c/EPA
           United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
              Office of Air Quality
              Planning and Standards
              Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EPA-453/B-95-001
April 1995
           Air
A Guidebook on How to Comply
with the Chromium Electroplating
and Anodizing National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants
              SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

-------
                                               EPA 453/B-95-001
        A GUIDEBOOK ON HOW TO COMPLY
      WITH THE CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING
AND ANODIZING NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS
         FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
                       Prepared for:

                  Organic Chemicals Group
                 Emission Standards Division
          Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
            U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
          Federal Small Business Assistance Program
  Information Transfer and Program Integration Division (ITPID)
          Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
            U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
                       Prepared by:

                 Midwest Research Institute
           401 Harrison Oaks Boulevard, Suite 350
                Gary, North Carolina  27513


                        April 1995

-------
       This report has been reviewed by the Emission Standards Division and the
Information Transfer and Program Integration Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS), U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and approved for
publication.  Mention of trade names or commercial products is not intended to constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use. For more information on this regulation, or to
obtain additional copies of this guidebook, please call your State Small Business Assistance
Program, your State Small Business Ombudsman; your State or local air pollution control
agency; your local, regional, or national metal finishers trade association; or your EPA
Regional Office. Contact EPA's Control Technology Center (CTC) Hotline at
(919) 541-0800 to get information on your State small business and air program contacts, or
to order single copies of this guidebook. Copies are also available through the Library
Services Office (MD-35), U. S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; from the OAQPS
Technology Transfer Network (TTN), (919) 541-5742 via modem (for assistance with the
TTN, call (919) 541-5384);  or, for a small fee, from the National Technical Information
Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
                                         11

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                            Page

CHAPTER 1  INTRODUCTION	     1

CHAPTER 2  OVERVIEW OF THE REGULATION	     3

CHAPTER 3  DOES THIS REGULATION APPLY TO ME?	     5

CHAPTER 4  WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY? 	     9

CHAPTER 5  HOW WELL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?	    23

CHAPTER 6  WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED
           TO DO?	    31

CHAPTER 7  WHAT ARE MY POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS?	    37

CHAPTER 8  HOW DOES THIS REGULATION RELATE TO OTHER
           FEDERAL AND STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS?  	    39

CHAPTER 9  HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? 	    43

CHAPTER 10 WHERE CAN I GO FOR MORE INFORMATION AND
           ASSISTANCE?  	    47


APPENDIX A.  FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE; FINAL RULE

APPENDIX B.  GLOSSARY OF TERMS

APPENDIX C.  LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES

APPENDIX D.  DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE REGULATION

APPENDIX E.  EXAMPLE FORMS
                               111

-------
                              LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 3-1.

TABLE 4-1.
TABLE 4-2.
TABLE 5-1.

TABLE 5-2.

TABLE 5-3.
TABLE 9-1.
TABLE 10-1.
FUNCTIONS AND PROCESS PARAMETERS OF THE TYPES
OF OPERATIONS	
EMISSION LIMITS	
SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS	
INFORMATION REQUIRED IN INITIAL PERFORMANCE
TEST REPORT	
METHODS USED TO ESTABLISH OPERATING PARAMETER
VALUES	
SUMMARY OF ONGOING MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
ESTIMATED EMISSION CONTROL COSTS	
EPA REGIONAL OFFICE CONTACTS  	
                                                                       Page
 8
10
20

24

25
27
44
48
                              LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                       Pat
Figure 3-1.     Approximate distribution of sources by State	
Figure 4-1.     Horizontal-flow, single packed-bed scrubber 	
Figure 4-2.     Horizontal-flow, double packed-bed scrubber	
Figure 4-3.     Horizontal-flow chevron-blade mist eliminator with a single set
              of blades	
Figure 4-4.     Mesh-pad mist eliminator	
Figure 4-5.     Schematic of a typical fiber-bed mist eliminator	
Figure 5-1.     Decision tree for decreasing the monitoring frequency of surface
              tension or foam blanket thickness measurements	
Figure 6-1.     Timeline for reporting requirements  	
                                                            6
                                                           13
                                                           14

                                                           15
                                                           16
                                                           18

                                                           28
                                                           34
                                     IV

-------
                                       CHAPTER 1
                                     INTRODUCTION
              BACKGROUND

     In  November  of   1994,   the   U.  S.
Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) issued
national regulations to control air emissions of
chromium  from chromium  electroplating and
anodizing tanks. The regulation appeared in the
January 25, 1995 edition of the Federal Register
[volume 60, beginning on page 4948].

     Why   is   EPA   regulating  chromium
electroplating and anodizing tanks? The Clean
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) directs EPA
to regulate emissions  of  a number  of toxic
chemicals,  including chromium,  from  a wide
range  of industrial sources.    The  EPA is
regulating   emissions   of  chromium   from
electroplating and anodizing tanks to meet the
requirements of the  CAA.

     The hexavalent form of chromium is highly
toxic and a known human carcinogen, causing
lung cancer; less is known  about the cancer risk
of the  trivalent form of chromium, but it can
accumulate  in  the  lungs  and may  result in
decreased  lung  function  after  continuous
exposure.  The regulatory requirements differ
for tanks that use  a trivalent chromium bath
rather   than  a  chromic  acid   (hexavalent
chromium)  bath.

     Chromium  electroplating and anodizing
tanks are one of the largest  sources of chromium
emissions in the United States.    Over 5,000
facilities   perform  chromium  electroplating
and/or anodizing in the United States.   Many
facilities  are small job shops that  are located
near residential areas.   The EPA estimates that
full  compliance with  its new regulation will
result  in  a reduction  of  about  173 tons  of
chromium emitted into the air annually, or about
a 99-percent reduction from today's levels.

       PURPOSE OF GUIDEBOOK

     The purpose of this guidebook is to provide
a straightforward overview of this regulation and
to equip  businesses with the basic  information
they need to comply with the regulation.  This
guidebook is not a complete and full statement
of the legal and technical requirements of the
regulation.  See  the Federal Register notice
(included as Appendix A to this guidebook) for
the complete text of the regulation.

            ORGANIZATION

     Chapter 2  presents  an overview  of the
requirements of the regulation, and Chapters 3
through 6 explain these requirements in more
detail.   Chapter  7 discusses some  pollution
prevention opportunities  associated  with  the
regulation. Chapter 8 provides an  explanation
of how this regulation  relates to other Federal
and  State  or   local  requirements,  including
permitting.  Estimated  costs for businesses to
comply with the regulation  are  provided  in
Chapter 9.  Sources of more information on the
regulation are provided in Chapter 10. A copy
                                           Page 1

-------
INTRODUCTION	CHAPTER I

of the regulation is  included as Appendix A.
Appendix B contains a glossary of terms. A list
of known facilities affected by this regulation are
included as Appendix C.  Appendix D provides
a detailed "table of contents" of the regulation.
Example forms for monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting are provided in Appendix E.
                                           Page 2

-------
                                        CHAPTER 2
                          OVERVIEW OF THE REGULATION
     The regulation affects all facilities that use
chromium  electroplating or  anodizing  tanks,
regardless  of size.   How  you  are affected
depends on the size and type (hard, decorative,
or anodizing) of operation you have and the
control technique(s) that you use to comply with
the  regulation.    In  general,  the  regulation
specifies:

     / Emission limits
     S Work practices
     / Initial performance testing
     / Ongoing compliance monitoring
     ./ Recordkeeping
     •  0.03 mg/dscm for small, existing hard
        chromium electroplating tanks (packed-
        bed scrubber or "PBS");
     »•  0.015  mg/dscm  for  all  other  hard
        chromium  electroplating   tanks
        (composite   mesh-pad   or   "CMP"
        system); and
     »•  0.01 mg/dscm or a surface tension limit
        of 45 dynes per centimeter (dynes/cm)
        for decorative chromium electroplating
        and chromium  anodizing tanks  (fume
        suppressants or "FS").

           WORK PRACTICES

     The regulation specifies   work  practice
standards to ensure that  air pollution control
systems and monitoring  equipment are  being
properly maintained and operated.   The work
practice standards  require that most facilities
develop an  operation and maintenance (O&M)
plan for the facility. Additional  work practice
requirements  include quarterly inspections  of
control  devices,  ductwork,  and  monitoring
equipment.

   INITIAL PERFORMANCE TESTING

     Initial performance testing is required (with
some exceptions noted below) to demonstrate
that you are meeting the emission limit for your
type of operation.   This is a one-time test.
However,   sources  that  meet  the following
criteria do not have  to perform  the initial  test:
                                           Page 3

-------
OVERVIEW OF THE REGULATION
                                CHAPTER 2
     »•  Decorative   chromium  electroplating
        tanks or chromium anodizing tanks that
        use a wetting agent and limit the surface
        tension of the bath to a maximum of 45
        dynes/cm and
     *•  Decorative   chromium  electroplating
        tanks  that use  a trivalent chromium
        bath.

     The regulation contains test methods (EPA
Reference   Methods   306   and   306A)  for
measuring   the  chromium   concentration
discharged to the atmosphere.

ONGOING COMPLIANCE MONITORING

     Continuous compliance with the regulation
is demonstrated  through  ongoing compliance
monitoring.   Monitoring of  specific operating
parameters that affect  the performance of the
particular control technique  you  are using is
required to  ensure continuous compliance with
the emission limits.  Therefore, the monitoring
requirements vary depending on  the  type  of
control technique that you use.

     If you  use an add-on air pollution control
device  that  is specified in the  regulation, you
must monitor the pressure drop across the unit
daily.   If you use a  packed-bed scrubber, you
must also monitor the velocity pressure (i.e., the
velocity of the gas stream at the inlet of the unit)
daily.   The surface tension  of  the bath or the
foam thickness must be monitored if you  use
wetting agents  or foam blankets, respectively.
The  regulation contains  a  test  method  for
measuring the surface tension of the bath (EPA
Reference Method 306B). If you use a control
system not specified in the regulation, you must
determine  the  appropriate  parameter(s)  to
monitor and get EPA approval.

            RECORDKEEPING

     The regulation  requires sources to  keep
records  to  document  compliance  with  the
regulation.     The  required  documentation
includes: (1) inspection records; (2) equipment
maintenance   records;   (3) records   of   the
occurrence,  duration,   and  cause  of  excess
emissions (see Chapter 5 for an explanation of
excess emissions); (4) performance test results;
and (5) monitoring data.  All records must  be
kept for 5 years.  If you operate a decorative
chromium  electroplating tank that  uses   a
trivalent chromium bath, you only need to keep
records of bath component purchases.

               REPORTING

     The extent  and frequency  of reporting
depends on  the  type and size of your source.
The regulation requires an initial notification that
you are subject to the regulation,  a notification
of performance  testing, and a report  of the
performance test results and compliance status
after  the test.   In addition, you  must prepare
reports that contain information on the ongoing
compliance  status of your facility.   If you
operate a decorative  chromium electroplating
tank that uses a trivalent chromium  bath, you
only need to submit the initial notification and an
initial compliance status report.
                                            Page 4

-------
                                        CHAPTERS
                      DOES THIS REGULATION APPLY TO ME?
 APPLICABILITY OF THE REGULATION

     The regulation applies to virtually all hard
and  decorative  chromium  electroplaters and
chromium anodizers as defined in the regulation,
regardless of size (see exemptions listed below).
Both major and area sources are covered by the
regulation. (Major sources are sources emitting
 10 tons per year or more of any hazardous air
pollutant or 25 tons  per year  or more of any
combination of hazardous air pollutants.   Area
sources, also referred  to as "nonmajor sources,"
are sources that do not qualify as major.)  The
EPA believes that the  high toxicity of chromium
compounds  and the  close proximity of  many
small  shops  to  residential   areas  warrant
regulation of all sources, even small businesses.

     Hard chromium  electroplating  operations
deposit a thick layer of chromium directly on a
base  metal  to  provide  wear  and  corrosion
resistance,  low friction,  and  hardness  (for
hydraulic cylinders, industrial rolls, etc.).

     Decorative   chromium    electroplating
operations deposit a thin layer of chromium on
a base material to provide a bright  finish and
wear  and  tarnish resistance  (for bicycles, auto
trim,   tools,  etc.).     Decorative  chromium
electroplating tanks may use a chromic acid bath
or a trivalent chromium bath.

     Chromium  anodizing operations form  a
chromium oxide layer on  aluminum to provide
corrosion   resistance   (for   aircraft   parts.
architectural structures, etc.).

     See Appendix B of this  guidebook  for
complete definitions  of  these  terms  as they
appear in the regulation.

     Are any sources exempt?  The regulation
specifically exempts certain types of sources.
These sources are:

     »•  Process  tanks that may  contain  low
        concentrations of chromium but neither
        chromium electroplating nor chromium
        anodizing is taking place in the tank
        (e.g.,  rinse  tanks,   etch  tanks,  and
        cleaning tanks);
     »•  Tanks that contain a chromium solution,
        but  in  which  no electrolytic  process
        occurs (e.g., chrome conversion coating
        tank); and
     »•  Tanks that  are used  for  research and
        laboratory operations.

     How many facilities are affected  and
where  are they located? The EPA  estimates
that  there are  about  5,020  affected  facilities
nationwide.  Of the estimated 5,020 facilities, an
estimated  1,540  are  hard  chromium  electro-
platers,  2,800   are  decorative  chromium
electroplaters, and 680 are chromium anodizers.
Figure 3-1 shows the approximate distribution of
the facilities by State.   Appendix C  of this
                                            PageS

-------
                                                                                        en


                                                                                        S
                                                                                        O

                                                                                        £
                                                                                        >
                                                                                        H

                                                                                        O
                                                                                        H
                                                                                        O
Figure 3-1.  Approximate distribution of sources by State.

-------
CHAPTERS
  DOES THIS REGULATION APPLY TO ME?
guidebook lists the known  facilities  that  are
affected by this regulation.

     How do you determine what type of facility
you have? The terms "hard  chromium electro-
plating," "decorative chromium electroplating,"
and "chromium anodizing"  are  defined  by
typical  process parameters,  as  well  as  by
function.  Therefore, regardless of what name
you assign  to your process,  you  will  be
regulated according to the functions and process
parameters of  your tank.  Process parameters
include the plating thickness,  the current density
applied,  and  the  plating  time.   Table  3-1
summarizes the functions and process parameters
associated with the three types of facilities.

     Some facilities may have operations that do
not fit exactly  into  one of the definitions in  the
regulation.     In  this  case, judgement  and
communication between the facility and its State
or local air pollution control agency is required.
     For example...  A facility that operates a
"black chromium  electroplating process" may
qualify  as  either  a  decorative  or  a  hard
chromium  electroplater,   depending  on  the
process parameters at the particular source.  In
one  case,  a  black  chromium  electroplating
process that calls for a current density of 40 to
90 amperes per square foot (A/ft2), a plating
time of 30 to  45 minutes  (min), and a plate
thickness of 5 microns (^m) would best fit the
description of a hard chromium plating process.
However, another black chromium electroplating
operation that uses  144 to 288 A/ft2, a plating
time of 5 min,  and a plate  thickness of 0.13 to
0.51 jim would best fit the  description of a
decorative chromium plating process. If you are
unsure  about   which  definition   fits   your
operation,  contact your  State or  local  air
pollution control agency.
                                            Page?

-------
DOES THIS REGULATION APPLY TO ME?
                                                                   CHAPTER 3
          TABLE 3-1.  FUNCTIONS AND PROCESS PARAMETERS OF THE TYPES
                                          OF OPERATIONS
       Type of operation
                                     Functions
                                              Process Parameters
    Hard (or "industrial")
    chromium electroplating
Provides a surface with functional
properties such as:

•  Wear resistance
•  A low coefficient of friction
•  Hardness
•  Corrosion resistance.
Specified in regulation:
Plate thickness of 1.3 to 760 microns
Current density of 150 to 600 A/ft2
Plating time of 20 minutes to 36 hours
Others:
Chromic acid concentration of 30 to SO oz/gal
SuLfuric acid concentration of 0.3 to 0.5 oz/gal
Solution temperature of 120° to 150°F
    Decorative chromium
    electroplating
Provides a bright surface with
wear- and-tarnish resistance.
Specified in regulation:
Plate thickness of 0.003 to 2.5 microns (chromic
  acid bath) or 0.13 to 25 microns (bivalent
  chromium bath)
Current density of 50 to 220 A/ft2
Plating time of 0.5 to 5 minutes
Others:
Chromic acid concentration of 30 to 50 oz/gal
Sulfuric acid concentration of 0.3 to 0.5 oz/gal
Solution temperature oflOO°toll50F
    Chromium anodizing
Provides corrosion resistance or
electrical insulation.
Specified in regulation:
Chromic acid concentration of 6.67 to 13.3 oz/gal
Others:
Film thickness of 0.02 to 0.05 microns
Current density of 144 to 720 A/ft2
Anodizing time of 30 to 60 minutes
Solution temperature of 90° to 95°F
pH of 0.5 to 0.85
Voltage of 20 or 40 volts
                                                PageS

-------
                 CHAPTER 4
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
  SUMMARY OF THE REQUIREMENTS

     The major requirements of the regulation
can be categorized as follows:

     /  Emission limits
     /  Work practices
     /  Initial performance testing
     /  Ongoing compliance monitoring
     
-------
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
CHAPTER 4
                              TABLE 4-1.  EMISSION LIMITS
Affected tanks
Control level3
Control technique
Hard Chromium Plating Tanks
Small, existing tanks"
Large, existing tanks
and all new tanks
0.03 mg/dscm
(1.3x 10'^ gr/dscf)
0.015 mg/dscm
(6.6 x 10"° gr/dscf)
packed-bed scrubber (PBS)
composite mesh-pad (CMP) system
Decorative Chromium Plating Tanks Using a Chromic Acid Bath
All tanks
0.01 mg/dscm
(4.4 x 10"6 gr/dscf) or
45 dynes/cm
(3.1 x I
-------
CHAPTER 4
    WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
instead of large by using either of the following
procedures:

     »>  Using a nonresettable ampere-hr meter
        on the  tank(s) and  keeping monthly
        records to show that the actual rectifier
        capacity (based on your facility's actual
        operating schedule and tank utilization)
        is below the cutoff or
     *•  Accepting a Federally-enforceable limit
        on the rectifier capacity  (contact your
        EPA Regional Office or  your State or
        local air pollution control  agency for
        information   on  how   to   obtain  a
        Federally-enforceable limit).

     How  do   I  calculate  the  maximum
cumulative potential rectifier capacity?   The
maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity
is based  on a  maximum  potential  operating
schedule of 8,400 hours per year for the  facility
and  assumes that each tank is in operation for
70 percent of the total operating hours.

     For example...  To calculate the maximum
cumulative  potential rectifier capacity  for  a
facility, sum the total installed rectifier capacities
associated with all hard plating tanks (EC^ in
amperes) and multiply this sum by 8,400 hours/
year and 0.7, as shown below:

     (£C.X8.400)(0.7) =  ampere-hours
     *~                      year

     What is meant by "existing"?   A tank
qualifies as "existing" if it was installed before
December  16, 1993, which  was the  date  this
regulation was proposed in the Federal Register.
     Which control technique should I use to
meet the emission limit?  As mentioned above,
the emission limits are based on  the level of
control that can be maintained using a  certain
control technique.  However, you may choose to
use another control technique, as  long  as  you
can meet the  emission  limit for your  type of
facility.  The  following paragraphs discuss the
control techniques in Table 4-1.

     Typical control efficiencies are also given
in the following paragraphs.  But,  beware  that
actual performance levels may vary from these
typical values, depending on such factors as the
inlet conditions and how well the control devices
are  operated  and maintained.    For  more
information on  how   these  typical  control
efficiencies were derived, see Chapters 4 and  5
of EPA's Chromium Emissions from Chromium
Electroplating and Chromic  Acid  Anodizing
Operations—Background    Information   for
Proposed Standards (Volume I) (EPA-453/R-93-
030a).   For information on the availability of
this document, see Chapter 10 of this guidebook.

     Packed-bed scrubbers are typically used to
reduce emissions  of chromic acid mist from
electroplating and anodizing tanks.   Both single
and  double  packed-bed  designs  are  used.
Chromic acid mist is  removed from the  gas
stream  primarily  by  droplets  impacting  on
packing media.  First, the gas stream is wetted
by spraying water countercurrent to the gas flow
to enlarge the droplet size. The gas stream then
passes  through the packed bed(s) where  the
droplets  impinge on the packing  media.   The
regulation requires periodic washing of packing
material using an overhead weir.
                                           Page 11

-------
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
                                CHAPTER 4
     In most cases, the packed-bed section of the
scrubber is followed by a mist eliminator section
comprised  of  a  single  chevron-blade  mist
eliminator.  The  mist  eliminator removes  any
water entrained from the packed-bed  section.
Treated gases then pass through an induced draft
fan  and out a stack or  exhaust  vent.  The
scrubber  water   is  usually  recirculated  and
periodically  tapped  and  discharged   to  the
electroplating tanks as makeup solution.

     Typical  efficiencies    of  packed-bed
scrubbers  are  97  percent  for   decorative
chromium electroplating and anodizing tanks and
99  percent  for hard chromium electroplating
tanks.    Schematics of a  single  packed-bed
scrubber and a double packed-bed  scrubber are
provided in Figures  4-1  and  4-2,  respectively.
Figure 4-3 is  a  schematic of a chevron-blade
mist eliminator.

     Composite mesh pads consist of layers of
interlocked fibers densely packed between  two
supporting grids.  The composite mesh pad  was
developed to remove small particles (<  5/tm or
0.2 mils) that were not effectively controlled by
conventional  technologies.    The  layers  of
material in composite pads are arranged with the
smallest diameter fiber layer  located in  the
center  of  the pad  and  progressively  larger
diameter layers  located  on both  sides of the
center.  Particles collide with the  fibers in the
pad  and  adhere  to their  surfaces.    These
captured particles coalesce into larger droplets as
they travel  through the  small-diameter fiber
layers in the center of the pad.  These enlarged
particles either drain to the bottom of the unit or
are  reentrained  in  the  gas  stream.    The
reentrained particles are then captured by the
large-diameter fiber layers in the back  of the
pad.   A  schematic of  a typical  composite
mesh-pad is provided in Figure 4-4.

     Composite mesh-pad systems incorporate a
larger  particle removal  system prior to  the
composite  mesh  pad to  reduce the  plugging
potential of the pad.  The large particle removal
system can either be a series of larger diameter
mesh pads or a packed-bed scrubber section.

     Typical removal efficiencies associated with
this control device are greater  than 99 percent.

     Fume suppressants are compounds that are
added directly to the bath to  reduce or  inhibit
misting.   Fume  suppressants  include:  wetting
agents,  foam  blankets,  and combinations that
include both a wetting agent and a foam blanket.
An important distinction between wetting agents
and foam blankets is how they reduce emissions.
Wetting  agents  reduce  or inhibit  misting by
lowering the surface tension of the bath.  When
the surface tension of the solution is  reduced,
gases escape at the surface of the solution with
less  of a "bursting" effect, forming less mist.
Foam blankets do not preclude the formation of
chromic  acid mist, but  rather trap  the  mist
formed  under a  blanket of foam.   The foam
blanket is formed by agitation produced  by the
hydrogen and oxygen  gas bubbles  generated
during electroplating.  Once  formed, the foarn
blanket  is usually maintained  at a thickness of
1.3 to 2.5 cm (0.5  to  1.0 in.)  and covers the
entire surface of the bath.

     Fume   suppressants  typically   reduce
chromium emissions by  more than 99 percent.
                                            Page 12

-------
                                                                                                                                           1
                                                           PACKED
                                                             BED
                                                                               MIST ELIMINATOR
                                                                                  SECTION
                            WATER SPRAY
                              SECTION
a?
*
c
MIST-LADEN
GAS STREAM
 CONTROLLED
^GAS STREAM
                                 INSPECTION
                                    DOOR
                                                                                          RECIRCULATION
                                                                                              PUMP
                                                                                                                                           H
                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                           H
                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                           O
                                               Figure 4-1.  Horizontal-flow, single packed-bed scrubber.

-------
era

h-k
4t
MIST-LADEN
GAS STREAM
                       WATER SPRAY
                         SECTION
                INSPECTION
                  DOOR
                                                                       MIST ELIMINATOR
                                                                          SECTION
                                                                                                                   M
                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                   H
                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                            CONTROLLED
                                                                                          *• GAS STREAM
                                                                     RECIRCULATION
                                                                         PUMP
                    Figure 4-2. Horizontal-flow, double packed-bed scrubber.
                                                                                                                                               90
                                                                                                                                               ^

-------
    SPRAY NOZZLE
     WASH DOWN
MIST-LADEN
GAS STREAM
                        ?*'
                        Iliiniin'
                        llllNllH
                        UlililHM
                   SPRAY NOZZLE
                    WASH DOWN
 iONTROLLED
GAS STREAM
                                       DRAIN
MIST-LADEN
GAS STREAM
CONTROLLED
GAS STREAM
                                                                                            DRAIN
                                                                                      H

                                                                                      O
                                                                                      O
              SINGLE SET OF BLADES
                                                                  DOUBLE SET OF BLADES
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           H
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           g
                                                                                                                           3
                                                                                                                           n
                                                                                                                           o
               Figure 4-3.  Horizontal-flow chevron-blade mist eliminators.

-------
                                                                                                                                                H
I
                                                                      I »:«•
                                                                      ita^B
                                                                      I-:**
             HORIZONTAL MIST ELIMINATOR
                                                                 	1.
                                                                      II
                                                                      F&
                                      §
                                      H
                                      O
                                                                   n
                                                                   o
	WOVEN POLYPRO MESH PAD
   CUTOUT IN CASING FOR
      PAD REMOVAL
PRIMARY MESH PAD

      SECONDARY MESH PAD
                                                                          PVC CASING
                                                                            WATER SPRAY
                                                                            FOR MESH PAD
                                                     DRAIN (TO PLATING
                                                          TANK)
                                                          Figure 4-4.  Mesh-pad mist eliminator.
                                                                    1—i
                                                                    5

-------
CHAPTER 4
    WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
     What if I want to use a different control
technique?    You  may  use another control
technique,  as long as you meet the emission
limit for your type of facility. You do not need
EPA approval to  choose another  technique;
however, you must get  EPA approval  on the
monitoring parameters and test methods that you
will use.    An  example  of another control
technique that may be used is the fiber-bed mist
eliminator, which is described below.

     Fiber-bed mist eliminators  mostly  have
been used  to reduce acid mists from sulfuric,
phosphoric,  and nitric  acid plants.    These
systems remove contaminants from a gas stream
through  the  mechanisms  of  inertial impaction
and Brownian  diffusion.   Fiber-bed units are
designed for horizontal,  concurrent gas-liquid
flow through the bed.   The contaminated gas
stream flows toward the downstream face of the
bed. The acid mist  in the gas stream impacts on
the surface  of the  fibers and drains down the
outer face of the bed to the sump while the
cleaned gas flows up and out the top of the unit.
A  schematic  of  a  typical  fiber-bed  mist
eliminator is  presented in Figure 4-5.

     Fiber-bed mist eliminators  are typically
installed downstream  of an existing control
system.  The  upstream  device  removes  the
majority of  the emissions and thus prevents
plugging of the fiber bed.

     Adequate  test  data  are not available  to
accurately  quantify the  control  efficiency  of
fiber-bed  mist eliminators.   However, EPA
believes  that  these  systems  can achieve  the
emission limits that were based on the  use  of
composite mesh-pad systems and fume suppres-
sants based on qualitative data available.

           WORK PRACTICES

     Besides complying with the emission limits
discussed  above,  you will  also be required to
perform work practice standards.  Work practice
standards are required to ensure that the control
technique you use to comply with the regulation
is properly maintained. Poor maintenance could
result  in  system  degradation over  time,  and
eventually  lead to  an increase  in emissions.
Work  practice  standards  must  be performed
quarterly in most cases. The requirements vary
slightly depending on  which control device you
use, as shown in Table 4-2.

     In addition to  these  work practices,  you
will also be required to write an operation and
maintenance (O&M)  plan  for  your facility.
(Decorative chromium electroplating operations
that use a trivalent chromium bath do not have
to prepare an O&M plan.)  The O&M plan must
be developed and implemented by the compli-
ance date for your facility.  However,you do not
have to submit your plan to EPA.  The O&M
plan will include:

     > descriptions of the control device and
       monitoring equipment in  use;
     *• a  checklist to  document the operation
       and maintenance of the equipment (see
       Appendix E of this guidebook, Opera-
       tion and Maintenance Checklist, for  an
       example checklist);
     »• a  list of  the  work practice standards
       from Table 4-2  that apply  to  your
       facility;
                                           Page 17

-------
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
CHAPTER 4
                                                       GAS



                                                       LIQUID



                                                   f~  1 COARSE FIBER DRAINAGE LAYER




                                                       FINE FIBER COLLECTION LAYER
               Figure 4-5.  Schematic of a typical fiber-bed mist eliminator.
                                        Page 18

-------
CHAPTER 4
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
     >• procedures to  follow  to  ensure that
       equipment or process malfunctions due
       to poor maintenance or other prevent-
       able conditions do not occur; and
     »• procedures for identifying malfunctions
       and for implementing corrective actions.

You may use any standard operating procedure
(SOP) manuals, vendor O&M manuals, Occupa-
tional Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
plans, or other existing plans  as part  of your
O&M plan,  as long as they meet the criteria in
the regulation.
                                          Page 19

-------
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
CHAPTER 4
            TABLE 4-2.  SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS
Control technique
Packed-bed
scrubber (PBS)



Composite mesh-
pad (CMP) system



PBS/CMP system
Fiber-bed mist
eliminator0


Other air pollution
control device
(APCD)
Work practice standards
Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no
chromic acid buildup on the packed beds, and no evidence of
chemical attack on the structural integrity of the device.
Visually inspect back portion of the chevron-blade mist
eliminator to ensure that it is dry and there is no breakthrough
of chromic acid mist. j
Visually inspect ductwork from tank or tanks to the control
device to ensure there are no leaks.
Add fresh makeup water to the top of the packed bed.a>')
Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no
chromic acid buildup on the pads, and no evidence of
chemical attack on the structural integrity of the device.
Visually inspect back portion of the mesh pad closest to the
fan to ensure there is no breakthrough of chromic acid mist.
Visually inspect ductwork from tank or tanks to the control
device to ensure there are no leaks.
Perform washdown of the composite mesh-pads in accordance
with manufacturer's recommendations.
Same as for CMP system.
Visually inspect fiber-bed unit and prefiltering device to
ensure there is proper drainage, no chromic acid buildup in
the units, and no evidence of chemical attack on the structural
integrity of the devices.
Visually inspect ductwork from the tank(s) to the control
device to ensure there are no leaks.
Perform washdown of fiber elements in accordance with
manufacturer's recommendations.
To be proposed by the source for approval by the
Administrator.
Frequency
1 /quarter
1 /quarter
1 /quarter
Whenever
makeup is
added
1 /quarter
1 /quarter
1 /quarter
Per
manufacturer
Same as for
CMP system
1 /quarter
1 /quarter
Per
manufacturer
Proposed by the
source for
approval by the
Administrator
(continued)
                                Page 20

-------
CHAPTER 4
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?
         TABLE 4-2. SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS (continued)
Monitoring equipment
Pilot tube
Stalagmometerd
Work practice standards
Backflush with water, or remove from the duct and
rinse with fresh water. Replace in the duct and rotate
1 80 degrees to ensure that the same zero reading is
obtained. Check pilot tube ends for damage. Replace
pitol tube if cracked or fatigued.
Follow manufacturer's recommendations.
Frequency
1 /quarter
Per
manufacturer
alf greater lhan 50 percenl of Ihe scrubber water is drained (e.g., for maintenance purposes), makeup
 water may be added to Ihe scrubber basin.
'•'For horizontal-flow scrubbers, top is defined as the section of the unit directly above the packing
 media such that the makeup water would flow perpendicular to the  air flow through the packing.
 For vertical-flow units, the top is defined as the area downstream of the packing material such that
 the makeup water would flow countercurrent to the air flow through the unit.
cWork practice standards for the control device installed upstream of the fiber-bed mist eliminator to
 prevent plugging do not apply as long as the work practice standards for the fiber-bed unit are
 followed.
^Device used to measure the surface tension of the bath.
                                         Page 21

-------
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO COMPLY?                                CHAPTER 4
                                Page 22

-------
                                       CHAPTERS
                    HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
     There are three components to demon-
strating compliance with the emission limits of
this regulation:

     •/"  Initial performance testing
     /  Ongoing compliance monitoring
     y  Special compliance provisions

   INITIAL PERFORMANCE TESTING
     However, sources that meet the following
criteria do not have to perform testing:

>•  Decorative chromium electroplating tanks or
   chromium anodizing tanks that use a wetting
   agent and limit the surface tension of the bath
   to a maximum of 45 dynes/cm and
»•  Decorative chromium electroplating tanks that
   use a trivalent chromium bath.
     What  is  the  purpose  of  the  initial
performance test?  There  are two  reasons to
perform an  initial performance test.  First, an
initial performance test is necessary to determine
if the  chromium emissions from the affected
source are the same or lower than the emission
limits set for the source.  The emission limits for
the different chromium electroplating tanks and
chromium   anodizing  tanks  were   listed  in
Table 4-1.   Second, the initial performance test
establishes values or ranges  of values for the air
pollution control system operating parameters.
Monitoring  and  recording  these   operating
parameters during tank operation will give you
an  indication  of whether or not you are in
compliance with the emission limits.

     Summary of testing requirements.  Except
for the situations  noted  below, you will  be
required to perform an initial performance test.
This test must be conducted by July 23, 1996 for
decorative  chromium  electroplaters  and  by
July 24, 1997 for hard chromium electroplaters
and chromium anodizers.
     A test  plan  that describes  the  proposed
initial performance testing program  should  be
developed prior to testing and may be requested
by EPA.   The test plan should  describe the
process to be tested, the conditions under which
testing is to be conducted,  the sampling loca-
tions, and the test methods  to be used.  Also,
you must notify EPA in writing of your intent to
conduct a performance test prior to the test.
This notification is described in Chapter 6 of this
guidebook.

     The performance test report is prepared  by
the  test   contractor  after  testing  has  been
conducted.  The test  report must contain the
information  listed in Table 5-1  and must  be
submitted to EPA  as  part of the  reporting
requirements described  in  Chapter 6  of this
guidebook.

     Test methods. EPA Reference Method 306
or 306A,  "Determination of Chromium Emis-
sions from  Decorative  and Hard Chromium
Electroplating and Anodizing Operations," must
                                          Page 23

-------
HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
                                CHAPTER 5
       TABLE 5-1.  INFORMATION
         REQUIRED IN INITIAL
     PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT
       Process description
       Sampling location descriptions
       Sampling and analysis procedures
       and any modifications to standard
       procedures
       Test results
       Quality assurance procedures and
       results
       Records of:
       -  operating conditions during
          testing
       —  preparation of standards
       ~  calibration procedures
       Raw data sheets for:
       —  field sampling
       —  field and laboratory analyses
       Documentation of calculations
       Any additional information
       required by the test method
be used to determine chromium emissions from
decorative or hard chromium electroplating tanks
or  chromium  anodizing  tanks.    Detailed
descriptions of these reference  methods  are
located in Appendix A of part 63 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.   The EPA produced  a
videotape on stack sampling and  monitoring
entitled "Construction and Operation of the EPA
Method 306A  Sampling  Train  and  Practical
Suggestions for Monitoring of Electroplating and
Anodizing Facilities" that is available to you for
a nominal  fee  through  North Carolina State
University,   Raleigh,   NC   by   calling
(919) 515-5875.

     The  California  Air  Resources   Board
(CARB)  Method 425  may also  be used  to
measure  chromium emissions as long as the
analytical requirements listed in  the regulation
are adhered to.  Alternate test methods may also
be used  as long  as they have been validated
using EPA Reference Method 301.

     EPA Reference  Method 306B,  "Surface
Tension  Measurement  and  Recordkeeping for
Tanks Used at  Decorative Chromium Electro-
plating and Anodizing Facilities'" must be used
to determine the surface tension of electroplating
and anodizing baths if you are complying with
the surface tension limit rather than the emission
limit.

     Monitoring requirements.  During perfor-
mance  testing, applicable air pollution control
system operating parameters  must be recorded.
These operating parameters are determined by
the air pollution control system  you are using
and are listed  in Table 5-2.  At the conclusion of
testing,  a  range  of  acceptable values  or  a
maximum  or  minimum  value   for   these
parameters can  be  established  as  described
below.

     For pressure drop measurements, the range
can be established as the range of pressure drops
measured during multiple performance tests, or
as plus or minus  1 inch of water column about
the average pressure drop measured during three
compliant test runs  (i.e.,  the source was  at or
below the applicable emission limit).

     For velocity  pressure  measurements, the
range can be established as the range of velocity
pressures measured during multiple performance
tests, or as plus or minus 10 percent about the
                                          Page 24

-------
CHAPTER 5
              HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
   TABLE 5-2.  METHODS USED TO ESTABLISH OPERATING PARAMETER VALUES
      Monitored parameter
  Applicable air pollution
     control systems
   Method used to establish
      acceptable values
         Pressure drop
Composite mesh-pad system
   Packed-bed scrubber
 Fiber-bed mist eliminator
1.  Range of values from
   multiple performance tests
   or
2.  +.1 inch of I^O column
   about the average pressure
   drop measured during
   three compliant test runs
        Velocity pressure
   Packed-bed scrubber
1.  Range of values from
   multiple performance tests
   or
2.  _+10 percent about the
   average velocity pressure
   measured during three
   compliant test runs
         Surface tension
      Wetting agent
1.  Use 45 dynes/cm or
2.  Maximum surface tension
   measured during at least
   three compliant test runs
     Foam blanket thickness
      Foam blanket
    Fume suppressant
1.  Use 1 inch foam blanket
   thickness or
2.  Minimum foam blanket
   thickness measured during
   at least three compliant test
   runs
                                         Page 25

-------
HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
                                CHAPTER 5
average velocity pressure measured during three
compliant test runs.

     For surface tension, a maximum value can
be established during performance testing, or
you can forego testing (if you have a decorative
chromium   electroplating   or   a  chromium
anodizing operation) and accept 45 dynes/cm as
the maximum surface tension value.

     For foam  blanket  thickness,  a minimum
foam blanket thickness can be established during
performance testing or the facility can elect to
use  1 inch   as  the  minimum  foam  blanket
thickness.

     Applicability  of previous test results.  If
you have already conducted a performance test
to obtain an operating permit  in your State, the
results of the testing can be used to demonstrate
compliance with this regulation only if each of
the following criteria is demonstrated'

     >  the appropriate test methods were used;
     >  the  test was conducted under represen-
        tative operating conditions;
     >  the  test report  contains  the  elements
        listed in Table 5-1;
     *•  the   test   was   conducted   after
        December  1991; and
     *•  you  developed  sufficient  monitoring
        data to establish the operating parameter
        values  that correspond to compliance
        with the emission limits.

If any of these criteria are not met, then you will
have to retest.
ONGOING COMPLIANCE MONITORING

     What is the purpose of ongoing monitor-
ing?    You  must  continue  to  monitor  the
operation of the air pollution control system to
ensure ongoing continuous compliance with the
emission limits. By monitoring and recording
the appropriate air  pollution  control  system
parameters and comparing the monitored values
to the range  of values,  maximum  value,  or
minimum  value   established   during   the
performance test, you and the enforcing agency
can determine if you are in compliance with the
emission limits.

    How do I know if I am out of compliance
with the emission limits? Monitored values that
fall outside of the range of values established for
pressure drop and velocity pressure, exceed the
maximum  surface  tension,  or fall below  the
minimum foam  blanket  thickness indicate that
the tank is  out of compliance with the emission
limits (i.e., excess emissions).  Table 5-3 sum-
marizes the ongoing  monitoring  requirements
including  the  monitoring  frequency for  the
various air pollution control systems.

    Can I decrease the monitoring frequency
of monitored values? The monitoring frequency
for pressure drop and velocity pressure cannot
be changed.  However, the frequency of moni-
toring   surface  tension  and  foam  blanket
thickness can be decreased.   Figure 5-1  is  a
flowchart showing how the monitoring frequency
can be decreased for a wetting agent, a combina-
tion wetting  agent/foam  blanket-type  fume
suppressant,  or  a foam  blanket-type  funje
suppressant.  The information in Figure 5-] is
also described in the footnotes to Table 5-3.
                                           Page 26

-------
CHAPTER 5
HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
          TABLE 5-3. SUMMARY OF ONGOING MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Air pollution control system
Composite mesh-pad system
Packed-bed scrubber
Packed -bed scrubber /composite
mesh-pad system
Fiber-bed mist eliminator
Wetting agent or combination
wetting agent/foam blanket
fume suppressants
Foam blanket-type fume
suppressants
Fume suppressant/add-on
control device
Monitored parameter3
Pressure drop across system
Pressure drop across system
Velocity pressure at system inlet
Pressure drop across the mesh-pad
system
Pressure drop across the mist
eliminator
Pressure drop across the control
device located upstream of the fiber
bed that prevents plugging
Surface tension
Foam blanket thickness
As identified above
Monitoring
frequency
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Every 4 hours'3'0
Every hourc'^

Acceptable values for these monitored parameters are established during initial performance testing.
"If there are no exceedances of the maximum surface tension after 40 hours of operation, then the
  monitoring frequency can be decreased to once every 8 hours.  If there are no exceedances for the
  next 40 hours, then the frequency can be decreased to once every 40 hours. If an exceedance
  occurs at any time after that, then the initial monitoring schedule (every 4 hours) must be resumed.
cThe initial schedule must be resumed for every new tank solution.
*% there are no exceedances of the minimum foam blanket thickness after 40 hours of operation, then
  the monitoring frequency can be decreased to once every 4 hours.   If there are no exceedances for
  the next 40 hours, then the frequency can be decreased to once every 8 hours.  If an exceedance
  occurs after that, then the initial monitoring schedule (every hour) must be resumed.
                                          Page 27

-------
HOW WELL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?
CHAPTER 5
                          BEGINNING MONITORING:
                     EVERY 4 HOURS (SURFACE TENSION)
                   EVERY HOUR (FOAM BLANKET THICKNESS)
              ANY EXCEEDANCES AFTER 40 HOURS OF MONITORING?
                                                         YES
                                 NO
                          CONTINUE MONITORING:
                     EVERY 8 HOURS (SURFACE TENSION)
                  EVERY 4 HOURS (FOAM BLANKET THICKNESS)
               ANY EXCEEDANCES AFTER 40 HOURS OF MONITORING?
                                                         YES
                                 NO
                                  *
                          CONTINUE MONITORING:
                     EVERY 40 HOURS (SURFACE TENSION)
                   EVERY 8 HOURS (FOAM BLANKET THICKNESS)
              ANY EXCEEDANCES AFTER 40 HOURS OF MONITORING?
                                                         YES
                                 NO
  Figure 5-1.  Decision tree for decreasing the monitoring frequency of surface tension or
                       foam blanket thickness measurements.
                                    Page 28

-------
CHAPTER 5     	^	HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?

  SPECIAL COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS

     The regulation contains special compliance
provisions for determining compliance with the
emission limits  under  certain circumstances.
These special compliance provisions are applic-
able  in  the  following situations  involving
multiple tanks manifolded to one control system:

     *• The multiple tanks include a chromium
       electroplating or chromium  anodizing
       tank  among other tanks not affected by
       the regulation or
     »• The  multiple tanks  include chromium
       tanks  performing different  operations
       subject to different emission limits (e.g.,
       hard   chromium   electroplating   and
       anodizing)  or  hard  chromium  tanks
       subject to different emission limits (e.g.,
       a new tank and  an existing small tank),
       which may or  may not be controlled
       with  nonaffected sources.

In these situations, it would be very difficult to
directly determine compliance with the emission
limits  in  the regulation.   Therefore, section
63.344(e)  of the  final  regulation  provides
equations for verifying compliance with  the
emission  limits in both of these situations.
                                           Page 29

-------
HOW WILL I DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE?                            CHAPTER 5
                               Page 30

-------
                                        CHAPTER 6

                 WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I
                                      NEED TO DO?
            RECORDKEEPING

     The  regulation  requires that you  keep
records to document compliance status with the
regulation. These records include:

     /  Inspection and maintenance records
     /  Malfunction records
     /  Performance test results
     /  Monitoring data records
     /  Excess emissions records
     •/  Process records
     /  Miscellaneous records

The recordkeeping  requirements are described
below.

     Inspection  and  maintenance  records.
Table 4-3  lists  the various  work  practice
standards  that  apply to  air  pollution control
systems  and  monitoring equipment  and  the
frequency with which these practices are to be
conducted. Records must be maintained to show
that the work practices  were conducted on
schedule.  The records can take the form of a
checklist;  an example checklist for  a composite
mesh-pad  system  is provided  in Appendix E of
this   guidebook.      Also,   records   of  all
maintenance  performed  on  the process,  air
pollution  control  system,   and  monitoring
equipment  must  also be maintained;  these
records  could  take the  form of contractor
invoices  that  describe  the  work   or  simply
handwritten descriptions of  the maintenance
performed.

     Malfunction  records.   Records  of the
occurrence,  duration,  and  cause   of  any
malfunction of the process, air pollution control
device,  and  monitoring equipment  must  be
maintained. If the actions required to correct
the malfunctions were  consistent with those
described   in the  operation  and maintenance
(O&M) plan, then records of these actions need
not be maintained.   However,  records  of the
actions taken to correct the malfunction when the
actions are inconsistent with the O&M plan must
be maintained,  and the plan must be  revised
accordingly.

     An example of a control device malfunction
is the settling of packing material in a packed-
bed scrubber. After the initial installation of the
unit,  the  packing  material  settles   which
sometimes  opens  up  a gap in the  top  of
horizontal flow units.  Settling  of the packing
material  should be indicated  by a  loss  in
pressure drop  across the unit because the  air
flow is following the path of least resistance and
bypassing  the packed  bed.   To correct  this
problem, additional packing material should be
added to the top of the packed bed.

     Performance  test results.    Test  reports
documenting the results of performance tests
conducted  on  the  affected  source  must  be
                                           Page 31

-------
WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED TO DO?
                                CHAPTER 6
maintained.    The  test  report  must  contain
process  and  air  pollution  control  system
operating  parameter  measurements  obtained
during testing as  described in Table 5-1.   Any
additional  measurements  required for  those
facilities using a common  control system  to
reduce  emissions from  multiple  sources  at  a
facility should also be included in the test report.

     Monitoring data records.  Records of the
monitoring data used to  determine compliance
with   the  emission  limits  must   also  be
maintained.    Table 5-3  lists  the  monitoring
requirements  for each of the air pollution control
systems. Monitoring data can be recorded on a
simple form  that identifies  the control system,
the monitored parameter(s), the  value of the
monitored parameter(s), and the time  and date
when  the  parameter  was  monitored.    An
example of a monitoring data form developed
for  a  packed-bed  scrubber  is  provided  in
Appendix E of this guidebook.

     Excess   emissions   records.     Excess
emissions  occur  when  the  values   of  the
monitored parameters exceed the value or  range
of values established under the performance test.
You must  record the start and end times and
dates  of  each  period  of  excess emissions,
regardless of the cause of the excess emissions.
The   example   monitoring   data form   in
Appendix E of this  guidebook provides a  space
to record the start and  end  times of excess
emissions episodes.

     Process  records.  All tanks.   The process
operating time for each chromium  electroplating
or chromium anodizing tank must be recorded.
For  those tanks using  fume suppressants, the
date  and  time  of each  addition  of  fume
suppressants must be recorded.

     Hard chromium tanks. If you are using the
actual rectifier capacity to demonstrate that your
facility is "small" (for purposes of the emission
limits),   then   the   actual  rectifier  capacity
expended by  month  and the  total capacity
expended for the reporting period (semiannual
for major sources and  annual for area sources)
must be recorded.

     Decorative chromium tanks. For decorative
chromium electroplating tanks using  a trivalent
chromium bath, records of the bath components
purchased must be maintained with the wetting
agent clearly  identified as a bath  constituent
contained in one of the  bath components. These
records   may  be invoices showing the  bath
components  (including  the   wetting  agent),
quantities purchased, and date of purchase.

     Miscellaneous records.  You are required
to keep  a copy of your O&M plan on record.
Records that support the reporting requirements
described below and that support any petitions to
the EPA (e.g., requests to waive the record-
keeping  or  reporting requirements  of  the
regulation)  must also be maintained.

               REPORTING

     The regulation requires that sources submit
reports and notifications, which include:

     /  Initial notification
     
-------
CHAPTER 6
WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED TO DO?
     /  Notification of compliance status
     • If construction or reconstruction com-
                             menced  after  January 25,   1995,   a
                             notification of the date when construc-
                             tion  or   reconstruction   commenced
                             within 30 calendar days after  the com-
                             mencement date.

                      A notification of the actual startup date of the
                      source must  be submitted within 30  calendar
                      days after that startup date.

                           Notification of construction/reconstruction.
                      After January 25,   1995,  no  one may  begin
                      construction  or  reconstruction   of  new   or
                      reconstructed sources  without  submitting   a
                      notification of construction/reconstruction to the
                      Administrator.  Construction  or reconstruction
                      may begin  as  soon as  the notification  of
                      construction/reconstruction has been submitted;
                      approval  by the Administrator is not required.
                      If construction  or  reconstruction  commenced
                      before  January 25,  1995,  but startup  did  not
                      occur,  then  a notification  of  construction/
                      reconstruction must be submitted by March 26,
                      1995.  An  example  form for notification  of
                      construction/reconstruction  is  provided   in
                      Appendix E of this guidebook.

                           Notification  of initial performance  test.
                      You must notify the Administrator in writing of
                      intent to  conduct an initial performance test at
                      least 60 calendar days before the scheduled date
                      of the test to allow the Administrator to have an
                      observer  present at the test. The Administrator
                      may or may not  choose  to have an  observer
                      present.  An example form for notification of
                      initial  performance  test  is  provided   in
                      Appendix E of this guidebook.
                                           Page 33

-------
WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED TO DO?
                                                                   CHAPTER 6
                                                                           TIMELINE
     ALL SOURCES
     1995
            Regulation published in Federal Register (effective date)  • • 1/25/95
                                                               Initial notification due  • • 7/24/95
     DECORATIVE
     1996
                              Sources must be in compliance
Notification of compiance status due for sources that do not have to test
                                                    Notification of performance test due

                                                          Testing must be completed
1/25/96
2/2496
                                                          60 days before test

                                                         7/23/96
                                         Notification of test results & compliance status due • •  90 days after test
     HARD AND ANODIZING
     1997
                              Sources must be In compliance  • • 1/25/97
                                                    Notification of performance test due

                                                          Testing must be completed
                                                          60 days before test

                                                         7/24/97
                                         Notification of test results & compliance status due • • 90 days after test
                         Figure 6-1.  Timeline for reporting requirements.
                                                Page 34

-------
CHAPTER 6
WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED TO DO?
     If the scheduled date for the test is changed
for unforeseen reasons, you  must inform the
Administrator within 5 calendar  days of the
originally scheduled test date  and  must specify
the date of the rescheduled test.

     Notification of compliance status.  You
must submit a notification of compliance status
within 90 days after your initial performance test
(if testing is required) or no later  than 30 days
after your compliance  date (if testing is not
required).  If testing is  required, a copy of the
test report must be submitted as  support for the
test results  shown (see  Table 5-1  for  a list of
items to be included in the test report).  If a
title V permit  has not been issued  to  your
source, you should send  the  notification  of
compliance  status to the Administrator.  If a
title V permit has been  issued, you should send
the notification   of  compliance status  to the
appropriate  permitting authority.  An  example
form  for notification of compliance status is
provided in  Appendix E of this guidebook.

     Ongoing compliance  status reports for
major  sources.   If your source  is located at a
major  source  site,  you must submit  ongoing
compliance  status reports to the Administrator
every  six months.   The  Administrator  may
decide on a case-by-case basis to  require  a
source to submit ongoing compliance  status
reports more  frequently.   Additionally,  if  a
source experiences exceedances of the emission
limits as indicated by ongoing  monitoring of air
pollution control  system operating parameters,
then the  source  will  be  required  to  submit
quarterly  reports.    An  example  form  for
reporting ongoing compliance status is provided
in Appendix E of this guidebook.
                          Reduced reporting frequency.   A source
                      that is required to submit ongoing status reports
                      on  a  quarterly or  more  frequent  basis may
                      reduce the frequency of reporting to semiannual
                      if the following conditions  are met:

                          * the ongoing compliance status reports
                             show that the source is in compliance
                             for a full year  (e.g., four quarterly or
                             12 monthly  reporting periods);
                          >• the source complies with all applicable
                             recordkeeping and monitoring require-
                             ments; and
                          >• the Administrator  does not object to a
                             reduced reporting frequency.

                          To reduce  the reporting frequency, the
                      source must notify the Administrator of its inten-
                      tion to make the change.   This notification can
                      take the form of a simple letter to the Adminis-
                      trator  that describes  the initial exceedance (that
                      caused the  source  to  have  to   report more
                      frequently),  any  actions taken to address the
                      exceedance, the subsequent period of compliance
                      (at  least  1 year),   and the intention of the
                      owner/operator  to  reduce the frequency  of
                      submittals of ongoing compliance status reports.
                      The Administrator may review all  previously
                      submitted reports or records kept by the source
                      to make a judgement on whether the reduced
                      frequency   request   should   be   approved.
                      Approval  is  automatically  granted  if  the
                      Administrator  does  not   issue  a  notice  of
                      disapproval within 45 days after the request is
                      submitted.

                          Ongoing  compliance  status reports for
                      area  sources.    The  owner/operator of  an
                      affected area source must also prepare ongoing
                                           Page 35

-------
WHAT RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING WILL I NEED TO DO?
                                CHAPTER 6
compliance status reports that contain the same
information described above for major sources.
The reports  must be prepared annually  and
retained onsite and must be made available to
the Administrator on request.   The example
form  for an  ongoing compliance status report
provided in Appendix E of this guidebook may
be used to fulfill this requirement.

     However, if both of the following condi-
tions  are met, then semiannual reports must be
prepared and submitted to the Administrator:

     *  the total  duration of excess emissions
        (as  indicated by monitoring data) is
        1 percent  or  greater   of  the  total
        operating time for the reporting period
        and
     >  the total duration of malfunctions of the
        add-on air pollution control  equipment
        and monitoring equipment is 5 percent
        or greater of the total operating time.

Regardless if  these  conditions are  met,  the
Administrator or the permitting authority may
choose to require that ongoing compliance status
reports  be completed more frequently  (e.g.,
semiannuallyj and be submitted.

     An area source may petition the Adminis-
trator (as described above for major sources) to
reduce the frequency of reporting and/or retain
the required reports onsite.

     Reports associated with trivalent chromium
baths.  If you use a trivalent chromium bath,
you must submit the following reports instead of
the reports described above:
     >  By July 24, 1995, an initial notification
        (Appendix E of this guidebook provides
        an example  initial notification  report)
        and
     *•  By February 24,  1996, a notification of
        compliance  status  that  updates  the
        information in the initial notification or
        a statement that the initial notification is
        still accurate.

If you decide to change your process (e.g., from
using a trivalent chromium process to using a
hexavalent  chromium   process   because   of
problems  with  the plating quality), you must
submit a report within 30 days after the change
that includes:

     >  a description of the  change and  any
        change in the emission limit and
     *  if a different emission limit applies, the
        information   required  in   the   initial
        notification described above.

In addition, you must submit all other applicable
notifications described above  according  to the
schedules shown.
                                           Page 36

-------
                                        CHAPTER 7
               WHAT ARE MY POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS?
     What is Pollution Prevention? As stated in
the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, Congress
has declared it to be the nation's policy that,
wherever feasible, pollution should be prevented
or reduced at the source.  The Act states that
source reduction is more desirable than waste
management  and  pollution control.   Source
reduction is defined as any practice that reduces
the amount of any hazardous substance entering
the waste stream or otherwise released into the
environment  prior to recycling,  treatment, or
disposal.   Therefore, you must  also  consider
wastewater, hazardous waste,  and solid waste
effects and regulations as well as air in selecting
any method of control.

     What are my options?   This regulation
allows for pollution prevention measures to be
used when complying with the requirements of
the regulation.  There are two source reduction
alternatives available.  The first is the use of
chemical fume suppressants to inhibit chromium
emissions at the source—the electroplating or
anodizing tank.   The second  source reduction
technique  involves  the  use   of  a trivalent
chromium electroplating process instead of the
traditional hexavalent chromium (chromic acid)
process.

     Even  though  add-on  pollution control
measures are  not considered source reduction
measures,   the   add-on  pollution  control
techniques  described  in  the  regulation (i.e.,
composite mesh-pad systems  and packed-bed
scrubbers) have a pollution prevention aspect.
These pollution control measures allow closed-
loop recycling of all collected chromium as well
as concentration of process rinsewaters for some
decorative chromium plating operations.

     Which  method should I use?  There are
advantages and  disadvantages associated  with
each  pollution  prevention  method  that  you
should consider before selecting a method.  The
advantages and  disadvantages  are summarized
below.  In general, the advantages of a method
and the benefits of pollution prevention to the
owner or operator outweigh the disadvantages.

     Fume suppressants. Fume suppressants are
used  widely  and  effectively  in  decorative
chromium  electroplating   and  chromic  acid
anodizing operations and less frequently in hard
chromium  electroplating   operations.    The
disadvantages of using fume suppressants are:

     ©    some wetting agents have a tendency
          to aggravate  pitting and
     ©    foam blankets that are too thick en-
          trap hydrogen  gas,  which poses an
          explosion hazard.
                                           Page 37

-------
WHAT ARE MY POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS?
                                CHAPTER 7
The advantages of using fume suppressants are:

     ©  minimization  of  plating  solution
         evaporation losses;
     ©  a very low-cost of chromium emission
         control;
     ©  no impact on energy consumption;
         and
     ©  no impact on solid waste generation.

     Trivalent chromium process.   Trivalent
chromium  processes  are  very  effective  in
reducing chromium emissions from  decorative
chromium electroplating operations.  Disadvan-
tages of using trivalent chromium processes are:

     ©  careful rinsing is required to minimize
         bath contamination;
     ©  the finish of satin nickel may appear
         more gray than blue; and
     ©  post treatment may  be required  to
         passivate unplated areas for corrosion
         resistance.
While   there  are  some  disadvantages  and
problems associated  with  the  use of trivalent
chromium processes, most can be overcome with
process adjustments  (e.g., careful  rinsing to
minimize bath contamination).  The advantages
of using trivalent chromium processes are:

     ©  lower   toxicity   than  hexavalent
         chromium;
     ©  reduced waste disposal problems and
         costs compared to use of hexavalent
         chromium;
     ©  provides better covering and throwing
         power than hexavalent chromium;
     ©  eliminates "burning;" and
     ©  provides enhanced  corrosion  resist-
         ance  compared    to   hexavalent
         chromium.
                                          Page 38

-------
                                      CHAPTERS

       HOW DOES THIS REGULATION RELATE TO OTHER FEDERAL AND
                        STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS?
              PERMITTING

     Will I need a permit ? The final chromium
electroplating regulation that was published in
the  Federal  Register  on  January 25,  1995
required all sources, major and nonmajor (i.e.,
area),  to  obtain  a title  V operating  permit.
However,  the EPA is considering amending the
final regulation to:

     * Allow States to defer for 5 years (i.e.,
       up to December   1999)  all nonmajor
       hard chromium electroplating operations
       from the requirement to obtain a title V
       permit;
     *• Exempt   all   nonmajor    decorative
       chromium electroplating and chromium
       anodizing  operations  that  use  fume
       suppressants as an emission reduction
       technology  from  the requirement  to
       obtain a title V permit; and
     *• Exempt   all   nonmajor    decorative
       chromium electroplating operations that
       use  a trivalent  chromium  bath  that
       incorporates a wetting agent as a bath
       ingredient.

It should be stressed that EPA is considering this
deferral and these permanent exemptions  for
nonmajor sources only.  Under title V, all major
sources are  required  to obtain  permits-no
deferrals or  exemptions are allowed for these
major sources.
     Title V   operating  permit   program
background. Title V of the CAA Amendments
of 1990  required the establishment of State-
implemented operating permit  programs with
Federal   oversight.     Prior  to  the   1990
amendments,  sources were  not required  by
Federal law to obtain operating permits for air
emissions.  However,  many States issued their
own  operating permits to certain sources. You
may  have been required to obtain an operating
permit for  your  facility  under  a State permit
program in the past.  Now, you may be required
to obtain  a title V operating permit.

     Permit  requirements  in general.    The
operating permit program will  incorporate all
applicable Federal CAA regulation requirements
and any State or local government requirements.
Therefore, permit requirements  will be at least
as stringent as requirements  mandated by the
Federal CAA regulations (e.g.,  the chromium
emission  standards for electroplaters).

     The  basic format of operating permits  is
detailed (codified) in a new part 70 of title 40 of
the   Code  of  Federal Regulations (40 CFR
part 70).    Owners  or operators of facilities
subject to Federal CAA regulations will have to:

     > submit a permit application;
     * submit compliance plans and schedules;
     > comply with all applicable air emission
       limits and standards listed in the permit
                                          Page 39

-------
HOW DOES THIS REGULATION RELATE TO OTHER
FEDERAL AND STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS?
                               CHAPTERS
       (e.g., the chromium emission standards
       for electroplaters);
     * monitor actual emissions, submit moni-
       toring reports,  and  make  an  annual
       certification of the source's compliance
       status;
     »• submit  applications  for  any  permit
       modifications;
     *• submit applications for  permit renewals
       every 5 years; and
     *• pay a permit or emission fee.

     States are allowed to develop one general
permit to  cover  similar  small businesses  or
industrial processes. Thus, States may choose to
develop a  "general permit"  that would cover
chromium electroplating and anodizing facilities.
The EPA  is currently  developing  a model
general permit for this source category.

     Does my State have a permitting program?
All  States must  develop a title V operating
permit program.  States were required to submit
their permitting programs to  EPA for approval
by November 15,  1993.  One year later, the
EPA was to have approved the States' permitting
programs and authorized the States to administer
their programs.  As of  November  1994,  EPA
had proposed to approve only  12 State agency
programs  and 7 local agency  programs.  The
EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN), an
electronic bulletin  board system, has the latest
status  of  permit  program  submittals   and
approvals.  (See Chapter 10  for instructions on
how to access the TTN.) You  may also contact
your State  or local air pollution control agency
for  more   information  on the  status  of  your
State's title V operating permit  program.
     If a State does not develop  an acceptable
title V operating permit program, the EPA will
implement a Federal permit program for sources
in that State.

     When do I apply for my operating permit?
Your deadline for submitting a title V operating
permit application will depend on when your
State  or local  title V  permitting program is
approved  by  the EPA.    In  general,  your
application will be due within 12 months after
this approval  date.  However, some State and
local  permitting  authorities   have   shorter
deadlines.  Regardless,  you will be required to
submit your application by November 15, 1996
at the latest  because title V requires  either  a
Federal  or State  program to be in place by
November  15,  1995.    Once you have your
operating permit, it must be renewed or updated
at least every 5 years.

     Where can I get  help with my  permit?
States are developing small business assistance
programs  (SBAP's) to  assist small  businesses
with the permitting process.  Contact EPA's
Control  Technology Center  (CTC) Hotline at
(919) 541-0800 for information  on your State
SBAP contacts.  Small  businesses may also be
eligible  for reduced permitting fees.  You can
also  contact  your State or local  permitting
authority for more information on  small  business
permitting assistance.

      EPA's  GENERAL PROVISIONS

     On  March 16, 1994, EPA  published the
General Provisions for all regulations codified in
pan 63  (i.e.,  all  NESHAP).  These  General
                                          Page 40

-------
CHAPTER 8
HOW DOES THIS REGULATION RELATE TO OTHER
FEDERAL AND STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS?
Provisions  were  published  in  the  Federal
Register   in   volume 59,  beginning   on
page 12408. When a source becomes subject to
a  regulation  in part 63,  it  automatically  is
subject  to  the General  Provisions  as  well.
However, individual regulations in part 63 may
override part or all  of the General Provisions.
In the case of this regulation, EPA has over-
ridden some of the requirements of the General
Provisions.  Table 1  of the chromium electro-
plating  regulation (located  in Appendix A on
pp. 4976-4979) explains in detail which sections
apply and which sections are overridden.

     STATE OR LOCAL CHROMIUM
   ELECTROPLATING REGULATIONS

     State or local requirements that may have
affected you prior to the new Federal regulation
for  chromium  electroplaters  and  anodizers
continue to  apply.  The new Federal regulation
is the minimum emission control that is required
nationally.  Some State and local agencies do
require  stricter  limits.  If the current State or
local standard is less stringent than the Federal
regulation, the Federal regulation must be met.
             The format of State or local standards may
        be different also.  For example, the California
        Air Resources Board Airborne Toxic  Control
        Measure  for  this  source  category expresses
        emission  limits in  terms  of process emission
        rates  rather   than  emission  concentrations.
        Through  source testing, you will be measuring
        the concentration of emissions at the outlet in
        mg/dscm, which is the format needed to comply
        with EPA's regulation.  From this, you  may
        convert to another format,  such as mg/Amp-hr
        required in the CARB regulation.

             In addition  to air  pollution  regulations,
        chromium electroplating and anodizing opera-
        tions may also be subject to wastewater and
        solid waste disposal regulations.
                                          Page 41

-------
HOW DOES THIS REGULATION RELATE TO OTHER
FEDERAL AND STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS?                       CHAPTER 8
                                Page 42

-------
                                        CHAPTER 9
                              HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?
       EMISSION CONTROL COSTS

     The emission control costs for each of the
control technologies  in  the  regulation  are
summarized in Table 9-1.  Ranges of costs are
presented  in the table because actual  control
costs will vary considerably depending on the
size of the facility.  Also, separate cost ranges
are  given  for new  versus  existing facilities
because of the added cost  to  retrofit existing
facilities.  For detailed cost information, refer to
the  other  EPA  guidance  materials  listed in
Chapter 10 of this guidebook.

     What do the capital costs include?  The
installed capital costs include:

     * the purchased cost of the control device
       and cost for auxiliaries,  such as inlet
       and outlet transition zones, exhaust fans
       and motors, and stack;
     * direct  installation  costs  for  erection,
       electrical  panels  and  wiring,  instru-
       mentation and controls, and piping; and
     »• startup costs.

     What do  the  annualized costs  include?
The annualized costs include:

     * direct operating costs, such as utilities;
     * labor and maintenance materials;
     >• replacement parts;
     *  disposal and transportation of the used
        impaction material;
     >•  indirect  operating   costs,  such  as
        overhead, property taxes, insurance and
        administration;
     *  capital  recovery costs; and
     >•  chromic acid recovery credits.

        SOURCE TESTING COSTS

     As   discussed   in   Chapter  5,   initial
performance testing is required if you are using
a control device to comply with  the regulation.
Ongoing  testing  is   not  required   by  the
regulation.  The estimated cost to perform the
initial performance  test using EPA  Reference
Method 306 is  about  $4,500 per stack if you
hire an outside testing  firm. However, you may
choose  to  do the testing inhouse using  EPA
Reference Method 306A,  which  is simpler and
less expensive  than Method 306.  The  costs
associated  with  performing  one  test  using
Method 306A are shown below:
Sampling train
Pilot, manometer, chemicals
Labor
Analysis
 TOTAL COST
If you conduct your own performance test, you
save an estimated $3,350 over having an outside
testing firm do the work.   Besides this  initial
                                           Page 43

-------
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?
                               CHAPTER 9
                 TABLE 9-1. ESTIMATED EMISSION CONTROL COSTS3
Control technology
Fume suppressants (FS)
Packed-bed scrubber
(PBS)
Composite mesh-pad
(CMP) system
Combination PBS/CMP
system
Fiber-bed mist eliminator
(FEME)
Capital costs, $
New
none
39,400
to 159,500
29,200
to 154,300
62,400
to 210,200
123,200
to 540,400
Existing
none
49,300
to 199,400
36,500
to 192,900
78,000
to 262,800
135,500
to 739,700
Annual ized costs, $
New
1,100
to 18,500
10,400
to 4 1,700
14,500
to 82,400
18,300
to 77,500
31,100
to 160,400
Existing
1,100
to 18,500
11,900
to 47,900
16,000
to 90,400
20,700
to 86,000
33,000
to 168,000
   a!994 dollars.
 cost savings, your company would also get to
 keep the equipment.  If any additional testing is
 necessary,  it would cost  only about $510 (for
 labor,  analysis, and  chemicals)  rather than  an
 additional $4,500 per stack.

   MONITORING EQUIPMENT COSTS

     Stalagmometers, which are  devices used to
 measure the surface tension of the plating bath,
 cost about $128.*  Tensiometers  may also  be
 used to measure surface tension and cost about
    i-\
 $80.z  A stainless steel S-type pitot tube, used to
 measure velocity  pressure at  the  inlet of a
 control device, costs from about $50 to $65
 depending  on the length  of the tube.  In this
 application, pitot tubes may have to be replaced
 about  every 4 months due to  corrosion.   A
 pressure gauge used to monitor pressure drop
 (e.g.,  a magnehelic  gauge) costs  about $120.
 Monitoring  equipment  are available  from
numerous vendors. You may consult your fume
suppressant supplier  for  recommendations on
how to obtain the equipment.

1 Price quote from Lurex Scientific.
^Price quote from Fisher Scientific.

   MONITORING, RECORDKEEPING,
        AND REPORTING COSTS

    The  average ongoing  annual  cost  for
monitoring,  recordkeeping,  and reporting is
about $2,300 per facility.  (Sources that have to
perform  initial   testing  will  incur  additional
upfront  costs associated  with  the testing  and
notification requirements.) This cost estimate is
an average for all types and sizes of operations;
small  sources will incur lower  costs due to the
reduced requirements for these  sources.
                                          Page 44

-------
CHAPTER 9
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?
           PERMITTING FEES

     As discussed  in Chapter 8, you  may be
required by the regulation to obtain an operating
permit under title V of the CAA.  If so, you will
be charged a permit or emission  fee by your
State or  local permitting authority  when you
apply for your title V permit. This  fee will vary
from State to State.  For more information on
title  V operating permit fees, contact your State
or  local  permitting authority  or  the EPA
Regional Office for your State.
                                          Page 45

-------
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?                                         CHAPTER 9
                                Page 46

-------
                                     CHAPTER 10
        WHERE CAN I GO FOR MORE INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE?
        TELEPHONE CONTACTS

     For more information on how to comply
with this regulation, please call:

     »  your State or local air pollution control
        agency;
     »  your local, regional, or national  metal
        finishers trade association;
     »  your State Small  Business Assistance
        Program; or
     «  your State Small Business Ombudsman.

For information on your State Small  Business
Assistance Program contacts, call EPA's Control
Technology Center Hotline at (919) 541-0800.

     Also, for more information, you may call
the EPA Regional Office that serves your State
or territory.   Table 10-1  lists the  telephone
numbers of the 10 EPA Regional Offices and the
States and territories that they serve.

     EPA's ELECTRONIC BULLETIN
            BOARD SYSTEM
(919) 541-5742.  Assistance with the TTN is
available by calling (919) 541-5384.

  OTHER EPA GUIDANCE MATERIALS

     In  developing this  regulation,  EPA has
prepared other  materials that  provide  more
information on  the technical  aspects of  the
regulation. These include:

     >   Chromium Emissions from Chromium
       Electroplating   and  Chromic   Acid
       Anodizing   Operations—Background
       Information for  Proposed Standards
        (Volumes I and II). EPA-453/R-93-030a
       and 030b. July 1993.
     *•   Technical Assessment of New Emission
        Control Technologies Used in the Hard
        Chromium  Electroplating  Industry.
       EPA-453/R-93-031.  July 1993.
     *•  Chromium Emissions from Chromium
       Electroplating and Chromic Acid Anod-
       izing Operations-Background Informa-
       tion   for  Promulgated   Standards.
       EPA-453/R-94-082b.  November  1994.
     The EPA operates an electronic bulletin
board,  the Technology Transfer  Network or
"777V," which contains copies of preambles and
regulations, background information documents,
policy   memoranda,   and  other   guidance
materials.   You  may  access portions  of the
EPA's   TTN   via   modem   by   dialing
Copies of these reports are available through
EPA's Library Services Office (MD-35), U. S.
Environmental Protection  Agency,  Research
Triangle  Park,  North  Carolina    27711,
(919) 541-2777; on EPA's TTN; or, for a fee,
from  the  National  Technical  Information
Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia  22161, (703) 487-4600.
                                        Page 47

-------
WHERE CAN I GO FOR MORE INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE?
                             CHAPTER 10
                   TABLE 10-1.  EPA REGIONAL OFFICE CONTACTS
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Telephone #
(617) 565-3728
(212) 637-4023
(215) 597-3237
(404) 347-2864
(312) 886-6793
(214) 665-7225
(913) 551-7097
(303) 293-1886
(415)744-1143
(206) 553-1949
States covered
CT, ME, MA, NH, RI
& VT
NJ, NY, Puerto Rico
& Virgin Islands
DE, MD, PA, VA,
WV & District of
Columbia
AL, FL, GA, KY,
MS, NC, SC & TN
IL, IN, MI, WI, MN
&OH
AR, LA, NM, OK &
TX
IA, KS, MO & NE
CO, MT, ND, SD,
UT& WY
AZ, CA, HI, NV,
American Samoa &
Guam
AK, ID, WA & OR
Address
Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Division
J.F.K. Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203-2211
Director, Air and Waste Management Division
290 Broadway
21st Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
Director, Air, Radiation and Toxics Division
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
Director, Air and Radiation Division
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Director, Air and Toxics Division
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Director, Air and Toxics Division
999 18th Street
1 Denver Place, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Director, Air and Toxics Division
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Director, Air and Toxics Division
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
    Also, EPA has developed  a videotape to
assist   sources  in  using  EPA   Reference
Method 306A   entitled  Construction   and
Operation of the EPA Method 306A Sampling
Train and Practical Suggestions for Monitoring
of Electroplating and Anodizing Facilities. This
videotape is available for a nominal fee through
North  Carolina State  University,  Registrar,
Environmental  Programs, Box 7513, Raleigh,
North Carolina  27695-7513.   The telephone
number is (919) 515-5875.
                                       Page 48

-------
       APPENDIX A

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE;
       FINAL RULE

-------
Wednesday
January 25, 1995
Part II



Environmental

Protection Agency

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
National Emission Standards for
Chromium Emissions From Hard and
Decorative Chromium Electroplating and
Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Final Rule

-------
4948
Federal  Register  /  Vol.  60,  No. 16  / Wednesday, January 25, 1995  /  Rules and Regulations
 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
 AGENCY

 40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
 [AD-FRL-5115-7]
 RIN 20CO-AC14

 National Emission Standards for
 Chromium Emissions From Hard and
 Decorative Chromium Electroplating
 and Chromium Anodizing Tanks
 AGENCY: Environmental Protection
 Agency (EPA).
 ACTION: Final rule.

 SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112 of the
 Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the
 Act), this action promulgates final
 standards that limit the discharge of
 chromium compound air emissions
 from existing and new hard chromium
 electroplating, decorative chromium
 electroplating, and chromium anodizing
 tanks at major and area sources.
 Chromium compounds are among the
 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAP)
 listed for regulation under section 112
 of the Act. Hard and decorative
 chromium electroplating and chromium
 anodizing tanks have been identified by
 the EPA as significant emitters of
 chromium compounds to the
 atmosphere. The purpose of the final
 rale is to reduce chromium compound
 air emissions from the source categories
 identified above. All affected sources
 must limit emissions to the level of the
 maximum achievable control
 technology (MACT). The EPA is also
 finalizing Methods 306, 306A, and 306B
 with these standards.
 DATES: Effective Date: January 25. 1995.
  Incorporation by Reference. The
 incorporation by reference of certain
 publications in this standard is
 approved by the Director of the Office
 of the Federal Register as of January 25,
 1995.
  Judicial Review. Under section
 307(b)(l) of the Act, judicial review  of
 national emission standards for
 hazardous air pollutants (N'ESHAP) is
 available only by filing a petition for
 review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
 the District of Columbia Circuit within
 60 days of today's publication of this
 final rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the
 Act,  the requirements that are the
 subject of today's notice may not be
 challenged later in civil or criminal
 proceedings brought by the EPA to
 enforce these requirements.
 ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-88-
02, containing information considered
by the EPA in developing the
promulgated NESHAP for hard and
decorative chromium electroplating  and
                             chromium anodizing tanks is available
                             for public inspection and copying
                             between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday
                             through Friday, except for Federal
                             holidays, at the EPA's Air and Radiation
                             Docket and Information Center, Room
                             M1500, U. S. Environmental Protection
                             Agency, 401 M Street, S\V., Washington.
                             DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A
                             reasonable fee may be charged  for
                             copying.
                               Background Information Document. A
                             background information document (BID)
                             for the promulgated NESHAP may be
                             obtained from the docket; the U. S. EPA
                             Library (MD-35), Research Triangle
                             Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone
                             (919) 541-2777; or from National
                             Technical Information Services, 5285
                             Port Royal Road,  Springfield, Virginia
                             22161, telephone (703) 487-4650. Please
                             refer to "Chromium Emissions  from
                             Chromium Electroplating and Chromic
                             Acid Anodizing Operations—
                             Background Information for
                             Promulgated Standards" (EPA-^SS/R-
                             94-=082b). The BID contains a summary
                             of the public comments made on the
                             proposed standards and EPA responses
                             to the comments.
                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
                             Lalit Banker of the Emission  Standards
                             Division (MD—13), U. S. Environmental
                             Protection Agency, Research Triangle
                             Park. North Carolina 27711; telephone
                             (919) 541-5420.
                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                             information presented in  this preamble
                             is organized as follows:
                             I. Background
                             II. Summary
                               A. Summary of Promulgated Standards
                               B. Summary of Major Changes Since
                                Proposal
                             III. Summary of Environmental, Energy. Cost.
                                and Economic Impacts
                               A. Environmental and Energy  Impacts
                               B. Cost Impacts
                               C. Economic Impacts
                             IV. Public Participation
                             V. Significant Comments and Responses
                               A. Selection of Source Categories and
                                Pollutants to be Regulated
                               B. Selection of MACT/GACT Approach
                               C. Selection of MACT for Hard Chromium
                                Electroplating Tanks
                              , D. Selection of MACT for Decorative
                                Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                                Anodizing Tanks
                               E. Selection of the Format of the  Standard
                               F. Selection of the Emission Limits       »
                               G. Selection of Compliance Dates
                               H. Selection of Monitoring Requirements_
                               I. Selection of Test Methods
                               J. Selection of Reporting and
                                Recordkeeping  Requirements
                               K. Operating Permit Program
                             VI. Administrative Requirements
                               A. Docket
                               B. Executive Order 12866
                               C. Paperwork Reduction Act
   D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
   E. Miscellaneous
 I. Background
   Section 112(b) of the Act lists 189
 HAP and requires the EPA to establish
 national emission standards  for all
 major sources and some area sources of
 those HAP. Among the listed pollutants
 are chromium compounds. On July 16,
 1992 (57 FR 31576)'. the EPA published
 a list of major and area sources for
 which NESHAP are to be promulgated
 and on December 3,1993 (58 FR 83941).
 the EPA published  a schedule for
 promulgation of those standards. The
 hard and decorative chromium
 electroplating and chromium anodizing
 source categories are included in the list
 of major and area sources for which the
 EPA is to establish national emission
 standards by November 1994.
   This NESHAP was proposed in the
 Federal Register on December 15, 1993
 (58 FR 65768). A public hearing on this
 rule was conducted on January 20, 1994.
 In addition, 62 letters commenting on
 the proposed rule were received during
 the public comment period, and 3 late
 comments were  received.
 II. Summary
 A. Summary of Promulgated Standards
   The final rule  applies to major and
 area sources performing hard chromium
 electroplating, decorative chromium
 electroplating, and  chromium
 anodizing. The affected source  is each
 chromium  electroplating or chromium
 anodizing tank. The emission
 limitations for each of these source
 categories are summarized in Table 1.
 These emission limitations apply only
. during tank operation, including
 periods of startup and shutdown. The
 emission limitation for all new hard
 chromium electroplating tanks, and for
 existing hard chromium electroplating
 tanks that are located at large, hard
 chromium  electroplating facilities is
 based on the use of a composite mesh-
 pad system. The emission limitation for
 existing hard chromium electroplating
 tanks located at small, hard chromium
 electroplating facilities is based on  the
 use of a packed-bed scrubber. Fo>- all
 existing and new sources performing
 decorative chromium electroplating and
 all existing and new sources performing
 chromium anodizing, the standard  is
 based on the use of fume suppressants.
 Even though these technologies formed
 the bases for the standards, any
 technology can be used as long as it is
 demonstrated to meet the prescribed
 emission limitation. All area and major
 sources must limit emissions to the
 level of the maximum achievable
 control technology  (MACT).

-------
          Federal  Register  / Vol.  60, No. 16  / Wednesday, January 25,  1995  / Rules  and  Regulations    494^

      TABLE 1.—STANDARDS  FOR CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING AND CHROMIUM ANODIZING TANKS BASED ON MACT
Type of tank
Emission limitations
Small

Large
                                                 Hard Chromium Plating Tanks
All existing tanks
All new tanks	
    0.03 mg/dcsm (1.3x1Q-J gr/dscf) ..
    0.015 mg/dcsm (6.6x10~6 gr/dscf)
0.015 mg/dscm (6.5x10"6 gr/dscf]
0.015 mg/dscm (6.6x10~6 gr/dscf)
                                 Decorative Chromium Plating Tanks Using a Chromic Acid Bath
All new and existing tanks
                                  0.01 mg/dscm->(4.4xlO-4 gr/dscf)
                                                  Chromium Anodizing Tanks
All new and existing tanks
                                  0.01 mg/dscm1(4.4xlO"6 gr/dscf)
  Mn accordance with §63.342(d){2), owners or operators using a fume suppressant containing a wetting agent as a control technique can meet
an alternate emission limitation of 45 dynes/cm (3.1x10~J Ibf/f!)-

    Owners  and operators  of  all affected  sources are also  subject to work  practice  standards, which require them  to
complete an operation  and maintenance  (O&M)  plan that contains the minimum elements of §63.342(f)(3) and Table
2.
                                   TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS
        Control technique
                    Work practice standards
                        Frequency
 Composite  mesh-pad  (CMP) sys-
  tem.
 Packed-bed scrubber (PBS)
 PBS/CMP system
 Fic-er-bed mist eliminator«
Air pollution control device (APCD)
   not listed in rule.
1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chro-
  mic acid buildup on the pads, and no evidence of chemical attack
  on the structural integrity of the device.
2. Visually inspect back portion of the mesh  pad closet to the fan to
  ensure there is no breakthrough of chromic acid mist.
3. Visually inspect ductwork  from tank or tanks to the control device
  to ensure there are no leaks.
4.  Perform washdown of the composite mesh-pads in accordance
  with manufacturers recommendations.
1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chro-
  mic acid buildup on the packed beds, and no evidence of chemical
  attack on the structural integrity of the device.
2. Visually inspect back portion of the chevron blade mist eliminator
  to ensure that it is dry and there is no breakthrough of chromic acid
  mist.
3. Same as number 3 above 	;	
4. Add fresh makeup water to the top of the packed bed *•»  	
1. Same as for CMP system  	
2. Same as for CMP system  	
3. Same as for CMP system  	
4. Same as for CMP system  	
1.  Visually  inspect fiber-bed unit and  prefiltering device  to ensure
  there is proper drainage, no chromic acid buildup in the units, and
  no evidence of chemical attack on the structural integrity of the de-
  vices.
2. Visually inspect ductwork  from tank or tanks to the control device
  to ensure there are no leaks.
3. Perform washdown of fiber elements in accordance with manufac-
  turers  recommendations.
To be proposed by the source for approval by the Administrator 	
             1. 1/quarter.


             2. 1/quarter.

             3. 1/quarier.

             4. Per manufacturer.

             1. 1/quarter.


             2. 1/quarter.
             3. 1/quarter.
             4. Whenever makeup is added.
             1. 1/quarter.
             2. 1/quarter.
             3. 1/quarter.
             4. Per manufacturer.
             1. I/quarter.
             2. I/quarter.

             3. Per manufacturer.

             To be proposed by the source  for
               approval by the Administrator.
                                                     Monitoring Equipment
Pilot lube
Slalagmometer
Backflush with water, or remove from the duct and rinse with fresh
  water. Replace in the duct and rotate 180 degrees to  ensure that
  the same zero reading is obtained. Check pilot tube ends for dam-
  age. Replace pilot tube if cracked or fatigued.
Follow manufacturers recommendations.
             1/quarter.
  'II greater than 50 percent of the scrubber water is drained (e.g., for maintenance purposes),  makeup water may be added to the scrubber
basin.
  » For horizontal-flow scrubbers, top is defined as the section of the unit directly above the packing media such that the  makeup water would
flow perpendicute' la Sue si flow tswough the packing. For vertical-flow units, the top is defined as the area downstream of the packing material
such that the makeisp wase* woufcJ flow countercurrent to the air flow through the unit.
  'Work practice standards for the control device installed upstream of the fiber-bed mist eliminator to prevent plugging do not apply as long as
the work practice standards for the fiber-bed unit are followed.

-------
,950    Federal Register  /  Vol. 60, No. 16  /  Wednesday, January 25.  1995  /  Rules and Regulations
  All existing sources performing hard
chromium electroplating and chromium
anodizing must comply with the
emission limitations within 2 years of
January 25, 1995. All existing sources
performing decorative chromium
electroplating must comply with the
emission limitations within  1 year of
                      January 25,1995. All new and
                      reconstructed sources must comply
                      immediately upon startup.
                        Sources must demonstrate initial
                      compliance with the prescribed
                      emission limitation in accordance with
                      §§ 63.343[b) and 53.344. Continuous
                      compliance is demonstrated through the
           monitoring required by § 64.343(c), as
           summarized in Table 3. As indicated in
           this table, the type of compliance
           monitoring performed is based on the
           type of control technique used to
           comply with the emission limitation,
           not the type of source being controlled.
                                 TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Control
technique
Composite mesh-pad (CMP)
system.
Packed-bed scrubber (PSB)
P3S/CMP system
Fiber-bed mist eliminator 	

suppressant.
Foam blankets
Air pollution control device
(APCD) not listed in rule.
Initial compliance test
Yes
Yes 	
Y°s
Yes 	

§53.343;b)(2) are met).
Yes
Yes 	

Parameter(s) for compliance monitoring
Pressure drop across the unit 	 - 	
Velocity pressure at the inlet of the control system and
pressure drop across the unit
Pressure drop across the unit 	
Pressure drop across the fiber-bed mist eliminator and
the pressure drop across the upstream control device
used to prevent plugging.
Foam thickness 	
To be proposed by the source (or approval by Adminis-
trator.
Frequency of compli-
ance monitoring
1/day.
1/day.
i/day
1/day.
Once every 4 hours.3
Once per hour.-1
N/A.

  •Frequency can be decreased according to §63.343 (c)(5)(ii) and (c)(6)(ii) of subpart N.
   Owners or operators of affected
 sources are required to keep the records
 required by § 63.346 to document
 compliance with these standards.
 Records include those associated with
                      the work practice standards,
                      performance test results, compliance
                      monitoring data, duration of
                      exceedances, and records to support a
                      Federally-enforceable limit on facility
           size. Reports must also be periodically
           submitted. Table 4 summarizes the
           reports to be submitted and the
           reporting timeframes.
                                  TABLE 4.—SUMMARY OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
    Section in
    Sutpart N
                 I
                    Description
                                                                  Timeframe for submirtal
 §63.345(b)
 §53.347(c)(1) 	
 §63.347(c)(2) 	
 §63.347(d)
 §53.347(f) .
 §63.347(S)

 §53.347(h)

 §63.347(i) .
Notification of constrjction or reconstruction

Initial notification 	
—Notification cf when construction commenced
—Notification of actual startup ...
Notification of performance test .
Notification of compliance status
Notification of performance test results .-	
Compliance status reports for major sources

Compliance status reports for area sources .,
—Initial notification for users of TVC baths 	
—Notification of compliance status for users of TVC baths
—Notification of process change 	
Depends   on  when   source   was   constructed—see
  §63.345(b)(5).
180 days after the effective date.
—Within 30 days of commencement for sources Duii; after
  effective date, or with notification required by §63.345(0) rf
  built prior to effective date.
—Within 30 days of startup.
At least 60 days prior to test.
Within 90 days of performance test (if a test is conducted) or
  within 30 days of compliance date.
Within 90 days of performance test.
2 times/yr. or 4 times/yr if exceedances occur or if requested
  by Administrator.
Cornplete once/yr and maintain  on site, or 2 times/yr  if
  exceedances occur or if requested by Administrator.
—Within 180 days of effective date.
—Within 30 days of compliance date.
—Within 30 days of process change.
 B. Summon' of Major Changes Since
 Proposal

   In response to public comments
 received and additional analyses
 performed by the EPA. the following
                       changes have been made to the final
                       rule since proposal:
                         1. The emission limits associated with
                       the control technologies that form the
                       bases for the standards have been
                       revised. The emission limit based on the
                       use of a composite mesh-pad system is
            0.015 milligrams of total chromium per
            dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) of
            exhaust air. The emission limit based on
            the use of a fume suppressant is 0.01
            mg/dscm. The emission limit based on
            the use of a packed-bed scrubber if
            unchanged (0.03 mg/dscm).

-------
          Federal Register  /  Vol. 60, N7o. 15  /  Wednesday, January 25.  1995  / Rules  and  Regulations     4951
                                 TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
     Control technique
                             into! compliance test
       Parameter(s) tor compliance monitoring
 Frequency of compfr-
   arce monitoring
Composite mesh-pad (CMP)
  system.
Packed-bed scrubber (PBS)

PBS/CMP system	
Fiber-bed mist eliminator —
Wetting agent-type fume
  suppressant
Foam blankets		
Air pollution control device
  (APCD) not fisted in nJe.
                          Yes

                          Yes

                          Yes
                          Yes
                          Yes (Unless the criteria of
                            §63343
-------
4952
Federal Register / Vol.
60
No.  16 / Wednesday. January  25,  1995  /  Rules and  Regulations
are reduced from the nationwide annual
costs associated with monitoring.
reporting, and recordkeeping in the
proposed rule of 58.6 million for hard
chromium electroplaters. 51.6 million
for decorative chromium electroplaters
using a trivalent chromium plating
process.'S14 million for other decorative
chromium electroplaters, and 53.8
million for chromium anodizers.

C. Economic Impacts

  The economic impacts for the sources
covered by this rulemaking are
unchanged from proposal because the
basis of the MACT standards have not
changed.

FV. Public Participation

  Prior to proposal of the chromium
electroplating and anodizing rule.
meetings of the National ALr Pollution
Control Techniques Advisory
Committee (NAPCTAC) were held on
January 30 and November 19, 1991.
These meetings were open to the public,
and each attendee was given an
opportunity to comment on the draft
rule.
  The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on December 16,
1993 (58  FR 65768). The preamble to the
proposal  discussed the availability of
the proposal BID [Chromium
Electroplating NESHAP—Background
Information for Proposed Standards
(Volume  I: EPA-153/R-93-030a and
Volume II: EPA-i53/R-93-030b)).
which describes in detail the regulatory
alternatives considered and the impacts
associated with those alternatives.
Public comments were solicited at the
time of proposal, and copies of the
proposal BID were made available to
interested parties.
  The public comment period officially
ended on March 14. 1994. A public
hearing was held on January 20, 1994.
In addition, 62 comment letters were
received  during the public comment
period: 3 late comments  were also
received. The comments were carefully
considered, and where determined to be
appropriate by the Administrator.
changes wore made in the final rule.

V. Significant Comments and Responses

  Comments  on the proposed rule were
received  from industry, environmental
groups, and State and local regulatory
agencies. A detailed discussion of these
comments and responses can be found
in the promulgation BID (see ADDRESSES
section). The  summary of comments and
responses in the promuJgation BID
serves as the basis for the revisions that
have beeji made to the rule between
proposal and  promulgation.
                              A. Selection of Source Categories and
                              Pollutants To Be Regulated
                                Six commenters said that maximum
                              cumulative potential rectifier capacity
                              was an inappropriate parameter for
                              determining facility size. Sources may
                              have excess rectifier capacity to handle
                              atypical applications, for safety
                              purposes, or for other reasons, but may
                              routinely operate at a significantly lower
                              rectifier output. Several commenters
                              urged the EPA to consider alternatives
                              to the maximum potential rectifier
                              capacity specified, such as actual
                              annual ampere-hour usage, raising the
                              maximum potential ampere-hour limit
                              for small sources to 100 million amp-hr/
                              yr, allowing sources to multiply the
                              maximum potential rectifier capacity by
                              0.75 to account for oversizing, or
                              allowing sources to accept Federally-
                              enforceable limits on their rectifier
                              capacity that would allow them to be
                              categorized as "small" facilities.
                                Although the cutoff between small
                              and large hard chromium electroplating
                              facilities has  not been changed, the EPA
                              has included two provisions in the final
                              rule to allow sources to use actual
                              rectifier capacity or to limit their
                              potential rectifier capacity. The first
                              provision is available to facilities whose
                              production records show that the
                              previous annual, actual rectifier
                              capacity was less than 60 million amp-
                              hr/yr. Under this provision, hard
                              chromium electroplating facilities may
                              determine their size by using actual
                              cumulative rectifier capacity in lieu of
                              the maximum potential capacity if
                              noaresettable. amp-hr meters are used
                              on affected tanks. The final rule
                              (§ 63.346fb)(12) and § 63.347(c)(l)(vi))
                              requires that  records of amp-hr usage be
                              kept.
                                The final rule also allows all sources
                              performing hard chromium
                              electroplating to establish Federally-
                              enforceable limits on their rectifier
                              capacity to allow facilities to comply
                              with the standards for small, hard
                              chromium electroplating'tanks, even if
                              .those facilities have potential rectifier
                              capacities that exceed the 60 million
                              amp-hr/yr cutoff. A Federally-
                              enforceable limit is obtained through
                              the title V permit that is rec/jired by
                              §63.340(e) of the final rule.'Records  are
                              required in accordance with
                              § 63.346fb)(12) and § 63.347(c)(l](viii)  to
                              document that the Federally-enforceable
                              limit is being maintained.
                                The final rule has also been clarified
                              to state that only the rectifiers
                              associated with hard chromium
                              electroplating should be used to
                              determine maximum cumulative
                              potential rectifier capacity
                                             Comments were received regarding
                                           other processes conducted by this
                                           source category that were not identified
                                           in the process description. One
                                           ccmmenter pointed out a distinction
                                           among decorative chromium
                                           electroplating processes: Black
                                           chromium and white chromium. The
                                           commenter stated that black chromium
                                           electroplating is more like hard
                                           chromium electroplating in terms of
                                           process parameters, and the commenter
                                           recommended that black chromium
                                           electroplating be subject to the same
                                           requirements as hard chromium
                                           electroplating processes. Other
                                           commenters noted that the proposed
                                           rule did not cover a hard chromium
                                           electroplating method that uses lower
                                           amperage and a longer electroplating
                                           time (less amperage per square foot than
                                           decorative electroplating process) such
                                           that emissions are lower.
                                             In the final rule, the definitions of
                                           hard chromium electroplating,
                                           decorative chromium electroplating,
                                           and chromium anodizing have been
                                           expanded, and are now expressed in
                                           terms of process parameters as well as
                                           by function. Regardless of what name a
                                           facility has assigned to its process, for
                                           the purposes of the regulation, the
                                           process will be regulated according to
                                           its function, bath operating parameters.
                                           and desired plating characteristics.
                                           Therefore, black decorative chromium
                                           electroplaters would likely be subject to
                                           the standards for hard chromium
                                           electroplaters based on plating
                                           characteristics. The EPA will provide
                                           States with additional guidance or. these
                                           types of applicability issues in the
                                           enabling document.
                                             The commenters that use a low-
                                           amperage electroplating process were
                                           concerned that such a process would
                                           not be allowed by the rule, even though
                                           emissions from this process are low.
                                           Although the  process does differ from
                                           other hard chromium electroplating
                                           processes in that a lower amperage is
                                           used, the  rule does not preclude the use
                                           of this process or any other technique to
                                           meet the applicable emission limitation.
                                           The rule does require that the technique
                                           be demonstrated through performance
                                           testing conducted in accordance with
                                           the test methods and procedures
                                           identified in the final rule, and that
                                           compliance monitoring be conducted  to
                                           determine continuous compliance.

                                           B. Selection of'MACT/GACT Approach
                                             Ten commenters questioned the
                                           Agency's  decision to regulate area
                                           sources with MACT. A number- of these
                                           commenters disagreed that the
                                           chromium compound toxicity data
                                           alone was justification for regulating

-------
         Federal Register / Vol.  60.  No. 16  /  Wednesday.  January 25. 1995  / Rules and Regulations    4953
area sources as stringently as major
sources. Other commenters stated that
the costs to area sources regulated with
MACT was unduly burdensome.
particularly if those sources would be
subject to title V. Two commenters -
suggested that the EPA apply GACT
standards to small facilities to allow the.
Agency to focus its resources on
facilities posing the greatest impact, or
establish a threshold below which
sources would be subject to GACT.
Another commenter questioned the
EPA's decision to apply MACT to area
sources on the grounds that the Act does
not intend a residual risk analysis for
area sources.  This commenter noted that
it was important to have separate
standards for area sources even if GACT
was as stringent as MACT to preserve
the intent of section 112(d).
  In determining whether to apply
MACT or GACT to the area sources in
this source category, the EPA
considered the toxicity of chromium
compounds emitted from such sources
and.the availability of controls. The EPA
has concluded that MACT should be
applied to all area sources in all source
categories. The basis for this decision is
the toxicity of chromium compounds.
The potency  of hexavalent chromium.
which is categorized as a Group A
carcinogen, is well documented, and at
least three epidemiological studies have
shown a strong association between
lung cancer and occupational exposures
to mixtures of bivalent and hexavalent
chromium. Therefore, the Agency has
concluded that all chromium
compounds emitted to the air should be
considered toxic until adequate data are
available to determine otherwise.
   In selecting MACT over GACT for all
area sources, the EPA also evaluated the
availability of control technologies and
the cost of compliance for area sources.
The control technologies'that form the
bases for MACT are widely available.
   Although § 112(d)(5) of the Act does
allow an alternative standard for area
sources, the EPA interprets this
paragraph as authorizing the
Administrator to establish GACT
standard for area sources when the
imposition of MACT is determined to be
unreasonable. For the source categories
subject to subpart N, the Agency
considers it reasonable to apply MACT
to area sources.

C. Selection of MACT for Hard
Chromium Electroplating Tanks
1. Selection of the MACT Floor
   Four commenters suggested that the
MACT floor for new hard chromium
electroplating tanks should be based on
the use of a fiber-bed mist eliminator
(FEME) because this is the best
technology in use.
  The EPA has gathered additional
information since proposal in response
to public comments received. Based on
this information, a total of five facilities
are known to be using FEME to control
chromium emissions from affected hard
chromium electroDlating and chromium
anodizing tanks. These five facilities
represent different sizes-of hard
chromium electroplating and chromium
anodizing operations.
  Emission test data were obtained from
four of the five facilities using FEME
(see Item No. IV-B-01 of Docket A-88-
02). The emission test data available
from one facility were incomplete and
could not be used to assess the
performance of fiber-bed units. The test
results from the other facilities were
adequate to evaluate the performance of
FEME, However, after a thorough
evaluation, it was determined that the
limited data are not sufficient to
establish an emission limit which must
be met on a continuous long-term basis.
In one case, the data were inadequate
because only a single traverse was made
•when two should have been performed.
In the other cases, the quantity of
emissions captured during sampling
was  too small to meet Agency
guidelines on minimum quantification
levels. These data, therefore, must be
treated as qualitative rather than
quantitative results and may not be used
to establish achievable emission limits.
Based on this qualitative issessment. it
appears that FBME offer excellent
control potential.
  In evaluating control technologies, the
Agency also must consider the
sustainability of any performance level
The  EPA is concerned with the long-
term performance of these systems
because of the tendency of the fiber beds
to plug. In other contexts, most vendors
of FEME systems do not recommend
their use as primary pollution control
systems.  Rather, they recommend that
coarse prefiltering be provided upstream
of the fiber beds to prevent plugging.
The prefiltering devices range from a
series of mesh pads to a complete
packed-bed scrubber unit At present,
there are no long-term data available to
assess any actual deterioration or
operational problems associated with
FBME. Fiber-bed mist eliminators to
control chromium electroplating and
anodizing tanks have only recently been
installed as a result of local air district
requirements; therefore, it is unlikely
that any  lon°-term data are available.
   Because of the uncertainties in  both
the measured FBME performance data
and  the potential long-term  variability
of the system performance, the
Administrator cannot at this time
determine that a more stringent
emission limit could be achieved based
on the application of FBME technology
for new hard chromium plating or
chromium anodizing operations.
Therefore, the final MACT performance
level of new hard chromium
electroplating and chromium anodizing
tanks is unchanged from the proposal.
However, the limited data do suggest
that FBME systems can achieve the
emission limits established for
composite mesh-pad systems and fume
suppressants. Because this standard is a
performance standard, the use of a
specific technology is not mandatory;
therefore, any system that meets or
exceeds the required performance level
may be used.
  In order to facilitate the use of FEME
to achieve compliance with the
standard, monitoring provisions have
been included in the final rule for use
with FBME. (See discussion in section
V.H.) The test methods in the proposed
rule are suitable for demonstrating
compliance with the standard regardless
of the control technology employed.
2. Regulatory Alternatives Considered
  Eight commenters suggested that the
EPA was too Limiting in the regulatory
alternatives for hard chromium
electroplating operations. These
commenters believed that the EPA
should allow sources in this subcategory
to use fume suppressants to comply
with the standard, instead of locking
sources into a control technology, such
as packed-bed scrubbers. Four of the
commenters also proposed that the EPA
allow new and existing hard chromium
electroplating operations the option of
meeting the same surface tension limit
allowed for decorative chromium
electroplating operations that use a
wetting agent-type fume suppressant.
  The EPA has selected an emission
limit format to provide sources with the
flexibility to choose the emission
control strategy best suited to their
facility. The regulation only requires
that any strategy selected meet the
emission limits set out in the rule. As
such, hard chromium electroplating
sources can use fume suppressants to
achieve compliance with the standard.
as long as initial compliance testing
demonstrates that the emission limit
stipulated in the standard is being
achieved. As discussed later in this
preamble, however, on-going '
compliance monitoring is control-
technique specific. As such, the owner
or operator of any source that uses a
fume suppressant to comply with an
emission limitation shall monitor
surface tension or foam blanket

-------
4954    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.  16 / Wednesday, January 25,  1995 / Rules and  Regulations
thickness, as appropriate, to
demonstrate continuous compliance.
3 Selection of MACT
  Several commenters remarked that the
standard for existing hard chromium
electroplaters is inappropriate. Nine
commer.ters stated that the standard
was too stringent for large, hard
chromium electroplaters; small, hard
chromium electroplaters; or both. The
arguments against regulating existing
hard chromium electroplaters as
stringently as that proposed were
primarily that the costs associated with
the standard were unduly burdensome
and did not justify the resulting
environmental benefit, and the emission
concentration limits specified in the
proposed rule were not consistently
achievable using the control devices
upon which the standards are based.
  Five commenters, on the other hand,
indicated lhat the standard for small,
hard chromium electroplaters was too
lenient. The arguments presented by the
commenters who supported a more
stringent standard for small, hard
chromium electroplaters were that the
residual risk associated with emissions
from these  sources warranted more
stringent controls, the Agency's
interpretation of the MACT floor was
flawed (i.e.; should be based on a
straight average, not a median); and the
control efficiency for packed-bed
scrubbers is overstated, as are the cost
impacts for a standard based on the use
of composite mesh-pad systems.
  In setting an emission standard, the
Act directs the Administrator to take
into account costs, nonair quality health
and environmental impacts, and energy
requirements. To fulfill this requirement
for existing hard chromium
electroplating sources, the EPA
evaluated the cost, impact, and benefit
of a standard based on the use of a
packed-bed scrubber as well as a
standard based on the use of a
composite mesh-pad system. The
Agency's estimate of the incremental
cost effectiveness of requiring all
sources to meet a standard based on
composite mesh-pad systems compared
to one  based on packed-bed scrubbers is
approximately S3.7 million per
Megagram of chromium controlled (S/
Mg) for large sources and S10.7 million/
Mg for small sources.
  Based on the EPA's economic .
analysis, a standard based on the use of
composite mesh-pad systems by all
sources would not cause adverse
economic effects on large sources that
currently use packed-bed scrubbers. Due
to economies of scale, the economic
impacts on larger facilities are
consistently less than those on small
facilities. As a result, larger facilities
will have a greater ability to pass on
control costs. Although these costs may
seem high, the EPA believes the toxicity
of chromium justifies these costs. In
consideration of the potential adverse
impacts to small sources, the final rule
requires a less stringent standard for
small sources than large sources, which
is based on the use of packed-bed
scrubbers rather than composite mesh-
pad systems. [See Chapter 5 of the New
Technology Document ("Technical
Assessment of New Emission Control
Technologies Used in the Hard
Chromium Electroplating Industry;"
EPA—J53/R-93-031) for a detailed
discussion of EPA's economic analysis
for these  systems.]
  The EPA considers the emission
limitation based on the use of composite
mesh-pad systems to be representative
of and consistently achievable with
well-maintained units. No data were
submitted to support an alternate
emission limitation. (For further
discussion of the emission limitations,
see section V.F.)
  Regarding the comments that the
proposed standard for small, hard
electroplaters was too lenient, the
Agency believes that the MACT floor is
properly  based on the use of packed-bed
scrubbers for this source category. The
EPA promulgated a final rule on June 6,
1994 (57  FR 29196) that presents the
Agency's interpretation of section
112(d)(A) of the Act regarding the basis
for the  MACT floor. Under this
interpretation, the Agency considers the
emission limitations achieved by the
best performing 12 percent of existing
sources and arrives at the MACT floor
by selecting the median of the values,
rather than a straight average. This
interpretation was followed in
establishing the MACT floor for small,
hard chromium electroplaters. The
Agency considers any discussion of the
risk remaining from small, hard
chromium electroplaters to be
premature at this time.
  In accordance with section 112(0 of
the Act, if a significant residual risk
from small, hard chromium
electroplating operations regulated by
MACT is found, the Agency is required
to promulgate standards to mitigate that
risk. The EPA recognizes the potential
hazards of chromium emissions from
small sources and has chosen to regulate
area sources with MACT rather than
GACT. The EPA also considers its cost
and impact analysis for small, hard
chromium electroplaters to be sound.
The EPA estimated retrofit costs based
on information from vendors who
supply the equipment  to the industry,
and therefore estimates are
representative of the control costs
incurred by affected sources. The EPA
considers the efficiency assigned to
packed-bed scrubbers for purposes of
calculating impacts to be representative
of that achieved by well-maintained and
well-operated units controlling
emissions  from hard chromium
electroplating tanks. As with comments
on the emission limit based on
composite mesh-pad systems, no data
supporting alternate emission limits for
a standard based on packed-bed
scrubbers were submitted.

D. Selection of MACT for Decorative
Chromium Electroplating and
Chromium Anodizing Tanks

1. Regulation of the Trivalent Chromium
Plating Process
  Eleven commenters disagreed that
decorative chromium electroplating
tanks tha'.  use a trivalent chromium
process should be regulated by the
proposed rule. Many of the commenters
felt that the EPA had insufficient data to
conclude-that the risk associated with
this process warranted regulation of
those sources. Four commenters found
fault with  the EPA's supporting data
and noted  that the level of hexavalent
chromium in a trivalent chromium bath
that corresponds to the EPA's estimate
of hexavalent emissions from that bath
would far exceed that level of
hexavalent chromium that would
destroy the trivalent bath. Three other
commenters stated that use of the
trivalent chromium process should be
encouraged by the EPA, because
trivalent processes result in less total
chromium in process wastewater and
less sludge generation. One of the
commenters suggested regulating
trivalent chromium electroplating
processes under GACT to eliminate
some of the burden associated  with the
reporting,  recordkeeping, and
monitoring requirements specified in
the proposed rule.
  Twelve commenters responded to the
EPA's request for comment on whether
the trivalent chromium electroplating
process should be required for new
sources. The majority of these
commenters did not think that this
should be  a requirement because the
process was not technically feasible for
the full range of decorative chromium
electroplating operations. Two
commenters pointed out inconsistencies
in the EPA's reasoning; the EPA can
only require trivalent chromium baths if
it recognizes the difference in  toxicity
between hexavalent and trivalent-
chromium.
  The EPA has reconsidered the
technical basis for regulating tanks

-------
         Federal  Register  /  Vol.
60
,  No. 16  /  Wednesday, January 25, 1995  /  Rules and Regulations    4955
using the trivalent chromium
electroplating process and the feasibility
of requiring such a process for new
sources. During development of the
proposed standards, the EPA evaluated
the trivalent chromium electroplating
process as a pollution prevention
alternative. Chromic acid is not present
in the plating solution in the trivalent
chromium processes, and hexavalent
chromium is regarded  as a bath
contaminant in these processes. In
addition, all of the trivalent chromium
plating solutions with which EPA is
familiar contain a wetting agent as an
inherent bath component. That is, the
wetting agent is part of the plating
solution purchased from the vendor; it
is not added separately by the end user.
   With a trivalent chromium plating
process, the  potential emissions of
chromium in any form are much lower
because the concentration of total
chromium in trivalent chromium baths
is approximately four times lower than
the total chromium concentration in
chromic acid baths. Trivalent chromium
processes greatly reduce emissions of
the most potent'form of chromium
(hexavalent), and significantly lower
emissions of chromium in other forms.
In addition to reduction of air
emissions, the use of trivalent
chromium processes results in lower
•chromium concentrations in process
wastewaters and, consequently, reduces
the amount of sludge generated. Based
on a source test conducted by the EPA,
total chromium emissions from a
trivalent chromium bath are
approximately  99 percent less than
those from a traditional, uncontrolled
decorative hexavalent chromium bath.
Hexavalent chromium emissions from a
trivalent chromium ba!h were found to
be approximately equivalent to those
emitted from a decorative hexavalent
chromium bath controlled  by adding a
wetting agent.
   Although  chromium emissions from
the trivalent chromium process were
low, the EPA had not anticipated the
presence of hexavalent chromium in
emissions from the trivalent
electroplating process nor the level of
total chromium emissions. Given that
the Act lists all forms of chromium on
the HAP list, the EPA  considered the
trivalent chromium  electroplating
process as a source of chromium
emissions as well as an emission control
alternative for the chromic acid
electroplating process. Based on the
emission test results, a decorative
hexavalent chromium bath controlled
by adding a wetting agent had
equivalent hexavalent chromium
emissions and less total chromium
emissions than a trivalent chromium
    plating bath. (As previously stated, for
    trivalent chromium baths, the wetting
    agent is inherent to the solution; it does
    not need to be added by the user.) In
    addition, the trivalent  chromium
    process may not be technically feasible
    for all decorative chromium
    electroplating applications. Therefore,
    the final rule does not  require the use
    of a trivalent chromium electroplating
    process for either existing or new
    decorative chromium electroplating
    tanks.
      The EPA has decided to regulate
    sources that use trivalent chromium
    baths in the final rule.  It is not clear
    whether the EPA data  accurately reflect
    emissions from the trivalent chromium
    electroplating process, or if the
    analytical integrity of the data is
    suspect. In light of the ambiguity of the
    air emissions data, and given the other
    environmental benefits from the
    trivalent chromium process, the EPA
    has decided to regulate these baths
    differently from hexavalent chromium
    electroclating baths.
      The final rule requires users of
    trivalent chromium baths to submit an
    initial notification  and a notification of
    compliance status certifying that a
    trivalent chromium bath is being used
    and identifying the bath components
    (specifically, the wetting agent).
    Subsequent notifications are required
    only if the process  is changed, or if a
    new trivalent chromium process is
    introduced. Users of trivalent chromium
    baths must also keep records of bath
    chemicals purchased so the EPA can be
    assured that the bath contains a wetting
    agent. These notification and
    recordkeeping requirements apply only
    to those trivalent chromium baths that
    incorporate a wetting agent. The EPA
    has evaluated baths with this
    characteristic and found them to have_
    the environmental  benefits discussed
    above. Although such  baths are not
    known to  exist, the EPA has chosen to
    regulate trivalent chromium baths that
    do not incorporate a wetting agent in the
    same manner as decorative chromium
    baths using a chromic acid solution. The
    EPA believes that this  will discourage
    the use of a trivalent chromium bath
    that does not have  a wetting agent as an
    inherent bath component.

    2. Selection of MACT  for Decorative
    Chromium Electroplating Tanks
      Three commenters suggested that the
    proposed  emission limit of 0.003 mg/
    dscm for decorative chromium
    electroplaters using hexavalent
    chromium baths was too stringent. Two
    commenters did not think that a source
    using either a fume suppressant or a
    fume suppressant in conjunction with a
                                        packed-bed scrubber could consistently
                                        meet a limit of 0.003 mg/dscm.
                                          In response to the comments received
                                        at propo'sal. the EPA has reconsidered
                                        the basis for the emission limit of 0.003
                                        mg/dscm for decorative chromium
                                        electroplating and chromium anodizing
                                        tanks. As stated in the preamble to the
                                        proposed rule, this emission limit was
                                        based on tests of a decorative chromium
                                        electroplating tank in which a
                                        combination wetting agent/foam blanket
                                        was used to control emissions. Tests
                                        had also been conducted on a decorative
                                        chromium electroplating tank using
                                        only a foam blanket for control. The
                                        chromium emission data for all types of
                                        fume suppressants ranged from 0.001 to
                                        0.007 mg/dscm, with the wetting agent/
                                        foam blanket data ranging from 0.001 to
                                        0,003 mg/dscm and the foam blanket
                                        data "ranging from 0.003 to 0.007 mg/
                                        dscm. In evaluc.'ing whether the
                                        proposed emission limit of 0.003 mg/
                                        dscm should be revised in the final rule.
                                        the EPA reassessed the effect the test
                                        methods may have had on the emission
                                        data obtained. The analytical method
                                        used for the fume suppressant test-was
                                        colorimetric spectroscopy. As more
                                        efficient control technologies (such as
                                        composite mesh-pad systems)  were
                                        developed, a more sensitive analytical
                                        method was needed to measure the
                                        lower concentrations of chromium being
                                        emitted. Therefore, the more sensitive
                                        ion chromatography method was used
                                        in the later phases of emission testing
                                        for these standards involving add-on
                                        control devices.
                                          By using the less sensitive
                                        colorimetric analytical method, it is
                                        unclear whether the variation found
                                        between the two types of fume
                                        suppressants was due to a performance
                                        difference in the fume suppressants or
                                        was an artifact of the analytical method
                                        used. The fact that  there is overlap
                                        between the foam blanket and wetting
                                        agent/foam blanket data further
                                        indicates that this could be ths case.
                                        (Both were able to achieve a limit of
                                        0.003 mg/dscm in one instance.)
                                        Therefore, the EPA has concluded that
                                        the emission limit in the final rule
                                        should be based on the performance of
                                        both foam blankets and wetting agents.
                                        Accordingly, the emission limit selected
                                        for decorative chromium electroplating
                                        and chromium anodizing tanks in the
                                        final rule is 0.01 mg/dscm. This
                                        emission limit was selected by applying
                                        a safety factor to the highest measured
                                        data point (0.007 mg/dscm) to account
                                        for variations in sampling and analytical
                                        procedures. The selection of this
                                        emission limit is consistent with the
                                        methodology used  to select emission
                                        limits based on other control

-------
4956    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.  16 / Wednesday, January  25,  1995 / Rules and Regulations
techniques, as is further discussed in
section V.F
3. Selection pf MACT Floor/MACT for
Chromium Anodizing Tanks
  Three commenters questioned the
MACT floor established by the EPA for
sources performing chromium
anodizing. The commenters stated that
it did not appear that the EPA had
sufficient data to perform a MACT floor
analysis for these sources. Commenters
stated thst chromium anodizers and
decorative chromium electroplaters that
cannot use fume suppressants should be
considered separately, and the MACT
floor for such sources should be based
on packed-bed scrubbers. Also,
according to six commenters, the
standard for chromium anodizing tanks
is not achievable in all situations,
especially when an add-on control
device is used in lieu of fame
suppressants. One commenter stated '
that unless the standard for chromium
anodizing tanks controlled with add-on
control devices is set at 0.03 mg/dscm,
sources will have to use an add-on
control device followed by a fiber-bed
mist eliminator to achieve the emission
limit.
  The MACT floor for chromium
anodizing sources was based on
information available to the EPA on the
source category. Information on the
industry was obtained through survey
questionnaires to both industry
representatives and control system
vendors, site visit reports, and available
emission data. Although information
was not available from all sources in the
category, the EPA believes the
information was sufficient to satisfy the
requirements of section 112(d)(3) of the
Act. The survey responses, which
included some aerospace facilities,
indicated that fume suppressants were
the control technique used
predominantly in the industry. Section
112(d)(3) of the Act prohibits'the EPA
from establishing a standard that is any
less stringent than the MACT floor for
a category or subcategory of sources. No
technical reason was provided by
industry, nor is one known to the EPA,
for creating a separate subcategory of
sources for which fume suppressants are
not technically feasible. Thus, all new
and existing sources performing
chromium anodizing must meet either
an emission limit of 0.01 mg/dscm or
maintain the surface tension specified
in the rule. The EPA believes that the
revised chromium emission limit of 0.01
mg/dscm for chromium anodizing tanks
in the final rule is achievable by sources
using add-on control technology.
Alternatively, the EPA believes that the
compliance timeframe for existing
sources performing chromium
anodizing in the final rule (2 years) will
allow these sources to further
investigate the feasibility of using fume
suppressants.

E. Selection of the Format of the
Standard
  Seven commenters stated that the
format of the standard should be
expressed as a process emission rate in
milligrams of chromium emitted per
amp-hour of operation (mg/amp-hr),
which would be consistent with
California rules, rather than as an
emission concentration (mg/dscm).
Accordinglo the commenters.
concentration-based standards are
flawed because they can be
circumvented by dilution, concentration
can vary from system to system, and
source test data indicate that outlet
concentrations vary widely for different
inlet conditions. Several commenters
also pointed out that emissions should
be correlated to production rates
because chromium emissions increase
proportionately with increased current.
Two other commenters  suggested  that
the final rule specify acceptable process
emission rates to avoid  an equivalency
evaluation.
  Based on the Agency's evaluation, the
available test data indicate that a
process emission rate format will not
ensure consistent compliance with the
control level required by the standard.
The concentration data  collected by the
EPA for the composite mesh-pad and
packed-bed scrubber systems do not
overlap; that is, composite mesh-pad
systems consistently outperform
packed-bed scrubbers. The process
emission rate data, on the other hand do
overlap; even though composite mesh-
pad systems are a superior technology to
packed-bed scrubbers, both sometimes
achieve the same process emission rate.
This occurs because two sources can be
using the same control technology and
achieving the same outlet emissions
concentration, but the one with the
higher current loading will have a lower
process emission rate. Commenters
contend that this is reasonable because
the production rate, as measured in
ampere-hours, is related to emissions.
However, the amount of current
supplied to the tank is an indicator of
the amount of uncontrolled emissions
from the tank, not the controlled
emission level from the tank. Because of
the differences in process emission rate-
based and concentration-based
standards, and the source-specific
nature of process emission rate
standards, the EPA cannot cite an
equivalent process emission rate in the
final rule.
  Regarding the issue of circumvention
of the standard through dilution of the
emission stream, the EPA believes that
dilution of the gas stream can be
determined by reviewing test and
permit data for a facility. The outlet air
flow rate measured during testing
should approximate the design air flow
rate for the control system reported on
the permit application. If the two values
differ significantly, then an inspection
of the control system can be made to
determine if dilution air is being
introduced. It is also possible for a
facility to dilute the inlet gas stream to
the control device by designing a system
to ventilate the electroplating tanks at
air flow rates substantially above those
required for adequate ventilation.
However, the increased installation and
maintenance costs associated with such
a system would outweigh the costs of
complying with the standard without
dilutio'n.  Further, §63.4(b) of the
General Provisions expressly prohibits
dilution as a means to comply with an
emission limit. Therefore, concerns of
dilution of the air stream were not
considered to outweigh the benefits of a
concentration-based format for the
standard.
  Eight commenters disagreed with the
EPA's decision to base the standard on
emissions of total chromium rather than
on emissions of hexava-lent chromium.
Two commenters suggested allowing
sources to demonstrate compliance by
testing for hexavalent chromium in lieu
of total chromium.
  The EPA decided to base the standard
on total chromium because the HAP list
identifies all chromium compounds, not
just hexavalent chromium compounds.
In addition, based on testing conducted
by the EPA for these source categories,
the available test data indicate that
hexavalent and total chromium levels in
the emission stream were essentially the
same for chromic acid baths (varying
within ±10 percent in most instances).
Because the EPA data base is mainly
comprised of data measured as
hexavalent chromium, the final rule
does allow all sources using chromic
acid baths to demonstrate compliance
by measuring either hexavalent or total
chromium for all sources.

F. Selection of the Emission Limits
  Many commenters stated that the
emission limit based on the use of
composite mesh-pad systems should be
changed. Three commenters suggested
lowering the emission  limit that is based
on the use of composite mesh-pad
systems, stating that the EPA did not
test the best systems available, and
suggested levels ranging from 0.001 mg/
dscm to 0.009 mo/dscm. Other

-------
         Federal Register  / Vol.  60,  No. 16  /  Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations    4957
commenters stated that the proposed
limit based on composite mesh-pad
systems (0.013 mg/dscm) was too low.
Five commenters stated that the
proposed emission limit for packed-bed
scrubbers was also too high, noting that
some units tested by the EPA did not
achieve this limit.
  The proposed emission limit of 0.013
mg/dscm for large hard chromium
electroplaters was based on tests that
the EPA conducted on actual control
-devices operating under normal process
conditions. Lower limits than the one
selected for large sources were
measured from these devices, but the
EPA based the emission limit on the
highest measured data point and
believes that this limit is consistently
achievable. Regarding the emission limit
based on packed-bed scrubbers, the EPA
did test some packed-bed scrubber
systems that were not achieving the
level of 0.03 mg/dscm required by the
proposed standard. However, these
devices were not optimized  to achieve
the higher removal efficiencies.
Specifically, when scrubbers were
operated with periodic or continuous
washdo%vn in which fresh water was
supplied as makeup to the top of the
bed, a limit of at least 0.03 mg/dscm was
achieved. The final rule includes work
practice standards that require the  use
of fresh water added to the top of the
packed bed whenever makeup additions
occur. Thus, packed-bed scrubbers that
are operated in accordance with the
requirements of the rule should be able
to achieve a limit.pi 0.03 mg/dscm. The
EPA does not think  it is appropriate to
substantially change the  emission limits
based on the use of composite mesh-pad
systems or packed-bed scrubbers; the
commenters did not provide data that
supported their claim that different
emission limits are more appropriate.
   As discussed previously, the emission
limit for decorative  chromium
electroplating tanks and  chromium
anodizing tanks has been changed  to
0.01 mg/dscm in the final rule by
applying a safety  factor to the highest
data point (0.007  mg/dscm) in the fume
suppressant data base. Similarly, the
emission limit that is based on packed-
bed scrubbers is based on rounding the
highest value (0.028 mg/dscm) in the
packed-bed scrubber data base to 0.03
mg/dscm to incorporate a safety factor.
Therefore, in the final rule, the emission
lim-it that is based on the use of
composite mesh-pad systems (0.013 mg/
dscm) has been adjusted to 0.015 mg/
dscm by applying a safety factor to the
highest value (0.013 mg/dscm) in the
data base to ensure that the  limit is
achievable on a consistent basis.
C. Selection of Compliance Dates
  Several commenters stated that the
proposed compliance dates for affected
existing sources did not allow sufficient
time to achieve compliance with the
proposed rule. The majority of these
commenters suggested compliance
timeframes of 2 to 3 years. According to
the commenters, the compliance period
specified in the proposed rule did not
allow enough time to inform and
educate affected owners and operators;
acquire capital; conduct research and
test systems; identify, purchase, and
install control equipment; develop
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plans; train staff; build inventories; and
establish reporting and recordkeeping
systems.
 [.The Agency agrees with the
commenters that the compliance
timeframes for affected sources should
be increased. The EPA recognizes that
some of the facilities within all of the
source categories will have to
investigate the technical feasibility of
installing control devices or using other
technologies at their facility to meet the
standards. Also, many area sources are
not yet aware that a rule is to be
promulgated for their industry, and time
is needed for them to be made aware of
the requirements of this rule. Therefore,
the EPA has extended the compliance
date to 1 year after the promulgation
date for existing decorative chromium
electroplaters and 2 years after the
promulgation date for existing hard
chromium electroplaters and chromium
ancdizers. The EPA believes that the  1
year timeframe for decorative chromium
electroplaters is sufficient because.
based on the EPA's survey data, 80
percent of existing sources already use
fume suppressants and very few will
need to install add-on air pollution
control devices. The EPA thinks that the
compliance timeframes  in the final rule
will address commenters concerns and
still ensure implementation of controls
in a timely fashion. Due to the toxicity
of chromium compounds and the
importance of controlling chromium
emissions to protect human health and
the environment, the Agency decided
against a compliance time longer than 2
years for any of the source categories
affected.
  To accommodate sources that cannot
comply with the standard by the
compliance date, §63.6(i) of the General
Provisions and § B3.343(a)(6) of subpart
N allows a source to request a 1-year
compliance extension, which must be
submitted 6 months in advance of the
compliance date identified in the
regulation. This extension combined
with the compliance timefrarnes in the
 proposed rule could provide a total of
 2 years for compliance for decorative
 chromium electroplaters and 3 years for
 compliance for hard chromium
 electroplaters and chromium anodizers.
 H. Selection of Monitoring Requirements
   Section 114(a)(3) of the Act requires
 enhanced monitoring and compliance
 certification of all major stationary
 sources. The annual compliance
 certifications certify whether
 compliance has been continuous or
 intermittent. Enhanced monitoring shall
 be capable of detecting deviations from
 each applicable emission limit or
 standard with sufficient            •
 representativeness, accuracy, precision.
 reliability, frequency, and timeliness to
 determine if compliance is continuous
 during a reporting period. The
 monitoring  in this-regulation satisfies
 the requirements of enhanced
 monitoring.
 1. Compliance Monitoring for Add-on
 Air Pollution Control Devices
   Eleven comments addressed  the
 suitability of measuring gas velocity to
 demonstrate on-going compliance when
 add-on air pollution control devices are
-used to comply with an emission limit.
 The commenters stated that measuring
 gas velocity is very complicated,
 redundant with measuring pressure
 drop, and not indicative of control
 device performance. Two commenters
 pointed out that no suitable testing
 point may be accessible, and a'
 permanent measurement device may be
 fouled by chromic acid.
   Several commenters remarked on the
 requirement for measuring chromium
 concentration in the scrubber water.
 Four of these commenters stated that
 there is no obvious relationship between
 scrubber water chromium concentration
 and scrubber performance. Other
 commenters indicated that
 measurement of chromium
 concentration in scrubber water with a
 hydrometer is not accurate.
   In revising the proposed rule, the EPA
 recognizes that the measurement of gas
 velocity could be burdensome and that
 other control system parameters could
 potentially be used to determine on-
 going  compliance. Therefore, in the
 final rule, sources using composite
 mesh-pad systems are required to
 monitor pressure drop across the device
 for compliance purposes. Based on
 information gathered by the EPA,"
 pressure drop is directly related to
 composite mesh-pad system
 performance, measurement of pressure
 drop is straightforward, and some users
 of composite mesh-pad systems are
 currently monitoring pressure drop. The

-------
4958    Federal  Register  /  Vol.  60,  No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules  and Regulations
EPA believes that this change makes the
rule more flexible for regulated sources,
while still ensuring that the EPA has a
mechanism for determining compliance
with the emission limits at any given
time.
  The final rule requires sources that
use a packed-bed scrubber to meet the
emission limit must measure the
velocity pressure at the inlet to the
control system as well as the pressure
drop across the device. The relationship
between pressure drop and packed-bed
scrubber performance is less reliable
than the relationship  between pressure
drop and composite mesh-pad system
performance because  of the lower
pressure drop in packed-bed scrubbers.
Therefore, the EPA also requires sources
using packed-bed scrubbers to monitor
the velocity pressure  at the inlet to the
control device. This requirement will
ensure that the gas velocity through the
control system is maintained in
accordance with vendor
recommendations and, along with the
pressure drop monitoring, will ensure
that the control system is properly
operating.
  The requirement that sources using
packed-bed scrubbers monitor the
chromium concentration in the scrubber
water has been eliminated, because the
EPA concluded that monitoring of the
velocity pressure at the control device
inlet and the pressure drop across the
device was sufficient  to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits
when packed-bed scrubbers are used.
  Compliance monitoring requirements
for fiber-bed mist eliminators have been
added in the final rule because these
devices could likely be used to meet the
emission limitations,  and  some fiber-
bed mist eliminators are known to be in
use. Sources that use  a fiber-bed mist
eliminator to meet the emission limit
must measure the pressure drop across
the fiber-bed unit,, as  well  as the
pressure drop across the control device
upstream of the fiber-bed unit that is in
place to prevent plugging.
  As discussed above, several changes
have been made to the monitoring
requirements specified in  the proposed
rule' based on the EPA's review of
comments received on the proposed
rule and further investigation of which
process parameters relate best to proper
performance of the control systems. The
final compliance monitoring
requirements are found in § 63.343{c) of
the final rule.
2. Work Practice Standards for Add-on
Air Pollution Control Devices
  In the proposed rule, Operation and
Maintenance (O&M) requirements for
add-on air pollution control devices
consisted of adding makeup water to
packed-bed scrubbers, requiring
washdown of composite mesh pads, and
various inspections for both types of
control devices. The majority of
comments focused on the requirements
associated with makeup water for
packed beds and washdown for
composite mesh pads. Several
commenters suggested alternatives for
the requirements for adding makeup
water to packed-bed scrubbers. The
commenters disagreed that makeup
water can or should be added to the top
of the scrubber. Others questioned the
need to use fresh water in scrubbers and
composite mesh pads because doing so
increased wastewater flows. Other
commenters requested that the final rule
define the term "fresh water."
  In the final rule, the O&M
requirements have been replaced  with
work practice standards that address
O&M practices [§ 63.342(f)]. The final
rule continues to require sources using
packed-bed scrubbers to meet an
emission limit and ensure that all
makeup water is fresh and supplied to
the unit at the top of the packed bed.
The EPA considers this requirement
essential to meeting the prescribed
emission limit. During source testing
conducted by the EPA to establish the
performance level of packed-bed
scrubbers, it was noted that a system
equipped with  an overhead spray
system that periodically cleaned the
packing with fresh water performed
much better than a system without such
cleaning. Based on those results, the
EPA believes that without the
requirement that makeup water be fresh
and added to the top of the packed bed,
scrubbers will not continuously meet
the required emission limit even if the
scrubber met the limit during the  initial
performance test and is operated within
the appropriate ranges of pressure drop
and velocity pressure. For clarification,
the term fresh water is defined in  the
final rule.
  There were 11 comments on the
washdown requirements for composite
mesh-pad systems. Several of these
commenters indicated that the specified
washdown frequency was either
impractical, infeasible, or unnecessary.
Seven commenters suggested washdown
requirements for composite mesh-pad
systems be site-specific, as
recommended by vendors, or apply only
if pressure drop determinations indicate
the potential presence of chromic acid
buildup. Two commenters indicated
that the washdown water will likely
exceed the quantity of water that  can be
recycled, thus resulting in a wastewater
stream that needs to be treated.
  In the final rule, the EPA has revised
 the requirement that sources complying
 with an emission limit by using a
 composite mesh-pad system perform
 washdown of the pads. The EPA
•believes that washdown is an essential
 part of composite mesh-pad system
 operation; if proper system maintenance
 such as washdown does not occur, there
 will be a decline in system  performance.
 However, instead of specifying a
 washdown frequency, the revised rule
 specifies that washdown be conducted
 in accordance with manufacturers'
 recommendations as part of a facility's
 O&M plan. The EPA recognizes that
 vendor designs for these systems vary
 significantly, and the requirements for
 washdown are based on the design of
 the unit and the operation of the plating
 tanks. The frequency  of washdown is
 dependent upon the position of the pad
 in the control unit. Pads located in the
 front portions of the unit are exposed to
 higher chromium concentrations and,
 therefore, require washdowns more
 frequently than those located in the
 back of the unit. Washdown practices
 recommended by manufacturers vary
 from continuous in some cases to a
 maximum of once every 1 to 2 weeks.
  The EPA has also added work practice
 standards for fiber-bed mist eliminators
 in the final rule because these control
 devices are likely to meet the emission
 limitations, and are known  to be in use
 by sources affected by these standards.
 The work practice standards identified
 for fiber-bed mist eliminators are
 analogous to those identified for the
 composite mesh-pad system. Washdown
 requirements for fiber-bed units will
 depend on the efficiency of the
 prefiltering device and the operation of
 the plating tanks. Fiber-bed units
 installed downstream of more efficient
 prefiltering systems, such as packed-bed
 scrubbers, will require less  frequent
 washdown than those using a less
 effective prefiltering device because of
 the lower inlet loading to the unit. Most
 vendors of fiber-bed units recommended
 monitoring of the pressure drop as a
 means of gauging when the unit needs
 to be washed down. If an increase in
 pressure drop is observed, then the unit
 will be washed down to remove any
 chromium built up on the fiber
 elements.

 3. Frequency of Monitoring for Add-on
 Air Pollution Control Devices
  Fourteen commenters indicated that
 the daily monitoring of add-on air
 pollution control devices is
 unnecessary, particularly for small
 sources, and suggested that at least some
 of the monitoring be required on only a
 weekly, monthly, or quarterly basis.

-------
         Federal Register / Vol. 60. No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25. 1995 / Rules  and Regulations
                                                                     4959
Other commenters suggested that
monitoring be tied to production rate,
that monitoring be conducted only on
days when electroplating is taking
place, or that monitoring requirements
be reduced after the source has been in
compliance for 6 months. Commenters
also requested that monitoring be
required only during tank operation,
and that tank operation be defined.
Several commenters disagreed with the
proposed inspection frequency because
of increased exposure hazards to
persons conducting the inspections or of
anticipated down-time due to the
inaccessibility of control systems.
  In response to these comments and to
minimize the burden on regulated
sources, the EPA has reduced the
burden associated with the compliance
monitoring and work practice standards
in the final rule. The final rule
continues to require daily monitoring of
pressure drop and velocity pressure for
compliance, but the monitoring
procedures specified in the rule are the
minimum required to determine
continuous compliance. Once the
monitoring devices are in place, the
only labor required is that needed to
read the gauges. The frequency of
inspections for compliance with the
work practice standards has also been
reduced or revised. In the final rule,  the
frequency of inspections has been
reduced from monthly or daily to once
every 3 months. The EPA believes that
the inspections are still necessary to
ensure that system degradation is not
occurring over time, because gradual
degradation may not be apparent from
compliance monitoring alone. Some
commenters noted that their systems
were not accessible for inspection, or
that the inspection would result in
extended downtime. The compliance
timeframes in the final rule should
allow sources sufficient time to retrofit
their systems to facilitate inspections,
and the negative effects of any
downtime are minimized by the
reduced inspection frequency.
  The final rule also has been clarified
so that monitoring requirements apply
only during tank operation; tank
operation is defined in § 63.341.

4. Compliance Monitoring Associated
With Fume Suppressants
  Regarding the use of wetting agent-
type fume suppressants, seven
commenters indicated that the
requirement for maintaining surface
tension below 40 dynes/on for chromic
acid baths is inappropriate. The reasons
provided by the commenters were that
a surface tension standard may not be
prudent to demonstrate compliance, a
direct correlation between exceedance
 of parameters and emission limits has
 not been established, and the rule
 should allow sources to set their own
 compliance value for surface tension.
 Other commenters noted that the
 specified limit was either too low or was
 not consistent with manufacturers'
 recommendations.
  Based on data collected by the EPA,
•the performance of an electroplating
 bath controlled with a wetting agent-
 type fume suppressant can be
 determined by the surface tension of the
 bath. Therefore, the EPA believes that
 there is a direct link between surface
 tension and emissions. The EPA also
 believes that it is necessary and
 appropriate to set a default value for
 surface tension in the rule.  Based on the
 EPA's experience, many decorative
 chromium electroplating tanks are not
 ventilated, making source testing
 impossible without considerable
 retrofitting.
  The EPA .has increased the default
 surface tension limit from the proposed
 40 dynes/cm to 45 dynes/cm based on
 information received  during the
 comment period. However, if a facility
 believes that a different surface tension
 value is appropriate, the rule allows a
 source to conduct a performance test
 concurrently with surface tension
 monitoring to establish the maximum
 surface tension that corresponds to
 compliance with the emission limits.
 The source would subsequently monitor
 surface tension, with  an exceedance
 occurring if the surface tension of the
 bath exceeded the value measured
 during the performance test.
  Regarding foam blanket-type fume
 suppressants, several commenters were
 concerned about the technique for
 measuring foam blanket thickness and
 the potential hazards associated with
 this measurement. Another commenter
 stated that the stack testing requirement
 is unreasonable due to its excessive
 cost.
  The EPA does not believe that it is
 necessary to specify a procedure
 because it is simply a depth
 measurement. Specifying & technique
 may also binder the development of
 site-specific techniques to reduce
 worker exposure. The EPA  believes that
 wetting agents are safer than foam
 blankets because foam blankets present
 a potential safety hazard. The foam traps
 the hydrogen gas and chromic acid mist-
 in the foam layer; if these gases build up
 and a spark is generated, a hydrogen
 explosion will result. As a means of
 encouraging wetting agent use over
 foam blankets, sources using wetting
 agents do not have to conduct a
 performance test unless they want to set
 a surface tension limit other than the
default value of 45 dynes/cm. The EPA
believes that the compliance timeframes
in the final rule will allow sources that
currently use foam blankets the
opportunity to explore the use of
wetting agents. Sources that wish to
continue using foam blankets will be
required to conduct a performance test.

5. Frequency of Monitoring Associated
With Fume Suppressants
  There were over 20 comments related
to the frequency of monitoring surface
tension. Several of these commenters
made recommendations for alternate
monitoring schedules, ranging from
daily to monthly monitoring, in place of
the 4-hour schedule. Among the reasons
cited for decreasing the surface tension
monitoring frequency were that surface
tension does not change on a daily or
weekly basis, measuring surface tension
is very time-consuming and could
require someone full-time if there were
multiple tanks, and frequent monitoring
results in increased worker exposure.
  Thirteen commenters provided
remarks regarding the burden of hourly
testing for sources using foam blankets.
The commenters noted that foam
blankets that are used according to
manufacturer's instructions are
designed to last 24 hours provided the
air is not agitated at the surface near the
anodes and freeboard height is
adequate. Therefore, visual observation
is adequate for determining foam
blanket effectiveness. Other commenters
stated that the excessive monitoring
requirements for foam blankets
discourage their use, yet several States
recommend or require foam blankets
with less testing and recordkeeping than
that proposed by the EPA.
  In response to comments and some
data received, the EPA recognizes that
the 4-hour surface tension monitoring
frequency specified in the proposed rule
may be burdensome, and in some cases,
unnecessary. The EPA has insufficient
data, however, to establish the
monitoring frequency that is appropriate
for each mode of bath operation.
Therefore, the final rule allows a
decrease in monitoring frequency if no
exceedances occur. Section
63.343(c)(5)(ii)(B) specifies that the
surface tension be measured once every
4-hours of tank operation for the first 40
hours of tank operation after the
compliance, date. If no exceedances •
occur, monitoring can occur once every
8 hours of tank operation. Once^here
are again no exceedances during 40
hours of tank operation, surface tension
measurement may be conducted once
every 40 hours of tank operation on an
on-going basis, until an exceedance
occurs. Once an exceedance of the

-------
 4960
Federal  Register /  Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday,  January 25. 1995 / Rules  and  Regulations
 standard occurs or the electroplating
 soluLion is changed out. the original
 monitoring schedule must be resumed
   Likewise, the final rule contains
 allowances to decrease the frequency of
 monitoring foam blanket thickness. The
 proposed hourly frequency is based on
 the EPA's experience that foam blankets
 can deplete quickly and must be closely
 monitored. The final rule is unchanged"
 in that sources using a foam blanket
 must conduct a performance test, and
 the initial monitoring frequency is once
 per hour. However, as with wetting
 agents, the final rule allows a decrease
 in monitoring frequeficy if no
 exceedances occur. Section
 63.343{c)(5)(ii)(B) specifies that the
 foam blanket thickness be measured
 once every hour of tank operation for
 the first 40 hours of tank operation after
 the compliance date. If no exceedances
 occur, the time between monitoring may
 be increased to once every 4  hours of
 tank operation. Once there are  no
 exceedances during 40 hours of tank
 operation, foam blanket thickness
 measurement may be conducted once
 every 8 hours of tank operation on an
 on-going basis. As with wetting agents,
 if there is an exceedance or if the
 electroplating bath is changed out, the
 original monitoring schedule must be
 resumed.
                                  •*
 I. Selection of Test Methods
   Three commenters requested that
 CARS Method 425 be evaluated for
 equivalency, and if determined to be
 equivalent, be identified as such in the
 rule. These commenters also stated that
 sources that have performed this test
 should not have to retest. Four
 commenters  asked whether retesting
-will be required if sources have
 conducted performance tests previously
 using 306, 306A, or an equivalent test
 method.
   Section 63.344(c)(2) identifies the
 conditions under which the CARB
 Method 42-5 is considered equivalent.
 Basically, the acceptability of this test
 method will  depend upon the analysis
 rather than the sampling train or
 sampling procedure. Regarding the issue
 of whether retesting is required,
 §63.344(b) of the final rule outlines  the
 criteria that must be met for a previous
 source test to be acceptable.
   Two commenters requested that the
 rule provide  guidance on how to verify
 compliance when both chromium
 anodizing and hard chromium
 electroplating tanks are vented to a
 comiaan control device. Three
 commenteis pointed out that the
 regulation does not account for the
 situation in which chromium
 electroplating sources share a
                             ventilation system with nonchromium
                             sources that could introduce dilution
                             air Three commenters noted that it is
                             extremely difficult to reconfigure some
                             existing systems in such a way that only
                             the emissions from chromium
                             electroplating or anodizing are tested.
                               There are basically two situations
                             involving multiple tanks manifolded to '
                             one control system: (1) The multiple
                             tanks include a chromium electroplating
                             or chromium anodizing tank among
                             other tanks not affected by the rule; or
                             (2) the multiple tanks include
                             chromium tanks performing different
                             operations (e.g..electroplating and
                             anodizing) or hard chromium tanks
                             subject to different emission limits (e.g.,
                             a new tank and an existing small tank),
                             which may or may not be controlled
                             with nonaffected sources. Section
                             63.344(e) of the final rule includes
                             compliance provisions for both of these
                             situations.
                             J. Selection of Reporting and
                             Recordkeeping Requirements
                               Several commenters stated that the
                             frequency of recordkeeping and
                             reporting outlined in  the proposed rule
                             was overly burdensome and suggested
                             several alternatives. Seven commenters
                             stated that the types of recordkeeping
                             required by the rule are inappropriate.
                             In general, the commenters remarked
                             that records, such as the amount  of
                             chemicals used and purchased and the
                             amount of fume suppressant material
                             added do not indicate compliance. Two
                             commenters stated that recordkeeping
                             requirements be limited to only surface
                             tension measurements because that
                             measurement is the basis of compliance.
                             One commenter indicated there is no
                             environmental benefit to keeping
                             records of gas velocities, pressure drops,
                             washdown conditions, and scrubber
                             water chromium concentrations.  Two
                             commenters stated that maintaining
                             records at a facility for 5 years is
                             excessive; a more appropriate length of
                             time would be 3 years. One commenter
                             suggested a minimum of 2 years.
                               Two commenters suggested that the
                             reporting schedule be replaced with a
                             requirement that the source submit an
                             annual certification that necessary
                             control parameters have been met,
                             consistent with the annual certification
                             requirements of title V. Another
                             commenter indicated that sources
                             should not be required to submit
                             compliance reports if the source's
                             permitting agency inspects the onsite
                             records annually. Finally, one
                             commenter suggested that the rule allow
                             a reduced reporting frequency after 2
                             years if sources do not experience
exceedances of any State or Federal
emission standards
  Seven commenters stated that the
costs associated with the monitoring
and recordkeeping constituted an
unnecessary burden to both large and
small facilities. These commenters also
noted that the EPA underestimated the
costs associated with monitoring,
reporting, and recordkeeping. Two of
the commenters stated that small
businesses do not have the resources to
keep extensive records. Another
commenter pointed out that the EPA has
recognized differences in large and
small facilities in selecting MACT
emission standards and should also
recognize differences between large and
small facilities in selecting reporting.
recordkeeping, and permitting
requirements.
  To respond to comments received and
to reduce the burden on the many area
sources that will be subject to these
standards, the monitoring, reporting,
and recordkeeping requirements have
been reduced in the final rule to the
extent possible while still providing the
EPA with the ability to determine a
source's continuous compliance status.
The recordkeeping requirements are
contained in § 63.346 of the final rule.
The EPA concurs that the records
required to be kept should correspond
specifically to that which  is required to
demonstrate compliance. As such,
recordkeeping associated with fume
suppressants requires only that sources
maintain records of the dale and time of
surface  tension or foam blanket
thickness measurements, as appropriate,
the value measured, and the date and
time of additions of fume suppressant  to
the bath. Likewise, the recordkeeping
associated with the add-on air pollution
control devices is reduced to the extent
that the monitoring requirements have
been reduced. Sources will have to keep
records  of pressure drop and velocity
pressure, as appropriate, as well as
records  to document adherence with the
O&M plan required by § 63.342(f)(3).
  The final rule is unchanged from
proposal in that it requires that owners
or operators of affected sources maintain
records  for a period of 5 years following
each occurrence, measurement,
maintenance, corrective action, report,
or record. This requirement is consistent
with the General Provisions and with
the title V permit program. The EPA
believes retention of records for 5 years
allows the EPA to establish a source's
history and pattern of compliance for
purposes of determining the appropriate
level of enforcement action.
  The final rule also requires
submission of on-going compliance
status reports to document whether a

-------
         Federal Register  /  Vol.  60.  No. 16  /  Wednesday,  January 25. 1995 / Rules  and Regulations    4961
source has been in continuous
compliance wiLh the standards. The
final rule contains different reporting
schedules for major and area sources.
Major sources are required to submit on-
going compliance status reports
semiannually, unless an exceedance
occurs, at which time quarterly reports
would be required. This change is
analogous to the requirements of the .
final General Provisions, which had
only been proposed at the time of this
proposed rulemaking.
  In an effort to reduce the burden  on
area sources, the final rule allows area
sources to complete an annual
compliance report, and allows the
source to maintain the report on site, to
be. made  available to the Administrator
or permitting authority upon request.
The EPA recognizes that many
permitting authorities may not be
equipped to handle reports from area
sources, and that these sources may not
be the sources of primary concern to the
authority. However, the requirements in
the final  rule do not alleviate affected
area sources from complying with the
reporting requirements of State or
Federal operating permit programs
under title V. The rule does require that
area sources submit reports
semiannually if exceedances occur, or if
required  by the Administrator or
permitting authority.
  Sources using a trivalent chromium
bath are only required to keep records
of the bath ingredients purchased. These
sources must submit an initial
notification and notification of
compliance status, but are not required
to submit on-going compliance status
reports.
  As a result of the reduced monitoring,
reporting, and recordkeeping in the final
rule compared to the proposed rule, the
costs of these activities have also been
reduced. A comparison of the  cost-of the
monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping associated with the final
and proposed rules was presented in
section UI.B of this preamble for each of
the regulated source categories.
  One commenter requested that the
rule clearly state which sections of the
General Provisions apply to chromium
electroplating sources and which do not
apply. To eliminate confusion
concerning the applicability of the
General Provisions to this source
category. Table 1 of subpart N lists
which of the General Provisions to  part
63 apply and which do not apply to
affected sources.

K. Operating Permit Program
  Eleven commenters stated that area
sources should not be required to obtain
title V operating permits because the
costs for area sources to obtain title V
permits would be overly burdensome.
and the emissions from these sources
may be insignificant. Three of these
commenters suggested that the rule
explicitly state that a permit is required
only for applicable emissions units at
nonmajor sources. Two commenters
asked that a general permit be included
in the final rule to reduce the burden for
small  facilities. Another commenter
stated that a title V permit is not
necessary because existing requirements
are enforceable through State and local
permits. This commenter and one other
commenter pointed out that because
area sources are not likely to be subject
to multiple MACT standards or to
employ emissions averaging and
complex alternate operating scenarios,
title V permits  do not benefit the area
sources.
  Two commenters stated that in
preparing their title V permit programs,
States did  not anticipate a need for
emission-unit specific permits  at
nonmajor sources, and inclusion of
nonmajor sources under title V will
require that many local agencies revise
their permit programs. Two other
commenters stated that States will not
have the resources for completing title
V permits for area sources; some states
have exempted nonmajor sources from
their permitting programs until the
nonmajor source permitting rule is
promulgated in the late 1990's.
  The EPA believes that requiring all
sources that are subject to the standards,
including area  sources, to  obtain title V
operating permits is important because
of the toxicity of chromium compounds
and the close proximity of many of
these sources to residential areas. The
EPA believes that permitting area
sources will not be overly burdensome
to permitting authorities and affected
sources for the reasons given below.
  First, many States are already
permitting these sources under their
State permit programs. The preamble to
the final part 70 rule states inat "some
nonmajor sources would already be
permitted at the State level, and
therefore would have some experience
with the permitting process and
completing permit applications."
Therefore, a State would have little
reason to defer title V permitting of
sources that already have State
operating permits. Second, the burden
may be reduced significantly by issuing
general permits to these sources.
According to the preamble to the final
part 70 rule, general permits "*  * *
provide an alternative means for
permitting sources for which the
procedures of the normal permitting
process would be overly burdensome,
such as area sources under section
112*  * *" Under this option. States _
would develop a single general permit
for this source category and issue it to
individual sources; or alternatively, a •
letter or certification may be used. The
burden would also be reduced by using
general permits because public
participation and the EPA and affected:"
State review is only  necessary when the.
initial general permit is drafted and
issued. When subsequent general
permits are issued to individual sources,
these activities are not required. Finally.
States are developing small business
assistance programs (SBAP's) to assist
these types of sources with the
permitting process that will be funded
using the annual fees collected from
permitted sources. Small businesses
may also be eligible  for reduced
permitting fees. Also, the EPA is
developing a guidance document,
scheduled to be completed by January
1995, which will include sample forms
for monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements.'and a simplified
general operating permit.
  Under title V, sources must include
information on all emission points
(except those considered insignificant
under the State or local permit program)
in their permit application. However,
only these emission  points that are
subject to regulation will be addressed
in the permit.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket
  The docket for this rulemaking is A-
8&-02. The docket is an organized and
complete file of all the information
submitted to or otherwise considered by
the EPA in the development of this
rulemaking. The principal purposes of
the docket are: (1) To allow interested
parties a means to identify and locate
documents so that they can effectively
participate in the rulemaking process;
and (2) to serve as the record in case of
judicial review (except for interagency
review materials) [section 307(d)(7)(A)
of the Act]. The docket is available for
public inspection at the EPA's Air and
Radiation Docket and Information
Center, the location  of which is given in
the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

B. Executive Order 12B66
  Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR
51735 (October 4.1993)], the  Agency
must determine whether the regulators1
action is "significant" and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:

-------
4962    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.  16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations
  (1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of SlOO million or more, or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
  (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
  (3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements,  grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the  rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
  (4) Raise  novel legal or policy issues
arising out  of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
  Pursuant to the terms of the Executive
Order 12866. the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has notified the EPA
that this action is a "significant
regulatory action" within the meaning
of the Executive Order.  For this reason,
this action was sent to OMB for review.
Changes made in response to OMB
suggestions or recommendations will be
documented in the public record.
C. Papenvork Reduction Act
  Information collection requirements
associated with this rule have been
approved by OMB under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.. and have been
assigned  OMB control number 2060-
0327. An Information Collection
Request (ICR) document has been
prepared by the EPA (ICR No. 1611.02)
Jo reflect the changed information
requirements of the final rule and has
been submitted to OMB for review. A
copy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer, Information Policy Branch,
EPA. 401 M Street. SVV.  (2136),
Washington. DC 20460,  or by calling
(202) 260-2740.
  The public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to
average 34 hours per respondent in the
first year, 117 hours per respondent in
the second year, and 297 hours per
respondent in the third  year. This
estimate includes the time required for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information. The burden is greatest in
the second and third years because this
is when performance tests will be
conducted.  An on-going burden of  104
hours per respondent is  representative
of the burden following  the third year.
  Send comments regarding the burden
estimate or  any other aspect of this
collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Chief. Information Policy Branch, EPA,
401 M Street, SVV. (2136), Washington,
DC 20460; and to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and  Budget,
Washington, DC 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA."

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
  The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be
performed for all rules that have
"significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities." If a
preliminary analysis indicates that a
proposed regulation would have a
significant economic impact on 20
percent or more of small entities, then
a regulatory flexibility analysis must be
prepared.
  Present Regulatory Flexibility Act
guidelines define an economic impact
as significant if it meets one of the
following criteria:
  (l) Compliance increases annual
production costs by more than 5
percent, assuming costs are passed on to
consumers;
  (2) Compliance costs as a percentage
of sales for small entities are at least 10
percent more than compliance costs as
a percentage of sales for large entities;
  (3) Capital costs of compliance
represent a "significant" portion of
capital available to small entities,
considering internal cash flow plus
external financial capabilities; or
  (4) Regulatory requirements are likely
to result in closures of small entities.
  Using the  Small Business
Administration's definition of a small
business for SIC  Code 3471 of less than
500 employees, it has been determined
that none of the above criteria are
triggered. In the hard chromium
electroplating source category, the
number of small businesses is estimated
to be 1,170. None of the regulatory
alternatives  considered will
significantly impact 20 percent of this
operation. For example, the estimated
number of closures is approximated as
less than 5 percent. Likewise, the
standards for decorative chromium
electroplaters and chromium anodizers
would not cause any of the above
criteria to be triggered.
  Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
605(b), I hereby certify that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
business entities because the number of
small business entities that would be
affected is not significant.

E. Miscellaneous
  In accordance with section 117 of the
Act, publication  of this promulgated
rule was preceded by consultation with
appropriate advisory committees,
independent experts, and Federal
departments and agencies.
  This regulation will be reviewed 8
years from the date of promulgation.
This review will include an assessment
of such factors as evaluation of the
residual health risks, any overlap with
other programs, the existence of
alternative methods, enforceability.
improvements in emission control
technology and health data, and the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9 and
63

  Environmental protection, Air
pollution control. Hazardous
substances, Incorporation by reference.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
  Dated: November 22, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

  For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, Chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as set
forth below.

PART 9—[AMENDED]

  1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
  Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 el seq.. 1235-136v;
15 U.S.C. 2001. 2003, 2005, 2006. 2601-267"l:
21 U.S.C. 331J. 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C 9701; 33 '
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.. 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1321,
1326.1330. 1344. 1345 (d) and (e), 1361: E.O.
11735. 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975;
Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b. 243, 2-16.
300f, 300g. 300g-l, 300g-2, 300g-3. 300g-4,
300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-1, 300J-2, 300|-3, 300J-
4. 300J-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-
7671q. 7542. 9601-9557. 11023, 1104S.

  2. Section 9.1 is amended by adding
a new entry to the table under the
indicated heading in numerical order to
read as follows:

§ 9.1  OMB approvals under the Paperwork
Reduction Act
      40 CFR citation
OMB con-
 trol No.
National Emission Standards
  for Hazardous Air Pollutants
  lor Source Categories:
63.345-53.3-57 	   2060-0327

-------
         Federal  Register  /  Vol. 60, No.  16 /"Wednesday, January  25,  1995  /  Rules and Regulations    4963
PART 63— {AMENDED]

  1. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
  Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
  2. Section 63.14 is amended by
adding paragraphs fb) (4) and (5) to read
as follows:

§63.14 Incorporation by reference.
  (4) ASTM D 1193-77, Standard
Specification for Reagent Water, IBR
approved for Method 306, section 4.1.1
and section 4.4.2, of appendix A to part
63.
  (5) ASTM D 1331-69, Standard Test
Methods for Surface and Interfacial
Tension of Solutions of Surface Active
•Agents, IBR approved for Method 306B,
section 2.2, section 3.1, and section 4.2,
of appendix A to part 63.
»    •     •    »     *
  3. By adding a new subpart N to read
as follows:
Subpart N — National Emission Standards
for Chromium Emissions From Hard and
Decorative Chromium Eisctroplating and
Chromium Anodizing Tanks
Sec.
63.340  Applicability and designation of
   sources.
63.341  Definitions and nomenclature.
63.342  Standards.
63.343  Compliance provisions.
63.344  Performance test requirements and
   test methods.
63.345  Provisions for new and
   reconstructed sources.
63.345  Recordkeeping requirements.
63.347  Reporting requirements.

Table 1 to Subpart N" of Part 63—
General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart N

Subpart  N — National Emission
Standards for Chromium Emissions
From Hard and Decorative Chromium
Electroplating and Chromium
Anodizing Tanks

§ 63.340  Applicability and designation of
sources.
  (a) The affected source to which the
provisions of this subpart apply is each
chromium electroplating or chromium
anodizing tank at facilities performing
hard chromium electroplating,
decorative chromium electroplating, or
chromium anodizing.
  (b) Owners or operators of affected
sources subject to the provisions of this
subpart must also comply with the
requirements of subpart A of this part,
according to the applicability of subpart
A of this part to such sources,  as
identified in Table  1 of this subpart.
  (c) Process tanks associated with a
chromium electroplating or chromium
anodizing process, but in which neither
chromium electroplating nor chromium
anodizing is taking place, are not subject
to the provisions of this subpart.
Examples of such tanks include, but are
not limited to; rinse tanks, etching
tanks, and cleaning tanks. Likewise,
tanks that contain a chromium solution,
but in which no electrolytic process
occurs, are not subject to this subpart.
An example of such a tank is a chrome
conversion coating tank where no
electrical current is applied.
  (d) Affected sources in which research
and laboratory operations are performed
are exempt from the provisions of this
subpart when such operations are taking
place.
  (e) The owner or operator of an
affected source subject to the
requirements of this subpart is required
to obtain a title V permit from the
permitting authority in which the
affected source is located.

§ 63".341  Definitions and nomenclature.
  (a) Definitions. Terms used in this
subpart are defined in the Act, in
subpart A of this part, or in this section.
For the purposes of subpart N of this
part, if the same term is defined in
subpart A of this part and in this
section, it shall have the meaning given
in this section.
  Add-on air pollution control device
means equipment installed in the
ventilation system of chromium
electroplating and anodizing tanks for
the purposes of collecting and
containing chromium emissions from
the tank(s).
  Air pollution control technique means
any method, such as an-add-on air
pollution control device  or a chemical
fume suppressant, that is used to reduce
chromium emissions from chromium
electroplating and chromium anodizing
tanks.
  Base metal means the metal or metal
alloy that comprises the workpiece.
  Bath component means the trade or
brand name of each component(s) in
trivalent chromium plating baths. For
trivalent chromium baths, the bath
composition is proprietary in most
cases. Therefore, the trade or brand
name for each component(s) can be
used; however, the chemical name of
the wetting agent contained in that
component must be identified..
  Chemical fume suppressant means
any chemical agent that reduces or
suppresses fumes  or mists at the surface
of an electroplating or anodizing bath;
another term for fume suppressant is
mist suppressant.
  Chromic acid means the common
name for chromium anhydride (CrO3).
  Chromium anodizing means the
electrolytic process by which an oxide
layer is produced on the surface of a
base metal for functional purposes (e.g.,
corrosion resistance or electrical
insulation) using a chromic acid
solution. In chromium anodizing, the
part to be anodized acts as the anode in
the electrical circuit, and the chromic
acid solution, with a concentration
typically ranging from 50 to 100 grains
p'er liter (g/L), serves as the electrolyte*
  Chromium electroplating or
chromium anodizing tank means the
receptacle or container in which hard or
decorative chromium electroplating or
chromium anodizing occurs.
  Composite mesh-pad system means
an add-on air pollution control device
typically consisting  of several mesh-pad
stages. The purpose  of the first stage is
to remove large particles. Smaller
particles are removed in the second
stage, which consists of the composite
mesh pad. A final stage may^emove any
reentrained particles not collected by
the composite mesh pad.
  Decorative chromium electroplating
means the process by which a thin layer
of chromium (typically 0.003 to 2.5
microns] is electrodeposited on a base
metal, plastic, or undercoating to
provide a bright surface with wear and
tarnish resistance. In this process, the
part(s) serves as the  cathode in the
electrolytic cell and  the solution serves
as the electrolyte. Typical current
density applied during this process
ranges from 540 to 2,400 Amperes  per
square meter (A/in1) for total plating
times ranging between 0.5 to 5 minutes.
  Electroplating or anodizing bath
means the electrolytic solution used as
the conducting medium in which the
flow of current is accompanied by
movement of metal ions for the
purposes of electroplating metal out of
the solution onto a workpiece  or for
oxidizing the base material.
  Emission limitation means, for the
purposes of this subpart, the
concentration of total chromium
allowed to be emitted expressed in
milligrams per dry standard cubic  meter
(mg/dscm), or the allowable surface
tension expressed in dynes per
centimeter (dynes/cm).
  Facility means the major or area
source at which chromium
electroplating or chromium anodizing is
performed.
  Fiber-bed mist eliminator means an
add-on air pollution control deVice that
removes contaminants from a gas stream
through the mechanisms of inertial
impaction and Brownian diffusion.
These devices are typically installed
downstream of another control device,
which serves to prevent plugging,  and

-------
4964    Federal Register  /  Vol.  60,  No. 16  /  Wednesday. January  25.  1995  /  Rules and  Regulations
 consist of one or more fiber beds. Each
 bed consists of a hollow cylinder
 formed from two concentric screens; the
 fiber between the screens may be
 fabricated from glass, ceramic plastic, or
 metal
   Foam blanket means the type of
 chemical fume suppressant that
 generates a  layer of foam across the
 surface of a solution  when current is
 applied to that solution.
   Fresh water means water, such as tap
 water, that has not been previously used
 in a process operation or, if the water
 has been recycled from a process
 operation, it has been treated  and meets
 the effluent guidelines for chromium
 wastewater.
   Hard chromium electroplating or
 industrial chromium electroplating
 means a process by which a thick layer
 of chromium (typically 1.3 to  760
 microns) is  electrodeposited on a base
 material to provide a surface with
 functional properties such as  wear
 resistance, a low coefficient of friction,
 hardness, and corrosion resistance. In
 this process, the part serves as the
 cathode in the electrolytic cell and the
 solution serves as the electrolyte. Hard
 chromium electroplating process is
 performed at current densities typically
 ranging from 1,600 to 6,500 A/m- for
 total plating times ranging from 20
 minutes to 36 hours depending upon
 the desired  plate thickness.
   Hexavalent chromium means the form
 of chromium in a valence state of -f 6.
   Large, hard chromium electroplating
 facility means a facility that performs
 hard chromium electroplating and has  a
 maximum cumulative potential rectifier
 capacity greater than or equal  to 60
 million ampere-hours per year (amp-hr/
 yr).
   Maximum cumulative potential
 rectifier capacity means the summation
 of the total installed rectifier capacity
 associated with the hard chromium
 electroplating tanks at a facility,
 expressed in amperes, multiplied by the
 maximum potential operating schedule
 of 8,400 hours per year and 0.7, which
 assumes that electrodes are energized 70
 percent of the total operating time. The
 maximum potential operating schedule
 is based on operating 24 hours per day,
 7 days per week, 50 weeks per year.
   Operating parameter value means a
 minimum or maximum value
 established  for a control device or
 process parameter which, if achieved by
 itself or in combination with one or
 more other operating parameter values,
 determines that an owner or operator is
ini coDtsnaai compliance with  the
applicable emission limitation or
standard.
  Packed-bed scrubber means an add-on
air pollution control device consisting
of a single or double packed bed that
contains packing media on which the
chromic acid droplets impinge. The
packed-bed section of the scrubber is
followed by a mist eliminator to remove
any water entrained from the packed-
bed section
  Research or laboratory operation
means an operation whose primary
purpose is for research and
development of new processes and
products, that is conducted under the
close supervision of technically trained
personnel, and that'is not involved in
the manufacture of products for
commercial sale in commerce, except in
a de minimis manner.
  Small, hard chromium electroplating
facility means a facility that performs
hard chromium electroplating and has a
maximum cumulative potential rectifier
capacity less than 60 million amp-hr/yr.
  StaJagmometer means a device used
to measure the surface tension of a
solution.
  Surface tension means the property,
due to molecular forces,  that exists in
the surface film of all liquids and tends
to prevent liquid from spreading.
  Tank operation means the time in
which current and/or voltage is being
applied to a chromium electroplating
tank or a chromium anodizing tank.
  Tensiometer means a device used to
measure the surface tension of a
solution.
  Trivalent chromium means the form
of chromium in a  valence state of +3.
  Trivalent chromium process means
the process used for electrodeposition of
a thin layer of chromium onto a base
material using a trivalent chromium
solution instead of a chromic acid
solution.
  Wetting agent means the type of
chemical fume suppressant that reduces
the surface tension of a liquid.
  fb) Nomenclature. The nomenclature
used in this subpart has the following
meaning:
  (1) AMR=the allowable mass emission
rate from each type of affected source
subject to the same emission limitation
in milligrams per  hour (mg/hr).
  (2) AMR,y,=the  allowable mass
emission rate from affected sources
controlled by an add-on air pollution
control device controlling emissions
from multiple sources in mg/hr.
  (3) EL=the applicable emission
limitation from § 63.342  in milligrams
per dry standard cubic meter (mg/
dscm).
  (4) lAlotmj=the sum of all inlet duct
areas from both affected and nonaffected
sources in meters  squared.
  (5) IDA,=the total inlet area for all
ducts associated with affected so^irces
in meters squared
  (6) IDA,.J=the total inlet duct area for
al! ducts conveying chromic acid from
each type of affected source performing
the same operation, or each type of
affected source subject to the same
emission limitation in meters squared.
  (7) VR=the total of ventilation rates
for each type of affected source subject
to the same emission limitation in dry
standard cubic meters per minute
(dscm/min).
  (8) VRmi«,=the total ventilation rate
from all inlet ducts associated with
affected sources in dscm/min.
  (9) VRiniel.a=the total ventilation rate
from all inlet ducts conveying chromic
acid from each type of affected source
performing the same operation, or each
type of affected source subject to the
same emission limitation in dscm/rnin.
  (10) VR,o<=the average total ventilation
rate for the three test runs as determined
at the outlet by means of the Method
306 in appendix A of this part testing in
dscm/min.

§ 63.342  Standards.
  (a) Each owner or operator of an
affected source subject to the provisions
of this subpart shall comply with these
requirements on and after the
compliance dates specified in
§ 63.343(a). All affected sources arc
regulated by applying maximum
achievable control technology.
  (b) Applicability of emission limits.
(1) The emission.limitations in this
section apply only during tank
operation, and also apply during
periods of startup  and shutdown as
these are routine occurrences for
affected sources subject to this subpart.
The emission limitations do not apply
during periods of malfunction, but the
work practice standards that address
operation and maintenance and that are
required by paragraph (f) of this section
must be followed during malfunctions.
  (2) If an owner or operator is
controlling a group of tanks with a
common add-on air pollution control
device, the emission limitations of
paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this
section apply whenever any one
affected source is operated. The
emission limitation that applies to the
group of affected sources is:
  (i) The emission limitation identified
in paragraphs (c),  (d), and (e) of this
section if the affected sources are
performing the same type of operation
(e.g., hard chromium electroplating), are
subject to the same emission limitation,
and are not controlled by an add-on air
pollution control device  also controlling
nonaffected sources;

-------
         Federal Register / Vo.  60.  No  16  /  Wednesday.  January 25,  1995  • Rules and  Regulations    4965
  (ii) The emission limitation calculated
according to § 63 344(e)(3) if affected
iources are performing the same type of
operation, are subject to the same
emission limitation, and are controlled
with an add-on air pollution control
device that is also controlling
nonaffected sources; and
  (iii) The emission limitation
calculated according to § 53.34-S(e)(4) if
affected sources are performing different
types of operations, or affected sources
are performing the same operations but
subject to different emission limitations.
and are controlled with an add-on air
pollution control device that may also
be controlling emissions from
nonaffected sources
  (c)(l) Standards for hard chromium
electroplating tanks. During tank
operation, each owner or operator of an
existing, new. or reconstructed affected
source shall control chromium
emissions discharged  to the atmosphere
from that affected source by not
allowing the concentration of total
chromium in the exhaust gas stream
discharged to the atmosphere to exceed:
  (i) 0.015 milligrams of total chromium
per dry standard cubic meter (mgAdscm)
of ventilation air (6.6x10 ~6 grains per
dry standard cubic foo: [gr/dscf]);  or
  '(ii) 0.03 mg/dscm (1.3xlO~3 gr/dscf) if
the hard chromium electroplating tank
is an existing affected source and is
located at a small, hard chromium
electroplating facility.
  (2)(i) An owner or operator mav
demonstrate the size of a hard
chromium electroplating facility-
through the definitions Li §63.341(a).
Alternatively, an owner or operator of a
facility with a maximum cumulative
potential rectifier capacity of 60 million
amp-hr/yr or more may be considered
small if the actual cumulative rectifier
capacity is less than 60 million amp-hr/
yr as demonstrated  using the following
procedures:
  (A) If records show  that the facility's
previous annual actual rectifier capacity
was less than 60 million amp-hr/yr, by
using nonresettable ampere-hr meters
and keeping monthly  records of actual
ampere-hr usage for each 12-month
rolling period following the compliance
date in accordance with § 63.346(b)(12).
The actual cumulative rectifier capacity
for the previous 12-month rolling period
shall be tabulated monthly by adding
the capacity  for the current month to the
capacities for the previous 11 months;
or
  (B) By accepting a Federally-
enforceable limit on the maximum
cumulative potential rectifier capacity
of a hard chromium electroplating
facility through the title V permit
required by § 63.340(e). and by
maintaining monthly records in
accordance with § 63 346(b)(12) to
demonstrate that the limit has not been
exceeded The actual cumulative
rectifier capacity for the previous 12-
month rolling period shall be tabulated
monthly by adding the capacity for the
current month to the capacities for the
previous 11 months
  (ii) Once the monthly records
required to be kept by § 63.346(b)(12)
and by this paragraph show that the
actual" cumulative rectifier capacity over
the previous 12-month rolling period
corresponds to the large designation, the
owner or operator is subject to the
emission limitation identified in
paragraph (c)(l)(i) of this section, in
accordance with the compliance
schedule of §63.343(a)(5).
  (d) Standards for decorative
chromium electroplating tanks using n
chromic acid bath and chromium
anodizing tanks. During tank operation.
each owner or operator of an existing.
new, or reconstructed affected source
shall control chromium emissions
discharged to the atmosphere from that
affected source by either:
  (1) Not allowing the concentration of
total chromium in the exhaust gas
stream discharged to the atmosphere to
exceed 0.01 mg/dscm (4.4xlO~° gr/
dscf); or
  (2) If a chemical fume suppressant
containing a wetting agent is used, by
not allowing the surface tension of the
electroplating or anodizing bath
contained within the affected source to
exceed 45 dynes per centimeter (dynes/
crn) (3.1xlO-J pound-force per foot [lb;V
ft]) at any time during operation of the
tank.
  (e) Standards for decorative
chromium electroplating tanks using a
trivalent chromium bath. (1) Each owner
or operator of an existing, new, or
reconstructed decorative chromium
electroplating tank that uses a trivalent
chromium bath that incorporates  a
wetting agent as a bath  ingredient is
subject to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements of
§§63.346(b)(14) and 63.347(i). but are
not subject to the work practice
requirements of paragraph (f) of this
section, or the continuous compliance
monitoring requirements in § 63.343(c).
The wetting agent must be an ingredient
in the trivalent chromium bath
comoonents purchased from vendors.
  (2} Each owner or operator of an
existing, new, or reconstructed
decorative chromium electroplating
tank that uses a trivalent chromium bath
that does not incorporate  a wetting
agent as a bath  ingredient is subject to
the standards of paragraph (d) of  this
section.
  (3) each owner or operator of existing.
new, or reconstructed decorative
chromium electroplating tank that had
been using a trivalent chromium bath
that incorporates a wetting agent and
ceases using this type of bath must  •
fulfill the reporting requirements of
§ 63.347(i)(3) and comply with the
applicable emission limitation within
the timeframe specified in
§63.343(a)(7)
  (f) Work practice standards. The work
practice standards of this  section
address'operation and maintenance
practices. All owners or operators
subject to the standards in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of this section are subject  to
these work practice standards.
  (l)(i) At all times, including periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction,
owners or operators shall  operate and
maintain any affected source, including
associated air pollution control devices
and monitoring equipment, in a manner
consistent with good air pollution
control practices, consistent with the
operation and maintenance plan
required by paragraph (f){3) of this
section.
  (ii) Malfunctions shall be corrected as
soon as practicable after their
occurrence in accordance with the
operation and maintenance plan
required by paragraph (f)(3) of this
section.
  (iii) Operation and maintenance
requirements established  pursuant to
section 112 of the Act are enforceable
independent of emissions limitations or
other requirements in relevant
standards.
  (2)(i) Determination of whether
acceptable operation and maintenance
procedures are being used will be based
on information  available to the
Administrator, which may include, but
is not limited to, monitoring results;
review of the operation and
maintenance plan, procedures, and
records; and inspection of the source.
  (ii) Based on the results of a
determination made under paragraph
(f)(2)(i) of this section, the
Administrator may require that an
owner or operator of an affected source
make changes to the operation and
maintenance plan required by paragraph
(f)(3) of this  section for that source.
Revisions may be required if the
Administrator finds that the plan:
  (A) Does not address a malfunction
that has occurred;
  (B) Fails to provide for the operation
of the affected source, the air pollution
control techniques, or the control
system and process monitoring
equipment during a malfunction in a
manner consistent with good air
pollution control practices; or

-------
4966    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.  16 / Wednesday, January  25,  1995  /  Rules and Regulations
  (C) Does not provide adequate
procedures for correcting
malfunctioning process equipment, air
pollution control techniques, or
monitoring equipment as quickly as
practicable.
  (3) Operation and maintenance plan.
(i) The owner or operator of an affected
source subject to the work practices of
paragraph (f) of this section shall
prepare an operation and maintenance
plan to be implemented no later than
the compliance date. The plan shall be
incorporated by reference into the
source's title V permit and shall include
the following elements:
  (A) The plan shall specify the
operation and maintenance criteria for
the affected  source, the add-on air
pollution control device (if such a
device is used to comply with the
emission limits), and the process and
control system monitoring equipment,
and shall include a standardized
checklist to  document the operation and
maintenance of this equipment;
  (B) For sources using an add-on air
pollution control device or monitoring
equipment to comply with this subpart,
the plan shall incorporate the work
practice standards for that device or
monitoring equipment, as identified in
Table 1 of this section, if the specific
equipment used is identified in Table 1
of this section;
  (C) If the specific equipment used is
not identified in Table 1 of this section,
the plan shall incorporate proposed
work practice standards. These
proposed work practice standards shall
be submitted to the Administrator for
approval as  part of the submittal
required under §63.343(d);
  (D) The plan shall specify procedures
to be followed to ensure that equipment
or process malfunctions due to poor
maintenance or other preventable
conditions do not occur; and
  (E) The plan shall include a
systematic procedure for identifying
 malfunctions of process equipment,
 add-on air pollution control devices,
 and process and control system
 monitoring equipment and for
 implementing corrective actions to
 address such malfunctions.
   (ii) If the operation and maintenance
 plan fails to address or inadequately
 addresses an event that meets the
 characteristics of a malfunction at the
 time the plan is initially developed, the
 owner or operator shall revise the
 operation and maintenance plan within
 45 days after such an event occurs. The
 revised plan shall include procedures
 for operating and maintaining the
 process equipment, add-on air pollution
 control device, or monitoring equipment
'"3uring similar malfunction events, and
 a program for corrective action for such
 events.
   (iii) Recordkeeping associated with
 the operation and maintenance plan is
 identified in §63.346(b). Reporting
 associated with the operation and
 maintenance plan is identified in
 § 63.347 (g)  and (h) and paragraph
 (f)(3){iv) of this section.
   (iv) If actions taken by the owner or
 operator during periods of malfunction
 are inconsistent with the procedures
 specified in the operation and
 maintenance plan required by paragraph
 (f)(3)(i) of this section, the owner or
 operator shall record the actions taken
 for that event and shall report such
 actions within 2 working  days after
 commencing actions inconsistent with
 the plan. This report shall be followed
 by a letter within 7 working days after
 the end of the event, unless the owner
 or operator makes alternative reporting
 arrangements, in advance, with the
 Administrator.
   (v) The owner or operator shall keep
 the written operation and maintenance
 plan on record after it is developed to
 be made available for inspection, upon
 request, by the Administrator for the life
 of the affected source or until the source
is no longer subject to the provisions of
this subpart. In addition, if the
operation and maintenance plan is
revised, the owner or operator shall
keep previous (i.e., superseded) versions
of the operation and maintenance plan
on record to be made available for
inspection, upon request, by the
Administrator for a period of 5 years
after each revision to the plan.
  (vi) To satisfy the requirements of
paragraph (f)(3) of this section, the
owner or operator may use applicable
standard operating procedure (SOP)
manuals, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) plans, or
other existing plans, provided the
alternative plans meet the requirements
of this section.
  (g) The standards in this section that
apply to chromic acid baths shall not be
met by using a reducing agent to change
the form of chromium from hexavalent
to trivalent.

§63.343  Compliance provisions.
  (a) Compliance dates. (1) The owner
or operator of an existing affected source
shall comply with the emission
limitations in § 63.342 as follows:
  (i) No later than 1 year after January
25, 1995, if the affected source is a
decorative chromium electroplating
tank; and
  (ii) No later than 2 years after January
25, 1995, if the affected source is a hard
chromium electroplating tank or a
chromium anodizing tank.
  (2) The owner or operator of a new or
reconstructed affected source that has
an initial startup after January 25, 1995.
shall comply immediately upon startup
of the source. The owner or operator of
a new or reconstructed affected source
that has an initial startup after
December 16, 1993 but before January
25, 1995, shall follow the compliance
schedule of § 63.6(b) (3) and (4).
                         TABLE 1 TO §63.342.—SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS
Control technique
Composite mesh-pad (CMP) sys-
tem.
Packed-bed scrubber (PSB) 	
Work practice standards
1. Visuafly inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chronic acid
buildup on the pads, and no evidence of chemical attack on the structural integ-
rity of the device.
2. Visualry inspect back portion of the mesh pad closest to the fan to ensure there
is no breakthrough of chromic acid mist.
3. Visualry inspect ductwork from tank to the control device to ensure there are no
leaks.
4. Perform washdown of the composite mesh-pads in accordance with manufac-
turers recommendations.
1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chromic acid
buildup on the packed beds, and no evidence ol chemical attack on the struc-
tural integrity ol the device.
2. Visually inspect back portion ol the chevron blade mist eliminator to ensure that
it is dry and there is no breakthrough of chromic acid misL
3. Same as number 3 above 	
Frequency
1. I/quarter.
2. 1/quarter.
3. 1/quarter.
4. Per manufacturer
1. I/quarter.
2. 1/quarter
3. I/quarter

-------
         Federal Register  /  Vol. 60. No. 16  X Wednesday. January 25,  1995  /  Rules  and  Regulations    496

                   TABLE 1 TO §63.342.—SUMMARY OF Woftx PRACTICE STANDARDS—Continued
      Control technique
                        Work practice standards
                                                                                                        Frequency
                             4. Add fresh makeup-water to the -top oHhe packed bed ** _..
PBS/CMP system 	
Fiber-tied mist eliminatorc
t Same as (or CMP system	
2. Same -as for CMP system	
3. Same as for CMP system _	_
4. Same as for CMP system .
Air   pollution  control  device
  (APCD) not fisted in rute.
1. VisuaBy inspect fiber-bed unfi and prefiftering device to ensure there is proper
  drainage, no chromic acid buildup in the units, and no evidence oi chemical at-
  tack on the structural integrity ci the devices.
2. Visually inspect ductwork  from tank or tanks to the control device to ensure
  there are no leaks.
3. Perform washdcwn cf fiber elements in accordance with manufacturers rec-
  ommendations.
To be proposed by the source for approval by the Administrator	„	
                   4. Whenever makeup is
                    added.
                   1. 1/quarter.
                   2. Uquaner.
                   3. I/quarter.
                   4. Per manufacturer.
                   1.1/quarter.
                   2. 1/quarter.

                   3. Per manufaciurer.

                   To be proposed by the
                    source tor approval
                    by the Administrator.
                                                  Monitoring Equipment
Pilot tube	
Stalagmometer	
Backflush with water, or remove from the duct arxJ rinse with fresh water. Replace
  in the duct and rotate 180 degrees to ensure that the same zero reading is ob-
  tained.  Check pilot tube ends for damage. Replace  pilot tube if cracked or fa-
  tigued.
Follow manufacturers recommendations	:	,	_	::_	
                   1/quarter
  •If greater than 50 percent ol the scrubber water is drained fe.g., for maintenance purposes), makeup water may be added to tne scrubber
basin.
  b For horizoniaf-flow scrubbers, top is defined as the section of the unit directly above the packing media such that the makeup water would
flow perpendicular to the air flow through the packing. For vertical-flow unite, the top is defined as the area downstream of the packing maleriai
such that the makeup water would flow countercurrent to the air How through the unit.
  < Work practice standarcs for the control -device instated upstream o< the -fiber-bed mist eliminator to prevent plugging da not appry as long as
the work practice standards for the fioer-bed unit are followed.                 -
  (3) The owner or operator of an
existing area source that increases actual
or potential emissions of hazardous air
pollutants such that the area source
becomes a major source must comply
with the provisions for existing major
sources,  including the reporting
provisions of § 63.34~(g), immediately
upon becoming a major source.
  (4) The owner or operator of a new
area source  (i.e., an area source for
which construction or reconstruction
was commenced after December 16,
1993) that increases actual or potential
emissions of hazardous air pollutants
such that the area source becomes a
major source must comply with the
provisions for new major sources,
immediately upon becoming a major
source.
  (5) An owner or operator of an
existing hard chromium electroplating
tank or tanks located at a small, hard
chromium electroplating facility that
increases its maximum cumulative
potential rectifier capacity, or its actual
cumulative  rectifier capacity, such that
the facility becomes a large, hard
chromium electroplating facility must
comply with the requirements of
§ 63.342(c}(l)[i) for all hard chromium
electroplating tanks at-the facility no
later than 1  yearafter the month in
which-morithly records required by
           §§ 63.342(c)(2) and 63.346(b)(12) show
           that the large designation is met
             (6) Request for an extension of
           compliance. An owner or operator of an
           affected source  or sources that requests
           an extension of compliance shall do so
           in accordance with this paragraph and
           the applicable paragraphs of § 63.6(i).
           When the owner or operator is
           requesting the extension for more than
           one affected source located at the
           facility, then only one request may be
           submitted for all affected sources at the
           facility.
             (i) The owner or operator of an
           existing affected source who is unable to
           comply with a relevant standard under
           this subpart may request that  the
           Administrator (or a State, when the
           State has an approved part 70 permit
           program and the source is required to
           obtain a part 70 permit under that
           program, or a State, when the State has
           been delegated  the authority to
           implement and  enforce the emission
           standard for that source] grant an
           extension allowing the owner or
           operator up to 1 additional year to
           comply with the standard for  the
           affected source. The owner or operator
           of an affected source who has requested
           an extension of compliance under this
           paragraph and is otherwise required to
           obtain a title V permit for the  source
           shall apply for such permit or apply to
havethe title V permit revised to
incorporate-the conditions of the
extension of compliance. The
conditions of an extension of
compliance granted under this
paragraph will be incorporated into the
owner or operator's title V permit for thn
affected source(s) according to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 70 or 4 0 CFR
part 71, whichever is applicable.
  (ii) Any request under this paragraph
for an extension of compliance with a
relevant  standard shall be submitted in
writing to the appropriate authority not
later than 6 months before the affected
source's  compliance date as specified in
this section.
  (7) An owner or operator of a
decorative chromium electroplating
tank that uses a trivalent chromium bath
that incorporates a wetting agent, and
that ceases using the trivalent chromium
process,  must comply with the emission
limitation now applicable to the tank
within 1 year of switching bath
operation.
  (b) Methods to demonstrate initial
compliance. (Ij Except as provided in
paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this
section, an owner or operator of an
affected source subject to the
requirements -of this subpart is required
to conduct an initial performance test as
required under § 63.7. using the

-------
4968    Federal Register  /  Vol.  60, No. 16  /  Wednesday,  January 25,  1995 / Rules and  Regulations
procedures and test methods listed in
•§63.7 and §63.344.
  (2) If the owner or operator of an
affected source meets all of the
following criteria, an initial
performance test is not required to be
conducted under this subpart:
  (i) The affected source is a decorative
chromium electroplating tank or a
chromium anodizing tank; and
  (ii) A wetting agent is used in the
plating or anodizing bath to inhibit
chromium emissions from the affected
source; and
  (iii) The owner or operator complies
with the applicable surface tension limit
of § 63.342(d)(2) as demonstrated
through the  continuous compliance
monitoring required by paragraph
(c)(5)(ii) of this section.
  (3) If the affected source is a
decorative chromium electroplating
tank using a trivalent chromium bath,
and the owner or operator is subject to
the provisions of § 63.342(e). an initial
performance test is not required to be
conducted under this subpart.
  (c) Monitoring to demonstrate
continuous compliance. The owner or
operator of an affected source subject to
the emission limitations of this subpart
shall conduct monitoring according to
the type of air pollution control
technique that is used to comply with
the emission limitation. The monitoring
required to demonstrate continuous
compliance  with the emission
limitations is identified in this section
for the air pollution control techniques
expected to be used by the owners or
operators of affected sources.
  (1) Composite mesh-pad systems, (i)
During the initial performance  test, the
owner or operator of an affected source,
or a group of affected sources under
common control, complying with the
emission limitations in § 63.342 through
the use of a composite mesh-pad system
shall determine the outlet chromium
concentration using the test methods
and procedures in § 63.344(c). and shall
establish as a site-specific operating
parameter the pressure drop across the
system, setting the value that
corresponds to compliance with the
applicable emission limitation, using
the procedures in § 63.344(d)(5). An
owner or operator may conduct multiple
performance tests to establish a range of
compliant pressure drop values, or may
set as the compliant value the average
pressure drop measured over the three
test runs of one performance test and
accept ±1 inch of water column from
this value as the compliant range.
  (ii) On and after the date on which the
initial performance test is required to be
completed under § 63.7, the owner or
operator of an affected source, or group
of affected sources under common
control, shall monitor and record the
pressure drop across the composite
mesh-pad system once each day that
any affected source is operating. To be
in compliance with the standards, the
composite mesh-pad  system shall be
operated within ±1 inch of water
column of the pressure drop value
established during the initial
performance test, or shall be operated
within the range of compliant values for
pressure drop established during
multiple performance tests.
  (2) Packed-bed scrubber systems, (i)
During the initial performance test, the
owner or operator of an affected source,
or group of affected sources under
common control, complying with the
emission limitations in § 63.342 through
the use of a packed-bed scrubber system
shall determine the outlet chromium
concentration using the procedures in
§ 63.344(c), and shall establish as site-
specific operating parameters the
pressure drop across the system and the
velocity pressure at the common inlet of
the control device, setting the value that
corresponds to compliance with the
applicable emission limitation using the
procedures in § 63.344(d) (4) and (5). An
owner or operator may conduct multiple
performance tests to establish a range of
compliant operating parameter  values.
Alternatively, the owner or operator
may set as the compliant value  the
average pressure drop and inlet velocity
pressure measured over the three test
runs of one performance test, and accept
±1 inch of water  column from the
pressure drop value and ±10 percent
from the velocity pressure value as the
compliant range.
  (ii) On and after the date on which the
initial performance test is required to be
completed under §63.7. the owner or
operator of an affected source, or group
of affected sources under common
control, shall monitor and record the
velocity pressure at the inlet to  the
packed-bed scrubber and the pressure
drop across the scrubber system once
each day that any affected source is
operating. To be in compliance  with the
standards, the scrubber system shall be
operated within ±10 percent of  the
velocity pressure value established
during the initial performance test, and
within ±1 inch of water column of the
pressure drop value established during
the initial performance test, or within
the range of compliant operating
parameter values established during
multiple performance tests.
  (3) Packed-bed scrubber/composite
mesh-pad system. The owner or
operator of an affected source, or group
of affected sources under common
control, that  uses a packed-bed  scrubber
in conjunction with a composite mesh-
pad system to meet the emission
limitations of § 63.342 shall comply
with the monitoring requirements for
composite mesh-pad systems as
identified in paragraph (c)(l) of this
section.
  (4) Fiber-bed mist eliminator, (i)
During the initial performance test, the
owner.or operator of an affected source.
or group of affected sources under
common control, complying with the
emission limitations in § 63.342 through
the use of a fiber-bed mist eliminator
shall determine the outlet chromium
concentration using the procedures in
§ 63.344(c), and shall establish as a site-
specific operating parameter the
pressure drop across the fiber-bed mist
eliminator and the pressure drop across
the control  device installed upstream of
the fiber bed to prevent plugging, setting
the value that corresponds to
compliance with the applicable
emission limitation using the
procedures in § 63.344(d)(5). An owner
or operator may conduct multiple
performance tests to establish a range of
compliant pressure drop values, or may
set as the compliant value the average
pressure drop measured over the three
test runs of one performance test and
accept ± 1 inch of water column from
this value as the compliant range.
  (ii) On and after the date on which the
initial performance test is required to be
completed under § 63.7, the owner or
operator of an affected source, or group
of affected sources under common
control, shall monitor and record the
pressure drop across the fiber-bed mist
eliminator,  and the control device
installed upstream of the fiber bed to
prevent plugging, once each day that
any affected source is operating. To be
in compliance with the standards, the
fiber-bed mist eliminator and the
upstream control device shall be
operated within ±1 inch of water
column of the pressure drop value
established during the initial
performance test, or shall be operated
within  the range of compliant values for
pressure drop established during
multiple performance tests.
  (5) Wetting agent-type or combination
wetting agent-type/foam blanket fume
suppressants, (i) During the initial
performance test, the o%vner or  operator
of an affected source complying with
the emission limitations in § 63.342
through the use of a wetting agent in the
electroplating or anodizing bath shall
determine the outlet chromium
concentration using the procedures in
§ 63.344(c). The owner or operator shall
establish as the site-specific operating
parameter the surface tension of the
bath using Method 306B, appendix A of

-------
         Federal Register /  Vol.  60,  No. 16  /  Wednesday, January 25, 1995  / Rules and Regulations
this part, setting the maximum value
that corresponds to compliance with the
applicable emission limitation. In lieu
of establishing the maximum surface
tension during the performance test, the -
owner or operator may accept 45 dynes/
cm as the maximum surface tension
value that corresponds to compliance
with the applicable emission limitation.
However, the owner or operator is
exempt from conducting a performance
test only if the criteria of paragraph
(b)(2) of this section are met.
  (ii) On and after the date on which the
initial performance test is required to be
completed under §63.7, the owner or
operator of an affected source shall
monitor the surface tension of the
electroplating or anodizing bath.
Operation of the affected source at a
surface tension greater than the value
established during the performance test,
or greater than 45 dynes/cm if the owner
or operator is using this value in
accordance with paragraph (c)(5)(i) of
this section, shall constitute
noncomph'ance  with the standards. The
.surface tension-shall be monitored
according to the following schedule:
  " (A) The surface tension shall be
me'asured  once every 4 hours during
operation of the tank with a
stalagmometer or a tensiometer as
specified in Method 3Q6B, appendix A
of this part.
  (B) Tne time between monitoring can
be increased if there have been no
exceedances. The surface tension shall
be measured once every 4 hours of tank
operation  for the first 40 hours of tank
operation after the compliance date.
Once there are no exceedances during
40 hours of tank operation, surface
tension measurement may be conducted
once every 8 hours of tank operation.
Once there are no exceedances during
40 hours of tank operation, surface
tension measurement may be conducted
once every 40 hours of tank operation
on an ongoing basis, until an
exceedance occurs. The minimum
frequency of monitoring allowed by this
subpart  is once every 40 hours of tank
operation.
  (C) Once an exceedance occurs as
indicated through surface tension
monitoring, the  original monitoring
schedule of once every 4 hours must be
resumed. A subsequent decrease in
frequency shall  follow the schedule laid
out in paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(8) of this
section. For example, if an owner or
operator had been monitoring an
affected source once every 40 hours and
an exceedance occurs, subsequent
monitoring would take place once e*ery
4 hours of tank operation. Oaoe an
exceedance does not occur for 40 hours
of tank operation, monitoring can occur .
 once every 8 hours of tank operation.
 Once an exceedance does not occur for
 40 hours of tank operation on this
 schedule, monitoring can occur once
 every 4O hours of tank operation.
   (iii) Once a bath solution is drained
 from the affected tank and a new
 solution added, the original monitoring
 schedule of once every 4 hours must be
 resumed, with a decrease in monitoring
 frequency allowed following the
 procedures of paragraphs (c)(5)(ii) (B)
 and (C) of this section.
   (6) Foam blanket-type fume
 suppressants, (i) During the initial
 performance test, the owner or operator
 of an affected source complying with
 the «nni«inn limitations in §63.342
 through the use of a foam blanket in the
 electroplating or anodizing bath shall
 determine the outlet chromium
 concentration using the procedures in
 § 63.344(c), and shall establish as the
 site-specific operating parameter the
" thickness of the foam blanket, setting
 the minimum thickness that
 corresponds to compliance with the
 applicable emission limitation. In lieu
 of-establishing the minimum foam
 blanket thickness during the  :  ;
 performance test, the owner or operator
 may accept 2.54 centimeters (1 inch) as
 the minimum foam blanket thickness
 that corresponds to compliance  with the
 applicable emission limitation. All foam
 blanket measurements must be taken in
 close proximity to the workpiece or
 cathode area in the plating tank(s).
   (ii) On and after the date on which the
 initial performance test is required to be
 completed under § 63.7, the owner or
 operator of an affected source shall
 monitor the foam blanket thickness of
 the electroplating or anodizing bath.
 Operation of the affected source at a
 foam blanket thickness less than the
 value established during the
 performance test, or less than 2.54 cm  ,
 (1 inch) if the owner or operator is using
 this value in accordance with paragraph
 (c)(6)(i) of this section, shall constitute
 noncomph'ance with the standards. The .
 foam blanket thickness shall be
 measured according to the  following
 schedule:
   (A) The foam blanket thickness shall
 be measured once every 1 hour of tank
 operation.
   (B) The time between monitoring can
 be increased if there have been no
 exceedances. The foam blanket
 thickness shall be measured once every
 hour of tank operation for the first 40
 hours of tank operation after the
 compliance date. Once there are no
 exceedances for 40 hours of tank
 operation, foam blanket thickness
 measurement may be conducted once
- every .4 hours of tank operation. Once
 there are no exceedances during 40
 hours of tank operation, foam blanket
 thickness measurement may be
 conducted once every 8 hours of tank
 operation on an ongoing basis, until an
 exceedance occurs. The minimum
 frequency of monitoring allowed by this
• subpart is once per 8 hours of tank
 operation.
   (C) Once an exceedance occurs as
 indicated through foam  blanket
 thickness monitoring, the original
 monitoring schedule of once every hour
 must be resumed. A subsequent
 decrease in frequency shall follow the
 schedule  laid out in paragraph
 (c)(6)(ii)(B) of this section. For example,
 if an owner or operator had been
 monitoring an affected source once
 even1 8 hours and an exceedance
 occurs, subsequent monitoring would
 take place once every hour of tank.
 operation. Once an exceedance does not
 occur for 40 hours of tank operation,.
 monitoring can occur once every 4
 hours of tank operation. Once an
.exceedance does not occur for 40 hours.
 of tank operation on this schedule.
 monitoring can occur once every 8
.hours of tank operation.
   (iii) Once a bath solution is drained
 from the affected tank and a new
 solution added, the original monitoring
 schedule  of once every hour must be
 resumed,  with a decrease in monitoring
 frequency allowed following the
 procedures of paragraphs (c)(6)(ii) (B)
 and (C) of this section.   •'•     -' •'
   (7) Fume suppressant/add-on control
 device, (i) If the owner or operator of an
 affected source uses both a fume
 suppressant and add-on control device
 and both are needed to comply with the
 applicable emission limit, monitoring
 requirements as identified in paragraphs
 (c) (1) through (6) of this section, and
 the work practice standards of Table 1
 of § 63.342, apply for each of the control
 techniques used.
   (ii) If the owner or operator of an
 affected source uses both a fume
 suppressant and add-on control device,
 but only one of these techniques is
 needed to comply with the applicable
 emission  limit, monitoring requirements
 as identified in paragraphs (c) (1)
 through (6) of this section, and work'
 practice standards of Table 1 of
 § 63.342. apply only for the control
 technique used to achieve compliance
   (8) Use of an alternative monitoring
 method, (i) Requests and approvals of
 alternative monitoring methods shall ho
 considered in accordance with
 $ 63.8MU (f)(3). (0(4).  and (f)(5).
   (ii) After receipt and consideration of
 an application for an alternative
 monitoring method, the Administrate!
 may app-ove sllemalives to anv

-------
'4970 -"-Federal -Register Y.^Vol.1 ^SOi' No-:--36  /-Wednesday,-January 25,' 1995  /-Rules'and 'Regulations'
 monitoring methods or procedures of
 this subpart including, but not limited
 to, the'following:
   (A) Alternative monitoring
 requirements when installation or-use of
 monitoring devices specified in.this
 subpart would not provide accurate
 •measurements due to interferences
 caused by substances within the effluent
 gases; or  '  •  " ~ "    •
   (B) Alternative locations for installing
 monitoring devices when the owner or
 operator can demonstrate that    "•*": •
 installation at alternate locations will
 enable accurate and representative
 -.measurements..     •..  ;-    ..
   (d) An owner or operator who uses an
 air pollution control device not listed in
 this section shall submit a description of
 the device, test results collected in
 accordance with § 63.344(c) verifying
 the performance of the device for
 reducing chromium emissions to the
 atmosphere to the level required by this
 subpart, a copy of the operation and
 maintenance plan referenced in
 §63.342(f) including proposed work
 practice standards, and appropriate
 operating parameters that will be
 monitored to establish continuous
 compliance with the standards. The
 monitoring plan submitted identifying
 the continuous compliance monitoring
 is subject to the Administrator's
 approval.

- § 63.344 . Performance test requirements
 and test methods.    ;  .   •--..--   *-.-•
   (a) Performance test requirements,
 Performance tests shall be conducted
 using the test  methods and procedures
 in this section and § 63.7. Performance
 test results shall be documented in
 complete test  reports that contain the
 information required by paragraphs
 (a)(l) through (a)(9) of this section, the
 test plan to be followed shall be made
 available to'the Administrator prior to
 the testing, if requested. •_;
   (1) A brief process description;
   (2) Sampling location  description(s);
   (3) A description of sampling and
 analytical procedures and any  ••;"-;
 modifications to standard procedures;
 . : (4) Test results; ...... .....  .  V-  ...- •  :
   (5) Quality assurance procedures and
.results;   ••      - .         ",     •-.--
   (6) Records  of operating conditions
 during the test, preparation of
 standards, and calibration procedures;
   (7) Raw data sheets for field sampling
 and field  and  laboratory analyses;
   (8) Documentation of.calculations;
 and          ;  •
   (9) Any other information required by
 the test method.
 -  (b)(l) If-the owner or-operator of an. .  ,
 affected source conducts" performance -:"
 testing at startup to obtain an "operating
 •permit in the State in which the affected
-source is located, the results of such
 testing may be used to demonstrate
 compliance with this subpart if:
   . (i) The test methods and procedures
 identified iri paragraph (c) of this
 section were used during the
 performance test;
 :  (ii) The performance test was  •"
 conducted under representative
 operating conditions for the source;
   (iii) The performance test report
 contains the elements required by
 paragraph (a) of this section; and
   (iv) The owner or operator of the
 affected source for which the  .
 performance test was conducted  has
 sufficient data to establish the operating
 parameter value(s) that correspond to
 compliance with the standards, as
 required for continuous compliance
 monitoring under § 63.343(c).
   (2) The results of tests conducted
 prior to December 1991 in which
 Method 306A, appendix A of this part,
 was used to demonstrate the
 performance of a control technique are
 not acceptable.
   (c) Test methods. Each owner or
 operator subject to the provisions of this
• subpart and required  by § 63.343 (b) to
 conduct an initial performance test shall
 use the test methods identified in this
 section to demonstrate compliance with
 the standards in § 63.342..
   (1) Method 306 or Method 306A.
 "Determination of Chromium Emissions
 From Decorative and  Hard Chromium
 Electroplating and Anodizing
 Operations," appendix A of this part
 shall be used to determine the
 chromium concentration from hard or
 decorative chromium electroplating
 tanks or chromium anodizing tanks. The
 sampling time and sample volume for
 each run of Methods 306 and 306A,
 appendix A of this part shall be at least
 120 minutes and 1.70 dscm (60 dsci],
 respectively. Methods 306 and 306A,
 appendix A of this part allow the
 measurement of either total chromium
 or hexayalent chromium emissions. For
 the purposes of this standard, sources
 using chromic acid baths can .
 demonstrate compliance with the
 emission limits of § 63.342 by -..-.-
.measuring either total chromium or
 hexavalent chromium. Hence, the
 hexavalent chromium concentration
 measured by these methods is equal to
 the total chromium concentration for
 the affected operations;
   (2) The California Air Resources
 Board (CARS) Method 425 (which is
 .available by contacting the California
 Air Resources Board,  1102 Q Street,
• Sacramento, California 95814) may be
•'used to determine the chromium
• concentration from hard and decorative
  chromium electroplating tanks and
  chromium anodizing tanks if the
  following conditions are met:
   (i) If a colorimetric analysis method is
  used, the sampling time and volume
  shall be sufficient to result in 33 to 66
  micrograms of catch in the sampling
  train.
   (ii) If Atomic Absorption Graphite
  Furnace (AAGF) or Ion Chromatography
  with a Post-column Reactor (ICPCR)
  analyses were used, the sampling time
  and volume should be"sufficient to
  result in a sample catch that is 5 to 10
  times the minimum detection limit of
.. the analytical method (i.e., 1.0
  microgram per liter of sample for AAGF
  and 0.5 microgram. per liter of sample
  for ICPCR);
   (iii) In the case of either paragraph
  (c)(2) (i) or (ii) of this section, a
  minimum of 3 separate runs must be
  conducted. The other requirements of
  § 63.7 that apply to affected sources, as
  indicated  in Table 1 of this subpart, . -
  must also be met.     •	"-
   (3) Method 306B, "Surface Tension
  Measurement and Recordkeeping for
  Tanks Used at Decorative Chromium'
  Electroplating and Anodizing  •  •  "" • •
  Facilities," appendix A of this part shall
  be used to measure the surface tension
  of electroplating and anodizing baths. . -.
   (4) Alternate test methods may also be
  used if the method has been validated
  using Method 301, appendix A of this
  part and if approved by the ' --'-'"
  Administrator. Procedures for' ' " ' '_'''
  requesting and obtaining approval are "
  contained in §63.7(f).
   (d) Establishing site-specific operating
  parameter values. (1) Each owner or
.  operator required to'establish site-  •
  specific operating parameters'shall ••-
  follow the procedures in this section.  •'
   '(2) All monitoring equipment shall be
  installed such that representative
  measurements of emissions or process
  parameters from the affected source are
  obtained. For monitoring equipment
  purchased from a vendor, verification of
  the operational status of the monitoring'
  equipment shall include execution of
  the manufacturer's written
  specifications or recommendations for
  installation, operation, and califaratio'n
  of the system.  '  "''       '     "  ;  "'"
   (i) Specifications for differential
  pressure measurement devices used to
  measure velocity pressure shall be. in
  accordance with section 2.2 of Method
  2 (40 CFR part 60. appendix A).
   (ii) Specification tor differential
  pressure measurement devices used to
  measure pressure drop across a control-
  system shall be in accordance with
  manufacturer's accuracy specifications.
   (3) The  surface tension of   "
  electroplating and anodizing baths shall'

-------
          Federal  Register /-Vol. 60, No- 16./.-Wednesday, January  25, 1995  /  Rules.and Regulations   4971
 be measured using Method 306B,
 "Surface Tension Measurement and
 Recordkeeping for Tanks used at
 Decorative Chromium Electroplating
 and Anodizing Facilities," appendix A
 of this part. This method should also be
 followed when'wetting agent type or
 combination wetting agent/foam blanket
 type fume suppressants are used to
 control chromium emissions from a
' hard chromium electroplating tank and
 surface tension measurement is
 conducted to demonstrate continuous
 compliance.
   . (4) The owner or operator of a source
 required to measure the velocity
 pressure at the inlet to an add:ori air
 pollutio'n control device in accordance
 with § 63.343(c)(2). shall establish the
 site-specific velocity pressure as
 follows:
   (i) Locate a velocity traverse port in a
 section of straight duct that connects the
 hooding on the plating tank or tanks
 with the control device. The port shall
 be located as close to the control system
 as possible, and shall be placed a
 minimum of 2 duct diameters
 downstream and 0.5 diameter upstream
 of any flow disturbance such as a bend.
 expansion, or contraction (see Method
 1, 40 CFR part 60. appendix A). If 2.5
 diameters x>f straight duct work does not
 exist, locate the port 0.8 of the duct
 diameter downstream and 0.2  of the
 duct diameter upstream from any flow
 disturbance.
   (ii) A 12-point velocity traverse of the
 duct to the control device shall be
 conducted along a single axis according
 to Method 2 (40 CFR part 60. appendix
 A) using an S-type pilot tube;
 measurement of the barometric pressure
 and duct temperature at each traverse
 point is not required, but is suggested.
 Mark the S-type pilot tube as specified
 in Method 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix
 A) with 12  points. Measure the velocity
 pressure (Ap) values for the velocity
 points and  record. Determine the square
 root of the individual velocity point Ap
 values and average. The point with the
 square root value that comes closest to
 the average square root value is the
 point of average velocity. The Ap value
 measured for this point during the
 . performance test will be used as the
 reference for future mor-.itoring.
  (5) The owner or operator of a source
required to measure the pressure drop
across the add-on air pollution control
device in accordance with § 63.343(c)
(1) through (4) may establish the
pressure drop in accordance with the
following guidelines:
  (i) Pressure taps shall be installed at
any of the following locations:
  (A)  At the inlet and outlet of the
control system. The inlet tap should be
installed in the ductwork just prior to
the control device and the
corresponding outlet pressure tap
should be installed on the outlet side of
the control device prior to the blower or
on the downstream side of the blower;
  (B) On each side of the packed bed
within the control system or on each
side of each mesh pad within the
control system; or
  (C) On the front side of the first mesh
pad and back side of the last mesh pad
within the control system.
  (ii) Pressure taps shall be sited st
locations that are:
  (A)  Free from pluggage as possible
and away from any flow disturbances
such as cyclonic demisters.   .
  (B) Situated such that no air
infiltration at measurement site will
occur that could bias the measurement.
  {iii) Pressure taps shall be constructed
of either polyethylene, polybutylene, or
other nonreactive materials.
  (iv) Nonreactive plastic tubing shall
be used  to connect the pressure taps to
the device used to measure pressure
drop.
  (v) Any of the following pressure
gauges can be used to monitor pressure
drop:  a magnehelic gauge, an inclined.
manometer, or a "U" tube manometer.
  (vi) Prior to connecting any pressure
lines to the pressure gauge(s), each
gauge should be zeroed. No calibration
of the pressure gauges is required.
  (e) Special compliance provisions for
multiple sources controlled by a
common add-on air pollution control
device.
  (1) This section identifies procedures
for measuring the outlet chromium
concentration from an add-on air
pollution control device that is used to
control multiple sources that may or
may not include sources not affected by
this subpart.
  (2) When multiple affected sources
performing-the same type of operation
(e.g., all are performing hard chromium
electroplating), and subject to the same
emission limitation, are controlled wit])
an add-on air pollution control device
that is not controlling emissions from
any other type of affected operation or
from any nonaffected sources, the
applicable emission limitation
identified in § 63.342 must be met at th
outlet of the add-on air pollution contr
device.
  (3) When multiple affected sources »
performing the same type of operation
and subject to the same emission
limitation are controlled with a commctj
add-on air pollution control device thai
is also controlling emissions from
sources not affected by these standards,;
the following procedures should be
followed to determine compliance with
the applicable emission limitation in
§63.342:
  (i) Calculate the cross-sectional area of
each inlet duct (i.e., uptakes  from each
hood) including those not affected by
the standard.
  (ii) Determine the total sample lime
per test run by dividing the total iniel
area from all tanks connected to the
control system by the total inlet area for
all ducts associated with affected
sources; and then multiply this number
by 2 hours. The calculated time is the
minimum sample time required per lesr
run.
  (iii) Perform Method 306 testing and
calculate an outlet mass emission rate.
  (iv) Determine the total ventilation
rate from the affected sources bv usine
equation 1:
         IDA..
                                 .(IV
where VR,o, is the average total
ventilation rate in dscm/min for the
three test runs as determined at the
outlet by means of the Method 306
testing; ID A; is the total inlet area for all
ducts associated with affected sources,
lAiouj is the sum of all inlet duct areas
from both affected and nonaffeded
sources; and VRinle, is the total
ventilation rate from all inlet ducts
associated with affected sources.
  (v) Establish the allowable mass
emission rate of the system (AMR^J in
milligrams of total chromium per hour
(mg/hr) using equation 2:
                                    „ VRinJci x EL x 60minutes/hours = AMRSVS
                                       (2)
 where I VRmlei is the total ventilation
 rate in dscm/min from the affected
 sources, and EL is the applicable
 emission limitation from § 63.342 in
rng/dscm. The allowable mass emission
rate (AMR,yJ calculated from equation 2
should be equal to or less .than'the outlel
three-run average mass emission rale
determined from Method 306 testing in
order for the source to be in compliance
with the standard.

-------
4972    Federal Reg&er  /  Vol.. 60. No. 16 / Wednesday. lanuary "25.-199S./..Rules and Regulations
  (4). When multiple affected sources
performing different types of- operations
(e.g-»hard chromium electroplating.
decorative chromiumelectroplatingvor
chromium anodizing} are controlled: by
a common add-on air pollution control
device that may or may not also be
controlling emissions-from sources not
affected by these standards, or rf the
affected sources controlled by the
common add-on air pollution control
device perform the same operation but
are subject to different emission
limitations (e.g^. because one is a new
hard chromium, plating tank and one is
an existing small,hard chromium
plating tank), the folio-wing:procedures
should be followed to-determine
compliance with, the.applicable
emission limitation in § 63.342:
  (i) Follow thesteps outlined in
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iu) of
this section.
  (ii) Determine the total ventilation
rate for each type of affected source
using equation 3:
         IDA;.
               -=VR.
                     inlet.a
                                  (3).
where VRu* is the average total
ventilation rate in dscm/min for the
three test runs as determined at the
outlet by means of the Method 306
testing: IDA;., is the total'Inlet duct area
for all ducts conveying,chromic acid
from each type of affected source
performing the same operation, or. each
type of affected source subject to the
same emission limitation; IA,olj is the
sum of all duct areas from both affected
and  nonaffected sources: and VR,nie,.3 is
the tola'ventilation rate from alli'nlet
ducts conveying chromic acid from each
type of affected source performing the
same operation,, or each type of affected
source subject to the same emission
limitation.
  (iii) Establish the allowable mass
emission rate in mg/hr for each type of
affected.sou'rce that is controlled by the
add-on air pollution control device
using equation 4, 5, 6. or 7 as-
appropriate:
VRhc, x ELhcuX 60 minutes/hour. =
    AMRhd.    (4)
\"Rtw: x ELhc; x 60-minutes/hour =
    AMRiK2    (5)
VRoc x ELoc x 60 minutes/hour = AMRjc
    (6)
VTVM x EU-j x 60 minutes/hour = AMR.-.,
    (7)
where "he" applies  to the total of
ventilation rates for all hard chromium
electroplating taaks.sabjecttn the same
emission Iimitation^""dc'' applies to the
total of ventilation rates for the.
decorative chromium electroplating
tanks, "ca" applies-to the total of..  .
ventilation rates for the diroirunm-
anodiring tanks, and EL is-the
applicable emission-. Limitation from
§ 63.342 in rag/dscm. There are-two-
equations for hard chromium.
electroplating tanks because different
emission limitations may apply (e.g-.,a
new tank versus an existing, smafl tank).
  (iv) Establish the allowable mass
emission rate (AMRJ in. mg/hr for the
system using equation 8, intruding.each
type of affected source as appropriate.
AMRhcr + AMR^ + AMJ^c -f AMRc* =
    AMR^,    (8)
The allowable mass emission- rate
calculated from equation 8 should be
equal to or less than the outlet three-run
average mass emission rate determined
from Method 306'testing in order for the
source to be in compliance with the
standards.
  (5) Each owner or operator that uses
the special compliance provisions of
this paragraph to-demonstrate
compliance with the emission
limitations of §"6-3-342 shall'submit the
measurements and calculations to
support these compliance methods- with •
the notification of compliance status
required by §63.347(e).
  (6) Each owner or operator that uses
the special compliance provisions of
this section to demonstrate compliance
u-ith the emission limitations of
§ 63.342 shall repeat these procedures if
a tank is added  or removed from the
control system regardless of whether
that tank is a nonaffected source. If. the
new nonaffected tank replaces an
existing nonaffected'tank of the same
size and is connected1 to the  control
systemjjirough the same size inlet duct
then this procedure does not have to be
repeated.

§ 63.345 Provisions for new and
reconstructed sources.
  (a) This section identifies  the-
preconstruction review requirements for
new and reconstructed affected sources
that are-subject  to. or becomesufaject to.
this subpart..
  (b) New or reconstructed affected
sources. The owner or operator of a new-
er reconstructed affected source is
subject to § 63.5(a). fb)flT. (b)(5). (b)(6).
and (f)(1), as well as the provisions of
this paragraph.
  (1) After January 25.1995, whether or
not an approved permit program is
effective in the State in which an.
affected source is (or would be) located.
no person may construct a new affected
source or reconstruct an affected source
subject to this subpart, or reconstruct a-
source such that it becomes-an affected
source subject to this-subpart^ without
submitting.! notification-of coristructioa
 or reconstruction tathe Administrator.
 The notificatioc-shall contain, the-
 information identified in,paragraphs (b)-
 (2) and (3) of this section, as
 appropriate.
  (2) The notification of construction or
 reconstruction required undec
 paragraph (h)(l J-of this section shal 1
 include:
  (i) The owner or operator's name.
 title, and address;
  (ii) The address (Le.. physical
 location), or proposed address of the
 affected source if different from the
 owner's or operator's;
  (ifi-T A notification of intention to
 construct a new affected source or make
 any physical or operational changes to
 an affected source that may meet or has
 been determined to meet the criteria for
 a reconstruction as defined in-§63.2;
  (iv) An  identification of subpart Mof
 this part as the basis for the notification:
  (v).The  expected commencement and
 completion dates of the construction or
 reconstruction;
  (vi) The anticipated date.of (initial)
 startup of the affected source;
  (vii) The type of process operation to
 be performed (hard or decorative '  ;
 chromium electroplating7or chromium
.anodizing);
  (viii) A  description of the air  '
 pollution  control  technique to be used
 to control emissions from the affected
 source.such as preliminary design
 drawings and design capacity if an add-
 on ah-pollution control device is used:
 and
  (ix) An estimate of emissions from the
 source'based on engineering
 calculations and-vendor information on
 control device efficiency, expressed in
 units consistent with the emission-
 limits of, this subpart. Calculations of
 emission estimates should be in
 sufficient  detail to permit assessment of
 the validity of the calculations;
  (3) If a reconstruction is to occur, the
 notification required under paragraph
 (b)(l)-of this section shall-include the
 following in addition to the information
 required in paragraph (b)(2) of this
 section:
  (i) A brief descriptionjof the affected
 source and the components to be
 replaced;.
  (ii) A brief description of the present
 and proposed emission control
 technique, including the information
 required by paragraphs (b)(2) (viii) and
 (ix) of this section:
  (iii) An  estimate of the fixed capital
 cost of the replacements and of
 constructing a comparable entirely new
 source:
  (\vf The estimated lifeof theaffected-
 source after the replacements: and
  (v) A discussion- of any ecxmomicot
 technical  limitations- tbe source may •

-------
         Federal  Register / Vol. 60, No.  16-/ Wednesday. January 25,  1995  /  Rules and-Regulations
have in complying with relevant
standards or other requirements after
the proposed replacements. The
discussion shall be sufficiently detailed
to demonstrate to the Administrator's
satisfaction that the technical or
economic limitations affect the source's
ability to comply with the relevant
standard and hoxv they do so.
  .(vi) If in the notification of   -
reconstruction, the owner or operator
designates the affected source as a
reconstructed source and declares that
there are no economic or technical
limitations to prevent the source from
complying with all relevant standards or
requirements, the owner or operator
need not submit the information
required in paragraphs (b)(3) (iii)
through (v) of this section.
   (4) The owner or operator of a new or
reconstructed affected source that  "
submits a notification in accordance
with paragraphs (b) (1) through (3) of
this section is not subject to approval by
the Administrator. Construction or
reconstruction is subject only to
notification and can begin upon
submission of.a complete notification.
   (5) Submittal timeframes. After
January 25,1995, whether or not an
approved permit program is effective in
the State in which an affected source is
(or would be) located, an owner or
operator of a new or reconstructed
affected source shall submit the
notification of construction or
reconstruction required by paragraph
(b)(l) of this section according to the
following schedule:
   (i) If construction  or reconstruction
commences after January 25,1995, the
notification shall be submitted  as soon
as practicable before the construction or
reconstruction is planned to commence.
   (ii) If the construction or
. reconstruction had commenced and
initial startup had not occurred before
January 25,1995, the notification shall
be submitted as soon as practicable
before startup but no later than 60 days
after January 25,1995.

§ 63.346  Recordkeeping requirements.
   (a) The owner or operator of each
affected source subject to these
standard* shall fulfill all recordkeeping
requirements outlined in this section
and in the General Provisions to 40 CFR
part  63, according to the applicability of
subpart A of this part as identified in
Table 1 of this subpart.
   (b) The owner or operator of an
affected source subject to the provisions
of this subpart shall maintain the
following records for such source:
   (1) Inspection records for the add-on
air pollution control device, if such a
device is used, and monitoring
equipment, to document that the
inspection and maintenance required by
the work practice standards of
§ 63.342(f) and Table 1 of § 63.342 have
taken place. The record can take the
form of a checklist and should identify
the device inspected, the date of
inspection, a brief description of the
working condition of the device during
the inspection, and any actions taken to
correct deficiencies found during the
inspection.
  (2) Records of all maintenance
performed on the-affected source, the
add-on air pollution control device, and
monitoring equipment;
  (3) Records of the occurrence,
duration, and cause (if known) of each
malfunction of process, add-on air
pollution control, and monitoring
equipment;
  (4]tRecords of actions taken during
periods of malfunction when such
actions are inconsistent with  the
operation and maintenance plan;
  (5) Other records, which may take the
form of checklists, necessary  to
demonstrate consistency with the
provisions of the operation and
maintenance plan required by
§63.342(f)(3);
  (6) Test reports documenting results
of all performance tests;
  (7) All measurements as may be
necessary to determine the conditions of.
performance tests, including
measurements necessary to determine •
compliance with the special compliance
procedures of § 63.344(e):
  (8) Records of monitoring data
required by § 63.343(c) that are used to
demonstrate compliance with the
standard including the date and time
the data are collected;
  (9) The specific identification (i.e., the
date and time of commencement and
completion) of each period of excess
emissions, as indicated by monitoring
data, that occurs during malfunction of
the process, add-on air pollution
control, or monitoring equipment;
  (10) The specific identification  (i.e.,
the date and time of commencement
and completion) of each period of
excess emissions, as indicated by
monitoring data, that occurs during
periods other than malfunction of the
process, add-on air pollution  control, or
monitoring equipment;
  (11) The total process operating time
of the affected source during  the
reporting period;
  (12) Records of the actual cumulative
rectifier capacity of hard chromium
electroplating tanks at a facility
expended during each month of the
reporting period, and the total capacity
expended to date for a reporting period,
if the owner or operator is using the
 actual cumulative rectifier capacity!
 determine facility size in accordant!
 with §63.342(c)(2);
   (13) For sources using fume
 suppressants to comply with the
 standards, records of the date and tii»
 that fume suppressants are added to |
 electroplating or anodizing bath;
   (14) For sources complying with '
 § 63.342(e), records of the bath
 components purchased, with the
 wetting agent clearly identified as a bal
 constituent contained  in one of the
 components;
   (15) Any information demonstratiij
 whether a source is meeting the '
 requirements for a waiver of
 recordkeeping or reporting
 requirements, if the source has been
 granted a waiver under § 63.10(f); ani
   (16) All documentation supporting
 the notifications and reports required b
 § 63.9, § 63.10, and § 63.347.
   (c) All records shall  be maintainedijq
 a period of 5 years in accordance wit]} I
 §63.10(b)(l).

 § 63.347 • Reporting requirements.
   (a) The owner or operator  of each
. affected source subject to these
 standards shall fulfill all reporting
 requirements outlined in this section
 and in the General Provisions to 40 CH
 part 63, according to the applicability^!
 subpart A as identified in'Table 1 of till
 subpart. These reports'shall  be made til
 the Administrator at the appropriate -'
 address as identified in § 63.13 or to tta
 'delegated State authority.
   (1) Reports required  by subpart A of"
 this part and this section may be sent |j|
 U.S. mail, fax, or by  another courier.
   (i) Submittals sent by U.S. mail  shall
 be postmarked on or before the specilfi
 date.
   (ii) Submittals sent by other methods n
 shall be received by the Administrator
 on or before the specified  date.
   (2) If acceptable to both the
 Administrator and the owner or
 operator of an affected source, reports
 may be submitted on electronic media.;
   (b) The reporting requirements of this
 section apply to the owner or operator!
 of an affected source when such sourc|
 becomes subject to the provisions of iSs
 subpart.
   (c) Initial notifications.  (1) The owner
 or operator of an affected source that his
 an initial startup before January 25,
 1995, shall notify the Administrator in
 writing that the source is subject to this
 subpart. The notification shall be
 submitted no later than 180'talendar
 days after January 25.1995,  and shall
 contain the following information:
   (i) The name, title, and address of th$
 owner or operator;                 ''
   (ii) The address (i.e., physics!
 location) of each affected  source;

-------
4974    Federal Register / Vot. 60. No.  16 / Wednesday. January  25. 199s /  Rules and Regulations
  (Lii) A statement that subpart N of this
part is the basis for this notification:
  (iv) Identification of the applicable
emission limitation and compliance
date for each affected- source;
  [y] A brief description; of each, affected
source, including the type of process
operation performed;.
  (vi) For sources performing hard
chromium electroplating, the maximum
potential cumulative potential1 rectifier
capacity;
  (vii) For sources performing hard
chromium electroplating, a statement of
whether the affected sourcefs) is located
at a small or a large, hard chromium
electroplating facility and whether this
will be demonstrated through actual or
maximum potential cumulative rectifier
capacity;
  (viii) For sources performing hard
chromium electroplating tanks, a
statement of whether the owner or
operator of an affected source(sj will
limit the  maximum potential
cumulative rectifier capacity in
accordance with §63.342(4(2^ such that
the hard chromium electroplating
facility is considered small; and
  (i.x) A statement of whether the
affected source is located at  a major
source or an area source as defined in
§63.2.
  (2) The owner or operator of a new or
reconstructed affected source that has
an initial startup after January 25.1995
shall submit an initial notification, (in
addition to the notification of
construction or reconstruction, required
by § 63.345(b).as follows:
  (i) A notification of the date when
construction or reconstruction was
commenced, shall be submitted
simultaneously with the notification of
construction or reconstruction, if
construction or reconstruction was
commenced before January 25, 1995;
  (ii) A notification of the date when
construction orreconstruction was
commenced, shall be submitted no later
than. 30 calendar days after such date, if
construction or reconstruction was
commenced after January 25.1995; and
  (iii) A notification of the actual date
of startup of the source shall be
submitted within 30 calendar, days after
such date.
  (d) Notification of performance test.
(1) The owner or operator of an. affected
source shall notify the Administrator in
writing of his or her intention, to
conduct a performance test at least 60
calendar days before the test is
scheduled to begin to. allow  the
Administrator tanave an observer
present curing the test. Observation of
the performance test by the
Administrator is optional
  (2) In the event the owner or opera tor
is unable to conduct the- performance
test as scheduled, the provisions of
§63.7(b)(2l apply.
  (e) Notification of compliance status-
(1) A notification, of compliance status
is required each time that an affected
source becomes subject to- the
requirements of this subpart.
  (2) Before a title V permit has been
issued to the owner or operator of an
affected source, each time a notification
of compliance status is required under
this part, the owner or operator of an
affected source shall submit to the
Administrator a notification of
compliance status, signed by the
responsible official (as defined in §63.21
who shall certify its accuracy. attesting.
to whether the affected source has
complied with this subpart. After a title
V permit has been issued to the owner
or operator of an affected source, the
notification of compliance status shall
be submitted to the appropriate
permitting authority. The notification
shall list for each affected sources
  (i) The applicable emission limitation
and the methods that were used to
determine compliance with this
limitation;
  (iif If a performance test is required by
this subpart, the test report
documenting the results-of the
performance test, which, contains the
elements required by §63_344(a).
including measurements and
calculations to support the special
compliance provisions of §63.344(er if
these are being followed:
  (iii)The type and quantityof
hazardous air pollutants emitted by the
source reported in mg/dscm or rrig/hx if
the source is using the-special
provisions of §63.344(e) to comply with
the standards. (If the owner or operator
is subject to the construction; and.
reconstruction provisions of §63-345
and had previously submitted emission
estimates, the owner or operator shall
state that this report corrects or verifies
the previous estimate.) For sources not
required to conduct a performance- test
in accordance- with. § 63>343(b)v the
surface tension- measurement may fulfill
this requirement;
  (iv) For each monitored parameter for
which a compliant value-is to be
established under §63-343(c), the
specific operating parameter value, or
range of values^ that corresponds, to
compliance with the applicable
emission; limit;
  (v) The methods that will be used to
determine continuous compliance,
including a description o£monitoring:
and reporting: requirements-, if methods
di ffer from those identified m this
subpart;
  (vi) A description- of the air pollution
control technique for each emission
point:
  (vii) A statement that the owner or
operator has completed and has on file
the operation and maintenance pianas
required by the work practice standards
in § 63.342(f)r
  (viii) If the owner or operator is
determining facility size based on actual
cumulative rectifier capacity in
accordance with § 63.342(c)(2). records
to support that the facility issmalL For
existing sources, records from any 12-
month period preceding.the compliance
date shall be used or a description-of
how operations will change to meet a
small designation shall  be provided. For
new sources, records of projected
rectifier capacity for the first 12-month
period of tank operation shall be used;
  (ix) A statement by the owner or
operator of the affected source as to
whether the source has complied with
the provisions of this subpart.
  (3) For sources required to conduct a
performance test by §63.3-i3(b). the
notification of compliance status shall
be submitted to the Administrator no
later than. 90 calendar days following
completion of the compliance
demonstration required by §63.7 and
§63.343(b).
  (4) FOE sources that are not. required
to complete a performance test in
accordance with, § 63.343 (b). the
notification of compliance statusshall
be submitted to the Administrator no
later than 30 days after the compliance
date specified in §63.343(a)-
  (f) Reports of performance test resu/ls.
(1) Before a. title V permit has been
issued to. the owner or operator of an
affected source, the owner or operator
shall report to-the Administrator the
results of any performance test
conducted as required by § 6-3.7 or
§ 63.343(b). After a title V permit has
been issued to the owner or operatorof
an affected source, theowner or
operator should report performance test
results to the appropriate permitting
authority.
  (2) Reports of performance test results
shall be submitted no later than 90" days
following the completion of the
performance test, and shall be submitted
as part of the notification of compliance
status* required by paragraph- (e)- of this
section.
  (g) Ongoing compliance status reports.
for major sources. (1) The owner or
operator of an affected source that is
located at a major source site shall'
submit a summary report to the
Administrator to document the ongoing-
compliance status of the affected source.
The report shall contain, the information
identified in paragraph (gj(3) of this

-------
          Federal Register A Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1395 / Rules and Regulations
                                                                     49/
 section, and shall be submitted
 semiannually except when:
   (i) The Administrator determines on a
 case-by-case basis that more- frequent
 reporting is necessary to accurately
 assess the compliance status of the
 source; or
   (ii) The monitoring'data collected fay
 the owner or operator of the affected
 source in accordance with § S3.343f.cJ
 show that the emission limit has been.
 exceeded, in. which case quarterly
 report shall be submitted. Once an
 owner or operator of an affected source
 reports an exceedance, ongoing
 compliance status reports shall be
 submitted quarterly until a request to
 reduce'reporting frequency under
 paragraph (g](2) of this section is
 approved.
   |2) Request to reduce frequency of
 ongoing compliance status reports, (i)
 An owner or operator who is required
 to submit ongoing compliance status
 reports on a quarterly (or more frequent
 basis) may reduce the frequency of
 reporting to semiannual if all of the
 following conditions are met:
   (A) For 1 full year (e.g., 4 quarterly or
 12 monthly reporting  periods}, the
 ongoing compliance status reports  .
 demonstrate that the affected source is
 in compliance with the relevant
 emission limit;
   (B) The owner or operator continues
 to comply with a!! applicable       .  .
 recordkeepine and monitoring
 requirements of subpart A of this part
 and this subpart; and
   '(C}The Administrator does not object
 to a reduced reporting frequency for the
 affected source, as provided in
 paragraphs (g)|2) (ii) and (Hi) of this
 section.
   (ii) The frequency of submitting
 ongoing compliance status reports may
 be reduced only after  the owaeror
 operator notifies the Administrator in
 writing of his or her intention to make
 such a change, and the Administrator
 does not object to the intended change.
 In deciding whether to approve a
 reduced reporting frequency, the
 Administrator may review information
 concerning the source's entire previous
 performance history during the 5-year
 recordkeeping period prior to the
 intended change, or the recordkeeping
 period since the source's compliance
 date, whichever is shorter. Records
 subject to review may include
 performance test results, monitoring  '
 data, and evaluations of an  owner or
 operator's conformance with emission
 limitations and  work practice standards.
 Such information may be used fay the
 Administrator to make a judgment about
 the source's potential for
• noncompliance in the future.  If the
Administrator disapproves the owner ci
operator's request to reduce reporting
frequency, the Administrator will notify
the owner or operator in writing within
45 days after receiving notice of the
owner or operator's intention. The
notification from the' Administrator to
the owner or operator will specify the
grounds OB which the disapproval is
based. In the absence of a notice of
disapproval within 45 days, approval is
automatically granted.
  [ii)} As soon as the monitoring data
required by §63.343(c) show that the
source is not in compliance with the
re levant, emission limit the frequency of
reporting shall revert to quarterly, and
the owner shall state this exceedance in
the ongoing compliance status report for
the next reporting period. After
demonstrating ongoing compliance with
the relevant emission Kmit for another
full year, the owner or operator may
again request approval from the
Administrator to reduce the reporting
frequency as allowed by paragraph (gj(2)
of this section. •
  (3) Contents of ongoing compliance
statvs reports. The oxvner or operator of
an affected source for which compliance
monitoring is.required in accordance
with §63.343(c) shall prepare a
summary report to document the
ongoing compliance status of the source.
The report must contain the following
information:
  (i) The company name and address of
the affected source;
  (ii) An identification of the operating
parameter that is monitored for  .
compliance determination, as required
by § 63.343(c):
  (iii) The relevant emission limitation
for the affected source, and the
operating parameter value, or range of
values, that correspond to compliance
with this emission limitation as
specified in the notification of
compliance status required by
paragraph (e) of this section;
  (ivj Toe beginning and ending dates
of the reporting period;
  (v) A description of the type of
process performed in the affected
source;
  (vi) The total operating time of the
affected source during the reporting
period;
  (vii) If the affected source is a hard
chromium electroplating tank and the
owner or operator is limiting the
maximum cumulative rectifier capacity
in accordance with § 63.342(c)(2), the
actual cumulative rectifier capacity
expended during the reporting period,
on a month-by-month basis;
  (viii) A summary of operating
parameter values, including the total
•duration of excess emissions during the
 reporting period as indicated by those
 values,the total duration of excess
 emissions expressed as a percent of tii
 total source operating time during thai
 reporting period, andVoreakdon-n of
 .the total-duration of excess emissions
 during ihereporting.period into those
 that are due to process upsets, control
 equipment malfunctions, other known
 causes, and unknown causes;
   (Lx) A certification by a responsib?*
 official, as defined in §63.2, that tee
 work practice standards in 5 63.3-}2(f)
 were followed in accordance with the
 .operation and maintenance plan for the
 source;
   (x) if the operation and maintenance
 plan required by § 63.342(f)(3) was cot
 followed, an explanation of the reasons
 for no* following the provisions, an
 assessment of whether any excess
 emission and/or parameter monitoring
 exceedances are believed to have
 occurred, and a copy of the report(s)
 required by §63.342(f)(3)(iv)
 documenting that the operation and
 maintenance plan was not followed;
   (xi) A description of any changes in
 monitoring, processes, or controls since
 the fast reporting period;
   (xii) The name, title, and signature of
 the responsible official who is certifying
 the accuracy of the report: and
   (xiii) The dale of the report.
   (4) When more than one monitoring
 device is used to comply with the
 continuous compliance monitoring
 required by § 63.343(c). the owner or
 operator shall report the results as
 required for each monitoring device.
 However, when one monitoring device
 is used as a backup for the primary
 monitoring device, the owner or
 operator shall only report the results
 from the monitoring device used to meet
 the monitoring requirements of this
 subpart. If both devices are used to meet
 these requirements, then the owner or
 operator shall report the results from
 each monitoring device for the relevant
 compliance period.
   (hj Ongoing compliance states repasts
 for area sources. The requirements of
 this paragraph do not alleviate affected
 area sources from complying with the
 requirements of State or Federal
• operating permit programs under 40
 CFRpart?!.
   (l}Tfceowner or operatorof an
 affected source that is located at an area
 source site shall prepare a summary
 •report to document the ongoing
 compliance status of the affected source.
 The report shall contain the information
 identified in paragraph (gj[3) of this
 section, shall be completed annually
 and retained on site, and made available
 to the Administrator upon.request. Tb-*
 report shall be completed annually

-------
 4976    Federal Register /  Vol.  60, No. 16 / Wednesday,  January 25. 1995 / Rules and Regulations
 except as provided in paragraph (hl(2)
 of this section.
  (2) Reports of exceedcnces. (i) If both
 of the following conditions are met,
 semiannual reports shall be prepared
 and submitted to the Administrator:
  (A) The total duration of excess
 emissions (as indicated by the
 monitoring data collected by the owner
 or operator of the affected source in
 accordance with § 63 343(c)) is 1
 percent or greater of the total operating
 time for the reporting period; and
  (B) The total duration of malfunctions
•of the add-on air pollution control
 device and monitoring equipment is 5
 percent or greater of the total operating
 time.
  (ii) Once an owner or operator of an
 affected source reports an exceedance as
 defined in paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this
 section, ongoing compliance status
 reports shall be submitted semiannually
 until a request to reduce reporting
 frequency under paragraph (h)(3) of this
 section is approved.
  (iii) The Administrator may determine
 on a case-by-case basis that the
 summary report shall be completed
 more frequently and submitted, or that
 the annual report shall be submitted
 instead of being retained on site, if these
 measures are necessary to accurately
 assess the compliance status of the  -
 source.
  (3) Request to reduce frequency of
 ongoing compliance status reports, (i)
 An owner or operator who is required
 to submit ongoing compliance status
 reports on a semiannual (or more
 frequent) basis, or is required to submit
 its annual report instead of retaining it
 on site, may reduce the frequency of
 reporting to annual and/or be allowed to
 maintain the annual report onsite if all
 of the following conditions are met:
  (A) For 1 full year (e.g., 2 semiannual
 or 4 quarterly reporting periods), the
 ongoing compliance status reports
 demonstrate that the affected source  is
 in compliance with the relevant
 emission limit;
  (B) The owner or operator continues
 to comply with all applicable
 recordkeeping and monitoring
requirements of subpart A of this part
and this subpart; and
  (C) The Administrator does not object
to a reduced reporting frequency for the
affected source, as provided in
paragraphs (h)(3) (ii) and (iii) of this
section.
  (ii) The frequency of submitting.
ongoing compliance status reports may
be reduced only after the owner or
operator notifies the Administrator in
writing of his or her intention to make
such a change, and the Administrator
does not object to the intended  change.
In deciding whether to approve a
reduced reporting frequency, the
Administrator may review information
concerning the source's previous
performance history during the 5-year
recordkeeping period prior to the
intended change, or the record-keeping
period since the source's compliance
date, whichever is shorter. Records
subject to review may include
performance test results, monitoring
data, and evaluations of an owner or
operator's conformance with emission
limitations  and work practice standards.
Such information may be used by the
Administrator to make a judgement
about the source's potential for.
noncompliance in the future. If the
Administrator disapproves the owner or
operator's request to reduce reporting
frequency, the Administrator will notify
the owner or operator in writing within
45 days after receiving notice of the
owner or operator's intention. The
notification from the Administrator to
the owner or operator will specify the
grounds on which the disapproval is
based. In the absence of a notice of
disapproval within 45 days, approval is
automatically granted.
  (iii) As soon as the monitoring data
required by §63.343(c) show that the
source is not in compliance with the
relevant emission limit, the frequency of
reporting shall revert to semiannual,
and the owner shall state this
exceedance in the ongoing compliance
status report for the next reporting
period. After demonstrating ongoing
compliance with the relevant emission
limit for another full vear, the owner  or
operator may again request approval
from the Administrator to reduce the
'reporting frequency as allowed by
paragraph (h)(3) of this section.
  (i) Reports associated mth trivalent
chromium baths. The requirements of
this paragraph do not alleviate affected
sources from complying with the
requirements of State or Federal
operating permit programs under title V.
Ov\Tiers or operators complying with the
provisions of § 63.342(e) are not subject
to paragraphs (a) through (h) of this
section, but must instead submit the
following reports:
  (1) Within 180 days after January 25.
1995, submit an initial notification that
includes:
  (i) The same information as is
required by paragraphs (c)(l) (i) through
(v) of this section; and
  (ii) A statement that a trivalent
chromium process that incorporates a
wetting agent will be used to comply
with §63.342(e);and
  (iii) The list of bath components that
comprise the trivalent chromium bath.
with the wetting agent clearly
identified; and
  (2) Within 30 days of the compliance
date specified in § 63.343(a), a
notification of compliance status that
contains an update of the information
submitted in accordance with paragraph
(i)(l) of this section or a statement that
the information is still accurate; and
  (3) Within 30 days of a change to the
trivalent chromium electroplating
process, a report that includes:
  (i) A  description of the manner in
which the process has been changed
and the emission limitation, if any, now
applicable to the affected source;
  (ii) If a different emission limitation
applies, the applicable information
required by paragraph (c)(l) of this
section; and
  (iii) The notification and reporting
requirements of paragraphs (d), (e), (f).
(g). and (h) of this section, which shall
be submitted in accordance with the
schedules identified in those
paragraphs.
              TABLE 1 TO SUBPART N OF PART 63.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N
General provisions
reference
63 Ha)(D 	
53 l(a)(2) 	
63 l(a)(3) 	
63 HaH4) 	
63 i(aU5) 	
63 1(a)(7) 	
firi iraHB* 	
Applies to
subpart N
Yes 	
Yes
Yes
Yes .
Yes
Yes
Yes
Comment
Additional terms defined in §63.341; when overlap between subpans A and N
takes precedence.
Subpart N clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to sources
N.
occurs, subpan N
subject to subpart

-------
 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations   4977
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART N of PART 63.—GENERAL PROVSIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N—Continued
General provisions
reference
63.1(a)(10) 	 ; 	
B3t{a}{11) , ,,

S"L-l(h}{1)
S3-1(h)p>)
63 tfhir-,1

63.1 (C)(2) 	
63.1 (cX4) 	 _ 	

63.1(e) 	
63.2 ..._ 	 _ 	
63.3 _ 	
63.4 	 _ 	
63 5 (a)
63.5(b)(l) 	
63.5(b)(3) ....
•63.5(b)'4} 	 _ 	 __ 	 	

63.5{b)(5) .._.:..._ 	 _ .. _...
63.5(b)(6) 	 	 	
63.5(d)0)(i) 	
6T "VrtVIWirt

63j«d)(2) 	
.63.5(6) ...:.._ 	 _..: 	 :...

63.5(f)(?) 	
63.6(a)
63.6(b)(1H2)
63.5(b)(3H4)
63.6(b)(5) 	
fi3.fi(h)(7)
63.5(c}(lH2> 	
63.5(cj(5) 	 _ 	
63.6(e) 	 	
63.6(0(1) 	

63.6(f)(2){iu) 	
63.6(f)(2)(iv) 	
63.6(0(2) (v) 	
63.6(f)(3) . 	 	
63.6(g) 	 _..
63.6(h) 	 _

63.6(i)(2) 	
63.6(')(3) 	
63.6(i)(4)fi) 	 - 	

63.6(iM5) 	

63.6(i)(7) ...*~'.~~~~
Applies to
subpart N
Yes
Yes
(sin
Yes
No

Yes
Yes
w.-.
Yes
Yes 	 —
Yes 	
Yes
Yes.
Yes
Yes 	
No. 	

Yes
Yes

YP<;
Yes
Yes 	 . 	
Yes 	
Yes
Yc-,
Wo
Yes

Yes-
Yes

Yes 	
No .. . 	
NO
No
Yes
No 	
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No 	
Yes-
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes'
Comrrtent
§63-347 (a) of subpart N atso atows report submissions via tax and on electronic media.

§63340 at subpart N specifies appScabfflty.

This provision in subpart A is being deleted. Also, art-affected area and major sources are siajec
to sabpart N; there are no exemptions.
Sufcpart N riariffcs tf» iff*re»hi»y *" each Pafil9raPh '** s*-*part A to sources subject to subpart
N.
Subpart N specifies permit requirements for area sowces.

Subpart N clarifies that an area source that becomes a major source is subject to the recjiire-
ments tor major sources.
Additional terms defined in §63.341; when overlap between subparis A and rV occurs, subpart N
takes precedence.
Other units used in subpart N are defined in thai sufcpart.

Except replace the term "source" and "stationary source" in §63.5(a}(1) and (2) of- subpart A win
"affected resources."
Applies only to major affected sources.
Subpart N (§63.345) specifies requirements for the notification of construction or reconstruaxw



§63JJ45 <& subpart N. ;
Applies to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed except: (1) replace "source" in
§ S334d)<2) o( subpart A wdht "affected source"; and (2) actua) control efficiencies are submfted
with the NotfficaBon ol Compliance Status required by § 53.347(e).
Applies to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed.
Applies to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed.
Except replace "source" in § 63^ "afff*cff*d SO^JTCP "

Exceot replace "source" in §63-6(b)(5) of subpart A with, "affected source "
Provisions tor new area sources that become major sources are contented in § 63 343(a}(4) c!
subpart N.
Except replace "source" in §63.6fc)nW2) of subpart A with, "affected source."
Compliance provisions for existing area sources that become major sources are contained in
§63JJ«(a){3) ol subpart N.
§63.342(T) of miftfEjri N contains work pi'dctice standards (operation and maintenance rec(urfe-
mertfs) that override these provisions.
§ 63 34'{h) o' subpgi N sppcifie-s orfipn ih? s*a™^rri^ apply

§ 63.344(b) of subpart N specifies instances in which previous performance test res-jfrs tor exist-
ing sources are acceptaUe.


Subpart N does not contain any opacity or visible emission standards.

Except replace "source" in §63.6{i}{2)(i) and (f) of subpari A wr^i "affected source "

§63 3-^3(a)(5) of subpart N specifies the procedures fo* obtaining an exf€nsion of compliance and
the date by which such requests must be submitted. *

This paragraph onry references- "paraoraph (r}(4) 'ol this section** for compliance extension provv
sionS. But, §63.343(a)(6) ol subpart N also contains ptovisions tor requesting a compfiaiice e»-
lension. '•

-------
4978   Federal Register / Vql::60. No...l6 ./-Wednesday,--January 25, 1995-A Rules and-Regulations




       TABLE l TO SUBPART.N OF PART.63.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N—Continued
General provisions
reference
63.6(i)(8) .-. 	
63 6(i)(9)
63.6(0(1 0)(i)-(rv) 	
63.6(i)(10)(v)(A)
63.6(i)(10)(v)(B) 	
63.6(i)(11) ... .
63 6(0(12)0)
63.6(i)(12)(ii)-(ii') 	
63.6(0(13) .-. 	 	
• 63 6(i)(14)
63.6(0(16) 	
63 6(j) .
637(a)(1)
63.7(a)(2)(i)-(vi) 	
63.7(a)(2)(ix) 	
63.7(a)(3) 	
63.7(b)(l) 	
63.7(b)(2) 	
63.7(c) 	
63.7(d) 	
63.7(e) ..' 	
637(0
63.7(g)(l) 	 _ 	
63 7(Q)(3)
63.7(h)(1 H2) 	
63.7(h)(3)(i) 	 _ .
63 7(h)(3)(ii)-(iii) 	 :.
53 7(h)(4)-(5) 	 v ..:.
63 B(a)(1)
63 8(a)(2)
63.8(a)(4) 	 .....
638(b)(1)
63.8(b)(2) 	
63 B(b)(3) . . _ 	
63 8(c)(1)(i)
63 8(c)(1)(ii)
638(c)(1)(iii) 	
63.8(c)(2)-{3) •- 	 • 	 - 	
63 8(c)(4V-f7) 	 •. . .
63.8(d) 	 :....: 	 	 	
63.8(6) 	
63.8(0(1) 	 -
63.8(0(2) 	 „ 	
63.8(0(3) 	 	 	
63.8(0(4) 	
63.8(0(5) 	
63.8(0(6) 	 :.:.
63 8(a) ' . . . -.
63 9(a) 	
63 9(b)(1Hi)-(ii)
63 9(b)(1)(iii) 	
63 9(b)(2)
63 9(b)(3) 	

Applies to
subpart N
Yes 	
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No 	 : 	
Yes
No 	
Yes ..! 	
Yes 	 ...
Yes
No 	
Yes
Yes
Yes 	 -
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No :
Yes
No ._ 	 ......
No 	
No . _.'. 	
No 	 '.'... ....
No 	
No 	 	 	
No
No 	
No 	
Yes
No 	 _
Yes
Yes
Yes
No 	
No 	
Yes
No .
No 	
No ". 	
No 	

Comment
This paragraph only references "paragraphs (i)(4) through (i)(6) of this section" for compliance ex-
tension' provisions. But, §63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a
compliance extension.
This paragraph only references "paragraphs (i)(4) through (i)(6) of this section" and "paragraphs
(i)(4) and (i)(5) of this section" for compliance extension provisions. But, §63.343(a)(6) of sub-
part N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension.
This paragraph only references "paragraph (i)(4)" for compliance extension provisions But
§63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension.

This paragraph only references "paragraph (i)(4)(i) or (i)(5) of this section" for compliance exten-
sion provisions. But, §63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a com-
pliance extension.








§63 347(d) of subpart N requires notification prior to the performance test §63 344 (a) of subpart
. N requires submission of a site-specific test plan upon request.
§63.344(a) of subpart N specifies what the test plan should contain but does not require test plan
approval Of performance audit samples.
Except replace "source" in the first sentence of §63.7(d) of subpart A with "affected source."
Subpart N also contains test methods specific to affected sources covered by that subpart
§63 344(c)(2) of subpart N identifies CARS Method 425 as acceptable under certain conditions
Subpart N identifies the items to be reported in the compliance test (§63.344(a)] and the time-
frame for submitting the resutts (§63.347(0].

This paragraph- only references "§63.6(0" for compliance extension provisions But §63.343(a)(6)
. ol subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension


Work practice standards are contained in §63.342(0 of subpart N

. .
§63.344(d) of subpart N specifies the monitoring location when there are multiple sources.
§63.347(g)(4) of subpart N identifies reporting requirements when multiple monitors are used.
Subpart N requires proper maintenance of monitoring devices expected to be used by sources
. subject to subpart N. . ..-
§63J42(0(3)(iv) of subpart N specifies reporting when the O&W plan is not followed
§63.343(0(2) identifies tt>e criteria for whether O&M procedures are acceptable.
§63.344(d)(2) requires appropriate use of monitoring devices.

Maintenance of monitoring devices is required by §§63.342(0 and 63.344(d)(2) of subpart N
There are no performance evaluation procedures for the monitoring devices expected to be used
to comply with subpart N.
Instances in which the Administrator may approve alternatives to the monitoring methods and pro-
cedures of subpart N are contained in §63.343(c)(8) of subpart N.


Subpart N does not require the use of CEM's.
Monitoring data does not need to be reduced for reporting purposes because subpart N requires
measurement once/day. .
§63 343(a)(3) of subpart N requires area sources to comply with major source provisions if an in-
crease in HAP emissions causes them to become major sources.
§63347(c)(2) of subpart N specifies initial notification requirements for new 01 reconstructed af-
fected sources.
§63 347(c)(!) of subpart N specifies the information to be contained in the initial notification
§63347(c)(2) of subpart N specifies notification -requirements for new or reconstructed sources
that are not major affected sources.

-------
          Federal Register /  Vol. 60.  No.  16  /Wednesday. January  25,-1995 /Rules  and Regulations
         TABLE  1 TO SUBPART N OF PART 63.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART f4—Continued
General provisions
reference
63.9(b}(4) 	 • ...
63.9(b)(5) 	
63.9 (c) .
63.9(d) 	
63.9.'e) 	
63.9(0 	 - 	 - 	
63.9(g) 	 	
63.9(h)C!}-(3) 	
63.9(h)(5) . .„. 	
63.9(h)(6)
63.9(i) 	
63.9{j) . ... 	
63.10(3)
63.10(b)(i) 	 _..
63.10(b)(2)
63.10(b)(3)
63.10(c) 	
63.10(d)(i) 	
63.10(d}(2) 	
63.iO(d}(3)
63.10(d)(4)
63.iC(d)(5) _ 	
63.10(6) 	 	
63.10(0 	
63.11 	
63.12-63.15 	
Applies to
subpart N
No
No
Yes
-Yes
No
No
No . ..
NO 	
No 	
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No 	
No . ..
No 	
Yes
No 	
No 	
Yes
No 	
No 	
Yes
No 	
Yes
Comment


This paragraph onty references "§63.6(i)(4) through §53.6(i)(6)" for compliance extension p,m
sions. But, §63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions tor requesting a compliance II
tension. Subpart N provides a different timeframe for submitting the request than §63.6(i)(4}.«
This paragraph only references "the notification dates established in paragraph (g) of this si
tion." But. §63.347 of subpart N also contains notification dates.
Notification of performance test is required by § 63.347(d) of subpart N.

Subpart N does not require a performance evaluation or relative accuracy test for monitoring a
vices.
§63.347(e) of subpart N specifies information to be contained in the notification ol compila?!
status and the timeframe forsubmitting this information. __
Similar language has been incorporated- into § 53.347(e)(2)(iii) of subpart N.





§ 63.346(b) of subpart N specifies the records that must be maintained.
Subpart N applies to major and area sources.
Applicable requirements of §63.iO(c) have been incorporated into §63.346(b) of sutpart N.
•
§63.347(f) of subpart N specifies the timeframe for reporting performance test resets.
Subpart N does not contain opacity or visible emissions standards.

§63.3J2(f)(3)(iv) and § 63.347(gJ(3) ol subpart N specify reporting associated with maKunc'.ions. 1
§ 63.347(g) and (h) of subpart N specify the frequency of periodic reports of monitoring data isii
to establish compliance. Applicable requirements of §63.10(e) have been incorporated in|
§ 63.347(g) and (h).
Flares will hot be used to compry with the emmission limits.

   3. Appendix A to part 63 is amended
 by adding Methods 306 and 306a in
 numerical order to read as follows:

 Appendix A to part 63—Test Methods
 Method 306—Determination of Chromium
 Emissions From Decorative and Hard
 Chromium Electroplating and Anodizing
 Operations

 1. Applicability and Principle
   1.1 Applicability. This method applies to
 "he determination of chromium (Cr) in
 emissions from decorative and hard chrome
 electroplating facilities and anodizing
 operations.
   1.2 Principle, (a) A sample is extracted
 isoldnetically from the source using an
 uaheated Method 5 sampling train (40 CFR
, part 60, appendix A), with a glass nozzle and
 probe liner, but with the filter omitted. The
 Cr emissions are collected in an alkaline
 solution:  0.1 N sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or
 0.1 N sodium bicarbonate (NaHCOj). The
 collected  samples remain in the alkaline
 solution until analysis. Samples with high Cr
 concentrations may be analyzed using
 inductively coupled plasma emission
 spectrometry UCP) at 267.72 nm.
 Alternatively, if improved detection limits
 are required, a portion of the alkaline
 impinger  solution is digested with nitric acid
 ond analyzed by graphite furnace atomic
absorption spectroscopy (GFAAS) at 357.9
nm.
  fb) If it is desirable to determine hexavalent
chromium (Cr**) emissions, the samples may
be analyzed using an ion chromatogjaph
equipped with a post-column reactor (IC/
PCR) and a visible wavelength detector. To
increase sensitivity for trace levels of Cr"0,
a preconcentration system can be used in
conjunction with the IC/PCR.

2. Range, Sensitivity, Precision, and
Interferences
  2.1   Range. The recommended analytical
range for each of the three analytical
techniques is given below. The upper limit
of all three techniques can be extended
indefinitely by appropriate dilution.
  2.1.1  GFAAS Range. As reported in
Method 7191 of SW-846 (Citation 5 in
Bibliography), the optimum concentration
range for GFAAS is 5 to 100 jig Cr/1 of
concentrated analyte.
  2.1.2  1CP Range. A linear response curve
for ICP can be obtained in the range of 10 to
at least 500 ug Cr/1 of absorbing solution.
  2.1.3  1C/PCR Range. In 40 CFR part 266,
appendix IX, the lower limit of the  detection
range for IC/PCR when employing a
preconcentration procedure is reported to be
about 0.1 MgO~*/l of absorbing solution.
  2.2   Sensitivity.
  2.2.1  Analytical Sensitivity.
  2.2.1.1   ICP Analytical Sensitivity. The
minimum detection limit for ICP, as reported
in Method 6010A of SW-846, is 7 ug C-.'l.
  2.2.1.2  GFAAS Analytical Sensitivity.
The minimum detection limit for GFAAS. si
reported in Method 7191 of SW-646, is 1 pgf
Cr/1.                           - '   '
  2.2.1.3  IC/PCR Analytical Sensitivity.1 Tip
minimum detection limit for IC/PCR with a]
preconcentrator, as reported in 40 CFR part
266, appendix IX is 0.05 fig Cr-«/l.
  2.2.2  ln-stadc Sensitivity. The in-slack
sensitivity depends upon the analytical
detection limit, the volume of stack gas
sampled, and the total volume of the
impinger absorbing solution plus the rinses.
Using the analytical detection limits given m
sections 2.2.1.1. 2.2.1.2, and 2.2.1.3; a s'.zc'i.
gas sample volume of 1.7 dscn; and 3 total
liquid sample volume of 500 ml; the
corresponding in-slack detection limits are
0.0021 mg Cr/dscm for ICP. 0.00015 mg C-/
dscra for.CFAAS, and 0.000015 mg Cf'l
dscm for IC/PCR with preconcentralion.
However, it is recommended that the
concentration of Cr in the analytical
solutions be at least five times the analytical
detection limit to optimize sensitivity in the
analyses. Using this guideline and ihe-sarr.e
assumptions for impinger sample volume
and stack gas sample volume (500 ml and 1 7
dscm, respectively), the recommended
minimum stack concentrations for optifn-" i
sensitivity are 0.0103 mg Cr/dscm for ICP.  ;
0.00074 mg Cr/dscn for CFAAS, and
0.000074 mg Cr-«/dscm for IC/PCR with
preconcentration. If required, the in-slack
detection limits can be improved by'either'
increasing the stack gas sample volume,

-------
4S80     Federal Re^sier-/ Vol. 60;. No. 16. /- Wednesday. January 25v 198S /•  Rules and Regulations
reducing.the volume^of the digested sample
for GFAks. taproviag the analytical"
detection limits, or any combination ofthe
three.
  2.3  Precision.The following.precisian.
data have been reported for the three
analytical methods. In the case of the CFAAS
there is also bias.data-in.all cases*, when:
sain p ling, precision, is. combined with-
analytical precisionv tie, resulting, overall:
precision, may. belbu-er-
  2.3.1  GFA-AS Precision. As reported in.
Method 7191 of SW-846. ircasiagle
laboratory (EMSL), using Cincinnati. Ohio
tap water spiked;atcanceattatioos-of 1-9-..48,
and 77 jig Cr/1. the standard deviations were
rO_l,.±0.2,.and.±Oi8,Bespectively- Recoveries
at these levels were 97 percent, 101 percent.
and 102 percent, respectively-
  2.3.2  ICP Precision. As reported in
Method 6010A of SW-646. in an EPA round-
robin Phase 1 study, seven laboratories
applied the 1C? technique to acid/distilled
water matrices that had been spiked with
various metal concentrates.. For true-values-of
10. 50. and 150 ug Cr/1; the mean reported
values were lO^SQ^antfr 14fa-m-tne:li:ieeiais«fen.oF -
high-concentration- elements.
  (b) Spectral overlap may be compensated
for by computer correcting ths ra-w data after
rnonitnTing anH Tnpagnrino thg interfering.
element. At the 267.72-nm Cr analytical
wavelength, iron, manganese, and uranium
•are potential interfering,elements;.
Background and stray Light interferences, ran,
usually be compensated foe by, a. background
correction adjacent to >R<»_ anaTy-t"-ar li n g
Unresolved;overlap.requires-tieseJection of.
an alternative Cr wave length-Consult, the
instrumenr manufacturer's operation manual
fbr interference correction procedures..
  2.4.2'.2'  ICP'Phy-icar Interferences. High.
levels of dissolved solids in the samples- may-
cause significant jnaccuracies.due to salt
buil'duparrhenebulizer and torch tips.This
problem 'can- be-controlled1 by diluting the
sample or providing for extended rinse times
between sample analyses. Standards are
prepared  in the same matrix as the samples
(i.e.. 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N NaHCOj).
  2.4.2.3   ICP Chemical Interferences..These
include-morecular compound- formation..
ionization effects and solute-vaporization
effects-, and are-usually not significant ITT ICP;
especially if the standards and samples a:e
marn;* matched-
  2.413-  IC/PGKtaterferenees. Components.
in the sample matrix may cause Cr*6 to
converttatriualeat chromiiim (Cr*3) or
cause.Cr"3 tb.convert to-Cr"*. The
csromalogranhic:separation- 06 Cr -|S us ing-
ion chromatography reduces- die potential- for
other metals  to  interfere with the post-
coliran.reacrion.  For the IQtCR analysis.
only compounds that coelute with Cr*6 and
afreet the diphenylcarbazTde reaction will"
cause interference. Periodic analyses of
reagent, water blanks-are used to demonstrate
that the analytical system is essentially free.
of contamination. Sample cross-
contamination that can occur, (then higE.-
level andTow-leyel'sampres or standards are.
analyzed'alternately is eliminated By
thorough  purging.of the sample loop. Purging
can easily, be achieved by. in creasing, the
injection volume of the samples to ten.ti*aes-
the size of the sample loop..

3. Apparatus
  3.1  Sampling Train. A schematic.o£ the
sampling train used in this method Ls. shown
in Figure  306rT. The train is the. same as.
Methods, section.2.T (40CFR.part.60,.
appendix A), except that the. filter is omitted.
and quartz or borasilicate glass.must.be used
for the probe nozzle and liner in.place of
stainless steel. Lc is noL necessary to.neat the
probe liner. Probe fittings of plastic such as
Teflon, polypropylene, etc are necommended'-
over metal'fittings-to prevent coruaminalioa.
If desired, a single combined'probe nozzle.
and liner, may be used..buLsunh a.singie.glass
piece Ts not'a- requirement- oCthis.
me thodblbgy.. Use. 0.1N" NaQH or. 0.1N
NaKCOi in tha i'mpingers;Ln.pEace o£ water.
  T.2'  Sample.RfiCOvery..Sa*aa:as Methods^
section. 2.2. C-fO CFR part 6D..apDeadixAJ^
\virri rfie fbubvvihg.except-ions:.
   3.211  Ptobe-Lirier arjJ Pr3be-"^>zzle
 Brushes.. Brushes-are not necessary tor-
 sample-recovery. If a probe brash-isus«d. it
 must 5e-nonmetal!ic.
   7.T.2'  SamDleRecovery Solution. Use 0.1
 NT NaOH or ff.T N XaHCOi. whichever was
 used as the impinger absorbing solution, in.
 pl-tcenf acetone to recover tae sampfe.
   3.2.3  Sample Storage Containers.
 Polyethylene,, with leak-free screw capi.500-
 ml"or 1,000 ml.
   3.2.4  Filtration Apparatus for IC'PCK-
 Tefion. or equivalent, filter holder and 0. "5-
 um acetate, or equivalent, filter.
   3.3  Analysis; For analysis, the follo'.ving
 equipment is seeded.
   3.3.1  General.
   3.3_L1_  PhiUips.Beaks.-s.  (P-hillips-beakers
 are preferred; but regular twakers-Gan also-be-
 used.)
   3.3.i:2   HotPlat^.
   3.3.1.3   Volumetric Flasks. Class- A.
 various sizes as appropriate.
 "3-.3-.1.4   Assorted  Pipettes.
   3.3.2  Analysis-by GFAAS.
   3;3-.2;l   Chromium Hollow Cathode Lamp
 ar Electrodeless Discharge Lamp.
   3:3.2'.2-  Graphite Furnace Atomic.
.Absorption S'pecL-ophotor-'.eter.  i
   3.3.3  Analysis by ICP.
   3.3.3.1-   ICP Spectrometer. Computer-
 cur.trolled emission  spectrometer with
 background correction and radio frequency
 generator.
   3.3.3.2'  Argon Gas Supply. VTelidJng grade
 or better..
   3.3.4  Analysis by IC/PCR.
   3.3.4.1   IC/PCR System. High, performance
 liquid'chromatograph pump, sample
 injection valve, post-column reageTTf delivery
 and mixing-system, and a-vijibfe-detecror.
 capable of operating  at 520 r.m..aU with a
 nornnetattic (or irrertl'rToivparrr. An
 electronic peak area  mode is recommended.
 but other recording devices and integration
 techniques are acceptable- provided' the-
 repeatability criteria-and the-lmearftj'-critcria
 for the-calibratiorrcur.-e-described hr section
 6.4.1 can be satisfied. A sample loading-
 system will be required ifpreconcenlratio:: is
 employed.
   3.3.4.J  . AnalyticalColuzz-A high.
 performance ion. chrorna^3graQh.(HPlC)
 nonmetalliccolumn. wi;h aaioa sepnration
 characteristics and a  high loading capacity
 designed forseparauo:Lof rnemlchelating:
 com pou nds. to.- prevent mera L ir.terferenci:.
 Resolution describe'd in.-sectiorD5.Smust be-
 obtained A: non-naaliic.guard column wUh
 the sarae:ion.-«xcrrange-marenal:is.
 recommended
   3'.3;4".3'  Preconcentration Column. An-
 HPIC nonme
-------
z
o
o
o
o
                   Tomporaturo
                     Sonsor
       •n
       H-
      IQ
       C
       M
       ft)

       u>
       o
       M-
       3
      U)
       tn
       n
       y
       fD
       n
 TypaS'
Pilot Tubo


     Glass
     Nozzle
                                 Probo
         Tomporaturo
           Sonsor
                                                                                Implnger Train
Stack
Wnll
                                                                       Temperature
                                                                          Sonsor
Type S Pilot
   Tubo
                                                                                                 Vacuum
                                                                                                   Uno

-------
4382.    Federal Register  / Vol.  68. No.  16  t Wednesday. January 25.  1995 /  Rules and. Regulations
  3.3.4.4  0.45-um Filter Cartridge. For the
removal of insoluble material. To be used just
prior to sample injection/analysis.

•4. Reagents
  Unless otherwise indicated, all reagents
shall conform to the specifications
established by the Committee on Analytical
Reagents of tie American Chemical Society
(ACS reagent grade). Where such
specifications are not available, use the best
available grade.
  4.1  Sampling.
  4.1.1  Water. Reagent water that conforms
to ASTM Specification D.U93-77, Type tt
(incorporated by reference—see §63.14). Iris
recommended that water-blanks be checked
prior to preparing samplfng.D»agents to
ensure that the Cr content is. less than, tie-
analytical detection limir.
  4.1.2  Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)
Absorbing Solution, 0.1 N or Sodium
Bicarbonate (NaHCQj).' Absorbing.Solution.
0.1 N. Dissolve 4.0 g of'sodium.hydroxide in
1 1 of water, or dissolve 8.5 g-of sodium
bicarbonate  in 1 1 of water.
  4.2  Sample Recovery.
  4.2.1   0.1 N NaOH or" 0.1 N NaHCOj. See
section 4.1.2. Use the same solution for
recover)' as was used in the impingers.
  4.2.2.  pH Indicator Strip, for E/PCR. pH
indicator capable of determining;thepH of
solutions between the pH range of 7 and  12,
at 0.5 pH intervals.
  4.3  Sample Preparation and Analysis'.
  4.3.1   Nitric Acid (HNOj)-, Concentrated.
for CFAAS. Trace metals  grade or better
HNOj must be used for reagent preparation.
The ACS reagent grade HNOj is acceptable
for cleaning glassware.
  4.3.2  HNOj. 1.0 percent fv/vj-. for GFAAS.
Add. with stirring. 10 ml  of concentrated
HNOj  to 800 ml of water. Dilute to 1,000 ml
with water. This reagent shall contain  less-
than 0.001 mgCr/1.
  4.3.3  Calcium Nitrate Ca(NOj)2 Solution
(10 ug Ca/ml) for GFAAS. Prepare the
solution by weighing 36 rag of Ca(NOjh into
a 1 I volumetric flask. Dilute with water to
1 1
  4.3.4  Matrix Modifier, for GFAAS.  See
instrument manufacturer's manual for
suggested matrix modifier.
  4.3.5  Chromatographic Eluent. for IC/
PCR. The eluent used in the analytical
system is ammonium sulfate based. Prepare
by adding 6.5 ml of 29 percent ammonium
hydroxide (NR»OH) and 33 g of ammonium
sulfate ((Nl-UhSOJ to 500 ml of reagent
water.  Dilute to 1 1 with reagent water and
mix well. Other combinations of eluents and/
or columns may be employed provided peak
resolution, as described in section 5.5.
repeatability and linearity, as described in
section 6.4.1, and analytical sensitivity are
acceptable.
  4.3.6  Post-Column Reagent. ForlC/PCR.
An effective post-column reagent for use with
the chromatographic eluent described in
section 4.3.5 is a diphenylcarbazide (DPC)
based system. Dissolve 0.5 g of 1.5-
diphenyicarbazide in 100 ml of ACS grade
methanol. Add 500 ml of reagent water
containing 50 ml of 96 percent
spectrophotometricgrade sulfuric acid.
Dilute to 1 1 wills reagent water.
  4.3.7   Chromium-Standard Stock Solution
(1.000 mg/1). Procure a certified aqueous
standard or dissolve 2.829 g.of potassium
dichzornate-(K:Cr:C>7.)'fn water and dilute to
11.
    4.3.B  Calibration Standards for GFAAS.
Chromium solutions for GFAAS calibration
shall be prepared to contain l.ffpercent (vi
vJ.HNO3. The zero standard shall be 1.0
percent (v/v) HMQj  ralihratJnn.ttanffai-H*-
should be prepared daily by diluting the Cr
standard-stock solution (section 4.3-Zr1 ««<•!>
1.0 percent R\Oj. Use. aL least four standards
to make the calibration- curve;. Suggested
levels are 0, 5.50. and 100 jigCc/t.
  4.3.9   Calibration Standard^ for ICP or IC/
PCR. Prepare calibration standards-for TCP or
1C/PCR byrd-Uutingithe Crstandard stock-
soliition (section 4.3.71 with Oi N NaOH or
0\1 N NaHCOj,. whichever was used as the.
impinger absorbing soLutfonvto achieve-a-
matrix similar CCT the acrnzl: field samples.
Suggested:levels-are-9-, 25-. SfkandTOO'ug-Cr/
1  for ICP. and0.0.5, 5, and lOiigCr-'/l for
IC/PCR.
  4.4"  Glassware-Cleaning. Reagents.
  4,4.1   HNOo. ConcentratEtiTheACS
reagent grade or. equivalent.
  4.4.2   Water. Reagent water that conforms
to ASTNtSpecification D1193-77. Type IL
(incorporated by reference—see §63.14).
  4.4.3'HNQj-10 percent  (v/v). Add with
stining-SDO'mJ of concentrated HNOj to-a
flask containing approximately 4,000, mi of
water. Dilute ID 5,000 ml with water. Mix
Well. The r»ag«»nt 'hall rnntain iixre-than  ? |]^
Cr/1.

5. Procedure
  5.1   Sampling, (a) Same asMethod 5,.
section 4.1 G*0 CFR parr60. appendix Al.
except omit the filter and  filter holder from.
the sampling train, use a glass:nozzleaud
probe liner, do not neat the probe.place  100
ml of 0.1 N NaOH or O.T N' NaHCOj in each
of the first two impingers, and record the
data for each run on a data s&eet such as the
one shown in Figure 306-2.
  fb) Clean all glassware prior to sampling in
hot soapy water designed1 for laboratory
cleaning of glassware. Next, rinse the
glassware three times with tap water,
followed by threeadditional rinses with
reagent water. Ttren soak all glassware in 10
percent (v/v) HNOj solution fora minimum
of 4 hours, rinse three times with reagent
water, and allowed to air dry. Cover all
glassware openings where contamination can
occur with Parafilm. or equivalent, until the
sampling train is assembled for sampling.
  (c) If the sample is going to be analyzed for
Cr * 6 using IC/PCR. determine the pH of the
solution in the first impinger at the end of the
sampling run-using.a.p.H indicator strip.  The.
pHofthe-scrfiTtion.sTiwrtibe'greater than »5-.
if not. the concentration of the NaOH or
NaHCOj impinger absorbing solution should
be increased to 0.5 N and  the sample should
be rerun.
  5.2   Sample Recover)-.  Follow the basic
procedures of'Method's, section  4.2. with the
exceptions noted below, a filter is cot
recovered from this train.
  5.2.1   Container No. 1. Measure the
volume of the liquid in the first, second, and
third impingers and quantitatively transfer
into a labelled sample container. Use
approximately 200 to 300 ml of 0.1 N NaOH
or 0.1 N NaHCOj to rinse the probe nozzle.
probe liner, three impingers. and connecting
glassware; add this rinse to the same
container.
  5.2i2   Container No. 2 (Reagent Blank).
Placeapproximately 500 ml of 0.1 N NaOH
or 0.1 N NaHCOj absorbing solution in a
labeled sample container.
  5.2".3   Sample Filtration for IC/PCR- If the
sample is to be analyzed for Cr"4 by IC/PCR.
it must be filtered immediately following
recovery to remove any insoluble matter.
Nitrogen gas may be used as a pressure assist
to the filtration process. Filter the entire
Gontents-of Container No. 1 through a 0.45-
jun  acetate filter (or equivalent), and collect
the  filtrate irta 1,000 ml graduated cylinder.
Rinse the sample container with reagent
water three separate times, pass these rinses
through the filter,  and add the rinses to the
sample filtrate. Determine the final volume of
the  filtrate and rinses and return them to the
rinsed polyethylene sample container.
  5.2.4   Sample Preservation. Refrigerate
samples upon receipt. (Containers Nos. 1 and
2).
  5.3   Sample Preparation and Analysis for
CFAAS. For analysis by GFAAS. an acid
digestion of the alkaline impinger solution is
required. Two types of blanks are required
for the analysis. The calibration blank is used
in establishing the analytical curve, and  the
reagent blank is used to assess possible
contamination resulting from the sample
processing. The 1.0 percent  HNOj is the
calibration blank. The 0.1 N NaOH solution
or the 0.1 N NaHCOj from section 5.2.2 is the
reagent blank. The reagent blank must be
carried: through the complete analytical
proceriiim. including the acid digestion,  and
must contain the same acid concentration in
the  fmal:5olution as the sample solutions.
  5.3.1   Acid Digestion for  GFAAS. (a) In a
beaker, add 10 ml of concentrated HN'Oj to
a sample aliquot of 100 ml taken for analysis.
Cover the beaker with a vtatch glass. Place
the  beaker on a hot place and reflux the
sampfe down tn-neardiyness. Add another
5 ml of concentrated HKOj to complete the
digestion-. CarefuDy reflnxthe sample volume
down to near dryness. Wash down the beaker
walls  and watch glass with reagent water.
The final concentration of HNOj in the
solution should be 1 percent (v/v}. Transfer
the  digested sample to a 50 ml volumetric
flask.  Add 0.5 ml of concentrated HNOj. and
1 mtof the ISO |ig/ml of Ca (NOj):.
  fb) Dilute to 50 ml with reagent water. A
different final volume may be used, based on
the  expected Cr concentration, but the HNOj
concentration must be mainfaiaesiai t
percent (v/v).
BILLING COO£ 6S6O-&0-P

-------



, t- _' 	
rWrnlnr
_ „„ ,
Him No
Sample bo?
Meier box
C" IVtor
CNc1
Mr,
?

Pi|0l tybe coefficient, C
Trmrw
, number





Tpt*l
(mln.)






Avmge
••
p •- 	
(in. H|)







SlACK
temptrnturo
(Ts) CF)



-



Amblep
O:\rotJKi
F'rplje K
NQ?.?!? i
Leak r;it
Stntic pr
SCIII;MA 1 1C Ol: STACK CROSS SIXTION
Velocity
head '
(ln.HS20)







Pressure
difforenllal
'me'cr
(in. H29)







Gas meter
reading
(ft3)







itimperiitur
flc prwurc
\ mQl.Miire,
ngth, (f^,)^
cJerMinc^iQi
cplibratecl
p ('•fn1)
ensure, (|n.
C 1- U

w
J
1 Mn ,.
ip'zzle (Jiameter, (in.). ^ • .
HE) 	 	 „ 	

Gut sample
temperature at dry g»s
meter
Inlet
(»F)





Avg.
Avg,
Outlet





Avg.

Temperjture
pf gas leaving
condenser or
last
impinger(*F)







*~ " " " ' ' . " 	 *" "*
Figure 306-2. Chromium Field Data Sheet.
*
i
o
k-»
cn
1
f
C"
hrt
(O
V
••»
1
B-.
0,
on
5
r
if»
J

-------
 4984     Federal Register /  Vol; 60,  No.  16  / Wednesday,  January 25,  1995  /  Rules and Regulations
   5.3.2 Sample Analysis by GFAAS. (a) The
 357.9-nm wavelength line shall be used.
 Follow the manufacturer's operating
 instructions for all other spectrophotometer
 parameters.
   (b) Furnace parameters suggested by the
 manufacturer should be employed as
 guidelines. Since temperature-sensing
 mechanisms and temperature controllers can
 vary between instruments and/or with time,
 the validity of the furnace parameters must
• be periodically confirmed by systematically
 altering the furnace parameters while
 analyzing a standard. In this manner, losses
 of analyte due to higher-than-necessary
 temperature settings or losses in  sensitivity
 due to less  than optimum settings can be
 minimized. Similar verification of furnace
 parameters may be required for complex
 sample matrices. Calibrate the GFAAS
 system following the procedures specified in
 section 6.
   (c) Inject a measured aliquot of digested
 sample into the furnace and atomize. If the
 concentration found exceeds the calibration
 range, the sample should be diluted with the
 calibration  blank solution (1.0 percent HNOj)
 and reanalyzed. Consult the operator's
 manual for suggested injection volumes. The
 use of multiple injections can improve
 accuracy and help detect furnace pipetting
 errors.
   (d) Analyze a minimum of one matrix-
 matched  reagent blank per sample batch to
 determine if contamination or any memory
 effects are occurring. Analyze a calibration
 blank and a midpoint calibration check
 standard  after approximately every 10 sample
 injections.                      =
   (e) Calculate the Cr concentrations:
   (1) By the method of standard additions
 (see operator's manual),
   (2) From the calibration curve, or
   (3) Directly from the instrument's
 concentration readout. All dilution or
 concentration factors must be taken into
 account. All results should  be reported in |jg
 Cr/ml with  up to  three significant figures.
   5.4  Sample Analysis by ICP. (a) The ICP
 measurement is performed directly on the
 alkaline impinger solution; acid digestion is
 not necessary provided the  samples and
 standards are matrix matched.  However. ICP
 should only be used when the solution
 analyzed  has a Cr concentration greater than
 35 tig/1.
   (b) Two types of blanks are required for the
 analysis. The calibration blank is used in
 establishing the analytical curve, and the
 reagent blank is used to assess possible
 contamination resulting from sample
 processing.  Use either 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N
 NaHCOj,  whichever was used for the
 impinger  absorbing solution, for the
 calibration blank. The calibration blank can
 be prepared fresh iri  the laboratory: it does
 not have to be from the same batch of
 solution that was  used in the Held. Prepare
 a sufficient quantity  to flush the system
 between standards and samples. The reagent
 blank (section 5.2.2)  is a sample of the
 impinger  solution used for sample collection
 thaj i:son>"ecied in the field drrir.g the testing
 program.
   (c) Set up the instrument  wi:h proper
 opfirati.-.g parameters ir.cludir.g wavelength.
background correction settings (if necessary'),
and interfering element correction settings (if
-necessary). The instrument must be allowed
to become thermally stable before beginning
performance of measurements (usually
requiring at least 30 min of operation prior
to calibration). During this warraup period,
the optics] calibration and torch position
optimization may be performed (consult the
operator's manual).
   (d) Calibrate the instrument according to
the instrument manufacturer's recommended
procedures, and the procedures specified in
section 6.3. Before analyzing the samples,
reanalyze the highest calibration standard as
if it were a sample. Concentration values
obtained should not deviate from the actual
values by more than 5 percent, or the
established control limits, whichever is lower
(see sections 6 and 7). If they do, follow the
recommendations of the instrument
manufacturer to correct for this condition.
   (e) Flush the system with the calibration
blank solution for at least 1 min before the
analysis of each sample or standard.  Analyze
the midpoint calibration standard and the
calibration blank after each 10 samples. Use
the average intensity of multiple exposures
for both standardization and sample  analysis
to reduce random error.
   (0 Dilute and reanalyze samples that are
more concentrated lhan the linear calibration
limit or use an alternate, less sensitive Cr
wavelength for which quality control data are
already established.
   (gj If dilutions are performed, the
appropriate factors must be applied to
sample values. All results should be  reported
in jig Cr/ml with up to three significant
figures.
   5.5  Sample Analyses by IC/PCR.  (a) The
Cr*6 content of the sample filtrate is
determined by IC/PCR. To increase
sensitivity for trace levels of chromium, a
preconcentration system is also used in
conjunction with the IC/PCR.
   (b) Prior to preconcentration and/or
analysis, filter all field samples through a
0.45-ura filter. This filtration  should  be
conducted just prior to sample injection/
analysis.
   (c) The preconcentration is accomplished
by selectively retaining the analyte on a solid
absorbent (as described in section 3.4.3.3),
followed by removal of the analyte from the
absorbent. Inject the sample into a sample
loop of the  desired size (use repeated
loadings or a larger size loop for greater
sensitivity). The Cr"* is collected on the
resin bed of the column. Switch the injection
valve so that the eluent displaces the
concentrated Cr*4 sample, moving it off the
preconcentration column and onto the 1C
anion separation column. After separation
from other sample components, the Cr" 6
forms a specific complex in the post-column
reactor with the DPC reaction solution, and
the complex is detected by visible absorbance
at a wavelength of 520 nm. The amount of
absorbance measured is proportional to the
concentration of the Cr*6 complex formed.
Compare  the 1C retention time and the
absorbance of the Cr*6 complex with known
Cr*6 standards analyzed under identical
conditions to provide both qualitative and
quantitative analyses.
  (d) Two types of blanks are required for the
analysis. The calibration blank is used in
establishing the analytical curve, and the
reagent blank is used to assess possible
contamination resulting from sample
processing. Use either 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N
NaHCOj, whichever was used for the
impinger solution, for the calibration blank.
The calibration blank can be prepared fresh
in the laboratory; it does not have to be from
the same batch  of solution that was used in
the field. The reagent blank (section 5.2.2) is
a sample of the impinger solution used for
sample collection that is collected in the field
during the testing program.
  (e) Prior to sample analysis, establish a
'stable baseline with the detector set at the
required attenuation by setting the eluent
flow rate at approximately 1 ml/min and the
post-column reagent flow rate at
approximately 0.5 ml/min. Note: As long as
the ratio of eluent flow rate to PCR flow ra'.e
remains constant, the standard curve should
remain linear. Inject a sample of reagent
water to ensure that no Cr"6 appears in the
water blank-
  (f) First, inject the calibration standards
prepared, as described in section 4.3.9 to
cover the appropriate concentration range,
starting with the lowest standard first. Next,
inject, in duplicate, the calibration reference
standard (as described in section 7.3.1),
followed by  the reagent blank (section 5.2.2),
and the field samples. Finally, repeat the
injection of the  calibration standards to
assess instrument drift. Measure areas or
heights of the Cr*6/DPC complex
chromatogram peaks. The response for
replicate, consecutive injections of samples
must be within  5 percent of the average
response, or the injection should be repeated
until the 5 percent criterion can be met. Use
the  average response (peak areas or heights)
from the duplicate injections of calibration
standards to generate a linear calibration
curve. From the calibration curve, determine
the  concentrations of the field samples
employing the average response from the
duplicate injections.

6. Calibration
  6.1   Sampling Train Calibration. Perform
all of the calibrations described in Method 5,
section 5 (40 CFR part 60. appendix A). The
alternate calibration procedures described in
section 7 of Method 5 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix A) may also be used.
  6.2   GFAAS Calibration. Either run a
series of chromium standards and a
calibration blank and construct a calibration
curve by plotting the concentrations of the
standards against the absorbencies, or using
the  method of standard additions, plot added
concentration versus absorbance. For
instruments  that read directly in
concentration, set the curve corrector to rcsd
out  the proper concentration, if applicable.
This is customarily performed automatically
with most instrument computer-based dn:a
systems.
  6.2.1  GFAAS Calibration Curve. If a
calibration curve is used, it should be
prepared daily with a minim-urn of a
calibration blank and three standards.
Calibration standards for total chromium
should start  with 1 percent v/v HN'Cs wi:!i

-------
          Federal Register  / VoK  60. No.  16  / Wednesday. January  25. 1995. / R^fes: aad Regubtiore
r.O r'nrnmiiiTTi tnr thg patihgafiryq KJanV- wiA
appropriate increases'in total ciiromium
concentration for the ot&ercaEbralfon   m
stan cards; (-see sectfon 1.3.9J- Cafibratioa
standarrfs jcoriW te piey«ue(J fiw>li daily.
  e.3  ICPCafifcratistt. CaEferate-tne-
LLJ>I—nuttagacrtiitfiag to the fesaunrenf
tzanafaetuceEs: •"- IUHIIU»«T<*«»J procedures,
using a catibratioa Ma
for the initial calibration. Calibration:
standards should be prepared fresh daily, as
described: in. secfroa 4. 15. Be- sare'tSaf
samples and calibration standards are- matrix
matched. Flush, the. system with, the
calibration blank between each standard. Use
the average intensity of multiple exposures
for both standardization and sample azalysfs
to reduce random error.
   6'A  IOPCR Calibration. Prepare a
calibratftm orrve using the calibration blank
and three- eatibidtiuii stJuuVJs prepared
fresh- daily 39 deser&ed Frt sectfon 4.3.9. Rnn
the-stantrards with- The
described hi sectina 5-5.

~. QuaiP.y Ccn':o[
   7 J . GEAASQuaiitt Control
   7.1.1.  Cf.iAS.CaiiaialiDa Reference
Standards. rf a, calibration curve is used.it -
must be verified by use ofat Feast one
calibration: reference standard (made from a
rsfererrie- material1 or other independent
standard nraterre IT er or neer-the. mid-range of
the-caUcratioa curre. The-cafibratioTi  .
reference staraiacd msst be measured wShfn
1 ft percent; of it's traE«aJae.fcr the. curve- to-
be considered, valid. Ihe curve most be
validated before. sacio.ie analyses- are
 "r.l.2  CEAAS rJip,- k Standards. (a.1 Run a
 check standard and a calibration. biaak.after
 approximately. every 10 sample infections..
 ar.d at The end of the ar.afytical run. These
 standards are rue, ur- parr. to monitor the liTe
 and perrbrmenee-ofthe grzpfrrte- Rrbe. Lack
 of refwoeucibrTrryor a sfgnfffcartt change- in
 the signal fo: the check standard indicates
 that the graphite tube should be replaced.
 Check standards can be the mid-range
 calibration standard or the reference
 standard. The results of the check standard
 shall agree within 10 percent of the expected
 value. If not. terminate the analyses, correct
 the problem, recalibrate the instrument, and
 reanalyze al! samples analyzed subsequent to
 the last acceptable check standard analysis.
  (b) The results of the calibration blank are
 to agree within three standard  deviations of
 the mean blank value. If not. repeat the
 analysis two more times and average the
 results. If the average is not within three
 standard  deviations of the background mean.
 terminate the analyses, correct the problem.
 recalibrate, and reanalyze all samples
 analyzed subsequent to the last acceptable
 calibration blank analysis.
  7.1.3-  GFAAS Duplicate Samples. Run one
 duplicate sample for every 20 samples, (or
 one per source test, whichever is more-
 frequent). Duplicate samples are brought
 through the whole sample preparation and
 analytical process separately. Duplicate
 samples shall agree within 10 percent.
  7.1.4  GFAAS Matrix Spiking. Spiked
 samples shall be prepared and analyzed daily
 to ensure lhat.correct procedures are being
followed and that-all equipment is operating
properlv. Spiked sample recovery analyses
should iudicaJfi a recovery for the-Cr spifce-
of between 75 and IZSpercenLSpSeaare
added prior to any sample preparation- Or
levels in the spiked sampfe.sao**l<£ pnwfde
final solution concentrations that fall within.
the linear oortion-of the calibration curve.
  7.T.5   GTAASMethod of Standard
Additions.  Whenever sampfe matrix "
problems are suspected aid standard/sample
matrix matching is not possible or whenever
a new sampfe matrix fs being analyzed, the-
method of standard additions.shall be used
for the analysis of aU extracts. Section. 5.4_2
of Method 12" t^tJ CFK part 60.appendlxAJ
specifies a performance, test to determine if
the method of standard additions is-
necessary.
  7.1.6  GFAAS Reagent Blank Samples^
Analyze a minimum  of one Datrix-matched.
reagent blank (section 5.2.21 per sample batch
to determine if contamination or. rfrrcfiry
effects are occurring. The results should
agree within three standard deviations of the
mean: biank vatae.
  7.2  ICPQbaiitjrOmlial-
  7.iJ.  ICP Imerfereccer Check. Prepare an-
interference check solution to contaie known
concentrations of iriter£ering.elemen£s that
will provide an adequate test of the
correction factors in- the event of ptrteiUial-
spectral interferences; Two potential
interferences, aott and manganese-, mar be
prepared as 1,00(J pg/mJ aorf 2O& ng-feF
solutions; respecrfvevy. Thesofutiocs-shoulrf
be prepared in ditute-RNOi ft-5 percent?.
Particular care-must be token-to enstrre that
the solnrieDs-and/or salts used to prepare the
solutions-are-eflCPgrade-purity (r.e>.. thatno-
rr.easurabfe Cr cont-anunettbtr exists- itr tire-
salts^solutions). Consfnerciafly prepared
interfering-element check standards- are-
available. Verify the interelement coueerie 11
factors every three months by znalyzing rtre
interference c&«dt solution-. The correction
factors are-cateulated according to- the-
instrument manufacturer's directions-. If
iaterelement' correction factors are-osed
properly, no false Cr should be detected.
  7.2.2  ICP Calibration Reference
Standards. Prepare a calibration reference
standard in the same alkaline matrix as the
calibration standards; it should be at least 10
times the instrumental detection limit This
reference standard should  be prepared from
a different  Cr stock solution source than that
used for preparation  of the calibration curve
standards and is used to verify the accuracy
of the calibration curve. Prior to sample
analysis, analyze at least one reference
standard. The calibration reference standard
must be measured within 10 percent of it's
true value for the curve to  be considered
valid. The curve must be validated before
sample analyses are performed.
  7.2.3  ICP Check Standards. Run a check
standard and a  calibration blank after every
10 samples, and at the end of the analytical
run. Check standards can be the mid-range
calibration standard  or the reference
standard. The results of the check standard
shall agree within 10 percent of the expected
value; if not. terminate the analyses, correct
the problem, recalibrate the instrument, and
rerun all samples analyzed subsequent to the
 last accepeabhtcheck standard smafwet-nu
 results of the calibration Wanft are- *> •».»",
 within three, ssmdard de^fKms-of u^
 Want «ahit If not; repeat the anafysfrewo
 ocre-times and avenge the-resuhs. rTlhe- -•'.
 average isnot withfe three-standard "••  -,
 deviations oi the bacJsgroanrf near;.
 terminate the analyses, correct the- probrenj.
 recalibrate, and reanalyze aft samples
 analyzed subsequent to the last acceptable
 calibration blank analysis.
   7.2.-5  ICP Duplicate SampBes. Analyze ona
 duplicate sample- for erery 2O sarmptes, for
 one-per source test, whichever rs more
 frequent). Duplicate samples are. farougfil
 through the- whofe- sample preparation and
 analytical-process. Dnptrcate sarnptesshall
 agree within 1» percent.
   7.2.5  ICP Reagent Blank Samples.
 Analyze- a. mjmmani o£ one matrix-matched
 reagent blank (section 5.2.2) per sample batdi
 to-detennLne: i£ contamination or memory-
 effects are occurring. The results sisoubd
 agree within three standard delations of the
 mean blank ralue-
   713  IC/PCR Qna^ty Co turot
   7.3.1  IC/PCR Calibration Reference
 Standards. Prepare a calibration refereace
 standard in the same- atkaJEne- matrix as the
 calibration standards at a concentration that
 isat or near the mid-peintof the calibration
 curve. This-reference standard should  be
 prepared Jrom a different Cr slock solution
 source; than that used for preparing the
 calibration curve.standards..The reference
 standard is. used to- verify the. accuracy ct the
 calibration curvet. Prior to sample anafysis,
 analyze at least, one reference; standard. The
 results of tins analysis of the reference
 standard must be within KX percent of the-
 true- value of the.reference standard for the
•calibration curve to be considered valid. The
 curve must be validated before-sampie.
 analyses, are performed-
   7.3.2  IC/PCR Check Spaniards, (a; Run
 the calibration blank and calibration
 standards with trie faeldsampfes as described
 rrr section 5.5. Fbreach standard^determine
 the peak areas (recommended! or' the peal:
 heights,  calculate the average response from
 the duplicate injections, and plot  the average
 response against the Crt-6 concentration in
 ug/1. The individual responses for each
 calibration standard determined before and
 after field sample analysis must be within 5
 percent of the average response  for the
 analysis to be.valid. If the 5 percent criteria .
 is exceeded, excessive drift and/or
 instrument degradation may have occurred.
 and must be corrected before further analyses
 are performed.
   CD) Employing linear regression, calculates
 predicted value for each calibration standard
 using the average response for the duplicate
 injections. Each predicted value must  be •
 within 7 percent of the  actual value for the
 calibration curve to be considered acceptable.
 If not acceptable, remake and/or rerun the
 calibration standards. If the  calibration curve
 is still unacceptable, reduce the range of the
 curve.     .                         '
   7.3.3  IC/PCR Duplicate Samples. Analyze
 one duplicate sample for every  20 samples,
 (or one per source test,  whichever is more
 frequent). Duplicate samples are brought
 through  the whole sample preparation and

-------
4986    Federal Register-/ VoL 60,'No.  16  /-.Wednesday, -January  25, 1995V Kules and "Regulations-
analytical process. Duplicate samples shall
agree within 10 percent.
  7.3.4   1CP Reagent Blank Samples.
Analyze a minimum of one matrix-matched
reagent blank (section 5.2.2) per sample batch
to determine if contamination or memory
effects are occurring. The results should
agree within three standard deviations of the
mean blank value.

8. Emission Calculations
  Carry out the calculations, retaining one
extra decimal figure beyond that of the
acquired  data. Round off figures after fina]
calculations.
  8.1 Total Cr in Sample. Calculate Mo. the
total pg Cr in each sample, as follows:
Mo = (V^)(Cs)(F)(D)'   Eq.306-1
where:
V'mi = Volume of impinger contents plus
    rinses, ml.  .
Cs = Concentration of Cr in sample solution,
    |jg Cr/ml.
F = Dilution factor.
= Volume ofaliquol after dilution, ml:
    Volume of aliquot before dilution, ml
D = Digestion factor.
= Volume of sample aliquot after digestion,
    ml; Volume of sample aiiquot submitted
    to digestion, ml
  8.2  Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature
and Average Orifice Pressure Drop. Same as
Method 5, section 6.2.
  8.3  Dry Gas Volume. Volume of Water
Vapor, Moisture Content. Same as Method 5,
sections 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5, respectively.
  8.4 Cr  Emission Concentration. Calculate
Co, the Cr concentration in the  stack gas, in
rog/dscm on a dry basis, corrected to
standard  conditions, as follows:
Co^lO-' mg/pg} (Mo/Vm.4U.,)    Eq. 306-2
where:
Vm<,uj»=Gas sample volume measured by the
    dry gas meter, corrected to dry standard
    conditions, dscm.
  8.5  Isokinetic Variation, Acceptable
Results. Same as Method 5, sections 6.11 and
6.12, respectively.
9. Bibliography
  1. "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods," U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Publication SW-846, 2nd Edition, July 1982.
  2. Cox, X.B., R.W. Linton, and F-E. Butler.
Determination of Chromium Speciation in
Environmental Particles—A Multitechnique
Study of Ferrochrome Smelter Dust.
Accepted for publication in Environmental
Science and Technology.
  3. Same as Bibliography of Method 5,
Citations 2 to 5 and 7."
  4. California Air Resources Board,
"Determination of Total Chromium and
Hexavalent Chromium Emissions from
Stationary Sources." Method 425, September
12,1990.
  5. "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods", U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Publication SW-846, 3rd Edition, November
1986 as  amended by Update I . November
1990.

Method 306A—Determination of Chromium
Emissions From Decorative and Hard
Chromium Electroplating and Anodizing
Operations

J. Applicability and Principle
  1.1  Applicability. This method applies !o
the determination of chromium (Cr) in
emissions from decorative and hard
chromium electroplating facilities and
anodizing operations. The method is less
expensive and less complex to conduct than
Method  306 of this appendix. Correctly
applied, the precision and bias of the sample
results will be comparable to those obtained
with the isokinetic Method 306 of this
appendix. This method is applicable under
ambient moisture, air, and temperature
conditions.
  1.2  Principle. A sample is extracted from
the source at a constant sampling rate
determined by a critical orifice and collected
in a probe and impingers. The sampling time
a: the sampling traverse points is varied
 according to the stack gas velocity at each
 po^nt to obtain a proportional sample. The
 concentration is determined by the same
 analytical procedures used in Method 306 of
 this appendix: inductively-coupled plasma
 emission spectrometry (1CP), graphite furnace
 atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS), or
 ion chroraatography with a post-column
 reactor (IC/PCR).

 2. Range, Sensitivity,.Precision, and
 Interferences

   Same as Method 306, section 2 of this
• appendix.

 3. Apparatus

   Note: Mention of trade names or specific
 products does not constitute endorsement by
 the Environmental Protection Agency.
   3.1   Sampling Train. A schematic of  the
 sampling train is shown in Figure 306A-1.
 The components of the train are available
 commercially; but some fabrication and
 assembly are required. If Method 306
 equipment is available, the sampling train
 may be assembled as specified in Method 306
 of this appendix and the sampling rate of !he
 meter box set at the delta Hg> specified for
 the calibrated orifice; this train is then
 operated as specified in this method.
   3.1.1  Probe Nozzle/Tubing and Shealh.
 Use approximately 1/4 in. inner diameter (ID)
 glass or rigid plastic tubing about 6 in. long
 with a short 90° bend at one end to form the
 nozzle. Grind a slight taper on the nozzle end
 before making the  bend. Attach the nozzle lo
 flexible tubing of sufficient length to collect
 a sample from the  stack. Use a straight piece
 of larger diameter rigid tubing (such as metal
 conduit or plastic water pipe) to form a
'sheath that begins  about 1 in. from the 903
 bend on the nozzle and encases the flexible
 tubing.

 BILLING CODE eSfiO-60-P

-------
c
2
O

O
O
o
      IQ
      C
      '-(
      fD


      U)

      O
      CTl
      •o
      M
      H-
      a
      10
      n
      a*
      ro
      rt
      \->-
      n
Probe/Nozzlo Sheath Assombly

     (1/4(1.D. Tubing)      '   '
               0.1 N NaOH

                   or

               0.1 NNnHCO
                                                        Plastic Tubing
                                                                           •  ]

                                                                  Critical Orifice
                                     Mason Jar Implngers
                                                                                   Vacuum Gauge

                                                                                      (optional)  ;
                      Temperature
                        Sensor
                                                                  Vacuum ;. ; ;
                                                                   Pump   :•   ;  .
                                                                                                          I
                                                                                         ,1    :.,-.
                                                                                      I
                                                                                      §-
                                                                                                          to
                                                                                                          en
ID
5°
Cn
A
en

pj
3',

-------
4988     Federal  Register / Vol. 60, No.  16  /  Wednesday, January 25,  1995 /-Rules and Regulations
  3.1.2   S-Type Pitot. Same as Method 2,
section 3 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A).
  3.1.3   Sample Line. Use thick wall flexible
plastic tubiag'(e.g., polyethylene,
polypropylene, or polyvinylchloride) about
'A in. to Va in. ID to connect the train
components. A combination of rigid plastic
tubing and thin wall flexible tubing may be
used as long as neither tubing collapses wben
leak-checking  the train. Metal tubing cannot
be used.
  3.1.4   Irnpingers. One quart capacity
"Mason" glass canning jars with vacuum seal
lids are used. Three impingers are required:
the first is for collecting the absorbing
solution, the second is empty and is used to
collect any absorbing solution carried over
from the first impieger, and the  third
contains the drying agent. Install bleak-tight
inlet and outlet tubes in the lids of each
irr.pinger for assembly with the train. The
tubes may be made of approximately 'A in.
ID glass or rigid plastic tubing. For the inlet
tube of the first impinger, heat the glass or
plastic tubing  and draw until the tubing
separates. Cut  the tip off until the tip orifice
is VD; in. in diameter. When fabricating the
firs! impinger. place the tip orifice Vie in.
above the bottom of the jar when assembled.
For the second irnpinger, the inlet rube need
not be drav.-n and sized, but the  tip  should
be approximately 2  in. above the bottom, of
the jar. The inlet tube of the third impinger
should extend to about 'A in. above the
bottom of the jar. Locate  the outlet tube end
of all impingers about Vi in. beneath the
bottom of the lid.
  3.1.5   Manometer. Inclined/vertical type,
or equivalent device, as described in section
2.2 of Method  2 (40 CFR part 60, eppecdix
A).
  3.1.6  Critical Orifice. The critical orifice
is a small restriction in the sample line
(approximately Vie in. in  diameter)  that is
located upstream of the vacuum pump and
sets the sample rate at about 0.75 cfm. An
orifice can be made of ^12 in, brass tubing
approximately Vi* in. long sealed inside
larger diameter, approximately Vie in., brass
tubing to serve as a critical orifice giving a
constant sample flow. Materials other than
brass can be used to construct the critical
orifice as long as the flow through the
sampling train is approximately 0.75 cfen.
  3.1.7 Connecting Hardware. Standard
pipe and fittings, V< in. or >A  in., are used
to install the vacuum pump and dry gas
meter in the sampling train.
  3.1.8 Pump Oiler. A glass oil reservoir   ••
with a wick mounted at the vacuum pump
inlet lubricates the pump vanes. The oiler
should be an inline type and  not vented to
the atmosphere.
  3.1.9 Vacuum Pump. Cast Model 0522-
V103-G18DX, or equivalent, capable of
delivering at least 1.5 cfm at 15 in. Kg
vacuum.
  3.1.10  Oil Trap. An empty glass oil
reservoir without wick is mounted at pump
outlet to prevent oil from reaching the dry
gas meter.
  3.1.11   Dry- Gas Meter. A Rockwell model
175-s test meter, or equivalent, with a
thermometer installed to monitor meter
temperature. The dry gas meter must be
capable of measuring volume to within 2
percent.
  3.2  Sample Recovery.
  3.2.1  Wash Bottles. These are glass or
inert plastic, 500 or 1000 ml,  with spray tabe.
  3.2.2  Sample Containers. The first mason
jar impinger of the sampling train serves as
the sample container. A new lid and plastic
wrap are substituted for the impinger inlet/
outlet assembly.
  3.3  Analysis. Same as Method 306, -
section 3.3 of this appendix.
J.
  4.1  Sampling. Same as Method 306,
section 4.1 of this appendix.
  4.2  Sample Recovery. Same as Method
306, section 4.2 of this appendix.

5. Procedure
  5.1  Sampling.
  5.1.1  Pretest Preparation.
  5.1.1.1  Port Location. Locate the sampling
ports as specified in section 2.1 of Method 1
(40 CFR part 60, appendix A).Use a total of
24 sampling points for round ducts and 25
points for rectangular ducts. Locate the
sampling points as specified in section 2.3 of
Method 1 (40 CFR part 60, Appendix A).
Mark the pilot and sampling probe with thin
strips of tape to permit velocity and sample
traversing. For ducts less than 12 in. in
diameter, use a total of 16 points.
  5.1.1.2  Velocity Pressure Traverse, (a)
Perform a velocity pressure traverse before
the first sample run. Figure 306A-2 may be
used to record velocity pressure  data. If
testing occurs over several days, perform the
traverse at the beginning of each day. Perform
velocity pressure traverses as specified in
section 3 of Method 2 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix A), but record only the Ap (velocity
head) values for each sampling point.
  (b) Check for cyclonic  flow during the first
traverse to verify that it does not exist; if
cyclonic flow does exist.'make sure that the
absolute average angle of misalignment does
not exceed 20°. If the average angle of
misalignment exceeds 20° at an outlet
location, install straightening vanes to
eliminate the cyclonic flow. If it  is necessary
to test an inlet location where cyclonic flow
exists, it may not be possible to install
straightening vanes. In this case, a variation
of the alignment method must be used. This
must be approved by the Administrator.
BILLING CODE «S«0-40--P

-------
        Federal Register /  Vol. 60. No. 16 / Wednesday. j^. 2     5 , ^^ ^ Reguiations
          Plant.
          Date.
Time
          Location _
          Operators) --
          Beginning slack temperature, *F-
                stack temperature, *F -
          Average stack temperature, °E
                                                        Schematic of Points
          Circle one:

          Before Run  I
  Before Run 2
Before Run 3
After Run No.
Traverse
Point
Number








Cyclonic
Flow
Angle
(Degrees)








Ap








V2p









-------
4990    Federal Roister /  Vol. 60,  No.  16  / Wednesday.  January 25,  1995 / Kuies  and Regulations
  5 : 1.3.  Point Sampling Times. Since the
sampling rare-of the train is hefd constant by
the criricai orifice, it is necessary to calculate
specific sampling times far each point in
order to obtain a proportional sample  If a!!
sampling can be completed in a single day,
it ii necessary to calculate the point sampling
times only once. II" sampling occurs over
several days, recalculate the point sample
times each day usin-3 velocity traverse data
•obtained earlier in ihe-day  Determine the
average of the Ap values obtained dicing the
velocity traverse (Figure. 3C6A-2). Calculate
the samplirtR times for each point using
Equation 306A-1  Convert lie decimal par;s
of minutes to seconds, if the stack diameter
is less than 12 in., we 7.5 minu-ies in place
of 5 minutes :3 the equation and 16 sampling
points.
                                                      JPoint n Ap
                                 Minutes at point n = •   		x5 minutes     E
-------
Federal Register / Vol.- 60
                               .' No. 16 J Wednesday. January 25
                                  --                     *   '
                                                   Stark radius, r. in
                                                   Ayg sq. rt. Ap,
Total Cr catch, M
Avg dry gas meter temp, T
                 r->  ID'
Meter correction factor,
Meter volume, Vffl, fp.
Barometric press, I
Start crock thne	
Stop clock time	
                         ,  b. Hg.
                                            Irak nle before run, cfm_
                                            Leak rate after run, cfm_
                                            Stop "meter volume, fr _
                                            Start meter volume, ft^ _
        REMARKS:
Poini No.







Sample
(Mia'Sec)







Gas Meter
Temp(eF)






"
                               ffl  + 460)
Point No.







Sample
(Min/Sec) ''



-



Gas Meter
TempCF)







          (499.6)
                             j  (VJ  (P
                                         AST'
                          (0.0001597)
                                                              :(TS
                                                                   (28.73)
        mg'cubic meter,
                                        (Optiooal) -kg.lir
            figure 30SA-3.   Chronrium  Constant Sampling Hate Field
                                        Data  Sheet,
BILLING CODE AMO-SO-C

-------
4992    Federal Register-/  Vol. 60.'No.'16  /Wednesday. January 25.  1995 / Rules  and  Regulations
  5.1.2.2 • Place the probe/nozzle into the
duct a! the first sampling point and turn on
the pump. A minimum vacuum of 15 in. Hg
or 0.47 atmosphere between the critical
orifice and pump is required to maintain
critical flow. Sample for the time interval
previously determined for that point. Move
to the second point and sample for the time
interval determined for that point; sample all
points on the traverse in this manner. Keep
ice around the impingers during the run.
Complete the traverse and turn off the pump.
Move to the next sampling port and repeat.
Record the final dry gas meter reading.
(NOTE: If an approximate mass emission rate
is desired, record the stack temperature
before and after the run.)
  5.1.2.3  Post Test Leak Check. Remove the
probe assembly and flexible tubing from the
first irnpinger. Do not cover the nozzle. Seal
the inle;  tube of the first impinger with a.
finger covered by clear plastic wrap and turn
on the pump. The vacuum in the line
between  the pump and the critical orifice
must be at least 15 in. Hg. Observe any leak
rate on the dry gas meter. If the leak rate
exceeds 0.02 cfm. reject the run. If the leak
rate is acceptable, take the probe assembly
and impinger assembly to the sample
recovery area.
  5.2  Sample  Recovery.
  5.2.1   Container No. 1. (a) After the train
has been moved to the sample recovery area,
disconnect the tubing that joins the first
impinger with the second.
  (b) The first impinger jar is also used as the
sample container jar. Unscrew the lid from
the first impinger jar. Lift the inlet/outlet
tube assembly almost out of the jar, and using
the wash bottle, rinse the outside of the
impinger tip that was immersed in the
impinger jar with extra absorbing solution.
rinse the inside of the tip zs well.
  (c) Recover the second impinger by  .
removing the lid and pouring any contents
from the second impinger into the first
impinger. Rinse the second impinger
including the inside and outside of the
impinger stem  as well as any connecting
plastic tubing with extra absorbing solution
and place the rinse into the first impinger.
  (d) Hold the  nozzle and  connecting plastic
tubing in a vertical position so that the tubing
forms a "U." Using the wash bottle, partially
fill the tubing with sampling reagent. Raise
and lower the end of the plastic tubing
several times to cause the reagent to contact
the major portion of the internal parts of the
assembly thoroughly. Do not raise the
solution level too high or part of the sample
will be lost Place the nozzle end of the
assembly over  the mouth of the first impinger
jar (sample container) and elevate the plastic
tubing so that the solution flows rapidly out
of the nozzle. Perform this procedure three
times. Next, repeat the recovery procedure
but allow the solution to flow rapidly out the
open end of the plastic tubing into the first
impinger jar.
  (e) Place a piece of clear plastic wrap over
the mouth of the first impinger jar. Use a
standard lid and band assembly to seal  the
jar. Label the jar with the sample number and
mark the liquid level to gauge any losses
during handling.
  5.2.2  Container No. 2 (Reagent Blank).
Place approximately 500 ml of the 0.1 N
NaOH or 0.1 N NaHCOj absorbing solution
in a labeled sample container.
  5.2.3  Sample Filtration for IC/PCR. If the
sample is to be analyzed for Cr*« by IC/PCR,
it must be filtered immediately following
recover.' as described in section 5.2.3 of
Method 306 of this-appendix.
  5.3  Analysis. Sample preparation and
analysis procedures are identical to Method
306, section 5.3 of this appendix.

6. Calibration
  6.1  Dry Gas Meter, (a) Dry gas meter
calibrations may be performed by either the
manufacturer, a firm who provid'es
calibration services, or the tester. The dry ges
meter calibration coefficient (Ym) must be
determined prior to initial use of the meter.
and must be checked following each field
use.
  (b) If the dry gas meter is new, the
manufacturer will have specified the Ym for
the meter. The manufacturer may also have
included a calibration orifice and a data sheet
with the meter that may be used for
calibration purposes. The sheet will specify
a standard cubic foot volume and a sample
time, and these values were determined
when the orifice was used to set the initial
Ym for the meter. The Ym may be checked by
disconnecting the critical orifice in the
sampling train and replacing it with the
calibration orifice. The inlet side of the
calibration orifice is open to the atmosphere
and is.not reconnected to the sample train.
Record the initial dry gas meter volume and
meter temperature. Turn on the pump and
operate it for the number of minutes
specified by the manufacturer's data sheet.
Stop the pump and record the  final dry  gas
meter volume and temperature. Subtract the
start volume from the stop volume and
average the temperatures. Check the Ym for
the dry gas meter after the test by using  the
following equation:
                                                      =  Ft.3m(Tm+460)

                                                        I7.647(Ft3P,)(Ptar)
Where:
Ft.:!m=Cubic feet given by meter manufacturer
Tm=Ternperat-jre of meter in degrees
    Fahrenheit
Ft3p,=Cubic fe«t from dry gas meter, post test
Pbir= Barometric pressure in inches of
    mercury
  Compare the Ym just calculated with the
Ym given by the manufacturer:

            Y  (manufacturer)
         Ym (calculated after test)
  If this value is between 0.95 and 1.05, the
Ym of the meter is acceptable. If the value lies
outside the specified range, the test series
shall either be voided, or calculations for the
test series shall be performed using
whichever meter coefficient value (i.e., before
and after) that gives the lower value of total
sample volume. Return the dry gas meter to
the manufacturer for recalibration. The
calibration may also be conducted as
specified in section 5.3.1 or section 7 of
Method 5 (40 CFR part 60. appendix A).
except that it is only necessary to check the
calibration at an approximate flow rate of
0.75 cfm. The calibration of the dry gas meter
must be checked after each field use in the
same manner. If the values of Ym obtained
before and after a test series differ by more
than 5%, the test series shall either be
voided, or calculations for the test series
shall be performed using whichever meter
coefficient value (i.e., before or after) that
gives the lower value of total sample volume.
  6.2   GFAA Spectrometer. Same as Method
306, section 6.2  of this appendix
  6.3   ICP Spectrometer. Same as Method
306, section 6.3  of this appendix

7. Quality Control
  Same as Method 306, section 7 of this
appendix.

8. Calculations
  8.1   Pollutant Concentration. Calculate
Co, the Cr concentration in the stack gas, in
mg/dscrn on a dry basis  as follows:
                                              (499.8) (1
                                                                           Eq.306A-2
                                           Mcr=Amount of Cr in sample from Method
                                            •   306 of this appendix, Eq. 306-1, ug.
                                           Tm=Dry gas meter temperature, CF.

-------
          Federal Register  /  Vol.  60, No. 16 /  Wednesday.  January.25.  1995 / Rules  and Regulations
                                                                                      4993
Ym=Dry gas meter correction factor.
    dimeasiordess.
                gas meter volume, ft5.
        Pa^Barometric pressure, in. Hg.
  8.2   Approximate Mass Emission Rate
(Optional). Calculate an approximate mass
emission rate of Cr in kg/hr using the
following equation:
= (0.0001 597) (C0
  *•          A  o
                                                                           -r460)
                                                                                 '
                                                                           ) (28.73)
                                                                                      Eq.306A-3'
w r, s re:
r=Radius of stack, in.
(v'ip),Yi=Average of Vip values.
Ts=Stack temperature, °F.
Po^Barometric pressure, in. Hg.
Ccr=Concentration of Cr, mg/dscm.
  Note: The emission rate calculated using
Equation 306A-3 is based on an assumed
moisture content of 2%.

9. Bibliography
  1. Clay. F.R. Memo, Impiager Collection
Efficiency—Mason Jars vs. Creenburg-Smiih
Irr.pingers. Dec. 1989.
  2. Segal!. R.R., VV.C. DeWees. F.R. Clay,
and J.W. Brown. Development of Screening
Methods for Use in Chromium Emissions
Measurement and Regulations Enforcement.
In:  Proceedings of the 1939 EPA/A&WMA
International Symposium—Measurement of
Toxic and Related Air Pollutants, AiWMA
Publication VIP-13, EPA Report No. 600/9-
89-060. p. 785.
  3. Clay. F.R. Chromium Sampling Method.
In: Proceedings of the 1990 EPA/AiWMA
International Symposium—Measurement of
Toxic and Related'Air Pollutants. A&VVMA
Publication VIP-17. EPA Report No. €00/9-
90-026. p. 576.
  •4. Clay. F.R. Proposed Sampling Method
306A for the Determination of Hexavalent
Chromium Emissions from Electroplating
and Anodizing Facilities. In: Proceedings of
the 1992 EPAM&WMA International
Symposium—Measurement of Toxic and
Related Air Pollutants. A&WMA Publication
VIP-25. EPA Report No. 600/R-92/131, p.
209.

Method 306-E—Surface Tension
Measurement and Recordkeeping for
Chromium Plating Tanks Used at
Electroplating and Anodizing Facilities

 !. Applicability and Principle
   1.1  Applicability. This method is
applicable to all decorative plating and
anodizing operations where a wetting agent
is used in the tank as the primary mechanism
        for reducing emissions from the surface of
        the solution.
          1.2  Principle. During an electroplating or
        anodizing operation, gas bubbles generated
        during the process rise to the surface of the
        tank liquid and burst. Upon bursting, tiny
        droplets of chromic acid become entrained in
        ambient air. The addition of a wetting agent
        to the tank bathreduces the surface tension of
        the liquid and diminishes the formation of
        these droplets.

        2. Apparatus
          2.1  Stalagrnometer. Any commercially
        available stalagmometer or  equivalent surface
        tension measuring device may be used to  .
        measure the surface  tension of the plating or
        anodizing tank liquid.
          2.2  Preciser tensiometer. A Preciser
        tensiometer may be used to measure the
        surface tension of the tank liquid provided
        the procedures specified in ASTM Method D
        1331-69. Standard Test Methods for Surface
        and Interfacial Tension of Solutions of
        Surface Active Agents (incorporated by
        reference—see § 63.14) are  followed.

        3. Procedure
          3.1  The surface tension of ths tank bath
        may be measured by using  a Preciser
        teasiometer. a stalagmometer or any other
        device suitable for measuring surface tension
        in dynes per centimeter. If  the Preciser
        tensiometer is used, the instructions given in
        ASTM Method D 1331-B9,  Standard Test
        Methods for Surface and Interfacial Tension
        of Solutions of Surface Active Agents
        (incorporated by reference—see § 63.14) must -
        be followed. If a Stalagrnometer or other
        device is used to measure surface tension, the
        instructions that came with the measuring
        device must be followed.
           3.2  (a) Measurements of the bath surface
        tension are done using a progressive system
        which minimizes the number of surface
        tension measurements required when the
        proper surface tension is maintained.
        Initially, measurements must be made every
        •4 hours of tank operation for the first 40
hours of tank operation after the compliance
date. Oace there are no exceedacces during
40 hours of tank operation, measurements
may be conducted once every 8 hours of tank
operation. Once there are no exceedances
during 40 hours of tank operation.
measurements may be conducted once every
40 hours of tank operation on an on-going
basis, until  an exceedance occurs. The
maximum time interval for measurements is
once every 40 hours of tank operation.
  (b) If a measurement of the surface tension
of the solution is above the 40 dynes per
centimeter limit, the lime interval reverts
back to the original monitoring schedule of
once every 4 hours. A subsequent decrease in
frequency would then be allowed according
to the previous paragraph.

•i. Recordkseping
  4.1  Log  book of surface tension
measurements and fume suppressant
additions. The surface tension of the platir.g
or anodizing tank bath must be measured as
specified in section 3.2. The measurements
must be recorded in the log book. In additio:
to the record of surface tension
measurements, the frequency of fume
suppressant maintenance additions and the
amount of fume suppressant added during
each maintenance addition will be recorded
in the log book. The log book will be readily
available for inspection by regulatory'
personnel.
  4.2  Instructions for apparatus used i:1.
measuring surface tension. Also included
with the log book must be a copy of the
instructions for the apparatus used  for
measuring the surface tension of the plating
or anodizing bath. If a Preciser tensiometer is
used, a copy of ASTM Method D 1331-89,
Standard Methods for Surface and Interfacia!
Tension of Solutions of Surface Active
Agents (incorporated by reference—see
§ 63.14) must be included with the  log book.

[FR Doc. 95-65 Filed 1-24-95: 6:45 anil
BILLING CODE 6S60-SO-P

-------
    APPENDIX B




GLOSSARY OF TERMS

-------
APPENDIX B
                     GLOSSARY OF TERMS
     Add-on  air  pollution  control  device
(APCD)   means  equipment  installed in  the
ventilation system of chromium electroplating
and   anodizing  tanks  for  the  purposes  of
collecting and containing chromium emissions
from the tank(s).

     Administrator means the Administrator of
the  United  States  Environmental Protection
Agency or his or her authorized representative
(e.g., a  State  that  has  been  delegated  the
authority  to  implement  the  provisions  of
40 CFR part 63).

     Air pollution control technique means any
method, such as an add-on air pollution control
device or a chemical fume suppressant, that is
used  to  reduce  chromium emissions  from
chromium   electroplating   and   chromium
anodizing tanks.

     Area source means any stationary source of
hazardous  air pollutants  that  is  not  a major
source  as defined  below  in  this  appendix.
Another  term for  area  source  is "nonmajor
source."

     Base metal means the metal or metal alloy
that comprises the workpiece.

     Bath component means the trade or brand
name  of  each   component(s)   in  trivalent
chromium plating baths.  For trivalent chromium
baths, the bath  composition is proprietary in
most cases.  Therefore, the trade or brand name
for each component(s) can be used; however, the
chemical name of the wetting agent contained in
that component must be identified.
     Chromic acid means the common name for
chromium anhydride
     Chromium anodizing  or  chromic  acid
anodizing  means  the  electrolytic process by
which an oxide layer is produced on the surface
of a base metal for functional purposes  (e.g.,
corrosion  resistance  or electrical  insulation)
using a chromic acid solution.  In chromium
anodizing,  the part to be anodized  acts as the
anode in the electrical circuit, and the chromic
acid  solution,  with a concentration  typically
ranging from 50 to  100 grams per  liter (g/L),
serves as the electrolyte.

     Chromium electroplating  or  chromium
anodizing tank means the receptacle or container
in  which   hard   or   decorative  chromium
electroplating or chromium anodizing occurs.

     Composite mesh-pad (CMP) system means
an add-on air pollution control device typically
consisting  of several mesh-pad  stages.   The
purpose of the first stage is to  remove large
particles.  Smaller  particles are removed in the
second stage, which consists of  the composite
mesh  pad.    A final stage  may remove any
reentrained  particles  not   collected  by  the
composite mesh pad.

    Decorative chromium electroplating means
the process by which a thin  layer of chromium
(typically    0.003   to   2.5 microns)   is
electrodeposited on  a  base  metal,  plastic, or
undercoating to provide a bright surface  with
wear and tarnish resistance.   In this process, the
part(s) serves as the cathode in the  electrolytic
cell and the solution serves  as the electrolyte.
Typical current density applied during this
                                           Page B-l

-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
                                APPENDIX B
process ranges  from 50  to  220 Amperes  per
square feet (A/ft2) for total plating times ranging
between 0.5 to 5 minutes.

     Electroplating or anodizing bath means the
electrolytic  solution used  as the  conducting
medium  in  which the  flow  of  current  is
accompanied by movement of metal ions for the
purposes  of electroplating  metal  out of  the
solution onto a workpiece or for oxidizing the
base material.

     Emission   limitation   means,   for   the
purposes of this regulation, the concentration of
total chromium allowed to be emitted expressed
in milligrams per  dry  standard  cubic meter
(mg/dscm),  or the allowable surface tension
expressed in dynes per centimeter (dynes/cm).

     Facility means the major or area source at
which chromium  electroplating or  chromium
anodizing is performed.

     Fiber-bed mist eliminator (FEME) means
an  add-on  air  pollution control  device  that
removes contaminants from a gas stream through
the  mechanisms  of  inertial  impaction   and
Brownian diffusion. These devices are typically
installed downstream of another control device,
which serves to prevent plugging, and consist of
one or more fiber beds.   Each bed consists of a
hollow cylinder formed  from two  concentric
screens;  the fiber  between the screens may be
fabricated from glass, ceramic plastic, or metal.

     Foam blanket means the type of chemical
fume suppressant that generates a layer of foam
across the surface  of a solution when current is
applied to that solution.
     Fresh  water means water,  such as  tap
water, that  has  not been previously used in a
process operation or, if the water  has  been
recycled from a process  operation, it has been
treated  and meets the effluent guidelines  for
chromium wastewater.

     Fume   suppressant  (FS)   means   any
chemical agent that reduces or suppresses fumes
or mists at  the  surface of an electroplating or
anodizing bath; other terms for fume suppressant
are chemical fume suppressant and mist suppres-
sant.

     Hard chromium electroplating or industrial
chromium  electroplating  means a process  by
which a thick layer of chromium (typically  1.3
to 760  microns) is electrodeposited on a base
material to  provide  a surface  with functional
properties  such  as   wear resistance,  a  low
coefficient of friction, hardness, and  corrosion
resistance.  In this process, the part serves as the
cathode in the electrolytic cell and the solution
serves  as  the  electrolyte.    Hard  chromium
electroplating process  is  performed at current
densities typically ranging from 150 to 600 A/ff
for total plating  times ranging from 20 minutes
to 36 hours depending upon the desired  plate
thickness.

     Hexavalent chromium means the form of
chromium in a valence state of +6.

     Large,   hard  chromium  electroplating
facility  means  a facility that performs  hard
chromium  electroplating  and  has  a maximum
cumulative  potential  rectifier capacity greater
                                        *
than  or equal to 60 million  ampere-hours  per
year (amp-hr/yr).
                                           Page B-2

-------
APPENDIX B
                      GLOSSARY OF TERMS
     Major source means any stationary source
or group of stationary sources located within a
contiguous area and under common control that
emits or has the potential  to emit considering
controls in the aggregate,  10 tons per year  or
more of any hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons
per  year   or  more  of any  combination  of
hazardous air pollutants.

     Maximum  cumulative potential rectifier
capacity  means  the  summation  of the total
installed  rectifier capacity  associated  with  the
hard chromium electroplating tanks at a facility,
expressed  in  amperes,   multiplied   by  the
maximum  potential  operating  schedule   of
8,400 hours per year and 0.7,  which assumes
that electrodes are energized 70 percent of the
total operating  time.  The maximum  potential
operating   schedule   is  based   on  operating
24 hours per day, 7 days per week, 50 weeks
per year.

     Operating  parameter  value  means   a
minimum  or maximum  value established for a
control device or process parameter which, if
achieved by itself or in combination with one or
more  other   operating   parameter   values,
determines that an  owner  or  operator  is  in
continual   compliance  with   the  applicable
emission limitation or standard.

     Packed-bed scrubber (PBS) means an add-
on air pollution control device  consisting of a
single  or  double packed  bed that  contains
packing media  on  which  the chromic  acid
droplets impinge.  The packed-bed section of the
scrubber  is followed  by a mist  eliminator  to
remove any water entrained from the packed-bed
section.
     Research or laboratory operation means an
operation whose primary purpose is for research
and development of new processes and products,
that is conducted under the close supervision of
technically trained personnel, and  that is not
involved in the manufacture of products for
commercial sale in  commerce,  except  in  a
de minimis manner.

     Small,  hard   chromium  electroplating
facility means  a facility that performs  hard
chromium  electroplating and  has a maximum
cumulative potential  rectifier  capacity less than
60 million amp-hr/yr.

     Stalagmometer  means  a device used  to
measure the surface tension of a solution.

     Surface tension means the property, due to
molecular forces, that exists in the surface film
of all liquids and tends to prevent liquid from
spreading (expressed in dynes/cm).

     Tank  operation means the time in which
current and/or  voltage  is being  applied  to  a
chromium  electroplating tank or a  chromium
anodizing tank.

     Technology  Transfer  Network  (TTN)
means a network of electronic bulletin boards
developed and operated by EPA's Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards.  The network
provides information and technology exchange in
different areas of air pollution control, ranging
from  emission  test  methods  to regulatory air
pollution models. The service is free, except for
the cost of the phone call.  The  TTN may  be
accessed from a computer through the use of a
modem and communications software.
                                           Page B-3

-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS	APPENDIX B

     Tensiometer  means  a device  used  to
measure the surface tension of a solution.

     Trivalent chromium means the form  of
chromium in a valence state of +3.

     Trivalent chromium  process  means  the
process used for electrodeposition of a thin layer
of chromium  onto  a base  material  using a
trivalent chromium solution instead of a chromic
acid  solution.

     Wetting agent means the type of chemical
fume suppressant that reduces the surface tension
of a  liquid.
                                         Page B-4

-------
       APPENDIX C




LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION*
 CHROME DEPOSIT, AL
 UNITED CHAIR CO, IRONDALE, AL
 HAGER HINGE COMPANY, MONTGOMERY, AL
 JR SMITH MFC, MONTGOMERY, AL
 MONROE AUTO EQUIPMENT, PARAGOULD, AR
 OSBORN PRODUCTS, INC, PHOENIX, AZ
 TREFFERS PRECISION, INC, PHOENIX, AZ
 MCCLELLAN AFB, CA
 ROLL TECH WEST, CA
 NAVAL AVIATION DEPOT, ALAMEDA, CA
 PEMACO METAL PROCESSING, ALHAMBRA, CA
 SCIENTIFIC HARD CHROME PLATING, ALHAMBRA, CA
 AMERICAN PRECISION METAL WORKS, ANAHEIM, CA
 CANYON PRECISION PLATING, ANAHEIM, CA
 PORTER PLATING CO, INC, ANAHEIM, CA
 PRECISION ANODIZING & PLATING, ANAHEIM, CA
 ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL, ANAHEIM, CA
 TECHPLATE ENGINEERING, ANAHEIM, CA
 BROTHERS PLATING, AZUSA, CA
 OPTICAL RADIATION CORPORATION, AZUSA, CA
 A & A PLATING, BAKERSFIELD, CA
 AC PLATING, BAKERSFIELD, CA
 BAKERSFIELD CHROME & BUMPER, BAKERSFIELD, CA
 BROOKSHIRES PLATING, BAKERSFIELD, CA
 STANDAFER ENTERPRISES, BALDWIN PARK, CA
 CHROME CRANKSHAFT CO, BELL GARDENS, CA
 DYNA-CHROME ENGINEERING, BELL GARDENS, CA
 J & S CHROME PLATING CO, INC, BELL GARDENS, CA
 MODEL PLATING CO, INC, BELL GARDENS, CA
 ELECTRO-COATINGS INC, BERKELEY, CA
 LAWRENCE BERKELEY LABORATORY, BERKELEY, CA
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                    Page C-l

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION**

 3EVERLY HILLS PLATING WORKS, BEVERLEY HILLS, CA
 WEST COAST PLATING, BUELLTON, CA
 A-H PLATING, BURBANK, CA
 ACCESSORY PLATING, BURBANK, CA
 AVIALL, INC, BURBANK, CA
 CARTER PLATING, BURBANK, CA
 CRANE CO, HYDRO-AIRE DIVISION, BURBANK, CA
 KAHR BEARING, BURBANK, CA
 LOCKHEED CALIFORNIA CO, BURBANK, CA
 MAGNA PLATING CO, INC, BURBANK, CA
 MENASCO OVERHAUL DIVISION, BURBANK, CA
 MESTAS PLATING, BURBANK, CA
 SPENCE ELECTRO PLATING CO, BURBANK, CA
 SUN ART PLATING CO, BURBANK, CA
  CHATSWORTH PLATING CORP, CANOGA PARK, CA
 ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP, CANOGA PARK, CA
  ROHR INDUSTRIES INC, CHULA VISTA, CA
  CONSOLIDATED DEVICES, INC, CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA
  PLATO PRODUCTS INC, CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA
  SPECIALIZED HARD CHROME, CLOVIS, CA
  EMPIRE PLATING INC, COLTON, CA
  ALLIED PLATING WORKS, COMPTON, CA
  BOWMAN PLATING CO, COMPTON, CA
  CAL-STYLE FURNITURE MFC CO, COMPTON, CA
  S & K PLATING, INC, COMPTON, CA
  LE MANS PLATING INC, CORONA, CA
  BROWN INTERNATIONAL CORP, COVINA, CA
  CACO PACIFIC CORP, COVINA, CA
  INTERMETRO INDUSTRIES, CUCAMONGA, CA
  ROBERT MFC CO, CUCAMONGA, CA
  MCDONNELL DOUGLAS HELICOPTERS, CULVER CITY, CA
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.  	

                                     Page C-2

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 PACIFIC PISTON RING CO, INC, CULVER CITY, CA
 BRICO METAL FINISHING, DOWNEY, CA
 FEDERAL-MOGUL CORP, DOWNEY, CA
 JAYDIE, DOWNEY, CA
 SPECIALIZED PROCESSING CO, INC, EL CAJON, CA
 CENTRAL PLATING SERVICE, EL MONTE, CA
 CROWN CITY PLATING CO, EL MONTE, CA
 EL MONTE PLATING CO, EL MONTE, CA
 FIELD MANUFACTURE CORP, EL SEGUNDO, CA
 GAR HONING SERVICE, INC, EL SEGUNDO, CA
 SUPERIOR QUALITY PLATING INC, EL SEGUNDO, CA
 WYREFAB INC, EL SEGUNDO, CA
 CHROMEX, EMERYVILLE, CA
 ANODIZING SPECIALIST, ESCONDIDO, CA
 ROBBINS & MYERS, FAIRFIELD, CA
 RUTTER ARMEY, FRESNO, CA
 KRYLER CORP, FULLERTON, CA
 PCA METAL FINISHING INC, FULLERTON, CA
 WESTERN ROTO ENGRAVERS INC, FULLERTON, CA
 ANGELUS PLATING WORKS, GARDENA, CA
 JAMES G. LEE RECORD PROCESSING, GARDENA, CA
 LOS ANGELES PLATING, GARDENA, CA
 DRILUBE COMPANY, GLENDALE, CA
 ITT GENERAL CONTROLS, GLENDALE, CA
 PENNOYER-DODGE CO, GLENDALE, CA
 PLATO PRODUCTS, GLENDORA, CA
 BUMPERLINE INC, HARBOR CITY, CA
 DYNAMARK, LTD, HARBOR CITY, CA
 QUALITY HARDWARE MFC CO, HAWTHORNE, CA
 VEILING PLATING CO, INC, HOLLYWOOD, CA
 ANO D' ART INC, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                    Page C-3

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION*
 PRODUCTION PLATING, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
 TARBY INC, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
 WEISER LOCK CO, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
 CHROMPLATE CO, INGLEWOOD, CA
 MICROPLATE CO INC, INGLEWOOD, CA
 PRINTRONK, IRVINE, CA
 STERLING ELECTRIC, INC, IRVINE, CA
 LA HABRA PLATING CO, LA HABRA, CA
 EQUALITY PLATING CO, LA MESA, CA
 SIGMA PLATING CO, LA PUENTE, CA
 SIZE CONTROL PLATING CO, LA PUENTE, CA
 LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATL LAB, LIVERMORE, CA
 VALLEY IND INC, LODI, CA
 CAL BUMPER CO, INC, LONG BEACH, CA
 DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT, LONG BEACH, CA
 LONG BEACH PLATING, LONG BEACH, CA
 NAVAL SHIPYARD/P.W./ENGR, LONG BEACH, CA
 NOVA TECHNO CORP, LONG BEACH, CA
 U.S. CHROME CORP OF CALIF, LONG BEACH, CA
 ACE PLATING COMPANY INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ACME METAL FINISHING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ALL AMERICAN MANUFACTURING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 AMERICAN ELECTROPLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ANGELUS SANITARY CAN MACHINE, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ARROWHEAD BRASS PRODUCTS, LOS ANGELES, CA
 AUTOMOTIVE BATTERY PRODUCTS CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 BARRY AVENUE PLATING CO, INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 BATHROOM JEWELERY INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 BRTTE PLATING CO INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 BRONZE WAY PLATING CORP, LOS ANGELES, CA
 BUMPER SHOP, LOS ANGELES, CA
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                     PageC-4

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION*
 CALIFORNIA ELECTRO PLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CALIFORNIA METAL PROCESSING CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CERTIFIED CADMIUM PLATING WORK, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CHAS P. YOUNG, LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CHEMPLATE CORPORATION, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CHROMAL PLATING CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, LOS ANGELES, CA
 CUSTOM PLATING CORP, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ELECTROL1ZING, INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 EXCELLO PLATING CO, INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 FAITH PLATING CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 GENE'S PLATING WORKS, LOS ANGELES, CA
 HARDEN INDUSTRIES, LOS ANGELES, CA
 HENRY SOSS & CO INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 IDEAL PLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 METCOR MFC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 MODERN PLATING CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 MULTICHROME CO INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 NU-WAY PLATING CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 PHYLRICH INTERNATIONAL, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ROYAL PLATING WORKS CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 SERVICE PLATING CO, INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 STANDARD NICKEL CHROMIUM PLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 STANDARD PLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 SUPERCHROME PLATING & ENGR CO, LOS ANGELES, CA
 V&M PLATING, LOS ANGELES, CA
 VALLEY PLATING WORKS INC, LOS ANGELES, CA
 VIRCO MFC CORP, LOS ANGELES, CA
 ALAMEDA PLATING & POLISHING, LYNWOOD, CA
 CHROME NICKEL PLATING, LYNWOOD, CA
 L.G. TURNER HARD CHROME PLATING, LYNWOOD, CA
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                     Page C-5

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION"
 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS CO, MONROVIA, CA
 THE CHROME SHOP, NAPA, CA
 LEMON GROVE PLATING INC, NATIONAL CITY, CA
 WESTERN INDUSTRIAL & MARINE, NATIONAL CITY, CA
 NEWPORT PLATING, NEWPORT BEACH, CA
 ALLIED/BENDK ELECTRODYNAMICS, NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA
 CASA DE CHROME, NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA
 WESTERN PLATING, NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA
 J&K AEROCHROME, NORWALK, CA
 LOGO PARIS, NOVATO, CA
 BARRETT METAL FINISHING INC, OAKLAND, CA
 CAL TECH METAL FINISHERS, OAKLAND, CA
 DOLSBY INC, OAKLAND, CA
 ESPOSITO PLATING CORP, OAKLAND, CA
 JOHNSON PLATING WORKS INC, OAKLAND, CA
 K L PLATING CO, OAKLAND, CA
 ALUMIN-ART PLATING CO, ONTARIO, CA
 DYNAMARK, ONTARIO, CA
 GARY'S GRINDING & HARD CHROME, ONTARIO, CA
 KEYSTONE PLATING, ONTARIO, CA
 TMC PLATING, ONTARIO, CA
 ORANGE COUNTY PLATING CO INC, ORANGE, CA
 PAMARCO PACIFIC INC, ORANGE, CA
 LIMON METAL FINISHING, OXNARD, CA
 MULITCHROME-OXNARD PLATING DIV, OXNARD, CA
 PRICE PFISTER, INC, PACOIMA, CA
 G.Q.I. CLASSIC, PALM SPRINGS, CA
 CALIFORNIA POLISHING & PLATING, PARAMOUNT, CA
 LEAvrrrs METAL FINISHING, PARAMOUNT, CA
 WALLY'S METAL POLISH & PLATE, PARAMOUNT, CA
 MONITOR POLISHING & PLATING, PASADENA, CA
aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                     PageC-6

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION*
 USS-POSCO INDUSTRIES, PITTSBURG, CA
 CHROME MASTERS PLATING CO, POMONA, CA
 HOOKER INDUSTRIES, POMONA, CA
 PACIFIC POLISHING AND PLATING, POMONA, CA
 POLYCHROME-METALLURGISTS, REDWOOD CITY, CA
 ELECTRO FORMING CO, RICHMOND, CA
 BIGGERS INDUSTRIAL GERLINGER, SACRAMENTO, CA
 CHROME-CRAFT, SACRAMENTO, CA
 PRECISION PLATING & GRINDING, SACRAMENTO, CA
 HOAK BROS PLATING, SAN BERNADINO, CA
 CALIFORNIA PLATING, SAN CARLOS, CA
 INDUSTRIAL PLATING CO, INC, SAN CARLOS, CA
 AEROSPACE COATINGS & TECHNOLOGY, SAN DIEGO, CA
 CALIFORNIA PLATING, SAN DIEGO, CA
 GENERAL DYNAMICS, CONVAIR DIV, SAN DIEGO, CA
 KEYSTONE AUTOMOTIVE IND INC, SAN DIEGO, CA
 MASTER PLATING, SAN DIEGO, CA
 PACIFIC PLATING, SAN DIEGO, CA
 WEST COAST PLATING (S.D.), SAN DIEGO, CA
 CROPPER'S PLATING CO, SAN DIMAS, CA
 CALIFORNIA TECHNICAL PLATING, SAN FERNANDO, CA
 SANTEE IND, SAN FERNANDO, CA
 C & M PLATING WORKS, SAN FRANCISCO, CA
 J & J PLATING WORKS, SAN FRANCISCO, CA
 UNITED AIRLINES MAINTENANCE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA
 WESTERN ROTO, SAN FRANSICO, CA
 ARCATA GRAPHICS/SAN JOSE, SAN JOSE, CA
 FAITH T&R PLATING, SAN JOSE, CA
 T & B AUTO BUMPER SERVICE, SAN JOSE, CA
 DEL RAY CHROME, SANTA ANA, CA
 EMBEE PLATING, SANTA ANA, CA
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                     Page C-7

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
  ===;
  .EAR SEIGLER, INC, SANTA ANA, CA
 REID METAL FINISHING, SANTA ANA, CA
 S&G TUBE CO INC, SANTA ANA, CA
 SANTA ANA PLATING, SANTA ANA, CA
 A-l CHEMNETICS, SANTA CLARA, CA
 A-l METAL FINISHING, INC, SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA
 CAL-TRON PLATING, SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA
 ELECTRONIC CHROME AND GRINDING CO, SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA
 FOSS PLATING CO, INC, SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA
 GELARDI'S PLATING INC, SANTA ROSA, CA
 SANTA ROSA PLATING WORKS, SANTA ROSA, CA
 ARTISTIC POLISHING & PLATING, SOUTH EL MONTE, CA
 MIL-SPEC PLATING CORP, SOUTH EL MONTE, CA
 ANADITE, INC, SOUTH GATE, CA
 DOMAR PRECISION, SOUTH GATE, CA
 UNITED PLATING INC, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
 STANFORD LINEAR ACCELERATOR, STANFORD, CA
 STOCKTON PLATING INC, STOCKTON, CA
 DKON HARD CHROME, INC, SUN VALLEY, CA
 FLIGHT ACCESSORY SERVICES, SUN VALLEY, CA
 VALLEY TODECO CO, SYLMAR, CA
 BORG WARNER, TEMECULA, CA
 PICHEL INDUSTRIES INC, TEMECULA, CA
 DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT CO, TORRANCE, CA
 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS, TORRANCE, CA
 THE TORRINGTON CO, TORRINGTON, CA
 BUCK'S OF UPLAND, UPLAND, CA
 MARE ISLAND NAVAL SHIPYARD, VALLEJO, CA
 THE MARQUARDT CO, VAN NUYS, CA
 THE MASTER PLATING, INC, VENTURA, CA
 CHRISTENSEN PLATING INC, VERNON, CA
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	^	

                                     Page C-8

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 FRANCIS PLATING, VERNON, CA
 ELECTRO-COATINGS, INC, WEST SACRAMENTO, CA
 WASHINGTON PLATING, WHITTIER, CA
 REMCO HYDRAULICS, INC, WILLITS, CA
 C&R RECONDITIONING CO, INC, WILMINGTON, CA
 AXELSON, INC, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO
 SUNDSTRAND AVIATION OPERATIONS, DENVER, CO
 TOOLS FOR BENDING, INC, DENVER, CO
 KAMAN, BLOOMFIELD, CT
 RELIABLE PLATING AND POLISHING CO, BRIDGEPORT, CT
 PRATT AND WHITNEY, EAST HARTFORD, CT
 HAMILTON STANDARD SERVICES, EAST WINDSOR, CT
 AEROTECH, HARTFORD, CT
 KAMAN, MOOSHAP, CT
 WARING PRODUCTS DIVISION D.C.A., NEW HARTFORD, CT
 A-l CHROME, NEWINGTON, CT
 SANITARY-DASH MFC CO INC, NO. GROSVENORDALE, CT
 PRATT-WHITNEY, NORTH HAVEN, CT
 THE PERKIN-ELMER CO, NORWALK, CT
 LIGHTOLIER, INC, NORWICH, CT
 PITNEY BOWES, INC, STAMFORD, CT
 SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT DIVISION, STRATFORD, CT
 WHYCO CHROMIUM COMPANY, INC, THOMASTON, CT
 NUTMEG CHROME CORP, WEST HARTFORD, CT
 HAMILTON STANDARD, WINDSOR LOCKS, CT
 HOLLY CHEMICAL CO, WOODBURY, CT
 GULF PLATING, FT. CAUDI, FL
 NAVAL AVIATION DEPOT, JACKSONVILLE, FL
 AEROTHRUST, MIAMI, FL
 PERKO, INC, MIAMI, FL
 MARTIN MARIETTA AEROSPACE, ORLANDO, FL
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                     Page C-9

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                              APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION*
 PENSACOLA NAVAL AIR REWORK FACILITY, PENSACOLA, FL
 GULF COAST PLATING, INC, PENSACOLA, FL
 FLORIDA PLATING, INC, PINELLAS PARK, FL
 HUGHES HARD CHROME CO, TAMPA, FL
 PRECISION INDUSTRIES, GA
 MACGREGOR GOLF COMPANY, ALBANY, GA
 UNITED STATES PLATING & BUMPER SERVICE, ALTANTA, GA
 WESTERN ROTO, ALTANTA, GA
 U.S. PLATING, ATLANTA, GA
 CUMMINS ENGINE COMPANY, INC, FLOWERY BRANCH, GA
 VERMONT AMERICAN CORP, TOCCOA GA
 UNIVERSAL GYM AND NISSEN CO, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA
 DU PAGE PLATING CO, ADDISON, IL
 QUALITY METAL FINISHING CO, BYRON, IL
 ACME SCIENTIFIC, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 BILBO PLATING CO, CHICAGO, IL
 BROOKLINE INDUSTRIES, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 CHICAGO MODERN PLATING CO, CHICAGO, IL
 CHROMIUM INDUSTRIES, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 DRISCOLL, CHICAGO, IL
 DURO-CHROME CORP, CHICAGO, IL
 ECONOMY PLATING, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 EMPIRE HARD CHROME, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 JENSEN PLATING WORKS, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 MOSCHIANO PLATING, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 NOBERT PLATING COMPANY PLANT NO. 2, CHICAGO, IL
 YALE POLISHERS AND PLATERS, INC, CHICAGO, IL
 CJ SAPORITO PLATING (ACCURATE ANODIZING), CICERO, IL
 WEST TOWN PLATING, INC, CICERO, IL
 INDUSTRIAL HARD CHROME, INC, ELK GROVE VILLAGE, IL
 PRECISION CHROME INC, FOX LAKE, IL
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                     Page C-10

-------
APPENDIX C                                              LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 BELMONT PLATING WORKS, FRANKLIN PARK, IL
 NOVA-CHROME, INC, FRANKLIN PARK, IL
 SLOAN VALVE CO, FRANKLIN PARK, IL
 MODERN PLATING CORP, FREEPORT, IL
 DEEVE AND CO, MOLINE, IL
 ARLINGTON PLATING CO, PALATINE, IL
 ROCKFORD PRODUCTS CORP, ROCKFORD, IL
 CASTLE METAL FINISHING CORP, SHILLER PARK, IL
 PRECISION PLATING DIVISION, R&R SALES, SOUTH CHICAGO HEIGHTS, IL
 AL-BAR LABS WILMETTE PLATERS, WILMETTE, IL
 WOODSTOCK DIE CAST, INC, WOODSTOCK, IL
 BASTIAN PLATING CO INC, AUBURN, IN
 PALMER INDUSTRIES, AURORA, IN
 COSCO, INC, COLUMBUS, IN
 MCDOWELL ENTERPRISE, INC, ELKHART, IN
 WAYNE BLACK OXIDE, INC, FORT WAYNE, IN
 NEO INDUSTRIES, GARY, IN
 DELTA FAUCET CO, GREENSBURG, IN
 B&B CUSTOM PLATING, HOAGLAND, IN
 CITY PLATING COMPANY, INC, INDIANAPOLIS, IN
 WILLIAMSON POLISHING & PLATING, INDIANAPOLIS, IN
 BAYCOTE METAL FINISHING, MISHAWAKA, IN
 SHERRY LABORATORIES, MUNCI, IN
 C&M PLATING CO, INC, ROANOKE, IN
 SHELBYVILLE PLATING-POLISHING CO, SHELBYVILLE, IN
 PRECISION INDUSTRIES, MCPHERSON, KS
 KANSAS PLATING, INC, WICHITA, KS
 UNIVERSAL FASTNERS, INC, LAWRENCEBURG, KY
 CUSTOM PLATING OF LOUISVILLE, LOUISVILLE, KY
 KENTUCKY PLATING COMPANY, INC, LOUISVILLE, KY
 N.I. INDUSTRIES, NICHOLASVILLE, KY
        THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                    Page C-ll

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                              APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 FENWAL INC, ASHLAND, MA
 WALTON AND ONSBURY, INC, ATTLEBORO, MA
 FOXBORO CO, FOXBORO, MA
 NEPONSET, FOXBORO, MA
 ADTEC INDUSTRIES, INC, LAWRENCE, MA
 CIRCLE FINISHING, INC, NEWBURY, MA
 FREDERICK R. GROVER COMPANY, INC, ROCKPORT, MA
 NOMETCO, INC, WARE, MA
 FOUNTAIN PLATING CO, WEST SPRINGFIELD, MA
 WESTFIELD ELECTROPLATING CO, WESTFIELD, MA
 ACME PLATING CO., INC, BALTIMORE, MD
 ALLIED METAL FINISHING CORP, BALTIMORE, MD
 ALMAG PLATING CORP, BALTIMORE, MD
 MUFFOLETTO OPTICAL COMPANY, INC, BALTIMORE, MD
 METAL FINISHING, INC, HAGERSTOWN, MD
 SACO DEFENSE, INC, SACO, ME
 SILVEX, INC, WESTBROOK IND. PARK, ME
 BELLEVILLE PLATING, BELLEVILLE, MI
 BRONSON PLATING CO, BRONSON, MI
 BUICK-OLDSMOBILE-CADILLAC GROUP, DETROIT, MI
 CHRYSLER CORP, DETROIT, MI
 GENERAL PLATING, INC, DETROIT, MI
 STANLEY TOOLS DIVISION, FOWLERVILLE, MI
  BISSELL INC, GRAND RAPIDS, MI
  FCM PLASTICS DIVISION OF PLASTICS TECHNOLOGY, GRAND RAPIDS, MI
  KEELER AUTOMOTIVE HARDWARE, GRAND RAPIDS, MI
  CHROME CRAFT CORP, HIGHLAND PARK, MI
  OTTAWA GAGE, INC, HOLLAND, MI
  DIAMOND CHROME PLATING, INC, HOWELL, MI
  KEELER BRASS AUTOMOTIVE - KENTWOOD PLANT, KENTWOOD, MI
  CHEVROLET-PONTIAC-CANADA GROUP, LIVONIA, MI
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.

                                     Page C-12

-------
APPENDIX C                                             LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 ATTWOOD CORP, LOWELL, MI
 LEAR SIEGLER PLASTICS CORP, MENDON, MI
 CRECO, INC, OWOSSO, MI
 AUTOMATIC DIE CASTING SPECIALTIES, ST CLAIR SHORES, MI
 LECO PLATING DIVISION, LECO CORP, ST JOSEPH, MI
 C.S. OHM MANUFACTURING CO, STERLING HEIGHTS, MI
 CHRYSLER CORP, STERLING HEIGHTS, MI
 CHRYSLER CORP, WARREN, MI
 MODERN HARD CHROME SERVICE CO, WARREN, MI
 UNISYS PARK, EAGAN, MN
 NAVAL INDUSTRIAL RESERVE ORDNANCE PLANT, FRIDLEY, MN
 DOUGLAS CORP, MINNEAPOLIS, MN
 CHROMOCRAFT FURNITURE, SENATOBIA, MS
 LUFKIN RULE, APEX, NC
 CONSOLIDATED ENGRAVERS CORP, CHARLOTTE, NC
 GIBBS PLATING CO, CHARLOTTE, NC
 STORK SCREEN, CHARLOTTE, NC
 C&R CHROME SERVICES, INC, GASTONIA, NC
 GREENSBORO INDUSTRIAL PLATERS, GREENSBORO, NC
 UNITED METAL FINISHING, INC, GREENSBORO, NC
 CUSTOM PROCESSING CO, HIGH POINT, NC
 SWAIM METALS, INC, HIGH POINT, NC
 PIEDMONT INDUSTRIAL PLATING, STATESVILLE, NC
 NORTH AMERICAN ROTO, WINSTON SALEM, NC
 MONROE AUTO EQUIPMENT, COZAD, NE
 PLATING PRODUCTS, NJ
 MILLER AND SON, INC, BELLEVILLE, NJ
 KAEHR CORP.(KAEHR PLATING AND METAL FIN), ALBUQUERQUE, NM
 LEVCO METAL FINISHERS, NY
 HUDSON CHROMIUM COMPANY, INC, ASTORIA, NY
 CHROMIUM PLATING & POLISHING CORP, BROOKLYN, NY
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION.  ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	  	___

                                    Page C-13

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 JAYAR METAL FINISHING CORP, BROOKLYN, NY
 NORWOOD ELECTROPLATING, INC, BROOKLYN, NY
 GENERAL SUPERPLATING CO, EAST SYRACUSE, NY
 HYGRADE POLISHING AND PLATING, LONG ISLAND CITY, NY
 KINGS/KINGSLEY CORP, MASPETH, NY
 P.J. VERNEUIL ELECTROPLATING, MT. VERNON, NY
 ERIC S. TURNER & CO, INC, NEW ROCHELLE, NY
 CHROMIUM PLATING POLISHING, NEW YORK, NY
 CATARACT METAL FINISHING, INC, NIAGARA FALLS, NY
 MCGRAW-EDISON POWER SYSTEMS, OLEAN, NY
 RAYCO OF SCHENECTADY, SCHENECTODY, NY
 ANOPLATE CORP, SYRACUSE, NY
 NATIONAL PLATING CO, INC, SYRACUSE, NY
 BENET LABORATORIES, WATERULIET, NY
 VERNON PLATING WORKS, INC, WOODSIDE, NY
 PRECISION PLATING CO, AKRON, OH
 ACME HARD CHROME, ALLIANCE, OH
 BELLAFONTAINE PLATING MANUFACTURING CO, BELLEFONTAINE, OH
 OLYMCO, INC, CANTON, OH
 UNITED HARD CHROME CORP, CANTON, OH
 CINCINNATI MILACRON, OAKLEY, CINCINNATI, OH
 SMITH ELECTROCHEMICAL CO, CINCINNATI, OH
 THOMPSON CONSUMER ELECTRONICS, CIRCLEVILLE, OH
 C. T. INDUSTRIES, INC, CLEVELAND, OH
 CHROME INDUSTRIES, INC, CLEVELAND, OH
 CRAFT MASTERS, CLEVELAND, OH
 METALS APPLIED, INC, CLEVELAND, OH
 MR. GASKET COMPANY, CLEVELAND, OH
 FRANKLIN PLATING, COLUMBUS, OH
 OI-NEG, COLUMBUS, OH
 HOHMAN PLATING & MANUFACTURING, INC, DAYTON, OH
 aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
 	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	^	

                                    Page C-14

-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 K&F METAL FINISHERS, INC, DAYTON, OH
 MIAMI PRECISION CHROME, DAYTON, OH
 STANDARD REGISTER, DAYTON, OH
 U.S. CHROME CORP OF OHIO, DAYTON, OH
 PLATERS SERVICE, INC, ENGLEWOOD, OH
 CASE PLATING, LORAIN, OH
 DELCO-MORAINE, MORAINE, OH
 NORTH CANTON PLATING CO, NORTH CANTON, OH
 WHITAKER PLATING, NORTHWOOD, OH
 CHAMPION SPARK PLUG COMPANY, TOLEDO, OH
 PLATING PERCEPTIONS INC, TWINSBURG, OH
 FULTON INDUSTRIES, INC, WAUSEON, OH
 YOUNGSTOWN HARD CHROME, YOUNGSTOWN, OH
 COOPER TOOLS, PA
 AMERICAN BANKNOTE, HORSHAM, PA
 PAUL'S CHROME PLATING, INC, MARS, PA
 FRANKLIN MINT HARING PL, PHILADELPHIA, PA
 Ol-NEG, PITTSTON, PA
 METALIFE INDUSTRIES INC, RENO, PA
 ARMOLOY OF WESTERN PA, INC, TURTLE CREEK, PA
 CATEPILLAR, INC, YORK, PA
 GARROD HYDRAULICS, INC, YORK, PA
 HARD CHROMIUM SPECIALISTS, YORK, PA
 MICROFIN CORP, PROVIDENCE, RI
 SURFACE COATING DIV WESTNELL IND, PROVIDENCE, RI
 B&E, SC
 CONSOLIDATED ENGRAVERS CORP, CHESTER, SC
 PROGRESS LIGHTING, COWPINS, SC
 GENERAL ELECTRIC CO, FLORENCE, SC
 CAROLINA PLATING CO, GREENVILLE, SC
 ROLL TECHNOLOGY, INC, GREENVILLE, SC
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
        LONGER BE IN OPERATION.
                                    Page C-15

-------
LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES                                             APPENDIX C
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 STEEL HEDDLE CO, GREENVILLE, SC
 TRUE TEMPER SPORTS, SENECA, SC
 SAXONIA FRANKE OF AMERICA, SPARTANBURG, SC
 ABLE MACHINE CO, TAYLORS, SC
 T&S BRASS AND BRONZE WORKS, TRAVELERS REST, SC
 HARMAN AUTOMOTIVE, INC, BOLIVAR, TN
 MURRAY OHIO MANUFACTURING CO, LAWRENCEBURG, TN
 MAREMONT CORP, PULASKI, TN
 COASTAL PLATING, CORPUS CHRISTI, TX
 MENASCO, EULESS, TX
 TEXAS PRECISION PLATING, INC, GARLAND, TX
 FUSION, INC, HOUSTON, TX
 PRECISE PRODUCTS, WACO, TX
 PRECISION INTERNATIONAL CO, WACO, TX
 HILL AFB, OGDEN, UT
 QUALITY PLATING CO, SALT LAKE CITY, UT
 ALEXANDRIA METAL FINISHERS, LORTON, VA
 NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING/DRY DOCK CO, NEWPORT NEWS, VA
 NORFOLK NAVAL AIR REWORK FACILITY, NORFOLK, VA
 NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, NORFOLK, VA
 WESTERN ROTO, RICHMOND, VA
 MARTIN MARIETTA ARMAMENT SYSTEMS, BURLINGTON, VT
 SIMMONDS PRECISION, VERGENNES, VT
 BOEING, AUBURN, WA
 N.U.W.E.S., KEYPORT, WA
 BOEING-FABRICATION DIVISION, S.W. AUBURN, WA
 BOEING, SEATTLE, WA
 PRECISION ENGINEERING, SEATTLE, WA
 HARRIS & GALLOB, BELGIUM, WI
 BRIGGS AND STRATTON, GLENDALE, WI
 ULTRA PLATING CORP, GREEN BAY, WI
aNOTE: THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                    Page C-16

-------
APPENDIX C                                            LIST OF KNOWN FACILITIES
 FACILITY NAME, LOCATION8
 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP, KENOSHA, WI
 KOHLER CO, KOHLER, WI
 JAGEMANN PLATING CO, MANITOWOC, WI
 E.F. BREWER CO, MENOMONEE FALLS, WI
 ACME GALVANIZING INC, MILWAUKEE, WI
 ASTRA PLATING, INC, MILWAUKEE, WI
 EASTON CORP, MILWAUKEE, WI
 G.E. MEDICAL SYSTEMS, MILWAUKEE, WI
 JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC, MILWAUKEE, WI
 MILWAUKEE PLATING CO, MILWAUKEE, WI
 RELIABLE PLATING WORKS, MILWAUKEE, WI
 CHF INDUSTRIES, RACINE, WI
 PRECISION MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, INC, WORTHINGTON, WV
aNOTE:  THIS LIST IS INCOMPLETE AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL SOURCES AFFECTED
        BY THE REGULATION. ALSO, SOME COMPANIES ON THIS LIST MAY NO
	LONGER BE IN OPERATION.	

                                   Page C-17

-------
         APPENDIX D

DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS OF
       THE REGULATION

-------
APPENDIX D
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE REGULATION
          TABLE D-l. DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE REGULATION
Requirement
Location in regulation
Applicability and designation of sources
Applicability of the regulation
List of what portions of EPA's General Provisions regulation (subpart A) apply to
sources covered under this regulation
Sources that are specifically exempted from the regulation
Requirement to obtain a permit under title V of the CAA
§ 63.340(a)
§ 63.340(b)
§ 63.340(c)-(d)
§ 63.340(e)
Definitions and nomenclature
Definitions of terms used in the regulation
Nomenclature for the special compliance provision calculations
§ 63.341(a)
§ 63.341(b)
Standards
When the emission limits apply
What emission limits apply when a group of tanks is controlled by one control
device
Emission limits for hard chromium electroplating tanks
Procedure for demonstrating the size of a hard chromium electroplating facility
Emission limits for decorative chromium electroplating tanks using a chromic acid
bath and chromium anodizing tanks
Emission limits for decorative chromium electroplating tanks using a trivalent
chromium bath
Work practice standards
Operation and maintenance plan requirements
Standards must not be met by using a reducing agent
§ 63.342(a)-(b)(l)
§ 63.342(b)(2)
§ 63.342(c)(l)
§ 63.342(c)(2)
§ 63.342(d)
§ 63.342(e)
§ 63.342(f)
§ 63.342(f)(3)
§ 63.342(g)
Compliance provisions
Compliance dates
Request for an extension of the compliance date
Methods to demonstrate initial compliance
Monitoring to demonstrate continuous compliance:
Composite mesh-pad systems
Packed-bed scrubber systems
Packed-bed scrubber/composite mesh-pad systems
Fiber-bed mist eliminators
Wetting agent-type or combination wetting agent-type/foam blanket fume
suppressants
Foam blanket-type fume suppressants
§ 63.343(a)
§ 63.343(a)(6)
§ 63.343(b)
§ 63.343(c)
§ 63.343(c)(l)
§ 63.343(c)(2)
§ 63.343(c)(3)
§ 63.343(c)(4)
§ 63.343(c)(5)
§ 63.343(c)(6)
                                Page D-l

-------
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE REGULATION
                                                                 APPENDIX D
                             TABLE D-l.  (continued)
Requirement
Monitoring to demonstrate continuous compliance (cont.):
Fume suppressant/add-on control device
Use of an alternative monitoring method
Submittal of information for sources using an air pollution control device not listed
above
Location in regulation
§ 63.343(c)(7)
§ 63.343(c)(8)
§ 63.343(d)
Performance test requirements and test methods
Performance test methods including the required contents of the test plan
When previous performance testing may be used to demonstrate compliance with
this regulation
Test methods (cited here, but actual methods are placed in 40 CFR part 63,
Appendix A)
How to establish site-specific operating parameters
Special compliance provisions for multiple sources controlled by a common control
device
§ 63.344(a)
§ 63.344(b)
§ 63.344(c)
§ 63.344(d)
§ 63.344(e)
Provisions for new and reconstructed sources
Notification requirements for new or reconstructed sources that become subject to
the regulation
§ 63.345
Recordkeeping requirements
Lists records that must be kept by the source for 5 years
§ 63.346
Reporting requirements
How the reports should be sent (e.g., U.S. mail, fax, or by another courier)
When these reporting requirements apply
Initial notification
Notification of performance test
Notification of compliance status
Reports of performance test results
Ongoing compliance status reports for major sources
Ongoing compliance status reports for area sources
Reports associated with trivalent chromium baths
§ 63.347(a)
§ 63.347(b)
§ 63.347(c)
§ 63.347(d)
§ 63.347(e)
§ 63.347(f)
§ 63.347(g)
§ 63.347(h)
§ 63.347(i)
                                  Page D-2

-------
                      APPENDIX E

                    EXAMPLE FORMS
CONTENTS:

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLISTS
MONITORING DATA FORM
INITIAL NOTIFICATION REPORT
NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION
NOTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE TEST
NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
ONGOING COMPLIANCE STATUS REPORT

-------
Applicable Rule:
   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST
            (for composite mesh-pad systems or
combination packed-bed scrubber/composite mesh-pad systems)

 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N--National Emission Standards for Chromium
 Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
 Anodizing Tanks
Plant Name/Location:
Control Device ID #:
Installation Date:    /  /

Date of Last Performance Test:    /  /
Tanks Ducted to Control System:
Tank ID #




Type of tank (i.e., hard chrome, decorative
chrome, or chrome anodizing)




Inspection/Maintenance Checklist (insert inspector's initials in boxes):
Control Device
Inspection
inlet and outlet
transition zones
spray nozzles
packed-bed section
mesh pads
drain lines
fan motor
fan vibration
Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








                                       Page 1 of 2

-------
              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST (continued)
Monitoring Equipment
Inspection
pressure lines connected
pressure drop monitor
calibrated
Control Device
Maintenance
washdown of pads
other: (specify)**



Date: / /



Date: / /






Date: / /



Date: / /






Date: / /



Date: / /






Date- / /



Date: / /






"Examples:  replaced nozzles, adjusted fan motor, replaced recirculation pump, etc.


Corrective Actions:

Describe actions taken and maintenance performed to correct any deficiencies.
                                 Date:   /  /    Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                 Date:   /  /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                _Date:   /  /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
NOTE: THIS CHECKLIST CONTAINS ONLY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL OF
THE SYSTEM CHECKS THAT NEED TO BE PERFORMED TO ENSURE PROPER OPERATION OF THE CONTROL
SYSTEM. FACILITIES SHOULD INCORPORATE INFORMATION RECOMMENDED BY THE CONTROL SYSTEM
VENDOR.
                                      Page 2 of 2

-------
                     OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST
                                 (for packed-bed scrubbers)

Applicable Rule:    40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N--National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks
Plant Name/Location:

Control Device ID #:
Installation Date:    /  /

Date of Last Performance Test:    /  /
Tanks Ducted to Control System:
Tank ID #




Type of tank (i.e., hard chrome, decorative
chrome, or chrome anodizing)




Inspection/Maintenance Checklist (insert inspector's initials in boxes):
Control Device
Inspection
inlet and outlet
transition zones
spray nozzles
packed-bed section
overhead weir
drain lines
fan motor
fan vibration
Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








                                       Page 1 of 2

-------
               OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST (continued)
Monitoring Equipment
Inspection
pressure lines connected
pressure drop monitor
calibrated
pilot tube3
Control Device
Maintenance
other: (specify)'-'



Date: / /




Date: / /





Date: / /




Date: / /





Date: / /




Date: / /





r»atft- / /




Date: / /





aBackflush with water, or remove from the duct and rinse with fresh water. Replace in the duct and
 rotate 180 degrees to ensure that the same zero reading is obtained.  Check pilot tube ends for
 damage.  Replace pilot tube if cracked or fatigued.
"Examples: replaced nozzles, adjusted fan motor, replaced recirculalion pump, elc.
Corrective Aclions:

Describe aclions laken and maintenance performed to correct any deficiencies.
                                  Date:   /  /    Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                .Date:  /  /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                .Date:  /  /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
NOTE: THIS CHECKLIST CONTAINS ONLY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL OF
THE SYSTEM CHECKS THAT NEED TO BE PERFORMED TO ENSURE PROPER OPERATION OF THE CONTROL
SYSTEM. FACILITIES SHOULD INCORPORATE INFORMATION RECOMMENDED BY THE CONTROL SYSTEM
VENDOR.
                                       Page 2 of 2

-------
                     OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST
                               (for fiber-bed mist eliminators)

Applicable Rule:    40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N-National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks
Plant Name/Location:

Control Device ID #:
Installation Date:    /  /

Date of Last Performance Test:   /  /
Tanks Ducted to Control System:
Tank ID #




Type of tank (i.e., hard chrome, decorative
chrome, or chrome anodizing)




Inspection/Maintenance Checklist (insert inspector's initials in boxes):
Control Device
Inspection
inlet and outlet
transition zones
spray nozzles
fiber beds
prefiltering device
drain lines
fan motor
fan vibration
Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








Date: / /








                                       Page 1 of 2

-------
              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST (continued)
\4nnitnrinp TCnninment
Inspection
pressure lines connected
pressure drop monitors
calibrated
fontrnl T)pvirp
Maintenance
washdown of fiber beds
other: (specify)3



Date- / /



Date- / /






Date: / /



Date: / /






Date: / /



Date: / /






nate- / /



Date: / /






aExamples:  replaced nozzles, adjusted fan motor, replaced recirculation pump, etc.


Corrective Actions:

Describe actions taken and maintenance performed to correct any deficiencies.
                                 Date:   /  /    Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                 Date:   /  /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
                                 Date:   /   /   Initials:
Supervisor informed (Y/N): _
NOTE: THIS CHECKLIST CONTAINS ONLY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL OF
THE SYSTEM CHECKS THAT NEED TO BE PERFORMED TO ENSURE PROPER OPERATION OF THE CONTROL
SYSTEM. FACILITIES SHOULD INCORPORATE INFORMATION RECOMMENDED BY THE CONTROL SYSTEM
VENDOR.
                                       Page 2 of 2

-------
                               MONITORING DATA FORM
Applicable Rule:
40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N~National Emission Standards for Chromium
Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
Anodizing Tanks
Plant Name/Location:
Air Pollution Control System:

Control System ID #: 	
Monitoring Data:
Pressure drop across system3
Inches of
t^O column

Date
recorded

Initials

Applicable range established during initial
performance test:
Velocity pressure of system inlet"
Inches of
H2O column

Date
recorded

Initials

Applicable range established during initial
performance test:
aPressure drop monitoring is required for composite mesh-pad (CMP) systems, packed-bed scrubbers
 (PBS), combination PBS/CMS, and fiber-bed mist eliminators (including the upstream control device
 used to prevent plugging). A continuous strip recorder may be added to the AP monitor to
 continuously record pressure drop.
"Velocity pressure monitoring is required for PBS only.
                                        Page  1 of 2

-------
                            MONITORING DATA FORM (continued)

Periods of Excess Emissions:
 Start:	        Start:.
 End:	        End:
 Corrective action taken:	        Corrective action taken:
 Initials:	        Initials:
 Start:	        Start:.
 End:	        End:
 Corrective action taken:	        Corrective action taken:
 Initials:	        Initials:
 Start:	        Start:.
 End:	        End:
 Corrective action taken:	        Corrective action taken:
 Initials:	       Initials:.
 Start:	        Start:.
 End:	        End:_
 Corrective action taken:	        Corrective action taken:
 Initials:	       Initials:
                                           Page 2 of 2

-------
                             INITIAL NOTIFICATION REPORT
Applicable Rule:   40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N~National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks

1.  Print or type the following for each plant in which chromium electroplating and/or chromium
   anodizing operations are performed.
   Owner/Operator/Title

   Street Address  	

   City 	
State
Zip Code
   Plant Name
   Plant Phone Number

   Plant Contact/Title
   Plant Address (if different than owner/operator's):

   Street Address 	

   City 	  State 	
                                Zip Code
2.  Complete this section for all affected tanks using a chromic acid bath.  If only trivalent chromium
   baths are used at the facility, go to No.  3.

   A.  Complete the following table. If additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Tank
ID#








Type of tank








Startup
date1








Total
installed
rectifier
capacity
(amperes)








Description of parts plated








Applicable
emission limit








Compliance
date2








  *New or reconstructed tanks with an initial startup date after 1/25/95 must submit a NOTIFICATION OF
   CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION form and notify the Administrator of the date
   construction/reconstruction commenced and the actual startup date in accordance with 40 CFR 63.347(c)(2).
                                         Page 1 of 4

-------
                          INITIAL NOTIFICATION REPORT (continued)

  ^Compliance dates for existing tanks (i.e., tanks for which operation commenced on or before 12/16/93):
       Hard chromium plating tanks      =>  1/25/97
       Decorative chromium plating tanks =»  1/25/96
       Chromium anodizing tanks        =*  1/25/97
   Compliance dates for new tanks (i.e., tanks for which construction or reconstruction commenced
   after 12/16/93):
       If initial startup occurred between 12/16/93 and  1/25/95 =» 1/25/95
       If initial startup occurred after  1/25/95                =» upon startup

EXAMPLE RESPONSE:



Tank
ID#
1
2
3
4



Type of tank
Chrome anodizing
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating



Startup
date
1/1/85
1/1/85
1/1/95
3/1/95
Total
installed
rectifier
capacity
(amperes)
5,000
10,000
12,000
12,000



Description of parts plated
Aircraft landing gear
pistons
pistons
pistons



Applicable
emission limit
45 dynes/cm or
0.01 mg/dscm
0.015 mg/dscm
0.015 mg/dscm
0.015 mg/dscm



Compliance
date
1/25/97
1/25/97
1/25/95
3/1/95
   B.  Check the box that applies.

   D  Tanks are located at a facility that is a major source.
   D  Tanks are located at a facility that is an area source.

   NOTE:  A major source is a facility that emits greater than 10 tons per year of any one hazardous
   air pollutant (HAP) or 25 tons per year of multiple HAPs. All other sources are area sources.
   The major/area source determination is  based on all HAP emission points inside the facility
   fenceline. not iust the chromium electroplating and anodizing tanks.

   C.  Complete the following if hard chromium electroplating tanks are operated. Check the
       box(es) that apply.

   D  The maximum cumulative potential  rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks is greater than or equal to  60  million amp-hr/yr. This was determined by taking the
       sum of the total installed rectifier capacity (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7
       for each tank.
   D  The maximum cumulative potential  rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks  is less than 60 million amp-hr/yr.  This was determined by taking the sum of the total
       installed rectifier capacity (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7 for each tank.
   D  Records show that the facility's previous 12-month cumulative current usage for the hard
       chromium electroplating tanks was less than 60 million amp-hr.
                                           Page 2 of 4

-------
                        INITIAL NOTIFICATION REPORT (continued)

    D  The facility wishes to accept a Federally-enforceable limit of less than 60 million amp-hr/yr
       on the maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks.

3.  Complete this section for all decorative chromium electroplating tanks using a trivalent chromium
    bath. If only chromic acid baths are used at the facility, go to No. 4.

    A.  Complete the following table.  If additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Tank ID #





Startup date1





Description of parts plated





Compliance date2





        or reconstructed tanks with an initial startup date after 1/25/95 must submit a NOTIFICATION OF
   CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION form and notify the Administrator of the date
   construction/reconstruction commenced and the actual startup date in accordance with 40 CFR 63.347(c)(2).
  ^Compliance date for existing tanks (i.e., tanks for which operation commenced on or  before 12/16/93) =»
   1/25/96
   Compliance dates for new tanks (i.e., tanks for which construction or reconstruction commenced
   after 12/16/93):
       If initial startup occurred between 12/16/93 and 1/25/95 =» 1/25/95
       If initial startup occurred after 1/25/95                =» upon startup

   B.  Provide a brief description of the trivalent chromium electroplating process used at your
       facility.  Attach process flow diagrams for each plating line.
   C.  Check the box that applies.

   D  The trivalent process used at the facility incorporates a wetting agent.
   D  The trivalent process used at the facility does not incorporate a wetting agent.
                                           Page 3 of 4

-------
                       INITIAL NOTIFICATION REPORT (continued)

   D.  List below (or attach a list of) the trivalent chromium bath components and clearly identify the
       wetting agent.
4. Print or type the name and title of the Responsible Official for the plant:



                                (Name)                                 (Title)

A Responsible Official can be:

    *  The president, vice-president, secretary, or treasurer of the company that owns the plant;
    *  The owner of the plant;
    *  The plant engineer or supervisor;
    *  A government official if the plant is owned by the Federal, State, City, or County
       government; or
    *  A ranking military officer if the plant is located on a military base.

   I Certify The Information Contained In This Report To Be Accurate And True To The Best Of
   My Knowledge.
                                                                                  I	/
                       (Signature of Responsible Official)                             (Date)
                                         Page 4 of 4

-------
                 NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION
Applicable Rule:   40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N-National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks

1.  This form is being completed because (check box(es) that apply):

    D  A chromium electroplating and/or chromium anodizing tank is being constructed.
    D  A chromium electroplating and/or chromium anodizing tank is being reconstructed.

2.  Print or type the following for each plant in which a chromium electroplating and/or chromium
    anodizing tank is being constructed or reconstructed.

    Owner/Operator/Title 	

    Street Address  ^____	
   City 	
State
Zip Code
   Plant Name
   Plant Phone Number
   Plant Contact/Title
   Plant Address (if different than owner/operator's):

   Street Address 	
   City 	  State  	
                                Zip Code
3. Complete the following table for each tank for which construction or reconstruction is planned.  If
   additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Tank
ID#






Type of tank






Expected beginning
date for
const/reconst






Expected
completion date
for
const/reconst






Anticipated
startup
date






Type of control
technique to be
used1






Control
System ID #






Estimated total
chromium
emissions after
control is applied^






* Attach design information from vendor, including design drawings and design capacity.
•^Attach engineering calculations to support estimate.  These calculations may be from the vendor.
Emissions estimates should be expressed in units consistent with the emission limits in the regulation.
                                         Page 1 of 3

-------
           NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION (continued)
EXAMPLE RESPONSE:
Tank
tt>#
1
2
Type of tank
Hard chrome
plating
Decorative
chrome plating
Expected beginning
date for
const/reconst
10/94
2/95
Expected
completion date
for
const/reconst
1/95
6/95
Anticipated
startup
date
1/95
6/95
Type of control
technique to be
used1
Composite mesh-
pad system
Wetting-agent
fume suppressant
Control
System ID #
5
N/A
Estimated total
chromium
emissions after
control is applied2
0.01 mg/dscm
Will meet
45 dynes/cm
4. Check the box that will apply after construction/reconstruction occurs.

   D  Tanks are located at a facility that is a major source.
   D  Tanks are located at a facility that is an area source.

   NOTE:  A major source is a facility that emits greater than 10 tons per year of any one hazardous
   air pollutant (HAP) or 25 tons per year of multiple HAPs.  All other sources are area sources.
   The major/area source determination is based on all HAP emission points inside the facility
   fenceline. not just the chromium electroplating and anodizing tanks.

5. Complete the following if hard chromium electroplating tanks are being constructed/reconstructed.
   Check the box(es) that apply.

   D  The maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks is greater than or equal to 60 million amp-hr/yr.  This was determined by taking the
       sum of the total installed rectifier capacity (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7
       for each tank.
   D  The maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks is less than 60 million  amp-hr/yr.  This was determined by taking the sum of the total
       installed rectifier capacity  (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7 for each tank.
   D  Records show that the facility's previous 12-month cumulative current usage for the hard
       chromium electroplating tanks was less than 60 million amp-hr.
   D  The facility wishes to accept a Federally-enforceable limit of less than 60 million amp-hr/yr
       on the maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks.

6. Attach a brief description of the  proposed emission control technique(s), including design
   drawings, design capacity,  and emissions estimates with supporting calculations.

7. If reconstruction is to occur, attach a brief description of the source and the components to be
   replaced.
                                          Page 2 of 3

-------
           NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION/RECONSTRUCTION  (continued)

8. Complete the following if reconstruction is to occur, and the facility believes that there are
   economic or technical limitations to prevent the facility from complying will all relevant standards
   or requirements.

   A.  Attach a discussion of any economic or technical limitations of complying with the relevant
       standards or requirements. The discussion must be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate how
       these limitations will  affect the facility's ability to comply.

   B.  Provide an estimate of the fixed capital cost of the replacements and of constructing a
       comparable entirely new source:  Replacements $	; New source $	.

   C.  Provide the estimated life of the source after the replacements: 	
9. Print or type the name and title of the Responsible Official for the plant:


                                (Name)                                  (Title)

A Responsible Official can be:

     *  The president, vice-president, secretary, or treasurer of the company that owns the plant;
     *  The owner of the plant;
     *  The plant engineer or supervisor;
     *  A government official if the plant  is owned by the Federal, State, City, or  County
        government; or
     *  A ranking military officer if the plant is located on a military base.

     I Certify The Information Contained In This Report To Be Accurate And True To The Best Of
     My Knowledge.
                       (Signature of Responsible Official)                             (Date)
                                         Page 3 of 3

-------
                       NOTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE TEST
                      (This notification is not required if you do not have to
                       conduct a performance test under the regulation.)
Applicable Rule:    40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N~National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks
1.  Print or type the following for each plant in which chromium electroplating and/or chromium
   anodizing operations are performed:
   Owner/Operator/Title
   Street Address	
   City  	
State
Zip Code
   Plant Name
   Plant Phone Number
   Plant Contact/Title
   Plant Address (if different than owner/operator's):
   Street Address
Citv State Zip Code
2. Complete the following table. If additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Type of control
technique


Control
System ID #


ID # of tank ducted
to control system










Type of tank










Date of
performance test


                                        Page 1 of 2

-------
              NOTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE TEST (continued)
EXAMPLE RESPONSE:
Type of control
technique
Composite mesh-pad
system
Packed-bed scrubber
Wetting agent fume
suppressant
Control
System ID #
10
11
N/A
ID # of tank ducted
to control system
1
2
3
4
5
6
Type of tank
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating
Hard chrome plating
Chrome anodizing
Date of
performance test
5/15/97
5/18/97
none required
                               Page 2 of 2

-------
                       NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
Applicable Rule:    40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N-National Emission Standards for Chromium
                  Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                  Anodizing Tanks

1.  Print or type the following for each plant in which chromium electroplating and/or chromium
   anodizing operations are performed.
   Owner/Operator/Title

   Street Address 	

   City  	
State
Zip Code
   Plant Name
   Plant Phone Number

   Plant Contact/Title
   Plant Address (if different than owner/operator's):

   Street Address 	

   City  	  State  	
                               Zip Code
2. Complete the following table.  If additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Tank
ro#





Type of tank





Applicable
emission limit





Type of control
technique





Control
system
ro#





Method to
determine
compliance





Test method
followed





Type and quantity
of HAP emitted2





hf a performance test was conducted, submit the test report containing the elements required by
40 CFR 63.344(a).
2If the compliance procedures of 40 CFR 63.344(e) are being followed, attach the calculations needed
to support the emission limit expressed in mg/hr.
EXAMPLE RESPONSE:
Tank
ro#
1
2
3
Type of tank
Hard chrome
plating
Chrome anodizing
Decorative chrome
plating
Applicable
emission limit
0.015 mg/dscm
45 dynes/cm
0.01 mg/dscm
Type of control
technique
Composite mesh-
pad system
Wetting agent
fume suppressant
Foam blanket
Control
system
ID#
10
N/A
N/A
Method to
determine
compliance'
Performance test
Surface tension
measurement
Performance test
Test method
followed
EPA Method 306
EPA Method 306B
EPA Method 306A
Type and quantity
of HAP emitted2
Cr 0.009 mg/dscm
Cr 40 dynes/cm
Cr 0.005 mg/dscm
                                        Page 1 of 3

-------
                  NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE STATUS (continued)

3.  Complete the following table for each control technique used.  If additional lines are needed,
   make copies of this page
Control
system ID #





Tank
ID #(s)





Range of site-specific operating parameter values1
Pressure drop





Velocity pressure





Surface tension





Foam blanket
thickness





* If the applicable monitoring and reporting requirements to demonstrate continuous compliance differ
 from those in 40 CFR Part 63, subpart N, attach a description.  Parameter value ranges are
 established through initial performance testing and are those that correspond to emissions at or below
 the level of the standard(s).

EXAMPLE RESPONSE:
Control
system ID #
10
N/A
N/A
Tank
ID #(s)
1
2
3
Range of site-specific operating parameter values1
Pressure drop
7 in. w.c.
± 1 in.
N/A
N/A
Velocity pressure
N/A
N/A
N/A
Surface tension
N/A
<45 dynes/cm
N/A
Foam blanket
thickness
N/A
N/A
>1 inch
4.     Complete the following if hard chromium electroplating tanks are operated (check the box(es)
       that apply):

    D  The maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks is greater than or equal to 60 million amp-hr/yr. This was determined by taking the
       sum of the total installed rectifier capacity (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7
       for each tank.
    D  The maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks is less than 60 million amp-hr/yr.  This was determined by taking the sum of the total
       installed rectifier capacity (amperes) multiplied by 8,400 hours/yr and by 0.7 for each tank.
    D  Records show that the facility's previous annual actual rectifier capacity of the hard  chromium
       electroplating tanks was less than 60 million amp-hr/yr.  If so, submit the records that support
       this rectifier capacity for any 12-month period preceding the compliance date, or submit a
       description of how operations will change to meet this rectifier capacity limit.  For new.
       sources, the capacity can be that projected for the first 12-month period of tank operation.
                                          Page 2 of 3

-------
                  NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE STATUS (continued)

   D  The facility has accepted or will accept a Federally-enforceable limit of 60 million amp-hr/yr
       on the maximum cumulative potential rectifier capacity of the hard chromium electroplating
       tanks.

5. Check one of the following boxes that describes the facility's compliance status:

   D  The facility is  in compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart N.
   D  The facility is  not in compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart N.

6. Print or type the name and title of the Responsible Official for the plant:
                                (Name)                                 (Title)

A Responsible Official can be:

    *  The president, vice-president, secretary, or treasurer of the company that owns the plant;
    *  The owner of the plant;
    *  The plant engineer or supervisor;
    *  A government official if the plant is owned by the Federal, State, City, or County
       government; or
    *  A ranking military officer if the plant is located on a military base.

   I Certify That An Operation And Maintenance Plan Has Been Completed And The Plan And
   Other Work Practice Standards Of 40 CFR 63.342(f) Are Being Followed.
                       (Signature of Responsible Official)                             (Date)
   I Certify That The Information Contained In This Report Is Accurate And True To The Best Of
   My Knowledge.
                       (Signature of Responsible Official)                             (Date)
                                         Page 3 of 3

-------
                       ONGOING COMPLIANCE STATUS REPORT
Applicable Rule:   40 CFR Part 63, Subpart N-National Emission Standards for Chromium
                 Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium
                 Anodizing Tanks
1.  Print or type the following for each plant in which chromium electroplating and/or chromium
   anodizing operations are performed:
   Owner/Operator/Title
   Street Address 	
   City  	
State
Zip Code
   Plant Name
   Plant Phone Number
   Plant Contact/Title
   Plant Address (if different than owner/operator's):
   Street Address  	
   City  	  State 	
                               Zip Code
2.  Complete the following table.  If additional lines are needed, make copies of this page.
Tank
ro#





Type of tank





Applicable
emission limit





Type of
control technique





Control
system
n>#





Operating parameter
monitored to
demonstrate
compliance





Acceptable value or
range of values for
monitored parameter(s)





Total operating
time during
reporting period





EXAMPLE RESPONSE:
Tank
n>#
1
2
3
Type of tank
Hard chrome
plating
Chrome
anodizing
Hard chrome
plating
Applicable
emission limit
0.015 mg/dscm
45 dynes/cm
0.015 mg/dscm
Type of
control technique
Composite mesh-
pad system
Wetting agent
fume suppressant
Composite mesh-
pad system
Control
system
ID#
10
N/A
10
Operating parameter
monitored to
demonstrate
compliance
pressure drop
surface tension
pressure drop
Acceptable value or
range of values for
monitored
parameter(s)
7 in. w.c. ± 1 in.
<45 dynes/cm
7 in. w.c. ± 1 in.
Total operating
time during
reporting period
l,040hr
l,040hr
l,040hr
                                       Page 1 of 3

-------
                 ONGOING COMPLIANCE STATUS REPORT (continued)

3. Identify the beginning and ending dates of the reporting period:

   Beginning   /   /                       Ending	/	/	

4.  For hard chromium electroplating tanks that are limiting their maximum cumulative rectifier
    capacity in accordance with 40 CFR 63.342(c)(2), complete the following table for this reporting
    period:
Tank
ID#



Total for all
tanks
Ampere-hours consumed by month
Month 1




Month 2




Month 3




Month 4




Month 5





Month 6



-
Total ampere-hours
consumed during
reporting period




EXAMPLE RESPONSE
Tank
ID#
1
3
Total for all
tanks
Ampere-hours consumed by month
Month 1
400,000
F 300,000
700,000
Month 2
400,000
300,000
700,000
Month 3
400,000
300,000
700,000
Month 4
200,000
300,000
500,000
Month 5
200,000
300,000
500,000
Month 6
200,000
300,000
500,000
Total ampere-hours
consumed during
reporting period
1,800,000
1,800,000
3,600,000
5.   Attach all MONITORING DATA FORMs for the reporting period.  Based on the data on excess
    emissions and the data on operating times, calculate the following hours:
                                                   Hours
Percent of total
operating time
   Duration of excess emissions caused by:
     Process upsets
     Control equipment malfunctions
     Other known causes
     Unknown causes

   Total duration of excess emissions
                                        Page 2 of 3

-------
                  ONGOING COMPLIANCE STATUS REPORT (continued)

6. Check the box that applies.

   D  During this reporting period, the work practices identified in 40 CFR 63.342(f) were followed
       in accordance with the operation and maintenance plan for this source.
   D  During this reporting period, the work practices identified in 40 CFR 63.342(f) were not
       followed in accordance with the operation and maintenance plan for this source.

 7.  If the operation and maintenance plan was not followed during the reporting period,  please
    provide an explanation of the reasons for not following the provisions in the plan, an assessment
    of whether any excess emissions and/or parameter monitoring exceedances are believed to have
    occurred,  and a copy of the appropriate records documenting that the operation and maintenance
    plan was not followed. Please state whether or not the plan is being revised accordingly.
 8.  Please describe any changes in monitoring, processes, or controls since the last reporting period.
 9.  Print or type the name and title of the Responsible Official for the plant:



                                  (Name)                                 (Title)

A Responsible Official can be:

    *  The president, vice-president, secretary, or treasurer of the company that owns the plant;
    *  The owner of the plant;
    *  The plant engineer or  supervisor;
    *  A government official if the plant is owned by the Federal, State, City, or County
       government; or
    *  A ranking military officer if the plant is located on a military base.

   I Certify That The Information  Contained In This Report Is Accurate And True To The Best Of
   My Knowledge.
                       (Signature of Responsible Official)                             (Date)
                                          Page 3 of 3

-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-453/B-95-001
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
A Guidebook on How to Comply with the Chromium
Electroplating and Anodizing National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants
7. AUTHOR(S)
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Emission Standards Division
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Federal Small Business Assistance Program
Information Transfer and Program Integration Division
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
April 1995
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND
Final
PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
National emission standards to control emissions of chromium compounds from new and existing
chromium electroplating and chromium anodizing tanks were promulgated under Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act in January 1995. This document presents guidance for businesses on how to comply with
the regulation.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
Air pollution control
Anodizing
Chromium
Electroplating
Environmental protection
Hazardous air pollutants
National emission standards
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Air pollution control
Chromium
Stationary sources
19. SECURITY CLASS (Report)
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (Page)
Unclassified
c. COSATI Field/Group

21. NO. OF PAGES
150
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)
PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE

-------