Reasons for
delay of repair may be documented by
citing the relevant sections of the
written procedure.
(B) If delay of repair was caused by
depletion of stocked parts, there must be
documentation that die spare parts were
sufficiently stocked onsite before
depletion and the reason for depletion.
(vi) If repairs were delayed, dates of
process shutdowns that occur while the
equipment is unrepaired.
(vii)(A) If the alternative in
§63.174(c)(l)(ii) of subpart H of this
part is not in use for the monitoring
period, identification, either by list,
location (area or grouping), or tagging of
connectors disturbed since the last
monitoring period required in
§ 63.174 (b) of subpart H of this part, as
described in § 63.174(c)(l) of subpart H
of this part.
(B) The date and results of follow-up
monitoring as required in §63.174(c) of
subpart H of this part. If identification
of disturbed connectors is made by
location, then all connectors within the
designated location shall be monitored.
(viii) The date and results of the
monitoring required in §63.178(c)(3)(i)
of subpart H of this part for equipment
added to a batch process since the last
monitoring period required in
§63.178(c)(3)(ii) and (iii) of subpart H of
this part. If no leaking equipment is
found in this monitoring, the owner or
operator shall record that the inspection
was performed. Records of the actual
monitoring results are not required.
(ix) Copies of the periodic reports as
specified in paragraph (h)(3) of this
section, if records are not maintained on
a computerized data base capable of
generating summary reports from the
records.
(5) Records of pressure tests. The
owner or operator who elects to
pressure test a process equipment train
and supply lines between storage and
processing areas to demonstrate
compliance with this section is exempt
from the requirements of paragraphs
(g)(2). (3), (4), and (6) of this section.
Instead, the owner or operator shall
maintain records of the following
information:
(i) The identification of each product,
or product code, produced during the
calendar year. It is not necessary to
identify individual items of equipment
in the process equipment train.
(ii) Records demonstrating the
proportion of the time during the
calendar year the equipment is in use in
the process that is subject to the
provisions of this subpart Examples of
suitable documentation-are records of
time in use for individual pieces of
equipment or average time in use for the
process unit. These records are not
required if the owner or operator does
not adjust monitoring frequency by the
time in use, as provided in
§ 63.178(c)(3)(iii) of subpart H of this
part.
(iii) Physical tagging of the equipment
to identify that it is in organic HAP
service and subject to the provisions of
this section is not required. Equipment
in a process subject to the provisions of
this section may be identified on a plant
site plan, in log entries, or by other
appropriate methods.
(iv) The dates of each pressure test
required in §63.178(b) of subpart H of
this part, the test pressure, and the
pressure drop observed during the test.
(v) Records of any visible, audible, or
olfactory evidence of fluid loss.
(vi) When a process equipment train
does not pass two consecutive pressure
tests, the following information shall be
recorded in a log and kept for 2 years:
(A) The date of each pressure test and
the date of each leak repair attempt.
(B) Repair methods applied in each
attempt to repair the leak.
(C) The reason for the delay of repair.
(D) The expected date for delivery of
the replacement equipment and the
actual date of delivery of the
replacement equipment.
(E) The date of successful repair.
(6) Records of compressor and
pressure relief valve compliance tests.
The dates and results of each
compliance test required for
compressors subject to the provisions in
§63.164(1) of subpart H of this part and
the dates and results of the monitoring
following a pressure release for each
pressure relief device subject to the
provisions in § 63.165(a) and (b) of
subpart H of this part. The results shall
include:
(i) The background level measured
during each compliance test.
(ii) The maximum instrument reading
measured at each piece of equipment
during each compliance test.
(7) .Records for closed-vent systems.
The owner or operator shall maintain
records of the information specified in
paragraphs (g)(7)(i) through (iii) of this
section for closed-vent systems and
control devices subject to the provisions
of paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
The records specified in paragraph
(g)(7)(i) of this section shall be retained
for the life of the equipment. The
records specified in paragraphs (g)(7)(ii)
and (iii) of this section shall be retained
for 5 years.
(i) The design specifications and
performance demonstrations specified
in paragraphs (g)(7)(i)(A) through (D) of
this section.
(A) Detailed schematics, design
specifications of the control device, and
piping and instrumentation diagrams.
(B) The dates and descriptions of any
changes in the design specifications.
(C) The flare design (i.e., steam
assisted, air assisted, or nonassisted)
and the results of the compliance
demonstration required by § 63.11 (b) of
subpart A of this part.
(D) A description of the parameter or
parameters monitored, as required in
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, to
ensure that control devices are operated
and maintained in conformance with
their design and an explanation of why
that parameter (or parameters) was
selected for the monitoring.
(ii) Records of operation of closed-
vent systems and control devices.
(A) Dates and durations when the
closed-vent systems and control devices
required in paragraph (c) of this section
and §§63.164 through 63.166. of subpart
H of this part are not operated as
designed as indicated by the monitored
parameters, including periods when a
flare pilot light system does not have a
flame.
(B) Dates and durations during which
the monitoring system or monitoring
device is inoperative.
(C) Dates and durations of startups
and shutdowns of control devices
required in paragraph (c) of this section
and §§63.164 through 63.166 of subpart
H of this part.
(iii) Records of inspections of closed-
vent systems subject to the provisions of
§63.172 of subpart H of this part.
(A) For each inspection conducted in
accordance with the provisions of
§63.172(f)(l) or (2) of subpart H of this
part during which no leaks were
detected, a record that the inspection
was performed, the date of the
inspection, and a statement that no
leaks were detected.
(B) For each inspection conducted in
accordance with the provisions of
§63.172(f)(D or (0(2) of subpart H of
this part during which leaks were
detected, the information specified in
paragraph (g)(4) of this section shall be
recorded.
(8) Records for components in heavy
liquid service. Information, data, and
-------
33608 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
analysis used to determine that a piece
of equipment or process is in heavy
liquid service shall be recorded. Such a
determination shall include an analysis
or demonstration that the process fluids
do not meet the criteria of "in light
liquid or gas/vapor service." Examples
of information that could document this
include, but are not limited to, records
of chemicals purchased for the process,
_ analyses of process stream composition,
engineering calculations, or process
knowledge.
(9) Records of exempt components.
Identification, either by list, location
(area or group), or other method of
equipment in organic HAP service less
than 300 hr/yr subject to the provisions
of this section.
(10) Records of alternative means of
compliance determination. Owners and
operators choosing to comply with the
requirements of § 63.179 of subpart H of
this part shall maintain the following
records:
(i) Identification of the process(es)
and the organic HAP they handle.
(ii) A schematic of the process,
enclosure, and closed-vent system.
(iii) A description of the system used
to create a negative pressure in the
enclosure to ensure that all emissions
are routed to the control device.
(h) Reporting Requirements. (I) Each
owner or operator of a source subject to
this section shall submit the reports
listed in paragraphs (h)(l)(i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) A Notification of Compliance
Status report described in paragraph
(h) (2) of this section, and
(ii) Periodic reports described in
paragraph (h) (3) of this section.
(2) Notification of compliance status
report. Each owner or operator of a
source subject to this section shall
submit the information specified in
paragraphs (h)(2)(i) through (iii) of this
section in the Notification of
Compliance Status report described in
§63.1368(f). Section 63.9(j) of subpart A
of this part shall not apply to the
Notification of Compliance Status
report.
(i) The notification shall provide the
information listed in paragraphs
(h)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of this section
for each group of processes subject to
the requirements of paragraphs (b)
through (g) of this section.
(A) Identification of the group of
processes.
(B) Approximate number of each
equipment type (e.g., valves, pumps) in
organic HAP service, excluding
equipment in vacuum service.
(C) Method of compliance with the
standard (for example, "monthly leak
detection and repair" or "equipped with
dual mechanical seals").
(ii) The notification shall provide the
information listed in paragraphs
(h)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section for
each process subject to the requirements
of paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section
and §63.178(b) of subpart H of this part.
(A) Products or product codes subject
to the provisions of this section, and
(B) Planned schedule for pressure
testing when equipment is configured
for production of products subject to the
provisions of this section.
(iii) The notification shall provide the
information listed in paragraphs
(h) (2) (iii) (A) and (B) of this section for
each process subject to the requirements
in § 63.179 of subpart H of this part.
(A) Process identification.
(B) A description of the system used
to create a negative pressure in the
enclosure and the control device used to
comply with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
(3) Periodic reports. The owner or
operator of a source subject to this
section shall submit Periodic reports.
(i) A report containing the
information in paragraphs (h)(3)(ii), (iii),
and (iv) of this section shall be
submitted semiannually. The first
Periodic report shall be submitted no
later than 240 days after the date the
Notification of Compliance Status report
is due and shall cover the 6-month
period beginning on the date the
Notification of Compliance Status report
is due. Each subsequent Periodic report
shall cover the 6-month period
following the preceding period.
(ii) For equipment complying with the
provisions of paragraphs (b) through (g)
of this section, the Periodic report shall
contain the summary information listed
in paragraphs (h)(3)(ii)(A) through (L) of
this section for each monitoring period
during the 6-month period.
(A) The number of valves for which
leaks were detected as described in
paragraph (e)(2) of this section, the
percent leakers, and the total number of
valves monitored;
(B) The number of valves for which
leaks were not repaired as required in
paragraph (e)(7) of this section,
identifying the number of those that are
determined nonrepairable;
(C) The number of pumps and
agitators for which leaks were detected
as described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section, the percent leakers, and the
total number of pumps and agitators
monitored;
(D) The number of pumps and
agitators for which leaks were not
repaired as required in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section;
(E) The number of compressors for
which leaks were detected as described
in §63.164 (f) of subpart H of this part;
(F) The number of compressors for
which leaks were not repaired as
required in §63.164 (g) of subpart H of
this part;
(G) The number of connectors for
which leaks were detected as described
in §63.174(a) of subpart H of this part,
the percent of connectors leaking, and
the total number of connectors
monitored;
(H) The number of connectors for
which leaks were not repaired as
required in §63.174 (d) of subpart H of
this part, identifying the number of
those that are determined nonrepairable;
(I) The facts that explain any delay of
repairs and, where appropriate, why a
process shutdown was technically
infeasible.
0) The results of all monitoring to
show compliance with §§ 63.164(i),
63.165(a), and 63.172(f) of subpartH of
this part conducted within the
semiannual reporting period.
(K) If applicable, the initiation of a
monthly monitoring program under
either paragraph (c)(4)(ii) or paragraph
(e) (4) (i) (A) of this section.
(L) If applicable, notification of a
change in connector monitoring
alternatives as described in
§ 63.174(c)(l) of subpart H of this part.
(iii) For owners or operators electing
to meet the requirements of § 63.178(b)
of subpart H of this part, the Periodic
report shall include the information
listed in paragraphs (h)(3)(iii) (A)
through (E) of this section for each
process.
(A) Product process equipment train
identification;
(B) The number of pressure tests
conducted;
(C) The number of pressure tests
where the equipment train failed either
the retest or two consecutive pressure
tests;
(D) The facts that explain any delay of
repairs; and
(E) The results of all monitoring to
determine compliance with § 63.172(f)
of subpart H of this part.
(iv) Any change in the Information
submitted under paragraph (h)(2) of this
section shall be provided in the next
Periodic report
163.1364 Compliance dates.
(a) Compliance dates for existing
sources. (1) An owner or operator of an
existing affected source must comply
with the provisions of this subpart
within 3 years after June 23,1999.
(2) Pursuant to section 112(1) (3}(B) of
the CAA, an owner or operator of an
existing source may request an
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33609
extension of up to 1 additional year to
comply with the provisions of this
subpart if the additional time is needed
for the installation of controls.
(i) For purposes of this subpart, a
request for an extension shall be
submitted no later than 120 days prior
to the compliance date specified in
paragraph (a)(l) of this section, except
as provided in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this
section. The dates specified In § 63.6(1)
of subpart A of this part for submittal of
requests for extensions shall not apply
to sources subject to this subpart.
(ii) An owner or operator may submit
a compliance extension request after the
date specified in paragraph (a)(l)(i) of
this section provided the need for the
compliance extension arose after that
date and before the otherwise applicable
compliance date, and the need arose
due to circumstances beyond reasonable
control of the owner or operator. This
request shall include the data described
in §63.6(i)(8)(A), (B), and (D) of subpart
A of this part.
(b) Compliance dates for new and
reconstructed sources. An owner or
operator of a new or reconstructed
affected source must comply with the
provisions of this subpart on June 23,
1999 or upon startup, whichever is later.
§ 63.1365 Test methods and Initial
compliance procedures.
(a) General. Except as specified in
paragraph (a) (4) of this section, the
procedures specified in paragraphs (c),
(d), (e), (f), and (g) of this section are
required to demonstrate initial
compliance with § 63.1362(b), (c), (d),
(f), and (g), respectively. The provisions
in paragraph (a) (1) of this section apply
to design evaluations that are used to
demonstrate compliance with the
standards for process vents and storage
vessels. The provisions in paragraph
(a) (2) of this section apply to
performance tests that are specified in
paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this
section. The provisions in paragraph
(a) (3) of this section describe initial
compliance procedures for flares. The
provisions in paragraph (a) (5) of this
section are used to demonstrate initial
compliance with the alternative
standards specified in § 63.1362(b)(6)
and (c)(4). The provisions in paragraph
(a) (6) of this section are used to comply
with the outlet concentration
requirements specified in
§63.1362(b)(2)(iv)(A),(b)(3)(ii),
(b)(4)(ii)(A), (b)(5)(ii), and (b)(5)(iii).
(1) Design evaluation. To demonstrate
that a control device meets the required
control efficiency, a design evaluation
must address the composition and HAP
concentration of the vent stream
entering the control device. A design
evaluation also must address other vent
stream characteristics and control
device operating parameters as specified
in any one of paragraphs (a)(l)(i)
through (vii) of this section, depending
on the type of control device that is
used. If the vent stream is not the only
inlet to the control device, the efficiency
demonstration also must consider all
other vapors, gases, and liquids, other
than fuels, received by the control
device.
(i) For an enclosed combustion device
used to comply with the provisions of
§63.1362(b)(2)(iv). (b)(4)(ii),
(c)(2)(iv)(B), or (c)(3) with a minimum
residence time of 0.5 seconds and a
minimum temperature of 760 °C, the
design evaluation must document that
these conditions exist.
(ii) For a combustion control device
that does not satisfy the criteria in
paragraph (a)(l)(i) of this section, the
design evaluation must document
control efficiency and address the
following characteristics, depending on
the type of control device:
(A) For a thermal vapor incinerator,
the design evaluation must consider the
autoignltion temperature of the organic
HAP, must consider the vent stream
flow rate, and must establish the design
minimum and average temperature in
the combustion zone and the
combustion zone residence time.
(B) For a catalytic vapor incinerator,
the design evaluation mus't consider the
vent stream flow rate and must establish
the design minimum and average
temperatures across the catalyst bed
inlet and outlet.
(C) For a boiler or process heater, the
design evaluation must consider the
vent stream flow rate, must establish the
design minimum and average flame
zone temperatures and combustion zone
residence time, and must describe the
method and location where the vent
stream is introduced into the flame
zone.
(ill) For a condenser, the design
evaluation must consider the vent
stream flow rate, relative humidity, and
temperature, and must establish the
design outlet organic HAP compound
concentration level, design average
temperature of the condenser, exhaust
vent stream, and the design average
temperatures of the coolant fluid at the
condenser inlet and outlet. The
temperature of the gas stream exiting the
condenser must be measured and used
to establish the outlet organic HAP
concentration.
(iv) For a carbon adsorption system
that regenerates the carbon bed directly
onsite in the control device such as a
fixed-bed adsorber, the design
evaluation must consider the vent
stream flow rate, relative humidity, and
temperature, and must establish the
design exhaust vent stream organic
compound concentration level,
adsorption cycle time, number of carbon
beds and their capacities, type and
working capacity of activated carbon
used for the carbon beds, design total
regeneration stream mass or volumetric
flow over the period of each complete
carbon bed regeneradon cycle, design
carbon bed temperature after
regeneration, design carbon bed
regeneration time, and design service
life of carbon. For vacuum desorption,
the pressure drop must be included.
(v) For a carbon adsorption system
tiiat does not regenerate the carbon bed
directly onsite in the control device
such as a carbon canister, the design
evaluation must consider the vent
stream mass or volumetric flow rate,
relative humidity, and temperature, and
must establish the design exhaust vent
stream organic compound concentradon
level, capacity of the carbon bed, type
and working capacity of activated
carbon used for the carbon bed, and
design carbon replacement interval
based on the total carbon working
capacity of the control device and
source operating schedule.
(vi) For a scrubber, the design
evaluation must consider the vent
stream composition, constituent
concentrations, liquid-to-vapor ratio,
scrubbing liquid flow rate and
concentration, temperature, and the
reaction kinetics of the constituents
with the scrubbing liquid. The design
evaluation must establish the design
exhaust vent stream organic compound
concentration level and must include
the additional information in
paragraphs (a)(l)(vi)(A) and (B) of this
section for trays and a packed column
scrubber.
(A) Type and total number of
theoretical and actual trays;
(B) Type and total surface area of
packing for entire column, and for
individual packed sections if column
contains more than one packed section.
(vii) For fabric filters, the design
evaluation must include die pressure
drop through the device and the net gas-
to-clodi ratio (i.e., cubic feet of gas per
square feet of cloth).
(2) Calculation of TOO or total organic
HAP concentration. The TOC
concentration or total organic HAP
concentration Is the sum of the
concentrations of the individual
components. If compliance is being
determined based on TOC, the owner or
operator shall compute TOC for each
run using Equation 6 of diis subpart. If
compliance with the percent reduction
format of the standard is being
-------
33610 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
determined based on total organic HAP,
the owner or operator shall compute
total organic HAP using Equation 6 of
this subpart. except that only organic
HAP compounds shall be summed;
when determining compliance with the
wastewater provisions of §63.1363(d),
the organic HAP compounds shall
consist of the organic HAP compounds
in Table 9 of subpart G of this part.
(Eq.6)
Where:
CGr = total concentration of TOC in
vented gas stream, average of
samples, dry basis, ppmv
CGS.j = concentration of sample
components in vented gas stream
for sample j, dry basis, ppmv
n = number of compounds in the sample
m = number of samples in the sample
run
(3) Initial compliance using flares.
When a flare is used to comply with the
standards, the owner or operator shall
comply with the provisions in §63.11 (b)
of subpart A of this part.
(i) The initial compliance
determination shall consist of a visible
emissions determination using Method
22 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as
described in §63.11 (b) (4) of subpart A
of this part, and a determination of net
heating value of gas being combusted
and exit velocity to comply with the
requirements of §63.11 (b) (6) through (8)
of subpart A of this part. The net heating
value and exit velocity shall be based on
the results of performance testing under
the conditions described in paragraphs
(b)(10) and (11) of this section.
(ii) An owner or operator is not
required to conduct a performance test
to determine percent emission reduction
or outlet organic HAP or TOC
concentration when a flare is used.
(4) Exemptions from compliance
demonstrations. An owner or operator
using any control device specified in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (ii) of this
section is exempt from the initial
compliance provisions in paragraphs
(c), (d), and (e) of this section.
(i) A boiler or process heater with a
design heat input capacity of 44
megawatts or greater.
(ii) A boiler or process heater into
which the emission stream is
introduced with the primary fuel.
(5) Initial compliance with alternative
standard. Initial compliance with the
alternative standards in § 63.1362(b)(6)
and (c)(4) is demonstrated when the
outlet TOC concentration is 20 ppmv or
less, and the outlet HC1 and chlorine
concentration is 20 ppmv or less. To
demonstrate initial compliance, the
owner or operator shall be in
compliance with the monitoring
provisions in § 63.1366(b)(5) on the
initial compliance date. The owner or
operator shall use Method 18 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A to determine the
predominant organic HAP in the
emission stream if the TOC monitor is
calibrated on the predominant HAP.
(6) Initial compliance with the 20
ppmv outlet limit. Initial compliance
with the 20 ppmv TOC and HC1 and
chlorine concentration is demonstrated
when the outlet TOC concentration is 20
ppmv or less, and the outlet HC1 and
chlorine concentration is 20 ppmv or
less. To demonstrate initial compliance,
the operator shall use applicable test
methods described in paragraphs (b)(l)
through (9) of this section, and test
under conditions described in
paragraphs (b)(10) or (11) of this section,
as applicable. The owner or operator
shall comply with the monitoring
provisions in § 63.1366(b)(l) through (5)
on the initial compliance date.
(7) Outlet concentration correction for
supplemental gases. If supplemental
gases are added to a vent stream for
which compliance with an outlet
concentration standard in §63.1362 or
63.1363 will be demonstrated, the
owner or operator must correct the
outlet concentration as specified in
paragraphs (a)(7)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Combustion device. If the vent
stream is controlled with a combustion
device, the owner or operator must
comply with the provisions in
paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) To comply with a TOC outlet
concentration standard in
§63.1362(b)(2)(iv)(A), (b)(4)(ii)(A),
(b)(6), (c)(2)(iv)(B), (c)(4). (d)(13), or
§63.172 of subpart H of this part, the
actual TOC outlet concentration must be
corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
(B) If the inlet stream to the
combustion device contains any HC1,
chlorine, or halogenated compounds,
and the owner or operator elects to
comply with a total HC1 and chlorine
outlet concentration standard in
§63.1362(b)(3)(ii), (b)(5)(ii), (b)(5)(iii),
(b){6), or (c)(4), the actual total HC1 and
.chlorine outlet concentration must be
corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
(C) The integrated sampling and
analysis procedures of Method 3B of 40
CFR part 60, appendix A shall be used
to determine the actual oxygen
concentration (%O2d). The samples shall
be taken during the same time that the
TOC and HC1 and chlorine samples are
taken. The concentration corrected to 3
percent oxygen (Cd) shall be computed
using Equation 7 of this subpart:
(Eq.7)
20.9 -%O2d
Where:
Ct = concentration of TOC or total HC1
and chlorine corrected to 3 percent
oxygen, dry basis, ppmv
Cm - total concentration of TOC or total
HC1 and chlorine in the vented gas
stream, average of samples, dry
basis, ppmv
%OM - concentration of oxygen
measured in vented gas stream, dry
basis, percent by volume
(ii) Noncombustion devices. If a
control device other than a combustion
device, and not in series with a
combustion device, is used to comply
with a TOC or total HC1 and chlorine
outlet concentration standard, the
owner or operator must correct the
actual concentration for supplemental
gases using Equation 8 of this subpart.
r =r
>^» ^~n
v.+v.
(Eq. 8)
Where:
C, = corrected outlet TOC or total HCI
and chlorine concentration, dry
basis, ppmv
Cm = actual TOC or total HCI and
chlorine concentration measured at
control device outlet, dry basis,
ppmv
V. = total volumetric flow rate of
affected streams vented to the
control device
Vs = total volumetric flow rate of
supplemental gases
(b) Test methods and conditions.
When testing is conducted to measure
emissions from an affected source, the
test methods specified in paragraphs
(b)(l) through (9) of this section shall be
used. Compliance tests shall be
performed under conditions specified in
paragraphs (b)(10) and (11) of this
section. Testing requirements for
condensers are specified in paragraph
(b) (12) of this section.
(1) Method 1 or 1A of appendix A of
40 CFR part 60 shall be used for sample
and velocity traverses.
(2) Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D of
appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 shall be
used for velocity and volumetric flow
rates.
(3) Method 3 of appendix A of 40 CFR
part 60 shall be used for gas analysis.
(4) Method 4 of appendix A of 40 CFR
part 60 shall be used for stack gas
moisture.
(5) Concentration measurements shall
be adjusted to negate the dilution effects
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33611
of introducing nonaffected gaseous
streams into the vent streams prior to
control or measurement. The following
methods are specified for concentration
measurements of organic compounds:
(i) Method 18 of appendix A of 40
CFR part 60 may be used to determine
HAP concentration in any control
device efficiency determination.
(ii) Method 25 of appendix A of 40
CFR part 60 may be used to determine
total gaseous nonmethane organic
concentration for control efficiency
determinations in combustion devices.
(iii) Method 25 A of appendix A of 40
CFR part 60 may be used to determine
the HAP or TOC concentration for
control device efficiency determinations
under the conditions specified in
Method 25 of appendix A of 40 CFR part
60 for direct measurement of an effluent
with a flame ionization detector, or in
demonstrating compliance with the 20
ppmv TOC outlet standard. If Method
25A of appendix A of 40 CFR part 60
is used to determine the concentration
of TOC for the 20 ppmv standard, the
instrument shall be calibrated on
methane or the predominant HAP. If
calibrating on the predominant HAP,
the use of Method 25 A of appendix A
of 40 CFR part 60 shall comply with
paragraphs (b)(5)(i)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) The organic HAP used as the
calibration gas for Method 25A, 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, shall be the single
organic HAP representing the largest
percent by volume.
(B) The use of Method 25 A, 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, is acceptable if the
response from the high level calibration
gas is at least 20 times the standard
deviation of the response from the zero
calibration gas when the instrument is
zeroed on the most sensitive scale.
(C) The span value of the analyzer
must be less than 100 ppmv.
(6) The methods in either paragraph
(b)(6)(i) or (ii) of this section shall be
used to determine the concentration, in
mg/dscm, of total HC1 and chlorine.
Concentration measurements shall be
adjusted to negate the dilution effects of
introducing nonaffected gaseous streams
into the vent streams prior to control or
measurement
(i) Method 26 or 26A of 40 CFR part
60, appendix A.
(ii) Any other method if the method
or data have been validated according to
the applicable procedures of Method
301 of appendix A of this part.
(7) Method 5 of appendix A of 40 CFR
part 60 shall be used to determine the
concentration of paniculate matter in
exhaust gas streams from bag dumps
and product dryers.
(8) Wastewater analysis shall be
conducted in accordance with
§63.144(b)(5)(i) through (iii) of subpart
G of this part.
(9) Method 22 of appendix A of 40
CFR part 60 shall be used to determine
visible emissions from flares.
(10) Testing conditions for continuous
processes. Testing of process vents on
equipment operating as part of a
continuous process shall consist of three
one-hour runs. Gas stream volumetric
flow rates shall be measured every 15
minutes during each 1-hour run.
Organic HAP concentration shall be
determined from samples collected in
an integrated sample over the duration
of each one-hour test run, or from grab
samples collected simultaneously with
the flow rate measurements (every 15
minutes). If an integrated sample is
collected for laboratory analysis, the
sampling rate shall be adjusted
proportionally to reflect variations in
flow rate. For continuous gas streams,
the emission rate used to determine
compliance shall be the average
emission rate of the three test runs.
(11) Testing conditions for batch
processes. Except as provided in
paragraph (b)(12) of this section for
condensers, testing of emissions on
equipment where the flow of gaseous
emissions is intermittent (batch
operations) shall be conducted at
absolute peak-case conditions or
hypothetical peak-case conditions, as
specified in paragraphs (b)(ll)(i) and (ii)
of this section, respectively. Gas stream
; volumetric flow rates shall be measured
at 15-minute intervals. Organic HAP,
TOC, or HC1 and chlorine concentration
shall be determined from samples
collected in an integrated sample over
the duration of the test, or from grab
samples collected simultaneously with
the flow rate measurements (every 15
minutes). If an integrated sample is
collected for laboratory analysis, the
sampling rate shall be adjusted
proportionally to reflect variations in
flow rate. In all cases, a site-specific test
plan shall be submitted to the
Administrator for approval prior to
testing In accordance with § 63.7 (c) of
subpart A of this part. The test plan
shall include the emissions profile
described in paragraph (b) (11) (ill) of this
section. The term "HAP mass loading"
as used in paragraphs (b)(ll)(i) through
(iii) of this section refers to the class of
HAP, either organic or HC1 and
chlorine, that the control device is
intended to control.
(i) Absolute peak-case. If the most
challenging conditions for the control
device occur under maximum HAP
load, the absolute peak-case conditions
shall be characterized by the criteria
presented in paragraph (b)(ll)(i)(A) or
(B) of this section. Otherwise, absolute
peak-case conditions are defined by the
conditions in paragraph (b)(ll)(i)(C) of
this section.
(A) The period in which the inlet to
the control device will contain at least
50 percent of the maximum HAP mass
load that may be vented to the control
device over any 8-hour period. An
emission profile as described in
paragraph (b) (11) (iii) (A) of this section
shall be used to Identify the 8-hour
period that includes the maximum
projected HAP load.
(B) A 1-hour period of time in which
the inlet to the control device will
contain the highest hourly HAP mass
loading rate that may be vented to the
control device. An emission profile as
described in paragraph (b) (11) (iii) (A) of
this section shall be used to identify the
1-hour period of maximum HAP
loading.
(C) The period of time when a
condition other than the maximum HAP
load is most challenging for the control
device. These conditions include, but
are not limited to the following:
(J) Periods when the streams contain
the highest combined VOC and HAP
hourly load, as described by the
emission profiles in paragraph
(b) (11) (iii) of this section; or
(2) Periods when the streams contain
HAP constituents that approach the
limits of solubility for scrubbing media;
or
(3) Periods when the streams contain
HAP constituents that approach the
limits of adsorptivity for carbon
adsorption systems.
(ii) Hypothetical peak-case.
Hypothetical peak-case conditions are
simulated test conditions that, at a
minimum, contain the highest total
average hourly HAP load of emissions
that would be predicted to be vented to
the control device from the emissions
profile described in either paragraph
(b)(ll)(iii)(B) or (C) of this section.
(iii) Emissions profile. The owner or
operator may choose to perform tests
only during those periods of the peak-
case episode(s) that the owner or
operator selects to control as part of
achieving the required emission
reduction. The owner or operator shall
develop an emission profile for the vent
to the control device that describes the
characteristics of the vent stream at the
inlet to the control device under either
absolute or hypothetical peak-case
conditions. The emissions profile shall
be developed based on the applicable
procedures described in paragraphs
(b) (11) (iii) (A) through (C) of this section,
as required by paragraphs (b)(ll)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
-------
33612 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
(A) Emissions profile by process. The
emissions profile must consider all
emission episodes that could contribute
to the vent stack for a period of time that
is sufficient to include all processes
venting to the stack and shall consider
production scheduling. The profile shall
describe the HAP load to the device that
equals the highest sum of emissions
from the episodes that can vent to the
control device during the period of
absolute peak-case conditions specified
in paragraph (b)(ll)(i)(A), (B), or (C) as
appropriate. Emissions per episode shall
be calculated using the procedures
specified in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section. When complying with
paragraph (b)(l)(i)(B) of this section,
emissions per episode shall be divided
by the duration of the episode if the
duration of the episode is longer than 1
hour.
(B) Emission profile by equipment.
The emission profile must consist of
emissions that meet or exceed the
highest hourly HAP load that would be
expected under actual processing
conditions. The profile shall describe
equipment configurations used to
generate the emission events, volatility
of materials processed in the equipment,
and the rationale used to identify and
characterize the emission events. The
emissions may be based on using a
compound more volatile than
compounds actually used in the
process(es), and the emissions may be
generated from all equipment in the
process (es) or only selected equipment.
(C) Emission profile by capture and
control device limitation. The emission
profile shall consider the capture and
control system limitations and the
highest hourly emissions that can be
routed to the control device, based on
maximum flow rate and concentrations
possible because of limitations on
conveyance and control equipment (e.g.,
fans, LEL alarms and safety bypasses).
(iv) Test duration. Three runs, at a
minimum of 1 hour each, are required
for performance testing. Each run must
occur over the same absolute or
hypothetical peak-case conditions, as
defined in paragraph (b)(ll)(i) or (ii) of
this section.
(12) Testing requirements for
condensers. For emission streams
controlled using condensers, the owner
or operator shall calculate the condenser
outlet gas temperature that is needed to
meet the required percent reduction.
(c) Initial compliance with process
vent provisions. The owner or operator
of an affected source shall demonstrate
compliance with the process vent
standards in §63.1362 (b) using the
procedures described in paragraphs
(c)(l) through (3) of this section.
(1) Compliance with the process vent
standards in §63.1362 (b) shall be
demonstrated in accordance with the
provisions specified in paragraphs
(c)(l)(i) through (viii) of this section.
(i) Initial compliance with the
emission limit cutoffs in
§63.1362(b)(2)(i) and (b)(4)(i) is
demonstrated when the uncontrolled
organic HAP emissions from the sum of
all process vents within a process are
less than or equal to 0.15 Mg/yr.
Uncontrolled HAP emissions shall be
determined using the procedures
described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(ii) Initial compliance with the
emission limit cutoffs in
§ 63.1362(b)(3)(i) and (b)(5)(i) is
demonstrated when the uncontrolled
HC1 and C12 emissions from the sum of
all process vents within a process are
less than or equal to 6,8 Mg/yr. Initial
compliance with the emission limit
cutoffs in §63.1362(b)(5)(ii) and (iii) is
demonstrated when the uncontrolled
HC1 and C12 emissions are greater than
or equal to 6.8 Mg/yr or greater than or
equal to 191 Mg/yr, respectively.
Uncontrolled emissions shall be
determined using the procedures
described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(iii) Initial compliance with the
organic HAP percent reduction
requirements specified in
§63.1362(b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii), and
(b)(4)(ii) is demonstrated by determining
controlled HAP emissions using the
procedures described in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section, determining
uncontrolled HAP emissions using the
procedures described in paragraph (c)(2)
of this section, and calculating the
applicable percent reduction.
(iv) Initial compliance with the HC1
and C12 percent reduction requirements
specified in § 63.1362(b)(3)(ii), (b)(5)(ii),
and (b)(5)(iii) is demonstrated by
determining controlled emissions of HC1
and Cl2 using the procedures described
In paragraph (c)(3) of this section,
determining uncontrolled emissions of
HC1 and C12 using the procedures
described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section, and calculating the applicable
percent reduction.
(v) Initial compliance with the outlet
concentration limits in
§63.1362(b)(2)(iv)(A),(b)(3)(li),
(b)(4)(ii)(A), (b)(5)(ii), and (b)(5){iii) is
demonstrated when the outlet TOC
concentration is 20 ppmv or less and the
outlet HC1 and chlorine concentration is
20 ppmv or less. The owner or operator
shall demonstrate compliance by
fulfilling the requirements in paragraph
(a) (6) of this section. If an owner or
operator elects to develop an emissions
profile by process as described in
paragraph (b)(ll)(iii)(A) of this section,
uncontrolled emissions shall be
determined using the procedures in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(vi) Initial compliance with the
alternative standard in § 63.1362 (b) (6) is
demonstrated by fulfilling the
requirements in paragraph (a) (5) of this
section.
(vii) Initial compliance when using a
flare is demonstrated by fulfilling the
requirements in paragraph (a) (3) of this
section.
(viii) No initial compliance
demonstration is required for control
devices specified in §63.1362(1).
(2) Uncontrolled emissions. The
owner or operator referred to from
paragraphs (c)(l)(i) through (v) of this
section shall calculate uncontrolled
emissions according to the procedures
described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) or (ii) of
this section, as appropriate.
(i) Emission estimation procedures.
The owner or operator shall determine
uncontrolled HAP emissions using
emission measurements and/or
calculations for each batch emission
episode according to the engineering
evaluation methodology in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i)(A) through (H) of this section.
(A) Individual HAP partial pressures
in multicomponent systems shall be
determined in accordance with the
methods specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i)(A)(J) through (3) of this section.
Chemical property data may be obtained
from standard references.
(1) If the components are miscible in
one another, use Raoult's law to
calculate the partial pressures;
(2) If the solution is a dilute aqueous
mixture, use Henry's law constants to
calculate partial pressures;
(3) If Raoult's law or Henry's law are
hot appropriate or available, use any of
the methods specified in paragraphs
(c) (2) (i) (A) (3) (i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Use experimentally obtained
activity coefficients;
(ii) Use models such as the group-
contribution models to predict activity
coefficients;
(iii) Assume the components of the
system behave independently and use
the summation of all vapor pressures
from the HAP as the total HAP partial
pressure;
(B) Charging or filling. Emissions from
vapor displacement due to transfer of
material to a vessel shall be calculated
using Equation 9 of this subpart:
(Eq. 9)
Where:
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33613
E = mass of HAP emitted
P, = partial pressure of the individual
HAP
V = volume of gas displaced from the
vessel
R = ideal gas law constant
T = temperature of the vessel vapor
space; absolute
MW, = molecular weight of the
individual HAP
(C) Purging. Emissions from purging
shall be calculated using Equation 10 of
this subpart, except that for purge flow
rates greater than 100 scfm, the mole
fraction of HAP will be assumed to be
25 percent of the saturated value.
i
(RXT)
H
(Eq. 10)
Where:
E = mass of HAP emitted
V = purge flow rate at the temperature
and pressure of the vessel vapor
space
R = ideal gas law constant
T = temperature of the vessel vapor
space; absolute
Pi = partial pressure of the individual
HAP
Pj = partial pressure of individual
condensable VOC compounds
(including HAP)
PT = pressure of the vessel vapor space
molecular weight of the
individual HAP
t = time of purge
n = number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
m = number of condensable VOC
compounds (including HAP) in the
emission stream
(D) Heating. Emissions caused by
heating the contents of a vessel to a
temperature less than the boiling point
shall be calculated using the procedures
in either paragraph (c)(2)(i)(D)(J), (2), or
(4) of this section, as appropriate. If the
contents of a vessel are heated to the
boiling point, emissions while boiling
are assumed to be zero if the owner or
operator is complying with the
provisions in paragraph (d)(2)(i)(C)(3) of
this section.
(1) If the final temperature to which
the vessel contents are heated is lower
than 50 K below the boiling point of the
HAP in the vessel, then emissions shall
be calculated using Equations 11
through 14 of this subpart.
(i) The mass of HAP emitted per
episode shall be calculated using
Equation 11 of this subpart:
(Eq. 11)
Where:
E = mass of HAP vapor displaced from
the vessel being heated
(P.Hn = partial pressure of each HAP in
the vessel headspace at initial (n =
1) and final (n = 2) temperatures
Pai = initial noncondensable gas
pressure in the vessel, as calculated
using Equation 13 of this subpart
Pa2 = final noncondensable gas pressure
in the vessel, as calculated using
Equation 13 of this subpart
At] = number of moles of
noncondensable gas displaced, as
calculated using Equation 12 of this
subpart
MWHAP = The average molecular weight
of HAP present in the vessel, as
calculated using Equation 14 of this
subpart:
n = number of HAP compounds in the
displaced vapor
(ii) The moles of noncondensable gas
displaced shall be calculated using
Equation 12 of this subpart:
(Eq. 12)
where:
ATI = number of moles of
noncondensable gas displaced
V = volume of free space in the vessel
R = ideal gas law constant
Pa, = initial noncondensable gas
pressure in the vessel, as calculated
using Equation 13 of this subpart
Paj = final noncondensable gas pressure
in the vessel, as calculated using
Equation 13 of this subpart
Ti = initial temperature of vessel
contents, absolute
Tz = final temperature of vessel
contents, absolute
(Hi) The initial and final pressure of
the noncondensable gas in the vessel
shall be calculated according to
Equation 13 of this subpart:
(Eq. 13)
Where:
Pan = partial pressure of
noncondensable gas in the vessel
headspace at initial (n = 1) and final
(n = 2) temperatures
P.un « atmospheric pressure
(Pj)Tn = partial pressure of each
condensable volatile organic
compound (including HAP) in the
vessel headspace at the initial
temperature (n = 1) and final (n =
2) temperature
(iv) The average molecular weight of
HAP in the displaced gas shall be
calculated using Equation 14 of this
subpart:
-------
33614 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Where:
= average molecular weight of
HAP in the displaced gas
rn = partial pressure of each HAP in
the vessel headspace at the initial
(T|) and final (TJ) temperatures
molecular weight of each HAP
n = number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
(2) If the vessel contents are heated to
a temperature greater than 50 K below
the boiling point, then emissions from
the heating of a vessel shall be
calculated as the sum of the emissions
calculated in accordance with
paragraphs (c) (2) (i) (D) (2) (i) and (11) of
this section.
(i) For the interval from the initial
temperature to the temperature 50 K
below the boiling point, emissions shall
be calculated using Equation 11 of this
subpart, where Tj is the temperature 50
K below the boiling point.
(j7) For the interval from the
temperature 50 K below the boiling
point to the final temperature, emissions
shall be calculated as the summation of
emissions for each 5 K increment, where
the emission for each increment shall be
calculated using Equation 11 of this
subpart. If the final temperature of the
heatup is lower than 5 K below the
boiling point, the final temperature for
the last increment shall be the final
temperature of the heatup, even if the
last increment is less than 5 K. If the
final temperature of the heatup is higher
than 5 K below the boiling point, the
final temperature for the last increment
shall be the temperature 5 K below the
boiling point, even if the last increment
is less than 5 K.
(3) While boiling, the vessel must be
operated with a properly operated
process condenser. An initial
demonstration that a process condenser
is properly operated is required for
vessels that operate process condensers
without secondary condensers that are
air poHutlon control devices. The owner
or operator must either measure the
condenser exhaust gas temperature and
show it is less than the boiling point of
the substance(s) in the vessel, or
perform a material balance around the
vessel and condenser to show that at
least 99 percent of the material
vaporized while boiling is condensed.
Uncontrolled emissions are assumed to
be zero under these conditions. The
initial demonstration shall be conducted
for all appropriate operating scenarios
and documented in the Notification of
Compliance Status report as specified in
§63.1368(f).
(4)(i) As an alternative to the
procedures described in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i)(D)U) and (2) of this section,
emissions caused by heating a vessel to
any temperature less than the boiling
point may be calculated using Equation
15 of this subpart.
MWHAPx
Navgxln
•v-ZM
(n
HAP,2
~n
HAP,l
(Eq. 15)
Where:
E = mass of HAP vapor displaced from
the vessel being heated
Navg = average gas space molar volume
during the heating process, as
calculated using Equation 16 of this
subpart
PT = total pressure in the vessel
P,,i = partial pressure of the individual
HAP compounds at TI
Pi.2 = partial pressure of the individual
HAP compounds at Tz
average molecular weight of
the HAP compounds, as calculated
using Equation 14 of this subpart
p. i = number of moles of total HAP
in the vessel headspace at Ti
nHAp.2 = number of moles of total HAP
in the vessel headspace at Tj
m = number of condensable VOC
compounds (including HAP) in the
emission stream
(if) The average gas space molar
volume during the heating process is
calculated using Equation 16 of this
subpart.
7-.- /
N.VI. =—- —+—
»VE on T T
(Eq. 16)
Where:
Navg = average gas space molar volume
during the heating process
V = volume of free space in vessel
PT = total pressure in the vessel
R = ideal gas law constant
Ti = initial temperature of the vessel
contents, absolute
T2 = final temperature of the vessel
contents, absolute
(iil) The difference In the number of
moles of total HAP in the vessel
headspace between the initial and final
temperatures Is calculated using
Equation 17 of this subpart.
1HAP,2
-n
HAP
Where:
number of moles of total HAP
in the vessel headspace at T2
HAP. i = number of moles of total HAP in
the vessel headspace at Ti
V = volume of free space in vessel
R = ideal gas law constant
Ti = initial temperature of the vessel
contents, absolute
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33615
T~2 = final temperature of the vessel
contents, absolute
P,,i = partial pressure of the individual
HAP compounds at TI
Pi,2=partial pressure of the individual
HAP compounds at T2
n=number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
(E) Depressurization. Emissions from
depressurization shall be calculated
using the procedures in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i)(E)(I) through (5) of this section.
Alternatively, the owner or operator
may elect to calculate emissions from
depressurization using the procedures
in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(E)(6) of this
section.
(1) The moles of HAP vapor initially
in the vessel are calculated using
Equation 18 of this subpart:
"HAP =
Where:
nHAF=moles of HAP vapor in the vessel
Pi=partial pressure of each HAP in the
vessel vapor space
V=free volume in the vessel being
depressurized
R=ideal gas law constant
T=absolute temperature in vessel
n=number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
(2) The initial and final moles of
noncondensable gas present in the
vessel are calculated using Equations 19
and 20 of this subpart:
VR,
n, =-
RT
VP,
n, =-
nc2
RT
(Eq. 19)
(Eq. 20)
Where:
ni=initial number of moles of
noncondensable gas in the vessel
n2=final number of moles of
noncondensable gas in the vessel
V=free volume in the vessel being
depressurized
Pnci=initial partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas, as calculated
using Equation 21 of this subpart
Pnc2=final partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas, as calculated
using Equation 22 of this subpart
R=ideal gas law constant
T=temperature, absolute
(3) The initial and final partial
pressures of the noncondensable gas in
the vessel are determined using
Equations 21 and 22 of this subpart
m_
Pnc,=P,-5>J*)(Xj) (Eq-21)
(Eq-22)
where:
Pnci=initial partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas
Pnci=final partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas
Pi = initial vessel pressure
P2=flnal vessel pressure
Pj«=vapor pressure of each condensable
VOC (including HAP) in the
emission stream
Xj=mole fraction of each condensable
VOC (including HAP) in the
emission stream
m=number of condensable VOC
compounds (including HAP) in the
emission stream
(4) The moles of HAP emitted during
the depressurization are calculated by
taking an approximation of the average
ratio of moles of HAP to moles of
noncondensable and multiplying by the
total moles of noncondensables released
during the depressurization, using
Equation 23 of this subpart:
Where:
nHAp,c=moles of HAP emitted
nHAP,e -
nHAP,l ^ nHAP,2
^— —^
n2
[n,-n2] (Eq. 23)
nHAp.i=moles of HAP vapor in vessel at
the initial pressure, as calculated
using Equation 18 of this subpart
nHAp.2=moles of HAP vapor in vessel at
the final pressure, as calculated
using Equation 18 of this subpart
n,=initial number of moles of
noncondensable gas in the vessel,
as calculated using Equation 19 of
this subpart
n2=final number of moles of
noncondensable gas in the vessel,
as calculated using Equation 19 of
this subpart
(5) Use Equation 24 of this subpart to
calculate the mass of HAP emitted:
- 24)
Where:
E=mass of HAP emitted
nHAp.c=moles of HAP emitted, as
calculated using Equation 23 of this
subpart
MWHAp=average molecular weight of
the HAP as calculated using
Equation 14 of this subpart
(6) As an alternative to the procedures
in paragraphs (c)(2)(i)(E)(l) through (5)
of this section, emissions from
depressurization may be calculated
using Equation 25 of this subpart:
E =
xln
H
(Bq.25)
where:
V=free volume in vessel being
depressurized
R=ideal gas law constant
T=temperature of the vessel, absolute
Pi=initial pressure in the vessel
P2=final pressure in the vessel
Pi=partial pressure of the individual
HAP compounds
-------
33616 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Pj=partial pressure of individual
condensable VOC compounds
(including HAP)
MW,=molecular weight of the
individual HAP compounds
n=number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
m=number of condensable VOC
compounds (including HAP) in the
emission stream
(F) Vacuum systems. Calculate
emissions from vacuum systems using
Equation 26 of this subpart:
E =
_ (MWs)(La)(t)
MWn
ii
Ifl
^ H ;
(Eq. 26)
Where:
E=mass of HAP emitted
Pr=absolute pressure of receiving vessel
or ejector outlet conditions, if there
is no receiver
P,=partial pressure of individual HAP at
the receiver temperature or the
ejector outlet conditions
Pj=partial pressure of individual
condensable VOC compounds
(including HAP) at the receiver
temperature or the ejector outlet
conditions
La=total air leak rate in the system,
mass/time
MWnc = molecular weight of
noncondensable gas
t=time of vacuum operation
MWHAp=average molecular weight of
HAP in the emission stream, as
calculated using Equation 14 of this
subpart, with HAP partial pressures
calculated at the temperature of the
receiver or ejector outlet, as
appropriate
n=number of HAP components in the
emission stream
m=number of condensable VOC
compounds (including HAP) in the
emission stream
(G) Gas evolution. Emissions from gas
evolution shall be calculated using
Equation 10 of this subpart with V
calculated using Equation 27 of this
subpart:
,
(PT)(MWg)
(Eq. 27)
Where:
V= volumetric flow rate of gas evolution
Wg=mass flow rate of gas evolution
R=ideal gas law constant
T=temperature at the exit, absolute
PT=vessel pressure
MWg=molecular weight of the evolved
gas
(H) Air drying. Use Equation 28 of this
subpart to calculate emissions from
air drying:
PS,
PS,
100-PS, 100 -PS2
(Eq. 28)
Where:
E=mass of HAP emitted
B=mass of dry solids
PSi=HAP in material entering dryer,
weight percent
PSz=HAP in material exiting dryer,
weight percent.
(ii) Engineering assessments. The
owner or operator shall conduct an
engineering assessment to determine
uncontrolled HAP emissions for each
emission episode that is not due to
vapor displacement, purging, heating,
depressurization, vacuum systems, gas
evolution, or air drying. For a given
emission episode caused by any of these
seven types of activities, the owner or
operator also may request approval to
determine uncontrolled HAP emissions
based on an engineering assessment. All
data, assumptions, and procedures used
in the engineering assessment shall be
documented in the Precompliance plan
in accordance with §63.1367 (b). An
engineering assessment includes, but is
not limited to, the information and
procedures described in paragraphs
(c)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section:
(A) Test results, provided the tests are
representative of current operating
practices at the process unit. If test data
show a greater than 20 percent
discrepancy between the test value and
the estimated value, the owner or
operator may estimate emissions based
on the test data, and the results of the
engineering assessment shall be
included in the Notification of
Compliance Status report.
(B) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data
representative of the process under
representative operating conditions.
(C) Maximum flow rate, HAP
emission rate, concentration, or other
relevant parameter specified or implied
within a permit limit applicable to the
process vent.
(D) Design analysis based on accepted
chemical engineering principles,
measurable process parameters, or
physical or chemical laws or properties.
Examples of analytical methods include,
but are not limited to:
(J) Use of material balances based on
process stoichiometry to estimate
maximum organic HAP concentrations;
(2) Estimation of maximum flow rate
based on physical equipment design
such as pump or blower capacities; and
(3) Estimation of HAP concentrations
based on saturation conditions.
(3) Controlled emissions. Except for
condensers, the owner or operator shall
determine controlled emissions using
the procedures in either paragraph
(c) (3) (i) or (ii) of this section, as
applicable. For condensers, controlled
emissions shall be calculated using the
emission estimation equations described
in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section.
The owner or operator is not required to
calculate controlled emissions from
devices described in paragraph (a) (4) of
this section or from flares for which
compliance is demonstrated in
accordance widi paragraph (a) (3) of this
section. If the owner or operator is
complying with an outlet concentration
standard and the control device uses
supplemental gases, the outlet
concentrations shall be corrected in
accordance with the procedures
described in paragraph (a) (7) of this
section.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33617
(i) Small control devices, except
condensers. Controlled emissions for
each process vent that is controlled
using a small control device, except for
a condenser, shall be determined by
using the design evaluation described in
paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section, or
by conducting a performance test in
accordance with paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of
this section.
(A) Design evaluation. The design
evaluation shall include documentation
demonstrating that the control device
being used achieves the required control
efficiency under absolute or
hypothetical peak-case conditions, as
determined from the emission profile
described in paragraph (b)(ll)(iii) of this
section. The control efficiency
determined from this design evaluation
shall be applied to uncontrolled
emissions to estimate controlled
emissions. The documentation must be
conducted in accordance with the
provisions in paragraph (a)(l) of this
section. The design evaluation shall also
include the value (s) and basis for the
parameters) monitored under §63.1366.
(B) Whenever a small control device
becomes a large control device, the
owner or operator must comply with the
provisions in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this
section and submit the test report in the
next Periodic report.
(ii) Large control devices, except
condensers. Controlled emissions for
each process vent that is controlled
using a large control device, except for
a condenser, shall be determined by
applying the control efficiency of the
large control device to the estimated
uncontrolled emissions. The control
efficiency shall be determined by
conducting a performance test on the
control device as described in
paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(A) through (C) of
this section, or by using the results of a
previous performance test as described
in paragraph (c) (3) (ii) (D) of this section.
If the control device is intended to
control only HC1 and chlorine, the
owner or operator may assume the
control efficiency of organic HAP is 0
percent. If the control device is intended
to control only organic HAP, the owner
or operator may assume the control
efficiency for HC1 and chlorine is 0
percent.
(A) Except for control devices that are
intended to meet outlet TOC or HC1 and
chlorine concentrations of 20 ppmv, the
performance test shall be conducted by
performing emission testing on the inlet
and outlet of the control device
following the test methods and
procedures of paragraph (b) of this
section. For control devices that meet
outlet TOC or HC1 and chlorine
concentrations of 20 ppmv, the
performance testing shall be conducted
by performing emission testing on the
outlet of the control device following
the test methods and procedures of
paragraph (b) of this section.
Concentrations shall be calculated from
the data obtained through emission
testing according to the procedures in
paragraph (a) (2) of this section.
(B) Performance testing shall be
conducted under absolute or
hypothetical.peak-case conditions, as
defined in paragraphs (b)(ll)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(C) The owner or operator may elect
to conduct more than one performance
test on the control device for the
purpose of establishing more than one
. operating condition at which the control
device achieves the required control
efficiency.
(D) The owner or operator is not
required to conduct a performance test
for any control device for which a
previous performance test was
conducted, provided the test was
conducted using the same procedures
specified in paragraphs (b)(l) through
(11) of this section over conditions
typical of the absolute or hypothetical
peak-case, as defined in paragraphs
(b)(ll)(i) and (ii) of this section. The
results of the previous performance test
shall be used to demonstrate
compliance.
(iii) Condensers. The owner or
operator using a condenser as a control
device shall determine controlled
emissions using exhaust gas
temperature measurements and
calculations for each batch emission
episode according to the engineering
methodology in paragraphs (c) (3) (iii) (A)
through (G) of this section. Individual
HAP partial pressures shall be
calculated as specified in paragraph
(c) (2) (i) of this section.
(A) Emissions from vapor
displacement due to transfer of material
to a vessel shall be calculated using
Equation 9 of this subpart with T set
equal to the temperature of the receiver
and the HAP partial pressures
determined at the temperature of the
receiver.
(B) Emissions from purging shall be
calculated using Equation 10 of this
subpart with T set equal to the
temperature of the receiver and the HAP
partial pressures determined at the
temperature of the receiver.
(C) Emissions from heating shall be
calculated using Equation 29 of this
subpart. In Equation 29 of this subpart,
ATI is equal to the number of moles of
noncondensable displaced from the
vessel, as calculated using Equation 12
of this subpart. In Equation 29 of this
subpart, the HAP average molecular
weight shall be calculated using
Equation 14 with the HAP partial
pressures determined at the temperature
of the receiver.
(Eq. 29)
Where:
E=mass of HAP emitted
AT)=moles of noncondensable gas
displaced
Pr=pressure in the receiver
Pi=partial pressure of the individual
HAP at the receiver temperature
Pj=partial pressure of the individual
condensable VOC (including HAP)
at the receiver temperature
n=number of HAP compounds In the
emission stream
MWHAp=the average molecular weight
of HAP in vapor exiting the
receiver, as calculated using
Equation 14 of this subpart
m=number of condensable VOC
(including HAP) in the emission
stream
(D)U) Emissions from
depressurlzation shall be calculated
using Equation 30 of this subpart.
-------
33618 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
i'l
F.-E.F,.
x — xMWB
RT *
(Bq. 30)
Where:
E=rnass of HAP vapor emitted
Vnii=initial volume of noncondensable
in the vessel, corrected to the final
pressure, as calculated using
Equation 31 of this subpart
VnC2=final volume of noncondensable in
the vessel, as calculated using
Equation 32 of this subpart
P,=partial pressure of each individual
HAP at the receiver temperature
Pj=partial pressure of each condensable
VOC (including HAP) at the
receiver temperature
Pr=receiver pressure
T= temperature of the receiver, absolute
R= ideal gas law constant
MWHAp=the average molecular weight
of HAP calculated using Equation
14 of this subpart with partial
pressures determined at the receiver
temperature
n=number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream
m=number of condensable VOC
(including HAP) in the emission
stream
(2) The initial and final volumes of
noncondensable gas present in the
vessel, adjusted to the pressure of the
receiver, are calculated using Equations
31 and 32 of this subpart.
Vnc, =
vnc2 =
VP
vrnc.
VP
rnc,
(Eq. 31)
(Eq. 32)
Where:
VnC|=initial volume of noncondensable
gas in the vessel
Vnc2=final volume of noncondensable
gas in the vessel
V=free volume in the vessel being
depressurized
Pnci=initial partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas, as calculated
using Equation 33 of this subpart
Pnc2=fmal partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas, as calculated
using Equation 34 of this subpart
Pr=pressure of the receiver
(3) Initial and final partial pressures
of the noncondensable gas in the vessel
are determined using Equations 33 and
34 of this subpart.
p — p —
^nc2 - *2
. 33)
(Eq. 34)
Where:
Pncl=initial partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas in the vessel
Pnc2=final partial pressure of the
noncondensable gas in the vessel
Pi=initial vessel pressure
P2=final vessel pressure
Pj=partial pressure of each condensable
VOC (including HAP) in the vessel
m=number of condensable VOC
(including HAP) in the emission
stream
(E) Emissions from vacuum systems
shall be calculated using Equation 26 of
this subpart.
(F) Emissions from gas evolution shall
be calculated using Equation 8 with V
calculated using Equation 27 of this
subpart, T set equal to the receiver
temperature, and the HAP partial
pressures determined at the receiver
temperature. The term for time, t, in
Equation 10 of this subpart is not
needed for the purposes of this
calculation.
(G) Emissions from air drying shall be
calculated using Equation 9 of this
subpart with V equal to the air flow rate
and P, determined at the receiver
temperature.
(d) Initial compliance with storage
vessel provisions. The owner or operator
of an existing or new affected source
shall demonstrate initial compliance
with the storage vessel standards in
§63.1362(c)(2) through (4) by fulfilling
the requirements in either paragraph
(d)(l),(2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of this
section, as applicable. The owner or
operator shall demonstrate initial
compliance with the planned routine
maintenance provision in
§ 63.1362(c)(5) by fulfilling the
requirements in paragraph (d)(7) of this
section.
(1) Percent reduction requirement for
control devices. If the owner or operator
equips a Group 1 storage vessel with a
closed vent system and control device,
the owner or operator shall demonstrate
initial compliance with the percent
reduction requirement of
§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)(A) or (c)(3) either by
calculating the efficiency of the control
device using performance test data as
specified in paragraph (d)(l)(l) of this
section, or by preparing a design
evaluation as specified in paragraph
(d)(l)(ii) of this section.
(i) Performance test option. If the
owner or operator elects to demonstrate
initial compliance based on
performance test data, the efficiency of
the control device shall be calculated as
specified in paragraphs (d)(l)(i)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) At the reasonably expected
maximum filling rate, Equations 35 and
36 of this subpart shall be used to
calculate the mass rate of total organic
HAP at the inlet and outlet of the
control device.
(Eq. 35)
E0=K2 £COJMOJ Q0 (Eq.36)
IH J
Where:
Ci,, C0j=concentration of sample
component j of the gas stream at the
inlet and outlet of the control
device, respectively, dry basis,
ppmv
EJ, E0=mass rate of total organic HAP at
the inlet and outlet of the control
device, respectively, dry basis, kg/
hr
My, Moj=molecular weight of sample
component j of the gas stream at the
inlet and outlet of the control
device, respectively, g/gmole
Qi, Qo-flow rate of gas stream at the
inlet and outlet of the control
device, respectively, dscmm
K2=constant, 2.494x10-* (parts per
million) ~' (gram-mole per standard
cubic meter) (kilogram/gram)
(minute/hour), where standard
temperature is 20 °C
(B) The percent reduction in total
organic HAP shall be calculated using
Equation 37 of this subpart:
R =
_Ei-E0
E;
(100) (Eq. 37)
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33619
Where:
R=control efficiency of control device,
percent
Ei=mass rate of total organic HAP at the
inlet to the control device as
calculated under paragraph
(d)(l)(i)(A) of this section, kilograms
organic HAP per hour
E0=mass rate of total organic HAP at the
outlet of the control device, as
calculated under paragraph
(d)(l)(i) (A) of this section,
kilograms organic HAP per hour
(C) A performance test is not required
to be conducted if the control device
used to comply with § 63.1362(c)
(storage tank provisions) is also used to
comply with § 63.1362 (b) (process vent
provisions), provided compliance with
§ 63.1362 (b) is demonstrated in
accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section and the demonstrated percent
reduction is equal to or greater than 95
percent.
(D) A performance test is not required
for any control device for which a
previous test was conducted, provided
the test was conducted using the same
procedures specified in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(ii) Design evaluation option. If the
owner or operator elects to demonstrate
initial compliance by conducting a
design evaluation, the owner or operator
shall prepare documentation in
accordance with the design evaluation
provisions in paragraph (a)(l) of this
section, as applicable. The design
evaluation shall demonstrate that the
control device being used achieves the
required control efficiency when the
storage vessel is filled at the reasonably
expected maximum filling rate.
(2) Outlet concentration requirement
for control devices. If the owner or
operator equips a Group 1 storage vessel
with a closed vent system and control
device, the owner or operator shall
demonstrate initial compliance with the
outlet concentration requirements of
§63.1362(c)(2)(iv)(B) or (c)(3) by
fulfilling the requirements of paragraph
(a) (6) of this section.
(3) Floating roof. If the owner or
operator equips a Group 1 storage vessel
with a floating roof to comply with the
provisions in §63.1362(c)(2) or (c)(3),
the owner or operator shall demonstrate
initial compliance by complying with
the procedures described in paragraphs
(d)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Comply with §63.119(b), (c), or (d)
of subpart G of this part, as applicable,
with the differences specified in
§63.1362(d)(2)(i) through (iii).
(ii) Comply with the procedures
described in §63.120(a), (b), or (c) of
subpart G of this part, as applicable,
with the differences specified in
§63.1362(d)(2)(i), (iv),and (v).
(4) Flares. If the owner or operator
controls the emissions from a Group 1
storage vessel with a flare, initial
compliance is demonstrated by fulfilling
the requirements in paragraph (a) (3) of
this section.
(5) Exemptions from initial
compliance. No initial compliance
demonstration is required for control
devices specified in paragraph (a) (4) of
this section.
(6) Initial compliance with alternative
standard. If the owner or operator
equips a Group 1 storage vessel with a
closed-vent system and control device,
the owner or operator shall demonstrate
initial compliance with the alternative
standard in §63.1362 (c) (4) by fulfilling
the requirements of paragraph (a) (5) of
this section.
(7) Planned routine maintenance. The
owner or operator shall demonstrate
initial compliance with the planned
routine maintenance provisions of
§ 63.1362 (c) (5) by including the
anticipated periods of planned routine
maintenance for the first reporting
period in the Notification of Compliance
Status report as specified in § 63.1368 (f).
(e) Initial compliance with wastewater
provisions. The owner or operator shall
demonstrate initial compliance with the
wastewater requirements by complying
with the applicable provisions in
§63.145 of subpart G of this part, except
that the owner or operator need not
comply with the requirement to
determine visible emissions that is
specified in §63.145(j)(l) of subpart G of
this part, and references to compounds
in Table 8 of subpart G of this part are
not applicable for the purposes of this
subpart.
(f) Initial compliance with the bag
dump and product dryer provisions.
Compliance with the paniculate matter
concentration limits specified in
§ 63.1362(e) is demonstrated when the
concentration of paniculate matter is
less than 0.01 gr/dscf, as measured
using the method described in
paragraph (b)(7) of this section.
(g) Initial compliance with the
pollution prevention a/ternative
standard. The owner or operator shall
demonstrate initial compliance with
§63.1362(h)(2) and (3) for a PAI process
unit by preparing the demonstration
summary in accordance with paragraph
(g)(l) of this section and by calculating
baseline and target annual HAP and
VOC factors in accordance with
paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) of this section.
To demonstrate initial compliance with
§ 63.1362 (h) (3), the owner or operator
must also comply with the procedures
for add-on control devices that are
specified in paragraph (g)(4) of this
section.
(1) Demonstration summary. The
owner or operator shall prepare a
pollution prevention demonstration
summary that shall contain, at a
minimum, the information in
paragraphs (g)(l)(i) through (iii) of this
section. The demonstration summary
shall be included in the Precompliance
report as specified in § 63.1368(e)(4).
(i) Descriptions of the methodologies
and forms used to measure and record
consumption of HAP and VOC
compounds.
(ii) Descriptions of the methodologies
and forms used to measure and record
production of the product(s).
(iii) Supporting documentation for the
descriptions provided in accordance
with paragraphs (g)(l)(i) and (ii) of this
section including, but not limited to,
operator log sheets and copies of daily,
monthly, and annual inventories of
materials and products. The owner or
operator must show how this
documentation will be used to calculate
the annual factors required in
§63.1366(f)(l).
(2) Baseline factors. The baseline HAP
and VOC factors shall be calculated by
dividing the consumption of total HAP
and total VOC by the production rate,
per process, for the first 3-year period in
which the process was operational,
beginning no earlier than the period
consisting of the 1987 through 1989
calendar years. Alternatively, for a
process that has been operational for
less than 3 years, but more than 1 year,
the baseline factors shall be established
for the time period from startup of die
process until the present.
(3) Target annual factors. The owner
or operator must calculate target annual
factors in accordance with either
paragraph (g)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) To demonstrate initial compliance
with §63.1362(h)(2), the target annual
HAP factor must be equal to or less than
15 percent of the baseline HAP factor.
For each reduction in a HAP that is also
a VOC, the target annual VOC factor ;
must be lower than the baseline VOC
factor by an equivalent amount on a
mass basis. For each reduction in a HAP
that is not a VOC, the target annual
factor must be equal to or less than the
baseline VOC factor.
(il) To demonstrate initial compliance
with §63.1362(h)(3)(i), die target annual
HAP and VOC factors must be
calculated as specified in paragraph
(g)(3)(i) of this section, except that when
"15 percent" is referred to in paragraph
(g)(3)(i) of this section, "50 percent"
shall apply for the purposes of this
paragraph.
-------
33620 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
(4) Requirements for add-on control
devices. Initial compliance with the
requirements for add-on control devices
in § 63.1362(h)(3)(ii) is demonstrated
when the requirements in paragraphs
(g)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section are
met.
(i) The yearly reductions associated
with add-on controls that meet the
criteria of §63.1362(h) (3) (ii) (A) through
(D), must be equal to or greater than the
amounts calculated using Equations 38
and 39 of this subpart:
= (HFb«e)(0.85 -
(Eq. 38)
- \FP2 -
(Eq. 39)
Where:
uccd = the annual HAP emissions
reduction required by add-on
controls, kg/yr
asc = the baseline HAP factor, kg
HAP consumed/kg product
= the fractional reduction in the
annual HAP factor achieved using
pollution prevention where RPJ is
>0.5
uccd = required VOC emission
reduction from add-on controls, kg/
y
VFbwc = baseline VOC factor, kg VOC
emitted/kg production
VFp2 = reduction in VOC factor achieved
by pollution prevention, kg VOC
emitted/kg production
VFannuai = target annual VOC factor, kg
VOC emitted/kg production
Mprod = production rate, kg/yr
(ii) Demonstration that the criteria in
§63.1362(i)(3)(ii)(A) through (D) are met
shall be accomplished through a
description of the control device and of
the material streams entering and
exiting the control device.
(iii) The annual reduction achieved by
the add-on control shall be quantified
using the methods described in
paragraph (c) of this section.
(h) Compliance with emissions
averaging provisions. An owner or
operator shall demonstrate compliance
with the emissions averaging provisions
of §63.1362(h) by fulfilling the
requirements of paragraphs (h)(l)
through (6) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator shall
develop and submit for approval an
Emissions Averaging Plan containing all
the information required in
§ 63.1367(d). The Emissions Averaging
Plan shall be submitted no later than 18
months prior to the compliance date of
the standard. The Administrator shall
determine within 120 calendar days
whether the Emissions Averaging Plan
submitted by sources using emissions
averaging presents sufficient
information. The Administrator shall
either approve the Emissions Averaging
Plan, request changes, or request that
the owner or operator submit additional
information. Once the Administrator
receives sufficient information, the
Administrator shall approve,
disapprove, or request changes to the
plan within 120 days. If the Emissions
Averaging Plan is disapproved, the
owner or operator must still be in
compliance with the standard by the
compliance date.
(2) For all points included in an
emissions average, the owner or
operator shall comply with the
procedures that are specified in
paragraphs (h)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section.
(i) Calculate and record monthly
debits for all Group 1 emission points
that are controlled to a level less
stringent than the standard for those
emission points. Equations in paragraph
(h)(5) of this section shall be used to
calculate debits.
(ii) Calculate and record monthly
credits for all Group 1 and Group 2
emission points that are overcontrolled
to compensate for the debits. Equations
in paragraph (h)(6) of this section shall
be used to calculate credits. All process
vent, storage vessel, and wastewater
emission points except those specified
in §63.1362(h)(l) through (6) may be
included in the credit calculation.
(iii) Demonstrate that annual credits
calculated according to paragraph (h)(6)
of this section are greater than or equal
to debits calculated according to
paragraph (h)(5) of this section for the
same annual compliance period. The
initial demonstration in the Emissions
Averaging Plan or operating permit
application that credit-generating
emission points will be capable of
generating sufficient credits to offset the
debit-generating emission points shall
be made under representative operating
conditions. After the compliance date,
actual operating data shall be used for
all debit and credit calculations.
(iv) Demonstrate that debits
calculated for a quarterly (3-month)
period according to paragraph (h)(5) of
this section are not more than 1.30 times
the credits for the same period
calculated according to paragraph (h) (6)
of this section. Compliance for the
quarter shall be determined based on
the ratio of credits and debits from that
quarter, with 30 percent more debits
than credits allowed on a quarterly
basis.
(v) Record and report quarterly and
annual credits and debits as required in
§§63.1367(d) and 63.1368(d).
(3) Credits and debits shall not
include emissions during periods of
malfunction. Credits and debits shall
not include periods of startup and
shutdown for continuous processes.
(4) During periods of monitoring
excursions, credits and debits shall be '
adjusted as specified in paragraphs
(h)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) No credits shall be assigned to the
credit-generating emission point.
(ii) Maximum debits shall be assigned
to the debit-generating emission point.
(iii) The owner or operator may
demonstrate to the Administrator that
full or partial credits or debits should be
assigned using the procedures in
§ 63.150(1) of subpart G of this part.
(5) Debits are generated by the
difference between the actual emissions
from a Group 1 emission point that is
uncontrolled or controlled to a level less
stringent than the applicable standard
and the emissions allowed for the Group
1 emission point Debits shall be
calculated in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraphs
(h)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Source-wide debits shall be
calculated using Equation 40 of this
subpart
Debits and all terms of Equation 40 of
this subpart are in units of Mg/month
Where:
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33621
(Eq. 40)
EPV.u = uncontrolled emissions from
process 1 calculated according to
the procedures specified In
paragraph (h)(5)(ii) of this section
EPViA = actual emissions from each
Group 1 process i that is
uncontrolled or is controlled to a
level less stringent than the
applicable standard. EPViA Is
calculated using the procedures in
paragraph (h)(5)(ii) of this section
ESju = uncontrolled emissions from
storage vessel i calculated according
to the procedures specified in
paragraph (h)(5)(iii) of this section
ES,A = actual emissions from each
Group 1 storage vessel i that is
uncontrolled or is controlled to a
level less stringent than the
applicable standard. ESjA is
calculated using the procedures in
paragraph (h)(5)(iii) of this section
EWW.c = emissions from each Group 1
wastewater stream i if the standard
had been applied to the
uncontrolled emissions. EWWiC is
calculated using the procedures in
paragraph (h) (5) (iv) of this section
EWW.A = actual emissions from each
Group 1 wastewater stream i that is
uncontrolled or is controlled to a
level less stringent than the
applicable standard. EWWiA is
calculated using the procedures in
paragraph (h)(5)(iv) of this section
n = the number of emission points being
included in the emissions average;
the value of n is not necessarily the
same for process vents, storage
tanks, and wastewater
(ii) Emissions from process vents shall
be calculated in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraphs
(h)(5)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Except as provided in paragraph
(h)(5)(ii)(C) of this section, uncontrolled
emissions for process vents shall be
calculated using the procedures that are
specified in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(B) Except as provided in paragraph
(h)(5)(ii)(C) of this section, actual
emissions for process vents shall be
calculated using the procedures
specified in paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3)
of this section, as applicable.
(C) As an alternative to the procedures
described in paragraphs (h)(5)(li)(A) and
(B) of this section, for continuous
processes, uncontrolled and actual
emissions may be calculated by the
procedures described in §63.150(g)(2) of
subpart G of this part. For purposes of
complying with this paragraph, a 90
percent reduction shall apply instead of
the 98 percent reduction in
§ 63.150(g) (2) (iii) of subpart G of this
part, and the term "process condenser"
shall apply instead of the term
"recovery device" in §63.150(g)(2) for
the purposes of this subpart.
(iii) Uncontrolled emissions from
storage vessels shall be calculated in
accordance with the procedures
described in paragraph (d)(l) of this
section. Actual emissions from storage
vessels shall be calculated using the
procedures specified in
§63.150(g)(3)(ll), (ill), or (iv) of subpart
G of this subpart, as appropriate, except
that when §63.150(g)(3)(H)(B) refers to
the procedures in § 63.120(d) for
determining percent reduction for a
control device, § 63.1365 (d) (2) or (3)
shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart
(iv) Emissions from wastewater shall
be calculated using the procedures
specified in §63.150(g)(5) of subpart G
of this part.
(6) Credits are generated by the
difference between emissions that are
allowed for each Group 1 and Group 2
emission point and the actual emissions
from that Group 1 or Group 2 emission
point that have been controlled after
November 15, 1990 to a level more
stringent than what is required in this
subpart or any other State or Federal
rule or statute. Credits shall be
calculated in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraphs
(h)(6)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Source-wide credits shall be
calculated using Equation 41 of this
subpart. Credits and all terms in
Equation 41 of this subpart are in units .
of Mg/month, the baseline date is
November 15, 1990, the terms consisting
of a constant multiplied by the
uncontrolled emissions are the
emissions from each emission point
subject to the standards in § 63.1362(b)
and (c) that is controlled to a level more
stringent than the standard.
Where:
Credits = D£[(0.10)(EPV11U) - EPVl^] + D£(EPV2iB - EPV2iA) + DX[(0.05)(ESliU) -
i=l i=l i=l
DX(ES2iB-ES2iA)+D£(EWWlic-EWWliA)-t-D£(EWW2iB-EWW2iA) (Eq. 41)
EPVlju = uncontrolled emissions from
each Group 1 process i calculated
according to the procedures in
paragraph (h) (6) (iii) (A) of this
section
EPV1,A = actual emissions from each
Group 1 process i that is controlled
to a level more stringent than the
applicable standard. EPVliA is
calculated according to the
procedures in paragraph
(h)(6)(iii)(B) of this section
EPV2iB = emissions from each Group 2
process i at die baseline date.
EPV2iB is calculated according to
the procedures in paragraph
(h)(6)(iii)(C) of this section
EPV2iA = actual emissions from each
Group 2 process i that is controlled.
EPV2iA is calculated according to
the procedures in paragraph
(h)(6)(iii)(C) of this section
uncontrolled emissions from
each Group 1 storage vessel i
calculated according to the
procedures in paragraph (h)(6)(iv)
of this section
actual emissions from each
Group 1 storage vessel i that is
controlled to a level more stringent
that the applicable standard. ESliA
is calculated according to the
procedures in paragraph (h)(6)(iv)
of this section
ES2iB - emissions from each Group 2
storage vessel i at the baseline date.
ES2jB is calculated according to the
procedures in paragraph (h)(6)(iv)
of this section
ES2iA - actual emissions from each
Group 2 storage vessel i that is
controlled. ES2iA is calculated
according to the procedures in
paragraph (h)(6)(iv) of this section
-------
33622 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
EWWlic = emissions from each Group
1 wastewater stream i if the
standard had been applied to the
uncontrolled emissions. EWW1,C is
calculated according to the
procedures in paragraph (h) (6) (v) of
this section
EWW1 ,A= emissions from each Group 1
wastewater stream i that is
controlled to a level more stringent
that the applicable standard.
EWWljA is calculated according to
the procedures in paragraph
(h) (6) (v) of this section
EWW2iB = emissions from each Group
2 wastewater stream 1 at the
baseline date. EWW2iB is calculated
according to the procedures in
paragraph (h)(6)(v) of this section
EWW2,A = actual emissions from each
Group 2 wastewater stream i that is
controlled. EWW2iA is calculated
according to the procedures in
paragraph (h)(6)(v) of this section
n = number of Group 1 emission points
that are included In the emissions
average. The value of n Is not
necessarily the same for process
vents, storage tanks, and wastewater
m = number of Group 2 emission points
included in the emissions average.
The value of m is not necessarily
the same for process vents, storage
tanks, and wastewater
D = discount factor equal to 0.9 for all
credit-generating emission points
except those controlled by a
pollution prevention measure,
which will not be discounted
(ii) For an emission point controlled
using a pollution prevention measure.
the nominal efficiency for calculating
credits shall be as determined as
described in §63.150(j) of subpartG of
this part.
(iii) Emissions from process vents
shall be calculated In accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraphs
(h)(6)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Uncontrolled emissions from
Group 1 process vents shall be
calculated according to the procedures
In paragraph (h)(5){il){A) or (C) of this
section.
(B) Actual emissions from Group 1
process vents with a nominal efficiency
greater than the applicable standard or
a pollution prevention measure that
achieves reductions greater than the
applicable standard shall be calculated
using Equation 42 of this subpart:
=EPVlju xJl-Nrff /100] (Eq. 42)
Where:
= actual emissions from each
Group 1 process i that is controlled
to a level more stringent than the
applicable standard
EPVl,u = uncontrolled emissions from
each Group 1 process i
Ncn = nominal efficiency of control
device or pollution prevention
measure, percent
(C) Baseline and actual emissions
from Group 2 process vents shall be
calculated according to the procedures
in §63.150(h)(2)(iii) and (iv) with the
following modifications:
(1) The term "90 percent reduction"
shall apply instead of the term "98
percent reduction"; and
(2) When the phrase "paragraph
(g)(2)" is referred to in §63.150(h)(2)(iii)
and (iv), the provisions in paragraph
(h) (5) (ii) of this section shall apply for
the purposes of this subpart.
(iv) Uncontrolled emissions from
storage vessels shall be calculated
according to the procedures described
in paragraph (d)(l) of this section.
Actual and baseline emissions from
storage tanks shall be calculated
according to the procedures specified in
§63.150(h)(3) of subpart G of this part,
except when § 63.150(h)(3) refers to
§63.150(g)(3)(i), paragraph (d)(l) of this
section shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(v) Emissions from wastewater shall
be calculated using the procedures in
§ 63. 1 50 (h) (5) of subpart G of this part.
§ 63.1366 Monitoring and Inspection
requirements.
(a) To provide evidence of continued
compliance with the standard, the
owner or operator of any existing or new
affected source shall install, operate,
and maintain monitoring devices as
specified in this section. During the
initial compliance demonstration,
maximum or minimum operating
parameter levels, or other design and
operating characteristics, as appropriate,
shall be established for emission sources
that will indicate the source is in
compliance. Test data, calculations, or
information from the evaluation of the
control device design, as applicable,
shall be used to establish the operating
parameter level or characteristic.
(b) Monitoring for control devices. (I)
Parameters to monitor. Except as
specified in paragraph (b)(l)(i) of this
section, for each control device, the
owner or operator shall install and
operate monitoring devices and operate
within the established parameter levels
to ensure continued compliance with
the standard. Monitoring parameters are
specified for control scenarios in
paragraphs (b)(l)(il) through (xll) of this
section, and are summarized in Table 3
of this subpart.
(i) Periodic verification. For control
devices that control vent streams
containing total HAP emissions less
than 0.91 Mg/yr, before control,
monitoring shall consist of a periodic
verification that the device is operating
properly. This verification shall include,
but not be limited to, a daily or more
frequent demonstration that the unit is
working as designed and may include
the daily measurements of the
parameters described in paragraphs
(b)(l)(ii) through (xii) of this section.
This demonstration shall be included in
the Precompliance plan, to be submitted
6 months prior to the compliance date
of the standard.
(ii) Scrubbers. For affected sources
using liquid scrubbers, the owner or
operator shall establish a minimum
scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure
drop as a site-specific operating
parameter which must be measured and
recorded at least once every 15 minutes
during the period in which the scrubber
is controlling HAP from an emission
stream as required by the standards In
§ 63.1362. If the scrubber uses a caustic
solution to remove acid emissions, the
pH of the effluent scrubber liquid shall
also be monitored once a day. The
minimum scrubber liquid flow rate or
pressure drop shall be based on the
conditions under which the initial
compliance demonstration was
conducted.
(A) The monitoring device used to
determine the pressure drop shall be
certified by the manufacturer to be
accurate to within a gage pressure of ±10
percent of the maximum pressure drop
measured.
(B) The monitoring device used for
measurement of scrubber liquid flowrate
shall be certified by the manufacturer to
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33623
be accurate to within ±10 percent of the
design scrubber liquid flowrate.
(C) The monitoring device shall be
calibrated annually.
(iii) Condensers. For each condenser,
the owner or operator shall establish the
maximum condenser outlet gas
temperature as a site-specific operating
parameter which must be measured and
recorded at least once every 15 minutes
during the period In which the
condenser is controlling HAP from an
emission stream as required by the
standards in §63.1362.
(A) The temperature monitoring
device must be accurate to within ±2
percent of the temperature measured in
degrees Celsius or ±2.5°C, whichever is
greater.
(B) The temperature monitoring
device must be calibrated annually.
(iv) Regenerative carbon adsorbers.
For each regenerative carbon adsorber,
the owner or operator shall comply with
the provisions in paragraphs
(b)(l)(iv)(A) through (F) of this section.
(A) Establish the regeneration cycle
characteristics specified In paragraphs
(b)(l)(iv)(A) (J) through (4) of this
section under absolute or hypothetical
peak-case conditions, as defined in
§63.1365(b)(ll)(i)or(ii).
(1) Minimum regeneration frequency
(i.e., operating time since last
regeneration);
(2) Minimum temperature to which
the bed is heated during regeneration;
(3) Maximum temperature to which
the bed is cooled, measured within 15
minutes of completing the cooling
phase; and
(4) Minimum regeneration stream
flow.
(B) Monitor and record the
regeneration cycle characteristics
specified in paragraphs (b)(l)(iv)(B) (1)
through (4) of this section for each
regeneration cycle.
(1) Regeneration frequency (i.e.,
operating time since end of last
regeneration);
(2) Temperature to which the bed is
heated during regeneration;
(3) Temperature to which the bed is
cooled, measured within 15 minutes of
the completion of the cooling phase;
and
(4) Regeneration stream flow.
(C) Use a temperature monitoring
device that is accurate to within ±2
percent of the temperature measured in
degrees Celsius or ±2.5°C, whichever is
greater.
(D) Use a regeneration stream flow
monitoring device capable of recording
the total regeneration stream flow to
within ±10 percent of the established
value (i.e., accurate to within ±10
percent of the reading).
(E) Calibrate the temperature and flow
monitoring devices annually.
(F) Conduct an annual check for bed
poisoning in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications.
(v) Nonregenerative carbon adsorbers.
For each nonregenerative carbon
adsorption system such as a carbon
canister that does not regenerate the
carbon bed directly onsite in the control
device, the owner or operator shall
replace the existing carbon bed in the
control device with fresh carbon on a
regular schedule based on one of the
following procedures:
(A) Monitor the TOC concentration
level in the exhaust vent stream from
the carbon adsorption system on a
regular schedule, and replace the
existing carbon with fresh carbon
immediately when carbon breakthrough
is indicated. The monitoring frequency
shall be daily or at an interval no greater
than 20 percent of the time required to
consume the total carbon working
capacity under absolute or hypothetical
peak-case conditions as defined in
§ 63.1365(b)(ll)(i) or (ii), whichever is
longer.
(B) Establish the maximum time
interval between replacement, and
replace the existing carbon before this
time interval elapses. The time interval
shall be established based on the
conditions anticipated under absolute or
hypothetical peak-case, as defined in
§63.1365(b)(ll)(i)or(ii).
(vi) Wares. For each flare, the
presence of the pilot flame shall be
• monitored at least once every 15
minutes during the period in which the
flare is controlling HAP from an
emission stream subject to the standards
in §63.1362. The monitoring device
shall be calibrated annually.
(vii) Thermal incinerators. For each
thermal incinerator, the owner or
operator shall monitor the temperature
of the gases exiting the combustion
chamber as the site-specific operating
parameter which must be measured and
recorded at least once every 15 minutes
during the period in which the
combustion device Is controlling HAP
from an emission stream subject to the
standards in §63.1362.
(A) The temperature monitoring
device must be accurate to within ±0.75
percent of the temperature measured in
degrees Celsius or ±2.5°C, whichever is
greater.
(B) The monitoring device must be
calibrated annually.
(viii) Catalytic incinerators. For each
catalytic incinerator, the parameter
levels that the owner or operator shall
establish are the minimum temperature
of the gas stream immediately before the
catalyst bed and the minimum
temperature difference across the
catalyst bed. The owner or operator
shall monitor the temperature of the gas
stream immediately before and after the
catalyst bed, and calculate the
temperature difference across the
catalyst bed, at least once every 15
minutes during the period in which the
catalytic incinerator is controlling HAP
from an emission stream subject to the
standards in § 63.1362.
(A) The temperature monitoring
devices must be accurate to within
±0.75 percent of the temperature
measured in degrees Celsius or ±2.5°C.
whichever is greater.
(B) The temperature monitoring
devices must be calibrated annually.
(ix) Process heaters and boilers. (A)
Except as specified in paragraph
(b)(l)(ix)(B) of this section, for each
boiler or process heater, the owner or
operator shall monitor the temperature
of the gases exiting the combustion
chamber as the site-specific operating
parameter which must be monitored
and recorded at least every 15 minutes
during the period in which the boiler or
process heater is controlling HAP from
an emission stream subject to the
standards in §63.1362.
(1) The temperature monitoring
device must be accurate to within ±0.75
percent of the temperature measured in
degrees Celsius or ±2.5°C, whichever is
greater.
(2) The temperature monitoring
device must be calibrated annually.
(B) The owner or operator is exempt
from the monitoring requirements
specified in paragraph (b)(l)(ix)(A) of
this section if either:
(1) All vent streams are introduced
with primary fuel; or
(2) The design heat input capacity of
the boiler or process heater is 44
megawatts or greater.
(x) Continuous emission monitor. As
an alternative to the parameters
specified in paragraphs (b)(l)(ii) through
(ix) of this section, an owner or operator
may monitor and record the outlet HAP
concentration or both the outlet TOC
concentration and outlet total HC1 and
chlorine concentration at least every 15
minutes during the period in which the
control device Is controlling HAP from
an emission stream subject to the
standards in § 63.1362. The owner or
operator need not monitor the total HC1
and chlorine concentration If the owner
or operator determines that the emission
stream does not contain HC1 or chlorine.
The owner or operator need not monitor
the TOC concentration if the owner or
operator determines the emission stream
does not contain organic compounds.
The HAP or TOC monitor must meet the
requirements of Performance
-------
33624 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Specification 8 or 9 of appendix B of
part 60 and must be installed,
calibrated, and maintained, according to
§ 63.8 of subpart A of this part. As part
of the QA/QC Plan, calibration of the
device must include, at a minimum,
quarterly cylinder gas audits. If
supplemental gases are introduced
before the control device, the monitored
concentration shall be corrected as
specified in §63.1365(aj(7).
(xi) Fabric filters. For each fabric filter
used to control particulate matter
emissions from bag dumps and product
dryers subject to §63.1362(e), the owner
or operator shall install, calibrate,
maintain, and continuously operate a
bag leak detection system that meets the
requirements in paragraphs (b)(l)(xi)(A)
through (G) of this section.
(A) The bag leak detection system
sensor must provide output of relative
particulate matter emissions.
(B) The bag leak detection system
must be equipped with an alarm system
that will sound when an increase in
particulate matter emissions over a
preset level is detected.
(C) For positive pressure fabric filters,
a bag leak detector must be installed in
each fabric filter compartment or cell. If
a negative pressure or induced air filter
is used, the bag leak detector must be
installed downstream of the fabric filter.
Where multiple bag leak detectors are
required (for either type of fabric filter),
the system instrumentation and alarm
may be shared among detectors.
VD) The bag leak detection system
shall be installed, operated, calibrated
and maintained in a manner consistent
with available guidance from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency or, in
the absence of such guidance, the
manufacturer's written specifications
and instructions.
(E) Calibration of the system shall, at
a minimum, consist of establishing the
relative baseline output level by
adjusting the range and the averaging
period of the device and establishing the
alarm set points and the alarm delay
time.
(F) Following initial adjustment, the
owner or operator shall not adjust the
sensitivity or range, averaging period,
alarm set points, or alarm delay time,
except as established in an operation
and maintenance plan that is to be
submitted with th.2 Precompliance plan.
In no event shall the sensitivity be
increased more than 100 percent or
decreased by more than 50 percent over
a 365-day period unless such
adjustment follows a complete baghouse
inspection which demonstrates the
baghouse is in good operating condition.
(G) If the alarm on a bag leak
detection system is triggered, the owner
or operator shall, within 1 hour of an
alarm, initiate the procedures to identify
the cause of the alarm and take
corrective action as specified in the
corrective action plan.
(xii) For each waste management unit,
treatment process, or control device
used to comply with § 63.1362(d). the
owner or operator shall comply with the
procedures specified in §63.143 of
subpart G of this part, except that when
the procedures to request approval to
monitor alternative parameters
according to the procedures in
§ 63.151(f) are referred to in
§ 63.143(d)(3), the procedures in
paragraph (b)(4) of this section shall
apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(xiii) Closed-vent system visual
inspections. The owner or operator shall
perform monthly visual inspections of
each closed vent system as specified in
§63.1362(j).
(2) Averaging periods. Averaging
periods for parametric monitoring levels
shall be established according to
paragraphs (b)(2)(0 through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) of this section, a daily (24-
hour) or block average shall be
calculated as the average of all values
for a monitored parameter level set
according to the procedures in (b)(3)(iii)
of this section recorded during the
operating day or block.
(ii) The operating day or block shall
be defined in the Notification of
Compliance Status report. The operating
day may be from midnight to midnight
or another continuous 24-hour period.
The operating block may be used as an
averaging period only for vents from
batch operations, and is limited to a
period of time that is, at a maximum,
equal to the time from the beginning to
end of a series of consecutive batch
operations.
(iii) Monitoring values taken during
periods in which the control devices are
not controlling HAP from an emission
stream subject to the standards in
§ 63.1362, as indicated by periods of no
flow or periods when only streams that
are not subject to the standards in
§ 63.1362 are controlled, shall not be
considered in the averages. Where flow
to the device could be intermittent, the
owner or operator shall install, calibrate
and operate a flow indicator at the inlet
or outlet of the control device to Identify
periods of no flow.
(3) Procedures for setting parameter
levels for control devices used to control
emissions from process vents, (i) Small
control devices. Except as provided in
paragraph (b)(l)(i) of this section, for
devices controlling less than 10 tons/yr
of HAP for which a performance test is
not required, the parameteric levels
shall be set based on the design
evaluation required in
§63.1365(c)(3)(i)(A). If a performance
test is conducted, the monitoring
parameter level shall be established
according to the procedures in
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
(ii) Large control devices. For devices
controlling greater than or equal to 10
tons/yr of HAP for which a performance
test is required, the parameter level
must be established as follows:
(A) If the operating parameter level to
be established is a maximum or
minimum, it must be based on the
average of the average values from each
of the three test runs.
(B) The owner or operator may
establish the parametric monitoring
level(s) based on the performance test
supplemented by engineering
assessments and/or manufacturer's
recommendations. Performance testing
is not required to be conducted over the
entire range of expected parameter
values. The rationale for the specific
level for each parameter, including any
data and calculations used to develop
the level (s) and a description of why the
level indicates proper operation of the
control device shall be provided in the
Precompliance plan. Determination of
the parametric monitoring level using
these procedures is subject to review
and approval by the Administrator.
(iii) Parameter levels for control
devices controlling batch process vents.
For devices controlling batch process
vents alone or in combination with
other streams, the level(s) shall be
established in accordance with
paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(A) or (B) of this
section.
(A) A single level for the batch
process(es) shall be calculated from the
initial compliance demonstration.
(B) The owner or operator may
establish separate levels for each batch
emission episode or combination of
emission episodes selected to be
controlled. If separate monitoring levels
are established, the owner or operator
must provide a record indicating at
what point in the daily schedule or log
of processes required to be recorded per
the requirements of §63.1367(b)(7), the
parameter being monitored changes
levels and must record at least one
reading of the new parameter level, even
if the duration of monitoring for the new
parameter level is less than 15 minutes.
(4) Requesting approval to monitor
alternative parameters. The owner or
operator may request approval to
monitor parameters other than those
required by paragraphs (b)(l)(ii) through
(xlii) of this section. The request shall
be submitted according to the
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33625
procedures specified in §63.8(f) of
subpart A of this part or in the
Precompliance report (as specified in
§63.1368(e)).
(5) Monitoring for the alternative
standards. For control devices that are
used to comply with the provisions of
§ 63.1362 (b) (6) and (c)(4), the owner or
operator shall monitor and record the
outlet TOC concentration and the outlet
total HC1 and chlorine concentration at
least once every 15 minutes during the
period in which the device is
controlling HAP from emission streams
subject to the standards in §63.1362. A
TOC monitor meeting the requirements
of Performance Specification 8 or 9 of
appendix B of 40 CFR part 60 shall be
installed, calibrated, and maintained,
according to §63.8 of subpart A of this
part. The owner or operator need not
monitor the total HC1 and chlorine
concentration if the owner or operator
determines that the emission stream
does not contain HC1 or chlorine. The
owner or operator need not monitor for
TOC concentration if the owner or
operator determines that the emission
stream does not contain organic
compounds. If supplemental gases are
introduced before the control device,
the monitored concentration shall be
corrected as specified in §63.1365(a)(7).
(6) Exceedances of operating
parameters. An exceedance of an
operating parameter is defined as one of
the following:
(i) If the parameter level, averaged
over the operating day or block, is below
a minimum value established during the
initial compliance demonstration.
(ii) If the parameter level, averaged
over the operating day or block, is above
the maximum value established during
the initial compliance demonstration.
(iii) A loss of all pilot flames for a
flare during an operating day or block.
Multiple losses of all pilot flames during
an operating day constitutes one
exceedance.
(iv) Each operating day or block for
which the time interval between
replacement of a nonregenerative carbon
adsorber exceeds the interval
established in paragraph (b)(l)(v) of this
section.
(v) Each instance in which procedures
to initiate the response to a bag leak
detector alarm within 1 hour of the
alarm as specified in the corrective
action plan.
(7) Excursions. Excursions are defined
by either of the two cases listed in
paragraph (b)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section.
An excursion also occurs if the periodic
verification for a small control device is
not conducted as specified in paragraph
(b)(l)(i) of this section.
(i) When the period of control device
operation is 4 hours or greater in an
operating day or block and monitoring
data are insufficient to constitute a valid
hour of data, as defined in paragraph
(b) (7) (iii) of this section, for at least 75
percent of the operating hours.
(ii) When the period of control device
operation is less than 4 hours in an
operating day or block and more than 1
of the hours during the.perlod of
operation does-not constitute a valid
hour of data due to insufficient
monitoring data.
(iii) Monitoring data are insufficient
to constitute a valid hour of data, as
used in paragraphs (b)(7)(i) and (ii) of
this section, if measured values are
unavailable for any of the required 15-
minute periods within the hour.
(8) Violations. Exceedances of
parameters monitored according to the
provisions of paragraphs (b)(l)(ii) and
(b)(l) (iv) through (ix) of this section or
excursions as defined by paragraphs
(b)(7) (i) and (ii) of this section
constitute violations of the operating
limit according to paragraphs (b)(8) (i),
(ii), and (iv) of this section. Exceedances
of the temperature limit monitored
according to the provisions of paragraph
(b)(l)(iii) of this section or exceedances
of the outlet concentrations monitored
according to the provisions of paragraph
(b)(l)(x) of this section constitute
violations of the emission limit
accord ing to paragraphs (b)(8) (i), (ii),
and (iv) of this section. Exceedances of
the outlet concentrations monitored
according to the provisions of paragraph
(b) (5) of this section constitute
violations of the emission limit
according to the provisions of
paragraphs (b)(8) (iii) and (iv) of this
section.
(i) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(8)(iv) of this section, for episodes
occurring more than once per day,
exceedances of established parameter
limits or excursions will result in no
more than one violation per operating
day for each monitored item of
equipment utilized in the process.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) (8) (iv) of this section, for control
devices used for more than one process
in the course of an operating day,
exceedances or excursions will result in
no more than one violation per
operating day, per control device, for
each process for which the control
device is in service.
(iii) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(8)(iv) of this section, exceedances of
the 20 ppmv TOC outlet emission limit,
averaged over the operating day, will
result in no more than one violation per
day per control device. Except as
provided in paragraph (b)(8)(iv) of this
section, exceedances of the 20 ppmv
HC1 and chlorine outlet emission limit,
averaged over the operating day, will
result in no more than one violation per
day per control device.
(iv) Periods of time when monitoring
measurements exceed the parameter
values as well as periods of inadequate
monitoring data do not constitute a
violation if they occur during a startup,
shutdown, or malfunction, and the
facility follows its startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan.
(c) Monitoring for uncontrolled
emission rates. The owner or operator
shall demonstrate continuous
compliance widi the emission limit in
§63.1362 (b)(2)(i) or (b)(4)(i) by
calculating daily a 365-day rolling
summation of uncontrolled emissions
based on the uncontrolled emissions per
emission episode, as calculated using
the procedures in § 63.1365 (c) (2), and
records of the number of batches
produced. Each day that the summation
for a process exceeds 0.15 Mg/yr is
considered a violation of the emission
limit.
(d) Monitoring for equipment leaks.
The standard for equipment leaks is
based on monitoring. All monitoring
requirements for equipment leaks are
specified in §63.1363.
(e) Monitoring for heat exchanger
systems. The standard for heat
exchanger systems is based on
monitoring. All monitoring
requirements for heat exchanger systems
are specified in § 63.1362(f).
(f) Monitoring for the pollution
prevention alternative standard. The
owner or operator of an affected source
that chooses to comply with the
requirements of §63.1362 (g) (2) or (3)
shall calculate annual rolling average
values of the HAP and VOC factors in
accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (f)(l) of this
section. If complying with
§63.1362(g)(3), the owner or operator
shall also comply with the monitoring
requirements specified in paragraph (b)
of this section for the applicable add-on
air pollution control device. '.
(1) Annual factors. The annual HAP
and VOC factors shall be calculated in
accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraphs (f)(l) (i) through
(Hi) of this section.
(i) The consumption of both total HAP
and total VOC shall be divided by the
production rate, per process, for 12-
month periods at the frequency
specified in either paragraph (f)(l) (ii) or
(iii) of this section, as applicable.
(ii) For continuous processes, the
annual factors shall be calculated every
30 days for the 12-month period
preceding the 30th day (annual rolling
-------
33626 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
average calculated every 30 days). A
process with both batch and continuous
operations is considered a continuous
process for the purposes of this section.
(iii) For batch processes, the annual
factors shall be calculated every 10
batches for the 12-month period
preceding the 10th batch (annual rolling
average calculated every 10 batches).
Additional annual factors shall be
f calculated every 12 months during the
period before the 10th batch if more
than 12 months elapse before the 10th
batch is produced.
(2) Violations. Each rolling average
that exceeds the target value established
in §63.1365 (g) (3) is considered a
violation of the emission limit.
(g) Monitoring for emissions
averaging. The owner or operator of an
affected source that chooses to comply
with the requirements of § 63.1362 (h)
shall meet all monitoring requirements
specified in paragraph (b) of this
section, as applicable, for all processes,
storage tanks, and waste management
units included in the emissions average.
§ 63.1367 Recordkeeplng requirements.
(a) Requirements ofsubpartA of this
part. The owner or operator of an
affected source shall comply with the
recordkeeping requirements in subpart
A of this part as specified in Table 1 of
this subpart and in paragraphs (a)(l)
through (5) of this section.
(1) Data retention. Each owner or
operator of an affected source shall keep
copies of all records and reports
required by this subpart for at least 5
years, as specified in § 63.10(b)(l) of
subpart A of this part.
(2) Records of applicability
determinations. The owner or operator
of a stationary source that is not subject
to this subpart shall keep a record of the
applicability determination, as specified
in § 63.10(b)(3) of subpart A of this part.
(3) Startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan. The owner or
operator of an affected source shall
develop and implement a written
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plan as specified in §63.6(e)(3) of
subpart A of this part. This plan shall
describe, in detail, procedures for
operating and maintaining the affected
source during periods of startup,
shutdown, and malfunction and a
program for corrective action for a
malfunctioning process, air pollution
control, and monitoring equipment used
to comply with this subpart. The owner
or operator of an affected source shall
keep the current and superseded
versions of this plan onsite, as specified
in § 63.6(e) (3) (v) of subpart A of this
part. The owner or operator shall keep
the startup, shutdown, and malfunction
records specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i)
through (iii) of this section. Reports
related to the plan shall be submitted as
specified in §63.1368(1).
(i) The owner or operator shall record
the occurrence and duration of each
malfunction of air pollution control
equipment used to comply with this
subpart, as specified in §63.6(e)(3)(lii)
of subpart A of this part.
(ii) The owner or operator shall record
the occurrence and duration of each
malfunction of continuous monitoring
systems used to comply with this
subpart.
(iii) For each startup, shutdown, or
malfunction, the owner or operator shall
record all information necessary to
demonstrate that the procedures
specified in the affected source's
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plan were followed, as specified in
§ 63.6(e)(3)(iii) of subpart A of this part;
alternatively, the owner or operator
shall record any actions taken that are
not consistent with the plan, as
specified in § 63.6(e) (3) (iv) of subpart A
of this part.
(4) Recordkeeping requirements for
sources with continuous monitoring
systems. The owner or operator of an
affected source who installs a
continuous monitoring system to
comply with the alternative standards in
§ 63.1362(b)(6) or (c)(4) shall maintain
records specified in § 63.10(c) (1)
through (14) of subpart A of this part.
(5) Application for approval of
construction or reconstruction. For new
affected sources, each owner or operator
shall comply with the provisions
regarding construction and
reconstruction in § 63.5 of subpart A of
this part.
(b) Records of equipment operation.
The owner or operator must keep the
following records up-to-date and readily
accessible:
(1) Each measurement of a control
device operating parameter monitored
in accordance with § 63.1366 and each
measurement of a treatment process
parameter monitored In accordance
with the provisions of §63.1362(d).
(2) For processes subject to
§ 63.1362(g), records of consumption,
production, and the rolling average
values of the HAP and VOC factors.
(3) For each continuous monitoring
system used to comply with the
alternative standards in § 63.1362(b)(6)
and (c)(4), records documenting the
completion of calibration checks and
maintenance of the continuous
monitoring systems.
(4) For processes in compliance with
the 0.15 Mg/yr emission limit of
§63.1362(b)(2)(i) or (b)(4)(i), records of
the rolling annual calculations of
uncontrolled emissions.
(5) For each bag leak detector used to
monitor paniculate HAP emissions from
a fabric filter, the owner or operator
shall maintain records of any bag leak
detection alarm, including the date and
time, with a brief explanation of the
cause of the alarm and the corrective
action taken.
(6) The owner or operator of an
affected source that complies with the
standards for process vents, storage
tanks, and wastewater systems shall
maintain up-to-date, readily accessible
records of the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through (vii) of this
section to document that HAP emissions
or HAP loadings (for wastewater) are
below the limits specified in §63.1362:
(i) The initial calculations of
uncontrolled and controlled emissions
of gaseous organic HAP and HC1 per
batch for each process.
(ii) The wastewater concentrations
and flow rates per POD and process.
(iii) The number of batches per year
for each batch process.
(Iv) The operating hours per year for
continuous processes.
(v) The number of batches and the
number of operating hours for processes
that contain both batch and continuous
operations.
(vi) The number of tank turnovers per
year, if used in an emissions average or
for determining applicability of a new'
PA1 process unit.
(vli) A description of absolute or
hypothetical peak-case operating
conditions as determined using the
procedures in §63.1365(b)(ll).
(viii) Periods of planned routine
maintenance as described in
§63.1362(c)(5).
(7) Daily schedule or log of each
operating scenario prior to its operation.
(c) Records of equipment leak
detection and repair. The owner or
operator of an affected source subject to
the equipment leak standards in
§63.1363 shall implement the
recordkeeping requirements specified in
§ 63.1363(g). All records shall be
retained for a period of 5 years, in
accordance with the requirements of
§63.10(b)(l) of subpart A of this part.
(d) Records of emissions averaging.
The owner or operator of an affected
source that chooses to comply with the
requirements of §63.1362(h) shall
maintain up-to-date records of the
following information:
(1) An Emissions Averaging Plan
which shall include in the plan, for all
emission points included in each of the
emissions averages, the information
listed in paragraphs (d)(l)(i) through (v)
of tiiis section.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday. June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33627
(i) The identification of all emission
points in each emissions average.
(ii) The values of all parameters
needed for input to the emission debits
and credits equations in §63.1365(h).
(iii) The calculations used to obtain
the debits and credits.
(iv) The estimated values for all
parameters required to be monitored
under § 63.1366(g) for each emission
point included in an average. These
parameter values, or as appropriate,
limited ranges for parameter values,
shall be specified as enforceable
operating conditions for the operation of
the process, storage vessel, or waste
management unit, as appropriate.
Changes to the parameters must be
reported as required by §63.1368(k).
(v) A statement that the compliance
demonstration, monitoring, inspection,
recordkeeping and reporting provisions
in §63.1365(h), §63.1366(g), and
§63.1368(k) that are applicable to each
emission point in the emissions average
will be implemented beginning on the
date of compliance.
(2) The Emissions Averaging Plan
shall demonstrate that the emissions
from the emission points proposed to be
included in the average will not result
in greater hazard or, at the option of the
operating permit authority, greater risk
to human health or the environment
than if the emission points were
controlled according to the provisions
in §63.1362 (b) through (d).
(i) This demonstration of hazard or
risk equivalency shall be made to the
satisfaction of the operating permit
authority.
(A) The Administrator may require an
owner or operator to use specific
methodologies and procedures for
making a hazard or risk determination.
(B) The demonstration and approval
of hazard or risk equivalency shall be
made according to any guidance that the
Administrator makes available for use or
any other technically sound information
or methods.
(ii) An Emissions Averaging Plan that
does not demonstrate hazard or risk
equivalency to the satisfaction of the
Administrator shall not be approved.
The Administrator may require such
adjustments to the Emissions Averaging
Plan as are necessary in order to ensure
that the average will not result in greater
hazard or risk to human health or the
environment than would result if the
emission points were controlled
according to §63.1362(b) through (d).
(iii) A hazard or risk equivalency
demonstration must satisfy the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(d)(2)(iii) (A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Be a quantitative, comparative
chemical hazard or risk assessment;
(B) Account for differences between
averaging and nonaveraging options in
chemical hazard or risk to human health
or the environment; and
(C) Meet any requirements set by the
Administrator for such demonstrations.
(3) Records as specified In paragraphs
(a) and (b) of this section.
(4) A calculation of the debits and
credits as specified In §63.1365 (h) for
the last quarter and the prior four
quarters.
(e) The owner or operator of an
affected source subject to the
requirements for heat exchanger systems
in §63.1362(g) shall retain the records
as specified in §63.104(f)(l)(i) through
(iv) of subpart G of this part
(f) For each vapor collection system or
closed-vent system that contains bypass
lines that could divert a vent stream
away from the control device and to the
atmosphere, the owner or operator shall
keep a record of the information
specified In either paragraph (f) (1) or
(2) of this section.
(1) Hourly records of whether the flow
Indicator specified under § 63.1362(j) (1)
was operating and whether a diversion
was detected at any time during the
hour, as well as records of the times and
durations of all periods when the vent
stream is diverted from the control
device or the flow indicator is not
operating.
(2) Where a seal mechanism is used
to comply with § 63.1362(j)(2), hourly
records of flow are not required. In such
cases, the owner or operator shall record
that the monthly visual Inspection of
the seals or closure mechanism has been
done, and shall record the occurrence of
all periods when the seal mechanism Is
broken, the bypass line valve position
has changed, or the key for a lock-and-
key type lock has been checked out, and
records of any car-seal that has broken.
(g) Record's of primary use. For a PAI
process unit that Is used to produce a
given material for use as a PAI as well
as for other purposes, the owner or
operator shall keep records of the total
production and the production for use
as a PAI on a semiannual or more
frequent basis If the use as a PAI is not
the primary use.
§63.1368 Reporting requirements.
(a) The owner or operator of an
affected source shall comply with the
reporting requirements of paragraphs (b)
through (1) of this section. The owner or
operator shall also comply with
applicable paragraphs of §§63.9 and
63.10 of subpart A of this part, as
specified in Table 1 of this subpart.
(b) Initial notification. The owner or
operator shall submit the applicable
initial notification In accordance with
§ 63.9(b) or (d) of subpart A of this part.
(c) Application for approval of
construction or reconstruction. The
owner or operator who Is subject to
§ 63.5 (b) (3) of subpart A of this part
shall submit to the Administrator an
application for approval of the construc-
tion of a new major source, the
reconstruction of a major affected
source, or the reconstruction of a major
affected source subject to the standards.
The application shall be prepared in
accordance with § 63.5(d) of subpart A
of this part.
(d) Notification of continuous
monitoring system performance
evaluation. An owner or operator who
Is required by the Administrator to
conduct a performance evaluation for a
continuous monitoring system that Is
used to comply with the alternative
standard In §63.1362(b) (6) or (c)(4) shall
notify the Administrator of the date of
the performance evaluation as specified
in § 63.8(e) (2) of subpart A of this part.
(e) Precompliance plan. The
Precompliance plan shall be submitted
at least 6 months prior to the
compliance date of the standard. For
new sources, the Precompliance plan
shall be submitted to the Administrator
with the application for approval of
construction or reconstruction. The
Administrator shall have 90 days to
approve or disapprove the
Precompliance plan. The Precompliance
plan shall be considered approved if the
Administrator either approves it in
writing, or fails to disapprove it in
writing within the 90-day time period.
The 90-day period shall begin when the
Administrator receives the
Precompliance plan. If the
Precompliance plan is disapproved, the
owner or operator must still be in
compliance with the standard by the
compliance date. To change any of the
information submitted in the
Precompliance plan, the owner or
operator shall notify the Administrator
at least 90 days before the planned
change is to be Implemented; the change
shall be considered approved if the
Administrator either approves the
change in writing, or fails to disapprove
the change in writing within 90 days of
receipt of the change. The
Precompliance plan shall include the
information specified in paragraphs
(e)(l) through (5) of this section.
(1) Requests for approval to use
alternative monitoring parameters or
requests to set monitoring parameters
according to §63.1366(b)(4).
(2) Descriptions of the daily or per
batch demonstrations to verify that
control devices subject to
-------
336Z8 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
§ 63.1366(b)(l)(i) are operating as
designed.
(3) Data and rationale used to support
the parametric monitoring level(s) that
are set according to
§63.1366(b)(3)(ii)(B).
(4) For owners and operators
complying with the requirements of
§63.1362(1), the po'lution prevention
demonstration summary required in
§63.1365(g)(3).
(5) Data and rationale used to support
an engineering assessment to calculate
uncontrolled emissions from process
vents as required in §63.1365 (c) (2) (ii).
(6) For fabric filters that are monitored
with bag leak detectors, an operation
and maintenance plan that describes
proper operation and maintenance
procedures, and a corrective action plan
that describes corrective actions to be
taken, and the timing of those actions,
when the paniculate matter
concentration exceeds the setpoint and
activates the alarm.
(f) Notification of compliance status
report. The Notification of Compliance
Status report required under § 63.9(h)
shall be submitted no later than 150
calendar days after the compliance date
and shall include the information
specified in paragraphs (f)(l) through (7)
of this section.
(1) The results of any applicability
determinations, emission calculations,
or analyses used to identify and
quantify HAP emissions from the
affected source.
(2) The results of emissions profiles,
performance tests, engineering analyses,
design evaluations, or calculations used
to demonstrate compliance. For
performance tests, results should
include descriptions of sampling and
analysis procedures and quality
assurance procedures.
(3) Descriptions of monitoring
devices, monitoring frequencies, and the
values of monitored parameters
established during the initial
compliance determinations, including
data and calculations to support the
levels established.
(4) Operating scenarios.
(5) Descriptions of absolute or
hypothetical peak-case operating and/or
testing conditions for control devices.
(6) Identification of emission points
subject to overlapping requirements
described in §63.1360 (h) and the
authority under which the owner or
operator will comply, and identification
of emission sources discharging to
devices described by §63.1362(1).
(7) Anticipated periods of planned
routine maintenance during which the
owner or operator would not be in
compliance with the provisions in
§63.1362(c)(l) through (4).
(8) Percentage of total production
from a PAI process unit that is
anticipated to be produced for use as a
PAI in the 3 years after either June 23,
1999 or startup, whichever is later.
(g) Periodic reports. The owner or
operator shall prepare Periodic reports
in accordance with paragraphs (g)(l)
and (2) of this section and submit them
to the Administrator.
(1) Submittal schedule. Except as
provided in paragraphs (g)(l)(l) and (ii)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall submit Periodic reports
semiannually, beginning 60 operating
days after the end of the applicable
reporting period. The first report shall
be submitted no later than 240 days
after the date the Notification of
Compliance Status report is due and
shall cover the 6-month period
beginning on the date the Notification of
Compliance Status report Is due.
(i) The Administrator may determine
on a case-by-case basis that more
frequent reporting Is necessary to
accurately assess the compliance status
of the affected source.
(ii) Quarterly reports shall be
submitted when the monitoring data are
used to comply with the alternative
standards in §63.1362(b)(6) or (c)(4) and
the source experiences excess
emissions. Once an affected source
reports excess emissions, the affected
source shall follow a quarterly reporting
format until a request to reduce
reporting frequency Is approved. If an
owner or operator submits a request to
reduce the frequency of reporting, the
provisions in § 63.10(e)(3) (ii) and (iii) of
subpart A of this part shall apply,
except that the term "excess emissions
and continuous monitoring system
performance report and/or summary
report" shall mean "Periodic report" for
the purposes of this section.
(2) Content of periodic report. The
owner or operator shall include the
Information in paragraphs (g)(2)(i)
through (vi) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) Each Periodic report must include
the information In § 63.10(e)(3)(vi)(A)
through (M) of subpart A of this part, as
applicable.
(ii) If the total duration of excess
emissions, parameter exceedances, or
.excursions for the reporting period is 1
'percent or greater of the total operating
time for the reporting period, or the total
continuous monitoring system
downtime for the reporting period is 5
percent or greater of the total operating
time for the reporting period, the
Periodic report must include the
information in paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) Monitoring data. Including 15-
minute monitoring values as well as
daily average values of monitored
parameters, for all operating days when
the average values were outside the
ranges established in the Notification of
Compliance Status report or operating
permit.
(B) Duration of excursions, as defined
in§63.1366(b)(7).
(C) Operating logs and operating
scenarios for all operating days when
the values are outside the levels
established in the Notification of
Compliance Status report or operating
permit.
(D) When a continuous monitoring
system is used, the information required
in §63.10(c)(5) through (13) of subpart
A of this part.
(iii) For each vapor collection system
or closed vent system with a bypass line
subject to §63.1362(j)(l), records
required under § 63.1366(f) of all
periods when the vent stream is
diverted from the control device
through a bypass line. For each vapor
collection system or closed vent system
with a bypass line subject to
§63.1362(0(2), records required under
§63.1366(f) of all periods in which the
seal mechanism is broken, the bypass
valve position has changed, or the key
to unlock the bypass line valve was
checked out.
(iv) The information in paragraphs
(g)(2)(iv)(A) through (D) of this section
shall be stated in the Periodic report,
when applicable.
(A) No excess emissions.
(B) No exceedances of a parameter.
(C) No excursions.
(D) No continuous monitoring system
has been inoperative, out of control,
repaired, or adjusted.
(v) For each storage vessel subject to
control requirements:
(A) Actual periods of planned routine
maintenance during the reporting
period in which the control device does
not meet the specifications of
§63.1362(c)(5);and
(B) Anticipated periods of planned
routine maintenance for the next
reporting period.
(vl) For each PAI process unit that
does not meet the definition of primary
use, the percentage of the production in
the reporting period produced for use as
a PAI.
(vlli) Updates to tf» corrective action -
plan.
(h) Notification of process change. (1)
Except as specified in paragraph (h)(2)
of this section, whenever a process
change is made, or any of the
information submitted in the
Notification of Compliance Status report
changes, the owner or operator shall
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations 33629
submit a report quarterly. The report
may be submitted as part of the next
Periodic report required under
paragraph (g) of this section. The report
shall include:
(i) A brief description of the process
change;
(ii) A description of any modifications
to standard procedures or quality
assurance procedures;
(iii) Revisions to any of the
information reported in the original
Notification of Compliance Status report
under paragraph (!) of this section; and
(iv) Information required by the
Notification of Compliance Status report
under paragraph (i) of this section for
changes involving the addition of
processes or equipment.
(2) The owner or operator must
submit a report 60 days before the
scheduled implementation date of either
of the following:
(i) Any change in the activity covered
by the Precompliance report.
(ii) A change in the status of a control
device from small to large.
(i) Reports of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction. For the purposes of this
subpart, the startup, shutdown, and
malfunction reports shall be submitted
on the same schedule as the Periodic
reports required under paragraph (g) of
this section instead of the schedule
specified in §63.10(d)(5)(i) of subpart A
of this part. These reports shall include
the information specified In
§63.1367(a)(3)(i) through (iii) and shall
contain the name, title, and signature of
the owner or operator or other
responsible official who is certifying its
accuracy. Reports are only required if a
startup, shutdown, or malfunction
occurred during the reporting period.
Any time an owner or operator takes an
action that is not consistent with the
procedures specified in the affected
source's startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan, the owner or operator
shall submit an immediate startup,
shutdown, and malfunction report as
specified in §63.10(d)(5)(ii) of subpart A
of this part.
(j) Reports of equipment leaks. The
owner or operator of an affected source
subject to the standards in § 63.1363,
shall implement the reporting
requirements specified in § 63.1363(h).
Copies of all reports shall be retained as
records for a period of 5 years, in
accordance with the requirements of
§ 63.10(b)(l) of subpart A of this part.
(k) Reports of emissions averaging.
The owner or operator of an affected
source that chooses to comply with the
requirements of § 63.1362 (h) shall
submit all information as specified in
§ 63.1367 (d) for all emission points
included in the emissions average. The
owner or operator shall also submit to
the Administrator all information
specified in paragraph (g) of this section
for each emission point included in the
emissions average.
(1) The reports shall also include the
information listed in paragraphs (k)(l)(i)
dirough (iv) of this section:
(i) Any changes to the processes,
storage tanks, or waste management unit
included in the average.
(ii) The calculation of the debits and
credits for the reporting period.
(ill) Changes to the Emissions
Averaging Plan which affect the
calculation methodology of
uncontrolled or controlled emissions or
the hazard or risk equivalency
determination.
(iv) Any changes to die parameters
monitored according to § 63.1366(g).
(2) Every second semiannual or fourth
quarterly report, as appropriate, shall
include the results according to
.§ 63.1367(d)(4) to demonstrate the
emissions averaging provisions of
§63.1362(h), §63.1365(h), §63.1366(g),
and § 63.1367 (d) are satisfied.
(1) Reports of heat exchange systems.
The owner or operator of an affected
source subject to the requirements for
heat exchange systems in § 63.1362 (f)
shall submit information about any
delay of repairs as specified in
§ 63.104(f)(2) of subpart F of diis part,
except dial when die phrase "periodic
reports required by § 63.152(c) of
subpart G of this part" is referred to in
§ 63.104 (f) (2) of subpart F of this part,
the periodic reports required in
paragraph (g) of this section shall apply
for the purposes of this subpart.
(m) Notification of performance test
and test Plan. The owner or operator of
an affected source shall notify the
Administrator of the planned date of a
performance test at least 60 days before
the test in accordance with § 63.7(b) of
subpart A of this part. The owner or
operator also must submit die test Plan
required by § 63.7(c) of subpart A of this
part and the emission profile required
by §63.1365(b)(10)(ii) widi die
notification of the performance test.
(n) .Request for extension of
compliance. The owner or operator may
submit to the Administrator a request
for an extension of compliance in
accordance with § 63.1364 (a) (2).
(o) The owner or operator who
submits an operating permit application
before die date the Emissions Averaging
Plan is due shall submit the information
specified in paragraphs (o)(l) through
(3) of this section with die operating
permit application instead of die
Emissions Averaging Plan.
(1) The information specified in
§ 63.1367 (d) for emission points
included in the emissions average;
(2) The information specified in
§63.9(h) of subpart A of this part, as
applicable; and
(3) The information specified in
paragraph (e) of this section, as
applicable.
S 63.1369 Delegation of authority.
(a) In delegating implementation and
enforcement authority to a State under
section 112(d) of the CAA, the
authorities contained in paragraph (b) of
this section shall be retained by the
Administrator and not transferred to a
State.
(b) The authority conferred In
§63.177 of subpart H of this part, the
authority to approve applications for
determination of equivalent means of
emission limitation, and die authority to
approve alternative test methods shall
not be delegated to any State.
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART MMM
Reference to subpart A
§63.1(a)(1)
§63.1(a)(2)-(3)
§63.1(a)(4)
§63.1(a)(5)
§63.1(a)(6)-(7)
§63.1(a)(8)
§63.1(a)(9)
§63.1(a)(10H14)
Applies to
subpart
MMM
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
No
N/A
Yes
Explanation
Additional terms are defined in §63.1361.
Subpart MMM (this table) specifies applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to
subpart MMM.
Reserved.
Discusses State programs.
Reserved.
-------
33630 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63 — GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART MMM — Continued
Reference to subpart A
S63.1(b)(1)
563 1(b)(2)-(3) .
863 Kcidi
s 63 1 (cM2)
$63.1(c)(3)
§63'.1(c)(4)-(5)
S63 1(d)
§63.1 (e)
863.2
§63.3
§63.4(a)(1)-(3)
§63.4(a)(4)
§634(a)(5Mc) ..
663 5(a)
S63.5(b)(1)
§63.5(b)(2)
563.5(b)(3H5)
§63.5(b)(6)
§63.5(c)
6,63.5(d)-fe)
$63.5(f)(1)
§63.5(f)(2)
§63.6(a)
§63.6(b)(1H2)
S.63.6(b)(3)-{4)
§63.6(b)(5)
§63.6(b)(6)
§63.6(b)(7)
§63.6(c)(1)-(2)
§ 63.6(c)(3)-(4)
S.e3.6(c)(5)
§63.6(d)
663.6(e)
§63.6(f)
§63.6(g)
§63.6(h)
§63.6(i)(1)
§63.6(i)(2)
§63.6(i)(3)-(14)
§63.6(0(15)
§63.6(i)(16)
§63.60)
§63.7(a)(1)
§63.7(a)(2)(i}-(vi)
§63.7(a)(2)(vii)-(viii)
§63.7(a)(2)(ix)-(c)
§63.7(d)
§63.7(e)(1)
§63.7(e)(2)
§63.7(e)(3)
§63.7(e)(4)
§63.7(f)
§63.7(g)(1)
§63.7(g)(2)
§63.7(g)(3)
§63.7(h)
§63.8(a)(1M2)
Applies to
subpart
MMM
No
Yes
Yes
No
N/A
Yes
N/A
Yes • •
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
No
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes.
N/A
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
No ... .
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes .
Yes.
Yes
Yes .
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Explanation
§63.1360 specifies applicability.
Subpart MMM (this table) specifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A
to sources subject to subpart MMM.
Area sources are not subject to subpart MMM.
Reserved.
Reserved.
Additional terms are defined in §63.1361; when overlap between subparts A and
MMM occurs, subpart MMM takes precedence.
Other units used in subpart MMM are defined in that subpart.
Reserved.
Except the term "affected source" shall apply instead of the terms "source" and
"stationary source" in §63.5(a)(1) of subpart A.
Reserved.
§63.1360(g) specifies requirements for determining applicability of added PAI
equipment.
Reserved.
Except "affected source" shall apply instead of "source" in §63.5(f)(1) of subpart
A.
§63.1364 specifies compliance dates.
Reserved.
Except "affected source" shall apply instead of "source" in §63.6(c)(1)-(2) of sub-
part A.
Reserved.
Reserved.
Except §63.1360 specifies that the standards in subpart MMM apply during startup
and shutdown for batch processes; therefore, these activities would not be cov-
ered in the startup, shutdown, and malfunction Plan.
Except §63.1360 specifies that the standards in subpart MMM also apply during
startup and shutdown for batch processes.
An alternative standard has been proposed; however, affected sources will have
the opportunity to demonstrate other alternatives to the Administrator.
Subpart MMM does not contain any opacity or visible emissions standards.
Except "affected source" shall apply instead of "source" in §63.6(i)(2)(i) and (ii) of
subpart A.
Reserved.
§63.1368 specifies that test results must be submitted in the Notification of Compli-
ance Status due 150 days after the compliance date.
Reserved.
Except "affected source" shall apply instead of "source" in §63.7(d) of subpart A.
§63.1365 contains test methods specific to PAI sources.
Except §63.1365 specifies less than 3 runs for certain tests.
Except §63.1368(a) specifies that the results of the performance test be submitted
with the Notification of Compliance Status report
Reserved.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23. 1999/Rules and Regulations 33631
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART MMM—Continued
Reference to subpart A
§63.8(a)(3)
§63.8(a)(4)
§63.8(b)(1)
§63.8(b){2)
§63.8(b)(3Hc)(3)
•
§63.8(cH4)
§63.8(c)(5)-(8)
§63.8(dMO(3)
§63.8(f){4)
§ 63.8(f)(5)
§63.8(f)(6)
§63.8(q)
§63.9(a)-(d)
§63.9(e)
§63.9(f)
§639(o)
§63.9(h)(1)
§63.9(h)(2)(i)
§639(h)(2)(ii)
§63.9(h)(3)
§63,9(h)(4)
§63.9(h)(5)-(6)
§639(i)-(i)
§63.10(a)-(b)(1)
§6310(b)(2)
663 10(b)(3)
§63.10(c)
§6310(d)CO
§63.10(d)(2)
§63.10(d)(3)
§63.10(d)(4)
§63.10(d)(5)
§63.10(e)(1)-(2)(i)
§63.10(e)(2)(ii)
§6310(e)(3)
§63 10(e)(4)
§63.10(f)
§63 11-§63.15
Applies to
subpart
MMM
N/A
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No .. ..
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes.
Explanation
Reserved.
§63.1366 specifies CMS requirements.
Except the submlttal date of the Immediate startup shutdown and malfunction re-
ports for CMS events .shall be 2 days as In §63.6(e)(3)(iv).
§63.1366 specifies monitoring frequencies.
Except §63.1368(b) specifies that requests may also be included in the
Precompliance report.
Subpart MMM does not require CEM's.
§63.1366 specifies data reduction procedures.
Subpart MMM does not contain opacity and visible emission standards.
Except §63.1368(a)(1) specifies additional information to include in the Notification
of Compliance Status report.
§63.1368 specifies the Notification of Compliance Status report is to be submitted
within 150 days after the compliance date.
Reserved.
Except § 63.9(j) does not apply for changes in information in the notification of com-
pliance status report on equipment leaks as specified in §63.1363(h)(2).
§63.1367 specifies recordkeeping requirements
Subpart MMM does not include opacity and visible emission standards.
Except that actions and reporting for batch processes do not apply during startup
and shutdown.
Subpart MMM does not include opacity monitoring requirements.
Subpart MMM does not include opacity monitoring requirements.
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—STANDARDS FOR NEW AND EXISTING PAI SOURCES
Emission source
Applicability
Requirement
Process vents
Storage vessels
Existing:
Processes having uncontrolled organic HAP emissions
20.15 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine emis-
sions 26.8 Mg/yr.
Individual process vents meeting flow and mass emis-
sions criteria that have gaseous organic HAP emissions
controlled to less than 90% on or after November 10,
1997.
New:
Processes having uncontrolled organic HAP emissions
20.15 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine emis-
sions 26.8 Mg/yr and <191 Mg/yr.
Processes having uncontrolled HCI and chlorine emissions
2191 Mg/yr.
Existing: 275 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 23.45 kPa ....
New: 238 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 216.5 kPa
275 m3 capacity and vapor pressure 23.45 kPa
90% for organic HAP per process or to outlet concentration
of £20 ppmv TOC.
94% for HCI and chlorine per process or to outlet HCI and
chlorine concentration of £20 ppmv.
98% gaseous organic HAP control per vent or £20 ppmv
TOC outlet limit.
98% for organic HAP per process or £20 ppmv TOC.
94% for HCI and chlorine per process or to outlet con-
centration of £20 ppmv HCI and chlorine.
99% for HO and chlorine per process or to outlet con-
centration of £20 ppmv HCI and chlorine.
Install a floating roof, reduce HAP by 95% per vessel, or to
outlet concentration of £20 ppmv TOC.
Same as for existing sources.
Same as for existing sources.
-------
33632 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 1999/Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—STANDARDS FOR NEW AND EXISTING PAI SOURCES—Continued
Emission source
Applicability
Requirement
Wastewater •
Equipment leaks
Product dryers and
bag dumps.
Heat exchange sys-
tems.
Existing: Process wastewater with £10,000 ppmw Table 9
compounds at any flowrate or 21,000 ppmw Table 9
compounds at 210 L/min, and maintenance wastewater
with HAP load 25.3 Mg per discharge event.
New:
Same criteria as for existing sources
Total HAP load In wastewater POD streams 22,100 Mg/
yr..
Subpart H
Dryers used to dry PAI that is also a HAP, and bag dumps
used to introduce feedstock that is a solid and a HAP.
Each heat exchange system used to cool process equip-
ment in PAI manufacturing operations.
Reduce concentration of total Table 9 compounds to <50
ppmw (or other options).
Reduce concentration of total Table 9 compounds to <50
ppmw (or other options).
99% reduction of Table 9 compounds from all streams.
Subpart H with minor changes, including monitoring fre-
quencies consistent with the proposed CAR.
Paniculate matter concentration not to exceed 0.01 gr/dscf.
Monitoring and leak repair program as in HON.
•Table 9 is listed in the appendix to subpart Q of 40 CFR part 63.
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTROL DEVICES"
Control device
Monitoring equipment required
Parameters to be monitored
Frequency
All control devices
Scrubber
Thermal incinerator
Catalytic incinerator.
Flare
Boiler or process heater <44
megawatts and vent stream is
not mixed with the primary fuel.
Condenser
Carbon adsorber (nonregenerative)
Carbon adsorber (regenerative)
1. Flow indicator installed at all
bypass lines to the atmosphere
and equipped with continuous
recorder or.
2. Valves sealed closed with car-
seal or lock-and-key configura-
tion.
Liquid flow rate or pressure drop
mounting device. Also a pH
monitor if the scrubber is used
to control acid emissions..
Temperature monitoring device
installed in firebox or in duct-
work immediately downstream
of fireboxb.
Temperature monitoring device
installed in gas stream imme-
diately before and after catalyst
bed.
Heat sensing device installed at
the pilot light.
Temperature monitoring device
installed in firebox b.
Temperature monitoring device
installed at condenser exit.
None
Stream flow monitoring device,
and.
Carbon bed temperature moni-
toring device.
1. Presence of flow diverted from
the control device to the atmos-
phere or.
2. Monthly Inspections of sealed
valves.
1. Liquid flow rate into or out of
the scrubber or the pressure
drop across the scrubber..
2. pH of effluent scrubber liquid ...
Firebox temperature
Temperature difference across
catalyst bed.
Presence of a flame at the pilot
light.
Combustion temperature
Condenser exit (product side)
temperature.
Operating time since last replace-
ment.
1. Total regeneration stream
mass or volumetric flow during
carbon bed regeneration
cyde(s).
2. Temperature of carbon bed
after regeneration.
3. Temperature of carbon bed
within 15 minutes of completing
any cooling cyde(s).
4. Operating time since end of
last regeneration.
5. Check for bed poisoning
Hourly records of whether the
flow Indicator was operating
and whether a diversion was
detected at any time during
each hour.
Monthly.
1. Every 15 minutes.
2. Once a day.
Every 15 minutes.
Every 15 minutes.
Every 15 minutes.
Every 15 minutes.
Every 15 minutes.
N/A.
1. For each regeneration cycle,
record the total regeneration
stream mass or volumetric flow.
2. For each regeneration cycle,
record the maximum carbon
bed-temperature.
3. Within 15 minutes of com-
pleting any cooling cycle,
record the carbon bed tempera-
ture.
4. Operating time to be based on
worst-case conditions.
5. Yearly.
•As an aHemative to the monitoring requirements specified in this table, the owner or operator may use a CEM meeting the requirements of
Performance Specifications 8 or 9 of appendix B of part 60 to monitor TOC every 15 minutes.
•> Monitor may be installed in the firebox or in the ductwork immediately downstream of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange is en-
countered.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23. 1999/Rules and Regulations 33633
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART MMM OF PART 63—CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR ITEMS OF EQUIPMENT THAT MEET THE
CRITERIA OF §63.1362(K)
Item of equipment
Control requirement*
Drain or drain hub
Manhole6
Lift station
Trench
Pipe
Oil/Water separator
Tank
(a) Tightly fitting solid cover (TFSC); or
(b) TFSC with a vent to either a process, or to a control device meeting the requirements of §63.1256(h)(2); or
(c) Water seal with submerged discharge or barrier to protect discharge from wind.
(a) TFSC; or
(b) TFSC with a vent to either a process, or to a fuel gas system, or to a control device meeting the requirements of
§63.1256(h)(2); or
(c) If the item is vented to the atmosphere, use a TFSC with a property operating water seal at the entrance or exit to the
Hem to restrict ventilation in the collection system. The vent pipe shall be at least 90 cm in length and not exceeding
10.2 cm in nominal inside diameter.
(a) TFSC; or
(b) TFSC with a vent to either a process, or to a control device meeting the requirements of §63.1256(h)(2); or
(c) If the Bft station is vented to the atmosphere, use a TFSC with a properly operating water seal at the entrance or exit
to the Item to restrict ventilation in the collection system. The vent pipe shall be at least 90 cm in length and not ex-
ceeding 10.2 cm in nominal inside diameter. The lift station shall be level controlled to minimize changes In the liquid
level.
(a) TFSC; or
(b) TFSC with a vent to either a process, or to a control device meeting the requirements of §63.1256(h)(2); or
(c) If the item is vented to the atmosphere, use a TFSC with a properly operating water seal at the entrance or exit to the
Item to restrict ventilation in the collection system. The vent pipe shall be at least 90 cm in length and not exceeding
10.2 cm in nominal inside diameter.
Each pipe shall have no visible gaps in joints, seals, or other emission interfaces.
(a) Equip with a fixed roof and route vapors to a process, or equip with a closed-vent system that routes vapors to a con-
trol device meeting the requirements of §63.1256(h)(2); or
(b) Equip with a floating roof that meets the equipment specifications of §60.693 (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), (a)(2), (a)(3), and
(a)(4).
Maintain a fixed roof.? If the tank is spargedd or used for heating or treating by means of an exothermic reaction, a fixed
roof and a system shall be maintained that routes the organic hazardous air pollutants vapors to other process equip-
ment or a fuel gas system, or a closed-vent system that routes vapors to a control device that meets the requirements
of 40 CFR §63.119(e)(1) or (e)(2).
•Where a tightly fitting solid cover is required, it shall be maintained with no visible gaps or openings, except during periods of sampling, in-
spection, or maintenance.
b Manhole includes sumps and other points of access to a conveyance system.
CA fixed roof may have openings necessary for proper venting of the tank, such as pressure/vacuum vent, j-pipe vent.
dThe liquid in the tank is agitated by injecting compressed air or gas.
[FR Doc. 99-12754 Filed 6-22-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
1. REPORT NO.
2.
3. RECIPIENTS
4 TITLE AKD SUBTITLE
Implementation Document for the Pesticide Active
Ingredient Production NESHAP (40 CFR 63,
Subpart MMM)
S. REPORT DATE
October 2000
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHORS)
X. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
Midwest Research Institute (MRI)
Ingrid Ward, EPA/OAQPS/ITPID/PRG
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10 PROGRAM ELEMENT NO
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO
68D30008
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Air and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
DRAFT
U SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer is Carolyn Wigington, Mail Drop 13 (919-541-5374)
Work Assignment Manager is Ingrid Ward, Mail Drop 12 (919-541-0300)
16 ABSTRACT
National emissions standards to control emissions of HAP from major sources producing
pesticide active ingredients were published in Federal Register 6/23/99, 64 FR 33550. This
document contains information to help State and local agencies for air pollution control, as well
as the regulated community, carry out these standards. The document summarizes the
NESHAP requirements and inspection checklists, and example notification and reporting
forms. The document also provides information on where to submit reports, go to for
additional help and applicability of foam sources to such things as General Provisions and Title
V. A copy of the rule is provided in hard copy format. An electronic version of this document
can be download at \ww.epa.gov/ttn'uatw'pest'pestpg.html.
17
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
o COSATI
Air pollution
Air pollution control
National emissions standards
Hazardous air pollutants
Pesticide Active Ingredient
Title m
NESHAP
Compliance
40 CFR 63
Subpart MMM
Air pollution control
18 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS iRtporr)
Unclassified
70. SECURITY CLASS (Page)
Unclassified
11.NO OFPAGES
205
21 PRICE
no cost
------- |