PB92-180124
Questions and Answers about the Early Reductions Program
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC
Jan 92
II)
L
J
-------
.REPORT NO.
EPA-450/3-92-005
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
iPleate read Inttntettoni on the rtvtne In fore complei'
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5. REPORT DATE
Jaauary 1992
Questions and answers about the Early Reductions Program6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
PB92-18012U
AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
II CONTHACT/OHANTNO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
tS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Regulations have been proposed governing compliance extensions for early reductions
of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). The regulations allow a six year MACT standard
compliance extension for sources that achieve HAP reductions of 90% (95% for
partlculates) from a base year of 1987 (or more recent base year). This document is a
compilation of questions and answers about the early reductions program, and is
intended to assist companies interested in participating In the program and to
assist Regulatory agencies responsible for implementing the program.
it.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field. Croup
Air Pollution
Hazardous Air Pollutants
MACT Standards
Early Reductions
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS iTtaS Report!
Unclassified
21. NO. OF 'AGES
20. SECURITY CLASS iTtns pJgtl
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Fora 2220-1 (H«». 4-77) PRCVIOU* EDITION 11 OSIOLCTE
-------
United Stfttt
Environmental Protection
Agwwy
Offlc* of Alf Quality
Pluming and Standards
RMMich Trtangl* Pvk NC 27711
PB92-1B012U
EPA-4SOA-92-008
January 1W2
Air
&EPA Questions and Answers
About the Early
Reductions Program
-------
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
ABOUT
THE EARLY REDUCTIONS PROGRAM
Emission Standards Division (MD-13)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
January 1992
-------
CONTENTS
page
Purpose of this Manual t il
SECTION A Administrative/General [ADMIN] 1
SECTION B Source [SOURCE] . 5
SECTION C Baso Year Emissions [BASE YEAR] 11
Specific Questions & Answers Pertaining
to Equipment Leaks 21
Specific Questions & Answers Pertaining
to Test Methods and Procedures 23
SECTION D Timing (TIMING] 25
SECTION E Enforceable Commitments [EC] 29
SECTION F State Involvement with the Early Reductions
Program [STATES] 31
SECTION G Permits [PERMITS] 35
SECTION H The Relationship of the Early Reductions Program with
other Regulatory Programs [EARLY REDUCTIONS] 38
SECTION I General Questions about Section 112(d) Standards and
MACT Control [MACT] 41
SECTION J Expansions/Modifications/Reconstructions [EXPANSIONS]... 46
INDEX 49
-------
PURPOSE OF THIS MANUAL
This manual has been produced to assist companies who are Interested in
participating in the Early Reductions Program, and to assist regulatory agencies who are
involved with the implementation of the program. The manual contains questions and
answers pertaining to the program that have been compiled by the EPA Early Reductions
team.
As part of the outreach program to support the early reductions rule, EPA has
been conducting workshops for various groups throughout the country. In addition, EPA
has been meeting with interested parties to discuss the regulations. Meetings have been
held with State and local regulatory agencies, industrial trade associations, and individual
companies. The questions and answers in this manual were generated during these
workshops and meetings.
The answers provided in this document are not necessarily EPA's final position.
At the time this document was prepared, neither the early reductions regulations nor the
Title V permitting regulations had been promulgated. A final question and answer
document will be published shortly after promulgation of the early reductions regulation.
As indicated in the table of contents, questions and answers in this document are
organized into ten topic groups. Within each topic area, all relevant questions and
answers are included. Some questions and answers are relevant to more than one topic
area and are, therefore, duplicated in each appropriate section. Questions and answers
that have been duplicated are followed by a bracketed key [ ] indicating the section
where the duplicated question and answer is found.
As an added aid to the reader, a detailed index has also been included at the end
of the document. Questions and answers can be located using the key words In the
index. For example, if the reader is interested in EPA's position on "shutdowns," all
questions and answers related to that topic are listed by number in the index.
-------
SECTION A - ADMINISTRATIVE / GENERAL
A1. When will there be public comment/public review for early reductions? [TIMING]
Public review will take place at two points in the Early
Reductions Program. Rrst, the public will have a chance to
review enforceable commitments and base year emissions
that are submitted for early review. Second, there will be a
public comment period for permit applications.
A2. What are the components of public review? [TIMING]
With respect to enforceable commitments, the components
of public review are outlined under section 63.76 of the
proposed rule. For permit applications, including the
demonstration of early reductions, the components of public
review are outlined In the permit regulations.
in summary, the components of public review for enforceable
commitments are as follows. Once EPA has determined that the
base year emissions are approvable, a notice providing the
aggregate base year emissions will be published by advertisement
in the area affected. The advertisement will explain that the base
year emissions are being proposed for approval and note the
availability of additional noncorfidential information contained in
the enforceable commitment. A 30 day public comment period will
be provided, with an opportunity to extend it to 60 days and/or
hold a public hearing upon request by an interested party. In the
event that adverse comments are received, the reviewing agency
has the authority to determine which, if any, public comments
need to be addressed for the base year emissions to be
approved. For those comments that need to be addressed, the
Agency will work with the applicant to make revisions.
A3. How do facilities appeal decisions made under this program?
Since decisions under the Early Reductions Program are
not judicially reviewable, there is not a formal appeals
process for decisions regarding base year emissions data.
Appeals concerning demonstration of early reductions will
be handled according to procedures outlined in the
-------
permitting regulations (Part 70 or Part 71, whichever is
applicable).
Although there is not an appeals process for base year
emissions data, the review process for base year emissions
is designed to allow input from alt interested parties in order
to reach agreement regarding the approvability of emissions
data. The State, Region, EPA Headquarters review team,
and the public will review the base year emissions. The
reviewing agency will determine which comments, if any,
need to be addressed by the applicant and the applicant
will be given an opportunity to revise and resubmit the
emission data. The EPA, however, will not accept poor
quality base year emissions data. In the case of
disagreements regarding base year emissions, the decision
of the reviewing authority will be final.
A4. Does the submittal date refer to the date a submittal is postmarked or to
the date it is received by EPA? [TIMING]
The submittal date refers to the date the submittal is
postmarked.
AS. Does the proposal date refer to the date a proposed regulation is signed
by the Administrator or to the date it is published in the Federal
Register? [TIMING]
The proposal date refers to the date the rule is published in
the Federal Register.
A6. Who pays for the local advertisement and the announcement in the Federal
Register?
The EPA headquarters will pay for announcements in the
Federal Register. The reviewing agency will pay for the
notification in local publications.
A7. If a source violates the alternative emission limitation, is the compliance
extension revoked?
No. The source is simply in violation of its permit condition
and will be treated in the same manner as any . !her permit
violation.
-------
AS. Will there be any annual or quarterly reporting requirements in this program to
demonstrate that 90(95) percent is maintained?
The reviewing agency will establish the alternative emission limitations
for the soured reflecting the control which qualified the source for a
compliance extension. Since the control method will vary in each
situation, the monitoring and reporting requirements will be determined
on an individual basis. All such requirements will be described in the
permit.
A9. When a submittal is made that contains confidential information, should the
submittal be made in duplicate with one copy containing the confidential
information and the other having no confidential information?
The Agency does not require that two separate copies be
sent, but it would be convenient to have the confidential
information separated in the submittal. A notice published in
the Federal Register (56 FR 7042, February 21,1991)
details EPA's procedures for handling .confidential
information.
A10. Define the "responsible official" who commits to the early reduction. Can this
be a plant manager? If he has written delegated authority?
Yes, the "responsible official" can be a plant manager. The definition of
"responsible official" given in the proposed regulation states that a responsible
official may be "the manager of one or more manufacturing, production, or
operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or having gross annual
sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second quarter 1990 dollars), if
authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in
accordance with corporate procedures..."
A11. What are the chances that compounds will be added or deleted from the list of
190?
As new information becomes available, compounds may be added. It is
unlikely that there will be frequent changes to the list.
A12. What advantages, if any, would a HAP area source (i.e. non-major HAP source)
have by participating in the Early Reductions Program. [SOURCE]
The Early Reductions Program allows a six-year
compliance extension for any 112(d) standard. Section
-------
112(d) standards are not limited to major sources, and
standards for area sources may be published. Therefore,
any source, major or area, that is covered by a 112(d)
standard may be granted an extension from compliance. In
addition, the definition of a major source may change if
lesser quantity cutoffs (LQC) are established. The LQC's
can cause an area source to become a major source.
A13. I am considering getting into the program. Is there a vehicle for exchanging
emission control technology within my industry?
The EPA maintains a Control Technology Center (CTC) that
may be helpful to facilities considering participation in the
Early Reductions Program. The toll free number for the
CTC is (919)-541-0800.
A14. For an R&D Facility, what are the regulatory incentives for entering the early
reduction program?
Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments recognizes
research facilities as a separate source category. The EPA
may promulgate standards for research facilities and,
therefore, a compliance extension for an applicable 112(d)
standard could be obtained by entering the Early
Reductions Program.
A15. In meeting the significance threshold for a source, should base year emissions
be expressed as metric tons or U.S. tons?
The unit "ton" in the regulation refers to U.S. tons, or 2,000
pounds.
-------
SECTION B - SOURCE
61. When is a single emission point a source for purposes of the Early Reductions
Program?
A single emission point is a source if it is a building,
structure, facility, or installation; or if it emits more than
10 tons per year (TPY) of HAP (or 5 TPY of HAP at a
facility that emits 25 TPY or less of HAP).
B2. If a contiguous facility leases a portion of the facility to another operator, can
the host facility take credit for emission reductions which occur in the leased
portion of the facility?
No. The host facility is not responsible for emissions from
the leased portion and may not take credit for any emission
reduction achieved by the leased portion. The leased
portion is not included as part of the contiguous facility
because it Is not under "common ownership or control."
The operator of the leased portion must apply separately
for an extension under the Early Reductions Program.
B3. If a portion of a contiguous facility is owned jointly between the owner/operator
of the entire facility and another entity (i.e., a joint venture), can the host facility
take credit for HAP reductions in the jointly owned portion of the facility?
Only if the host facility has control of emissions. If the host
facility does not have complete control over emissions, then
the portion of the facility under joint ownership must apply
separately for an extension.
B4. Within a contiguous facility, can a company define multiple sources with
different base years for individual sources?
Yes. Facilities may choose to define multiple sources within a facility.
Each source may have its own base year as long as each source meets
the criteria established by the early reductions rule. However, within a
defined source the base year must be the same for all emission points.
B5. If a corporate research facility is located at the same site as the production
facility, must it be included in the "contiguous facility" definition of source?
-------
A research facility on the plant site is included as part of the contiguous
area under common ownership or control. The research facility,
however, does not have to be included as part of the source as defined
for the Early Reductions Program. The early reductions definition of
source Is flexible and allows any combination of emission points that
meet the significance criteria. Therefore, on owner/operator does not
have to include research operations in the early reductions source.
B6. Can sources include emission points that have been eliminated due to
shutdown of a certain unit or portions of a contiguous facility? [EXPANSIONS]
Yes. If the emission point was operating in the base year
chosen and will continue to remain unoperational
throughout the six-year extension period, the emission
reduction resulting from the shut down may be included in
the demonstration of early reduction. A requirement for that
point or set of points to remain shut down will be included
as an operating condition in the issued permit. In addition,
reduced operating hours can be a valid means of reducing
emissions, if made a permit condition. However, if the
shutdown unit is replaced by equipment elsewhere in the
contiguous facility or production hours are increased
elsewhere at the facility to compensate for the reduced
operating hours of the defined source, the HAP emissions
from these emission points are considered part of the
source and must be included in the demonstration.
Additionally, if the owner or operator wishes to restart the
shutdown portion of the facility or increase operating hours
during the extension period, the owner or operator must
maintain the 90 (95) percent reduction of HAP within the
early reductions source and would have to make
compensating reductions in HAP emissions to offset any
' HAP emissions from the restarted unit or increased
operation.
87. Suppose a refinery and bulk terminal are located on contiguous property but
have different SIC codes and, therefore, may have different regulatory
schedules under section 112(d) of the Act. In such an example, do the
requirements needed for participation in the Early Reductions Program have to
be met prior to proposal of a 112(d) standard for either source category?
Yes, As described in Section 63.81 of the proposed rule, if parts
of an Early Reductions Source are subject to different H2(d)
standards, the requirements for an extension must be met prior to
-------
the proposal of the first applicable 112(d) standard. Alternatively,
the facility could define two sources and make separate submittals
prior to proposal of the applicable 112(d) standard.
B8. If the early reductions source is defined as the entire plant site and an
additional process unit is added after proposal of a 112(d) standard, is the
additional process unit considered a "new source" versus an existing source
and, thus, not eligible for the Early Reductions Program?
Since the early reductions source is the entire contiguous facility, the
process unit addition is considered part of the early reductions source. If
such a unit is added, sufficient HAP reductions must be made at the
contiguous facility to maintain the 90(95) percent reduction from base
year emissions.
B9. If a process unit is within an early reductions source, and sometime during the
six-year extension period the company wants to expand or modify the process
unit, may the source be redefined to exclude the process unit as long as the
90(95) percent reduction of the remaining part of the early reductions source is
still maintained? [EXPANSIONS]
No. Once a source is defined for the Early Reductions Program and
alternative emission limitations are granted in the permit, the source may
not be redefined.
In the situation described, the owner/operator may make
the expansion/modification if offsetting emission reductions
can be made within the early reductions source to maintain
the overall 90(95) percent reduction.
B10. How will the source definition in the Early Reductions Program correspond to
the source definition for establishing a 112(d) standard? [MACTJ
The "source" for each particular 112(d) standard will be
determined in that rulemaking. The definition of source in
Section 63.73 of the proposed Early Reductions Rule
encompasses the range of definitions that may be adopted
In 112(d) standards.
B11. Can marine loading/unloading operations be included in the sources?
Yes. As long as the marine loading/unloading operations are part
of the contiguous facility under common ownership or control.
-------
812. Can we define a source to include a barge loading and unloading terminal
located on non-contiguous property approximately 5 miles from the main
facility?
No. The "source" for purposes of the Early Reductions Program
may be part or all of the HAP emission points from a "contiguous
area under common control or ownership," but may not be an
aggregation of emission points from non-contiguous properties.
The terminal could be defined as a source by itself.
B13. If an owner or operator has defined a source (e.g., including all the
emission points from production of chemical X), can any of the same
emission points be included in another demonstration of early reductions
for some other defined source within the facility?
No. If a facility has identified a group of emission points as
a source for the Early Reductions Program, none of those
emission points can be used in another early reductions
source.
814. What advantages, if any, would a HAP area source (i.e. non major HAP source)
have by participating in the Early Reductions Program. [AOMIN]
The Early Reductions Program allows a six-year compliance extension
for any 112(d) standard. Section 112(d) standards are not limited to
major sources, and standards for area sources may be promulgated.
Therefore, any source, major or area, that is covered by a 112(d)
standard may be granted an extension from compliance. In addition, the
definition of a major source may change if lesser quantity cutoffs (LQC)
are established. The LQC's can cause an area source to become a
major source.
B15. If a facility submits an enforceable commitment in November 1991 with a
control plan to add an incinerator on Stream A, then later in November 1992
realizes that an incinerator on Stream B would get the same percent reduction
with less cost, but Stream B is not part of the definition of source, can Stream B
be substituted for Stream A?
No. In general, once an enforceable commitment is submitted, the
definition of source should remain constant throughout the Early
Reductions Program. In this case, Stream B could be substituted for
Stream A only prior to proposal of a Section 112(d) standard applicable
to the early reductions source. If a 112(d) standard has been proposed,
8
-------
Stream B could not be added to the source definition. In addition, if an
enforceable commitment is submitted prior to the promulgation of the
early reductions rule, the definition of source can be changed in
response to changes in the rule from the proposed version.
As an additional note, if Stream A and Stream B were included in the
definition of source and the control plan indicated that the incinerator
would be added to Stream A, the source may change the control plan
and put the incinerator on Stream B. The control plan outlined in the
enforceable commitment is not binding or enforceable. The control plan
is simply a general plan provided to the permitting authority to indicate
that the facility is serious about the commitment and has considered
possible emission reduction techniques to reduce emissions by the
necessary 90(95) percent.
B16. If a facility makes emission reductions on some equipment, can other
uncontrolled equipment be included in the source definition to delay controls on
this other equipment?
Yes, if the source meets the requirement for an overall emission
reduction of 90(95) percent.
B17. If part of my wastewater emissions are greater than 10 tons per year (eg., pond
emissions), can I exclude the rest of the wastewater emissions, such as those
from the collection system, from my early reductions source definition? If so,
what are the implications?
It is possible to identify part of the wastewater system as an early
reductions source. However, the part not included in the early
reductions source will be subject to H2(d) standards. In addition,
reductions from a wastewater system will most likely be related to
reductions at the point of generation of the wastewater. It is
anticipated that the wastewater portion of the 112(d) standard
covering the chemical industry will define "source" for wastewater
systems as the point of generation. Therefore, including individual
wastewater components as part of an early reductions source will
probably not result in a compliance extension for the entire
wastewater system unless reductions are demonstrated at the
point of generation.
B18. Is there a de minimis level of a HAP in a source that dues not have to be
measured? (Example: in the distillation of methyl methacrylate [MAA], 99.99%
of emissions are probably MMA, but hydroquinone is used as an inhibitor at 10
to 100 ppmw and it is not volatile. Would I have to measure for hydroquinone?)
-------
There is no established de minimis level for measurement
of HAP. All HAP emissions must be accounted for if they
are expected or known to be emitted.
If calculations based on engineering principles, emission factors, or
material balances can be used to show that the mass rate of the
hydroquinone is insignificant compared to the total rate of HAP emissions
from the source, then source testing for hydroquinone is not required.
B19. Must all HAP be included in the determination of 90(95) percent reduction (i.e.,
can you single out a portion of the HAP at a given source)? For example, a
source will require two control technologies to reduce mercury, toluene, and
formaldehyde emissions. The company wants to install the 112(d) controls for
mercury but reduce early the toluene and formaldehyde and get an extension
for the toluene and formaldehyde 112(d) standards. Is this possible, or must
the reduction be 90 percent actual weighted average for all HAP at the source?
A 90(95) percent reduction must be obtained counting all HAP
emitted by the early reductions source, but you may be able to
define the early reductions source such that it does not include the
mercury emission points.
B20. If an entire facility is included in the early reductions definition of source or
sources, does the early reductions permit, in effect, become the HAP "Title V
permit for the facility? [BASE YEAR]
Yes, the Early Reductions Program is administered through the Title V
permitting program. A permit issued for an early reductions source is,
therefore, a Title V permit. The early reductions permit application must
include all requirements applicable to the early reductions source such as
those from other sections of the Clean Air Act.
An exception to this is that if the State does not have an approved Title
V permitting program and the EPA Regional Office, therefore, is the
permitting authority which will receive the early reductions permit
application, then the owner/operator may submit a permit application just
for the early reductions demonstration. In this case, the permit
application for other Clean Air Act requirements would be submitted later
to the State, after approval of the State's permitting program under Title
V.
10
-------
SECTION C - BASE YEAR EMISSIONS
C1. Must the same base year be used for all emission points within a source?
Yes, the base year must be the same for all emission
points within a defined source. However, test data for
different years can be used to support emission levels. For
example, if test data for various emission points within the
source are availaole from different years, the applicant may
be able to use the data to establish emissions for a single
base year, if the applicant can show that the data also
represent emission levels for the base year, or make
adjustments to the data (such as for production rate
differences between the test year and the base year) so
that it represents base year conditions.
C2. Are Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) submissions acceptable as base year
emissions?
In general, TRI data alone are not sufficient to support base
year emissions. The early reductions rule requires more
rigorous support for emissions data than Is required by TRI.
If the data submitted to TRI has supporting data that meets
all the requirements of the'Early Reductions Program, then
it is acceptable, as long as the supporting data is provided
in the early reductions submittal.
C3. Do all emissions within permit levels qualify as not artificially or substantially
higher emissions?
No. The source owner/operator must provide actual data
demonstrating that the base year emissions were not
artificially high. Permit levels are maximum limits and often
do not reflect actual emissions.
C4. What is the base year if the source is constructed and begins operation just
prior to proposal of a 112(d) standard?
The Early Reductions Program was not intended for
sources that are built just prior to proposal of an applicable
112(d) standard and in most cases it will not be possible for
such sources to participate. First, the regulations require
that actual and verifiable base year emissions be
11
-------
-------
C8. How do you measure base year emissions if you are currently in a startup
mode and will not have a full year of operation until 1992?
It would be difficult to use 1991 as a base year because emissions from
the startup period would probably not be representative of a full year of
operation. In this situation, 1992 would have to be the base year.
C9. Can emission reductions for emissions not in compliance with permit levels be
credited toward the 90(95) percent reduction? For example, in 1987, a facility
submitted data to the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) based on existing permits
and calculations. In 1988, the measured emissions were higher than those
allowed by the permit. In 1988-89, the facility paid penalties for higher
emissions, installed equipment and lowered emissions. Can this reduction be
counted toward the Early Reductions Program?
No, if an emission is considered, routine, it must be in compliance with all
applicable regulations to be acceptable as a base year emission.
Emissions in excess of permitted levels cannot be credited toward early
reductions. However, the amount of reduction below original permitted
levels can be counted.
C10. How will non-routine or upset emissions such as safety releases or start-
up/shutdown emissions be considered in the base year and post-reduction
rate?
The Early Reductions Program is for routine HAP emissions. The
definition of routine does not include emissions associated with a
malfunction, including startup and shutdown emissions. If
startup/shutdowns are regularly scheduled during the year such as for
routine maintenance, then these emissions could be included. States
and EPA will work with facilities on a case-by-case basis on classifying
emissions.
13
-------
011. Should accidental releases be included in base year and post-reduction
emissions or only routine emissions?
The intent of the Early Reductions Program is to reduce
routine HAP emissions from sources. The definition of
actual emissions states that it "does not include excess
emissions from a malfunction." Base year and post-
reduction emissions that include "abnormally high emissions
such as could be caused by equipment malfunctions,
accidents,..." are considered artificially or substantially
greater emissions and are not acceptable for the Early
Reductions Program. There are some situations where
standards have been written for what may be considered
accidental releases. If malfunctions are preventable, it may
be possible to consider them not accidental. The State and
EPA will work with facilities on a case-by-case basis if there
is some question as to whether a particular emission is
considered accidental or routine. The facility must keep in
mind that if an emission is considered routine it must be in
compliance with all applicable regulations to be acceptable
as a base year emission.
C12. The Early Reductions Program indicates that emissions exceeding permitted
limits are not to be included in base year emissions. What about a situation
where emission points in a plant are presently not subject to any regulatory
requirements? Can these be included in the base year for early reductions?
Yes, as long as the emissions are actual and verifiable, can be
satisfactorily documented, and are within all regulatory
requirements that are applicable to those emission points.
C13. Prior to expanding our plant, we took measures to significantly reduce
emissions. Expansion of the plant resulted in a new operating permit. Can we
still take credit for the emission reductions we achieved prior to being issued
the new operating permit?
Yes. To qualify for a compliance extension a source must
demonstrate that it has reduced HAP emissions by 90
(95) percent from base year emission levels. Therefore, credit will
be given for the control measures taken before plant expansion,
as long as these reductions were achieved after the chosen base
year. It should be noted that any emission increases resulting
from expansion must be included in the post-reduction emission.
14
-------
C14. To be acceptable, do the base year emissions (1967 or later) have to have
been submitted on a State inventory?
No. Base year emissions will be accepted on the merit of
supporting information submitted.
C15. A facility is permitted to emit up to 100 tons/year of a HAP. However, from
1987 through 1991 the facility has been operating at 50 percent of capacity, or
50 tons/year. The 50 tons has been reported in the TRI. Is the base year for
the early reductions production program 100 or 50 tons?
Base year emissions for the Early Reductions Program are based on
actual; not permitted levels of emissions. If the 50 tons/year can be
demonstrated according to the criteria in the regulation and is not
artificially or substantially higher than emissions in other years, the base
year would be 50 tons/year, not 100.
C16. Can more than one base year be used for two or more sources on the same
site using the enforceable commitment approach? For example, In 1987 only a
portion of the plant was operating and a couple of years later, the rest of the
plant started up.
For a single source, only one base year may be used. Facilities
can define more than one source, and use a different base year
for each specific source.
C17. May an emission source that was not previously documented be included in
base year data?
Yes. Base year emissions will be accepted on the merit of
supporting information submitted.
C18. What if volatile organic compound (VOC) data are on file with the
Administrator? Can it be used to establish a 1985 or 1986 base year?
No, the information must be specifically for HAP emitted by the
source, not VOC, in order to qualify a source to use 1985 or 1986
as a base year.
C19. If you have no test data, what are the chances of your early commitment being
approved?
Base year and post-reduction emissions must be actual and
verifiable. The program rules, as proposed, establish the
15
-------
presumption that source test data are the best estimates for
emissions. However, testing may not be required in a number of
circumstances, it depends on the character of the emission points
included in the defined source. The EPA recognizes that source
testing is not always the best method for establishing base year
emissions. Specific situations for which calculations may be
accepted in lieu of testing are provided in the proposed rule.
C20. Can an existing State permit program (not yet under Title V) be used to
document prior emission reductions?
If emission reductions have been properly documented,
they could be acceptable for the Early Reductions Program.
The documentation required of a source under the Early
Reductions Program is the same regardless of whether the
source's emissions are covered in a State permit. All
reductions must be actual and verifiable, and are subject to
the review process, including public review.
C21. What action needs to be taken if the base year emissions data conflict with
data previously submitted to the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)?
The Early Reductions Program requires more rigorous
support for base year emissions than is required by TRI. It
is possible that the process of more rigorously determining
emission data will result in emissions data different from
what was reported to TRI. In most instances, it will not be
possible for the reviewing agency to. compare these data
because TRI data is reported for the entire facility, whereas
the early reductions application will likely include only a
portion of the facility. If the facility realizes that emissions
are different than those reported under TRI, the facility
should submit a modification to the TRI data.
C22. If the base year chosen has one-half year of reductions on a point source, can
the "full year" uncontrolled amount be used as a base?
The actual emissions in the base year must be used. If
half the year represents control, that must be used. A
source cannot prorate uncontrolled emissions from part of a
year to the entire base year unless that represents actual
emissions.
16
-------
C23. If data for 1985 were submitted to EPA In response to a request under section
114 of the Clean Air Act, and later test data showed emissions to be greater
than were previously estimated, can the test data be used in lieu of the 114
data to establish 1985 as a base year?
No, only data submitted as part of the 114 request can be
used to establish 1985 as a base year. If the data in the
114 response has been superseded by later data, then
1985 could not be used as the base year.
C24. A State Air Permit in 1987 stated point source emissions of:
Toluene -10 TRY
Acetone - 8 TPY
Source test measurements in 1988 revealed that actual emissions were:
Toluene = 25 TPY
Acetone » 4 TPY
MeOH o 100 TPY
Controls then were added to bring emissions to:
Toluene » 10 TPY (-15)
Acetone-3 TPY (-1)
MeOH . 2 TPY (-98)
Can 1988 be claimed as the base year and the 114 TPY reduction claimed as
part of 90% reduction?
The owner or operator has the freedom to choose 1987 or any
later year as the base year. Therefore, 1988 can be chosen as
the base year. Additional supporting information is required to
determine whether or not all of the 114 TPY reduction could count
under the Early Reductions Program. In addition to being actual
and verifiable, the base year emissions must reflect compliance
with all existing regulatory requirements. If the actual emissions
measured in 1988 were within permitted levels and in compliance
with all state and local requirements, then it is possible that the
entire 114 TPY reduction will Qualify. If, however, the actual
emissions in 1988 exceeded regulatory requirements, any
emissions in excess of permitted levels cannot be counted as
1988 base year emissions.
17
-------
It is also worth noting that the source is not limited to choosing
1988 as the base year simply because the emission
measurements were conducted in 1988. The 1988 data could be
used to extrapolate back to 1987, allowing for changes in
production and other factors that affect emissions.
C25. Reference has been made to controlling continuous releases. Can controls
placed on start-up emissions be counted toward early reductions?
Example: A refinery has an incinerator to control emissions. However during
start-ups, emissions are vented through a water scrubber because start-ups
have a large volume of emissions unsuitable for the current incinerator.
Yes, if the emissions are considered routine and can be
documented, then reductions in these emissions can be
credited.
C26. Do base year emissions submitted for early approval need to be
resubmitted during application? [PERMITS]
The complete Title V permit application will include base
year and post-reduction emission estimates. Therefore, the
permit application for early reductions should either contain
another copy of the previously submitted enforceable
commitment (or base year) or make reference to the
previously submitted enforceable commitment or base year
already on file at the permitting authority's office.
C27. How do you evaluate "actual emissions" for a production facility which produces
two or three different products? Production time per year for each product
depends upon market demand and could vary from no production of a "product"
to year-long production of another. How do I participate and maintain
operational flexibility on product mix?
Under the Early Reductions Program you are required to establish
"actual and verifiable" base year emissions that are not "artificially
or substantially" greater than other years before control is
employed. Within these parameters it is possible to establish
base year and post-reduction emissions even for sources that
have a variable nature. Nonetheless, once a source's base year
emissions are established, the source must achieve and maintain
a 90(95) percent reduction to qualify for a compliance extension.
This effectively places a cap on a sources's post-reduction
18
-------
emissions until a compliance extension expires, which may in turn
restrict a highly-variable source's production flexibility.
C28. If an entire facility is included in the early reductions definition of source or
sources, does the early reductions permit, in effect, become the HAP Title V"
permit for the facility? [SOURCE]
Yes, the Early Reductions Program is administered through the Title V
permitting program. A permit issued for an early reductions source is,
therefore, a Title V permit. The early reduction permit application must
include all requirements applicable to the early reductions source such as
those from other sections of the Clean Air Act.
* «. •
An exception to this is that if the State does not have an approved Title
V permitting program and the EPA Regional Office, therefore, is the
permitting authority which will receive the early reductions permit
application, then the owner/operator may submit a permit application just
for the early reductions demonstration. In this case, the permit
application for other Clean Air Act requirements would be submitted later
to the State, after approval of the State's permitting program under Title
V.
C29. Is submittal of unacceptable base year emission data the only basis for denying
an enforceable commitment? [EC]
No. However, the base year emission data are the primary
basis for denial or acceptance. In addition to acceptable
base year data, the enforceable commitment must satisfy
all of the requirements listed under §63.75 of the regulation.
This includes a signed commitment that satisfies the
requirements and also a general control plan. The base
year emissions are the most critical data provided. Hence,
most denials will be based on some deficiency in
establishing base year emissions.
C30. In determining base year emissions, must all wastewater streams be accounted
for?
Wastewater streams must only be accounted for if the
source defined for the Early Reductions Program includes
the wastewater system. (Also see answer to B17)
C31. What methods are available for quantifying emissions from wastewater systems
in determining base year emissions?
19
-------
Wastewater emissions are very difficult to measure directly. The
emission estimating document (Procedures for Establishing
Emissions for Early Reduction Compliance Extensions, EPA-
450/3-91-0123, July, 1991) describes some acceptable
approaches for estimating emissions from wastewater.
20
-------
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS & ANSWERS PERTAINING TO EQUIPMENT LEAKS
C32. Can equipment leak emissions be included in an early reductions "source?'
Yes, as long as equipment leaks for an entire process unit (or multiple
entire process units) are included. A process unit consists of all
equipment from the feedstock storage tanks through end product
disposition. Equipment leaks from part of a process unit cannot be
included.
C33. If some of the emission points from a process unit are included in the source
definition submitted to the Early Reductions Program, do the associated
equipment leak emissions for the process unit also have to be included in the
source definition?
No, equipment leak emissions need not be included in the source
definition. If they are included, then the equipment leak emissions from
the entire process unit must be included.
C34. If my source is subject to an existing equipment leak NESHAP (prior to the
Clean Air Act Amendments) and will be subject to the negotiated rulemaking for
equipment leaks to be proposed in the near future, can I use the Early
Reductions Program to get out of both requirements?
No. You cannot get out of complying with existing regulations
promulgated under the Clean Air Act (e.g., benzene and vinyl
chloride NESHAP). However, reductions made after 1987 to
comply with regulations under section 112 do qualify as early
reductions, and can be used to obtain a six-year compliance
extension from future 112(d) standards, including the negotiated
rulemaking as long as the equipment leak emissions are
acceptably documented.
C35. If my source includes equipment leaks and I achieve 90% reduction, does that
mean that the source does not have to comply with the forthcoming negotiated
regulation for equipments leaks to be proposed with the SOCMI Hazardous
Organic NESHAP?
Yes, provided acceptable emission estimates are made for
the emissions from equipment leaks and that the base year
emissions for the source meet the significance threshold in
the source definition.
21
-------
C36. If a process is shut down, can emission reduction" from equipment leaks be
credited toward the 90(95) percent reduction eve.i if the equipment leak
emission points are not included in the defined early redjctions source?
No. Any emission reductions must occur within the source as defined by
the applicant.
C37. If the regulatory negotiation will be MACT for equipment leaks, doesn't the
proposal date, of the regulatory negotiation set the deadline for sending in an
early reductions enforceable commitment date?
-N
Not for all enforceable commitments. This deadline varies according to
the proposal date of the standard applicable to a source. The proposed
standard resulting from the regulatory negotiation for equipment leaks will
be published as part of the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON)
proposal. If a source is covered by the HON, then the enforceable
commitment must be submitted prior to the HON proposal.
C38. Can a mass balance approach be used to estimate emissions from all emission
points in a process unit, even if the process unit contains equipment leaks?
In some cases, a mass balance approach may be as good
or better than actual emissions testing. In this situation, a
mass balance must account for emissions from each
emission point, and the method for calculating the
emissions from equipment leaks must be as good or better
than the leak/no leak method described in the procedures
document ("Procedures for Establishing Emissions for Early
Reduction Compliance Extensions, EPA-450/3-91-012a,
July 1991). The burden of proving the validity and
acceptability of the emissions estimates will be on the
owner/operator submitting the enforceable commitment or
permit application.
22
-------
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS & ANSWERS PERTAINING TO TEST METHODS &
PROCEDURES
C39. If test methods used to establish emission reductions become obsolete (i.e. a
more sensitive test becomes available), will facilities have to re-test and
subsequently achieve more reductions as a result of the new test's sensitivity?
No, once data are accepted using test methods currently
available, the data will be good for the duration of the
facility's participation in the Early Reductions Program.
C40. What will be an acceptable validation for tank emissions?
The accepted technique for establishing HAP emissions from tanks is a
computation technique prescribed in the procedures document. These
techniques are based on AP-42 with some additional information from
recent studies.
C41. What would be an acceptable method of estimating base year emissions from a
laboratory hood?
Emissions from a laboratory hood most likely will be small and
intermittent and therefore not easily source tested. In most cases an
engineering estimate based on the operation being performed and the
types of chemicals involved will be acceptable.
C42. If a waste stream condenses after cooling, but the control systems treat the
waste stream while it is in the vapor phase, which reduction requirement must
be met - 90 or 95 percent?
Determination of the percent reduction required primarily is based on the
stream characteristics at the point of discharge to the atmosphere, which
also will determine the type of control required. If the stream is gaseous
at the point of discharge, then the required reduction is SO percent. If
the discharge is paniculate, 95 percent must be achieved.
23
-------
C43. Wastewater emission estimates per the procedures document talks about
"potential emissions." This is not actual and verifiable emissions. Is modeling
using the Surface Impoundment Modeling System (SIMS) acceptable for
"wastewater pond" actual and verifiable emissions?
The language in the procedures document is being revised and
expanded to address how SIMS and CHEMDAT7 can be used to
establish actual HAP emissions.
C44. Transfer operation (loading/unloading) emissions equations in AP-42 are based
on bulk gasoline dispensing/tank filling. Are these acceptable for HAP?
Yes. Although the equations were developed based on gasoline
loading operations, the equations require the material vapor
pressure as an input. By using the vapor pressure of the HAP
material being loaded, h'PA feels that these equations are
appropriate for HAP as well as gasoline.
C45. Are bagging factors acceptable for base year calculations?
Yes, as long as the protocols outlined in "Protocols for Generating
Unit-Specific Emission Estimates for Equipment Leaks of VOC and
VHAP" (EPA-450/3-88-010, October 1988) are followed.
C46. What are the testing requirements for emission points from batch processes?
Due to the unique characteristics of a batch process,
engineering calculations or material balances may be the
most accurate and preferred method for establishing
emissions and emission reductions. It will be the
responsibility of the owner/operator submitting the data to
demonstrate the accuracy and validity of all calculations.
24
-------
SECTION D - TIMING
01. What are the major criteria to consider when choosing between the route of
permit application or the route of enforceable commitment to participate in the
Early Reductions Program?
The timing of the proposal of an applicable 112(d) standard and whether
the emission reductions have already occurred are the most important
factors in deciding between a permit application or an enforceable
commitment. Only if the 112{d) standard is proposed prior to January 1,
1994, may a source submit an enforceable commitment. Submission of
an enforceable commitment allows a source until January 1,1994 to
achieve the 90(95) percent reductions and allows a source to submit a
permit application as late as December 1,1993. A source can also
rescind the commitment by December 1,1993, without penalty. When
submitting a permit application without an enforceable commitment, the
90(95) percent reductions must have been achieved prior to proposal of
the regulation, the application must also be submitted by the proposal
date of the earliest applicable 112(d) standard or 120 days subsequent
to the approval of the Part 70 or Part 71 regulations and once a permit is
submitted, it may be more difficult to withdraw. In general, for the early
standards the enforceable commitment route will allow the source more
time and flexibility to participate in the Early Reductions Program.
D2. What enforcement action will be taken if an early reductions permit application
is denied?
If an early reductions permit application is denied, no enforcement action
will be taken. The source will have to meet any applicable 112(d)
standard according to the compliance schedule. However, if an
owner/operator makes an enforceable commitment for sources within
their facility, the commitments are subject to enforceable action if they
are not achieved by January 1,1994, or rescinded by December 1,
1993. If an enforceable commitment is rescinded, no enforcement action
will be taken.
03. At the end of the six-year compliance extension, does the source have to
continue to comply with the alternative emission limitation for emission
points not covered by the H2(d) standard?
Nothing in the Early Reductions Program requires continued
compliance with the alternative emission limitation after the
25
-------
six-year compliance extension. States, however, may
choose to continue this requirement when issuing the
renewal permit.
04. If a 90(95) percent reduction is achieved prior to MACT proposal but there is no
State Title V permit program, what must be done and by when to participate in
the Early Reductions Program?
Generally, a facility that has achieved early reductions prior to proposal
of an applicable standard must also submit a permit application to the
permitting authority prior to proposal of the standard. However, if
permitting regulations or the State permitting program is not in place, the
applicant should wait to file a permit application but must submit an
application within 120 days after promulgation of Part 71 (Federal
permitting) regulations or 120 days after the State obtains approval of a
Title V permitting program, whichever occurs first. Prior to approval of
the State Title V program, the EPA Regional Office will be the permitting
authority.
05. What happens to a company that signs up for early reduction, and then finds
out it cannot meet the reductions?
Companies that submit an enforceable commitment may
rescind the commitment by December 1,1993, without
penalty if the company cannot achieve tho necessary
reductions. Facilities that submit a permit application that is
disapproved will simply meet the H2(d) standard according
to the compliance schedule.
06. If an enforceable commitment is made based on calculations and the basis Is
rejected, can testing be done after the proposal date of an applicable 112(d)
standard?
Yes. For an enforceable commitment, the applicant may submit
additional data, including test data, in response to adverse comments by
the reviewing agency.
26
-------
D7, Can the six-year extension be rescinded? For example, will the extension be
rescinded in the case where a facility achieves the necessary 90(95) percent
reduction, but future plant expansion causes additional emissions of HAP so
that the facility no longer achieves the 90(95) percent reduction?
(EXPANSIONS]
If a facility increases emissions of HAP at a portion of the plant that is
included in the source definition, then compensating reductions would
have to be made so that the 90(95) percent overall emission reduction is
maintained and In order to stay in the Early Reductions Program. The
six-year extension would not be rescinded but the source could be
subject to penalties until the source reduced emissions by the necessary
quantities to comply with the permit requirements or the source complied
with all applicable section I12(d) standards. If the increases in HAP
emissions occur at the facility but not from emission points included as
part of the source that has been granted a six-year extension, the
emissions increase will not affect the Early Reductions Program.
D8. Does participation in the Early Reductions Program delay the timing of residual
risk regulation?
No. Participation In the Early Reductions Program has no Impact
on the compliance date for residual risk regulations.
09. When will there be public comment/public review for early reductions? [AOMIN]
Public review will take place at two points in the Early Reductions
Program. First, the public will have a chance to review enforceable
commitments and base year emissions that are submitted for early
review. Second, there will be a public comment period for permit
applications.
010. What are the components of public review? [ADMIN]
With respect to enforceable commitments, the components of
public review are outlined under section 63.76 of the proposed
rule. For permit applications, including the demonstration of early
reductions, the components of public review are outlined in the
permit regulations.
In summary, the components of public review of enforceable
commitments are as follows. Once EPA has determined that the
base year emissions are approvable, a notice providing the
27
-------
aggregate base year emissions will be published by advertisement
in the area affected. The advertisement will explain that the base
year emissions are being proposed for approval and note the
availability of additional nonconfidential information contained in
the enforceable commitment. A 30 day public comment period will
be provided, with an opportunity to extend It to 60 days and/or
hold a public hearing upon request by an interested party. In the
event that adverse comments are received, the reviewing agency
has the authority to determine which, if any, public comments
need to be addressed for the base year emissions to be
approved. For those comments that need to be addressed, the
Agency will work with the applicant to make revisions.
D11. Does the submittal date refer to the date the submittal is postmarked or to the
date it is received by EPA? [ADMINl
The submitta! date refers to the date the submittal is
postmarked.
012. Does the proposal date refer to the date a proposed regulation is signed by the
Administrator or to the date it is published in the Federal Register? [ADMIN]
The proposal date refers to the date the rule is published in
the Federal Register.
28
-------
SECTION E - ENFORCEABLE COMMITMENTS
El. Suppose I make an enforceable commitment, get 90 percent reduction, and
obtain a compliance extension. If an applicable 112(d) standard is proposed
that requires 98 percent reduction, do I have to reduce by 98 percent the 10
percent of emissions that I did not reduce when the compliance extension
expires? [MACT]
No, 112(d) standards will be numerical limits, work practices, or
equipment standards, that reflect the maximum achievable control
relative to uncontrolled conditions.
E2. If an applicable 112(d) standard turns out to be less than 90 percent control,
can the source rescind its enforceable commitment?
A source may rescind any enforceable commitment prior to
December 1,1993, for any reason without penalty. After
this date, the facility must comply with its commitment.
E3. If several sources are combined in one enforceable commitment letter for early
reductions and one of the sources cannot meet the commitment, can the
commitment for one source be rescinded?
Although only one letter is submitted, each defined source, in effect,
would be treated as a separate application. The owner/operator may
rescind the commitment for one source, leaving the commitments on the
other sources intact.
E4. What are the penalties for not meeting enforceable commitments?
Sources have until December 1,1993, to rescind an
enforceable commitment. If a commitment Is not rescinded
by that date, the source must be In compliance with the
alternative emission limitation by January 1,1994, or be
subject to penalties. Penalties will depend on the extent of
the violation and other factors. Consideration will be given
to companies that make a good faith effort and fail.
E5. If the 30 and 60 day review guidelines for enforceable commitments are not
rigid, then are the schedules for revisions and submittal by the applicant also
not rigid?
29
-------
The submitter generally has 90 days to respond when notified of a need
for additional information or revisions. Additional time to complete
revisions would be granted by the EPA Regional Office, if requested by
the submitter. It Is important to note that if no response by the submitter
is received within 90 days, the submittal is considered withdrawn and a
letter will be sent to the submitter by EPA informing them that the source
is no longer eligible for the Early Reductions Program.
E6. If a source fails to meet an enforceable commitment, how long is it subject to
penalties?
The source is subject to penalties until it achieves 90(95)
percent reduction or meets all applicable 112(d) standards.
If the source has made a good faith effort to achieve the
enforceable commitment and/or the emission reduction
meets what has been proposed as the 112(d) standard,
such efforts will be taken into consideration in establishing
penalties.
E7. Is submittal of unacceptable base year emission data the only basis for denying
an enforceable commitment? {BASE YEAR]
No. However, the base year emission data are the primary
basis for denial or acceptance. In addition to acceptable
base year data, the enforceable commitment must satisfy
all of the requirements listed under §63.75 of the regulation.
This includes a signed commitment that satisfies the
requirements and also a general control plan. The base
year emissions are the most critical data provided. Hence,
most denials will be based on some deficiency in
establishing base year emissions.
E8. If, during the review of an enforceable commitment submittal, EPA and the
facility cannot agree on base year emissions for an emission point(s) which is
one of many emission points in the source definition for purposes of the Early
Reduction Program, can the facility remove the emission point(s) from the
definition of source? [BASE YEAR]
Yes, the source is allowed to amend the commitment to take into
account evaluation decisions made by the reviewing authority.
30
-------
SECTION F . STATE INVOLVEMENT WITH THE EARLY REDUCTIONS PROGRAM
F1. What happens if the source is granted an alternative emission limitation in a
permit issued by the EPA Regional Office and the State later attempts to
require greater than 90 (95) percent reduction, when it receives permitting
approval under Title V? [PERMITS]
Once an alternative emission limitation is granted in a Title V permit by
the EPA or a State Agency under the Early Reductions Program, it
remains in effect for the entire six-year compliance extension period.
Under this program, neither the State nor EPA can revoke the permit or
require an alternative emission limitation more stringent than that already
approved by the permitting agency, until the end of the six-year period.
However, the six-year extension applies only to 112(d) standards and
does not necessarily exempt a source from compliance with any other
regulations (e.g., State air toxics regulations).
F2. If a company participates in the Early Reductions Program, won't the company
be penalized if the State comes out with more stringent requirements for
control?
Possibly; the company should keep close contact with the State
agency and be aware of their actions regarding control of HAP.
F3. A source makes an acceptable enforceable commitment to the EPA but later
submits the permit application to the State because It has an approved Title V
permitting program. Can the State require greater than 90(95) percent reduction
as a condition of granting the permit? [PERMITS]
Once a State has an approved permitting program under
• Title V, a State may require greater than 90 (95) percent
reduction under the Early Reductions Program as a
condition of granting the compliance extension. In concept,
a source owner or operator could make-a commitment to
reduce HAP emissions by 90(95) percent and later have
the State require a greater than 90(95) percent reduction.
However, the program implementation process should
minimize or eliminate this situation. The company should
know prior to making the commitment if the State will
require more than 90(95) percent reduction.
The EPA's implementation program focuses on close
communication and coordination between the States, EPA
31
-------
Regional Offices, and EPA Headquarters. The State will
receive a copy of the enforceable commitment at the same
time as the EPA Region and will review the enforceable
commitment concurrent with EPA review. The EPA
Regional Offico will discuss the commitment with the State
early in the review process and State comments on the
enforceable commitment will be solicited by the EPA
Region.
F4. Can States grant extensions for less than six years?
No. The provision in Section 112(i)(5)(A) states that,
"Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude a State from
requiring reductions in excess of those specified in this
subparagraph as a condition of granting the extension...".
The provision allows for States to require greater reduction
(e.g., greater than 90 or 95 percent) of HAP emissions, but
does not allow the State to restrict the extension to less
than six years.
F5. If a source is granted a compliance extension and is issued a permit according
to the Part 71 regulations, when the permit expires after five years, may the
State reviewing the application require BACT (95 percent or higher) when there
is still one year left on the extension? [PERMITS]
If a compliance extension is granted, the extension will last for six
years beyond the normal 112(d) compliance date. The program
cannot shield against BACT standards the State may impose
under other provisions of the Clean Air Act or other State
regulations.
F6. In what ways can States prevent participation in the Early Reductions Program?
States may not prevent the participation of any source in the Early
Reductions Program. However, sources making early reductions also
must meet applicable State regulations as well.
32
-------
F7, If a source obtains a compliance extension under the Early Reductions
Program, may the States require additional reductions from the source to help
with ozone attainment under Title I? [EARLY REDUCTIONS]
Yes, States have the right to impose additional
requirements needed to meet Title I mandates for attaining
ambient air quality standards. The EPA plans to issue a
policy statement upon promulgation of the early reductions
rule that will discuss the interaction of Title I requirements
with the Early Reductions Program. The intent of the policy
will be to minimize the adverse effects of overlapping
requirements while preserving the goals of Early Reductions
and Title I.
F8. If an early reductions permit application is submitted to EPA and accepted, but
denied by the State, Is there a problem?
The permit application will be subject to only one level of review. The
application will be reviewed by either the EPA or the State, depending on
who has responsibility for review and approval of applications in a given
State. Therefore, the application can only be denied or approved by one
permitting authority. However, States are responsible for enforcing their
own VOC and/or air toxics requirements. Facilities interested in
participating in the Early Reductions Program should coordinate their
actions with State agencies.
F9. What is the schedule for delegation of the Early Reductions Program to the
State?
Delegation criteria will be available by the time the early reductions rule
is promulgated so that a State may receive delegation authority prior to
approval of a Title V permitting program.
F10. Under what circumstances will States handle enforceable commitments?
Under two circumstances, States will handle enforceable
commitments. First, if a State permitting program is
approved during the time enforceable commitments still are
being made (theoretically, until December 31,1993), then
the State would be the permitting authority and would
handle any enforceable commitments. Second, any State
delegated authority to review submittals under the Early
33
-------
Reductions Program prior to obtaining permitting program
approval also would handle the commitments.
F11. Will States be given funding to cover their time and effort in reviewing early
reductions applications? [PERMITS]
Permit applications for the Early Reductions Program will be submitted
according to Part 70 regulations just as any other Title V permit. The
applicant, therefore, will be required to pay fees for the Title V permit
application. A sufficient fee system will be established by the State to
cover the time and effort involved in reviewing early reductions permit
applications.
F12. The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management(NESCAUM) has
said they don't want to participate in the Early Reductions Program. Does that
preclude participation for sources within those States?
The EPA is working toward for full acceptance of the Early
Reductions Program by all States and is working with NESCAUM
States to mitigate differing viewpoints on program implementation.
State support and Involvement is critical to success of the
program. For this reason, it is important for applicants to
coordinate their early reductions activities with their State agency.
F13. If we need to obtain a Construction Permit from the Texas Air Control Board
(TACB), will BACT review force us to do other extra things that we had not
planned to do for the early reductions commitment?
It is possible that State requirements may mean that a source
must do things above and beyond what is required to qualify for
an extension under the Early Reductions Program. For this
reason, EPA encourages sources to contact the State prior to
making commitments to ascertain what other requirements must
be met. Participation in the Early Reductions Program does not
shield a source from any other State regulations.
F14. At present, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
proposes to exempt ammonia from MACT controls provided the modeled fence
tine concentrations are less than 1/42 of the threshold limit value (TLV). If EPA
adds ammonia to the list of HAP, will they honor LDEQ guidelines for MACT on
ammonia?
Both Federal and State requirements will need to be met.
34
-------
SECTION G - PERMITS
G1. II a source obtained a compliance extension through an approved permit and,
due to revisions of the hazardous air pollutant list, one of the pollutants emitted
by the source is now considered a HAP and the source would no longer qualify
for the Early Reductions Program, what happens to the existing permit?
The EPA is considering two approaches to deal with this situation. The
first would allow the source to be "grandfathered" and no action would be
taken on the existing permit. The second would be to give the source
some period of time to make additional reductions so that the source
achieves 90(95) percent reduction for the new HAP.
G2. If a source is granted a compliance extension and is issued a permit according
to the Part 71 regulations, when the permit expires after five years, may the
State reviewing the application require 8ACT (95 percent or higher) when there
is still one year left on the extension? [STATES]
If a compliance extension is granted, the extension will last for six
years beyond the normal 112(d) compliance date. The program
cannot shield against BACT standards the State may impose
under other provisions of the Clean Air Act or other State
regulations.
G3. May sources whose application for an extension under the Early Reductions
Program is denied apply for a compliance extension under Section 112(i)(3)(B)
of the Clean Air Act Amendments (this section of the Act allows for a one year
extension if the time is needed to install controls)? [MACT]
Yes. The early reductions rule states that facilities not
meeting requirements of the Early Reductions Program
must comply with the requirements of an applicable 112(d)
standard. In complying with a 112(d) standard, the facility
may apply for an extension under Section 112(i)(3)(B). The
facility is treated as if it had never applied for the Early
Reductions Program.
G4. Will States be given funding to cover their time and effort in reviewing early
reductions applications? [STATES]
Permit applications for the Early Reductions Program will be submitted
according to Part 70 regulations just as any other Title V permit. The
applicant, therefore, will be required to pay fees for the Title V permit
35
-------
application. A sufficient fee system will be established by the State to
cover the time and effort involved in reviewing early reductions permit
applications.
G5. Oo base year emissions submitted for early approval need to be
resubmitted during application? [BASE YEAR]
The complete Title V permit application will include base
year and post-reduction emission estimates. Therefore, the
permit application for early reductions should either contain
another copy of the previously submitted enforceable
commitment (or base year) or make reference to the
previously submitted enforceable commitment or base year
already on file at the permitting authority's office.
G6. What happens if the source is granted an alternative emission limitation in a
permit issued by the EPA Regional Office and the State later attempts to
require greater than 90 (95) percent reduction, when it receives permitting
approval under Title V? [STATES]
Once an alternative emission limitation is granted in a Title
V permit by the EPA or a State Agency under the Early
Reductions Program, it remains in effect for the entire six-
year compliance extension period. Under this program,
neither the State nor EPA can revoke the permit or require
an alternative emission limitation more stringent than that
already approved by the permitting agency, until the end of
the six-year period. However, the six-year extension
applies only to 112(d) standards and does not necessarily
exempt a source from compliance with any other
regulations (e.g., State air toxics regulations).
G7. A source makes an acceptable enforceable commitment to the EPA but later
submits the permit application to the State because it has an approved Title V
permitting program. Can the State require greater than 90(95) percent reduction
as a condition of granting the permit? [STATES]
Once a State has an approved permitting program under
Title V, a State may require greater than 90(95) percent
reduction under the Early Reductions Program as a
condition of granting the compliance extension. In concept,
a source owner or operator could make a commitment to
reduce HAP emissions by 90(95) percent and later have
the State require a greater than 90(95) percent reduction.
36
-------
However, the program implementation process should
minimize or eliminate this situation. The company should
know prior to making the commitment if the State will
require more than 90(95) percent reduction.
The EPA's implementation program focuses on close
communication and coordination between the States, EPA
Regional Offices, and EPA Headquarters. The State will
receive a copy of the enforceable commitment at the same
time as the EPA Region and will review the enforceable
commitment concurrent with EPA review. The EPA
Regional Office will discuss the commitment with the State
early in the review process and State comments on the
enforceable commitment will be solicited by the EPA
Region.
G8. If there are existing grandfathered facilities (i.e. no existing State or local
permit) where significant reductions are planned, and these facilities are part of
the "source" as defined by the eariy reductions plan, will these facilities need
state air permits obtained prior to January 1,1994? If grandfathereo facilities
are included in a contiguous facility, will these facilities need state air permits
before an early reductions permit is issued?
No, participation in the Early Reductions Program does not
depend on a source having State permits. Qualification for
the program on the federal level depends on demonstration
of base year and post-reduction emissions which are in
compliance with any existing State, local, or federal
requirements. In any case, you need to assure that all State
regulatory requirements are met and provide supporting
documentation for emission levels claimed.
37
-------
SECTION H - THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE EARLY REDUCTIONS PROGRAM
WITH OTHER REGULATORY PROGRAMS
H1. if a facility closes a process line in order to build a new line with greater
capacity and the process closure was used under the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) rules to offset emissions from the new line, can the closed
line be bubbled into other units (not including the new line) under the Eariy
Reductions Program to get an extension on the bubbled units. [EXPANSIONS]
The regulation clearly states that if any shutdown equipment is replaced
by new equipment, any HAP emissions from the new equipment shall be
counted in the post-reduction emissions from the source. Therefore, only
if the new line emitted fewer HAP than the original line would any
emission reductions be counted for the Early Reductions Program.
H2. If a facility achieves reductions of HAP and is granted a six-year extension, the
emission reductions cannot be used for offsets under Title I. if the facility
makes the same reductions of HAP but does not apply for a six-year extension,
the reductions may be used for offsets under Title I.
Possibly, but not if the reductions are required under some other part of
the Clean Air Act. Section 173(c)(2) of Title I does not allow emission
reductions required by other sections of the Act to be used as offsets.
Once a permit is issued to allow a six-year extension, the emission
reductions are then considered to be required by section 112 of the Act.
If the emission reductions are not a part of the permit requirement, they
may be used for Title I offsets until an applicable I12(d) standard is
promulgated, at which time the reductions become "required* and not
usable as offsets.
H3. Can the reductions made under the Early Reductions Program be used by the
State for State Implementation Plan (SIP) percent VOC reduction requirements
(15 percent by 1996. 3 percent thereafter)? (Focusing on non-attainment
areas)
Yes. However, only those early reductions achieved after
November 15,1990, are creditable towards the Title I
requirements to achieve "reasonable further progress."
38
-------
H4. Can previously achieved emission reductions that have been used as VOC
offsets for a plant addition also be used as qualifying reductions under the Early
Reductions Program?
Yes, as long as the offset reductions were made after 1987
and prior to passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments
(November 15,1990).
H5. If I take out all 190 HAP, will I still have to meet a control technique guideline
(CTG)?
Possibly, you still have to meet requirements for any criteria
pollutants that remain after all HAP are removed.
H6. Is there any benefit for reducing the VOC as part of early reduction?
Surplus HAP reductions (those beyond what is required to obtain the
compliance extension) can be used for offsets under Title f. Any VOC
reduced as part of an early reductions demonstration can be used for
"netting" purposes. Any-coincidental reductions of non-hazardous VOC
also can be used for netting or offsets.
H7. If a source obtains a compliance extension under the Early Reductions
Program, may the States require additional reductions from the source to help
with ozone attainment under Title I? [STATES]
Yes, States have the right to impose additional
requirements needed to meet Title I mandates for attaining
the ambient air quality standards. The EPA plans to issue
a policy statement upon promulgation of the early
reductions rule that will discuss the interaction of Title I
requirements with the Early Reductions Program. The
intent of the policy will be to minimize the adverse effects of
overlapping requirements while preserving the goals of
Early Reductions and Title I.
H8. Is a reduction in HAP that occurred as a result of a NESHAP regulations
considered a credit for the 90 percent reduction?
Yes, if the reduction was achieved after 1987.
H9. Louisiana's VOC (ozone) regulations are statewide and include implementation
of Category 3 CTG controls. Some states have not required this. It seems like
39
-------
Louisiana industries will not get credits that some other state facilities may get
simply because the State did not implement CTG earlier.
The reductions will be creditable if made after 1987.
H10. Can HAP emission reductions resulting from criteria pollutant (i.e., VOC, PM)
offsets be credited toward early reductions in HAP?
Yes, reductions achieved for any reason are creditable toward early
reductions. The one exception is where reductions are made to remedy
violations of existing air pollution regulations.
H11. Can reductions in HAP emissions resulting from participation in the 33/50
Industrial Toxics Project be credited toward early reductions in HAP?
Yes. The reductions in HAP emissions are creditable under
the Early Reductions Program. However, the Early
Reductions Program requires more stringent documentation
of emission reductions to obtain a benefit (compliance
extension). As long as the early reductions requirements
are met, 33/50 reductions can be used.
HI2. Is there any "shield" from future rules that will motivate a facility to control
uncontrolled pieces of equipment within the early reductions source?
The Early Reductions Program only offers compliance extensions for
section 112(d) standards. An uncontrolled emission point included as part
of an early reductions source is "shielded" from an otherwise applicable
112(d) standard for the duration of the compliance extension. The
program does not provide a shield against other rules issued under the
Clean Air Act or State rules.
40
-------
SECTION I - GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT SECTION 112(d) STANDARDS AND
MACT CONTROLS
11. If you have to install MACT on ail emission points to get 90 percent reduction,
what is the reason to get into this program?
In this instance, there may not be an economic advantage to
participating in the program. Congress set 90 percent as the goal for the
Early Reductions Program because it is expected that most 112(d)
standards will require greater than 90 percent reduction. A more likely
scenario for a source participating in the program is that MACT (i.e.
greater than 90 percent) could be applied to some emission points in the
source while leaving others uncontrolled to achieve an overall 90 percent
reduction from the source. This scenario would result in an economic
advantage.
12. How will the source definition in the Early Reductions Program correspond to
the source definition for establishing a 112(d) standard? [SOURCE]
The source definition may or may not be the same.
Facilities will have to define their early reductions source
before a 112(d) standard is proposed. This could lead to
differences in source definitions, especially since the Early
Reductions Program allows the source owner considerable
latitude in determining which emitting units at a plant site
can be used to establish a source.
13. May sources whose application for an extension under the Early Reductions
Program is denied apply for a compliance extension under Section 112(i)(3)(B)
of the Clean Air Act Amendments (this section of the Act allows for a one year
extension if the time is needed to install controls)? [PERMITS]
Yes. The early reductions rule states that facilities not
meeting requirements of the Early Reductions Program
must comply with the requirements of an applicable 112(d)
standard. In complying with a 112(d) standard, the facility
may apply for an extension under Section 112(i)(3)(B). The
facility is treated as if it had never applied for the Early
Reductions Program.
41
-------
14. Once defined, will MACT ever change?
Yes, it may. The statute requires periodic review and
revision if necessary.
15. I use one of the 190 HAP as a solvent. Do I have regulatory Incentives to
consider the Early Reductions Program?
The EPA intends to list and regulate all categories of major
sources and appropriate area sources. Therefore, you likely have
an incentive to consider the Early Reductions Program.
16. Will polyethylene and polypropylene plants be regulated by the forthcoming
112(d) standard for chemical plants (otherwise known as the Hazardous
Organic NESHAP) because some of the solvents (hexarte, methano!) are used
in some of the processes?
No. However, they will be regulated under the polymers
manufacturing 112(d) standards which are not far behind HON.
Section 112(d) standards for polymers production are expected to
be proposed prior to November 1993.
17. If 1 !2(d) standards are technology based and based on the best performing
12 percent of existing similar sources, how do you know it will be "far" more
than 90 percent?
Section 112(d) standards will be specific to a source
category. They may require more or less than 90(95)
percent, but it is anticipated that MACT technologies for
most categories will be well in excess of 90 percent.
18. Is the focus of EPA going to be the control of HAP or regulating sources?
The EPA's focus is on regulating source categories and
subcategories of HAP rather than the individual HAP. It is the
goal of EPA to control all major and appropriate area sources of
HAP listed in the statute. The mechanism Congress has directed
the Agency to use is to investigate industry categories and
applicable controls for all HAP emitted from these source
categories. This contrasts from prior Agency practice where EPA
focused on an individual pollutant and regulated sources that
emitted that pollutant.
42
-------
19. When do you think 112(d) standards for refineries will be proposed?
Petroleum refineries may be in the four-year group and if so,
regulations would be promulgated before November, 1994.
Allowing a year between proposal and promulgation, standards
are expected to be proposed about November, 1993.
110. How does the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) interact with refineries?
Organic chemical manufacturing operations and petroleum
refineries will be regulated under separate standards. However,
certain petrochemical manufacturing operations (eg. benzene,
toluene, and xylene production) located in refineries will be
covered by the HON.
111. Can you say what the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) will cover?
The HON will cover 5 types of emissions from about 400 synthetic
organic chemical manufacturing operations. The five emission
types covered include: process vents, equipment leaks, storage
tanks, loading operations, and wastewater.
112. What happens if I install abatement of 93 percent on a source of HAP and
MACT is identified later as 95 percent; will EPA force the additional 2 percent
reduction, or will there be some tolerance?
The source will be required to meet MACT as specified after the
six-year compliance extension expires.
113. Will there be a de minimis emissions level below which a 112(d) standard will
not be required?
Some standards may not apply to ali emission points in a
source. Applicability criteria will be determined separately
for each standard.
114. Suppose I make an enforceable commitment, get 90 percent reduction, and
obtain a compliance extension. If an applicable H2(d) standard is proposed
that requires 98 percent reduction, do I have to reduce by 98 percent the 10
percent of emissions that I did not reduce when the compliance extension
expires? [EC]
43
-------
No, 112(d) standards will be numerical limits, work practices, or
equipment standards, that reflect the maximum achievable control
relative to uncontrolled conditions.
115. A process produces a product not on the MACT source category list. Toluene
is a byproduct of this process. Is this a toluene production process?
Possibly, it depends on how EPA defines "production" in
the applicable regulation. In cases where a HAP is the
normal byproduct or coproduct of a production process,
EPA is likely to include the process under the definition of
production. In cases where the HAP is a consequential
byproduct in trace quantities, it is unlikely that EPA will
include such production under the production category.
116. One of our facilities emits a regulated Clean Air Act Substance (eg., Hexane)
from a source that is not yet identified by the EPA as a Source Category. Am I
correct in assuming that this source is not yet subject to MACT standards?
Currently, there are no sources subject to MACT standards
as none have been proposed to date. The EPA has
published a draft list of source categories for which MACT
standards will promulgated (Federal Register, June 21,
1991, 56 FR 28548). This list is intended to be a
comprehensive list of source categories of the 190 HAP
listed in the Act. There is the possibility that EPA has not
included a source category because of incomplete
information or because your source is included under
another broadly defined source category. Additionally, EPA
may add or delete sources as new information becomes
available.
117. Will there be "de minimis levels" below which 112(d) standards will not apply?
In other words, if you have very small releases of a chemical, will you be
subject to a standard?
If a source category or subcategory emits a very small
amount of HAP, it will likely not be listed in the first place.
If a particular plant within a listed source category emits a
small amount of HAP, it may not have to install controls if
the standard has cutoffs. Therefore, there is the possibility
that small emitters of HAP will not have to control under a
112(d) standard. However, small emitters of HAP may be
44
-------
subject to residual risk standards under section 112(f) of
the Act, if additional controls are warranted.
118. Are benzo pyrans considered hazardous pollutants? Dibenzo pyrans are similar
to dibenzo dioxins with one oxygen rather than two.
Yes, benzo pyrans are products of combustion and are therefore
considered to be polycyclic organic matter (POM). POM will be
considered as a group of compounds by EPA.
119. If I make reductions and receive a six-year extension and an enforceable permit
under Part 70 or 71, am I still subject to enhanced monitoring regulations when
they are promulgated?
Enhanced monitoring will be part of any emission limit, including
alternative limits issued under the Early Reductions Program. The
enhanced monitoring requirements will be part of an applicable Title V
permit and required as a condition to certify compliance.
45
-------
SECTION J - EXPANSIONS / MODIFICATIONS / RECONSTRUCTIONS
J1. If a company has an approved six-year extension under the Early Reductions
Program and later wants to expand a part of the source, what options are
available?
The owner/operator always has the option to upgrade to MAC! within
the early reductions source. Another option may be to offset the
incremental emission increases at one portion of the early reductions
source with emission reductions at another portion to maintain overall
90% reductions. In order to do this, the permit would have to be
modified to allow such changes. The facility should try to anticipate any
possible expansions when applying for the permit and work with the
State in developing a permit that will allow the necessary flexibility. The
source may also reduce emissions by greater than 90(95) percent Initially
to allow for expansions later.
J2. Can the six-year extension be rescinded? For example, will the extension be
rescinded in the case where a facility achieves the necessary 90(95) percent
reduction, but future plant expansion causes additional emissions of HAP so
that the facility no longer achieves the 90(95) percent reduction? {TIMING]
If a facility increases emissions of HAP at a portion of the plant that is
included in the source definition, then compensating reductions would
have to be made so that the 90(95) percent overall emission reduction is
maintained and in order to stay in the Early Reductions Program. The
six-year extension would not be rescinded but the source could be
subject to penalties until the source reduced emissions by the necessary
quantities to comply with the permit requirements or the source complied
with all applicable section 112(d) standards. If the increases in HAP
emissions occur at the facility but not from emission points included as
part of the source that has been granted a six-year extension, the
emissions increase will not affect the Early Reductions Program.
J3. If a major expansion occurs between the base year and the post-reduction
year, can the base year be adjusted to reflect the expanded plant conditions?
No, the base year emissions are only those that are actual
emissions in the base year. Facilities need to carefully consider
their source definitions and anticipate possible expansions.
46
-------
J4. Is there no allowance for business increases under this program?
For a source participating in the Early Reductions Program, increases in
production would be allowed as long as emissions from the source
remained 90(95) percent less than base year emissions.
J5. If a facility closes a process line In order to build a new line with greater
capacity and the process closure was used under the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) rules to offset emissions from the new line, can the closed
line be bubbled into other units (not including the new line) under the Early
Reductions Program to get an extension on the bubbled units. [EARLY
REDUCTIONS]
The regulation clearly states that if any shutdown equipment is replaced
by new equipment, any HAP emissions from the new equipment shall be
counted in the post-reduction emissions from the source. Therefore, only
if the new line emitted fewer HAP than the original line would any
emission reductions be counted for the Early Reductions Program.
J6. If a process continues to meet the 90% reduction criteria, can changes be
made in the process during the extension period?
Yes. However, adjustments or modifications may need to
be made to the permit.
J7. Suppose reconstruction of an existing source causes that source to be
considered a "new" source after the source has entered the Early Reductions
. Program (i.e. made an enforceable commitment or permit application). If the
reconstructed source still achieves a 90 percent reduction from the base year,
what is the deadline for compliance with an applicable 112(d) standard?
An existing source may participate in the Early Reductions
Program. The fact that the source was reconstructed later
does not preclude participation in the program. Such a
source can be granted the six-year compliance extension.
J8. If a process unit is within an early reductions source, and sometime during the
six-year extension period the company wants to expand or modify the process
unit, may source be redefined to exclude the process unit as long as the 90(95)
percent reduction of the remaining part of the early reductions source is still
maintained? [SOURCE]
47
-------
No. Once a source is defined for the Early Reductions Program and
alternative emission limitations are granted in the permit, the source may
not be redefined.
In the situation described, the owner/operator may make
the expansion/modification if offsetting emission reductions
can be made within the early reductions source to maintain
the overall 90(95) percent reduction.
J9. Can sources include emission points that have been eliminated due to
shutdown of a certain unit or portions of a contiguous facility? [SOURCE]
Yes. If the emission point was operating in the base year
chosen and will continue to remain unoperational
throughout the six-year extension period, the emission
reduction resulting from the shutdown may be included in
the demonstration of early reduction. A requirement for that
point or set of points to remain shut down will be included
as an operating condition in the issued permit. In addition,
reduced operating hours can be a valid means of reducing
emissions, if made a permit condition. However, if the
shutdown unit is replaced by equipment elsewhere in the
contiguous facility or production hours are increased
elsewhere at the facility to compensate for the reduced
operating hours of the defined source, the HAP emissions
from these emission points are considered part of the
source and must be included in the demonstration.
Additionally, if the owner or operator wishes to restart the
shutdown portion of the facility or increase operating hours
during the extension period, the owner or operator must
maintain the 90 (95) percent reduction of HAP within the
early reductions source and would have to make
compensating reductions in HAP emissions to offset any
HAP emissions from tha restarted unit or increased
operation.
48
-------
INDEX
Accidental releases - C11
Alternative emission limitation (AEL) - A7, A8, 69, D3, F1, G6, J8
Appeals • A3
AP-42 factors - C40, C44
Applications - A1, A2, D9, D10, F8, F11, G4
Area source - A12, B14,15,18
BACT - F5, F13, G2
Base year - A1, A2. A3, A15, B4, 86, B8, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C9, C10,
C11, C12, C13, C14, C15, C16, C17, C18, C19, C21, C22, C23, C24, C26,
C27, C29, C30, C31, C35, C45, D9, D10, E7, G5, G8, J3, J4, J7, J9
Benzene - C34,110
Bubbles -H1, J5
Chemdat7 - C43
Clean Water Act - C5
Common control - B12
Compliance extensions - A14. C33, C38, H12
Confidential business information - A2, A9, D10
Contiguous facility - B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B11, G8, J9
Control technique guidelines (CTG) - H5, H9
Criteria pollutants - H5, H11
De minimis level - B18,113, 117
Distillation - B18
Enforcement - C5, D2
Enforceable commitment - A1, A2, B15, C16, C26, C29, C37, C38, D1. D5,
D6. D9, 010, E1, E2, E3, E4, E5, E6, F3, F5, F9, F10, F11, G4. G5, G7, 114,
J7
Enhanced monitoring -119
Engineering calculations - C43, C46
Equipment leaks - C32, C33, C34, C35, C36, C37, C38, C45,111
Federal Register - AS, A6, A9, 013,116
Formaldehyde- B19
Grandfathering - G1, G8
Hazardous organic NESHAP (HON) - C35, C37,110,111
Hexane -16, II6
49
-------
Joint ventures - 63
Leased facilities - 82
MACT - C34, C37, D4, F14, G3,11,14,17,112.115,
116, J1
Malfunctions - 011
Marine terminals - B11
Mercury - B19
Modification • B9, 815, C21, J6, J8
NESHAP - C34, C35, C37, H8,16,110,111
New sources - C4
Non-attainment areas - H3
Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) - F12
Offsets - H2, H4. H6, H10
Ozone - F7, H7, H9
Part 70-A3, D1.F11.G4,
Part 71 - A3, D1.D4, F5, G2,
Permits - C9, C26, F1. F3, F5, F11, G8,13
Petroleum refineries -19, HO
Polycyciic organic matter (POM) -118
Prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) - H1, J5
Procedures for Establishing Emissions for Early Reductions - C33, C38
Process changes - 011
Protocols for Generating Unit-Specific Emission Estimates for Equipment Leaks of
VOC and VOHAP - C45
Reconstruction • J7
Regional offices - F3, G7
.Regulatory negotiation (reg neg) - C37
Research facilities - A14
Section 114 letters - C23
Shield-F5. F13, G2, H12
Shutdowns - 86, C10, H1, J5, J9
SIMS - C43
SOCMI - C35
Source - A12, C24, C28,12,116, J8, J9
Startups -C8, C10.C25
State implementation plans (SIP) - H3
States - C4. C6, 03, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F10, F11. F12, G2, G3,
50
-------
G4.G6, 07, H1.H7, H9.I3.J5
Testing - B18, C7, C19, C38, C39, C41, C46, D6
Texas Air Control Board (TACB) - F13
Threshold limit value (TLV) - F14
Title I - F7, H2, H3, H6, H7
Title V - B20, C20, C28, D4, F1, F3, F9, F11, G4, G6, G7
33/50 Industrial Toxics Project - H11
Toluene - 819, C24,110,115
Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) • C2, C10. C16, C22
Volatile organic compounds (VOC) - C18, C45, F8, H3, H4, H6, H9. H10
VOHAP - C45
Wastewater - B17, C30, C31, C43
51
------- |