National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production, 29528-29607 [2011-9838]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29528
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037; FRL–9298–7]
RIN 2060–AN33
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers Production. The proposed
rule would establish emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants from
polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
production located at major and area
sources. The proposed rule includes
requirements to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the
proposed emission standards. EPA is
proposing standards that would apply at
all times, including during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunctions.
The proposed standards also include
continuous monitoring provisions and
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
SUMMARY:
Comments. Comments must be
received on or before July 19, 2011.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act,
comments on the information collection
provisions are best assured of having
full effect if the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of
your comments on or before June 20,
2011.
Public Hearing. We 1 will hold two
public hearings concerning the
proposed polyvinyl chloride and
copolymers (PVC) production rules in
the Houston, Texas area, and in Baton
Rouge, Louisiana. Persons interested in
presenting oral testimony at either
public hearing should contact Ms.
Teresa Clemons at (919) 541–0252 or at
clemons.teresa@epa.gov by May 31,
2011. If no one requests to speak at the
public hearings by May 31, 2011, then
the public hearings will be cancelled
without further notice. We will specify
the date and time of the public hearings
on https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pvc/
pvcpg.html.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0037 by one of the following
methods:
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
DATES:
1 Throughout
VerDate Mar<15>2010
this preamble, ‘‘we’’ refers to EPA.
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• https://www.epa.gov/oar/
docket.html. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov.
Attn: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attn: Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037.
• Mail: By U.S. Postal Service, send
your comments to: EPA Docket Center,
EPA West Building (Air Docket), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attn:
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037. Please include a total of two
copies. In addition, please mail a copy
of your comments on the information
collection provisions to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Attn:
Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
• Hand Delivery: By courier, deliver
your comments to: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
EPA West Building (Air Docket), Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20004, Attn: Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays), and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: All submissions must
include agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes
information claimed to be confidential
business information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI,
or otherwise protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or E-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an E-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your E-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket, and
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment, and with
any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties, and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may
not be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: EPA has established a docket
for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA West
Building (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the EPA
Docket Center is (202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Jodi Howard, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (E143–01), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; Telephone number: (919) 541–
4607; Fax number: (919) 541–0246; Email address: howard.jodi@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Acronyms and Abbreviations. Several
acronyms and terms are used in this
preamble. While this may not be an
exhaustive list, to ease the reading of
this preamble and for reference
purposes, the following terms and
acronyms are defined here:
CAA—Clean Air Act
CBI—confidential business information
CDD/CDF—chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins and
furans
CDX—Central Data Exchange
CEMS—continuous emission monitoring
system
CPMS—continuous parameter monitoring
system
ERT—Emissions Reporting Tool
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Fe—fraction emitted
GACT—generally available control
technologies or management practices
HAP—hazardous air pollutants
HCl—hydrogen chloride
HON—Hazardous Organic NESHAP
ICR—information collection request
K—kurtosis
lbs/yr—pounds per year
l/min—liters per minute
MACT—maximum achievable control
technology
NESHAP—national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants
ng/dscm—nanograms per dry standard cubic
meter
NTTAA—National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
OP—Office of Policy
ppbv—parts per billion by volume
ppbw—parts per billion by weight
ppmv—parts per million by volume
ppmw—parts per million by weight
PRD—pressure relief device
psia—pounds per square inch absolute
PVC—polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
PVCPU—PVC production process unit
RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIN—Regulatory Information Number
S—skewness
SEK—standard error of kurtosis
SES—standard error of skewness
TCEQ—Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality
TEF—toxic equivalency factor
TEQ—toxic equivalent
THC—total hydrocarbons
TTN—Technology Transfer Network
UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UPL—upper prediction limit
VCM—vinyl chloride monomer
WWW—World Wide Web
Organization of This Document. The
following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
I. General Information
A. Do these rules apply to me?
B. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments to EPA?
C. Where can I get a copy of this
document?
II. Background Information for these
Proposed Rules
A. What is the statutory authority for the
proposed PVC rule?
B. What is the history of the PVC
Production source category?
C. Summary of Related Court Decisions
D. What are the emission sources at PVC
production facilities?
E. What HAP are emitted from PVC
production facilities?
F. How did we gather information for the
proposed PVC rule?
III. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. What is the affected source for the
proposed rule?
B. What is the relationship between this
proposed rule and the existing 40 CFR
part 61 standards for PVCPU?
C. How have we used subcategories in the
proposed rule?
D. What proposed emission limitations and
work practice standards must I meet?
E. When must I comply with the proposed
standards?
F. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements?
G. What are the performance testing
requirements for batch process
operations?
H. What are the notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
I. What are the electronic data submittal
requirements?
J. What revisions are proposed for the area
source rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD)?
IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC Rule for
Major and Area Sources (40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH)
A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC
production?
B. How did EPA select the emission points,
format, and pollutants for the proposed
rule?
C. How did EPA determine the proposed
emission standards for area sources?
D. How did EPA determine the MACT
floors for existing major sources?
E. How did EPA determine the MACT
floors for new major sources?
F. How did EPA analyze beyond-the-floor
options and determine MACT?
G. How did EPA select the compliance and
monitoring requirements for the
proposed rule?
H. How did EPA determine compliance
times for the proposed rule?
I. How did EPA determine the required
records and reports for this proposed
rule?
29529
J. What are the startup, shutdown, and
malfunction provisions?
V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule
A. What are the air impacts?
B. What are the cost impacts?
C. What are the non-air quality health,
environmental, and energy impacts?
D. What are the economic impacts of the
proposed standards?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
A redline version of the regulatory
language that incorporates the changes
in this proposed action to 40 CFR 63,
subpart DDDDDD is available in the
docket.
I. General Information
A. Do these rules apply to me?
The proposed rules establish national
emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for PVC
production.
The regulated categories and entities
potentially affected by the proposed
PVC production standards include the
following:
Category
NAICS1 Code
Examples of potentially regulated entities
Polyvinyl chloride resins manufacturing .....................................
325211
Facilities that polymerize vinyl chloride monomer to produce
polyvinyl chloride and/or copolymers products.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
1 North
American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. To determine
whether your facility, company,
business, organization, etc., would be
affected by this proposed action, you
should examine the applicability
criteria in the proposed 40 CFR part 63,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
subpart HHHHHHH (National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production), and in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD (National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production Area Sources).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Your PVC production process unit
(PVCPU) is not subject to this subpart if
it is a research and development facility,
as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
the proposed action to a particular
entity, contact the person listed in the
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29530
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments to EPA?
Submitting CBI. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or E-mail. Send or
deliver information identified as CBI to
only the following address: Ms. Jodi
Howard, c/o OAQPS Document Control
Officer (Room C404–02), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0037.
Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI.
For CBI information in a disk or CD–
ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the
outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI
and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD–ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
comment that includes information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. If you
submit a disk or CD–ROM that does not
contain CBI, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM clearly that it does not
contain CBI. Information marked as CBI
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
If you have any questions about CBI
or the procedures for claiming CBI,
please consult the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
C. Where can I get a copy of this
document?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this
proposed action will also be available
on the World Wide Web (WWW)
through the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN). Following signature, a
copy of the proposed action will be
posted on the TTN’s policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at the following
address: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/.
The TTN provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of
air pollution control.
II. Background Information for These
Proposed Rules
A. What is the statutory authority for the
proposed PVC rule?
Section 112(d) of the CAA requires us
to establish NESHAP for source
categories and subcategories of both
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
major and area sources of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) that are listed for
regulation under CAA section 112(c). A
major source emits or has the potential
to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more
of any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of
any combination of HAP. An area
source is a HAP-emitting stationary
source that is not a major source.
Section 112(d) of the CAA requires
EPA to set emissions standards for HAP
emitted by major stationary sources
based on performance of the maximum
achievable control technology (MACT).
The MACT standards for existing
sources must be at least as stringent as
the average emissions limitation
achieved by the best performing 12
percent of existing sources (for which
the Administrator has emissions
information) or the best performing five
sources for source categories or
subcategories with fewer than 30
sources (CAA section 112(d)(3)(A) and
(B)). This minimum level of stringency
is called the MACT floor. For new
sources, MACT standards must be at
least as stringent as the control level
achieved in practice by the best
controlled similar source (CAA section
112(d)(3)). EPA also must consider more
stringent ‘‘beyond-the-floor’’ control
options. When considering beyond-thefloor options, EPA must consider not
only the maximum degree of reduction
in emissions of HAP, but must take into
account costs, energy, and non-air
quality health and environmental
impacts when doing so.
Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA
requires EPA to identify at least 30 HAP
which, as a result of emissions from area
sources, pose the greatest threat to
public health in the largest number of
urban areas. EPA implemented this
provision in 1999 in the Integrated
Urban Air Toxics Strategy (Strategy), (64
FR 38715, July 19, 1999). Specifically,
in the Strategy, EPA identified 30 HAP
that pose the greatest potential health
threat in urban areas, and these HAP are
referred to as the ‘‘30 urban HAP.’’ CAA
section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list
sufficient categories or subcategories of
area sources to ensure that area sources
representing 90 percent of the emissions
of the 30 urban HAP are subject to
regulation. A primary goal of the
Strategy is to achieve a 75-percent
reduction in cancer incidence
attributable to HAP emitted from
stationary sources.
EPA can set MACT standards for area
sources. Section 112(d)(2).
Alternatively, under CAA section
112(d)(5), EPA can promulgate
standards or requirements for area
sources ‘‘which provide for the use of
generally available control technologies
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
[‘‘GACT’’] or management practices by
such sources to reduce emissions of
hazardous air pollutants.’’ Additional
information on GACT is found in the
Senate report on the legislation (Senate
Report Number 101–228, December 20,
1989), which describes GACT as:
* * * methods, practices and techniques
which are commercially available and
appropriate for application by the sources in
the category considering economic impacts
and the technical capabilities of the firms to
operate and maintain the emissions control
systems. Consistent with the legislative
history, we can consider costs and economic
impacts in determining GACT.
Determining what constitutes GACT
involves considering the control
technologies and management practices
that are generally available to the area
sources in the source category. We also
consider the standards applicable to
major sources in the analogous source
category to determine if the control
technologies and management practices
are transferable and generally available
to area sources. In appropriate
circumstances, we may also consider
technologies and practices at area and
major sources in similar categories to
determine whether such technologies
and practices could be considered
generally available for the area source
categories at issue. Finally, as noted
above, in determining GACT for a
particular area source category, we
consider the costs and economic
impacts of available control
technologies and management practices
on that category.
Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are
required to ‘‘review, and revise as
necessary (taking into account
developments in practices, processes,
and control technologies), emission
standards promulgated under this
section no less often than every 8 years.’’
We are proposing revised standards
for vinyl chloride emissions from area
sources under the authority of CAA
section 112(d)(6). We are also proposing
standards for dioxin, hydrogen chloride
(HCl), and total HAP under CAA section
112(d)(5).
B. What is the history of the PVC
Production source category?
On July 16, 1992, PVC Production was
listed as a major source category for
regulation pursuant to section 112(c) of
the CAA (57 FR 31576). A major source
of HAP is a stationary source that has
the potential to emit 10 tpy or more of
any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of any
combination of HAP.
On June 26, 2002, PVC Production
was listed as an area source category for
regulation pursuant to sections 112(c)(3)
and 112(k)(3)(B)(ii) of the CAA (67 FR
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
43112). An area source is a stationary
source of HAP that is not a major
source.
On July 10, 2002, EPA promulgated
NESHAP for new and existing PVC
production facilities that are major
sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart J (67
FR 45886, July 10, 2002) (referred to as
the ‘‘part 63 NESHAP’’). In that
rulemaking, EPA determined that
compliance with the existing Vinyl
Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61,
subpart F) (referred to as the ‘‘part 61
NESHAP’’) reflected the application of
MACT; thus, satisfying CAA section
112(d), with the exception of adding
requirements for equipment leaks at
new sources. In the part 61 NESHAP
and the associated part 63 NESHAP,
EPA regulated vinyl chloride emissions
as a surrogate for all HAP emitted from
PVC production. For equipment leaks,
the part 63 NESHAP required that new
sources comply with 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, National Emission
Standards for Equipment Leaks—
Control Level 2 Standards.
In Mossville Environmental Action
Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232 (DC Cir.
2004), the petitioners argued that EPA
failed to set emission standards for all
HAP emitted by PVC plants. EPA had
set emission standards for vinyl
chloride as a surrogate for the remaining
HAP, because it was the predominant
HAP used and emitted at PVC plants.
The Court ruled that EPA did not
adequately explain the basis for its
decision to use vinyl chloride as a
surrogate for other HAP. The Court
‘‘vacated and remanded [the rule in its
entirety] to the Agency for it to
reconsider or properly explain its
methodology for regulating [HAP]
emitted in PVC production other than
vinyl chloride by use of a surrogate.’’
370 F.3d at 1243. This rule proposes
NESHAP for PVC production major
sources in response to the remand, and
in accordance with section 112 of the
CAA.
On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930),
EPA promulgated NESHAP for new and
existing PVC production area sources in
40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD.
Subpart DDDDDD is based on GACT,
and requires area sources to meet the
requirements in the existing Vinyl
Chloride NESHAP (part 61 NESHAP).
The part 61 NESHAP requirements
address only vinyl chloride emissions.
In this rulemaking, we are fulfilling our
obligation under section 112(d)(6) of the
CAA to review, and revise, as necessary,
the PVC production area source
standards. We are coordinating our
review of the area source standards with
the development of major source MACT
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
standards in response to the Court
remand.
C. Summary of Related Court Decisions
In addition to Mossville
Environmental Action Now v. EPA,
summarized above, two other court
decisions are relevant to this proposal.
In March 2007, the District of Columbia
Circuit Court issued an opinion (Sierra
Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875 (DC Cir.
2007) (Brick MACT)) vacating and
remanding CAA section 112(d) MACT
standards for the Brick and Structural
Clay Ceramics source categories. Some
key holdings in that case were:
• MACT floors for existing sources
must reflect the average emission
limitation achieved by the best
performing 12 percent of existing
sources, not levels EPA considers to be
achievable by all sources (479 F.3d at
880–81);
• EPA cannot set floors of ‘‘no
control.’’ The Court reiterated its prior
holdings, including National Lime
Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625 (DC
Cir. 2000), confirming that EPA must set
floor standards for all HAP emitted by
the major source, including those HAP
that are not controlled by at-the-stack
control devices (479 F.3d at 883); and
• EPA cannot ignore non-technology
factors that reduce HAP emissions,
including when determining which
sources are best performers for purposes
of ascertaining the MACT floor.
Specifically, the Court held that ‘‘EPA’s
decision to base floors exclusively on
technology even though non-technology
factors affect emissions violates the
Act.’’ (479 F.3d at 883).
In addition, the fact that a specific
level of performance is not being
intentionally achieved by the source is
not a legal basis for excluding the
source’s performance from
consideration. Sierra Club v. EPA, 479
F.3d at 631–34; National Lime
Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d at 640.
The Brick MACT decision also stated
that EPA may account for variability in
setting floors. However, the Court found
that EPA erred in assessing variability,
because it relied on data from the worst
performers to estimate best performers’
variability, and held that ‘‘EPA may not
use emission levels of the worst
performers to estimate variability of the
best performers without a demonstrated
relationship between the two’’ (479 F.3d
at 882).
A second Court opinion of relevance
to this proposal is Sierra Club v. EPA,
551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008). In that
case, the Court vacated portions of two
provisions contained in the General
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).
The regulations at issue were 40 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29531
63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), which,
when incorporated into CAA section
112(d) regulations for specific source
categories, exempt sources from the
requirement to comply with the
otherwise applicable CAA section
112(d) emission standard during periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
D. What are the emission sources at PVC
production facilities?
PVC production includes the
manufacture of PVC resins. The resins
are then used to make a large number
of commercial and industrial products.
Producing these resins involves batch
reactors where vinyl chloride monomer
(VCM), along with initiators and
inhibitors, is polymerized as a
homopolymer, or copolymerized with
varying amounts of a co-monomer, such
as vinyl acetate. At most facilities, the
resulting resins are in a slurry form and
are then stripped to recover the
unreacted VCM. The stripped resin is
then dried into powders or granules.
PVC resins are then either shipped
offsite, or used to make final products
in equipment and unit operations that
are not covered under this source
category.
PVC is not a HAP, but the
manufacture of PVC resin requires VCM,
which is a HAP, as a primary feedstock.
Unreacted VCM and other organic HAP
present in feedstocks or formed during
the polymerization process may be
present in process components. HAP
may be released from an opening or leak
in a process component; or the residual
HAP (i.e., unreacted VCM, and other
organic compounds) in the resin may be
released to the atmosphere as a result of
drying or handling dry resin. Stripping
the polymerized resin to recover
unreacted VCM reduces the air
emissions of vinyl chloride and other
HAP from the resin slurry by reducing
the amount of HAP present. Gaseous
vent streams containing vinyl chloride
and other HAP that originates from
process equipment prior to, and
including the resin stripper, are sent to
a VCM recovery process before being
routed to one or more control devices,
such as an absorber, or thermal oxidizer,
followed by a halogenated compound
scrubber. Combustion controls greatly
reduce vinyl chloride and other HAP
emissions, but may create other HAP, in
particular, chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins
and furans (CDD/CDF), and HCl.
Emission sources in the PVC
production process include process
components prior to, and including, the
resin stripper(s) (e.g., the reactor, resin
stripper, reactor used as a stripper,
storage and feed vessels for raw
materials, additives, initiators, and
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29532
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
inhibitors); VCM recovery systems (e.g.,
condenser or other vapor separation
devices, holding tanks, gas holders); and
process components downstream of the
resin stripper(s) (e.g., centrifuges,
concentrators, blend tanks, filters,
dryers, conveyor air discharges, bagging
operations, resin handling and
conveyance equipment), and final resin
storage tanks or storage silos. Additional
emission sources at PVC production
facilities include leaking equipment
(e.g., pumps, valves, compressors);
wastewater collection and treatment
systems; heat exchange system
components (e.g., cooling towers, heat
exchangers, pumps, and other
equipment associated with the heat
exchange system); and other emission
sources, such as opening a reactor and
other components for maintenance and
cleaning.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
E. What HAP are emitted from PVC
production facilities?
The HAP emitted from PVC
production processes includes a wide
variety of HAP. There are no metal HAP
emitted from PVC production. In
addition, combustion control devices
emit HCl and CDD/CDF. Of the HAP
emitted from PVC production processes,
1,3-butadiene, benzene, CDD/CDF, and
vinyl chloride have been classified as
known human carcinogens.2 Several
other compounds that may be emitted
from PVC production processes have
been classified as probable carcinogens,
such as acetaldehyde, bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, chloroform, chloroprene,
ethylene dichloride, ethylidene
dichloride, formaldehyde, iso-octane,
methylene chloride, vinyl bromide, and
vinylidene chloride.3Hydrogen chloride,
along with other non-carcinogenic HAP
(e.g., methanol), are also emitted from
PVC production processes.
F. How did we gather information for
the proposed PVC rule?
We gathered information on PVC
production through review of
previously collected information,
current literature, data from the
National Emissions Inventory, meetings
and voluntary information submissions
by industry and the industry trade
association, and formal information
collection pursuant to CAA section 114.
There were two components to the
information collection. First, we
solicited information from eight PVC
companies in the United States that
manufacture PVC resin. The collection
obtained available information on PVC
2 U.S. EPA, Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS). Available at https://www.epa.gov/IRIS/
index.html.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
production units at major and area
sources (e.g., information on production
processes, equipment, emission points,
control techniques, operating practices,
and emissions based on previous tests
or calculations). Companies were also
asked to provide data for other emission
sources, including process component
openings and cleanouts, handling of
unstripped resin, filters, and gas
holders. Second, we required the same
companies to measure the HAP content
in their PVC resins (both following
stripping, but before drying, and after
drying) and measure the HAP emissions
at the inlet and outlet to their process
vent control devices. The information
collection is documented in the
memorandum, Information Collection
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, and results of this information
collection are available in the docket.
III. Summary of the Proposed Rule
This section summarizes and provides
our rationale for the requirements
proposed in this action. In section III of
this preamble, the term ‘‘you’’ refers to
owners and operators of sources affected
by the proposed rule.
A. What is the affected source for the
proposed rule?
The proposed rule applies to owners
or operators of PVC PU located at, or
that are part of, a major source or an
area source as defined in 40 CFR 63.2.
The affected source for this subpart is
each individual PVCPU. An existing
affected source is a PVCPU that is not
a new affected source, as defined in 40
CFR 63.11870 of the proposed rule. A
new affected source is a PVCPU for
which construction is commenced on or
after May 20, 2011 at a major or area
source. If components of an existing
affected source are replaced such that
the replacement meets the definition of
reconstruction in 40 CFR 63.2 and the
reconstruction commenced on or after
May 20, 2011, then the existing source
becomes a reconstructed source and is
subject to the relevant standards for a
new affected source. The reconstructed
source must comply with the
requirements for a new affected source
upon initial startup of the reconstructed
source, or by the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, whichever is later.
A PVCPU is defined as a collection of
process components that is assembled
and connected by hard-piping or duct
work that processes raw materials to
manufacture PVC resin. A PVCPU
includes, but is not limited to,
polymerization reactors; resin strippers;
blend tanks; centrifuges; dryers; product
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
separators; recovery devices; feed,
intermediate, and product storage
vessels; finished product loading
operations; heat exchange systems;
wastewater strippers; wastewater
treatment systems; connected ducts and
piping; and equipment in HAP service,
including pumps, compressors,
agitators, pressure relief devices (PRD),
sampling connection systems, openended valves or lines, valves, and
connectors.
B. What is the relationship between this
proposed rule and the existing 40 CFR
part 61 standards for PVCPU?
PVCPU are currently subject to
requirements in the part 61 NESHAP.
This proposed rule includes
requirements that are at least as
stringent as the requirements in this
existing rule. We, therefore, propose
that once facilities are in compliance
with the final PVCPU MACT, the
requirements of the part 61 NESHAP
would no longer apply.
C. How have we used subcategories in
the proposed rule?
Most of the emissions sources subject
to the proposed regulation have the
same characteristics, and are addressed
consistently, independent of process
operations or products produced. We
are proposing, however, three
subcategories for our limits on the
amount of HAP remaining in resins
following polymerization and stripping
(i.e., the stripped resin). These
subcategories are based on the type of
resin produced, and include: (1) Bulk
resin, (2) dispersion resin, and (3) all
other resin (e.g., suspension and
solution resin).
D. What proposed emission limitations
and work practice standards must I
meet?
The proposed rule would establish
the same requirements for affected
sources located at major and area
sources. We explain in section IV.C
below our rationale for the standards
proposed for area sources.
1. Storage Vessels and Handling
Operations
Under 40 CFR 63.11910 and Table 4
of the proposed rule, if you own or
operate a storage vessel at a new or
existing affected source, we are
proposing that material with a
maximum true vapor pressure of the
stored liquid greater than 11.1 pounds
per square inch absolute (psia) be stored
in pressure vessels with no emissions to
the atmosphere. During those times
when purging is required, or when the
pressure vessel is being loaded, the
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
purged stream or the emission stream
during loading would be required to be
routed to a closed vent system and
control device. The closed vent system
and control device must meet the
requirements specified in 40 CFR
63.11925 of the proposed rule. You
would also be required to equip all
openings in the pressure vessel with
closure devices that are designed to
operate with no detectable emissions, as
determined using procedures specified
in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of the
proposed rule.
For storage vessels with a capacity
greater than or equal to 40,000 gallons,
storing material with a maximum true
vapor pressure greater than or equal to
0.75 psia, or storage vessels with a
capacity greater than or equal to 20,000
gallons (but less than 40,000 gallons),
storing materials with a maximum true
vapor pressure greater than or equal to
4 psia, we are proposing two equivalent
compliance options. We are proposing
that material be stored in either: (1) A
floating roof tank meeting the operating,
inspection, and maintenance
requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
WW, or (2) a fixed roof storage vessel
that routes vent streams to a closed vent
system and control device (meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925 of the
proposed rule) capable of reducing inlet
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions by 95 or greater.
We are proposing that all other
storage vessels meet the operating,
inspection, and maintenance
requirements for fixed roof vessels of 40
CFR 63.11910(a) of the proposed rule, or
comply with either the controlled fixed
roof or floating roof requirements
discussed previously. 40 CFR
63.11910(a)(1)(ii) and 40 CFR
63.11910(a)(3)(i) of the proposed rule
include requirements to equip each
opening in the roof with a closure
device, and to perform initial and
annual inspections, and repair any
defects found within the specified time
period. Defects include, but are not
limited to, visible cracks, holes, gaps, or
other open spaces in the closure device
or between the perimeter of the opening
and the closure device; broken, cracked,
or otherwise damaged seals or gaskets
on closure devices; and broken or
missing hatches, access covers, caps, or
other closure devices.
We are not proposing requirements
for handling operations (unloading and
transfer) for reasons explained in
section IV.D of this preamble.
2. Equipment Leaks
In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing that existing and
new affected sources comply with the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
leak detection and repair (LDAR)
program requirements of the National
Emission Standards for Equipment
Leaks-Control Level 2 Standards,
subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63, except for
agitators, and rotating or reciprocating
pumps and compressors. For gas and
light liquid valves, subpart UU specifies
a leak definition of 500 parts per million
VOC, and a monitoring frequency that is
dependent upon the number of leaking
valves. Subpart UU also requires
equipment specifications that prevent
leaks for other pieces of equipment.
We are proposing that rotating pumps
be sealless, equipped with double seals,
or equivalent. Reciprocating pumps,
reciprocating and rotating compressors,
and agitator must be equipped with
double seals, or equivalent, as provided
in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed
rule. If double mechanical seals or
double outboard seals are used, HAP
emissions must be minimized by
maintaining the pressure between the
two seals so that the leak occurs into the
pump, compressor, or agitator; by
ducting any HAP between the two seals
through a closed vent system to a
control device meeting the process vent
emission limits specified in 40 CFR
63.11925 of the proposed rule; or by an
equivalent method, as provided in 40
CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule.
We are proposing that a vinyl chloride
monitoring system be operated for
detection of major leaks and
identification of the general area of the
plant where a leak is located. A vinyl
chloride monitoring system is a device
that obtains air samples from one or
more points continuously, and analyzes
the samples with gas chromatography,
infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion
detection, or an equivalent or alternate
method.
In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed
rule, we are also proposing that, in
addition to operating with no detectable
emissions, there be no discharge to the
atmosphere from any PRD on any
equipment in HAP service within the
PVCPU. We are proposing that upon a
discharge to the atmosphere from the
PRD that the monitoring requirements
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU
for pressure releases from PRD be
followed.
3. Heat Exchange Systems
In 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing that you
implement a LDAR program to detect
leaks of VOC into cooling water. For
existing sources, we are proposing
monthly monitoring for both closed
loop and once-through heat exchange
systems using either the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29533
(TCEQ) Modified El Paso Method 3 or
EPA Method 8021B, Aromatic and
Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization
and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors, with a leak action level of 38
parts per billion by weight (ppbw) of
total strippable VOC in the cooling
water or 2.9 parts per million by volume
(ppmv) of total strippable VOC in the
stripping gas. For new sources, we are
proposing twice-daily (12 hour
intervals) monitoring for both closed
loop and once-through heat exchange
systems using either the TCEQ’s
Modified El Paso Method 4 or EPA
Method 8021B with a leak action level
of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC in
the cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total
strippable VOC in the stripping gas. The
delay of repair action level for both new
and existing sources is 380 ppbw of
total strippable VOC in the cooling
water or 29 ppmv of total strippable
VOC in the stripping gas. When a leak
is identified, additional monitoring
must be performed to isolate the source
of the leak. If the total strippable VOC
concentration remains below the leak
action level throughout the period of
additional monitoring, then repairs are
not required; otherwise, repairs must be
completed within 45 days of identifying
the leak. Repairs may be delayed if the
concentration of total strippable VOC in
the cooling water or stripping gas
remains below the delay of repair action
level and either: (1) It is technically
infeasible to repair the leak without a
shutdown, or (2) the necessary
equipment, parts, or personnel are not
available.
4. Process Vents
In 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing all the vent
streams from: polymerization reactors,
resin strippers, other process
components prior to the resin stripper,
VCM recovery systems, wastewater
collection and treatment system, slip
gauges, unloading and loading lines,
and samples be routed through a closed
vent system to a control device. We are
proposing the emission limitations
presented in Table 1 of this preamble for
3 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method)
for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number
One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures
Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring,
prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated
by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645).
4 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method)
for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number
One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures
Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring,
prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated
by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645).
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29534
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the outlet of the control device. These
emission limitations apply at all times.
TABLE 1—EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR PROCESS VENTS a
Emission Limitations b
Pollutant
Existing
sources
Vinyl chloride .........................................................................................................................................................
Hydrogen chloride .................................................................................................................................................
Total organic HAP .................................................................................................................................................
Dioxin/Furans (TEQ) .............................................................................................................................................
New sources
0.32 ppmv .......
150 ppmv ........
12 ppmv ..........
0.023 ng/dscm
3.2 ppbv
0.17 ppmv
0.22 ppmv
0.0087 ng/
dscm
a Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers,
other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery systems, certain storage vessels, the wastewater collection and treatment
system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples.
b ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent O 2. ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent O 2. ng/dscm = nanograms per
dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent O 2.
5. Other Emission Sources
Other emission sources include
reactor and other component opening
losses. When reactors or other
components (including prepolymerization reactors used in the
manufacture of bulk resins) are opened
for cleaning, we are proposing in 40
CFR 63.11955 of the proposed rule that
emissions be minimized prior to
opening. We are proposing that
emissions from opening a
polymerization reactor must not exceed
0.04 pound vinyl chloride/ton of
polyvinyl chloride product where the
product means the gross product of pre-
polymerization and postpolymerization. We are proposing
emissions from opening of process
components for any reason be
minimized by reducing the volume of
vinyl chloride to an amount that
occupies a volume of no more than 2.0
percent of the component’s containment
volume or 25 gallons, whichever is
larger, at standard temperature and
pressure. Any vinyl chloride removed
from opening equipment must be
ducted through a closed vent system to
a control device meeting the
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925
through 40 CFR 63.11950 of the
proposed rule. The outlet of the control
device must meet the emission
limitations for process vents discussed
in section III.D.4.
6. Stripped Resin
In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing emission
limitations for residual vinyl chloride
and total HAP in the stripped resin
presented in Tables 2 and 3 of this
preamble. The limits were developed for
new and existing sources for three
subcategories of PVC resins: (1) Bulk
resins, (2) dispersion resins, and (3) all
other resins. These emission limits
would apply at all times.
TABLE 2—LIMITS FOR STRIPPED RESIN AT EXISTING SOURCES
Emission limits (ppmw)
Pollutant
Bulk
resins
Vinyl chloride ...........................................................................................................................................................
7.1
Total HAP .........................................................................................................................................................
170
Dispersion
resins
55
110
All
other
resins
0.48
76
TABLE 3—LIMITS FOR STRIPPED RESIN AT NEW SOURCES
Emission limitations (ppmw)
Pollutant
Bulk
resins
Vinyl chloride ...........................................................................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Total HAP .........................................................................................................................................................
7. Wastewater
In 40 CFR 63.11965 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing that you must
determine the vinyl chloride
concentration for each wastewater
stream at the point of wastewater
generation. Streams with 10 ppmw
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
vinyl chloride, or more, must be treated
to reduce the concentration of vinyl
chloride to a concentration of 0.11
ppmw for existing sources, and 0.0060
ppmw for new sources. The 10 ppmw
determination applies before the
wastewater stream is exposed to the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
7.1
170
Dispersion
resins
41
58
All
other
resins
0.20
42
atmosphere, stored, mixed with any
other wastewater stream, and enters a
wastewater treatment process, or is
discharged untreated as a wastewater.
We are also proposing that wastewater
streams with flow rates greater than or
equal to 10 liters per minute (l/min),
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
and the concentrations of HAP, as
determined by Method 305 (as specified
in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9)
greater than or equal to 1,000 ppmw,
meet the Hazardous Organic NESHAP
(HON) wastewater requirements, as
described in the sections of 40 CFR part
63, subpart G, and specified in the
proposed rule.
Streams that contain less than 10
ppmw vinyl chloride (at the point of
generation), and streams that either
contain less than 1,000 ppmw total
HAP, or have a flow rate less than the
10 l/min criteria (at the point of
determination, as defined by 40 CFR
part 63, subpart G), are not required to
further reduce emissions, but must
remain below these levels.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
E. When must I comply with the
proposed standards?
Existing affected sources would be
required to comply with the proposed
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH no
later than 3 years after publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. New
affected sources would be required to
comply on the effective date of the final
rule, or upon startup, whichever is later.
F. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements?
In 40 CFR 63.11896 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing that, if you make
a process change to an existing affected
source that does not meet the criteria to
become a new affected source in 40 CFR
63.11870(c) of the proposed rule, you
must demonstrate that any added
emission points are in compliance with
the applicable requirements for an
existing affected source. If the process
change results in a change in the
characteristics of any emission point
such that a different emission limit,
operating parameter limit, or work
practice standard applies, we are
proposing that you demonstrate that the
changed emission point complies with
the applicable requirements for an
existing affected source. You must
demonstrate compliance with any
applicable work practice standards
upon startup of the changed emission
point, and must demonstrate
compliance with any emission limits
and establish applicable operating limits
by 180 days after the date of initial
startup of the changed process unit.
We are also proposing that, if you
make a process change to a new affected
source, you would demonstrate that any
added emission point(s) is/are in
compliance with the applicable work
practice standards for a new affected
source by start-up of the changed
emission point. You must also
demonstrate initial compliance with any
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
emission limits and establish applicable
operating limits by 180 days after the
date of initial startup of the changed
process unit.
If you make a process change that
adds or changes emission points, we are
proposing that you demonstrate
continuous compliance with your
emission limits and standards, operating
limits, and work practice standards
according to the procedures and
frequency in 40 CFR 63.11910 through
40 CFR 63.11980 of this proposed rule,
and submit a notification report
specified in 40 CFR 63.11985 of the
proposed rule.
1. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for storage
vessels?
For each floating roof storage vessel,
we are proposing that you meet the
operating, inspection, repair, and
maintenance requirements of 40 CFR
part 63, subpart WW. For each fixed
roof storage tank venting through a
closed vent system to a control device
achieving 95-percent reduction in total
HAP emissions, we are proposing that
you meet the requirements for closed
vent systems and control devices in 40
CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule, and
summarized in section III.D.3 of this
preamble.
In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed
rule, we are also proposing that, for each
fixed roof tank, you install and maintain
the tank with no visible cracks, holes, or
other open spaces between roof section
joints or between the interface of the
roof edge and the tank wall. We are also
proposing that you must install closure
devices that you secure in the closed
position except during periods when
you need to have access to the interior
of the fixed roof tank. The closure
device may be opened when needed to
provide access. The fixed roof tank and
its closure device would be required to
be inspected initially, and at least once
per year. The inspection requirements
would not be applicable to parts of the
fixed roof that are determined to be
unsafe to inspect if you document and
explain why it is unsafe to inspect and
develop a plan to conduct inspections
when the tank is not in service. A first
attempt to repair defects must be made
no later than 5 calendar days after
detection, and repairs would be
required to be completed no later than
45 days after detection, except as
specified in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(4)(ii) of
the proposed rule.
In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed
rule, for pressure vessels, we are
proposing that all potential leak
interfaces in the pressure vessel be
monitored for leaks annually and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29535
repaired following the procedures of 40
CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule.
2. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for equipment
leaks?
For each applicable piece of
equipment (e.g., valves, connectors)
associated with your affected source, we
are proposing that you meet the LDAR
requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
UU. In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed
rule, you would also be required to
install electronic indicators on each
PRD that would be able to identify and
record the time and duration of each
pressure release and notify operators
that a pressure release has occurred.
3. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for heat
exchange systems?
We are proposing that for each
affected source, you must operate an
equipment leak program, as specified in
the proposed rule. Under the
compliance requirements for heat
exchange systems in 40 CFR 63.11920 of
the proposed rule, an affected source
would be required to conduct sampling
and analyses using either the TCEQ
Modified El Paso Method, Revision
Number One, dated January 2003,5 or
EPA Method 8021B, no less frequently
than monthly for existing sources and
twice-daily (12-hour intervals) for new
sources, and fix any leaks detected. We
are proposing different sampling
locations for once-through and closed
loop heat exchange systems as specified
in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed
rule. For once-through systems only,
you may monitor at the cooling tower
return line prior to exposure to the air.
For once-through systems, you must
monitor selected heat exchanger exit
line(s) so that each heat exchanger or
group of heat exchangers within a
system is covered by the selected
monitoring location. Monitoring of
selected heat exchanger exit lines is also
a monitoring option for closed loop
systems. Additionally, for once-through
systems, you may also monitor the inlet
water feed line prior to any heat
exchanger. If multiple heat exchange
systems use the same water feed (i.e.,
inlet water from the same primary water
source), you may monitor at one
representative location and use the
monitoring results for that sampling
location for all heat exchange systems
5 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method)
for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number
One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures
Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring,
prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated
by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645).
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29536
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
that use that same water feed. We are
proposing to exempt a heat exchange
system from the monitoring
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11920 if all
heat exchangers within the heat
exchange system operate with the
minimum pressure on the cooling water
side at least 35 kilopascals greater than
the maximum pressure on the process
side, or the heat exchange system does
not contain any heat exchangers.
Identified leaks must be repaired as
soon as practicable, but within 45 days
after identifying the leak. We are
proposing delay of repair action levels
as either a total strippable VOC
concentration (as methane) in the
stripping gas of 29 ppmv or a total
strippable VOC concentration in the
cooling water of 380 ppbw. Leaking heat
exchanger repairs may be delayed if the
repair is technically infeasible without a
shutdown, or the necessary equipment,
parts, or personnel are not available. To
delay repairs in either case, the total
strippable VOC must initially be, and
remain less than, the delay of repair
action level for all monitoring periods
during the delay of repair.
4. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for process
vents?
To demonstrate compliance for
process vents, you would be required to
meet the requirements of proposed 40
CFR 63.11930 for each closed vent
system that routes emissions from
process vents subject to the HAP
emission limits to a control device. You
would be required to meet the initial
and continuous compliance
requirements for process vents specified
in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR
63.11935, the monitoring requirements
for your process vent control device, as
specified in proposed 40 CFR 63.11940,
and the performance testing
requirements for process vents in 40
CFR 60.11945. You may not use a flare
to comply with the emission limits of
the proposed rule, as specified in 40
CFR 63.11925(b).
Closed vent systems. In 40 CFR
63.11930 of the proposed rule, for
closed vent systems, you would be
required to meet specified design
requirements and install flow indicators
in the bypass lines, or meet other
requirements to prevent and detect
bypass of the control device. You must
also follow the inspection, leak
monitoring, and repair requirements in
40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule
for closed vent systems. Closed vent
systems in vacuum service would be
required to install alarms rather than
performing leak inspection and
monitoring. If you operate a closed vent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
system in vacuum service, you are not
required to comply with the other
closed vent system requirements in the
proposed rule.
Performance testing, continuous
parameter monitoring system (CPMS),
and continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS) requirements for process
vents and associated control devices.
Compliance would be demonstrated
through a combination of performance
testing (as specified in 40 CFR 63.11925
and 40 CFR 63.11945) and/or
monitoring using CEMS or CPMS that
measure process vent control device
operating parameters (as specified in 40
CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR 63.11935, and 40
CFR 63.11940). These sections also refer
to Tables 1, 2, 6, and 7 of the proposed
rule for emission limits, testing
methods, and requirements. Below, we
summarize the process vent testing and
compliance requirements by pollutant.
Each test would consist of three test
runs.
We are proposing that existing and
new sources would be required to
demonstrate initial and annual
compliance with the total organic HAP
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 of the
proposed rule by measuring total
hydrocarbon (THC) at the outlet of the
control device using EPA Method 25A,
as specified in Table 9 of the proposed
rule. The minimum test run duration
would be 1 hour.
During the initial compliance test,
you would be required to establish
values for the control device operating
parameters specified in 40 CFR
63.11935 and 40 CFR 63.11940 (e.g.,
incinerator temperature). You would
then use a CPMS to continuously
monitor that parameter to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the total
organic HAP limit. New and existing
sources could elect to use THC CEMS
instead of annual testing and CPMS for
total organic HAP. All CEMS must meet
the applicable performance
specifications, procedures, and other
calibration, accuracy, and operating and
maintenance requirements, as specified
in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed
rule. For vinyl chloride, you would
demonstrate compliance by conducting
initial and annual performance tests
using EPA Method 18. You would be
required to establish monitoring
parameters during the initial
performance test, and continuously
monitor control device operating
parameters.
For CDD/CDF, you would
demonstrate compliance by conducting
initial and annual performance tests
using EPA Method 23. The minimum
sampling volume collected would be 5
cubic meters for Method 23. For HCl,
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
you would demonstrate compliance by
conducting an initial performance test
using EPA Method 26 or 26A. The
minimum sampling volumes collected
would be 60 liters for EPA Method 26,
or 1 cubic meter for EPA Method 26A.
You would be required to establish
monitoring parameters during the initial
performance test, and continuously
monitor control device operating
parameters (e.g., liquid flow rate and pH
for scrubbers, and temperature and
carbon injection rate for activated
carbon injection). After EPA publishes
final performance specifications for
CEMS for HCl and CDD/CDF, new
sources would be required to use CEMS
instead of annual testing for these
pollutants, as required in 40 CFR
63.11925 of the proposed rule. Existing
sources could elect to use CEMS instead
of annual testing and CPMS for these
pollutants. All CEMS must meet the
applicable performance specifications,
procedures, and other calibration,
accuracy, and operating and
maintenance requirements, as specified
in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed
rule.
We have included specific
performance testing requirements,
including the process operating
conditions under which performance
tests should be conducted, for
continuous process vents and batch
operations, as provided in 40 CFR
63.11945 of the proposed rule, and
discussed in section III.F and III.G of
this preamble.
All CPMS would be required to have
data averaging periods of 3-hour block
averages. All CPMS would be required
to meet minimum accuracy and
calibration frequency requirements, as
specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and Table
8 of the proposed rule. For each
monitored parameter, you would
establish a minimum, maximum, or a
range that indicates proper operation of
the control device, as specified in 40
CFR 63.11935(d). The proposed rule
specifies the parameters that would be
monitored for each type of control
device, including each incinerator,
absorber, adsorber, condenser, sorbent
injection system, fabric filter, or other
control device. You must also install a
flow indicator at the inlet of the control
device to indicate periods of no flow to
the control device.
Some control devices would be
subject to additional emission pointspecific performance testing
requirements, as described in 40 CFR
63.11945 of the proposed rule. We have
included specific performance testing
requirements for continuous process
vents and batch operations, as provided
in 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
rule, and discussed in section III.F of
this preamble.
5. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for
wastewater?
As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965(a) of
the proposed rule, we are proposing that
you must conduct an initial test for
wastewater streams from the affected
source to determine the vinyl chloride
concentration, the total HAP
concentration (including all HAP listed
in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G),
and the flow rate. The concentration
tests would be conducted using EPA
Method 107 in combination with
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) Method SW–8260B and
EPA Method 305. Prior to testing, you
would be required to submit a test plan
for EPA approval that includes your
proposed method for analysis using
these methods. We are proposing that
you sample for vinyl chloride by
collecting one grab sample at the point
of generation. We are also proposing
that you sample for total HAP by
collecting one grab sample at the point
of determination, as specified in 40 CFR
part 63, subpart G.
Wastewater streams that contain less
than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at the
point of generation), and wastewater
streams that either contain less than
1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a flow
rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the
point of determination, as defined by 40
CFR part 63, subpart G), must remain
below these levels. You would conduct
periodic tests at the same locations, and
using the same test methods described
above to verify that the stream
concentration stays below the vinyl
chloride and total HAP concentration
levels. Wastewater streams would be
tested monthly. There are also proposed
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11975(e)(2)
of the proposed rule, for demonstrating
that you remain below the 10 l/min flow
rate criterion, based on flow rate
measurements.
If your wastewater stream contains
vinyl chloride concentrations greater
than or equal to 10 ppmw, you would
be required to treat the wastewater
stream to achieve a concentration of
0.11 ppmw vinyl chloride at the
wastewater stripper outlet for existing
sources, and 0.0060 ppmw at new
sources. You must conduct an initial
compliance test and monthly testing to
demonstrate compliance with these
limits. We are proposing that you
measure at the outlet of the wastewater
stripper by collecting one grab sample.
In addition, during your performance
test, you would be required to establish
operating ranges for your wastewater
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
steam or vacuum stripper, including
steam-to-feed ratios and stripper
bottoms temperature, and also the
vacuum level measured in the column
for vacuum strippers. You would use a
CPMS to continuously monitor control
device operating parameters to
demonstrate that you continuously meet
these limits.
If the wastewater stream exceeds the
1,000 ppmw HAP concentration (based
on the list of HAP in Table 9 of 40 CFR
part 63, subpart G), and the 10-l/min
flow rate, then you must comply with
the 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Group 1,
wastewater suppression and treatment
requirements, and conduct the
compliance testing and monitoring
required in subpart G.
For more information on the
wastewater compliance requirements,
see 40 CFR 63.11965, 40 CFR 63.11970,
and 40 CFR 63.11975 of the proposed
rule.
6. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for stripped
resins?
In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed
rule, we are proposing that you conduct
initial performance tests to demonstrate
compliance with the proposed vinyl
chloride and total HAP limits for
stripped resin. We are also proposing
that you conduct daily performance
testing to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the proposed vinyl
chloride limit, and monthly
performance testing to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the
proposed total HAP limit. The tests
would be conducted at the outlet of the
resin stripper for continuous processes
and immediately after stripping for
batch processes. You would be required
to use EPA Method 107 in combination
with RCRA Method SW–8260B, and to
include in your test plan a proposed
method for analysis using these
methods. You would be required to
submit the test plan for EPA approval.
In addition, during your initial
performance test, you would be required
to establish operating ranges for your
resin steam or vacuum stripper,
including steam-to-feed ratios, stripping
temperature, and the vacuum level
measured in the column for vacuum
strippers. You would use a CPMS to
continuously monitor resin stripper
operating parameters. All CPMS would
be required to calculate 3-hour block
averages for the parameters measured.
To demonstrate initial compliance
with the total HAP limits, you would be
required to collect one grab sample
every 8 hours for a single grade, or one
grab sample per grade of PVC resin
produced, whichever is more frequent
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29537
for each resin stripper over a 24-hour
period. To determine initial compliance
with the vinyl chloride limit, you would
be required to collect one grab sample
every 8 hours for a single grade, or one
grab sample per grade of PVC resin
produced, whichever is more frequent,
for each resin stripper over a 24-hour
period. You would be required to collect
samples over a 24-hour period during
which you are manufacturing the grade
of resin, which you produce the most of,
based on total mass of resin produced in
the preceding month.
To demonstrate continuous
compliance with the vinyl chloride
limit for a continuous process, you
would be required to collect one grab
sample from each resin stripper every 8
hours for a single grade, or one grab
sample per grade of PVC resin
produced, whichever is more frequent.
Grade is defined in 40 CFR 63.12010 of
the proposed rule and is unchanged
from the definition in the Part 61
NESHAP other than the insertion of the
term ‘‘PVC.’’ To demonstrate compliance
with the vinyl chloride limit for a batch
process, you would be required to
collect one grab sample from each batch
of resin produced. You must
demonstrate compliance on a daily basis
using a 24-hour average concentration
weighted on production.
To demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP limits
for a continuous process, on a monthly
basis you would be required to collect
one grab sample every 8 hours for a
single grade, or per grade of PVC resin
produced, whichever is more frequent
from each resin stripper over a 24-hour
period. Individual sampling events may
be 3 to 5 weeks apart, but you must
conduct a minimum of 12 sampling
events per calendar year. The 24-hour
arithmetic average total HAP
concentration for each stripper for each
resin grade produced during the 24-hour
sampling period must be calculated
using the individual HAP
concentrations measured for the grab.
Beginning 13 months following your
initial demonstration of compliance,
you must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart,
based on a 12-month rolling average
concentration, calculated as the average
of the 12 most recent 24-hour arithmetic
average concentrations.
To demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP limits
for a batch process, on a monthly basis,
you would be required to collect one
grab sample for each batch of resin
produced over a 24-hour period. You
would be required to collect samples
over a 24-hour period during which you
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29538
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
are producing the grade of resin, which
you manufacture for a majority of the
time during that month. You must
demonstrate compliance on a monthly
basis with the average concentration of
the most recent 12 months of data.
7. What are the initial and continuous
compliance requirements for other
emission sources?
To demonstrate compliance with the
requirements for other emission sources,
we are proposing that for reactors and
other components prior to opening, you
must follow the initial and continuous
compliance requirements in 40 CFR
63.11925. We are requesting comments
on this compliance approach.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
G. What are the performance testing
requirements for batch process
operations?
For batch process operations,
performance tests would be conducted
under the most challenging conditions
that you would run your batch process
operations to make sure that the control
devices are operating at the level needed
to demonstrate compliance with the
appropriate emission limits. The
Agency’s intent is to require testing of
the performance of the control device
under its most challenging conditions.
Subsequent to the initial compliance
test, continuous monitoring of operating
parameters established during the initial
test is a reasonable measure of
continuous compliance with the
efficiency requirement under all
conditions. Presumably, the control
device should function as well or better
under conditions that are not as
challenging. You would be required to
develop an emission profile that
describes the characteristics of the vent
stream at the inlet to the control device
under either absolute or hypothetical
worst-case conditions. The emissions
profile may be developed by process, by
process component, or by capture and
control device limitations, as specified
in 40 CFR 63.11945(c)(3) of the
proposed rule. We have provided
methodologies to develop the emissions
profile for each batch processing
operation in proposed 40 CFR 63.11950,
including methodologies for vapor
displacement, gas sweep of a partially
filled vessel, heating, depressurization,
vacuum systems, gas evolution, air
drying, and purging. All other HAP
emissions for the emissions profile
would be determined through an
engineering assessment, or through
testing approved by the Administrator.
See 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed
rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
H. What are the notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
1. Notifications and Reports
All new and existing sources would
be required to comply with certain
requirements of the General Provisions
(40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are
identified in Table 5 of the proposed 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. The
General Provisions include specific
requirements for notifications,
recordkeeping, and reporting. Reports
include notifications of initial startup,
initial notification, notification of
compliance status, compliance reports,
notification of performance test,
notification of inspection, batch precompliance report, and other
notifications and reports specified in
proposed 40 CFR 63.11985.
The notification of compliance status
report required by 40 CFR 63.9(h) must
include certifications of compliance
with rule requirements.
The excess emissions and continuous
system performance report and
summary report required by 40 CFR
63.10(e)(3) of the NESHAP General
Provisions (referred to in the rule as a
compliance report) would be required to
be submitted semi-annually for
reporting periods during which there
was: An exceedance of any emission
limit or a monitored parameter; a
deviation from any of the requirements
in the rule occurred; or if any process
changes occurred and compliance
certifications were reevaluated. The
proposed rule includes additional
requirements for what you must include
in these reports for each type of
emission point. See 40 CFR 63.11985 of
the proposed rule.
2. Recordkeeping
The proposed rule would require
compiling and retaining records to
demonstrate compliance with each
emission limit and work practice
standard. These recordkeeping
requirements are specified either
directly in the proposed rule, in the
General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63,
and in 40 CFR part 63, subparts UU and
WW. Records that we are proposing that
you keep include performance tests,
records of CPMS and CEMS, records of
malfunction, records of deviations,
records specific to each emission point,
and other records specified in proposed
40 CFR 63.11990. The 40 CFR part 63
General Provisions requirements that
apply are listed in Table 5 of the
proposed rule. We are proposing that
records be kept for 5 years in a form
suitable and readily available for EPA
review. We are proposing that records
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
be kept on-site for 2 years; you may
keep the records off-site for the
remaining 3 years. See 40 CFR 63.11990
of the proposed rule.
I. What are the electronic data submittal
requirements?
EPA must have performance test data
to conduct effective reviews (e.g., risk
assessment) of CAA section 112
standards, as well as for many other
purposes, including compliance
determinations, emission factor
development, and annual emission rate
determinations. In conducting these
reviews, EPA has found it ineffective
and time consuming, not only for us,
but also for regulatory agencies and
source owners and operators to locate,
collect, and submit emissions test data
in paper form because of varied
locations for data storage and varied
data storage methods. In recent years,
though, stack testing firms have
typically collected performance test data
in electronic format, making it possible
to move to an electronic data submittal
system that would increase the ease and
efficiency of data submittal and improve
data accessibility.
In this action, EPA is proposing a step
to increase the ease and efficiency of
data submittal and improve data
accessibility. Specifically, we are
proposing that owners and operators of
PVC production facilities would be
required to submit electronic copies of
reports of certain required performance
test reports to EPA’s WebFIRE database.
The WebFIRE database was constructed
to store performance test data for use in
developing emission factors. A
description of the WebFIRE database is
available at https://cfpub.epa.gov/
oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main.
EPA solicits comment on the proposed
electronic data submittal requirements.
Data entry will be through an
electronic emissions test report
structure called the Electronic Reporting
Tool (ERT). The ERT would be able to
transmit the electronic report through
EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX)
network for storage in the WebFIRE
database making submittal of data very
straightforward and easy. A description
of the ERT can be found at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html.
The requirement to submit source test
data electronically to EPA would only
apply to those performance tests
conducted using test methods that are
supported by the ERT. The ERT
contains a specific electronic data entry
form for most of the commonly used
EPA reference methods. A listing of the
pollutants and test methods supported
by the ERT is available at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
We believe that industry would benefit
from this proposed approach to
electronic data submittal. Having these
data, EPA would be able to develop
improved emission factors, make fewer
information requests, and promulgate
better regulations.
One major advantage of submitting
source test data through the ERT is that
it will provide a standardized method to
compile and store much of the
documentation required to be reported
by the proposed rule. Another
advantage is that the ERT clearly states
what testing information would be
required.
Another important benefit of
submitting these data to EPA at the time
the source test is conducted is that it
should substantially reduce the effort
involved in data collection activities in
the future. When EPA has performance
test data in hand, there will likely be
fewer or less substantial data collection
requests in conjunction with
prospective required residual risk
assessments or technology reviews. This
would result in a reduced burden on
both affected facilities (in terms of
reduced manpower to respond to data
collection requests) and EPA (in terms
of preparing and distributing data
collection requests and assessing the
results).
State, local, and Tribal agencies may
also benefit from a more streamlined
and accurate review process rather than
a manual data assessment, making
review and evaluation of the source
provided data and calculations easier
and more efficient. Finally, another
benefit of the proposed data submittal to
WebFIRE electronically is that these
data would greatly improve the overall
quality of existing and new emissions
factors by supplementing the pool of
emissions test data for establishing
emissions factors, and by ensuring that
the factors are more representative of
current industry operational procedures.
A common complaint heard from
industry and regulators is that emission
factors are outdated or not
representative of a particular source
category. With timely receipt and
incorporation of data from most
performance tests, EPA would be able to
ensure that emission factors, when
updated, represent the most current
range of operational practices. In
summary, consistent with Executive
Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, issued on January
18, 2011, in addition to supporting
regulation development, control strategy
development, and other air pollution
control activities, having an electronic
database populated with performance
test data would save industry, State,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
local, Tribal agencies, and EPA
significant time, money, and effort
while also improving the quality of
emission inventories and, as a result, air
quality regulations.
J. What revisions are proposed for the
area source rule (40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD)?
We are proposing to revise the
existing NESHAP for PVC production
area sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD) to require that PVC
production area sources comply with
the proposed rule. Area sources would
be required to continue to comply with
the current provisions of subpart
DDDDDD until they are in compliance
with the proposed rule. After that date,
existing and new area sources would no
longer be subject to the requirements of
subpart DDDDDD.
IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC
Rule for Major and Area Sources (40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH)
A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC
production?
The CAA allows EPA to divide source
categories into subcategories, based on
differences in class, type, or size. For
example, differences between given
types of units can lead to corresponding
differences in the nature of emissions
and the technical feasibility of applying
emission control techniques. For the
stripped resin limits, we are proposing
three subcategories.
In the United States, four different
types of polymerization processes have
been used to manufacture PVC:
dispersion, suspension, solution, and
bulk. The type of resin production
process used is dictated by the end use
of the product and the product’s
required physical and chemical
properties and function, such as the
need for flexibility, rigidity, or the
ability to be molded. For example, to
make dispersion resins (as compared to
other types of resins), different
reactants, initiators, and surfactants are
used in the manufacturing process. The
differences in chemicals used for
manufacturing, and the properties of the
final product, result in products with
different compositions.
After the polymerization process is
complete, the PVC resin is sent to a
resin stripper, or the resin can be
stripped directly in the reactor to
remove residual HAP such as vinyl
chloride. The vent streams from the
resin stripper, polymerization reactors,
other process components upstream of
the resin stripper, and vents from the
wastewater stripper are sent to recovery
processes to recover unreacted VCM.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29539
After recovery, the vent stream
containing unrecovered VCM is sent to
a control device before being emitted to
atmosphere.
Dispersion resins have less porosity,
mechanical stability, and heat stability
than suspension or solution resins,
resulting in more difficulty in stripping
vinyl chloride. Consequently, the levels
of vinyl chloride in the stripped
dispersion resin products are not as low
as those in the stripped suspension
resin products. At bulk resin
production, the product of the
polymerization process results in a resin
that is more of a solid than a slurry,
which is unlike solution, dispersion,
and suspension resins, and results in a
different emissions profile at the resin
stripper for organic HAP and vinyl
chloride. We are unaware of any resin
that is being manufactured using the
solution process, and we do not have
emissions data on this type of process.
For purposes of the stripped resin
limits, which serve to limit emissions
from points downstream of the resin
stripper, we are proposing to
subcategorize PVCPU into three
subcategories: bulk resins, dispersion
resins, and all other resin types. In the
absence of data on solution resin
production facilities, we are
incorporating them into the ‘‘other
resins’’ subcategory, which also includes
suspension resin. We are requesting
comment on the proposed
subcategorization, and the
appropriateness of including suspension
and solution resins in the same
subcategory.
We are not proposing to establish
separate subcategories for any of the
other emission points regulated by the
proposed rule (process vents, equipment
leaks, wastewater, storage vessels, other
emission sources, and heat exchange
systems by resin type). The same air
pollution control devices, wastewater
treatment processes, and work practices
for these kinds of emission points are
applicable and effective regardless of
any potential differences in physical
and chemical properties of the resin
being produced. Therefore, EPA chose
not to subcategorize in setting emission
limitations and work practice standards
for these emission points.
B. How did EPA select the emission
points, format, and pollutants for the
proposed rule?
1. How did EPA select the emission
points covered?
The emission points covered by the
proposed rule were selected to ensure
control of all sources of HAP emissions
within the PVC production process. The
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29540
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
HAP emission points within PVCPU are
process vents (e.g., process vents from
polymerization reactors, resin strippers,
other process components prior to the
resin stripper, the VCM recovery
system, slip gauges, loading and
unloading lines, samples, the
wastewater collection and treatment
system that routes emissions through a
closed vent system to a control device,
and emission control devices), stripped
resin, equipment leaks (e.g., valves,
pumps, connectors, and PRD),
wastewater collection and treatment
systems, storage vessels, reactor and
other process component openings, and
heat exchange systems.
EPA solicits comment on the emission
points proposed for regulation.
2. How did EPA select the format of the
proposed rule?
We are proposing to establish
numerical emission limits in the form of
concentration limits for process vents,
stripped resin, and wastewater. We are
establishing the process vent emission
limits at the outlet of the control device.
The process vent emissions are
comprised of emissions from
polymerization reactors, resin strippers,
other process components prior to the
resin stripper, the VCM recovery
system, certain pressurized and fixed
storage vessels, slip gauges, loading and
unloading lines, samples, the
wastewater collection and treatment
system that routes emissions through a
closed vent system to the control device,
and emission control devices.
The emission limits in the proposed
rule provides flexibility for the
regulated community by allowing a
regulated source to choose any control
technology or technique to meet the
emission limits, rather than requiring
each unit to use a prescribed control
method that may not be appropriate in
each case. We are proposing numerical
emission rate limits as ppmv dry
standardized to 3-percent oxygen for
process vents. A concentration limit in
units of ppmv is consistent with
previous EPA and State regulations for
PVC production facilities, and other
processes controlled by combustion
devices.
We are proposing a concentration
limit for HAP in the stripped resin in
units of ppmw as a means to control
HAP emissions from downstream
sources (e.g. dryers, centrifuges, filters).
We are proposing a concentration based
limit because the HAP emissions from
vents associated with processes
downstream of the resin stripper are
dependent on the concentration of HAP
in the stripped resin. That is, the greater
the HAP concentration in the stripped
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
resin, the greater the HAP emissions
from downstream process components.
Similarly, the lower the HAP
concentration in the stripped resin, the
lower the HAP emissions from
downstream process components.
Consequently, limiting HAP in the
stripped resin is the best means to
control HAP emissions from
downstream processes. This approach is
consistent with current Federal and
State regulations that are applicable to
PVC production facilities.
For wastewater streams that contain
greater than or equal to 10 ppmw vinyl
chloride, and, accordingly, require
treatment to reduce the vinyl chloride
concentration, we are proposing a
stripper outlet concentration.
Wastewater streams with less than 10
ppmw vinyl chloride must stay below
that level. To address HAP emissions
other than vinyl chloride, the proposed
rule would require compliance with the
HON requirements in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart G.
We are proposing work practice
standards to reduce emissions from
storage vessels, equipment leaks, and
heat exchange systems.
CAA section 112(h)(1) states that the
Administrator may prescribe a work
practice standard or other requirements,
consistent with the provisions of CAA
sections 112(d) or (f), in those cases
where, in the judgment of the
Administrator, it is not feasible to
enforce an emission standard. CAA
section 112(h)(2) defines the phrase ‘‘not
feasible to prescribe or enforce an
emission standard’’ as follows:
[A]ny situation in which the Administrator
determines that (A) a hazardous air pollutant
or pollutants cannot be emitted through a
conveyance designed and constructed to emit
or capture such pollutant, or that any
requirement for, or use of, such a conveyance
would be inconsistent with any Federal,
State, or local law, or (B) the application of
measurement methodology to a particular
class of sources is not practicable due to
technological and economic limitations.
The work practice standards in this
proposed rule are consistent with CAA
section 112(h)(2)(B), because applying a
measurement methodology to this class
of sources is not technologically feasible
due to the number of openings and
possible emissions points.
The proposed work standards for
emissions from storage tanks are
evaporative losses that result from
barometric pressure and ambient
temperature changes, as well as filling
and emptying operations. The flow rate
of vent emissions from a tank is very
low, except during filling. The
concentration of HAP in the vent stream
varies with the degree of saturation of
HAP in the tank vapor space. The
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
degree of saturation depends on such
factors as HAP vapor pressure, tank size,
and liquid throughput. Low flow rate
and varying concentration make
emission measurement impractical.
Emissions from equipment leaks are
intermittent and fugitive in nature, so it
is, therefore, not feasible to fully
measure the mass emission rate from
numerous potential leaks at an affected
source.
3. How did EPA determine the
pollutants for which to set emission
limits?
The major HAP emitted from PVC
production processes is the raw
material, vinyl chloride. This is from the
feed material processing prior to the
reaction, and from post reaction
processing (some of the VCM raw
material remains unreacted during the
polymerization process). For these
reasons, we are setting emission limits
for vinyl chloride.
PVC production processes also emit a
variety of other HAP that may be
contained in initiators or inhibitors of
polymerization, additives, copolymer
feedstocks, impurities, or formed during
the polymerization process. As
discussed earlier, these HAP include
1,3-butadiene, benzene, acetaldehyde,
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, chloroform,
chloroprene, ethylene dichloride,
ethylidene dichloride, formaldehyde,
iso-octane, methylene chloride, vinyl
bromide, and vinylidene chloride.3
PVCPU use different processes to
produce a variety of resin products.
Rather than setting individual emission
limits for the wide variety of other HAP
that can be found in PVC production
processes, we are proposing a total HAP
emission limit. A total HAP limit is
appropriate because emissions from
PVC facilities are comprised of mixtures
of these HAP, and the control
technologies used to control total HAP
such as condensers and thermal
oxidizers, achieve control of the
individual HAP. Thermal oxidizers
combust all organic HAP and convert
them to carbon dioxide and water, with
only trace amounts of organic
compounds remaining. An acid gas
scrubber removes any inorganic
compounds that remain after
combustion. Condensers, as a part of the
vinyl chloride recovery system
condense out organic compounds that
are re-used in the process.
Process vents are often controlled
using thermal oxidizers because they are
effective at reducing emissions of vinyl
chloride and organic HAP. However, the
combustion of halogenated organic
compounds results in formation of
hydrogen chloride, which is a HAP, and
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
can also result in the formation of CDD/
CDF. We are proposing to set emission
limits for HCl from process vents.
We are authorized to regulate the
CDD/CDF class of HAP. While
dibenzofuran and 2,3,7,8–TCDD are
identified by name as HAP in CAA
section 112, all CDD/CDF are polycyclic
organic matter, and, as such, we have
the authority to regulate these
compounds. Under CAA section 112(d),
the MACT floor standards are to be
based on the average emissions
performance of the best performing
units for which the Administrator has
emissions information. We received a
substantial amount of emissions test
data for CDD/CDF emissions through
the CAA section 114 information
collection, in which we sought CDD/
CDF information from sampling runs
that lasted about 4 hours each. While
reported CDD/CDF emissions were
below detectable levels in
approximately 46 percent of the
individual test runs for all CDD/CDF
isomers reported, only 37 percent of
three-run test averages were comprised
of individual test runs where all runs
were below detection limits. Therefore,
a majority (63 percent) of the three-run
tests detected some level of CDD/CDF.
Furthermore, some of the emission tests
detected most or all isomers at some
level, and CDD/CDF emissions can be
precisely measured for most control
devices in the PVC production source
category. Therefore, the statutory test for
establishment of work practice
standards—i.e., that measurement of
emissions is impracticable due to
technological and economic
limitations—is not met.
To make sure that the emission limits
are set at a level that can be measured,
we adjusted for variability using the
upper prediction limit (UPL) approach,
and we used the ‘‘three times MDL’’
approach (discussed elsewhere in this
preamble) as a minimum level at which
a CDD/CDF emission limit, on a toxic
equivalency (TEQ) basis, is set. Rather
than establishing work practice
standards, but recognizing that
emissions tend to be very low compared
to more significant sources of CDD/CDF,
such as incinerators, our approach to
CDD/CDF requires an initial compliance
test to demonstrate that the PVCPU meet
the CDD/CDF standard, and additional
compliance testing on an annual basis.
Initial and continuous compliance
requirements for process vents are
discussed in section III.F.4 of this
preamble. Furthermore, the CDD/CDF
test method, EPA Method 23, requires
that, for compliance purposes, nondetect values from runs should be
reported and calculated as zeroes.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
Therefore, for purposes of compliance,
there should be no concern about being
unable to meet the standards because of
the contribution of non-detect values.
Consequently, we are proposing to set
emission limits for CDD/CDF (on a TEQ
basis) from process vents.
Cooling towers may emit a variety of
VOC, depending on which process
components may be leaking into the
heat exchange system. The most
prevalent HAP that may leak into a heat
exchange system is vinyl chloride,
which is also a VOC. The proposed
compliance method for heat exchange
systems measures total VOC and not
speciated compounds. A detection of
total VOC in the cooling water indicates
leakage of organic HAP (including vinyl
chloride) into the heat exchange system.
4. Solicitation of Comments
EPA solicits comment on the emission
points proposed for regulation and the
format of the proposed standards. We
also solicit comments on the pollutants
that we have proposed for regulation
and how we grouped pollutants such as
total HAP and dioxin.
C. How did EPA determine the proposed
emission standards for area sources?
Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are
required to ‘‘* * * review, and revise as
necessary (taking into account
developments in practices, processes,
and control technologies), emission
standards promulgated under this
section no less often than every 8 years.’’
With this rulemaking, we are fulfilling
our obligation to review, and revise, as
necessary, the PVC Production area
source standards. The 2007 NESHAP for
PVC production area sources (40 CFR,
part 63, subpart DDDDDD) are based on
GACT. The area source NESHAP only
set emission limits for vinyl chloride,
which was the pollutant for which we
needed the PVC Production area source
category to meet our 90-percent
obligation in CAA section 112(c)(3) and
(k)(3)(B). We are proposing to tighten
emission standards for vinyl chloride
under CAA section 112(d)(6).
Under CAA section 112(d)(5), we may
elect to promulgate standards or
requirements for area sources ‘‘which
provide for the use of generally
available control technologies [‘‘GACT’’]
or management practices by such
sources to reduce emissions of
hazardous air pollutants.’’ In this
proposed rule, we have determined that
area source emission limits should be
set for total HAP, CDD/CDF, and HCl, in
addition to vinyl chloride, that are
emitted from PVC production processes.
As explained in other area source rules,
the Agency has discretion to set
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29541
standards for all urban HAP, in this
case, CDD/CDF and total HAP, and to
not limit standards to only the urban
HAP for which the area source category
was listed (i.e., vinyl chloride). In
addition to vinyl chloride, PVC
production processes emit a variety of
other HAP that may be contained in
initiators or inhibitors of
polymerization, additives, copolymer
feedstocks, impurities, or formed during
the polymerization process. The urban
HAP reported to be emitted by the only
existing PVC area source include 1,3butadiene, ethylene dichloride, and
methylene chloride. However, PVCPU
can produce a variety of resin products
over time which can influence the HAP
emitted, so there is a potential that the
area source could also emit other
organic HAP reported at major source
PVCPU (such as benzene, acetaldehyde,
chloroform, and formaldehyde). Rather
than setting individual emission limits
for the wide variety of HAP that can be
emitted by the area source PVC facility,
we are proposing a total HAP emission
limit (as we are for major sources). A
total HAP limit is appropriate because
emissions from the area source PVC
facility are comprised of mixtures of
these organic HAP, and the control
technologies used to control total HAP
achieve control of the individual
organic HAP.
Although we recognize that we have
met the 90-percent requirement of CAA
section 112(c)(3), nothing precludes the
Agency from regulating beyond the 90
percent with regard to the 30 urban
HAP. We also believe it is appropriate
to establish area source emission
standards for HCl because, although not
an urban HAP, it is formed as a product
of combustion in controlling vents
containing vinyl chloride and HAP. We
solicit comment on our proposal to
regulate these other HAP, beyond vinyl
chloride since the Agency has already
met its 90-percent statutory obligation
under CAA section 112(c)(3) and
112(k)(3)(B).The 2007 GACT standards
(40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD)
generally required area sources to
continue to comply with the vinyl
chloride emission limits, and other
requirements in the part 61 NESHAP,
which had been promulgated in 1976
(41 FR 46560, October 21, 1976).
Therefore, the 2007 GACT standards did
not achieve any emissions reductions.
In determining what constitutes
GACT for this proposed rule, we
considered the control technologies and
management practices that are generally
available to PVC area sources by
examining relevant data and
information, including information
collected from the only known PVC area
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29542
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
source. We also considered the
standards proposed for major sources to
determine if the control technologies
and management practices are
transferable and generally available to
area sources. (See section III of this
preamble for a summary of the MACT
standards and sections IV.D through
IV.F for further information on how the
proposed MACT standards were
determined.) As part of the GACT
determination, we considered the costs
and economic impacts of available
control technologies and management
practices on area sources.
As explained in greater detail below,
we determined that GACT standards for
area sources should be the same as the
major source MACT standards, based on
the similarity between production
processes, emission points, emissions,
and control technologies that are
characteristic of both major and area
source PVC production facilities. Due to
the nature of the PVC production
process and as reported in the
information collected, the one existing
area source has the same kinds of
emission points (process vents, stripped
resin, wastewater, equipment leaks,
storage, heat exchangers, and other
emission sources) and emits the same
types of pollutants (identified in section
IV.B of this preamble) as major sources.
From the information that we collected
during this rule development, which
includes stack testing and site visits at
both major and area sources, we now
know that area sources have the same
types of emissions, emission sources,
and controls (see control information
below) as major sources. Information
that we have collected to support
development of these proposed
standards indicates that the one area
source would be major, based on its
potential to emit, except that the source
has an enforceable requirement to
operate its thermal oxidizer, which
keeps it below major source levels. We
are not aware of any planned new area
sources.
In reviewing the data collected from
major and area sources for development
of the proposed rule, it is clear that the
one PVC area source, like the major
sources, is achieving vinyl chloride
emission limits well below those
required in the 2007 area source
NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD) and the part 61 NESHAP. The
data collected from major and area
sources are discussed in the
memorandum, Baseline Emission
Estimates for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, which is available in the
docket. The PVC area source uses the
same control technologies as the major
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
sources. For example, for process vents,
the area source is using the same control
technology (a thermal oxidizer in series
with an acid gas scrubber) as most major
sources. It is also using the same
wastewater control (a wastewater
stripper) used by major sources, and
implementing the same type of
equipment LDAR program as most
major sources. The achievability of
stripped resin HAP limits is a function
of the resin-type subcategory (bulk,
dispersion, or other) rather than the size
of the PVCPU, or its location at a major
or area source, and the PVC area source
is already meting the proposed stripped
resin MACT limits for the bulk PVC
subcategory. In addition, the area source
PVC plant is already meeting the
proposed MACT limits for storage
vessels and other emission sources
(reactor and other component opening
losses). Therefore, the control
technologies and management practices
used by major sources are generally
available for area sources. In addition,
the part 61 NESHAP for this industry
requires all PVC production facilities to
meet the same standards with no major
or area source distinction, and because
of the similarities between major and
area sources, it is reasonable for them to
meet the same emission standards under
this proposed rule.
As part of the GACT determination,
we analyzed the cost and emissions
reduction for the area source to meet the
proposed GACT standards. The overall
annual cost is $332,351, and the annual
emission reduction is 17.23 tons of HAP
per year. For information on the
methodology and more detailed results
of this analysis, see the memorandum,
Costs and Emission Reductions of the
Proposed Standards for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production Source Category, in the
docket. The economic impact analysis
(see section V.D of this preamble)
showed that there are no significant
economic impacts.
For the aforementioned reasons, we
have determined, pursuant to CAA
sections 112(d)(5) and (6), that the
control technologies and management
practices necessary to meet the
proposed major source emission
standards are generally available for
area sources in this source category.
Accordingly, we are proposing the
GACT level of control for area sources
is the same as the MACT level of control
for major sources, and that these area
sources must meet the same standards
as proposed in this rule for major
sources.
Because the compliance dates in the
proposed rule are 3 years after
promulgation for existing area sources,
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and startup or the date of promulgation,
whichever is later, for new area sources,
area sources must continue to comply
with the current provisions of 40 CFR
part 63, subpart DDDDDD until they are
required to comply with 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH. However, on and
after the proposed rule’s compliance
dates, existing and new PVC production
area sources would no longer be
required to comply with subpart
DDDDDD. The proposed amendments to
subpart DDDDDD make this clear.
Amending subpart DDDDDD in this
manner allows for continuous
compliance with emission standards for
PVC production area sources, while
avoiding duplicative or burdensome
requirements under more than one
subpart.
EPA solicits comment on the
proposed approach. We further solicit
comment on whether we should issue
MACT standards under CAA section
112(d)(2) and (3) in lieu of GACT
standards under CAA section 112(d)(5)
given the significant amount of
additional information on the one area
source that was not available to EPA at
the time of the 2007 area source GACT
promulgation.
D. How did EPA determine the MACT
floors for existing major sources?
There are less than 30 sources in this
source category. Therefore, EPA has
based the MACT floor on the average of
the best performing five sources. The
determination of the best performing
sources is discussed below.
In general, MACT floor analyses
involve an assessment of the emissions
from the best performing sources in a
source category using the available
emissions information. For each source
category, the assessment involves a
review of emissions data with an
appropriate accounting for emissions
variability. Various methods of
estimating emissions can be used if the
methods can be shown to provide
reasonable estimates of the actual
emissions performance of a source or
sources.
Process vents and stripped resin. To
develop the MACT floor emission limits
for process vents (which includes all the
vent streams from polymerization
reactors, resin strippers, other process
components prior to the resin stripping
operation, VCM recovery system, slip
gauges, loading and unloading lines,
samples, and the wastewater collection
and treatment system that are sent to a
control device) and stripped resin, we
ranked all the available emission
concentration or resin concentration
data for each pollutant: vinyl chloride,
HCl, CDD/CDF, and total HAP for
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
process vents; and vinyl chloride and
total HAP for stripped resin. For this
ranking, EPA included all major sources
and the one synthetic area source. In
previous rulemakings (e.g., Brick
NESHAP, 68 FR 26697–26698, May 16,
2003), EPA determined that including
synthetic area sources in calculating the
MACT floor for major sources is
consistent with CAA section 112(d).
Concentration data for each pollutant
were ranked from sources within the
entire category (for process vents), or
each subcategory (for resins) from
lowest to highest. Based on information
available to EPA, at all existing PVC
production facilities, emissions from
process vents are routed to a VCM
recovery system. The vent stream from
the recovery system is controlled either
by a thermal oxidizer followed by a
scrubber, or by an absorber. Emissions
data were collected from emissions tests
(consisting of three test runs) conducted
at the outlet of the absorber, or the
thermal oxidizer/scrubber control
system. For each pollutant, the average
of the three test runs was calculated for
each facility. The average values (for
each pollutant) from each facility were
then ranked from lowest to highest to
identify the best performing sources.
The CAA section 114 information
collection required each facility to take
samples of the stripped resin being
produced daily over a 30-day period at
the outlets of the resin stripper(s) and
the resin dryer(s). The facilities
analyzed the samples for the
concentration(s) of HAP present in the
resin, and then calculated the
corresponding mass of each HAP
present in the stripped resin, based on
the analysis of the concentration in each
of the samples. Facilities were asked to
report both the mass of each HAP
present in the sampled resin, and also
the production rate for that resin. The
test results revealed that the methods
used to convert the HAP concentration
to mass varied across the industry
making the emissions information
incomparable. For example, some
companies used the production rate
from the entire plant, while others used
the production rate from the production
lines being sampled. We did not
initially request the HAP concentration
values for the analyzed resins, but
because of the many discrepancies in
the mass of each HAP in the stripped
resin, these HAP concentrations values
were provided in a subsequent data
submittal by the industry trade
association. The industry trade
association also provided additional
detail related to the detection levels and
specific test methods used during the
sampling and analysis required by our
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
CAA section 114 information collection.
The data used to calculate the MACT
floors for stripped resin were the HAP
concentration data, and not the mass
loading data. To determine the stripped
resin limits, we calculated the average
concentration levels for each pollutant
at each facility. They were then ranked
from lowest to highest for each facility
in the subcategory to identify the best
performing sources.
MACT floors were calculated for each
pollutant regulated by the proposed
rule. Because there are fewer than 30
sources in the source category (for
process vents) and each subcategory (for
stripped resins), the MACT floor for
each pollutant was calculated from the
average of the best performing (i.e.,
lowest emitting) five sources. We took
the numerical average of the five best
performing sources, and accounted for
variability, as discussed later in this
section of the preamble.
Wastewater. All PVC production
facilities are currently subject to the part
61 NESHAP inprocess wastewater
standards. In the part 61 NESHAP,
inprocess wastewater is defined as
‘‘* * * water which, during
manufacturing or processing, comes into
direct contact with vinyl chloride or
results from the production or use of
any raw material, intermediate product,
finished product, by-product, or waste
product containing vinyl chloride or
polyvinyl chloride, but which has not
been discharged to a wastewater
treatment process or discharged
untreated as wastewater. Gasholder seal
water is not wastewater until it is
removed from the gasholder.’’ The part
61 NESHAP requires control of
inprocess wastewater streams with a
concentration of 10 ppmw or more vinyl
chloride at the point of generation, and
all facilities achieve this control by
using a wastewater steam stripper. The
average annual vinyl chloride
concentrations at the outlet of the
stripper were provided in survey
responses for 13 out of 17 facilities. The
average values from each facility were
then ranked from lowest to highest to
identify the best performing sources
(that controlled streams with vinyl
chloride concentrations greater than 10
ppmw at the point of generation). We
took the numerical average of the five
best performing sources, and accounted
for variability, as discussed later in this
section of the preamble. The
predominant HAP in wastewater
streams generated from this source
category is vinyl chloride. All of the
stripped wastewater streams contain
vinyl chloride, which the survey data
show comprises, on average, 95 percent
of the HAP concentration in these
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29543
streams. A review of the streams exiting
the wastewater stripper, and streams
that do not require control to meet the
10 ppmw vinyl chloride requirements
(from the part 61 NESHAP) at the point
of generation, does not indicate that
additional control is used to reduce
those compounds that are not easily
removed by the wastewater stripper. We
have documented this analysis in the
memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for
the Polyvinyl Chloride and (PVC)
Copolymers Production Source
Category, which is available in the
docket. However, as explained in
section IV.F of this preamble, we are
proposing additional control of
wastewater streams, based on other HAP
(in additional to vinyl chloride as a
beyond-the-floor option, and have
included total HAP limits in the
proposed rule.
Equipment leaks. For equipment
leaks, we ranked the LDAR programs
used at each affected PVC source from
most stringent to least stringent, based
on the leak definitions, monitoring
frequencies, control requirements, and
repair requirements. We then identified
the LDAR programs employed by the
best performing five sources. The results
of this analysis showed that three out of
the best performing five sources comply
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU level
2 controls. The remaining sources
comply with less stringent LDAR
programs, such as 40 CFR part 61,
subpart V. Additionally, existing
sources are complying with the
requirements of the part 61 NESHAP,
that rotating pumps must be either
sealless, equipped with double
mechanical seals, or equivalent and all
reciprocating pumps, rotating and
reciprocating compressors, and agitators
must be equipped with double
mechanical seals or equivalent. If
double mechanical seals or double
outboard seals are used, HAP emissions
must be minimized by maintaining the
pressure between the two seals so that
the leak occurs into the pump,
compressor, or agitator by ducting any
HAP between the two seals through a
closed vent system to a control device.
Therefore, we are proposing that
existing and new affected sources
comply with the LDAR program
requirements of the National Emission
Standards for Equipment Leaks-Control
Level 2 Standards, subpart UU of 40
CFR part 63, except for rotating or
reciprocating pumps, compressors, and
agitators. We are proposing that rotating
pumps be sealless, equipped with
double seals, or equivalent.
Reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and
rotating compressors, and agitator be
equipped with double seals, or
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29544
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
equivalent, as provided in 40 CFR
63.11915 of the proposed rule.
The part 61 NESHAP also requires
installation of a vinyl chloride
monitoring system for detection of
major leaks and identification of the
general area of the plant where a leak is
located. A vinyl chloride monitoring
system is a device that obtains air
samples from one or more points
continuously, and analyzes the samples
with gas chromatography, infrared
spectrophotometry, flame ion detection,
or an equivalent or alternate method.
These requirements from the part 61
NESHAP also constitute the MACT floor
level of control.
The MACT floor analysis is available
in the docket in the memorandum,
MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production Source Category.
Storage vessels and handling
operations. Two different types of
storage vessels were identified from data
collected from the PVC production
industry: (1) Storage vessels storing
material that are gases at ambient
conditions (vapor pressures greater than
14.7 psia), and (2) storage vessels storing
all other materials. The information
collected showed that materials with
vapor pressures greater than 14.7 psia
are stored under pressure. A closed vent
system that is routed to a control device
is used at all facilities when filling the
tank or purging the tank. All other
materials are stored at all facilities in
fixed roof tanks ranging in size from less
than 5,000 gallons up to 30,000 gallons.
These tanks primarily store methanol.
The responses to the CAA section 114
information collection indicated that
these tanks are not controlled.
The part 61 NESHAP, which covers
ethylene dichloride, vinyl chloride, and
PVC plants, has specific emission
standards for handling operations (i.e.,
loading and unloading of liquid
products). However, PVC processes do
not produce liquid products and do not
have transfer rack loading operations.
Handling a solid final product is
unlikely to emit HAP, and the stripped
resins limit already minimizes the HAP
content of the final product.
Consequently, no emission standards
are being proposed for transfer
operations. Unloading operations at
PVC production facilities are considered
part of process vents or storage, because
emissions from unloading operations
occur when charging storage vessels or
reactor vessels, and any emissions are
released from reactor vents or from the
storage vessels. The emissions from
these activities are subject to the process
vent emission limits or storage vessel
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
work practices. We are requesting
comment on our proposed standards.
Heat exchange systems. For heat
exchange systems, we requested
information on each heat exchange
system at PVC production facilities,
including closed loop and once-through
systems, existing programs and
procedures to identify leaks of HAP into
cooling water, leak action levels, and
estimates of emissions from cooling
towers. We also requested information
on the regulations applicable to PVC
production facilities. Leak action levels
are the concentration of pollutants in
the cooling water that indicates one or
more heat exchangers is leaking process
fluid, or other HAP-containing fluid into
the circulating cooling water. The HAP
contained in the cooling water can then
be emitted from a cooling tower once
the cooling water is exposed to the
atmosphere. We received leak action
levels for vinyl chloride, ethylene
dichloride, vinylidene chloride, VOC,
and non-methane hydrocarbons from
twelve facilities. From the data
submitted by the best performing
facilities discussed above, we
determined that leak action levels
ranged from 30 ppbw to 5,000 ppbw for
VOC and non-methane hydrocarbons.
The best performers had an average leak
action level of 38 ppbw for total VOC,
which corresponds to a total strippable
VOC concentration of 2.9 ppmv in
stripping gas. Therefore, we are
proposing a leak action level of 38 ppbw
of total strippable VOC in cooling water,
or 2.9 ppmv total strippable VOC in
stripping gas with monthly monitoring
is the MACT floor for existing sources.
While the data provided indicate that
facilities monitor on a variety of
different frequencies, we are proposing
monthly monitoring. The majority
perform either weekly or monthly
monitoring.
Other emission sources. The
requirements from the part 61 NESHAP
for reactor opening losses and
component openings set numeric limits
that must be met. The reactor opening
loss from each reactor must not exceed
0.04 pound vinyl chloride/ton of PVC
product. This requirement does not
apply to pre-polymerization reactors in
the bulk process. This requirement does
apply to post-polymerization reactors in
the bulk process, where the product
means the gross product of prepolymerization and postpolymerization.
The part 61 NESHAP also require that
emissions from opening of other
components, including prepolymerization reactors used in the
manufacture of bulk resins are to be
minimized by reducing the volume of
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
vinyl chloride to an amount which
occupies a volume of no more than 2.0
percent of the equipment’s containment
volume, or 25 gallons, whichever is
larger, at standard temperature and
pressure. In the case of reactors used as
strippers, the standard is based on the
sum of allowable reactor opening losses,
and the emissions limit for all
downstream equipment (e.g., the
stripped resin limits). Furthermore,
exhaust gasses from reactors and any
vinyl chloride removed from process
components must be ducted through a
control system meeting specified outlet
concentration limits. These
requirements from the part 61 NESHAP
constitute the MACT floor level of
control from these emission sources.
1. Variability Calculation for MACT
Floor Emission Limits Based on
Emissions Test Data
For process vents, facilities measured
the concentration of HAP in the vent
stream exiting the control device used to
control process vent streams. For
stripped resin, facilities measured the
concentration of HAP in the resin slurry
exiting the resin stripper. For
wastewater, facilities measured the
concentration of vinyl chloride in the
wastewater exiting the wastewater
stripper. We used the emission
concentration, resin concentration, and
wastewater concentration data from the
best performing sources to determine
the MACT floor emission limits, with an
accounting for variability. Data were
collected from the CAA section 114
information collection, process vent
emission testing results, resin sampling
and analysis results, and additional data
submissions by individual companies
and the industry trade association that
clarified, and/or corrected initial
submissions, or that provided the same
data in a different format (e.g.,
concentration instead of mass in the
case of stripped resin analysis results).
We account for variability of the bestcontrolled source in setting floors, not
only because variability is an element of
performance, but because it is
reasonable to assess best performance
over time. The District of Columbia
Circuit Court of Appeals has recognized
that EPA may consider variability in
estimating the degree of emission
reduction achieved by best performing
sources, and in setting MACT floors. See
Mossville Environmental Action Now v.
EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1241–42 (DC Cir.
2004).
In determining the MACT floor limits
for process vents, stripped resins, and
wastewater, we first determined the
MACT floor, which is the level achieved
in practice by the average of the best-
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
29545
the kurtosis statistic (K) is greater than
2 times the SEK, the data distribution is
typically considered to be non-normal.
We applied the skewness and kurtosis
hypothesis tests to both the reported test
values and the lognormal values of the
reported test values. If the skewness (S)
and kurtosis (K) statistics of the reported
data set were both less than twice the
SES and SEK, respectively, we classified
the dataset as normally distributed. If
neither of the skewness (S) and kurtosis
(K) statistics, or only one of these
statistics were less than twice the SES
or SEK, respectively, then we conducted
the skewness and kurtosis hypothesis
tests for the natural log-transformed
data. Then, we selected the distribution
most similar to a log-normal distribution
as the basis for calculating the UPL,
based on EPA guidance documents. If
both the reported values and the natural
log-transformed reported values had
skewness (S) and kurtosis (K) statistics
that were greater than twice the SES or
SEK, respectively, we selected the
normally distributed dataset as the basis
of the MACT floor to be conservative. If
the results of the skewness and kurtosis
hypothesis tests were mixed for the
reported values, and the natural logtransformed reported values, we also
chose the log-normal distribution to
comply with EPA guidance. We believe
this approach is more accurate and
obtained more representative results
than a more simplistic normal
distribution assumption.
Because compliance with the MACT
floor emission limit is based on the
average of a three-run test, the UPL is
calculated by:
Lognormal distribution: 99-percent
UPL = EXP{AVERAGE(Natural Log
Values of Test Runs in Top 5) +
[STDEV(Natural Log Values of Test
Runs in Top 5) × TINV(2 × probability,
n-1 degrees of freedom)* SQRT((1/n) +
(1⁄3))]}, for a one-tailed t-value (with 2 x
probability), probability of 0.01, and
sample size of n.
We followed these procedures for
determining the variability of process
vent emission limits (for vent streams
from polymerization reactors, resin
strippers, other process components
prior to the resin stripper, VCM
recovery system, and wastewater
collection and treatment system). For
the stripped resin variability analysis,
the same procedures were followed with
one change. The variability calculation
for stripped resins uses the average of
the sampling results for each day of the
30-day sampling period (e.g., essentially
30 runs instead of three runs for process
vents). As a result, the 99-percent UPL
equation uses a compliance average
value of 30 instead of 3.
For wastewater, we followed the same
procedures for determining variability.
A variability analysis was performed on
the top five facilities. The skewness and
kurtosis statistics were calculated
(following the same procedure as for
process vents and resins) to determine
the top 5 data set distribution. The 99percent UPL value was calculated for
both the normal and log-normal
distribution using the same formula as
This calculation was performed using
the following two Microsoft Excel©
functions:
Normal distribution: 99-percent UPL
= AVERAGE(Test Runs in Top 5) +
[STDEV(Test Runs in Top 5)x TINV(2 x
probability, n¥1 degrees of
freedom)*SQRT((1/n)+(1⁄3))], for a onetailed t-value (with 2 x probability),
probability of 0.01, and sample size of
n.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.044</GPH>
common measure of the dispersion of
the data set around the average for a
normally distributed data set.
We first determined the distribution
of the emissions data for the best
performing five sources within the
source category for process vents, and
within each subcategory for resins prior
to calculating UPL values. To evaluate
the distribution of the best performing
dataset, we first computed the skewness
and kurtosis statistics, and then
conducted the appropriate small-sample
hypothesis tests.
The skewness statistic (S)
characterizes the degree of asymmetry of
a given data distribution. Normally,
distributed data have a skewness of 0.
A skewness statistic that is greater (or
less) than 0 indicates that the data are
asymmetrically distributed with a right
(or left) tail extending towards positive
(or negative) values. Further, the
standard error of the skewness statistic
(SES) is given by SES = SQRT(6/N),
where N is the sample size. According
to the small sample skewness
hypothesis test, if the skewness statistic
(S) is greater than 2 times the SES, the
data distribution can be considered nonnormal.
The kurtosis statistic (K) characterizes
the degree of peakedness or flatness of
a given data distribution in comparison
to a normal distribution. Normally,
distributed data have a kurtosis of 0. A
kurtosis statistic that is greater (or less)
than 0 indicates a relatively peaked (or
flat) distribution. Further, the standard
error of the kurtosis statistic (SEK) is
calculated by SEK = SQRT(24/N) where
N is the sample size. According to the
small sample kurtosis hypothesis test, if
Where:
n = Number of test runs.
m = Number of test runs in the compliance
average.
s = Standard deviation.
x bar = Mean
t (0.99,n¥1) = T-statistic for 99-percent
significance, and a sample size of n.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
performing five sources. We then
assessed variability of the best
performers by using a statistical formula
designed to estimate a MACT floor level
that is achieved by the average of the
five best performing sources.
Specifically, the MACT floor limit is an
UPL calculated with the Student’s t-test
using the TINV function in Microsoft
Excel©. The UPL has also been used in
other EPA rulemakings (e.g., the final
NESHAP for Portland cement
manufacturing, and the final NESHAP
for industrial/commercial/institutional
boilers) in accounting for variability. A
prediction interval for a future
observation is an interval that will, with
a specified degree of confidence,
contain the next (or some other prespecified) randomly selected
observation from a population. In other
words, the prediction interval estimates
what future values will be based upon
present or past background samples
taken. Given this definition, the UPL
represents the value that we can expect
the mean of three future observations
(three-run average) to fall below, based
upon the results of an independent
sample from the same population. In
other words, if we were to randomly
select a future test condition from any
of these sources (i.e., average of three
runs), we can be 99-percent confident
that the reported level will fall at or
below the UPL value. To calculate the
UPL, we used the average (or sample
mean) and sample standard deviation,
which are two statistical measures
calculated from the sample data. The
average is the central value of a data set,
and the standard deviation is the
29546
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
process vents and resins, except that the
number of samples in the data set was
set to 5 (the top 5 fraction remaining
values), and the number of samples in
the compliance average was set to 1
(because the data provided by facilities
only included one value for any
wastewater concentration).
2. Incorporation of Non-Detect Data
Non-detect values constitute more
than 50 percent of the process vent
emissions data for CDD/CDF and HCl,
and approximately 42 percent of the
stripped resin data for all reported HAP.
For these pollutants, we developed a
methodology to account for the
imprecision introduced by
incorporating non-detect data into the
MACT floor calculation.
At very low emission levels for which
emissions tests result in non-detect
values, the inherent imprecision in the
pollutant measurement method has a
large influence on the reliability of the
data underlying the MACT floor
emission limit. Because of resin sample
and emission matrix effects, laboratory
techniques, sample size, and other
factors, method detection levels
normally vary from test to test for any
specific test method and pollutant
measurement. The confidence level that
a value measured at the detection level
is greater than zero is about 99 percent.
The expected measurement imprecision
for an emissions value occurring at or
near the method detection level is about
40 to 50 percent. Pollutant measurement
imprecision decreases to a consistent
level of 10 to 15 percent for values
measured at a level about 3 times the
method detection level.6
We are using an approach to account
for measurement variability when
significant numbers of non-detect
measurements are included in the
dataset that starts with defining a
method detection level that is
representative of the data used in the
data pool.
The first step in this approach is to
identify the highest test-specific method
detection level reported in a data set
that is also equal to or less than the
average emission calculated for the data
set. This approach has the advantage of
relying on the data collected to develop
the MACT floor emission limit, while,
to some degree, minimizing the effect of
a test(s) with an inordinately high
method detection level (e.g., the sample
volume was too small, the laboratory
technique was insufficiently sensitive,
or the procedure for determining the
detection level was other than that
specified).
The second step is to determine the
value equal to 3 times the representative
method detection level, and compare it
to the calculated MACT floor emission
limit. If 3 times the representative
method detection level is less than the
calculated MACT floor emission limit,
we would conclude that measurement
variability is adequately addressed, and
we would not adjust the calculated
MACT floor emission limit. If, on the
other hand, the value equal to 3 times
the representative method detection
level is greater than the calculated
MACT floor emission limit, we would
conclude that the calculated MACT
floor emission limit does not account
entirely for measurement variability.
We, therefore, use the value equal to 3
times the method detection level, in
place of the calculated MACT floor
emission limit, to ensure that the MACT
floor emission limit accounts for
measurement variability and
imprecision. The same procedures were
followed for non-detect values for the
resin information, but the analysis was
done for 30 days worth of samples from
each facility rather than three test runs.
We request comment on this approach
to incorporation of non-detect data in
the MACT floor.
We followed the following additional
procedures for CDD/CDF TEQ basis
limits. To calculate a limit on a TEQ
basis, first, we identified non-detect
values on an individual CDD/CDF
congener basis. There are 17 CDD/CDF
congeners used to calculate TEQ values.
For facilities that reported some, but not
all CDD/CDF congeners as non-detect,
we calculated the mean of the nondetect values for each CDD/CDF
congener. Then we multiplied the toxic
equivalency factor (TEF) for each
congener by the mean to determine the
TEQ detection level for each CDD/CDF
congener. For facilities that reported all
CDD/CDF congeners as non-detect, we
multiplied each non-detect value by the
respective TEF factor. We used the sum
of the detection level toxic
equivalencies for each of the 17 CDD/
CDF congeners of interest to calculate a
TEQ detection level sum value. The
TEQ sum was then used as the detection
limit for the test run. We used the
second step discussed above to set the
limit. The methodology is described in
detail in the memorandum MACT Floor
Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, and is available in the docket.
We solicit comment on these
procedures. For wastewater, non-detect
values were not incorporated into the
variability analysis because they were
not included with the facility submitted
survey information.
3. Existing Source MACT Floor Results
for Process Vents, Stripped Resins, and
Wastewater
We identified the best performing five
sources in the category (for process
vents and wastewater), or each
subcategory (for stripped resins), and
each pollutant (e.g., vinyl chloride, total
HAP, HCl, and CDD/CDF). We then
compiled the individual test run and
sampling concentration data for these
sources, and conducted a statistical
analysis to calculate the average and
account for variability, and, thereby,
determine the MACT floor emission
limit.
Table 4 of this preamble summarizes
results of the UPL analysis and the
MACT floor emission limits for existing
process vents for each pollutant. Table
5 of this preamble presents the results
for stripped resins. A detailed
discussion of the MACT floor
methodology is presented in the
memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for
the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
(PVC) Production Source Category, and
is available in the docket.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT EXISTING SOURCES c,d
Pollutant (and units of measure)
99% UPL
Vinyl chloride (ppmv) .....................................................................................................................................................
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) .............................................................................................................................................
Total HAP (ppmv) ..........................................................................................................................................................
6 American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
Reference Method Accuracy and Precision
(ReMAPJ: Phase 1, Precision of Manual Stack).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
0.319
140.17
11.3
MACT floor
emission
limit a
0.32
150
12 b
29547
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT EXISTING SOURCES c,d—
Continued
Pollutant (and units of measure)
99% UPL
CDD/CDF (TEQ) (ng/dscm) ...........................................................................................................................................
MACT floor
emission
limit a
0.023 b
0.0183
a Limits
were rounded up to two significant figures.
result of detection limit variability analysis.
= parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ng/dscm = nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen.
d Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers,
other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), certain storage vessels, VCM recovery systems, wastewater collection and treatment
system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples.
b Limit
c ppmv
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC STRIPPED RESINS AT EXISTING SOURCES (PPMW)
Bulk resins
Dispersion resins
Pollutant
99%
UPL
MACT
floor
emission
limit a
99%
UPL
Vinyl chloride .........................................................................................................
Total HAP ..............................................................................................................
7.1
167.3
7.1
170
54.8
100.1
MACT floor
emission
limit a
55
110
All other resins
99%
UPL
MACT floor
emission
limit a
0.471
33.3
0.48
76 b
a Limits
b Limit
were rounded up to two significant figures.
result of detection limit variability analysis.
For wastewater that exceeds the 10
ppmw vinyl chloride limit at the point
of generation, we determined that the
99-percent UPL is 0.109 ppmw at the
outlet of the wastewater stripper and the
MACT floor level of control rounded up
to two significant figures is 0.11 ppmw.
The analysis is documented in the
memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for
the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
(PVC) Production Source Category, and
is available in the docket. Wastewater
streams below the 10 ppmw vinyl
chloride limit at the point of generation,
must remain below the 10 ppmw limit.
Results of the MACT floor analysis for
heat exchange systems, storage vessels,
equipment leaks, and other emission
sources are discussed in section IV.D of
this preamble.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
E. How did EPA determine the MACT
floors for new major sources?
Similar to the MACT floor process
used for existing sources, the approach
for determining the MACT floor for new
sources is based on available emissions
information. Using such an approach to
develop the MACT floor emission limits
for process vents and stripped resins for
each pollutant, we ranked all the
available emission concentration,
stripped resin concentration, or
wastewater concentration data for each
pollutant from sources within the entire
category (for process vents and
wastewater), or each subcategory (for
stripped resin) from lowest to highest.
As discussed in section IV.D of this
preamble, data from all major sources
and the one synthetic area source were
included in this ranking. See section
IV.D of this preamble for more
information about the emission
concentration and resin concentration
data. Based on this ranking, we
calculated the MACT floor limits for
each pollutant, and for the summation
of pollutants making up the total HAP
value, based on the performance (of the
lowest emitting (best controlled)) source
for each pollutant in the category or
subcategory.
We calculated the MACT floor limits
accounting for variability for new
sources using the same formula that we
used for existing sources. As discussed
in section IV.D of this preamble, we
account for variability of the bestcontrolled source in setting floors, not
only because variability is an element of
performance, but also because it is
reasonable to assess best performance
over time. If we do not account for this
variability, we would expect that even
the best-controlled similar source would
potentially exceed the floor emission
levels part of the time, which would
mean that their variability was not
properly accounted for when setting the
MACT floor. We calculated the MACT
floor based on the UPL (upper 99th
percentile), as described in section IV.D
from the average performance, based on
emission testing and resin sampling of
the best controlled similar source,
Students t-factor, the total variability of
the best controlled source, and
incorporating the non-detect
procedures.
This approach reasonably ensures that
the emission limit selected as the MACT
floor adequately represents the level of
control actually achieved by the best
controlled similar source, considering
ordinary operational variability. Tables
6 and 7 of this preamble present the
analysis summaries, and the new source
MACT floor limits for PVC process
vents and stripped resins, respectively.
A detailed discussion of the MACT
floor methodology is presented in the
memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for
the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer
(PVC) Production Source Category, and
is available in the docket.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT NEW SOURCES c,d
99%
UPL
Pollutant (and unit of measure)
Vinyl chloride (ppbv) ..................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
1.53
MACT
floor
emission
limit a
3.2 b
29548
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT NEW SOURCES c,d—Continued
Pollutant (and unit of measure)
99%
UPL
MACT
floor
emission
limit a
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) .........................................................................................................................................................
Total HAP (ppmv) ......................................................................................................................................................................
CDD/CDF (TEQ)(ng/dscm) ........................................................................................................................................................
0.162
0.217
0.00428
0.17
0.22
0.0087 b
a Limits
were rounded up to two significant figures.
result of detection limit variability analysis.
= parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ng/dscm =
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen.
d Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers,
other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery systems, certain storage vessels, slip gauges, loading and unloading
lines, samples, and the wastewater collection and treatment system.
b Limit
c ppbv
TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC STRIPPED RESINS AT NEW SOURCES (PPMW)
Bulk resins
Dispersion resins
Pollutant
99%
UPL
MACT
floor
emission
limit a
99%
UPL
MACT floor
emission
limit a
Vinyl chloride ...........................................................................................................
Total HAP ................................................................................................................
7.1
167.3
7.1
170
40.3
57.8
41
58
All other resins
99%
UPL
0.191
25.1
MACT floor
emission
limit a
0.20
42 b
a Limits
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
b Limit
were rounded up to two significant figures.
result of detection limit variability analysis.
The best performing wastewater
source is complying with the part 61
NESHAP wastewater standards. The
part 61 NESHAP requires that inprocess
wastewater streams that exceed a vinyl
chloride concentration limit of 10
ppmw, at the point of generation, be
controlled. The best-performing source
achieves this control by using a
wastewater steam stripper and achieves
a vinyl chloride concentration at the
outlet of the wastewater stripper of
0.0060 ppmw. The analysis is
documented in the memorandum,
MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production Source Category, and is
available in the docket. We are
proposing that all new wastewater
streams meet a vinyl chloride limit of 10
ppmw, at the point of generation. We
are also proposing that new wastewater
streams that exceed the 10 ppmw vinyl
chloride limit at the point of generation,
reduce vinyl chloride to a wastewater
stripper outlet concentration of 0.0060
ppmw.
For equipment leaks, the best
performing source complies with the
LDAR requirements for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU and the existing part 61
NESHAP LDAR requirements for
rotating and reciprocating pumps and
compressors, and agitators. For storage
vessels, the information collected
showed that at all sources, including the
best performing source, materials with
vapor pressures greater than 14.7 psia
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
are stored under pressure; a closed vent
system that is routed to a control device
is used at all facilities when filling the
tank, or purging the tank. All other
materials are stored at all facilities in
fixed roof tanks.
The current requirements from the
part 61 NESHAP, for reactor opening
losses and equipment openings, set
standards that must be met. In the case
of reactors used as strippers, the
standard is based on the sum of
allowable reactor opening losses, and
the standard for all downstream
equipment (e.g., the stripped resin
limits). All affected sources are required
to meet the part 61 NESHAP
requirements.
For heat exchange systems, the best
performing source has a leak action
level of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC
in the cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total
strippable VOC in the stripping gas,
with twice-daily monitoring, which is,
therefore, the MACT floor for heat
exchange systems at new sources.
EPA solicits comment on the
proposed MACT floors for new PVC
production facilities.
F. How did EPA analyze beyond-thefloor options and determine MACT?
1. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for
Existing Sources
Once the MACT floor determinations
were done for each category or
subcategory, we considered various
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
regulatory options more stringent than
the MACT floor levels of control (e.g.,
control technologies or work practices
that could result in lower emissions). A
detailed description of the beyond-thefloor consideration is in the
memorandum, Analysis of Beyond
MACT Floor Controls for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymer (PVC)
Production Source Category, and is
available in the docket.
We first identified regulatory
requirements for each emission point
that would be more stringent than the
MACT floor level of control, and
determined whether they were
technically feasible. If the more
stringent requirements were technically
feasible, a cost and emission impacts
analysis was conducted for applying
them.
Process Vents. The control
technologies that would be needed to
achieve the proposed MACT floor levels
for process vents (e.g., enhanced vinyl
chloride recovery, activated carbon
injection, and fabric filters, in
combination with existing controls,
such as incinerators and acid gas
scrubbers) are generally the most
effective controls available for reducing
vinyl chloride, HCl, total organic HAP,
and dioxins/furans. Therefore, no
beyond-the-floor regulatory options
were identified for HAP from process
vents.
Equipment Leaks. For equipment
leaks, we are proposing to require that
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
facilities implement the LDAR program
from 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, which
is generally equivalent to the HON, and
which we identified as the most
effective control of emissions from
equipment leaks. We are also proposing
that facilities implement the equipment
requirements for rotating and
reciprocating pumps and compressors
and agitators from part 61 NESHAP,
which are leakless equipment.
Therefore, no beyond-the-floor HAP
emission reduction approaches were
identified for equipment leaks.
Heat Exchange Systems. For heat
exchange systems, the proposed existing
source MACT floor level of control is a
LDAR program with a leak action level
of 38 ppbw of total strippable VOC in
the cooling water, or 2.9 ppmv of total
strippable VOC in the stripping gas and
monthly monitoring. We analyzed a
beyond-the-floor option of requiring a
lower leak action level for the cooling
water of 25 ppbw. Average costs and
emission reductions were calculated on
a per leak basis. The results of the
analysis showed that 5.78 tpy of total
VOC would be reduced for an annual
cost of $175,630, resulting in a cost of
$30,386 per ton of VOC reduced.
Consequently, we determined it was not
appropriate to go beyond-the-floor
considering the cost and emission
reductions of this option.
Storage Vessels. For storage vessels,
the CAA section 114 information
collection data indicate that methanol is
the primary material stored in fixed roof
tanks ranging from 5,000 gallons to
30,000 gallons associated with PVCPU.
We analyzed a beyond-the-floor option
of requiring storage vessels meeting
specific vapor pressure and storage
capacity parameters specified in 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb to comply with the
control requirements of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart WW. The subpart Kb standard
in 40 CFR 60.112(b), requires material
be stored in controlled tanks if: (1) The
material stored has a maximum true
vapor pressure greater or equal to 0.75
psia, and the storage vessel has a
capacity equal to, or greater than 40,000
gallons, or (2) the material stored has a
maximum true vapor pressure greater or
equal to 4 psia, and the storage vessel
has a capacity equal to, or greater than
20,000 gallons, but less than 40,000
gallons. Subpart Kb also requires
materials above 11.1 psia to be stored in
pressure tanks. The beyond-the-floor
controls include specific sealing
mechanisms for internal or external
floating roofs or routing streams from a
fixed roof vessel through a closed vent
system to a control device meeting a 95percent or greater reduction in volatile
organic emissions. We calculated the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
emission reduction and cost of
retrofitting subpart WW controls on
model fixed roof tanks meeting subpart
Kb vapor pressure and size parameters.
The results of the analysis showed that
cost-effectiveness ranged from $2,000 to
$12,000 per ton of HAP reduced by this
option, depending on the number of
turnovers assumed. Considering the cost
and emissions reduction, we have
determined that it is appropriate to
propose this beyond-the-floor
requirement for storage vessels. Based
on information submitted by PVC
production facilities, we are not aware
of any storage vessels from affected
sources that meet the capacity levels
(20,000 gallons or 40,000 gallons), and
store material that meet the vapor
pressure levels. Therefore, we estimate
that there are no additional costs and
emission reductions for this option for
storage vessels currently at PVCPU.
However, the proposed beyond-the-floor
standards for storage vessels will ensure
that, if there are any storage vessels
(now or in the future) that meet the
capacity and vapor pressure criteria,
they will be controlled. This analysis is
documented in the memorandum,
Analysis of Beyond MACT Floor
Controls for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymer (PVC) Production Source
Category, and is available in the docket.
Five gas holders are currently in use
by three facilities, and are a part of the
vinyl chloride recovery system. In these
recovery systems, process vents
originating from polymerization
reactors, resin strippers, and wastewater
strippers (among others) are routed in
closed vent systems to a separate
process to recover unreacted VCM from
the vent gasses. Gas holders provide
intermediate storage of vent gasses
which contain VCM before the VCM is
recovered, compressed, and recycled
back into the process. Gas holders are
cylindrical tanks with a floating bell
top. The tanks contain water that serves
as a seal between the contained gas and
the ambient air outside of the tank. The
pressure inside the gas holder changes
as gasses are fed to, or removed from,
the tank. The water inside the gas
holder is in constant contact with the
vinyl chloride laden gas and can
approach saturation. The primary
source of emissions from gas holders is
from the water seal on the gas holder
that is continually exposed to the
ambient atmosphere. In addition, as the
gas holder bell rises, a thin film of water
that contains vinyl chloride remains on
the outer surface of the bell. Methods to
reduce emissions may include keeping
the gas holder water level at the lowest
possible level, using either floating
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29549
objects on the surface of the water seal
or using a thin layer of oil, or using a
windshield around the gas holder water
seal.
We do not have information from
emission tests, control information, or
cost information on gas holders. We are
requesting comment and additional
information on emissions, controls, and
costs of controls for this emission
source.
Wastewater. For wastewater, EPA has
previously determined for the HON that
a beyond-the-floor option of treating
streams with HAP concentrations
greater than 1,000 ppmw (of 40 CFR part
63, subpart G, Table 9 HAP), and annual
average flow rates greater than 10 l/min
measured at the point of determination
(as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
G), is cost-effective ($670/ton in 2010
dollars). The analysis previously
conducted for the HON is applicable to
PVC, because the cost-effectiveness of
wastewater treatment depends on the
wastewater flow and HAP
concentration, not on the type of
process unit from which the wastewater
stream is generated. The same treatment
systems (steam stripping or
biotreatment), and the same measures to
prevent atmospheric emissions from the
systems conveying the wastewater
streams to the treatment systems, are
applicable to wastewater streams that
meet these criteria. Furthermore, 35
percent of PVC production facilities are
co-located with chemical manufacturing
process units that are subject to the
HON, and could potentially route PVC
wastewater streams (if any) that meet
the total HAP criteria to existing HON
wastewater treatment processes to meet
these limits. Consequently, we are
proposing that streams with HAP
concentrations greater than 1,000 ppmw
(of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9
HAP), and annual average flow rates
greater than 10 l/min be treated as
specified in the HON requirement as a
beyond-the-floor HAP emissions
reduction approach. Based on
information submitted by PVC
production facilities, we are not aware
of any wastewater streams from affected
sources that are above these flow rate
and concentration limits. Therefore, we
estimate that there are no additional
costs or emission reductions because all
facilities are below the 1,000 ppmw
total HAP concentration and 10 l/min
flow rate limits. However, the limit will
ensure that, if there are any wastewater
streams meeting the total HAP and flow
rate criteria, they will be controlled.
Additionally, wastewater generated
during maintenance activities is not
currently regulated by 40 CFR part 61,
subpart F. We requested and received
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29550
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
limited information on vinyl chloride
and HAP concentrations in maintenance
wastewater streams. We are requesting
comment on whether maintenance
wastewater should have separate limits
from inprocess wastewater. We are also
soliciting additional data relevant to
setting a maintenance wastewater
MACT standard.
Other Emission Sources. We did not
identify more stringent control
requirements than what we are
proposing to require at the MACT floor
to reduce emissions from reactor and
equipment openings. The proposed
MACT standard requires that, prior to
being opened, emissions from reactor
and process component openings must
be reduced to a specified level and
ducted through a closed vent system
and control device that would meet the
proposed emission limits for process
vents. We did identify an additional
work practice that could be used to
minimize emissions from all PVC
production facilities. One facility
identified placing filter bags, strainers,
and other removable separation media
in closed and sealed containers that
remain closed and sealed unless being
actively filled or emptied to minimize
emissions. However, we do not have
information on the costs and emission
reductions of this work practice, or the
procedures followed. We request
comments, and any further information,
including cost and performance data, on
this practice, and other work practices
that are being followed by the industry
to minimize emissions from other
emission sources.
Stripped Resin. For stripped resins,
we determined that facilities would use
additional steam in existing equipment
to reduce the concentrations of residual
vinyl chloride and total HAP to meet the
limits for resins being proposed. We
believe that additional stripping in
existing equipment beyond what would
be required to meet the proposed limits
would not be technically feasible as the
incremental additional concentration
reductions would be either negligible or
zero, and existing sources may not be
able to further reduce concentrations to
the beyond-the-floor levels without
degrading product. However, additional
HAP emission reductions could be
achieved by routing vents from process
components downstream of the resin
stripper (e.g., resin dryers and
centrifuges) to an incinerator. We then
determined the cost and emission
reductions of applying a 98-percent
efficient incinerator to the process vents
downstream of the resin stripper (e.g.,
dryer and centrifuge vents). The results
of the analysis are shown in Table 8.
Summary of Beyond the Floor
Analysis. Table 8 of this preamble
summarizes the costs of the MACT floor
emission level (referred to as option 1),
and one beyond-the-floor option for
stripped resins (option 2). Option 2 is
the same as option 1 plus the
installation of a thermal oxidizer on
vent streams from processes
downstream of the resin stripper.
TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF COSTS FOR PVCPU TO COMPLY WITH MACT CONTROL OPTIONS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
(2010$)
Total capital
costs
($million)
Option
1—MACT Floor ........................................................................................................................................................
2—Option 1 + additional control of resin .................................................................................................................
16
370
Total
annualized
costs
($million/Yr)a,
b
20
129
a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for costs for process vents, equipment leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor
options for wastewater and storage vessels do not result in costs, because no sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability requirements for these emission points.
b Calculated using a 7-percent discount factor.
Table 9 of this preamble summarizes
the emission reductions of each
pollutant for the MACT control options
analyzed.
TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR PVCPU TO COMPLY WITH THE MACT CONTROL OPTIONS FOR
EXISTING SOURCES
Option 1
(MACT floor)
(tpy)
Pollutant
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
CDD/CDF TEQ ........................................................................................................................................................
HCl ...........................................................................................................................................................................
Vinyl chloride ...........................................................................................................................................................
Total HAP ................................................................................................................................................................
2.45E–08
33
135
1,570
Option 2
(Option 1 +
additional control of stripped
resin)
(tpy)a
2.45E–08
33
176
2,618
a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for process vents, equipment leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor options for
wastewater and storage vessels do not result in emission reductions, because no sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability requirements for these emission points.
The results provided in Tables 8 and
9 of this preamble were calculated using
data gathered for the PVC industry. We
estimate that applying additional
control to reduce emissions from
stripped resins would result in a total
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
annualized cost of $129 million, and
would achieve vinyl chloride and total
HAP reductions of 176 tpy and 2,618
tpy, respectively. The incremental costeffectiveness of adding a thermal
oxidizer to control emissions from
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
process vents downstream of the resin
stripper was estimated to be $2.7
million per ton of vinyl chloride
reduced, and over $100,000 per ton of
total HAP reduced. Consequently, we
determined it was not appropriate to go
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
beyond the floor, considering the cost
and emission reductions of this option.
The results of the beyond-the-floor
analysis are documented in the
memorandum, Analysis of Beyond
MACT Floor Controls for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production Source Category, and is
available in the docket. Table 1 in this
preamble summarizes the proposed
emissions limits for existing PVCPU.
2. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for New
Sources
Except for wastewater and storage
vessels, we did not identify any
technologies or methods to achieve HAP
emission limits more stringent than the
MACT floor limits, or work practices for
new units, based on the best performing
PVC facilities. The control technologies
and work practices necessary to achieve
the MACT floor levels are generally the
most effective controls available.
For wastewater, EPA has previously
determined for the HON that a beyondthe-floor option of treating streams with
HAP concentrations greater than 1,000
ppmw (of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G,
Table 9 HAP), and annual average flow
rates greater than 10 l/min is costeffective for new sources ($1,300/ton in
2010 dollars for new sources). For the
same reasons discussed in section IV.F.1
of this preamble, the analysis previously
conducted for HON is applicable to PVC
because the cost- effectiveness of
wastewater treatment depends on the
wastewater flow and HAP
concentration, not on the type of
process unit the wastewater stream is
coming from. As discussed in section
IV.F.1 of this preamble, we are
requesting comment on whether
maintenance wastewater should have
separate limits from inprocess
wastewater, and requesting data
relevant to setting a maintenance
wastewater MACT standard.
We also concluded, in section IV.F.1
of this preamble, that it was costeffective ($2,000 to $12,000 per ton of
HAP) to require floating roof tanks or
fixed roof tanks routed to a closed vent
system, and control device for storage
vessels that (1) have a storage capacity
equal to or greater than 40,000 gallons
(151 cubic meters), and store material
with maximum true vapor pressures
greater or equal to 0.75 psia, or (2) have
a storage capacity equal to or greater
than 20,000 gallons, and less than
40,000 gallons, and store material with
maximum true vapor pressures greater
or equal to 4 psia. Consequently, the
beyond-the-floor options for wastewater
and storage vessels are the only ones
being proposed for new sources. Tables
1 and 3 of this preamble summarizes the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
proposed emissions limits for new
PVCPU.
EPA solicits comment on the
proposed beyond-the-floor
determinations.
G. How did EPA select the compliance
and monitoring requirements for the
proposed rule?
We are proposing testing, monitoring,
notification, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements that are adequate
to assure continuous compliance with
the requirements of the proposed rule.
These requirements are described in
detail in various sections in the
proposed rule. We solicit comment on
the proposed compliance and
monitoring requirements. We selected
these requirements based upon our
examination of the information
necessary to ensure that the emission
standards and work practices are being
followed, and that emission control
devices and process components are
maintained and operated properly.
These proposed requirements impose on
facilities the minimum burden that is
necessary to ensure compliance with the
proposed rule.
1. How did we select the compliance
and monitoring requirements for storage
vessels?
For storage vessels, we are proposing
that you meet the operating, inspection,
repair, and maintenance requirements
in 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed
rule, as discussed in section III.F.1 of
this preamble. We are proposing work
practice standards to ensure that
pressure vessels and fixed roof storage
tanks are being operated correctly and
maintained. Pressure vessels, during
purging and filling, are required to meet
the closed vent system and control
device requirements specified in 40 CFR
63.11910(c)(1) of the proposed rule.
Annual monitoring of potential leak
interfaces on pressure vessels using EPA
Method 21 is proposed to be used to
verify there are no leaks. Any detectable
emissions would be considered a
violation of the rule. These
requirements ensure that pressure
vessels do not vent to the atmosphere.
We are requesting comment on this
requirement.
Floating roof storage vessels would be
required to comply with the operation,
maintenance, and inspection
requirements of 40 CFR part 63 subpart
WW. The requirements of subpart WW
are in many EPA standards, such as the
Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON),
and provide more current compliance
requirements that better reflect the
current state of operations for the
industry. The subpart WW provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29551
for floating roof tanks would ensure that
floating roof vessels operate correctly by
requiring periodic inspection of the
floating roofs.
If you choose to route vent streams
from fixed roof tanks to a closed vent
system and control device, we are
proposing that the control device must
reduce the inlet VOC emissions by 95
percent, or greater. This requirement is
based on the provisions of 40 CFR part
60, subpart Kb, which provides
reduction requirements for fixed roof
vessels routed to a closed vent system,
and control device in 40 CFR
60.112b(a)(3)(ii). These are achievable
reductions for storage tanks that have
been previously implemented, as in
subpart Kb. You would also be required
to meet the requirements for closed vent
systems and control devices in 40 CFR
63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11930 of the
proposed rule. These requirements
would limit the VOC emissions released
to the atmosphere from storage tanks.
All types of storage vessels are
required to be equipped with closure
devices. You would also be required to
visually inspect the fixed roof tanks and
their closure devices for defects
initially, and at least once per calendar
year, with the exception of parts of the
fixed roof that you determine are unsafe
to inspect.
For parts that you have determined
are unsafe to inspect, you would be
required to prepare and maintain
written documentation that identifies
each part and explains why the part is
unsafe to inspect, and to conduct
inspections during times when it is safe
to do so (as frequently as practicable,
but not required more than once per
calendar year). We have included
provisions intended to clarify the
required intervals between inspections,
because we have received comments
during development of prior rules that
some requirements could be subject to
different interpretations. For example, a
requirement to conduct inspections
‘‘annually’’ could be read to mean in
every calendar year, no later than the
date 1 year after the previous
inspection, or in the same month every
year. To address concerns about when
inspections must be conducted if the
storage vessel is out of service on the
date when the inspection must be
completed, instead of proposing to
require inspections ‘‘annually,’’ we are
proposing a requirement to conduct
inspections at least ‘‘once per calendar
year.’’ For fixed roof parts that are
unsafe to inspect, an inspection may be
delayed until an alternative storage
vessel can be made available, and the
vessel to be inspected can be emptied
and temporarily removed from service.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29552
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
The inspection must be conducted
before the fixed roof storage vessel is
returned to service. These provisions are
provided in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of
the proposed rule.
We have included fixed roof repair
provisions in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(4) of
the proposed rule for when a defect is
identified. These requirements are based
on the requirements in 40 CFR
63.1063(e) of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
WW. We have made one clarification to
the conditions under which delay of
repair extensions are allowed. You must
make a first attempt to repair the defect
no later than 5 calendar days after
detection, and complete the repair as
soon as possible, but no later than 45
calendar days after detection. The delay
of repair provisions would allow delay
beyond 45 calendar days if you
determine that the repair requires
emptying or temporary removal from
service of the storage vessel, and no
alternative storage capacity is available
at the site. You would be required to
repair the defect the next time
alternative storage capacity becomes
available, and the storage vessel can be
emptied, or temporarily removed from
service.
Under 40 CFR 63.11910(c) of the
proposed rule, pressure vessels, as
defined in proposed 40 CFR 63.12010,
may not vent to the atmosphere, but
must instead be vented back into the
process, or vented to a closed vent
system and control device. These
provisions have been included in 40
CFR 63.11910(c) of the proposed rule to
ensure that the pressure vessel stream is
not inadvertently directed to the
atmosphere.
2. How did we select the compliance
and monitoring requirements for
equipment leaks?
For equipment leaks, we are
proposing in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the
proposed rule, as discussed in section
III.F.2 of this preamble, that you meet
the LDAR requirements of 40 CFR part
63, subpart UU, which defines leak
thresholds and monitoring frequencies
for each type of equipment. These
requirements are already being used at
several PVCPU and in other source
categories, and have been shown to be
effective in minimizing emissions from
leaking equipment.
Release events from PRD have the
potential to emit large quantities of
HAP. We are concerned that a large
number of these releases that occur may
not be identified and controlled in a
timely manner and may be due to repeat
problems that have not been corrected.
The end result would be significant
increases in annual HAP emissions. To
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
address this issue, we are proposing that
you be required to install electronic
indicators on each PRD that would be
able to identify and record the time and
duration of each pressure release.
3. How did we select the compliance
and monitoring requirements for heat
exchangers?
For heat exchange systems, we are
proposing in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the
proposed rule to include requirements
equivalent to the primary monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements that were finalized for
heat exchange systems for Refinery
MACT 1 sources (74 FR 55669),
including a LDAR program that requires
you to conduct sampling and analyses
using the TCEQ Modified El Paso
Method or EPA Method 8021B, no less
frequently than monthly for existing
sources and twice-daily (12-hour
intervals) for new sources. We are
proposing a leak action level of 38 ppbw
of total strippable VOC in the cooling
water, or 2.9 ppmv of total strippable
VOC in the stripping gas for existing
sources, and a leak action level of 30
ppbw of total strippable VOC in the
cooling water, or 2.3 ppmv of total
strippable VOC in the stripping gas for
new sources. We are also proposing a
delay of repair leak action level of 380
ppbw of total strippable VOC in cooling
water, or 29 ppmv of total strippable
VOC in the stripping gas for new and
existing sources.
In contrast to a water sampling
method such as EPA Method 601 or 624,
the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method
provides similar detection limits, as
speciated water analysis and simulates
the actual losses that might occur from
cooling water. Further, the Modified El
Paso Method helps overcome potential
losses of highly VOC during water
sampling. The sensitivity of the
Modified El Paso Method using flame
ionization detector (FID) analysis is
typically 0.1 to 0.5 ppmv (as methane)
in the stripped air, with 1.0 ppmv (as
methane) being typical. We note that the
Modified El Paso Method has been
demonstrated at numerous sources as an
effective means of identifying leaks in
heat exchange systems, and the method
has been used extensively for over 20
years.
We considered the variety of systems
that may be monitored, and whether the
Modified El Paso Method should be
used exclusively. For the PVC
Production source category, a limited
number of compounds may be present
in the process stream for which
analytical methods are available that
can detect these compounds at low
concentrations. Additionally, for
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
streams containing highly chlorinated
organic compounds such as vinyl
chloride, these alternative methods may
provide lower detection limits and
better sensitivity than using the
Modified El Paso Method (which uses a
flame ionization detector). We believe
that the specific analytical method used
is not critical to the emission limitations
achieved, provided that the method can
accurately quantify pollutant
concentrations at levels far enough
below the leak action level that the
method could accurately indicate
whether or not a leak exists. As such,
we are proposing to include a direct
water analysis method in the proposed
rule. We are proposing different
sampling locations and leak repair
provisions for heat exchange systems,
including a cooling tower (i.e., closedloop recirculation systems) and oncethrough heat exchange systems (e.g.,
river or brackish water), as specified in
40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule.
For closed-loop recirculation systems,
sampling could be conducted at the
combined return line at the inlet to the
cooling tower prior to exposure to air.
Alternatively, sampling could be
conducted in the ‘‘exit’’ lines (i.e., water
lines returning the water from the heat
exchangers to the cooling tower) from
an individual heat exchanger or bank of
heat exchangers. Therefore, if the
cooling tower services multiple heat
exchangers, you could elect to monitor
only the heat exchangers in HAP
service, monitor at branch points that
combine several heat exchanger exit
lines, or monitor at the combined stream
for the entire closed-loop recirculation
system. These provisions allow
flexibility and potentially reduce the
cost of monitoring, while still ensuring
leak detection. For closed-loop
recirculation heat exchange systems, the
impacts of the potential dilution of the
leak from aggregation with other process
cooling waters are minimized due to the
physical limitations of quantity of water
that can be processed by a single cooling
tower.
A once-through heat exchange system
consists of one or more heat exchangers
servicing an individual process unit and
all water lines to and from the heat
exchanger. As such, sampling for oncethrough heat exchange systems must be
conducted in exit lines from individual
heat exchangers, or group of heat
exchangers associated with a single
process unit. If once-through heat
exchange systems are not limited to a
single process unit, a once-through heat
exchange system could include all heat
exchangers at the entire facility. The
potential to aggregate all cooling water
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
at a facility prior to sampling would
reduce the effectiveness of the leak
monitoring methods, and would allow
HAP leaks to remain undetected, based
solely on the dilution effect from the
large quantity of water processed at the
facility. Commenters are encouraged to
provide additional information and
suggestions for sampling alternatives
that would allow flexibility, but would
include a small enough number of
individual heat exchangers to provide
meaningful measurements in oncethrough systems.
We are also proposing to allow the
owner or operator of a once-through
heat exchange system to monitor both
the inlet and outlet of an individual heat
exchanger or group of heat exchangers
associated with a single process unit,
and compare the difference between
those two measurements to the leak
action level to determine if a leak is
detected. The use of a differential leak
is provided for once-through systems
because the water supply for these
systems (often river water or ocean
water) may contain higher background
concentrations of hydrocarbons than the
purchased water that is used in closedloop recirculation systems.
The proposed rule allows facilities to
use more frequent or continuous
monitoring as an alternative, but only
requires monthly monitoring.
4. How did we select the compliance
and monitoring requirements for
process vents?
As described in section III.F.4 of this
preamble, we are proposing in 40 CFR
63.11925 through 40 CFR 63.11950 of
the proposed rule, performance testing,
CEMS, and CPMS monitoring
requirements to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the limits
in Tables 1 and 2 of the proposed rule
for process vents.
To demonstrate compliance with the
total organic HAP emission limits, we
are proposing in 40 CFR 63.11945, and
in Table 9 of the proposed rule, to
require initial and annual performance
tests using EPA Method 25A to measure
THC. Because measuring THC is more
practical than measuring total organic
HAP using available test methods, we
are proposing to allow compliance with
the total organic HAP limit to be
determined by measuring THC. We
calculated the THC level that equates to
the total HAP limit from the THC data
reported for the same best performing
five sources used to calculate the total
organic HAP limit. During the initial
performance test, you would be required
to establish an operating limit for the
control device operating parameters
specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and 40
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
CFR 63.11940 (e.g., incinerator
temperature). You would then
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the total HAP limit by staying
within the operating limit established
for each operating parameter. In 40 CFR
63.11925 of the proposed rule, we are
providing the option of using a THC
CEMS meeting the specifications in 40
CFR Part 60, appendix B, Performance
Specification 8A as an alternative to
CPMS. CEMS have been widely used to
demonstrate that air pollution control
devices are being operated correctly to
ensure emission limitations are being
met.
To demonstrate initial compliance
with the CDD/CDF and HCl emission
limits, under 40 CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR
63.11935, 40 CFR 63.11940, and 40 CFR
63.11945 of the proposed rule,
compliance would be determined by
performance tests using EPA Method 18
for vinyl chloride, EPA Method 23 for
CDD/CDF, and either EPA Method 26 or
26A for HCl. Continuous compliance
with the vinyl chloride, CDD/CDF and
HCl emission limits would be
demonstrated using continuous
monitoring of control device parameters
(e.g., liquid flow rate and pH for
scrubbers, and temperature and carbon
injection rate for activated carbon
injection, temperature for thermal
oxidizers), and annual performance tests
for CDD/CDF and vinyl chloride. While
parameter monitoring has historically
been a cost-effective monitoring option,
CEMS are increasingly being used in
many different situations, and provide
more accurate data for demonstrating
continuous compliance. As specified in
proposed 40 CFR 63.11925, after EPA
publishes final performance
specifications for CEMS for HCl and
CDD/CDF, new sources would be
required to use CEMS instead of annual
testing and CPMS for these pollutants,
and existing sources would be given the
option to use CEMS.
To demonstrate compliance for
process vents, we are also proposing in
40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule
that you must meet the requirements of
proposed 40 CFR 63.11930 for each
closed vent system, and proposed 40
CFR 63.11940 for each control device,
including each incinerator, absorber,
adsorber, condenser, sorbent injection
system, fabric filter, or other control
device.
The requirements we are proposing
for closed vent systems are based on the
requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
SS, although we have revised and
incorporated new requirements, as
discussed below.
The standards for closed vent systems
in 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29553
include bypass monitoring
requirements, and leak monitoring and
inspection requirements. We are
proposing that for all closed vent
systems, except those systems in
vacuum service, as defined in 40 CFR
63.12010, for bypasses that do not
contain an automatic flow control valve
and have manual lock-and-key flow
control valves, anytime the manual
valve is opened, it would result in a
violation. If you install and maintain a
bypass flow indicator equipped with an
automatic alarm system, then any
indication of flow through the bypass is
a violation, but the action of opening the
valve is not a violation. These
provisions are to ensure that any flow
directed to a bypass is detected and
addressed by the operator. We have not
included monitoring exemptions for
difficult-to-inspect, or unsafe-to-inspect
equipment. Instead, we are proposing
that you maintain and follow a written
plan that requires inspecting the
equipment designated as unsafe-toinspect as frequently as practical during
safe-to-inspect times, but not more
frequently than the otherwise applicable
annual inspection schedule.
For the leak monitoring and
inspection requirements in 40 CFR
63.11930 of the proposed rule, we have
added provisions based on 40 CFR part
60, subpart VVa, which require a
calibration drift assessment for the leak
detection instrument at the end of each
monitoring day. The post-test
calibration drift assessments constitute
good practice, and are a useful quality
assurance/quality control tool to
validate the proper operation of the leak
detection instrument during the
monitoring period, and, hence, the
measurement data.
We are proposing that closed vent
systems that operate in vacuum service,
as defined in 40 CFR 63.12010 of the
proposed rule, are not required to
perform the leak monitoring and
inspection requirements required for
other closed vent systems. However, if
you choose to operate in vacuum service
under 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed
rule, you would be required to install a
pressure gauge and an automatic alarm
system capable of alerting an operator
immediately when the closed vent
system is no longer in vacuum service.
Unless you meet the monitoring and
inspection requirements of 40 CFR
63.11930 of the proposed rule for closed
vent systems, which are not in vacuum
service, if a loss of vacuum alarm is
triggered, you would be in violation of
the rule, and would be required to bring
the closed vent system back into
vacuum service. These requirements
ensure that vacuum systems remain in
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29554
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
compliance with the rule and do not
leak.
For process vents that must
demonstrate compliance using a control
device and continuous monitoring using
a CPMS, the parameters that would be
monitored for each type of control
device are specified in proposed 40 CFR
63.11940. The monitoring requirements
for each control device were primarily
based on requirements from 40 CFR part
63, subpart SS, and 40 CFR part 63,
subpart FFFF, with additional
requirements added for new control
devices, and significant revisions for
adsorbers, which are discussed in this
section.
In 40 CFR 63.11940 of the proposed
rule, we have revised the former 40 CFR
part 63, subpart SS requirements for
‘‘carbon adsorbers’’ to apply to
‘‘adsorbers,’’ and modified the
applicability to pertain to adsorbers
containing carbon, zeolite, adsorbing
polymers, or any other adsorbents. This
change reduces the need for owners and
operators to request alternative controls,
and for EPA to review these requests.
The proposed rule has been written to
address known performance issues for
adsorbers, including the regeneration
frequency of the adsorbent, the
effectiveness of regeneration, the life of
the adsorbent material before
replacement is required, mechanical
issues with the system operation,
including valve sequencing, and for
non-regenerative systems, the expected
life of the bed before replacement. We
are proposing several monitoring
approaches for non-vacuum systems,
regenerative adsorption systems, and
non-regenerative adsorption systems,
based on requirements from 40 CFR part
63, subparts G, SS, GGG, MMM, FFFF,
GGGGG, and BBBBBB, as well as
approaches which have been reviewed
and approved by EPA through
alternative monitoring requests, and
which we believe have universal
applicability.
Under 40 CFR 63.11925(b) of the
proposed rule, we are not allowing
process vents to be routed to a flare due
to the potential for acid-gas formation
from combustion of halogenated streams
at PVCPU. We have included in 40 CFR
63.11940 of the proposed rule
compliance and monitoring
requirements for control devices not
covered by 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS,
including sorbent injection systems and
fabric filters. The compliance
requirements for sorbent injection
systems were based on the NESHAP for
the Portland cement manufacturing
industry, and the compliance
requirements for fabric filters were
modeled after the Pesticide Active
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
remain below these levels. You would
test periodically at the same locations,
and using the same test methods
described above, to verify that the
stream concentration stays below these
levels. Wastewater streams would be
tested monthly. We believe these are the
least burdensome intervals to test for
wastewater, considering the variety of
resin grades that may be produced,
5. How did we select the compliance
while still ensuring compliance with the
requirements for wastewater?
proposed emission limits. There are also
As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965 of
proposed requirements in 40 CFR
the proposed rule, we are proposing that
63.11975(d) of the rule for
you must conduct an initial test for
demonstrating that you remain below
wastewater streams from the affected
the 10 l/min flow rate criterion. These
source to determine the vinyl chloride
would be required for wastewater
concentration, the total HAP
streams that are not required to apply
concentration (including all HAP listed
in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), additional control because they are
below the 10 l/min flow rate criterion.
and the flow rate. The concentration
The flow rate determination procedures
tests would be conducted using EPA
are consistent with the HON, which is
Method 107 for sampling, in
the basis of the flow rate criterion.
combination with RCRA Method SW–
8260B, Volatile Organic Compounds by
Under 40 CFR 63.11970 and 40 CFR
Gas Chromatography/Mass
63.11975 of the proposed rule, you
Spectrometry (GC/MS), and EPA
would conduct an initial compliance
Method 305, Measurement of Emission
test and monthly testing to demonstrate
Potential of Individual Volatile Organic compliance with the wastewater
Compounds in Waste, for analysis. EPA stripper outlet concentration limit. In
Method 107 is commonly used in this
addition, during your performance test,
source category as both a sampling and
you would be required to establish
analytical method for vinyl chloride. We operating ranges for your wastewater
are proposing to require RCRA Method
vacuum stripper, including steam-toSW–8260B for analysis of HAP except
feed ratios and wastewater stripper
for methanol because it provides
temperature, and also the vacuum level
concentrations for vinyl chloride, as
measured in the column for wastewater
well as other HAP. We are proposing to
vacuum strippers. These operating
require EPA Method 305 for analysis of
parameters are good indicators of
methanol. Prior to testing, you would be wastewater stripper performance and
required to submit a test plan for EPA
proper operation. You would use a
approval that includes your proposed
CPMS to continuously monitor control
method for analysis using these
device operating parameters to
methods.
demonstrate that you meet these
For wastewater, you would be
operating parameter limits.
required to test for vinyl chloride at the
If the wastewater stream exceeds the
point where the wastewater is
1,000 ppmw HAP concentration
generated, and test for Table 9 HAP at
the point of determination, as defined in (measured at the point of determination,
and based on the list of HAP in Table
40 CFR part 63, subpart G. The HAP
9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), and
most prevalent in wastewater, and in
exceeds an annual average flow rate of
the largest amounts for this source
10 l/min (as measured at the same point
category, is vinyl chloride, which is
of determination), then you would be
volatile, and is easily stripped. Testing
at the point of generation is necessary to required, under 40 CFR 63.11970(a)(2)
of the proposed rule, to comply with the
get an accurate assessment of the
subpart G Group 1, wastewater
amount of vinyl chloride in the
suppression and treatment
wastewater stream before it potentially
volatizes in the downstream wastewater requirements, and conduct the
compliance testing and monitoring
processes.
required in subpart G. As discussed in
Wastewater streams that contain less
section IV.F of this preamble, this
than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at the
proposed requirement is a beyond-thepoint of generation), and wastewater
floor option selected because it was
streams that either contain less than
determined to be cost-effective in the
1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a flow
rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the HON. Consequently, we are proposing
point of determination, as defined by 40 that you comply with the HON testing
CFR part 63, subpart G), are not required and monitoring requirements for these
streams.
to further reduce emissions, but must
Ingredient Production NESHAP (40 CFR
part 63, subpart MMM, as referenced by
the MON), and the Portland Cement
Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR part
63, subpart LLL).
We have also included requirements
from the MON for batch processing
operations, as discussed in section
IV.G.8 of this preamble.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
6. How did we select the compliance
requirements for stripped resin?
As discussed in section III.F.6 of this
preamble, we are proposing in 40 CFR
63.11960 of the proposed rule that you
conduct initial and continuous
performance tests to demonstrate
compliance with the proposed vinyl
chloride limits and monthly
performance tests to demonstrate
compliance with the proposed total
HAP limits for stripped resin. The tests
would be conducted at the outlet of the
resin stripper as the stripped resin exits
the stripper for continuous processes
and immediately after stripping for
batch processes. You would be required
to use EPA Method 107 in combination
with RCRA Method SW–8260B, and to
include in your test plan a proposed
method for analysis using these
methods. Affected sources are currently
measuring vinyl chloride using EPA
Method 107 to comply with limits in the
part 61 NESHAP, and would continue to
do so under this proposed rule. Initial
and subsequent sampling for vinyl
chloride would follow the same
requirements as those in part 61
NESHAP. You would be required to
sample for total HAP initially, and then
on a monthly basis to demonstrate
continuous compliance. We are
proposing that RCRA Method SW–
8260B also be used to analyze for
concentrations of organic HAP in the
stripped resin other than vinyl chloride.
You would be required to submit the
test plan for EPA approval.
The MACT floor limits for total HAP
were based on averages of 30 days of
resin sampling. We are proposing that
samples be taken monthly, and
compliance be demonstrated, based on
a 12 month rolling average of the 12
most recent months. In the first 12
months following your demonstration of
initial compliance, you would be
required to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP emission
limit on a monthly basis, using the same
procedures required for initial
compliance. We request comment on
adding an alternative to allow you, in
these first 12 months, to use data
collected in the year preceding your
initial compliance to demonstrate
continuous compliance. You would also
be required to conduct your monthly
monitoring for total HAP on a day that
you are producing the resin grade of
which you manufacture the most, based
on total mass of resin produced in the
month preceding the sampling event. To
allow you flexibility in selecting this
sampling day, sampling is required
monthly, with a minimum of 12
sampling events per year, but individual
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
sampling events may be 3 to 5 weeks
apart.
In addition, during your initial
performance test, you would be required
to establish operating ranges for your
resin steam or vacuum stripper,
including steam-to-feed ratios and
stripper temperature, and also the
vacuum level measured in the
component for vacuum strippers. You
would use a CPMS to continuously
monitor control device operating
parameters. The proposed monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements are necessary to ensure
compliance with the proposed emission
limits.
7. How did we select the compliance
requirements for other emission
sources?
Other emission sources include
reactor and other component opening
losses. Reactor exhaust gas streams and
any HAP removed from process
component openings must be ducted
through a closed vent system and
control device. Therefore, we are
proposing the same compliance
requirements for these emission sources
as those requirements for process vents.
8. How did we select the compliance
requirements for batch process
operations?
We are proposing compliance
language, based on the MON, to
accommodate batch process vents. The
MON primarily references the batch
process vent provisions in the
Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP
(40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG), but
includes some changes and exceptions
when specifying how to calculate
uncontrolled emissions from batch
process vents (including emission
episode equations), as well as requiring
performance testing under worst-case
conditions. Although the MON uses a
hierarchy to determine applicable
requirements for combined emission
streams (e.g., it allows you to comply
with only the batch process vent
requirements for combined batch and
continuous process vents), 40 CFR
63.11945(b)(3) of the proposed rule
requires that you meet all requirements
for each emission stream type in a
combined emission stream (i.e., both
continuous and batch process vent
requirements must be met). The
proposed rule is written in this way to
ensure compliance for each emission
stream.
Additionally, we revised the purging
emission episode equation included in
40 CFR 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) (Equation
12). This equation specifies that the
partial pressure of HAP shall be
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29555
assumed to be 25 percent of the
saturated value if the purge flow rate is
greater than 100 standard cubic feet per
minute (scfm). We revised this
requirement to incorporate iterative
methodology equations from the
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
NESHAP (40 CFR 63.8050(c)(1)(ii)),
requiring you to determine a HAPspecific saturation factor, and are calling
the episode ‘‘gas sweep of a partially
filled vessel,’’ in lieu of ‘‘purging.’’ This
revision is in accordance with Volume
II, Chapter 16 of the Emission Inventory
Improvement Program (EIIP), issued
August 2007. This change includes sitespecific values where possible, and
ensures that the calculated emissions
are more accurate.
H. How did EPA determine compliance
times for the proposed rule?
Section 112 of the CAA provides
limits for the dates by which affected
sources must comply with the emission
standards. New or reconstructed units
must be in compliance with the final
rule immediately upon startup, or the
date the final rule is published in the
Federal Register, whichever is later.
The proposed rule allows existing
sources 3 years to comply with the final
rule, which is the maximum period
allowed by the CAA. We believe that 3
years for compliance is necessary to
allow adequate time to design, install,
and test control systems, as well as
obtain permits for the use of add-on
controls. We welcome comment on the
proposed compliance dates.
I. How did EPA determine the required
records and reports for this proposed
rule?
Section 112 of the CAA requires the
EPA to develop regulations that include
requirements for reporting the results of
testing and monitoring performed to
determine compliance with the
standards. You would be required to
comply with the applicable
requirements in the NESHAP General
Provisions, subpart A of 40 CFR part 63,
as referenced in Table 5 of the proposed
rule. We evaluated the General
Provisions requirements, and included
those we determined to be the minimum
notification, recordkeeping, and
reporting necessary to ensure
compliance with, and effective
enforcement of, this rule, as proposed.
The reports that we are proposing to be
required are presented in 40 CFR
63.11985 of the proposed rule.
We also reviewed the necessary
records that need to be kept to
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the proposed emission limits and
work practice standards. These
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29556
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
recordkeeping requirements are
specified either directly in the proposed
rule, in the General Provisions to 40
CFR part 63, or in other rules to which
the proposed rule refers. Recordkeeping
requirements are found in the proposed
40 CFR 63.11990. We are proposing that
records be kept for 5 years, in a form
suitable and readily available for EPA
review. We are proposing that records
be kept on site for 2 years, and you can
keep the records off site for the
remaining 3 years.
The General Provisions include
specific requirements for notifications,
recordkeeping, and reporting. The
reports are specified in proposed 40
CFR 63.11985.
The notification of compliance status
report required by 40 CFR 63.9(h) must
include certifications of compliance
with rule requirements. The excess
emissions and continuous system
performance report and summary report
required by 40 CFR 63.10(e)(3) of the
NESHAP General Provisions (referred to
in the rule as a compliance report)
would be required to be submitted
semiannually for reporting periods
during which there was an exceedance
of any emission limit, or a monitored
parameter, or a deviation from any of
the requirements in the rule occurred, or
if any process changes occurred, and
compliance certifications were
reevaluated.
The part 61 NESHAP requires that,
within 10 days of any discharge from a
PRD to the atmosphere, the owners or
operators must submit to the
Administrator a report containing
information on the source, nature, and
cause of the discharge, the date and time
of the discharge, duration of the
discharge, the approximate emissions
during the discharge, and the method
used for determining the HAP emitted
(i.e., the calculation method). The report
must also include a description of the
actions taken to prevent the discharge,
and measures adopted to prevent future
discharges. We are proposing to extend
this recordkeeping and reporting
requirement to violations associated
with bypasses, pressure vessels and
closed vent systems in vacuum service
as discussed in section III.H of this
preamble. We solicit comment on the
proposed recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
J. What are the startup, shutdown, and
malfunction provisions?
Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA,
551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008), EPA is
proposing standards in this rule that
apply at all times. In proposing the
standards in this rule, EPA has taken
into account startup and shutdown
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
periods, and, for the reasons explained
below, has not proposed different
standards for those periods. We solicit
comment on this approach.
We expect facilities can meet the
proposed emission standards during
startup and shutdown. For process
vents, control is achieved by routing
vents to thermal oxidizers, or vent gas
absorbers. During startup, it is common
practice to start the thermal oxidizers
using natural gas, before process vent
emissions are routed to them, so that the
oxidizers are at the required
temperature prior to receiving the vent
streams and will accomplish the same
level of control that they would during
normal operation. Vent gas absorbers
operate such that vent streams can be
routed to them at all times. For
wastewater streams and stripped resins,
we expect that during startup, streams
normally fed to the wastewater stripper
and resin stripper are recycled back to
the process until the correct stripper
steam to feed ratio is established. At
such time, the feed streams are no
longer recycled back to the process, and
are then sent through the stripper to
remove HAP to the required levels. For
batch processes, startups and
shutdowns are a part of their normal
daily operations. For the other emission
points, the proposed rule requires work
practices that can be followed during
startup and shutdown. Additionally, we
are proposing that process components,
such as reactors, cannot be opened
except when the process or process
component is shut down. The proposed
rule includes several requirements to
reduce emissions during openings.
Periods of startup, normal operations,
and shutdown are all predictable and
routine aspects of a source’s operations.
However, by contrast, malfunction is
defined as a ‘‘sudden, infrequent, and
not reasonably preventable failure of air
pollution control and monitoring
equipment, process equipment or a
process to operate in a normal or usual
manner * * *.’’ (40 CFR 63.2). EPA has
determined that malfunctions should
not be viewed as a distinct operating
mode, and, therefore, any emissions that
occur at such times do not need to be
factored into development of CAA
section 112(d) standards, which, once
promulgated, apply at all times. In
Mossville Environmental Action Now v.
EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1242 (DC Cir.
2004), the Court upheld as reasonable
standards that had factored in
variability of emissions under all
operating conditions. However, nothing
in CAA section 112(d) or in case law
requires that EPA anticipate and
account for the innumerable types of
potential malfunction events in setting
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
emission standards. See, Weyerhaeuser
v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (DC Cir.
1978) (‘‘In the nature of things, no
general limit, individual permit, or even
any upset provision can anticipate all
upset situations. After a certain point,
the transgression of regulatory limits
caused by ‘uncontrollable acts of third
parties,’ such as strikes, sabotage,
operator intoxication or insanity, and a
variety of other eventualities, must be a
matter for the administrative exercise of
case-by-case enforcement discretion, not
for specification in advance by
regulation.’’).
Further, it is reasonable to interpret
CAA section 112(d) as not requiring
EPA to account for malfunctions in
setting emissions standards. For
example, we note that CAA section 112
uses the concept of ‘‘best performing’’
sources in defining MACT, the level of
stringency that major source standards
must meet. Applying the concept of
‘‘best performing’’ to a source that is
malfunctioning presents significant
difficulties. The goal of best performing
sources is to operate in such a way as
to avoid malfunctions of their units.
Moreover, even if malfunctions were
considered a distinct operating mode,
we believe it would be impracticable to
take malfunctions into account in
setting CAA section 112(d) standards for
PVC and copolymer production. As
noted above, by definition, malfunctions
are sudden and unexpected events, and
it would be difficult to set a standard
that takes into account the myriad
different types of malfunctions that can
occur across all sources in the category.
Moreover, malfunctions can vary in
frequency, degree, and duration, further
complicating standard setting.
In the event that a source fails to
comply with the applicable CAA section
112(d) standards, as a result of a
malfunction event, EPA would
determine an appropriate response
based on, among other things, the good
faith efforts of the source to minimize
emissions during malfunction periods,
including preventative and corrective
actions, as well as root cause analyses
to ascertain and rectify excess
emissions. EPA would also consider
whether the source’s failure to comply
with the CAA section 112(d) standard
was, in fact, ‘‘sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable,’’ and was not
instead ‘‘caused in part by poor
maintenance or careless operation.’’ 40
CFR 63.2 (definition of malfunction).
Finally, EPA recognizes that even
equipment that is properly designed and
maintained, can sometimes fail and that
such failure can sometimes cause an
exceedance of the relevant emission
standard. (See, e.g., State
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29557
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding
Excessive Emissions During
Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown
(Sept. 20, 1999); Policy on Excess
Emissions During Startup, Shutdown,
Maintenance, and Malfunctions (Feb.
15, 1983)). EPA is therefore proposing to
include an affirmative defense to civil
penalties for exceedances of emission
limits. See 40 CFR 63.12010 of the
proposed rule (defining ‘‘affirmative
defense’’ to mean, in the context of an
enforcement proceeding, a response or
defense put forward by a defendant,
regarding which the defendant has the
burden of proof, and the merits of which
are independently and objectively
evaluated in a judicial or administrative
proceeding). We also are proposing
other regulatory provisions to specify
the elements that are necessary to
establish this affirmative defense; the
source must prove by a preponderance
of the evidence that it has met all of the
elements set forth in 40 CFR 63.11895
of the proposed rule. (See 40 CFR
22.24). The criteria ensure that the
affirmative defense is available only
where the event that causes an
exceedance of the emission limit meets
the narrow definition of malfunction in
40 CFR 63.2 (sudden, infrequent, not
reasonable preventable and not caused
by poor maintenance and or careless
operation). For example, to successfully
assert the affirmative defense, the source
must prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that excess emissions ‘‘[w]ere
caused by a sudden, infrequent, and
unavoidable failure of air pollution
control and monitoring equipment,
process equipment, or a process to
operate in a normal or usual manner
* * *.’’ The criteria also are designed to
ensure that steps are taken to correct the
malfunction, to minimize emissions in
accordance with 40 CFR 63.11895 of the
proposed rule and to prevent future
malfunctions. For example, the source
must prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that ‘‘[r]epairs were made as
expeditiously as possible when the
applicable emission limitations were
being exceeded * * * ’’ and that ‘‘[a]ll
possible steps were taken to minimize
the impact of the excess emissions on
ambient air quality, the environment
and human health * * *.’’ In any
judicial or administrative proceeding,
the Administrator may challenge the
assertion of the affirmative defense and,
if the respondent has not met its burden
of proving all of the requirements in the
affirmative defense, appropriate
penalties may be assessed in accordance
with section 113 of the CAA (see also 40
CFR 22.77).
V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule
The impacts presented in this section
include the impacts for PVC production
facilities to comply with the proposed
rule, and with the requirements of other
subparts referenced by the proposed
rule.
A. What are the air impacts?
We have estimated the potential
emission reductions that may be
realized through implementation of the
proposed emission standards. Table 10
of this preamble summarizes the
emission reductions for compliance for
each pollutant and emission point. The
analysis is documented in the
memorandum, Costs and Emission
Reductions of the Proposed Standards
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, and is available in the docket.
TABLE 10—EMISSION REDUCTIONS OF THE PROPOSED PVC AND COPOLYMERS PRODUCTION STANDARDS
Pollutant emission reductions (tpy)
Emission point
Vinyl
chloride
Process vents ......................................................................................................................
Stripped resin .......................................................................................................................
Wastewater ..........................................................................................................................
Equipment leaks ..................................................................................................................
Storage vessels ...................................................................................................................
Other emission sources .......................................................................................................
Heat exchange systems ......................................................................................................
Total ..............................................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
a Emission
0.085
129
0.40
0
0
0
5.3
2.26 a
853
0.40
680
0
0
35
135
1,570
CDD/CDF
(TEQ)
HCl
2.45E–08
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.45E–08
33
reductions for process vents are stated as total organic HAP; this value does not include HCl reductions.
We estimated emission reductions of
the proposed rule for each emission
point. For all emission points, we first
calculated emissions at the current level
of control for each facility (referred to as
the baseline level of control), and at the
proposed level of control. We calculated
emission reductions as the difference
between the proposed level and
baseline.
For process vents, we calculated
baseline emissions from the measured
HAP concentrations at the outlet of the
control devices, and HAP emissions
using the proposed emission limits, in
combination with the vent stream flow
rates measured during emission tests.
For stripped resins, we calculated
emissions assuming that all the HAP
remaining in the resin would eventually
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Total HAP
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
be emitted from processes downstream
of the resin stripper. This assumption
results in a calculation of the potential
emissions at the baseline stripped resin
concentration levels, and proposed
MACT concentration levels. Emissions
were calculated from the HAP
concentration in the stripped resin, and
the resin production rate.
For wastewater, we estimated the
emissions from the HAP concentration
in the uncontrolled wastewater streams,
in the controlled wastewater streams,
and the wastewater flow rates or
generation rates.
For equipment leaks, we estimated
emissions for the baseline LDAR
program in use at each facility, and the
proposed equipment leaks requirements
using model equipment counts, average
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
emission factors for leaking equipment
provided in previous EPA studies, and
control efficiencies for LDAR programs
provided in previous EPA studies.
Model equipment counts were used
because actual equipment counts were
not collected in survey questionnaires
sent to the industry. The survey
requested information only on
regulatory LDAR programs currently in
place at each facility, and the costs for
the facility to conduct the LDAR
program.
We calculated emissions from heat
exchange systems from emissions
information provided in information
survey responses provided by affected
sources. Emission reductions from heat
exchange systems were calculated
assuming that, once the LDAR program
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29558
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
was in effect, emissions would be
eliminated due to the low leak action
level that is being proposed.
necessary controls, monitoring devices,
inspections, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements to comply with
the proposed rule. Based on this
analysis, we anticipate an overall total
capital investment of 15.6 million, with
an associated total annualized cost of
B. What are the cost impacts?
We have estimated compliance costs
for all existing sources to add the
$19.7 million (using a discount rate of
7 percent), in 2010 dollars, as shown in
Table 11 of this preamble. We do not
anticipate the construction of any new
PVCPU in the next 5 years, and,
therefore, there are no new source cost
impacts.
TABLE 11—COST IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PVC AND COPOLYMERS PRODUCTION STANDARDS
Total capital
cost (million
2010$)
Emission Point
Process vents ......................................................................................................................................................
Stripped resin .......................................................................................................................................................
Wastewater ..........................................................................................................................................................
Equipment leaks ..................................................................................................................................................
Storage vessels ...................................................................................................................................................
Other emission sources .......................................................................................................................................
Heat exchange systems ......................................................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Total ..............................................................................................................................................................
We calculated costs to meet the
proposed level of control for each
emission point. For process vents, we
estimated costs to meet the proposed
level of control for PVCPU that do not
currently meet the proposed emission
limit, based on reported data. For such
PVCPU that currently use incinerators
in combination with acid-gas scrubbers,
we estimate the cost of compliance
through the use of enhanced vinyl
chloride recovery using a refrigerated
condenser to reduce the quantity of
vinyl chloride combusted to meet the
vinyl chloride, HCl, and total organic
HAP emission limits. If a PVCPU
needed only to meet the HCl emission
limit, we estimated the cost of
compliance using a packed bed scrubber
to reduce HCl emissions. To meet the
CDD/CDF levels, costs were based on
application of activated carbon injection
in combination with a fabric filter. For
PVCPU that currently use an absorber
for vinyl chloride recovery, cost
calculations were based on routing the
vent gas from the absorber to existing
incinerators. Costs calculations also
included capital and annual costs for
testing and monitoring of vinyl chloride,
HCl, total organic HAP, and CDD/CDF.
For PVCPU not currently meeting the
proposed stripped resin limits, costs to
meet the proposed level of control were
based on additional steam being used in
the resin stripper to further remove
vinyl chloride and total HAP from the
resin. Testing and monitoring costs were
also included in the costs to meet the
proposed level of control. We are aware
that there may be concerns about
applying additional heat to the resin
because it might degrade the product.
Therefore, we are requesting comment
on this cost assumption. We are also
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
requesting data on the performance of
resin strippers when additional steam is
added, and the limits that resin
strippers can achieve without degrading
the product. We note that the proposed
limits for stripped resins were
calculated, based on the resin analysis
data provided by surveyed facilities,
indicating that some facilities are
already achieving the emission limits
without affecting their products.
For PVCPU not currently meeting the
proposed wastewater stripper outlet
concentration limit, costs to meet the
proposed level of control were based on
additional steam being used in the
wastewater stripper to further remove
vinyl chloride. Annual costs also
include additional testing and
monitoring required to meet the
proposed level of control.
For equipment leaks, annual costs to
conduct LDAR programs were provided
by PVC production facilities in
responses to data collection surveys.
The average cost difference between
PVCPU complying with 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU and PVCPU complying with
other equipment leak standards, such as
40 CFR part 61, subpart V, was applied
to each PVCPU that did not already
meet the proposed level of control (i.e.,
40 CFR part 63, subpart UU). We
estimated additional costs for an
electronic PRD indicator, based on data
collected for other EPA projects. We
calculated costs for complying with the
proposed level for heat exchange
systems, based on information collected
for other EPA projects. No costs were
estimated for the remaining emission
points, because all affected sources
already meet the proposed levels of
control for them.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Total annualized
cost (million
2010$/yr)
12.5
0
0
3.14
0
0
0
3.4
14.5
0.791
0.638
0
0
0.309
15.6
19.7
The analysis is documented in the
memorandum, Costs and Emission
Reductions of the Proposed Standards
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, and is available in the docket.
C. What are the non-air quality health,
environmental, and energy impacts?
We anticipate affected sources would
need to apply additional controls to
meet the proposed emission limits.
These controls, such as steam strippers
and scrubbers, use water. We estimate
an annual requirement of 380 million
gallons per year of additional
wastewater would be generated as a
result of additional steam stripping of
PVC resin and water used for scrubbers.
We also anticipate 106 tpy of dust from
activated carbon usage that will need to
be disposed.
The energy impacts associated with
meeting the proposed emission limits
would consist primarily of additional
electricity needs to run added or
improved air pollution control devices.
By our estimate, we anticipate that an
additional 5,900 megawatt-hours per
year would be required for the
additional and improved control
devices.
We anticipate secondary air impacts
from adding controls to meet the
standards. The combustion of fuel
needed to generate additional electricity
would yield slight increases in nitrogen
oxide (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO),
and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions.
Since NOX and SO2 emissions and
electric generating units are covered by
capped emissions trading programs, we
do not estimate an increase in secondary
air impacts for these pollutants for this
rule form additional electricity demand.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
The combustion of additional fuel from
additional electrical usage and
supplemental fuel for incineration
devices would yield CO emissions of 1.3
tpy. The analyses are documented in the
memorandum, Secondary Impacts of
MACT Level of Control for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymer (PVC)
Production Source Category, and is
available in the docket.
D. What are the economic impacts of the
proposed standards?
We performed an economic impact
analysis for PVC consumers and
producers nationally, using the annual
compliance costs estimated for this
proposed rule. The impacts to producers
affected by this proposed rule are
annualized costs of less than 0.7 percent
of their revenues, using the most current
year available for revenue data. Prices
and output for PVC should increase by
no more than the impact on cost to
revenues for producers; thus, PVC
prices should increase by less than 0.7
percent. Hence, the overall economic
impact of this proposed rule should be
low on the affected industries and their
consumers. For more information,
please refer to the Economic Impact
Analysis for this proposed rulemaking
that is in the docket (EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because it
raises novel legal or policy issues.
Accordingly, EPA submitted this action
to OMB for review under Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), and any
changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this
action.
In addition, EPA prepared an analysis
of the potential costs and benefits
associated with this action. This
analysis is contained in Cost and
Impacts of the PVC and Copolymers
Proposed Standard, in Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. A copy of
the analysis is available in the docket
for this action and the analysis is briefly
summarized in section V.B of this
preamble.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
been submitted for approval to OMB
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The Information
Collection Request (ICR) document
prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA
ICR No. 2432.01.
The information requirements are
based on notification, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements in the
NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR
part 63, subpart A), which are
mandatory for all operators subject to
national emission standards. These
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements are specifically authorized
by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414).
All information submitted to EPA
pursuant to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for which a
claim of confidentiality is made is
safeguarded according to Agency
policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2,
subpart B.
The proposed rule would require
maintenance inspections of the control
devices, and some notifications or
reports beyond those required by the
General Provisions. The recordkeeping
requirements require only the specific
information needed to determine
compliance. The information collection
activities in this ICR include the
following: performance tests,
wastewater sampling, resin sampling,
LDAR monitoring, heat exchanger
monitoring, PRD monitoring, operating
parameter monitoring, preparation of a
site-specific monitoring plan,
monitoring and inspection, one-time
and periodic reports, and the
maintenance of records. Some
information collection activities
included in the NESHAP may occur
within the first 3 years, and are
presented in this burden estimate, but
may not occur until 4 or 5 years
following promulgation of the proposed
standards for some affected sources. To
be conservative in our estimate, the
burden for these items is included in
this ICR. An initial notification is
required to notify the Designated
Administrator of the applicability of this
subpart, and to identify storage vessels,
process vents, stripped resin, equipment
leaks, wastewater, heat exchange
systems, and other emission sources
subject to this subpart. A notification of
performance test must be submitted,
and a site-specific test plan written for
the performance test, along with a
monitoring plan. Following the initial
performance test, the owner or operator
must submit a notification of
compliance status that documents the
performance test and the values for the
operating parameters. A periodic report
submitted every 6 months documents
the values for the operating parameters
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29559
and deviations; a notification of
inspection of vessels and related
inspection records; leaking and
monitoring information for equipment
leaks; and leaking and monitoring data
for heat exchangers, if greater than leak
definition. Owners or operators of PVC
facilities are required to keep records of
certain parameters and information for a
period of 5 years. The annual testing,
annual monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping burden for this collection
(averaged over the first 3 years after the
effective date of the standards) is
estimated to be $2.5 million. This
includes 3,200 labor hours per year at a
total labor cost of $0.3 million per year,
and total non-labor capital costs of $3.3
million per year. This estimate includes
initial and annual performance tests,
conducting and documenting
semiannual excess emission reports,
maintenance inspections, developing a
monitoring plan, notifications, and
recordkeeping. Monitoring and testing
cost were also included in the cost
estimates presented in the control costs
impacts estimates in section V of this
preamble. The total burden for the
Federal government (averaged over the
first 3 years after the effective date of the
standard) is estimated to be 1,098 hours
per year, at a total labor cost of $50,482
per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.3(b).
When a malfunction occurs, sources
must report them according to the
applicable reporting requirements of 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. An
affirmative defense to civil penalties for
exceedances of emission limits that are
caused by malfunctions is available to a
source if it can demonstrate that certain
criteria and requirements are satisfied.
The criteria ensure that the affirmative
defense is available only where the
event that causes an exceedance of the
emission limit meets the narrow
definition of malfunction in 40 CFR 63.2
(e.g., sudden, infrequent, not reasonably
preventable and not caused by poor
maintenance or careless operation) and
where the source took necessary actions
to minimize emissions. In addition, the
source must meet certain notification
and reporting requirements. For
example, the source must prepare a
written root cause analysis and submit
a written report to the Administrator
documenting that it has met the
conditions and requirements for
assertion of the affirmative defense. EPA
considered whether there might be any
burden associated with the notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements associated with the
assertion of the affirmative defense.
While recognizing that any such
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29560
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
burdens are only incurred if there has
been a violation and a source chooses to
take advantage of the affirmative
defense. The PVC industry is currently
required to comply with the part 61
NESHAP requirement for releases from
pressure relief valves and reactor
manual vent valves, which does not
allow a discharge into the atmosphere
from these valves, except during an
emergency. An emergency discharge
means a ‘‘discharge which could not
have been avoided by taking measures
to prevent the discharge.’’ The owners or
operators must, within 10 days of any
release from a pressure relief valve or a
reactor manual vent valve, submit a
report to the Administrator. The report
must include the ‘‘nature and cause of
discharge, the date and time of the
discharge, the approximate total vinyl
chloride loss during the discharge, the
method used for determining the vinyl
chloride loss, the action that was taken
to prevent the discharge, and measures
adopted to prevent future discharges.
The costs for these reports are already
accounted for in the ICR burden
estimate. Therefore, EPA estimates that
there would be no additional costs for
sources that choose to take advantage of
the affirmative defense for malfunctions
since it is already required for
compliance with the rule. However,
there may be other malfunctions that are
not currently regulated under the part
61 NESHAP that might prompt a source
to take advantage of an affirmative
defense.
To provide the public with an
estimate of the relative magnitude of the
burden associated with an assertion of
the affirmative defense position adopted
by a source (for those not already
regulated under the part 61 NESHAP),
EPA is including in the ICR the
notification, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements associated with
the assertion of the affirmative defense
might entail. EPA’s estimate for the
required notification, reports, and
records, including the root cause
analysis, totals $3,141, and is based on
the time and effort required of a source
to review relevant data, interview plant
employees, and document the events
surrounding a malfunction that has
caused an exceedance of an emission
limit. The estimate also includes time to
produce and retain the record and
reports for submission to EPA. EPA
provides this illustrative estimate of this
burden because these costs are only
incurred if there has been a violation
and a source chooses to take advantage
of the affirmative defense.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
To comment on the Agency’s need for
this information, the accuracy of the
provided burden estimates, and any
suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, EPA has established
a public docket for this rule, which
includes this ICR, under Docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037.
Submit any comments related to the ICR
to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this notice
for where to submit comments to EPA.
Send comments to OMB at the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.
Since OMB is required to make a
decision concerning the ICR between 30
and 60 days after May 20, 2011, a
comment to OMB is best assured of
having its full effect if OMB receives it
by June 20, 2011. The final rule will
respond to any OMB or public
comments on the information collection
requirements contained in this proposal.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act, or any
other statute, unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of this proposed rule on small entities,
small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business, as defined by the Small
Business Administration’s regulations at
13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3)
a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated, and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of this proposed rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule will not impose any
requirements on small entities. To
EPA’s knowledge, there are no small
entities subject to the proposed rule. We
continue to be interested in the
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
potential impacts of the proposed rule
on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such
impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more for State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any
one year. The total annualized cost of
this rule is estimated to be no more than
$20 million (2010$) in any one year.
Thus, this rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of
UMRA.
This rule is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA,
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. This
rule only impacts PVC production
facilities, and, thus, does not impact
small governments uniquely or
significantly.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. The proposed
rule imposes requirements on owners
and operators of specified major and
area sources, and not on State or local
governments. There are no PVC
production facilities owned or operated
by State or local governments. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132,
and consistent with EPA policy to
promote communications between EPA
and State and local governments, EPA
specifically solicits comment on this
proposed action from State and local
officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have Tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). The proposed rule imposes
requirements on owners and operators
of specified area sources, and not Tribal
governments. There are no PVC
production facilities owned or operated
by Indian Tribal governments. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action. EPA specifically solicits
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
additional comment on this proposed
action from Tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying to those regulatory actions that
concern health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5–
501 of the Executive Order has the
potential to influence the regulation.
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045, because it is based solely
on technology performance.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
because it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. EPA
estimates that the requirements in this
proposed action would cause most
PVCPU to modify existing air pollution
control devices (e.g., increase the
horsepower of their wet scrubbers) or
install and operate new control devices,
resulting in approximately 92,000
megawatt-hours per year of additional
electricity being used.
Given the negligible change in energy
consumption resulting from this
proposed action, EPA does not expect
any significant price increase for any
energy type. The cost of energy
distribution should not be affected by
this proposed action at all since the
action would not affect energy
distribution facilities. We also expect
that any impacts on the import of
foreign energy supplies, or any other
adverse outcomes that may occur with
regards to energy supplies, would not be
significant. We, therefore, conclude that
if there were to be any adverse energy
effects associated with this proposed
action, they would be minimal.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No.
104–113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS) in its regulatory
activities, unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. VCS are
technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that
are developed or adopted by VCS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable VCS.
This proposed rulemaking involves
technical standards. EPA proposes to
use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, Flue
and Exhaust Gas Analyses, as an
acceptable alternative to EPA Method
3B. This standard is available from the
American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue,
New York, NY 10016–5990.
No applicable VCS were identified for
EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 21,
107, RCRA SW–846, PS–8, PS–9, and
the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method.
During the search, if the title or
abstract (if provided) of the VCS
described technical sampling and
analytical procedures that are similar to
EPA’s reference method, the EPA
ordered a copy of the standard and
reviewed it as a potential equivalent
method. All potential standards were
reviewed to determine the practicality
of the VCS for this rule. This review
requires significant method validation
data that meet the requirements of EPA
Method 301 for accepting alternative
methods or scientific, engineering, and
policy equivalence to procedures in
EPA reference methods. EPA may
reconsider determinations of
impracticality when additional
information is available for particular
VCS.
The search identified 17 other VCS
that were potentially applicable for this
rule in lieu of EPA reference methods.
After reviewing the available standards,
EPA determined that 17 candidate VCS
(ASTM D3154–00 (2006), ASTM
D3464–96 (2007), ASTM D3796–90
(2004), ISO 10780:1994, ASME B133.9–
1994 (2001), ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–
1981 Part 10, ISO 10396:1993 (2007),
ISO 12039:2001, ASTM D5835–95
(2007), ASTM D6522–00 (2005), CAN/
CSA Z223.2–M86 (1999), NIOSH
Method 2010, Amines, Aliphatic, ASTM
D6060–96 (2001), EN 1948–3 (1996), EN
1911–1.2.3 (1998), ASTM D6735–01,
ASTM D4855–97 (2002)) identified for
measuring emissions of pollutants or
their surrogates subject to emission
standards in the rule would not be
practical due to lack of equivalency,
documentation, validation data and
other important technical and policy
considerations.
EPA welcomes comments on this
aspect of the proposed rulemaking, and,
specifically, invites the public to
identify potentially applicable VCS, and
to explain why such standards should
be used in this regulation.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29561
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this
proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations,
because it increases the level of
environmental protection for all affected
populations without having any
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on any population, including any
minority or low-income population.
An analysis of demographic data
shows that the average percentage of
minorities, percentages of the
population below the poverty level, and
the percentages of the population 17
years old and younger, in close
proximity to the sources, are similar to
the national averages, with percentage
differences of 3, 1.8, and 1.7,
respectively, at the 3-mile radius of
concern. These differences in the
absolute number of percentage points
from the national average indicate a 9.4percent, 14.4-percent, and 6.6-percent
over-representation of minority
populations, populations below the
poverty level, and the percentages of the
population 17 years old and younger,
respectively.
In determining the aggregate
demographic makeup of the
communities near affected sources, EPA
used census data at the block group
level to identify demographics of the
populations considered to be living near
affected sources, such that they have
notable exposures to current emissions
from these sources. In this approach,
EPA reviewed the distributions of
different socio-demographic groups in
the locations of the expected emission
reductions from this rule. The review
identified those census block groups
with centroids within a circular
distance of a 0.5, 3, and 5 miles of
affected sources, and determined the
demographic and socio-economic
composition (e.g., race, income,
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29562
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
education, etc.) of these census block
groups. The radius of 3 miles (or
approximately 5 kilometers) has been
used in other demographic analyses
focused on areas around potential
sources.7 8 9 10 There was only one
census block group with its centroids
within 0.5 miles of any source affected
by the proposed rule. EPA’s
demographic analysis has shown that
these areas, in aggregate, have similar
proportions of American Indians,
African-Americans, Hispanics, and
‘‘Other and Multi-racial’’ populations to
the national average. The analysis also
showed that these areas, in aggregate,
had similar proportions of families with
incomes below the poverty level as the
national average, and similar
populations of children 17 years of age
and younger.11
EPA defines Environmental Justice to
include meaningful involvement of all
people regardless of race, color, national
origin, or income with respect to the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and polices. To promote
meaningful involvement, EPA has
developed a communication and
outreach strategy to ensure that
interested communities have access to
this proposed rule, are aware of its
content, and have an opportunity to
comment during the comment period.
During the comment period, EPA will
publicize the rulemaking via
environmental justice newsletters,
Tribal newsletters, environmental
justice listservs, and the Internet,
including the EPA Office of Policy
Rulemaking Gateway Web site (https://
yosemite.epa.gov/opei/RuleGate.nsf/).
EPA will also conduct targeted outreach
to environmental justice communities,
as appropriate. Outreach activities may
include providing general rulemaking
fact sheets (e.g., why is this important
for my community) for environmental
justice community groups, and
conducting conference calls with
interested communities. In addition,
7 U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office).
Demographics of People Living Near Waste
Facilities. Washington DC: Government Printing
Office; 1995.
8 Mohai P, Saha R. Reassessing Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Environmental Justice
Research. Demography. 2006;43(2): 383–399.
9 Mennis J. Using Geographic Information
Systems to Create and Analyze Statistical Surfaces
of Populations and Risk for Environmental Justice
Analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 2002;83(1):281–
297.
10 Bullard RD, Mohai P, Wright B, Saha R, et al.
Toxic Waste and Race at Twenty 1987–2007. United
Church of Christ. March, 2007.
11 The results of the demographic analysis are
presented in Review of Environmental Justice
Impacts: Polyvinyl Chloride, September 2010, a
copy of which is available in the docket.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
State and Federal permitting
requirements will provide State and
local governments, and members of
affected communities the opportunity to
provide comments on the permit
conditions associated with permitting
the sources affected by the proposed
rule.
3. Part 63 is amended by adding a
new subpart HHHHHHH to read as
follows:
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Sec.
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
What This Subpart Covers
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, is
proposed to be amended as follows:
Subpart HHHHHHH—National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production
§ 63.11860 What is the purpose of this
subpart?
§ 63.11865 Am I subject to the requirements
in this subpart?
§ 63.11870 What is the affected source of
this subpart?
§ 63.11871 What is the relationship to 40
CFR part 61, subpart F?
§ 63.11875 When must I comply with this
subpart?
Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and
Work Practice Standards
§ 63.11880 What emission limits, operating
limits, and standards must I meet?
PART 63—[AMENDED]
General Compliance Requirements
1. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
§ 63.11885 What parts of the General
Provisions apply to me?
§ 63.11890 What are my additional general
requirements for complying with this
subpart?
§ 63.11895 How do I establish an
affirmative defense for exceedance of an
emission limit during malfunction?
§ 63.11896 What am I required to do if I
make a process change to a PVCPU at my
affected source?
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart DDDDDD—[Amended]
2. Section 63.11140 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(2) and adding
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 63.11140
Am I subject to this subpart?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) An affected source is a new source
under this subpart if you commenced
construction or reconstruction of the
affected source on or after October 6,
2006 but prior to the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. An affected source
that commences construction or
reconstruction on and after the effective
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register is not subject to
this subpart and is required to comply
with subpart HHHHHHH of this part.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Each affected source that
commences construction or
reconstruction on and after the effective
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register is required to
comply with subpart HHHHHHH of this
part by the compliance dates specified
in subpart HHHHHHH. On and after the
compliance date specified in subpart
HHHHHHH of this part that applies to
your affected source, the requirements
in § 63.11140(d) and §§ 63.11141
through 63.11145 of this subpart do not
apply to the affected source.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Testing and Compliance Requirements
§ 63.11900 By what date must I conduct
initial performance testing and
monitoring, establish any applicable
operating limits, and demonstrate initial
compliance with my emission limits and
work practice standards?
§ 63.11905 When must I conduct
subsequent performance testing and
monitoring to demonstrate continuous
compliance?
§ 63.11910 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
storage vessels?
§ 63.11915 What are my compliance
requirements for equipment leaks?
§ 63.11920 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
heat exchange systems?
§ 63.11925 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
process vents?
§ 63.11930 What requirements must I meet
for closed vent systems?
§ 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS
requirements must I meet to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with
the emission standards for process vent
control devices, resin strippers, and
wastewater treatment processes?
§ 63.11940 What continuous monitoring
requirements must I meet for control
devices required to install CPMS to meet
the emission limits for process vents?
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
§ 63.11945 What performance testing
requirements must I meet for process
vents?
§ 63.11950 What emissions calculations
must I use for an emission profile by
process of my batch process operation?
§ 63.11955 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
other emission sources?
§ 63.11956 What are my compliance
requirements for ambient monitoring?
§ 63.11960 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
stripped resin?
§ 63.11965 What are my general compliance
requirements for wastewater?
§ 63.11970 What are my initial compliance
requirements for wastewater?
§ 63.11975 What are my continuous
compliance requirements for
wastewater?
§ 63.11980 What are my test methods and
calculation procedures for wastewater?
Notifications, Reports, and Records
§ 63.11985 What notifications and reports
must I submit and when?
§ 63.11990 What records must I keep?
§ 63.11995 In what form and how long must
I keep my records?
§ 63.12000 Who implements and enforces
this subpart?
Definitions
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Tables to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Emission Limits and Standards for
Existing Affected Sources
Table 2 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Emission Limits and Standards for New
Affected Sources
Table 3 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Emission Limits and Standards for
Wastewater for New and Existing
Affected Sources
Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Summary of Control Requirements for
Storage Vessels at New and Existing
Sources
Table 5 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Applicability of the General Provisions
to Part 63
Table 6 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Operating Parameters, Operating Limits,
and Data Monitoring, Recording, and
Compliance Frequencies for Process
Vent Control Devices, Resin Strippers,
and Wastewater Treatment Processes.
Table 7 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Toxic Equivalency Factors
Table 8 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Calibration and Accuracy Requirements
for Continuous Parameter Monitoring
Systems
Table 9 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Methods and Procedures for Conducting
Performance Tests for Process Vents
Table 10 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—
Methods and Procedures for Conducting
Performance Tests for Stripped Resin
and Wastewater
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
What This Subpart Covers
§ 63.11860
subpart?
What is the purpose of this
This subpart establishes national
emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants emitted from the production
of polyvinyl chloride and copolymers.
This subpart also establishes
requirements to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the
emission standards.
§ 63.11865 Am I subject to the
requirements in this subpart?
You are subject to this subpart if you
own or operate a polyvinyl chloride and
copolymers process unit (PVCPU) as
defined in § 63.12005 that is located at,
or is part of, a major source or an area
source as defined in § 63.2. Your PVCPU
is not subject to this subpart if it is a
research and development facility, as
defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean
Air Act.
§ 63.11870 What is the affected source of
this subpart?
§ 63.12005 What definitions apply to this
subpart?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Subpart HHHHHHH—National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production
(a) The affected source for this subpart
is each individual PVCPU.
(b) An existing affected source is one
for which construction was commenced
before May 20, 2011 at a major or area
source.
(c) A new affected source is one for
which construction is commenced on or
after May 20, 2011 at a major or area
source.
(d) If components of an existing
affected source are replaced such that
the replacement meets the definition of
reconstruction in § 63.2 and the
reconstruction commenced on or after
May 20, 2011, then the existing affected
source becomes a reconstructed source
and is subject to the relevant standards
for a new affected source. The
reconstructed source must comply with
the requirements for a new affected
source upon initial startup of the
reconstructed source or by the effective
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register, whichever is later.
§ 63.11871 What is the relationship to 40
CFR part 61, subpart F?
After the applicable compliance date
specified in § 63.11875(a), (b), or (c), an
affected source that is also subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F,
is required to comply with the
provisions of this subpart and not 40
CFR part 61, subpart F.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
§ 63.11875
subpart?
29563
When must I comply with this
(a) If you own or operate an existing
affected source, you must achieve
compliance with the applicable
provisions in this subpart no later than
3 years after the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. On or after the date 3
years after the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, any such existing
affected source is no longer subject to
the provisions of 40 CFR part 61,
subpart F.
(b) If you start up a new affected
source on or before the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, you must achieve
compliance with the provisions of this
subpart no later than the effective date
of publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. On or after the
effective date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register, any such
new affected source is not subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F.
(c) If you start up a new affected
source after the effective date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, you must achieve
compliance with the provisions of this
subpart upon startup of your affected
source. Upon startup, any such new
affected source is not subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F.
(d) You must meet the notification
requirements in §§ 63.9 and 63.11985
according to the dates specified in those
sections. Some of the notifications must
be submitted before you are required to
comply with the emission limits and
standards in this subpart.
Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and
Work Practice Standards
§ 63.11880 What emission limits, operating
limits, and standards must I meet?
(a) You must comply with each
emission limit and standard specified in
Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart that
applies to your existing affected source,
and you must comply with each
emission limit and standard specified in
Tables 2, 3, and 4 to this subpart that
applies to your new affected source.
(b) You must establish an operating
limit for each operating parameter
required to be monitored in §§ 63.11925,
63.11960, 63.11970, and 63.11975. As
specified in those sections, you must
establish each operating limit as an
operating range, minimum operating
level, or maximum operating level. You
must comply with each established
operating limit.
(c) You must comply with the
emission limits and standards specified
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29564
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
in §§ 63.11910 through 63.11980 that
apply to your affected source.
General Compliance Requirements
§ 63.11885 What parts of the General
Provisions apply to me?
Table 5 to this subpart specifies
which parts of the General Provisions in
subpart A of this part apply to you.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11890 What are my additional general
requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) The emission limits, operating
limits, and work practice standards
specified in this subpart apply at all
times, including periods of SSM.
(b) At all times, you must operate and
maintain your affected source, including
associated air pollution control
components and monitoring system
components, in a manner consistent
with safety and good air pollution
control practices for minimizing
emissions. 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 operation and maintenance
procedures, review of operation and
maintenance records, and inspection of
the source.
(c) You must install, calibrate,
maintain, and operate all monitoring
system components according to § 63.8,
§ 63.11935(b) and (c), and paragraphs
(c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Except for periods of monitoring
system malfunctions, repairs associated
with monitoring system malfunctions,
and required monitoring system quality
assurance or quality control activities
(including, as applicable, calibration
checks and required zero and span
adjustments), you must operate the
continuous monitoring system at all
times the affected source is operating. A
monitoring system malfunction is any
sudden, infrequent, not reasonably
preventable failure of the monitoring
system to provide data. Monitoring
system failures that are caused in part
by poor maintenance or careless
operation are not malfunctions. You are
required to complete monitoring system
repairs in response to monitoring
system malfunctions and to return the
monitoring system to operation as
expeditiously as practicable.
(2) You may not use data recorded
during monitoring system malfunctions,
repairs associated with monitoring
system malfunctions, or required
monitoring system quality assurance or
control activities in calculations used to
report emissions or operating levels.
You must use all the data collected
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
during all other required data collection
periods in assessing the operation of the
control device and associated control
system. You must report any periods for
which the monitoring system failed to
collect required data.
(d) A deviation means any of the cases
listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through (7) of
this section.
(1) Any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart, or an
owner or operator of such a source, fails
to meet any requirement or obligation
established by this subpart, including,
but not limited to, any emission limit,
operating limit, or work practice
standard.
(2) When a performance test indicates
that emissions of a pollutant in Table 1,
2, or 3 to this subpart are exceeding the
emission standard for the pollutant
specified in Table 1, 2, or 3 to this
subpart.
(3) When a 3-hour block average from
a continuous emissions monitor, as
required by § 63.11925(c), exceeds an
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart.
(4) When the average value of a
monitored operating parameter, based
on the data averaging period for
compliance specified in Table 6 to this
subpart, does not meet the operating
limit established in § 63.11880(b).
(5) When an affected source
discharges to the atmosphere from any
of the sources specified in paragraphs
(d)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) A pressure relief device, as defined
in § 63.12005.
(ii) A bypass, as defined in
§ 63.12005.
(iii) A closed vent system in vacuum
service.
(iv) A closure device on a pressure
vessel.
(6) Any instance in which the affected
source subject to this subpart, or an
owner or operator of such a source, fails
to meet any term or condition specified
in paragraph (d)(6)(i) or (ii) of this
section.
(i) Any term or condition that is
adopted to implement an applicable
requirement in this subpart.
(ii) Any term or condition that is
included in the operating permit for any
affected source required to obtain such
a permit.
(7) Any failure to collect required
data, except for periods of monitoring
system malfunctions, repairs associated
with monitoring system malfunctions,
and required monitoring system quality
assurance or quality control activities
(including, as applicable, calibration
checks and required zero and span
adjustments).
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
§ 63.11895 How do I establish an
affirmative defense for exceedance of an
emission limit during malfunction?
In response to an action to enforce the
standards set forth in § 63.11880, you
may assert an affirmative defense to a
claim for civil penalties for exceedances
of such standards that are caused by
malfunction, as defined in § 63.2.
Appropriate penalties may be assessed,
however, if you fail to meet your burden
of proving all of the requirements in the
affirmative defense. The affirmative
defense shall not be available for claims
for injunctive relief.
(a) To establish the affirmative
defense in any action to enforce such a
limit, you must timely meet the
notification requirements in paragraph
(b) of this section, and must prove by a
preponderance of evidence that:
(1) The excess emissions:
(i) Were caused by a sudden,
infrequent, and unavoidable failure of
air pollution control and monitoring
system devices, process components, or
a process to operate in a normal or usual
manner; and
(ii) Could not have been prevented
through careful planning, proper design,
or better operation and maintenance
practices; and
(iii) Did not stem from any activity or
event that could have been foreseen and
avoided, or planned for; and
(iv) Were not part of a recurring
pattern indicative of inadequate design,
operation, or maintenance; and
(2) Repairs were made as
expeditiously as possible when the
applicable emission limitations were
being exceeded. Off shift and overtime
labor were used, to the extent
practicable to make these repairs; and
(3) The frequency, amount, and
duration of the excess emissions
(including any bypass) were minimized
to the maximum extent practicable
during periods of such emissions; and
(4) If the excess emissions resulted
from a bypass of control device
components or a process, then the
bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss
of life, personal injury, or severe
property damage; and
(5) All possible steps were taken to
minimize the impact of the excess
emissions on ambient air quality, the
environment, and human health; and
(6) All emissions monitoring and
control systems were kept in operation,
if at all possible, consistent with safety
and good air pollution control practices;
and
(7) All of the actions in response to
the excess emissions were documented
by properly signed, contemporaneous
operating logs; and
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(8) At all times, the facility was
operated in a manner consistent with
good practices for minimizing
emissions; and
(9) A written root cause analysis has
been prepared, the purpose of which is
to determine, correct, and eliminate the
primary causes of the malfunction and
the excess emissions resulting from the
malfunction event at issue. The analysis
must also specify, using best monitoring
methods and engineering judgment, the
amount of excess emissions that were
the result of the malfunction.
(b) The owner or operator of the
facility experiencing an exceedance of
its emission limit(s) during a
malfunction must notify the
Administrator by telephone or facsimile
(FAX) transmission as soon as possible,
but no later than 2 working days after
the initial occurrence of the
malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself
of an affirmative defense to civil
penalties for that malfunction. The
owner or operator seeking to assert an
affirmative defense must also submit a
written report to the Administrator
within 45 days of the initial occurrence
of the exceedance of the standard in
§ 63.11880 to demonstrate, with all
necessary supporting documentation,
that it has met the requirements set forth
in paragraph (a) of this section. The
owner or operator may seek an
extension of this deadline for up to 30
additional days by submitting a written
request to the Administrator before the
expiration of the 45-day period. Until a
request for an extension has been
approved by the Administrator, the
owner or operator is subject to the
requirement to submit such report
within 45 days of the initial occurrence
of the exceedance.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11896 What am I required to do if I
make a process change to a PVCPU at my
affected source?
If you make a process change to an
existing affected source that does not
meet the criteria to become a new
affected source in § 63.11870(c), you
must comply with the requirements in
paragraph (a) of this section. If you
make a process change to a new affected
source, you must comply with the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this
section. If you must comply with the
provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section, you must also meet the testing
and reporting requirements in
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
Refer to § 63.12005 for the definition of
process changes.
(a) If you replace any components of
an existing affected source or make a
process change to an existing affected
source resulting in a change to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
characteristics of any emission point,
such that a different emission limit,
operating parameter limit, or work
practice requirement applies, and the
criteria to become a new affected source
in § 63.11870(c) are not met, you must
demonstrate that the changed or added
emission point is in compliance with
the applicable requirements for an
existing affected source. You must
demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limits and establish any
applicable operating limits in
§ 63.11880 within 180 days of the date
of start-up of the changed process unit.
You must demonstrate compliance with
any applicable work practice standards
upon startup of the changed process
unit.
(b) If you replace any components of
a new affected source, or make a process
change to a new affected source
resulting in a change to the
characteristics of any emission point,
such that a different emission limit,
operating parameter limit, or work
practice requirement applies, you must
demonstrate that all changed emission
points are in compliance with the
applicable requirements for a new
affected source. You must demonstrate
initial compliance with the emission
limits and establish any applicable
operating limits in § 63.11880 within
180 days of the date of startup of the
changed process unit. You must
demonstrate compliance with any
applicable work practice standards
upon startup of the changed process
unit.
(c) For process changes, you must
demonstrate continuous compliance
with your emission limits and
standards, operating limits, and work
practice standards according to the
procedures and frequency in
§§ 63.11910 through 63.11980.
(d) For process changes, you must
submit the report specified in
§ 63.11985(b)(4)(iii).
Testing and Compliance Requirements
§ 63.11900 By what date must I conduct
initial performance testing and monitoring,
establish any applicable operating limits,
and demonstrate initial compliance with my
emission limits and work practice
standards?
(a) For existing affected sources, you
must establish any applicable operating
limits required in § 63.11880 and
demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limits and standards specified
in Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart, as
applicable, no later than 180 days after
the compliance date specified in
§ 63.11875 and according to the
applicable provisions in § 63.7(a)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29565
(b) For existing affected sources, you
must demonstrate initial compliance
with any applicable work practice
standards required in § 63.11880 no
later than the compliance date specified
in § 63.11875 and according to the
applicable provisions in § 63.7(a)(2).
(c) For new or reconstructed affected
sources, you must establish any
applicable operating limits required in
§ 63.11880, and demonstrate initial
compliance with the emission limits
and standards specified in Tables 2, 3,
and 4 to this subpart, as applicable, no
later than 180 days after the effective
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register or within 180 days
after startup of the source, whichever is
later, according to § 63.7(a)(2)(ix).
(d) For new and reconstructed
affected sources, you must demonstrate
initial compliance with any applicable
work practice standards required in
§ 63.11880 no later than the startup date
of the affected source or the effective
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register, whichever is later,
and according to the applicable
provisions in § 63.7(a)(2).
(e) If you demonstrate initial
compliance using a performance test
and a force majeure is about to occur,
occurs, or has occurred for which you
intend to assert a claim of force majeure,
then you must follow the procedures in
§ 63.7(a)(4).
§ 63.11905 When must I conduct
subsequent performance testing and
monitoring to demonstrate continuous
compliance?
Following the date of your initial
demonstration of compliance in
§ 63.11900, you must conduct
subsequent performance testing and
monitoring to demonstrate continuous
compliance with your emission limits,
operating limits, and work practice
standards according to the procedures
and frequency in §§ 63.11910 through
63.11980. If you make a process change
as specified in § 63.11896, such that a
different emission limit or operating
parameter limit applies, you must
conduct a performance test according to
§ 63.11896.
§ 63.11910 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
storage vessels?
You must comply with the
requirements specified in Table 4 to this
subpart for each storage vessel.
(a) For each fixed roof storage vessel
used to comply with the requirements
specified in Table 4 to this subpart, you
must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this
section. If you elect to use a fixed roof
storage vessel vented to a closed vent
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29566
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
system and control device, the closed
vent system and control device must
meet the requirements in §§ 63.11925
through 63.11950.
(1) Design requirements. (i) The fixed
roof must be installed in a manner such
that there are no visible cracks, holes,
gaps, or other open spaces between roof
section joints or between the interface of
the roof edge and the tank wall.
(ii) Each opening in the fixed roof
must be equipped with a closure device
designed to operate such that when the
closure device is secured in the closed
position there are no visible cracks,
holes, gaps, or other open spaces in the
closure device or between the perimeter
of the opening and the closure device.
(2) Operating requirements. (i) Except
as specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this
section, the fixed roof must be installed
with each closure device secured in the
closed position.
(ii) Opening of closure devices or
removal of the fixed roof is allowed
under conditions specified in
paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) A closure device may be opened
or the roof may be removed when
needed to provide access.
(B) A conservation vent that vents to
the atmosphere is allowed during
normal operations to maintain the tank
internal operating pressure within tank
design specifications. Normal operating
conditions that may require these
devices to open are during those times
when the internal pressure of the
storage vessel is outside the internal
pressure operating range for the storage
vessel as a result of loading or
unloading operations or diurnal ambient
temperature fluctuations.
(3) Inspection and monitoring
requirements. (i) Visually inspect the
fixed roof and its closure devices for
defects initially and at least once per
calendar year except as specified in
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section.
Defects include, but are not limited to,
visible cracks, holes, or gaps in the roof
sections or between the roof and the
wall of the storage vessel; broken,
cracked, or otherwise damaged seals or
gaskets on closure devices; and broken
or missing hatches, access covers, caps,
or other closure devices.
(ii) The inspection requirement
specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this
section does not apply to parts of the
fixed roof that you determine are unsafe
to inspect because operating personnel
would be exposed to an imminent or
potential danger as a consequence of
complying with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of
this section, provided you comply with
the requirements specified in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) You prepare and maintain at the
plant site written documentation that
identifies all parts of the fixed roof that
are unsafe to inspect and explains why
such parts are unsafe to inspect.
(B) You develop and implement a
written plan and schedule to conduct
inspections the next time alternative
storage capacity becomes available and
the storage vessel can be emptied or
temporarily removed from service, as
necessary, to complete the inspection.
The required inspections must be
performed as frequently as practicable
but do not need to be performed more
than once per calendar year. You must
maintain a copy of the written plan and
schedule at the plant site.
(4) Repair requirements. (i) Make first
efforts to repair a defect no later than 5
days after detection, and complete
repair as soon as possible, but no later
than 45 days after detection. You must
comply with the requirements in this
paragraph (a)(4)(i) except as provided in
paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.
(ii) Repair of a defect may be delayed
beyond 45 days if you determine that
repair of the defect requires emptying or
temporary removal from service of the
storage vessel and no alternative storage
capacity is available at the site to accept
the removed material. In this case,
repair the defect the next time
alternative storage capacity becomes
available and the storage vessel can be
emptied or temporarily removed from
service.
(b) If you elect to use an internal
floating roof storage vessel or external
floating roof storage vessel to comply
with the requirements specified in Table
4 to this subpart, you must meet all
requirements of §§ 63.1060 through
63.1067 of subpart WW of this part for
internal floating roof storage vessels or
external floating roof storage vessels, as
applicable.
(c) For each pressure vessel used to
comply with the requirements specified
in Table 4 to this subpart, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) Whenever the pressure vessel is in
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) service,
you must operate the pressure vessel as
a closed system that does not vent to the
atmosphere, e.g., during filling,
emptying, and purging. The vent stream
during filling, emptying, and purging
must meet the process vent emission
limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, as
applicable, by routing to a closed vent
system and control device that is
designed and operated in accordance
with §§ 63.11925 through 63.11950.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(2) Each opening in the pressure
vessel must be equipped with a closure
device designed to operate such that
when the closure device is secured in
the closed position there are no visible
cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces
in the closure device or between the
perimeter of the opening and the closure
device.
(3) All potential leak interfaces must
be monitored annually for leaks using
the procedures specified in § 63.11915.
You must comply with the
recordkeeping provisions specified in
§ 63.11990(b) and the reporting
provisions specified in § 63.11985(a)(1),
(b)(1), and (c)(8). For any leak detected,
you must submit the report specified in
paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
(4) Pressure vessel closure devices
must not discharge to the atmosphere.
Any such release (e.g., leak) constitutes
a violation of this rule. Within 10 days
of any such release, you must submit to
the Administrator the report specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required
even if you elect to follow the
procedures specified in § 63.11895 to
establish an affirmative defense.
§ 63.11915 What are my compliance
requirements for equipment leaks?
For equipment (as defined in
§ 63.12005) in HAP service, you must
comply with the requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (c) of this
section.
(a) Requirement for certain equipment
in subpart UU of this part. You must
comply with §§ 63.1020 through
63.1025, § 63.1027, and §§ 63.1029
through 63.1039 of subpart UU of this
part.
(b) Requirements for pumps,
compressors, and agitator seals. You
must meet the requirements specified
for each type of equipment in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this
section. For each type of equipment
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(5) of this section, you must also meet
the requirements of paragraph (a) of this
section.
(1) Rotating pumps. HAP emissions
from seals on all rotating pumps in HAP
service are to be minimized by installing
sealless pumps, pumps with double
mechanical seals or equivalent
equipment, or procedures approved by
the Administrator. If double mechanical
seals are used, HAP emissions from the
seals are to be minimized by
maintaining the pressure between the
two seals so that any leak that occurs is
into the pump; by ducting any HAP
between the two seals through a control
system from which the concentration of
HAP in the exhaust gases does not
exceed 10 parts per million; or
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
equivalent equipment or procedures
approved by the Administrator.
(2) Reciprocating pumps. HAP
emissions from seals on all
reciprocating pumps in HAP service are
to be minimized by installing double
outboard seals, or equivalent equipment
or procedures approved by the
Administrator. If double outboard seals
are used, HAP emissions from the seals
are to be minimized by maintaining the
pressure between the two seals so that
any leak that occurs is into the pump;
by ducting any HAP between the two
seals through a control system from
which the concentration of HAP in the
exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm;
or equivalent equipment or procedures
approved by the Administrator.
(3) Rotating compressors. HAP
emissions from seals on all rotating
compressors in HAP service are to be
minimized by installing compressors
with double mechanical seals, or
equivalent equipment, or procedures
approved by the Administrator. If
double mechanical seals are used, HAP
emissions from the seals are to be
minimized by maintaining the pressure
between the two seals so that any leak
that occurs is into the compressor; by
ducting any HAP between the two seals
through a control system from which
the concentration of HAP in the exhaust
gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or
equivalent equipment or procedures
approved by the Administrator.
(4) Reciprocating compressors. HAP
emissions from seals on all
reciprocating compressors in HAP
service are to be minimized by installing
double outboard seals, or equivalent
equipment, or procedures approved by
the Administrator. If double outboard
seals are used, HAP emissions from the
seals are to be minimized by
maintaining the pressure between the
two seals so that any leak that occurs is
into the compressor; by ducting any
HAP between the two seals through a
control system from which
concentration of HAP in the exhaust
gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or
equivalent equipment or procedures
approved by the Administrator.
(5) Agitators. HAP emissions from
seals on all agitators in HAP service are
to be minimized by installing agitators
with double mechanical seals, or
equivalent equipment, or procedures
approved by the Administrator. If
double mechanical seals are used, HAP
emissions from the seals are to be
minimized by maintaining the pressure
between the two seals so that any leak
that occurs is into the agitated vessel; by
ducting any HAP between the two seals
through a control system from which
the concentration of HAP in the exhaust
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or
equivalent equipment or procedures
approved by the Administrator.
(c) Requirements for pressure relief
devices. For pressure relief devices, you
must meet the requirements of this
paragraph (c) and paragraph (a) of this
section. Any release to the atmosphere
from a pressure relief device in HAP
service, as defined in § 63.12005,
constitutes a violation of this rule. You
must install, maintain, and operate
release indicators as specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section
unless the pressure relief device meets
the process vent emission limits in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart by routing
to a closed vent system and control
device designed and operated in
accordance with the requirements in
§§ 63.11925 through 63.11950. For any
pressure relief devices, you must
comply with the recordkeeping
provisions in § 63.11990(c) and
reporting provisions in
§§ 63.11985(a)(2), (b)(2), and (c)(8). For
any release, you must submit the report
specified in § 63.11985(c)(8), as
described in paragraph (c)(3) of this
section.
(1) A release indicator must be
properly installed on each pressure
relief device in such a way that it will
indicate when an emission release has
occurred.
(2) Each indicator must be equipped
with an alert system that will notify an
operator immediately and automatically
when the pressure relief device is open.
The alert must be located such that the
signal is detected and recognized easily
by an operator.
(3) For any instance that the release
indicator indicates that a pressure relief
device is open, you must notify
operators that a pressure release has
occurred, and, within 10 days of the
release, you must submit to the
Administrator the report specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required
even if you elect to follow the
procedures specified in § 63.11895(b) to
establish an affirmative defense.
§ 63.11920 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
heat exchange systems?
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, you must perform
monitoring to identify leaks of total
strippable volatile organic compounds
from each heat exchange system subject
to the requirements of this subpart
according to the procedures in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Monitoring locations for closedloop recirculation heat exchange
systems. You must collect and analyze
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29567
a sample from the location(s) described
in either paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this
section.
(i) Each cooling tower return line
prior to exposure to air for each heat
exchange system.
(ii) Selected heat exchanger exit
line(s) so that each heat exchanger or
group of heat exchangers within a heat
exchange system is covered by the
selected monitoring location(s).
(2) Monitoring locations for oncethrough heat exchange systems. You
must collect and analyze a sample from
the location(s) described in paragraph
(a)(2)(i) of this section. You may also
elect to collect and analyze an
additional sample from the location(s)
described in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this
section.
(i) Selected heat exchanger exit line(s)
so that each heat exchanger or group of
heat exchangers within a heat exchange
system is covered by the selected
monitoring location(s).
(ii) The inlet water feed line for a
once-through heat exchange system
prior to any heat exchanger. If multiple
heat exchange systems use the same
water feed (i.e., inlet water from the
same primary water source), you may
monitor at one representative location
and use the monitoring results for that
sampling location for all heat exchange
systems that use that same water feed.
(3) Monitoring method. Determine the
total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration at each
monitoring location using the analytical
method specified in either paragraph
(a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Determine the total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration (in parts per million by
volume) as methane from the air
stripping testing system using ‘‘Air
Stripping Method (Modified El Paso
Method) for Determination of Volatile
Organic Compound Emissions from
Water Sources,’’ Revision Number One,
dated January 2003, Sampling
Procedures Manual, Appendix P:
Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by
Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, January 31, 2003 (incorporated
by reference, see § 63.14) using a flame
ionization detector analyzer.
(ii) Determine the total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration (in parts per billion by
weight) in the cooling water using
Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and
Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization
and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors,’’ dated December 1996
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14).
The target list of compounds shall be
generated based on a pre-survey sample
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29568
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
and analysis by gas chromatography/
mass spectrometry and process
knowledge to include all compounds
that can potentially leak into the cooling
water. If Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and
Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization
and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors,’’ dated December 1996
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14)
is not applicable for all compounds that
can potentially leak into the cooling
water for a given heat exchange system,
you cannot use this monitoring method
for that heat exchange system.
(4) Monitoring frequency. Determine
the total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration at each
monitoring location at the frequencies
specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) For heat exchange systems for
which you have not delayed repair of
any leaks, monitor at the frequencies
specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) For heat exchange systems at an
existing affected source, monitor at least
monthly. You may elect to monitor
more frequently than the minimum
frequency specified in this paragraph
(a)(4)(i)(A).
(B) For heat exchange systems at a
new affected source, monitor at least
once every 12 hours. You may elect to
monitor more frequently than the
minimum frequency specified in this
paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B).
(ii) For heat exchange systems for
which you have delayed repair, as
provided in paragraph (f) of this section,
monitor at least monthly. You may elect
to monitor more frequently than the
minimum frequency specified in this
paragraph (a)(4)(ii).
(iii) If you elected to monitor the inlet
water feed line for a once-through heat
exchange system, as provided in
paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, you
must monitor the inlet water feed line
at the same frequency used to monitor
the heat exchange exit line(s), as
required in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section.
(b) A heat exchange system is exempt
from the monitoring requirements in
paragraph (a) of this section if it meets
the criteria in either paragraph (b)(1) or
(2) of this section.
(1) All heat exchangers within the
heat exchange system operate with the
minimum pressure on the cooling water
side at least 35 kilopascals greater than
the maximum pressure on the process
side.
(2) The heat exchange system does not
contain any heat exchangers.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(c) The leak action level is specified
in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) For a heat exchange system at an
existing affected source, the leak action
level is a total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration (as methane)
in the stripping gas of 2.9 parts per
million by volume or a total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration in the cooling water of 38
parts per billion by weight.
(2) For a heat exchange system at a
new affected source, the leak action
level is a total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration (as methane)
in the stripping gas of 2.3 parts per
million by volume or a total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration in the cooling water of 30
parts per billion by weight.
(d) A leak is defined as specified in
paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) For once-through heat exchange
systems for which you monitor the inlet
water feed, as described in paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section, a leak is
detected if the difference in the
measurement value of the sample taken
from a location specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(i) of this section and the
measurement value of the
corresponding sample taken from the
location specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)
of this section equals or exceeds the leak
action level.
(2) For all other heat exchange
systems, a leak is detected if a
measurement value taken according to
the requirements in paragraph (a) of this
section equals or exceeds the leak action
level.
(e) If a leak is detected, you must
repair the leak to reduce the measured
concentration to below the applicable
action level as soon as practicable, but
no later than 45 days after identifying
the leak, except as specified in
paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section.
Repair includes re-monitoring as
specified in paragraph (a) of this section
to verify that the measured
concentration is below the applicable
action level. Actions that you can take
to achieve repair include but are not
limited to any action specified in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this
section.
(1) Physical modifications to the
leaking heat exchanger, such as welding
the leak or replacing a tube.
(2) Blocking the leaking tube within
the heat exchanger.
(3) Changing the pressure so that
water flows into the process fluid.
(4) Replacing the heat exchanger or
heat exchanger bundle.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(5) Isolating, bypassing, or otherwise
removing the leaking heat exchanger
from service until it is otherwise
repaired.
(f) If you detect a leak when
monitoring a cooling tower return line
or heat exchanger exit line under
paragraph (a) of this section, you may
conduct additional monitoring
following the requirements in paragraph
(a) of this section to further isolate each
heat exchanger or group of heat
exchangers in regulated material service
within the heat exchange system for
which the leak was detected. If you do
not detect any leaks when conducting
additional monitoring for each heat
exchanger or group of heat exchangers,
the heat exchange system is excluded
from repair requirements in paragraph
(d) of this section.
(g) The delay of repair action level is
defined as either a total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration (as methane) in the
stripping gas of 29 parts per million by
volume or a total strippable volatile
organic compounds concentration in the
cooling water of 380 parts per billion by
weight. You may delay the repair of a
leaking heat exchanger when one of the
conditions in paragraphs (g)(1) or (2) of
this section is met. You must determine
if a delay of repair is necessary as soon
as practicable, but no later than 45 days
after first identifying the leak.
(1) If the repair is technically
infeasible without a shutdown and the
total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration is initially
and remains less than the delay of repair
action level for all monitoring periods
during the delay of repair, you may
delay repair until the next scheduled
shutdown of the heat exchange system.
If, during subsequent monitoring, the
total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration is equal to or
greater than the delay of repair action
level, you must repair the leak within 30
days of the monitoring event in which
the total strippable volatile organic
compounds was equal to or exceeded
the delay of repair action level.
(2) If the necessary equipment, parts,
or personnel are not available and the
total strippable volatile organic
compounds concentration (as methane)
is initially and remains less than the
delay of repair action level for all
monitoring periods during the delay of
repair, you may delay the repair for a
maximum of 120 days from the day the
leak was first identified. You must
demonstrate that the necessary
equipment, parts, or personnel were not
available. If, during subsequent monthly
monitoring, the total strippable volatile
organic compounds concentration is
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
equal to or greater than the delay of
repair action level, you must repair the
leak within 30 days of the monitoring
event in which the leak was equal to or
exceeded the total strippable volatile
organic compounds delay of repair
action level.
(h) To delay the repair under
paragraph (g) of this section, you must
record the information in paragraphs
(h)(1) through (h)(4) of this section.
(1) The reason(s) for delaying repair.
(2) A schedule for completing the
repair as soon as practical.
(3) The date and concentration of the
leak as first identified and the results of
all subsequent monitoring events during
the delay of repair.
(4) An estimate of the potential
emissions from the leaking heat
exchange system following the
procedures in paragraphs (g)(4)(i) and
(g)(4)(ii) of this section.
(i) Determine the total strippable
volatile organic compounds
concentration in the cooling water, in
parts per billion by weight. If the
Modified El Paso Method is used,
calculate the total strippable volatile
organic compounds concentration in the
cooling water using equation 7–1 from
‘‘Air Stripping Method (Modified El
Paso Method) for Determination of
Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
from Water Sources,’’ Revision Number
One, dated January 2003, Sampling
Procedures Manual, Appendix P:
Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by
Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, January 31, 2003 (incorporated
by reference, see § 63.14) and the total
strippable volatile organic compounds
concentration measured in the stripped
air.
(ii) Calculate the emissions for the
leaking heat exchange system by
multiplying the volatile organic
compounds concentration in the cooling
water, parts per billion by weight, by the
flow rate of the cooling water at the
selected monitoring location and by the
expected duration of the delay. The flow
rate may be based on direct
measurement, pump curves, heat
balance calculations, or other
engineering methods.
§ 63.11925 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
process vents?
Each process vent must meet the
requirements of paragraphs (a) through
(f) of this section.
(a) Emission limits. Each process vent
stream must meet the emission limits in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart prior to the
vent stream being exposed to the
atmosphere. The emission limits in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart apply at all
times.
(b) Closed vent systems and control
devices. Each control device used to
comply with paragraph (a) of this
section must meet the requirements of
§§ 63.11925 and 63.11940, and all
process vent streams treated by the
control device must be routed through
a closed vent system meeting the
requirements in § 63.11930. You must
not use a flare to comply with the
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart.
(c) General monitoring requirements.
Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (3) of this section, for each
control device used to comply with the
process vent emission limit specified in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you must
install and operate a continuous
parameter monitoring systemsCPMS to
monitor each operating parameter
specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i) to
comply with your operating limit(s)
required in § 63.11880(b)
(1) Hydrogen chloride continuous
emission monitoring system (CEMS).
According to the schedule specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section, respectively, new affected
sources must comply with paragraph
(c)(1)(i) of this section, and existing
affected sources must comply with
paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, in
lieu of establishing operating limits in
§ 63.11880(b) and using CPMS to
comply with the operating limits, as
specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i).
(i) New affected sources, beginning no
more than 6-months after the date of
promulgation of a performance
specification for hydrogen chloride
CEMS, must install and operate a
hydrogen chloride CEMS to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with
the hydrogen chloride emission limit for
process vents, as specified in paragraphs
(d)(2) through (4) and (e) of this section.
(ii) Existing affected sources, upon
promulgation of a performance
specification for hydrogen chloride
CEMS, have the option to install a
hydrogen chloride CEMS to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with
the hydrogen chloride emission limit for
process vents, as specified in paragraphs
(d) and (e) of this section.
(2) Dioxin/furan CEMS. According to
the schedule specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section,
respectively, new affected sources must
comply with paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section, and existing affected sources
must comply with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of
this section, in lieu of establishing
operating limits in § 63.11880(b) and
using CPMS to comply with the
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29569
operating limits as specified in
§ 63.11940(a) through (i):
(i) New affected sources, beginning no
more than 6 months after the date of
promulgation of a performance
specification for dioxin/furan CEMS,
must install and operate a dioxin/furan
CEMS to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the dioxin/
furan emission limit for process vents,
as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) through
(4) and (e) of this section.
(ii) Existing sources, upon
promulgation of a performance
specification for dioxin/furan CEMS,
have the option to install a dioxin/furan
CEMS to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the
dioxins/furan emission limit for process
vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2)
through (4) and (e) of this section.
(3) Total hydrocarbon CEMS. In lieu
of establishing operating limits in
§ 63.11880(b) and using CPMS to
comply with the operating limits as
specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i),
new and existing affected sources have
the option to install a total hydrocarbon
CEMS to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the total
organic HAP emission limit for process
vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2)
through (4) and (e) of this section.
(d) Initial compliance. To demonstrate
initial compliance with the process vent
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart, you must comply with
paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this
section.
(1) You must conduct an initial
inspection as specified in § 63.11930(d)
for each closed vent system.
(2) For each CEMS and CPMS
required or that you elect to use as
specified in paragraph (c) of this
section, you must prepare the quality
control program and site-specific
performance evaluation test plan
specified in § 63.11935(b) and sitespecific monitoring plan specified in
§ 63.11935(c), respectively.
(3) For each CEMS and CPMS
specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section, you must install, operate, and
maintain the CEMS and CPMS as
specified in §§ 63.11935(b) and (c),
respectively, and you must conduct an
initial site-specific performance
evaluation test according to your sitespecific monitoring plan and
§§ 63.11935(b)(3) and (c)(4),
respectively.
(4) For each emission limit for which
you use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must demonstrate
initial compliance with the emission
limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart
based on 3-hour block averages of CEMS
data collected at the minimum
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29570
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
frequency specified in §§ 63.11935(b)(2)
and 63.11890(c), and calculated using
the data reduction method specified in
§ 63.11935(e). For a CEMS used on a
batch operation, you may use a data
averaging period based on an operating
block in lieu of the 3-hour averaging
period.
(5) For each emission limit for which
you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must meet the
requirements of paragraphs (d)(5)(i)
through (iii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct an initial
performance test according to the
requirements in § 63.11945 to
demonstrate compliance with the total
organic HAP, vinyl chloride, hydrogen
chloride, or dioxin/furan emission limit
in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
(ii) During the performance test
specified in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of this
section, for each CPMS installed and
operated as specified in paragraph (d)(2)
of this section, you must establish an
operating limit as the operating
parameter range, minimum operating
parameter level, or maximum operating
parameter level specified in
§ 63.11935(d). Each operating limit must
be based on the data averaging period
for compliance specified in Table 6 to
this subpart using data collected at the
minimum frequency specified in
§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and
calculated using the data reduction
method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a
CPMS used on a batch operation, you
may use a data averaging period based
on an operating block in lieu of the
averaging period specified in Table 6 to
this subpart.
(e) Continuous compliance. To
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the emission limits in Table 1 or
2 to this subpart for each process vent,
you must comply with paragraphs (e)(1)
through (5) of this section.
(1) You must meet the requirements
in § 63.11930 for each closed vent
system.
(2) You must operate and maintain
each CEMS and CPMS required in
paragraph (c) of this section as specified
in § 63.11935(b) and (c), respectively.
(3) For each emission limit for which
you use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct a periodic sitespecific CEMS performance evaluation
test according to your quality control
program and site-specific performance
evaluation test plan specified in
§ 63.11935(b)(1).
(ii) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limits in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based on 3-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
hour block averages of CEMS data, the
minimum data collection frequency
specified in §§ 63.11935(b)(2) and
63.11890(c), and the data reduction
method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a
CEMS used on a batch operation, you
may use a data averaging period based
on an operating block in lieu of the 3hour averaging period.
(4) For each emission limit for which
you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must meet the
requirements of paragraphs (e)(4)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(i) Except for hydrogen chloride, you
must conduct an annual performance
test according to the requirements in
§ 63.11945 for each pollutant in Table 1
or 2 to this subpart.
(ii) For each CPMS operated and
maintained as specified in paragraph
(e)(2) of this section, you must meet the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(e)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) You must conduct periodic sitespecific CPMS performance evaluation
tests according to your site-specific
monitoring plan and § 63.11935(c).
(B) For each control device being
monitored, you must continuously
collect CPMS data consistent with
§ 63.11890(c) and your site-specific
monitoring plan. You must
continuously determine the average
value of each monitored operating
parameter based on the data collection
and reduction methods specified in
§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11935(e), and
the applicable data averaging period for
compliance specified in Table 6 to this
subpart for all periods the process is
operating. For a CPMS used on a batch
operation, you may use a data averaging
period based on an operating block in
lieu of the averaging periods specified
in Table 6 to this subpart.
(C) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with each operating limit
established in paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of
this section using these average values
calculated in paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(B) of
this section.(5) Each closed vent systems
and control device used to comply with
an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart must be operated at all times
when emissions are vented to, or
collected by, these systems or devices.
(f) To demonstrate compliance with
the dioxin/furan toxic equivalency
emission limit specified in Table 1 or 2
to this subpart, you must determine
dioxin/furan toxic equivalency as
specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3)
of this section.
(1) Measure the concentration of each
dioxin/furan tetra-through
octachlorinated-congener emitted using
Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A–7.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(2) For each dioxin/furan (tetrathrough octachlorinated) congener
measured in accordance with paragraph
(f)(1) of this section, multiply the
congener concentration by its
corresponding toxic equivalency factor
specified in Table 7 to this subpart.
(3) Sum the products calculated in
accordance with paragraph (f)(2) of this
section to obtain the total concentration
of dioxins/furans emitted in terms of
toxic equivalency.
§ 63.11930 What requirements must I meet
for closed vent systems?
(a) General. To route emissions from
process vents subject to the HAP
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart to a control device, you must
use a closed vent system and meet the
requirements of this section and all
provisions referenced in this section.
However, if you operate and maintain
your closed vent system in vacuum
service as defined in § 63.12005, you
must meet the requirements in
paragraph (h) of this section and are not
required to meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
section.
(b) Collection of emissions. Each
closed vent system must be designed
and operated to collect the HAP vapors
from the process vent, and to route the
collected vapors to a control device.
(c) Bypass. For each closed vent
system that contains a bypass as defined
in § 63.12005 (e.g., diverting a vent
stream away from the control device or
causing air intrusion into the control
device), you must not discharge to the
atmosphere through the bypass. Any
such release constitutes a violation of
this rule. The use of any bypass diverted
to the atmosphere during a performance
test invalidates the performance test.
You must comply with the provisions of
either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this
section for each closed vent system that
contains a bypass that could divert a
vent stream to the atmosphere.
(1) Bypass flow indicator. Install,
maintain, and operate a flow indicator
as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(i) The flow indicator must be
properly installed at the entrance to any
bypass.
(ii) The flow indicator must be
equipped with an alarm system that will
alert an operator immediately, and
automatically when flow is detected in
the bypass. The alarm must be located
such that the alert is detected and
recognized easily by an operator.
(iii) If the alarm is triggered, you must
immediately initiate procedures to
identify the cause of the alarm. If any
closed vent system has discharged to the
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
atmosphere through a vent or bypass,
you must initiate procedures to stop the
bypass discharge.
(iv) For any instances where the flow
indicator alarm is triggered, you must
submit to the Administrator within 10
days of the discharge the report
specified in § 63.11985(c)(8). This report
is required even if you elect to follow
the procedures specified in § 63.11895
to establish an affirmative defense and
submit the reports specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(4).
(2) Bypass valve configuration. Secure
the bypass valve in the non-diverting
position with a car-seal or a lock-andkey type configuration.
(i) You must visually inspect the seal
or closure mechanism at least once
every month to verify that the valve is
maintained in the non-diverting
position, and the vent stream is not
diverted through the bypass. A broken
seal or closure mechanism or a diverted
valve constitutes a violation from the
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart. You must maintain the records
specified in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this
section.
(ii) For each seal or closure
mechanism, you must comply with
either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of
this section.
(A) For each instance that you change
the bypass valve to the diverting
position, you must submit to the
Administrator within 10 days of the
action the report specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required
even if you elect to follow the
procedures specified in § 63.11895 to
establish an affirmative defense and
submit the reports specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(4).
(B) You must install, maintain, and
operate a bypass flow indicator as
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this section and you must meet the
requirements in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) and
(iv) of this section for each instance that
the flow indicator alarm is triggered.
(d) Closed vent system inspection and
monitoring requirements. Except as
provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this
section, you must inspect each closed
vent system as specified in paragraph
(d)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) Hard-piping inspection. If the
closed vent system is constructed of
hard-piping, you must comply with the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Conduct an initial inspection
according to the procedures in
paragraph (e) of this section.
(ii) Conduct annual inspections for
visible, audible, or olfactory indications
of leaks.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(2) Ductwork inspection. If the closed
vent system is constructed of ductwork,
you must conduct initial and annual
inspections according to the procedures
in paragraph (e) of this section.
(3) Equipment that is unsafe to
inspect. You may designate any parts of
the closed vent system as unsafe to
inspect if you determine that personnel
would be exposed to an immediate
danger as a consequence of complying
with the initial and annual closed vent
system inspection requirements of this
subpart.
(e) Closed vent system inspection
procedures. Except as provided in
paragraph (e)(4) of this section, you
must comply with all provisions of
paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3) of this
section.
(1) General. Inspections must be
performed during periods when HAP is
being collected by or vented through the
closed vent system. A leak is indicated
by an instrument reading greater than
500 parts per million by volume above
background or by visual inspection.
(2) Inspection procedures. Each
closed vent system subject to this
paragraph (e)(2) must be inspected
according to the procedures specified in
paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (vii) of this
section.
(i) Inspections must be conducted in
accordance with Method 21 at 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A–7, except as
otherwise specified in this section.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph
(e)(2)(iii) of this section, the detection
instrument must meet the performance
criteria of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A–7, except the instrument
response factor criteria in section 8.1.1.2
of Method 21 must be for the
representative composition of the
process fluid and not of each individual
volatile organic compound in the
stream. For process streams that contain
nitrogen, air, water, or other inerts that
are not organic HAP or volatile organic
compound, the representative stream
response factor must be determined on
an inert-free basis. You may determine
the response factor at any concentration
for which you will monitor for leaks.
(iii) If no instrument is available at the
plant site that will meet the
performance criteria of Method 21 at 40
CFR part 60, appendix A–7 specified in
paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, the
instrument readings may be adjusted by
multiplying by the representative
response factor of the process fluid,
calculated on an inert-free basis as
described in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this
section.
(iv) The detection instrument must be
calibrated before use on each day of its
use by the procedures specified in
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29571
Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A–7.
(v) Calibration gases must be as
specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(v)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) Zero air (less than 10 parts per
million by volume hydrocarbon in air).
(B) Mixtures of methane in air at a
concentration less than 10,000 parts per
million by volume. A calibration gas
other than methane in air may be used
if the instrument does not respond to
methane or if the instrument does not
meet the performance criteria specified
in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section. In
such cases, the calibration gas may be a
mixture of one or more of the
compounds to be measured in air.
(C) If the detection instrument’s
design allows for multiple calibration
scales, then the lower scale must be
calibrated with a calibration gas that is
no higher than 2,500 parts per million
by volume.
(D) Perform a calibration drift
assessment, at a minimum, at the end of
each monitoring day. Check the
instrument using the same calibration
gas(es) that were used to calibrate the
instrument before use. Follow the
procedures specified in Method 21 at 40
CFR part 60, appendix A–7, Section
10.1, except do not adjust the meter
readout to correspond to the calibration
gas value. Record the instrument
reading for each scale used as specified
in paragraph (g)(4) of this section.
Divide these readings by the initial
calibration values for each scale and
multiply by 100 to express the
calibration drift as a percentage. If any
calibration drift assessment shows a
negative drift of more than 10 percent
from the initial calibration value, then
all equipment monitored since the last
calibration with instrument readings
below the appropriate leak definition
and above the leak definition multiplied
by the value specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(v)(D)(1) of this section must be remonitored. If any calibration drift
assessment shows a positive drift of
more than 10 percent from the initial
calibration value, then, at your
discretion, all equipment since the last
calibration with instrument readings
above the appropriate leak definition
and below the leak definition multiplied
by the value specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(v)(D)(2) of this section may be remonitored.
(1) 100 minus the percent of negative
drift, divided by 100.
(2) 100 plus the percent of positive
drift, divided by 100.
(vi) You may elect to adjust or not
adjust instrument readings for
background. If you elect not to adjust
readings for background, all such
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29572
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
instrument readings must be compared
directly to 500 parts per million by
volume to determine whether there is a
leak. If you elect to adjust instrument
readings for background, you must
measure background concentration
using the procedures in this section.
You must subtract the background
reading from the maximum
concentration indicated by the
instrument.
(vii) If you elect to adjust for
background, the arithmetic difference
between the maximum concentration
indicated by the instrument and the
background level must be compared
with 500 parts per million by volume
for determining whether there is a leak.
(3) Instrument probe. The instrument
probe must be traversed around all
potential leak interfaces as described in
Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A–7.
(4) Unsafe-to-inspect written plan
requirements. For equipment designated
as unsafe to inspect according to the
provisions of paragraph (d)(3) of this
section, you must maintain and follow
a written plan that requires inspecting
the equipment as frequently as practical
during safe-to-inspect times, but not
more frequently than the annual
inspection schedule otherwise
applicable. You must still repair unsafeto-inspect equipment according to the
procedures in paragraph (f) of this
section if a leak is detected.
(f) Closed vent system leak repair
provisions. The provisions of this
paragraph (f) apply to closed vent
systems collecting HAP from an affected
source.
(1) Leak repair general for hardpiping. If there are visible, audible, or
olfactory indications of leaks at the time
of the annual visual inspections
required by paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this
section, you must follow the procedure
specified in either paragraph (f)(1)(i) or
(ii) of this section.
(i) You must eliminate the leak.
(ii) You must monitor the equipment
according to the procedures in
paragraph (e) of this section and comply
with the leak repair provisions in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
(2) Leak repair schedule. Leaks must
be repaired as soon as practical, except
as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this
section.
(i) A first attempt at repair must be
made no later than 5 days after the leak
is detected.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph
(f)(3) of this section, repairs must be
completed no later than 15 days after
the leak is detected or at the beginning
of the next introduction of vapors to the
system, whichever is later.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(3) Delay of repair. Delay of repair of
a closed vent system for which leaks
have been detected is allowed if repair
within 15 days after a leak is detected
is technically infeasible or unsafe
without a closed vent system shutdown,
as defined in § 63.12005, or if you
determine that emissions resulting from
immediate repair would be greater than
the emissions likely to result from delay
of repair. Repair of such equipment
must be completed as soon as practical,
but not later than the end of the next
closed vent system shutdown.
(g) Closed vent system records. For
closed vent systems, you must record
the information specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (5) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) Bypass records. For each closed
vent system that contains a bypass that
could divert a vent stream away from
the control device and to the
atmosphere, or cause air intrusion into
the control device, you must keep a
record of the information specified in
either paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this
section, as applicable.
(i) You must maintain records of any
alarms triggered because flow was
detected in the bypass, including the
date and time the alarm was triggered,
the duration of the flow in the bypass,
as well as records of the times of all
periods when the vent stream is
diverted from the control device or the
flow indicator is not operating.
(ii) Where a seal mechanism is used
to comply with paragraph (c)(2) of this
section, hourly records of flow are not
required. In such cases, you must record
that the monthly visual inspection of
the seals or closure mechanisms has
been done, and must record the
occurrence of all periods when the seal
mechanism is broken, the bypass valve
position has changed, or the key for a
lock-and-key type lock has been
checked out, and records of any car-seal
that has been broken.
(2) Inspection records. For each
instrumental or visual inspection
conducted in accordance with
paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section for
closed vent systems collecting HAP
from an affected source during which no
leaks are detected, you must record that
the inspection was performed, the date
of the inspection, and a statement that
no leaks were detected.
(3) Leak records. When a leak is
detected from a closed vent system
collecting HAP from an affected source,
the information specified in paragraphs
(g)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section must
be recorded and kept for 5 years.
(i) The instrument and the equipment
identification number and the operator
name, initials, or identification number.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(ii) The date the leak was detected
and the date of the first attempt to repair
the leak.
(iii) The date of successful repair of
the leak.
(iv) The maximum instrument reading
measured by the procedures in
paragraph (e) of this section after the
leak is successfully repaired.
(v) Repair delayed and the reason for
the delay if a leak is not repaired within
15 days after discovery of the leak. You
may develop a written procedure that
identifies the conditions that justify a
delay of repair. In such cases, reasons
for delay of repair may be documented
by citing the relevant sections of the
written procedure.
(vi) Copies of the compliance reports
as specified in § 63.11985(b)(9), if
records are not maintained on a
computerized database capable of
generating summary reports from the
records.
(4) Instrument calibration records.
You must maintain records of the
information specified in paragraphs
(g)(4)(i) through (vi) of this section for
monitoring instrument calibrations
conducted according to sections 8.1.2
and 10 of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A–7, and paragraph (e) of this
section.
(i) Date of calibration and initials of
operator performing the calibration.
(ii) Calibration gas cylinder
identification, certification date, and
certified concentration.
(iii) Instrument scale(s) used.
(iv) A description of any corrective
action taken if the meter readout could
not be adjusted to correspond to the
calibration gas value in accordance with
section 10.1 of Method 21 at 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A–7.
(v) Results of each calibration drift
assessment required by paragraph
(e)(2)(v)(D) of this section (i.e.,
instrument reading for calibration at end
of the monitoring day and the calculated
percent difference from the initial
calibration value).
(vi) If you make your own calibration
gas, a description of the procedure used.
(5) Unsafe-to-inspect records. If you
designate equipment as unsafe-toinspect as specified in paragraph (d)(3)
of this section, you must keep the
records specified in paragraph (g)(5)(i)
and (ii) of this section.
(i) You must maintain the identity of
unsafe-to-inspect equipment as
specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this
section.
(ii) You must keep a written plan for
inspecting unsafe-to-inspect equipment
as required by paragraph (e)(4) of this
section and record all activities
performed according to the written plan.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(h) Closed vent systems in vacuum
service. If you operate and maintain a
closed vent system in vacuum service as
defined in § 63.12005, you must comply
with the requirements in paragraphs
(h)(1) through (3) of this section, and
you are not required to comply with any
other provisions of this section. Any
incidence where a closed vent system
designed to be in vacuum service is
operating and not in vacuum service
constitutes a violation of this rule,
unless the closed vent system is meeting
the requirements in paragraphs (a)
through (g) of this section for closed
vent systems that are not in vacuum
service. Any such incidence during a
performance test invalidates the
performance test.
(1) In vacuum service alarm. You
must install, maintain, and operate a
pressure gauge and alarm system that
will alert an operator immediately and
automatically when the pressure is such
that the closed vent system no longer
meets the definition of in vacuum
service as defined in § 63.12005. The
alarm must be located such that the alert
is detected and recognized easily by an
operator.
(2) In vacuum service alarm
procedures. If the alarm is triggered for
a closed vent system operating in
vacuum service as specified in
paragraph (h)(1) of this section, you
must immediately initiate procedures to
identify the cause of the alarm. If the
closed vent system is not in vacuum
service, you must initiate procedures to
get the closed vent system back in
vacuum service as defined in
§ 63.12005, or you must immediately
comply with the requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section
for closed vent systems that are not in
vacuum service.
(3) In vacuum service alarm records
and reports. For any incidences where
a closed vent system designed to be in
vacuum service is not in vacuum
service, you must submit to the
Administrator within 10 days of the
incident the report specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required
even if you elect to follow the
procedures specified in § 63.11895 to
establish an affirmative defense and
submit the reports specified in
§ 63.11985(c)(4).
§ 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS
requirements must I meet to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with the
emission standards for process vent
control devices, resin strippers, and
wastewater treatment processes?
(a) General requirements for CEMS
and CPMS. You must meet the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
section for each CEMS specified in
§ 63.11925(c) used to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits for
process vents in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart. You must meet the CPMS
requirements in paragraph (c) of this
section and establish your operating
limits in paragraph (d) of this section for
each operating parameter specified in
Table 6 to this subpart for each process
vent control device, resin stripper, or
wastewater treatment process specified
in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) For each control device specified
in § 63.11925(c) that is used to comply
with the emission limits for process
vents in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart,
except that flow indicators specified in
§ 63.11940(e) are not subject to the
requirements of this section.
(2) For each resin stripper specified in
§ 63.11960(c) and used to comply with
the emission limit for resin in Table 1
or 2 to this subpart.
(3) For each wastewater treatment
process specified in § 63.11975(a) and
used to comply with the emission limit
for wastewater in Table 3 to this
subpart.
(b) CEMS. You must install, operate,
and maintain each CEMS according to
paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this
section and continuously monitor
emissions.
(1) You must prepare your quality
control program and site-specific
performance evaluation test plan, as
specified in § 63.8(d) and (e). You must
submit your performance evaluation test
plan to the Administrator for approval,
as specified in § 63.8(e)(3).
(2) The monitoring equipment must
be capable of providing a continuous
record, recording data at least once
every 15 minutes.
(3) You must conduct initial and
periodic site-specific performance
evaluations and any required tests of
each CEMS according to your quality
control program and site-specific
performance evaluation test plan
prepared as specified in § 63.8(d) and
(e).
(4) If supplemental gases are added to
the control device, you must correct the
measured concentrations in accordance
with § 63.11945(d)(1).
(5) You must operate and maintain
the CEMS in continuous operation
according to the quality control program
and performance evaluation test plan.
CEMS must record data at least once
every 15 minutes.
(6) CEMS must meet the minimum
accuracy and calibration frequency
requirements specified in the
performance specifications specified in
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29573
paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section, as applicable.
(i) A hydrogen chloride or dioxin/
furan CEMS must meet the requirements
of the promulgated performance
specification for the CEMS.
(ii) A total hydrocarbon CEMS must
meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part
60, Appendix B, performance
specification 8A.
(7) Before commencing or ceasing use
of a CEMS system, you must notify the
Administrator as specified in
paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) You must notify the Administrator
1 month before starting use of the
continuous emissions monitoring
system.
(ii) You must notify the Administrator
1 month before stopping use of the
continuous emissions monitoring
system, in which case you must also
conduct a performance test within 60
days of ceasing operation of the system.
(c) CPMS. You must install, maintain,
and operate each CPMS as specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this
section and continuously monitor
operating parameters.
(1) As part of your quality control
program and site-specific performance
evaluation test plan prepared as
specified in § 63.8(d) and (e), you must
prepare a site-specific monitoring plan
that addresses the monitoring system
design, data collection, and the quality
assurance and quality control elements
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through
(v) of this section and § 63.8(d). You are
not required to submit the plan for
approval unless requested by the
Administrator. You may request
approval of monitoring system quality
assurance and quality control procedure
alternatives to those specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of this
section in your site-specific monitoring
plan.
(i) The performance criteria and
design specifications for the monitoring
system equipment, including the sample
interface, detector signal analyzer, and
data acquisition and calculations.
(ii) Sampling interface (e.g.,
thermocouple) location such that the
monitoring system will provide
representative measurements.
(iii) Equipment performance checks,
calibrations, or other audit procedures.
(iv) Ongoing operation and
maintenance procedures in accordance
with provisions in § 63.8(c)(1) and (3).
(v) Ongoing reporting and
recordkeeping procedures in accordance
with provisions in § 63.10(c), (e)(1), and
(e)(2)(i).
(2) The monitoring equipment must
be capable of providing a continuous
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29574
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
record, recording data at least once
every 15 minutes.
(3) You must install, operate, and
maintain each CPMS required in this
paragraph (c) according to the
procedures and requirements in your
site-specific monitoring plan.
(4) You must conduct an initial and
periodic site-specific performance
evaluation tests of each CPMS according
to your site-specific monitoring plan.
(5) All CPMS must meet the specific
parameter (e.g., minimum accuracy and
calibration frequency) requirements
specified in § 63.11940 and Table 8 to
this subpart.
(6) Monitoring equipment for
temperature, pressure, volumetric flow
rate, mass flow rate, and conductivity
must be capable of measuring the
appropriate parameter over a range that
extends at least 20 percent beyond the
normal expected operating range of
values for that parameter. The data
recording system associated with
affected CPMS must have a resolution
that is equal to or better than one-half
of the required system accuracy.
(d) Establish operating limit. For each
operating parameter that must be
monitored in § 63.11925(c) for process
vent control devices, in § 63.11960(c) for
resin strippers, and in § 63.11975(a) for
wastewater treatment processes, you
must establish an operating limit as
specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(6) of this section. You must establish
each operating limit as an operating
parameter range, minimum operating
parameter level, or maximum operating
parameter level as specified in Table 6
to this subpart. Where this subpart does
not specify which format to use for your
operating limit (e.g., operating range or
minimum operating level), you must
determine which format is best to
establish proper operation of the control
device, resin stripper, or treatment
process such that you are meeting the
emission limits specified in Table 1, 2,
or 3 to this subpart.
(1) For process vent control devices,
the operating limit established for each
monitored parameter specified in
§ 63.11940 must be based on the
operating parameter values recorded
during any performance test conducted
to demonstrate compliance in
§ 63.11925(d)(4) and (e)(4) and may be
supplemented by engineering
assessments and/or manufacturer’s
recommendations. You are not required
to conduct performance tests over the
entire range of allowed operating
parameter values. The established
operating limit must represent the
conditions for which the control device
is meeting the emission limits specified
in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(2) For resin strippers, the operating
limit established for each monitoring
parameter specified in § 63.11960(c)
must be based on the operating
parameter values recorded during any
resin sampling event specified in
§ 63.11960(b)(2) or (4) or
§ 63.11960(c)(3) or (5). You may use
engineering assessments and/or
manufacturer’s recommendations to
supplement the initial performance test
results when establishing the operating
limit. The established operating limit
must represent the conditions for which
the resin stripper is meeting the
emission limits specified in Table 1 or
2 to this subpart.
(3) For wastewater treatment
processes treating a wastewater stream
to achieve the vinyl chloride
concentration specified in Table 3 to
this subpart, the operating limit
established for each monitored
parameter specified in § 63.11975(a)(1)
must be based on the operating
parameter level recorded during any
sampling event specified in
§ 63.11970(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or
§ 63.11975(a)(3). You may use
engineering assessments and/or
manufacturer’s recommendations to
supplement the initial testing results
when establishing the operating limit.
The established operating limit must
represent the conditions for which the
treatment process is meeting the
requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart.
(4) You must include as part of the
notification of compliance status or the
operating permit application or
amendment, the information in
paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section, as applicable, for each process
vent control device, resin stripper, and
wastewater treatment process requiring
operating limits.
(i) Descriptions of monitoring devices
and monitoring frequencies for each
emission point and operating scenario.
(ii) The established operating limit of
the monitored parameter(s).
(iii) The rationale for the established
operating limit, including any data and
calculations used to develop the
operating limit and a description of why
the operating limit indicates proper
operation of the control device, resin
stripper, or wastewater treatment
process.
(iv) The rationale used to determine
which format to use for your operating
limit (e.g., operating range, minimum
operating level, or maximum operating
level), where this subpart does not
specify which format to use.
(5) For batch processes, you may
establish operating limits for individual
batch emission episodes, including each
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
distinct episode of process vent
emissions or each individual type of
batch process that generates wastewater,
if applicable. You must provide
rationale in a batch precompliance
report as specified in § 63.11985(c)(2)
instead of the notification of compliance
status for the established operating
limit. You must include any data and
calculations used to develop the
operating limits and a description of
why each operating limit indicates
proper operation of the control device
during the specific batch emission
episode, or of the wastewater treatment
process or resin stripper during the
individual batch operation generating
wastewater or stripped resin.
(6) If you elect to establish separate
operating limits for different batch
emission episodes within a batch
process as specified in paragraph (d)(5)
of this section, you must maintain daily
records indicating each point at which
you change from one operating limit to
another, even if the monitoring duration
for an operating limit is less than 15
minutes. You must maintain a daily
record according to § 63.11990(e)(4)(i).
(e) Reduction of CPMS and CEMS
data. You must reduce CEMS and CPMS
data to 1-hour averages according to
§ 63.8(g) to compute the average values
for demonstrating compliance specified
in §§ 63.11925(e)(3)(ii),
63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 63.11960(c)(2), and
63.11975(a)(2) for CEMS and CPMS, as
applicable.
§ 63.11940 What continuous monitoring
requirements must I meet for control
devices required to install CPMS to meet
the emission limits for process vents?
As required in § 63.11925(c), you
must install and operate the applicable
CPMS specified in paragraphs (a)
through (i) of this section for each
control device you use to comply with
the emission limits for process vents in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. You must
monitor, record, and calculate CPMS
data averages as specified in Table 6 to
this subpart. Paragraph (j) of this section
provides an option to propose
alternative monitoring parameters or
procedures.
(a) Flow indicator. If flow to a control
device could be intermittent, you must
install, calibrate, and operate a flow
indicator at the inlet or outlet of the
control device to identify periods of no
flow.
(b) Incinerator monitoring. If you are
using an incinerator to meet an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and
you are required to use CPMS as
specified in § 63.11925(c), you must
equip the incinerator with the
monitoring equipment specified in
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this
section, as applicable.
(1) If an incinerator other than a
catalytic incinerator is used, you must
install a temperature monitoring device
in the fire box or in the ductwork
immediately downstream of the fire box
in a position before any substantial heat
exchange occurs.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(3) of this section, where a catalytic
incinerator is used, you must install
temperature monitoring devices in the
gas stream immediately before and after
the catalyst bed. You must monitor the
temperature differential across the
catalyst bed.
(3) Instead of complying with
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, and if
the temperature differential between the
inlet and outlet of the catalytic
incinerator during normal operating
conditions is less than 10 degrees
Celsius (18 degrees Fahrenheit), you
may elect to monitor the inlet
temperature and conduct catalyst
checks as specified in paragraphs
(b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct annual sampling
and analysis of the catalyst activity (i.e.,
conversion efficiency) following the
manufacturer’s or catalyst supplier’s
recommended procedures. If problems
are found during the catalyst activity
test, you must replace the catalyst bed
or take other corrective action consistent
with the manufacturer’s
recommendations within 15 days or by
the next time any process vent stream is
collected by the control device,
whichever is sooner.
(ii) You must conduct annual internal
inspections of the catalyst bed to check
for fouling, plugging, or mechanical
breakdown. You must also inspect the
bed for channeling, abrasion, and
settling. If problems are found during
the annual internal inspection of the
catalyst, you must replace the catalyst
bed or take other corrective action
consistent with the manufacturer’s
recommendations within 15 days or by
the next time any process vent stream is
collected by the control device,
whichever is later. If the catalyst bed is
replaced and is not of like or better kind
and quality as the old catalyst then you
must conduct a new performance test
according to § 63.11945 to determine
destruction efficiency. If a catalyst bed
is replaced and the replacement catalyst
is of like or better kind and quality as
the old catalyst, then a new performance
test to determine destruction efficiency
is not required.
(c) Absorber and acid gas scrubber
monitoring. If you are using an absorber
or acid gas scrubber to meet an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
you are required to use CPMS as
specified in § 63.11925(c), you must
install the monitoring equipment
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through
(3) of this section.
(1) Install and operate the monitoring
equipment as specified in either
paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) A flow meter to monitor the
absorber or acid gas scrubber influent
liquid flow.
(ii) A flow meter to monitor the
absorber or acid gas scrubber influent
liquid flow and the gas stream flow
using one of the procedures specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(A), (B), or (C) of this
section. You must monitor the liquid-togas ratio determined by dividing the
flow rate of the absorber or acid gas
scrubber influent by the gas flow rate.
The units of measure must be consistent
with those used to calculate this ratio
during the performance test.
(A) Determine gas stream flow using
the design blower capacity, with
appropriate adjustments for pressure
drop.
(B) Measure the gas stream flow at the
absorber or acid gas scrubber inlet.
(C) If you have previously determined
compliance for a scrubber that requires
a determination of the liquid-to-gas
ratio, you may use the results of that test
provided the test conditions are
representative of current operation.
(2) Install and operate the monitoring
equipment as specified in either
paragraph (c)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this
section.
(i) Install and operate pressure gauges
at the inlet and outlet of the absorber or
acid gas scrubber to monitor the
pressure drop through the absorber or
acid gas scrubber.
(ii) If the difference in the inlet gas
stream temperature and the inlet liquid
stream temperature is greater than 38
degrees Celsius, you may install and
operate a temperature monitoring device
at the scrubber gas stream exit.
(iii) If the difference between the
specific gravity of the scrubber effluent
scrubbing fluid and specific gravity of
the scrubber inlet scrubbing fluid is
greater than or equal to 0.02 specific
gravity units, you may install and
operate a specific gravity monitoring
device on the inlet and outlet of the
scrubber.
(3) If the scrubbing liquid is a reactant
(e.g., lime, ammonia hydroxide), you
must install and operate one of the
devices listed in either paragraph
(c)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section.
(i) A pH monitoring device to monitor
the pH of the scrubber liquid effluent.
(ii) A caustic strength monitoring
device to monitor the caustic strength of
the scrubber liquid effluent.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29575
(iii) A conductivity monitoring device
to monitor the conductivity of the
scrubber liquid effluent.
(d) Regenerative adsorber monitoring.
If you are using a regenerative adsorber
to meet an emission limit in Table 1 or
2 to this subpart and you are required
to use CPMS as specified in
§ 63.11925(c), you must install and
operate the applicable monitoring
equipment listed in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (5) of this section, and comply
with the requirements in paragraphs
(d)(6) and (7) of this section. If the
adsorption system water is deemed as
wastewater or process vents as specified
in § 63.11935, it is subject to the
requirements in this subpart.
(1) For non-vacuum regeneration
systems, an integrating regeneration
stream flow monitoring device having
an accuracy of ±10 percent, capable of
recording the total regeneration stream
mass for each regeneration cycle. For
non-vacuum regeneration systems, an
integrating regeneration stream flow
monitoring device capable of
continuously recording the total
regeneration stream mass flow for each
regeneration cycle.
(2) For non-vacuum regeneration
systems, an adsorber bed temperature
monitoring device, capable of
continuously recording the adsorber bed
temperature after each regeneration and
within 15 minutes of completing any
temperature regulation (cooling or
warming to bring bed temperature closer
to vent gas temperature) portion of the
regeneration cycle.
(3) For non-vacuum and non-steam
regeneration systems, an adsorber bed
temperature monitoring device capable
of continuously recording the bed
temperature during regeneration, except
during any temperature regulating
(cooling or warming to bring bed
temperature closer to vent gas
temperature) portion of the regeneration
cycle.
(4) For a vacuum regeneration system,
a pressure transmitter installed in the
vacuum pump suction line capable of
continuously recording the vacuum
level for each minute during
regeneration. You must establish a
minimum target and a length of time at
which the vacuum must be below the
minimum target during regeneration.
(5) A device capable of monitoring the
regeneration frequency (i.e., operating
time since last regeneration) and
duration.
(6) You must perform a verification of
the adsorber during each day of
operation. The verification must be
through visual observation or through
an automated alarm or shutdown system
that monitors and records system
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29576
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
operational parameters. The verification
must verify that the adsorber is
operating with proper valve sequencing
and cycle time.
(7) You must conduct weekly
measurements of the carbon bed outlet
volatile organic compounds
concentration, as specified in this
paragraph (d)(7), over the last 5 minutes
of an adsorption cycle for each carbon
bed. For regeneration cycles longer than
1 week, you must perform the
measurement over the last 5 minutes of
each adsorption cycle for each carbon
bed. The outlet concentration of volatile
organic compounds must be measured
using a portable analyzer, in accordance
with Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A–7, for open-ended lines.
Alternatively, outlet concentration of
HAP(s) may be measured using
chromatographic analysis using Method
18 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–6.
(e) Non-regenerative adsorber
monitoring. If you are using a nonregenerative adsorber, or canister type
system that is sent off site for
regeneration or disposal, to meet an
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart and you are required to use
CPMS as specified in § 63.11925(c), you
must install a system of dual adsorber
units in series and conduct the
monitoring and bed replacement as
specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through
(4) of this section.
(1) Establish the average adsorber bed
life by conducting daily monitoring of
the outlet volatile organic compound or
HAP concentration, as specified in this
paragraph (e)(1), of the first adsorber
bed in series until breakthrough occurs
for the first three adsorber bed changeouts. The outlet concentration of
volatile organic compounds must be
measured using a portable analyzer, in
accordance with Method 21 at 40 CFR
part 60, Appendix A–7, for open-ended
lines. Alternatively, outlet concentration
of HAP may be measured using
chromatographic analysis using Method
18 at 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A–6.
Breakthrough of the bed is defined as
the time when the level of HAP detected
is at the highest concentration allowed
to be discharged from the adsorber
system.
(2) Once the average life of the bed is
determined, conduct ongoing
monitoring as specified in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Except as provided in paragraphs
(e)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section, conduct
daily monitoring of the adsorber bed
outlet volatile organic compound or
HAP concentration, as specified in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(ii) You may conduct monthly
monitoring if the adsorbent has more
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
than 2 months of life remaining, as
determined by the average primary
adsorber bed life, established in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section, and the
date the adsorbent was last replaced.
(iii) You may conduct weekly
monitoring if the adsorbent has more
than 2 weeks of life remaining, as
determined by the average primary
adsorber bed life, established in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section, and the
date the adsorbent was last replaced.
(3) The first adsorber in series must be
replaced immediately when
breakthrough is detected between the
first and second adsorber. The original
second adsorber (or a fresh canister) will
become the new first adsorber and a
fresh adsorber will become the second
adsorber. For purposes of this paragraph
(e)(3), ‘‘immediately’’ means within 8
hours of the detection of a breakthrough
for adsorbers of 55 gallons or less, and
within 24 hours of the detection of a
breakthrough for adsorbers greater than
55 gallons.
(4) In lieu of replacing the first
adsorber immediately, you may elect to
monitor the outlet of the second canister
beginning on the day the breakthrough
between the first and second canister is
identified and each day thereafter. This
daily monitoring must continue until
the first canister is replaced. If the
constituent being monitored is detected
at the outlet of the second canister
during this period of daily monitoring,
both canisters must be replaced within
8 hours of the time of detection of
volatile organic compounds or HAP at
90 percent of the allowed level (90
percent of breakthrough definition).
(f) Condenser monitoring. If you are
using a condenser to meet an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and
you are required to use CPMS as
specified in § 63.11925(c), you must
install and operate a condenser exit gas
temperature monitoring device.
(g) Sorbent injection monitoring. If
you are using sorbent injection as an
emission control technique to comply
with an emission limit in Table 1 or 2
to this subpart and you are required to
use CPMS as specified in § 63.11925(c),
you must equip sorbent injection
systems with the monitoring equipment
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through
(3) of this section, as applicable. You
must also meet the requirements in
paragraph (h) of this section for the
fabric filters used for sorbent collection.
(1) A flow meter to monitor the rate
of sorbent injection.
(2) A flow meter to monitor the
sorbent injection system carrier gas flow
rate.
(3) You must install and operate a
temperature monitoring device to
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
monitor the temperature in the
ductwork immediately downstream of
the fire box of the combustion device.
Also, if you are using a particulate
matter control device upstream of the
adsorbent injection system, you must
install and operate a temperature
monitoring device to monitor the
temperature in the ductwork
immediately downstream of the
particulate matter control device.
(h) Fabric filter monitoring. If you are
using a fabric filter to meet an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and
you are required to use CPMS as
specified in § 63.11925(c), you must
equip the fabric filter with a bag leak
detection system that meets the
requirements in paragraphs (h)(1)
through (11) of this section. You must
conduct the performance evaluation
specified in paragraph (h)(12) of this
section.
(1) Each bag leak detection system
must be installed, operated, calibrated,
and maintained in a manner consistent
with the manufacturer’s written
specifications and recommendations
and in accordance with the guidance
provided in Fabric Filter Bag Leak
Detection Guidance, EPA–454/R–98–
015, September 1997 (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) such that the
alarm does not sound more than 5
percent of the operating time during a
6-month period. You must calculate the
alarm time as specified in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) through (iv).
(i) If inspection of the fabric filter
demonstrates that no corrective action is
required, no alarm time is counted.
(ii) If corrective action is required,
each alarm time shall be counted as a
minimum of 1 hour.
(iii) If you take longer than 1 hour to
initiate corrective action, each alarm
time (i.e., time that the alarm sounds) is
counted as the actual amount of time
taken by you to initiate corrective
action.
(iv) Your maximum alarm time is
equal to 5 percent of the operating time
during a 6-month period.
(2) The bag leak detection system
must be certified by the manufacturer to
be capable of detecting particulate
matter emissions at concentrations of 10
milligrams per actual cubic meter or
less.
(3) The bag leak detection system
sensor must provide output of relative
or absolute particulate matter loadings.
(4) The bag leak detection system
must be equipped with a device to
continuously record the output signal
from the sensor.
(5) The bag leak detection system
must be equipped with an alarm system
that will alert an operator automatically
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
when an increase in particulate matter
emissions over a preset level is detected.
The alarm must be located such that the
alert is detected and recognized easily
by an operator.
(6) For positive pressure fabric filter
systems that do not duct all
compartments of cells to a common
stack, a bag leak detection system must
be installed in each fabric filter
compartment or cell. If a negative
pressure or induced air filter is used, the
bag leak detector must be installed
downstream of the fabric filter. If
multiple bag leak detectors are required,
the system’s instrumentation and alarm
may be shared among detectors.
(7) Calibration of the bag leak
detection system must, at a minimum,
consist of establishing the relative
baseline output level by adjusting the
range and the averaging period of the
device and establishing the alarm set
points and the alarm delay time.
(8) Following initial adjustment, you
must not adjust the sensitivity or range,
averaging period, alarm set points, or
alarm delay time, except as established
in an operation and maintenance plan
required in paragraph (h)(10) of this
section that is to be submitted with the
notification of compliance status report.
In no event may the sensitivity be
increased more than 100 percent or
decreased by more than 50 percent over
a 365-day period unless such
adjustment follows a complete baghouse
inspection that demonstrates the
baghouse is in good operating condition.
(9) If the alert on a bag leak detection
system is triggered, you must, within 1
hour of an alarm, initiate the procedures
to identify the cause of the alarm and
take corrective action as specified in the
corrective action plan required in
paragraph (h)(11) of this section.
(10) You must maintain an operation
and maintenance plan describing the
items in paragraphs (h)(10)(i) through
(v) of this section.
(i) Installation of the bag leak
detection system.
(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of
the bag leak detection system, including
how the alarm set-point will be
established.
(iii) Operation of the bag leak
detection system, including quality
assurance procedures.
(iv) How the bag leak detection
system will be maintained, including a
routine maintenance schedule and spare
parts inventory list.
(v) How the bag leak detection system
output will be recorded and stored.
(11) You must maintain a corrective
action plan describing corrective actions
to be taken, and the timing of those
actions when the particulate matter
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
concentration exceeds the setpoint and
activates the alarm. Corrective actions
may include, but are not limited to the
actions listed in paragraphs (h)(11)(i)
through (vi) of this section.
(i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air
leaks, torn or broken bags or filter
media, or any other conditions that may
cause an increase in particulate matter
emissions.
(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter
media.
(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter
media or otherwise repairing the control
device.
(iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter
compartment.
(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection
system probe or otherwise repairing the
bag leak detection system.
(vi) Shutting down the control device
producing the particulate matter
emissions.
(12) You must conduct an initial
performance evaluation of each
continuous monitoring system and bag
leak detection system, as applicable, in
accordance with your quality control
program site-specific performance
evaluation test plan (or site-specific
monitoring plan specified in
§ 63.11935(c) for CPMS), according to
§ 63.8(d). For the purposes of this
subpart, the provisions of § 63.8(d), also
apply to the bag leak detection system.
(i) Other control devices. If you use a
control device other than those listed in
this subpart to comply with an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and
you are required to use CPMS as
specified in § 63.11925(c), you must
comply with the requirements as
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of
this section.
(1) Submit a description of the
planned monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting procedures as required in
§ 63.11985(b)(5)(iv). The Administrator
will approve, deny, or modify the
proposed monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping requirements as part of
the review of the plan or through the
review of the permit application or by
other appropriate means.
(2) You must establish operating
limits for monitored parameters that are
approved by the Administrator. To
establish the operating limit, the
information required in § 63.11935(d)
must be submitted in the notification of
compliance status report specified in
§ 63.11985(a).
(j) Alternatives to monitoring
requirements.
(1) You may request approval to use
alternatives to the continuous operating
parameter monitoring listed in this
section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29577
(2) You may request approval to
monitor a different parameter than those
established in § 63.11935(d) or to set
unique monitoring parameters, as
specified in § 63.11985(c)(6). Until
permission to use an alternative
monitoring procedure, method, or
parameter has been granted by the
Administrator, you remain subject to the
requirements of this subpart.
§ 63.11945 What performance testing
requirements must I meet for process
vents?
(a) General. For each control device
used to meet a total organic HAP, vinyl
chloride, hydrogen chloride, and/or
dioxin/furan emission limit for process
vents in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you
must conduct the initial and periodic
performance tests required in
§ 63.11925(d) and (e) and as specified in
§ 63.11896 using the applicable test
methods and procedures specified in
Table 9 to this subpart and paragraphs
(b) through (d) of this section.
(b) Process operating conditions. You
must conduct performance tests under
the conditions specified in paragraphs
(b)(1) through (3) of this section, as
applicable. Upon request, the owner or
operator shall make available to the
Administrator such records as may be
necessary to determine the conditions of
performance tests.
(1) Continuous process vents. For
continuous process vents, you must
conduct all performance tests at
maximum representative operating
conditions for the process. For
continuous compliance, you must
operate the control device as close as
possible to your operating limit(s) for
the control device established during
the initial or subsequent performance
tests specified in § 63.11925(d) and (e).
If an operating limit is a range, then you
must operate the control device as close
as possible to the maximum or
minimum operating limit for the control
device, whichever results in higher
emissions (i.e., lower emission
reduction).
(2) Batch process operations. Testing
must be conducted at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions as specified in
paragraph (c) of this section.
(3) Combination of both continuous
and batch unit operations. You must
conduct performance tests when the
batch process vents are operating at
absolute worst-case conditions or
hypothetical worst-case conditions, as
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of
this section, and at maximum
representative operating conditions for
the process. For continuous compliance,
you must operate the control device as
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29578
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(ii) The period of time when the HAP
loading or stream composition
(including non-HAP) is most
challenging for the control device.
These conditions include, but are not
limited to the following:
(A) Periods when the stream contains
the highest combined organic load, in
pounds per hour, described by the
emission profiles in paragraph (c)(3) of
this section.
(B) Periods when the streams contain
HAP constituents that approach limits
of solubility for scrubbing media.
(C) Periods when the streams contain
HAP constituents that approach limits
of adsorptivity for adsorption systems.
(2) Hypothetical worst-case
conditions. For batch process
operations, hypothetical worst-case
conditions are simulated test conditions
that, at a minimum, contain the highest
hourly HAP load of emissions that
would be predicted to be vented to the
control device from the emissions
profile described in paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)
or (iii) of this section.
(3) Emission profile. For batch process
operations, you must develop an
emission profile for the vent to the
control device that describes the
characteristics of the vent stream at the
inlet to the control device under worstcase conditions. The emission profile
must be developed based on any one of
the procedures described in paragraphs
(c)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Emission profile by process. The
emission profile must consider all batch
emission episodes that could contribute
to the vent stack for a period of time that
is sufficient to include all processes
venting to the stack and must consider
production scheduling. The profile must
describe the HAP load to the device that
equals the highest sum of emissions
from the episodes that can vent to the
control device in any given hour.
Emissions per episode must be
calculated using the procedures
specified in § 63.11950. Emissions per
episode must be divided by the duration
of the episode only if the duration of the
episode is longer than 1 hour.
(ii) Emission profile by equipment.
The emission profile must consist of
emissions that meet or exceed the
highest emissions, in pounds per hour
that would be expected under actual
processing conditions. The profile must
describe equipment configurations used
to generate the emission events,
volatility of materials processed in the
equipment, and the rationale used to
identify and characterize the emission
events. The emissions may be based on
using a compound more volatile than
compounds actually used in the
process(es), and the emissions may be
generated from all equipment in the
process(es) or only selected equipment.
(iii) Emission profile by capture and
control device limitation. The emission
profile must consider the capture and
control system limitations and the
highest emissions, in pounds per hour
that can be routed to the control device,
based on maximum flowrate and
concentrations possible because of
limitations on conveyance and control
equipment (e.g., fans and lower
explosive level alarms).
(d) Concentration correction
calculation. If a combustion device is
the control device and supplemental
combustion air is used to combust the
emissions, the concentration of total
organic HAP, vinyl chloride, and
hydrogen chloride must be corrected as
specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of
this section. If a control device other
than a combustion device is used to
comply with an outlet concentration
emission limit for batch process vents,
you must correct the actual
concentration for supplemental gases as
specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this
section.
(1) Determine the concentration of
total organic HAP, vinyl chloride, or
hydrogen chloride corrected to 3percent oxygen (Cc) using Equation 1 of
this section.
Where:
Cc = Concentration of total organic HAP,
vinyl chloride, or hydrogen chloride
corrected to 3-percent oxygen, dry basis,
parts per million by volume.
Cm = Concentration of total organic HAP,
vinyl chloride, or hydrogen chloride, dry
basis, parts per million by volume.
%O2d = Concentration of oxygen, dry basis,
percentage by volume.
(2) To determine the oxygen
concentration, you must use the
emission rate correction factor (or
excess air), integrated sampling and
analysis procedures of Method 3, 3A, or
3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–2, or
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, ‘‘Flue and
Exhaust Gas Analyses’’ [Part 10,
Instruments and Apparatus]
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14).
(3) Correct the measured
concentration for supplemental gases
using Equation 2 of this section. Process
knowledge and representative operating
data may be used to determine the
fraction of the total flow due to
supplemental gas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.045</GPH>
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
close as possible to your operating
limit(s) for the control device
established during the initial or
subsequent performance tests specified
in § 63.11925 (d) and (e). If an operating
limit is a range, then you must operate
the control device as close as possible
to the maximum or minimum operating
limit for the control device, whichever
results in higher emissions (i.e., lower
emission reduction), unless the
Administrator specifies or approves
alternate operating conditions.
(c) Batch worst-case conditions. The
absolute worst-case conditions for batch
process operations must be
characterized by the criteria presented
in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The
hypothetical worst-case conditions for
batch process operations must be
characterized by the criteria presented
in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. In all
cases, a site-specific plan must be
submitted to the Administrator for
approval prior to testing in accordance
with § 63.7(c). The test plan must
include the emission profile described
in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
(1) Absolute worst-case conditions.
For batch process operations, absolute
worst-case conditions are defined by the
criteria presented in paragraph (c)(1)(i)
of this section if the maximum load is
the most challenging condition for the
control device. Otherwise, absolute
worst-case conditions are defined by the
conditions in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this
section. You must consider all relevant
factors, including load and compoundspecific characteristics in defining
absolute worst-case conditions.
(i) A 1-hour period of time in which
the inlet to the control device contains
the highest HAP mass loading rate, in
pounds per hour, capable of being
vented to the control device. An
emission profile as described in
paragraph (c)(3) of this section must be
used to identify the 1-hour period of
maximum HAP loading.
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
29579
Except as specified in paragraph (i) of
this section, if you choose to develop an
emission profile by process for your
batch process operation as specified in
§ 63.11945(c)(3)(i) when determining
your absolute worst-case conditions,
you must calculate emissions from
episodes caused by vapor displacement,
purging a partially filled vessel, heating,
depressurization, vacuum operations,
gas evolution, air drying, or empty
vessel purging, using the applicable
procedures in paragraphs (a) through (h)
of this section.
(a) Vapor displacement. You must
calculate emissions from vapor
displacement due to transfer of material
using Equation 3 of this section.
(b) Gas sweep of a partially filled
vessel. You must calculate emissions
from purging a partially filled vessel
using Equation 4 of this section. The
pressure of the vessel vapor space may
be set equal to 760 millimeters of
mercury (mmHg). You must multiply
the HAP partial pressure in Equation 4
of this section by a HAP-specific
saturation factor determined in
accordance with Equations 5 through 7
of this section. Solve Equation 5 of this
section iteratively beginning with
saturation factors (in the right-hand side
of the equation) of 1.0 for each
condensable compound. Stop iterating
when the calculated saturation factors
for all compounds are the same to two
significant figures for subsequent
iterations. Note that for multicomponent emission streams, saturation
factors must be calculated for all
condensable compounds, not just the
HAP.
Where:
E = Mass of HAP emitted.
V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable
gas at the temperature and pressure of
the vessel vapor space.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space;
absolute.
Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
at saturated conditions.
Pj = Partial pressure of individual
condensable compounds (including
HAP) at saturated conditions.
PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space.
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP.
t = Time of purge.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
j = Identifier for a condensable compound.
m = Number of condensable compounds
(including HAP) in the emission stream.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.046</GPH>
EP20MY11.047</GPH>
EP20MY11.048</GPH>
§ 63.11950 What emissions calculations
must I use for an emission profile by
process of my batch process operation?
Where:
E = Mass of HAP emitted.
V = Volume of gas displaced from the vessel.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space;
absolute.
Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP.
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Where:
Ca = Corrected outlet concentration of HAP,
dry basis, parts per million by volume
(ppmv).
Cm = Actual concentration of HAP measured
at control device outlet, dry basis, ppmv.
Qa = Total volumetric flow rate of all gas
streams vented to the control device,
except supplemental gases.
Qs = total volumetric flow rate of
supplemental gases.
29580
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Where:
Si = Saturation factor for individual
condensable compounds.
Pi = Partial pressure of individual
condensable compounds at saturated
conditions.
PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space.
A = Surface area of liquid.
V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable
gas.
Visat = Volumetric flow rate of individual
condensable compounds at saturated
vapor pressure.
Ki = Mass transfer coefficient of individual
condensable compounds in the emission
stream.
Ko = Mass transfer coefficient of reference
compound (e.g., 0.83 cm/s for water).
Mo = Molecular weight of reference
compound (e.g., 18.02 for water).
Mi = Molecular weight of individual
condensable compounds in the emission
stream.
n = Number of condensable compounds in
the emission stream.
Where:
Navg = Average gas space molar volume
during the heating process.
V = Volume of free space in vessel.
PT = Total pressure in the vessel.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T1 = Initial temperature of the vessel.
T2 = Final temperature of the vessel.
Where:
V = Volume of free space in vessel.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T1 = Initial temperature in the vessel.
T2 = Final temperature in the vessel.
Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
compounds at T1.
EP20MY11.052</GPH>
MWHAP = Average molecular weight of the
HAP compounds calculated using
Equation 13 of this section.
ni,1 = Number of moles of condensable in the
vessel headspace at initial temperature
(T1).
ni,2 = Number of moles of condensable in the
vessel headspace at final temperature
(T2).
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
ln = Natural logarithm.
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.049</GPH>
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
compounds at T2.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
EP20MY11.050</GPH>
EP20MY11.051</GPH>
Where:
E = Mass of HAP vapor displaced from the
vessel being heated.
Navg = Average gas space molar volume
during the heating process.
PT = Total pressure in the vessel.
Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
compounds at initial temperature (T1).
Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
compounds at final temperature (T2).
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(c) Heating. You must calculate
emissions caused by the heating of a
vessel to a temperature lower than the
boiling point using the procedures in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section. If the
contents of a vessel are heated to the
boiling point, you must calculate
emissions using the procedures in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(1) If the final temperature to which
the vessel contents are heated is lower
than the boiling point of the HAP in the
vessel, you must calculate the mass of
HAP emitted per episode using
Equation 8 of this section. The average
gas space molar volume during the
heating process is calculated using
Equation 9 of this section. The
difference in the number of moles of
condensable in the vessel headspace
between the initial and final
temperatures is calculated using
Equation 10 of this section.
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
29581
Equations 11, 12, and 13 of this section.
(Note that Pa2 = 0 in the calculation of
Dh in Equation 12 of this section.)
condenser or at the conditions of the
dedicated receiver.
Pj = Partial pressure of the individual
condensable (including HAP)
determined at the exit temperature of the
condenser or at the conditions of the
dedicated receiver.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
j = Identifier for a condensable compound.
MWHAP = The average molecular weight of
HAP in vapor exiting the dedicated
receiver, as calculated using Equation 13
of this section with partial pressures
determined at the exit temperature and
exit pressure conditions of the condenser
or at the conditions of the dedicated
receiver.
m = Number of condensable compounds
(including HAP) in the emission stream.
Where:
Dh = Number of moles of noncondensable gas
displaced from the vessel.
V = Volume of free space in the vessel.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T1 = Initial temperature of vessel contents,
absolute.
T2 = Final temperature of vessel contents,
absolute.
Pan = Partial pressure of noncondensable gas
in the vessel headspace at initial (n=1)
and final (n=2) temperature.
MWHAP = The average molecular weight of
HAP in vapor exiting the dedicated
receiver.
(Pi)Tn = Partial pressure of each HAP in the
vessel headspace at initial (T1) and final
(T2) temperature of the receiver.
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
the condenser and show it is less than
the boiling or bubble point of the
HAP(s) in the vessel; or perform a
material balance around the vessel and
condenser and show that at least 99
percent of the recovered HAP vaporized
while boiling is condensed. This
demonstration is not required if the
process condenser is followed by a
condenser acting as a control device or
if the control device is monitored using
a CEMS.
(d) Depressurization. You must
calculate emissions from
depressurization using Equation 14 of
this section.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.053</GPH>
EP20MY11.054</GPH>
EP20MY11.055</GPH>
(ii) While boiling, the vessel must be
operated with a properly operated
process condenser. An initial
demonstration that a process condenser
is properly operated must be conducted
during the boiling operation and
documented in the notification of
compliance status report described in
§ 63.11985(a). You must either measure
the liquid temperature in the receiver or
the temperature of the gas stream exiting
EP20MY11.056</GPH>
in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) To calculate the emissions from
heating to the boiling point use
Where:
E = Mass of HAP emitted.
Dh = The number of moles of
noncondensable displaced from the
vessel, as calculated using Equation 12 of
this section.
PT = Pressure in the receiver.
Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
determined at the exit temperature of the
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(2) If the final temperature to which
the vessel contents are heated is at the
boiling point or higher, you must
calculate emissions using the procedure
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Where:
E = Mass of HAP emitted.
B = Mass of dry solids.
PS1 = HAP in material entering dryer, weight
percent.
PS2 = HAP in material exiting dryer, weight
percent.
Where:
V = Volume of empty vessel.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space;
absolute.
Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP
at the beginning of the purge.
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP.
F = Flow rate of the purge gas.
t = Duration of the purge.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
(i) Engineering assessments. You must
conduct an engineering assessment to
calculate HAP emissions for each batch
emission episode that is not due to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(h) Empty vessel purging. You must
calculate emissions from empty vessel
vapor displacement, partially filled
vessel purging, heating,
depressurization, vacuum operations,
gas evolution, air drying, or empty
vessel purging. An engineering
assessment may also be used to support
a finding that the emissions estimation
equations in this section are
inappropriate. All data, assumptions,
and procedures used in the engineering
assessment must be documented, are
subject to preapproval by the
Administrator, and must be reported in
the batch precompliance report. An
engineering assessment may include,
but is not limited to, the items listed in
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(e) Vacuum systems. You must
calculate emissions from vacuum
systems using Equation 15 of this
section if the air leakage rate is known
or can be approximated. The receiving
vessel is part of the vacuum system for
purposes of this subpart.
temperature of the receiver or ejector
outlet, as appropriate.
(f) Gas evolution. You must calculate
emissions from gas evolution using
Equation 15 in paragraph (e) of this
section with mass flow rate of gas
evolution, Wg, substituted for La.
(g) Air drying. You must calculate
emissions from air drying using
Equation 16 of this section:
purging using Equation 17 of this
section (Note: The term e-Ft/v can be
assumed to be 0):
paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Previous test results provided the
tests are representative of current
operating practices at the process unit.
(2) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data
representative of the process under
representative operating conditions.
(3) Maximum flow rate, HAP emission
rate, concentration, or other relevant
parameter specified or implied within a
permit limit applicable to the process
vent.
(4) Design analysis based on accepted
chemical engineering principles,
measurable process parameters, or
physical or chemical laws or properties.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.059</GPH>
temperature or the ejector outlet
conditions.
La = Total air leak rate in the system, mass/
time.
MWnc = Molecular weight of noncondensable
gas.
t = Time of vacuum operation.
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP in the emission stream, with HAP
partial pressures calculated at the
j = Identifier for a condensable compound.
ln = Natural logarithm.
EP20MY11.058</GPH>
Pj = Partial pressure of the individual
condensable compounds (including
HAP).
MWi = Molecular weight of the individual
HAP compounds.
n = Number of HAP compounds in the
emission stream.
m = Number of condensable compounds
(including HAP) in the emission stream.
i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
Where:
E = Mass of HAP emitted.
PT = Absolute pressure of receiving vessel or
ejector outlet conditions, if there is no
receiver.
Pi = Partial pressure of the HAP at the
receiver temperature or the ejector outlet
conditions.
Pj = Partial pressure of condensable
(including HAP) at the receiver
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Where:
E = Emissions.
V = Free volume in vessel being
depressurized.
R = Ideal gas law constant.
T = Temperature of the vessel, absolute.
P1 = Initial pressure in the vessel.
P2 = Final pressure in the vessel.
EP20MY11.057</GPH>
29582
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Examples of analytical methods include,
but are not limited to the following:
(i) Use of material balances based on
process stoichiometry to estimate
maximum organic HAP concentrations.
(ii) Estimation of maximum flow rate
based on physical equipment design
such as pump or blower capacities.
(iii) Estimation of HAP concentrations
based on saturation conditions.
§ 63.11955 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
other emission sources?
(a) For each process component
(including pre-polymerization reactors
used in the manufacture of bulk resins)
that contains a gas, vapor, liquid, or
solid material containing HAP, except
for the process components specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this
section, before opening the process
component for any reason, the quantity
of total HAP is to be reduced to an
amount that occupies a volume of no
more than 2.0 percent of the
component’s containment volume or 25
gallons, whichever is larger, at standard
temperature and pressure.
(1) Process components that, during
opening, are vented to a closed vent
system and control device meeting the
requirements in §§ 63.11925 through
63.11950.
(2) Pressure relief devices meeting the
requirements in § 63.11915(c).
(3) Process vent bypasses meeting the
requirements specified in § 63.11930(c).
(b) Before opening a polymerization
reactor for any reason, the quantity of
vinyl chloride is not to exceed 0.04
pounds per ton of PVC product, with
the product determined on a dry solids
basis.
(c) Any gas or vapor HAP removed
from a process component in
accordance with paragraphs (a)(2) and
(3) of this section is to be vented to a
closed vent system and control device
meeting the requirements in § 63.11925.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11956 What are my compliance
requirements for ambient monitoring?
You must operate a reliable and
accurate vinyl chloride monitoring
system for detection of major leaks and
identification of the general area of the
affected source where a leak is located.
A vinyl chloride monitoring system
means a device which obtains air
samples from one or more points on a
continuous sequential basis and
analyzes the samples with gas
chromatography or, if you assume that
all hydrocarbons measured are vinyl
chloride, analyzes the samples with
infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion
detection, or an equivalent or alternative
method. You must operate the vinyl
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
chloride monitoring system according to
a program that you develop for your
affected source. You must submit a
description of the program to the
Administrator within 45 days of your
compliance date, unless a waiver of
compliance is granted by the
Administrator, or the program has been
approved and the Administrator does
not request a review of the program.
Approval of a program will be granted
by the Administrator provided the
Administrator finds:
(a) The location and number of points
to be monitored and the frequency of
monitoring provided for in the program
are acceptable when they are compared
with the number of pieces of equipment
in vinyl chloride service and size and
physical layout of the affected source.
(b) It contains a definition of leak
which is acceptable when compared
with the background concentrations of
vinyl chloride in the areas of the plant
to be monitored by the vinyl chloride
monitoring system. Measurements of
background concentrations of vinyl
chloride in the areas of the plant to be
monitored by the vinyl chloride
monitoring system are to be included
with the description of the program. The
definition of leak for a given plant may
vary among the different areas within
the plant and is also to change over time
as background concentrations in the
plant are reduced.
(c) It contains an acceptable plan of
action to be taken when a leak is
detected.
(d) It provides for an acceptable
calibration and maintenance schedule
for the vinyl chloride monitoring system
and portable hydrocarbon detector. For
the vinyl chloride monitoring system, a
daily span check is to be conducted
with a concentration of vinyl chloride
equal to the concentration defined as a
leak according to paragraph (b) of this
section. The calibration is to be done
with either:
(1) A calibration gas mixture prepared
from the gases specified in sections
7.2.1 and 7.2.2 of Method 106 and in
accordance with section 10.1 of Method
106, or
(2) A calibration gas cylinder standard
containing the appropriate
concentration of vinyl chloride. The gas
composition of the calibration gas
cylinder standard is to have been
certified by the manufacturer. The
manufacturer must have recommended
a maximum shelf life for each cylinder
so that the concentration does not
change greater than ±5 percent from the
certified value. The date of gas cylinder
preparation, certified vinyl chloride
concentration, and recommended
maximum shelf life must have been
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29583
affixed to the cylinder before shipment
from the manufacturer to the buyer. If a
gas chromatograph is used as the vinyl
chloride monitoring system, these gas
mixtures may be directly used to
prepare a chromatograph calibration
curve as described in Sections 8.1 and
9.2 of Method 106. The requirements in
Sections 7.2.3.1 and 7.2.3.2 of Method
106 for certification of cylinder
standards and for establishment and
verification of calibration standards are
to be followed.
§ 63.11960 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
stripped resin?
(a) Emission limits. You must meet
the applicable vinyl chloride and total
HAP emission limits for stripped resin
specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
(b) Demonstration of initial
compliance. For each stripped resin
stream specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, you must meet the requirements
in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this
section to demonstrate initial
compliance. You must demonstrate
compliance for each resin stripper or for
each group of resin strippers used to
process the same type of resin.
(1) For each resin stripper required to
meet the emission limit for stripped
resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you
must prepare the site-specific
monitoring plan specified in
§ 63.11935(c)(1) for CPMS. You must
install, operate, and maintain CPMS
meeting the requirements of
§ 63.11935(c) and capable of
continuously monitoring the parameters
specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section. You must conduct an initial
site-specific performance evaluation test
of each CPMS according to your sitespecific monitoring plan.
(2) You must conduct an initial
performance test for the resin stripper,
measuring the concentration of vinyl
chloride in the stripped resin at the
outlet of each resin stripper as specified
in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of
this section.
(i) Use the test method(s) and
procedures specified in paragraph (d) of
this section.
(ii) Collect samples on a day when the
PVCPU (or collection of PVCPUs, as
applicable, if demonstrating compliance
with a group of strippers) is producing
the resin grade of which you
manufacture the most, based on total
mass of resin produced in the month
preceding the sampling event.
(iii) For continuous processes, collect
1 grab sample for each 8 hours or per
grade of PVC produced, whichever is
more frequent, during a 24-hour
sampling period.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29584
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(iv) For batch processes, collect 1 grab
sample for each batch during a 24-hour
sampling period. Sampling must be
completed immediately after stripping.
(3) Demonstrate initial compliance
with the vinyl chloride emission limit
in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart as
specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic
average vinyl chloride concentration for
each stripper for each resin grade
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, using the vinyl chloride
concentrations measured for the grab
samples collected as specified in
paragraph (b)(2)(iii) or (iv) of this
section.
(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the
vinyl chloride emission limit in Table 1
or 2 to this subpart based on the 24-hour
arithmetic average concentration
calculated in either paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.
(A) If more than one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, calculate the 24-hour weighted
arithmetic average vinyl chloride
concentration for each stripper, or for
each group of strippers used to process
the same type of resin, using the 24hour average vinyl chloride
concentrations calculated in paragraph
(b)(3)(i) of this section and the mass of
each resin grade produced during the
24-hour sampling period.
(B) If only one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
event, use the 24-hour arithmetic
average vinyl chloride concentration for
the one resin grade in paragraph (b)(3)(i)
of this section for each stripper or
calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average
vinyl chloride concentration for all
strippers used to process the one grade
of resin.
(4) You must measure the
concentration of total HAP in the
stripped resin at the outlet of the resin
stripper as specified in paragraphs
(b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Use the test method(s) and
procedures specified in paragraph (d) of
this section.
(ii) Collect samples on a day when the
PVCPU (or collection of PVCPUs, as
applicable, if demonstrating compliance
with a group of strippers) is producing
the resin grade of which you
manufacture the most, based on total
mass of resin produced in the month
preceding the sampling event.
(iii) For continuous processes, you
must collect 1 grab sample for each 8
hours or per grade of PVC produced,
whichever is more frequent, during a
24-hour sampling period.
(iv) For batch processes, you must
collect 1 grab sample for each batch
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
during a 24-hour sampling period.
Sampling must be completed
immediately after stripping.
(5) Demonstrate initial compliance
with the total HAP emission limit for
stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart as specified in paragraphs
(b)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic
average total HAP concentration for
each stripper for each resin grade
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, using the individual HAP
concentrations measured for the grab
samples collected in paragraph (b)(4)(iii)
or (iv) of this section and the calculation
procedures specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the
total HAP emission limit for stripped
resin in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart
based on each 24-hour arithmetic
average concentration calculated in
either paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(A) or (B) of
this section.
(A) If more than one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, calculate the 24-hour weighted
arithmetic average total HAP
concentration for each stripper, or for
each group of strippers used to process
the same type of resin, using the 24hour average total HAP concentrations
calculated in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this
section and the mass of each resin grade
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period.
(B) If only one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
event, use the 24-hour arithmetic
average total HAP concentration for the
one resin grade in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of
this section for each stripper or
calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average
vinyl chloride concentration for all
strippers used to process the one grade
of resin.
(6) During the initial vinyl chloride
and total HAP performance tests
specified in paragraphs (b)(2) and (4) of
this section, you must collect the CPMS
data specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section. Using this CPMS data, you must
establish an operating limit according to
the procedures specified in
§ 63.11935(d) for each applicable
operating parameter specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this
section. Each operating limit must be
based on the data averaging period for
compliance specified in Table 6 to this
subpart using data collected at the
minimum frequency specified in
§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and
calculated using the data reduction
method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a
CPMS used on a batch operation, you
may use a data averaging period based
on an operating block in lieu of the
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
averaging period specified in Table 6 to
this subpart.
(c) Demonstration of continuous
compliance. For each stripped resin
stream specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, you must meet the requirements
in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this
section to demonstrate continuous
compliance. Compliance must be
demonstrated for each resin stripper or
for each group of resin strippers used to
process the same type of resin.
(1) For each resin stripper required to
meet the emission limit for stripper
resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you
must operate and maintain CPMS
meeting the requirements of
§ 63.11935(c) and capable of
continuously recording the operating
parameters specified in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section, as
applicable. You must conduct periodic
site-specific CPMS performance
evaluation tests according to your sitespecific monitoring plan and
§ 63.11935(c).
(i) For each resin steam stripper, you
must monitor the ratio of steam feed rate
to the flow rate of the resin entering the
stripper and the temperature of the
stripped resin exiting the stripper before
any cooling process. The ratio of steam
feed rate to entering resin flow rate is
calculated by dividing the steam feed
rate by the resin flow rate.
(ii) For each resin vacuum stripper,
you must monitor the vacuum level
maintained in the column, the
maximum flow rate of the resin entering
the stripper, and the temperature of the
stripped resin exiting the stripper before
any cooling process. If steam is used,
you must monitor the ratio of steam feed
rate to the flow rate of the resin entering
the resin stripper instead of the
maximum flow rate of the resin entering
the resin stripper. The ratio of steam
feed rate to entering resin flow rate is
calculated by dividing the steam feed
rate by the resin flow rate.
(iii) If you are using process
components other than a steam or
vacuum stripper to meet a vinyl
chloride or total HAP level specified for
stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart, you must request approval to
use an alternative process component by
submitting to the Administrator the
information specified in paragraphs
(c)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) A description of the proposed
stripping process.
(B) A description of the operating
parameter(s) to be monitored to ensure
the stripping process is operated in
conformance with its design and
achieves the performance level as
specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
and an explanation of the criteria used
to select the operating parameter(s).
(C) A description of the methods and
procedures that will be used to
demonstrate that the parameter
specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(B) of
this section indicates proper operation
of the resin stripper, the schedule for
this demonstration, and a statement that
you will establish an operating limit for
the monitored operating parameter as
part of the notification of compliance
status report specified in § 63.11935(d).
(iv) Alternatives to monitoring
requirements.
(A) You may request approval to use
alternatives to the continuous operating
parameter monitoring listed in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5).
(B) You may request approval to
monitor a different operating parameter
than those established in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section or to
set a unique monitoring parameter, as
specified in § 63.11985(c)(6).
(C) Until permission to use an
alternative operating procedure,
method, or operating parameter has
been granted by the Administrator, you
remain subject to the requirements of
this subpart.
(2) You must ensure that each
operating parameter monitored in
paragraph (c)(1) through (4) of this
section for the stripper meets the
operating limit established in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section. You must
continuously determine the average
value of each monitored operating
parameter based on the data collection
and reduction methods specified in
§ 63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and the
applicable data averaging period for
resin strippers specified in Table 6 to
this subpart for all periods the process
is operating. You must follow the data
measurement and recording frequencies
and data averaging periods specified in
Table 6 to this subpart. For a CPMS
used on a batch operation, you may use
a data averaging period based on an
operating block in lieu of the averaging
periods specified in Table 6 to this
subpart.
(3) On a daily basis, you must
measure the concentration of vinyl
chloride in the stripped resin at the
outlet of the resin stripper for
continuous processes, or immediately
after stripping for batch processes, using
the test method(s) and procedures
specified in paragraph (d) of this
section, and the procedures specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this
section.
(4) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the vinyl chloride
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
subpart on a daily basis using the
procedures specified for initial
compliance in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(5) On a monthly basis, you must
measure the concentration of total HAP
in the stripped resin at the outlet of the
resin stripper for continuous processes,
or immediately after stripping for batch
processes, as specified in paragraphs
(b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.
Individual sampling events may be 3 to
5 weeks apart, but you must conduct a
minimum of 12 sampling events per
calendar year.
(6) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP emission
limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2
to this subpart as specified in
paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic
average total HAP concentration for
each stripper for each resin grade
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, using the individual HAP
concentrations measured for the grab
samples collected as specified in
paragraph (b)(4)(iii) or (iv) of this
section and the calculation procedures
specified in paragraph (e) of this
section.
(ii) In the first 12 months following
your demonstration of initial
compliance in paragraph (b)(4) and (5)
of this section, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance with the total
HAP emission limit for stripped resin in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart on a
monthly basis as specified in paragraph
(b)(4) and (5) of this section.
(iii) Beginning 13 months following
your initial demonstration of
compliance in paragraph (b)(5) of this
section, demonstrate continuous
compliance with the total HAP emission
limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2
to this subpart based on a 12-month
rolling average concentration, calculated
as the average of the 12 most recent 24hour arithmetic average concentrations
in either paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(A) or (B) of
this section.
(A) If more than one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period, calculate the 24-hour weighted
arithmetic average total HAP
concentration for each stripper, or for
each group of strippers used to process
the same type of resin, using the 24hour average total HAP concentrations
calculated in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this
section and the mass of each resin grade
produced during the 24-hour sampling
period.
(B) If only one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
event, use the arithmetic average total
HAP concentration for the one resin
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29585
grade in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this
section for each stripper or calculate the
24-hour arithmetic average vinyl
chloride concentration for all strippers
used to process the one grade of resin.
(d) Performance test methods and
procedures for determining
concentration of vinyl chloride and total
HAP. You must determine the
concentration of vinyl chloride and total
HAP using the test methods and
procedures specified in paragraphs
(d)(1) through (5) of this section. Upon
request, the owner or operator shall
make available to the Administrator
such records as may be necessary to
determine the conditions of
performance tests.
(1) You must conduct performance
tests during maximum representative
operating conditions for the process and
when the resin stripper is operating as
close as possible to your operating
limits established during the initial
performance test, as required in
§ 63.11935(d)(2), or during a subsequent
performance test, as provided in
§ 63.11935(d)(2). If an operating limit is
a range, then you must operate the
stripper as close as possible to the
maximum or minimum operating limit
for the resin stripper, whichever results
in higher emissions (i.e., lower emission
reduction). If the resin stripper will be
operating at several different sets of
operating conditions, you must
supplement the testing with additional
testing, modeling and/or engineering
assessments to demonstrate compliance
with the operating limit. Alternative
operating conditions may be used if
specified or approved by the
Administrator.
(2) For measuring total HAP, you
must propose a method in your test plan
prepared in § 63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for
conducting sampling and analysis using
the methods specified in paragraphs
(d)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. You
must submit the test plan for approval
as specified in § 63.8(d) and (e).
(i) Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61,
appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample
collection, preservation, storage, and
transport.
(ii) Method 8260B Volatile Organic
Compounds by Gas Chromatography/
Mass spectrometry (GC/MS) in ‘‘Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods,’’ Revision
3, February 2007, EPA Publication No.
SW–846, Third Edition (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for sample
analysis.
(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you
must use Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61,
appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample
collection, preservation, storage,
transport, and analysis.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(4) When using the methods in
paragraphs (d)(2) and (3) of this section,
for sample collection, preservation,
transport, and analysis, you must
minimize loss of HAP and maintain
sample integrity.
(5) For batch process operations, you
must obtain samples when the batch
process is operating at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions, as specified in
§ 63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and the stripper
is operating at conditions for the
monitored operating parameters that
achieve normal emission reduction. For
combined continuous and batch process
operations, you must obtain sample
when the batch processes are operating
at absolute worst-case conditions and
the stripper is operating at conditions
for the monitored operating parameters
that achieve normal emission reduction.
(e) Method for calculating total HAP
concentration. For each stripped resin
sample measured using the methods
specified in paragraph (d) of this
section, calculate the sum of the
measured individual HAP compound
concentrations by using Equation 1 to
this section.
Where:
CHAP = Concentration of total HAP
compounds in the stripped resin, in
parts per million by weight (ppmw).
Ci = Concentration of each individually
identified HAP compound in the
stripped resin, in ppmw, where a value
of zero should be used for any HAP
concentration that is below the detection
limit.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11965 What are my general
compliance requirements for wastewater?
(a) Initial control level determination.
You must meet the control level (i.e.,
emission limit or standard) specified in
Table 3 to this subpart for each
wastewater stream. To determine the
applicable control level for each
wastewater stream, you must follow the
procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2)
of this section.
(1) You must measure the
concentrations of vinyl chloride and
total HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G
of this part as specified in paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) You must collect wastewater
samples at the location specified in
paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) for vinyl chloride
and paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) for total HAP
listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this
part.
(A) For vinyl chloride, collect samples
at the location that the wastewater
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
stream is generated and prior to the
wastewater stream being exposed to the
atmosphere, stored, combined with any
other liquid stream, treated (e.g.,
stripping, distillation, thin film
evaporating), or discharged to a
wastewater treatment plant.
(B) For total HAP listed in Table 9 to
subpart G of this part, collect samples at
the point of determination, as defined in
subpart G of this part.
(ii) You must measure the
concentration of vinyl chloride and total
HAP (based on the HAP listed in Table
9 to subpart G of this part) using the test
methods and procedures specified in
§ 63.11980(a) and Table 10 to this
subpart and the calculation method
specified in § 63.11980(b).
(2) You must determine the annual
average flow rate as specified in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(b) Requirements for wastewater
streams that must be treated to reduce
the vinyl chloride concentration. Each
wastewater stream that has a vinyl
chloride concentration equal to or
greater than 10 parts per million by
weight, determined pursuant to
paragraph (a)(1) of this section must be
treated to reduce the concentration of
vinyl chloride at the outlet of the
treatment process as specified in Table
3 to this subpart. You must meet the
wastewater treatment process
requirements of either paragraph (b)(1)
or (2) of this section. You must also
meet the continuous compliance
requirements specified in § 63.11975.
(1) Route wastewater streams through
hard piping from the point of generation
directly to the treatment process and
route the vent stream from the treatment
process to a closed vent system and
control device meeting the requirements
of §§ 63.11925 through 63.11945.
(2) Meet the requirements for
wastewater tanks, surface
impoundments, containers, individual
drain systems, and oil/water separators
used to manage the wastewater from the
point of generation through the
treatment process as specified in
§§ 63.133 through 63.137 and all
requirements of subpart G of this part
referenced therein.
(c) Requirements for wastewater
streams that must be treated to reduce
the concentration of the total HAP listed
in Table 9 to subpart G of this part. For
each wastewater stream that contains
greater than or equal to 1,000 parts per
million by weight total HAP in
paragraph § 63.11970(a)(2) or
§ 63.11975(d)(3), and has an annual
average flow rate greater than or equal
to 10 liters per minute in
§ 63.11970(a)(2) or § 63.11975(e)(2), as
determined pursuant to paragraphs
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) Comply with the applicable
requirements for wastewater tanks,
surface impoundments, containers,
individual drain systems, and oil/water
separators as specified in §§ 63.133
through 63.137.
(2) Comply with the applicable
requirements specified in § 63.138 for
control of total HAP listed in Table 9 to
subpart G of this part. Alternatively, you
may elect to comply with the
wastewater treatment provisions
specified in § 63.132(g).
(3) Comply with the applicable
monitoring and inspection requirements
specified in § 63.143.
(4) Comply with the applicable
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements specified in §§ 63.146 and
63.147.
(d) Determination of the annual
average flow rate. The annual average
flow rate for the wastewater stream must
be representative of actual or
anticipated operation of the PVCPU
generating the wastewater over a
designated 12-month period. You must
consider the total annual wastewater
volume generated by the PVCPU. You
must use one or more of the procedures
specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(3) of this section to determine the flow
rate. Documentation to determine the
annual average flow rate is not required
for wastewater streams with an annual
average flow rate of 10 liters per minute
or greater.
(1) Knowledge of the wastewater. You
may use knowledge of the wastewater
stream and/or the process to determine
the annual average flow rate. You must
use the maximum expected annual
average production capacity of the
process unit, knowledge of the process,
and/or mass balance information to
either: estimate directly the annual
average wastewater flow rate; or
estimate the total annual wastewater
volume and then divide the total
volume by 525,600 minutes in a year.
When knowledge is used to determine
the annual average flow rate, you must
provide sufficient information to
document the flow rate for wastewater
streams determined to have an annual
average flow rate of less than 10 liters
per minute.
(2) Historical records. You may use
historical records to determine the
annual average flow rate. Derive the
highest annual average flow rate of
wastewater from historical records
representing the 5 most recent years of
operation, or, if the process unit has
been in service for less than 5 years but
at least 1 year, from historical records
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.060</GPH>
29586
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
representing the total operating life of
the process unit. When historical
records are used to determine the
annual average flow rate, you must
provide sufficient information to
document the flow rate for wastewater
streams determined to have an annual
average flow rate of less than 10 liters
per minute.
(3) Measurements of flow rate. You
may take measurements to determine
the annual average flow rate. If you elect
to measure flow rate, you must measure
flow rate measurements at or near the
point of determination, as defined in
subpart G of this part. When
measurement data are used to determine
the annual average flow rate, you must
provide sufficient information to
document the flow rate measurements
for wastewater streams determined to
have an annual average flow rate of less
than 10 liters per minute.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11970 What are my initial compliance
requirements for wastewater?
(a) Demonstration of initial
compliance for wastewater streams that
must be treated. For each wastewater
stream that must be treated as specified
in § 63.11965(b) and (c), you must meet
the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (3) of this section, respectively,
to demonstrate initial compliance.
(1) For each wastewater stream that
must be treated to reduce the vinyl
chloride concentration limit specified in
Table 3 to this subpart, and for which
you elect to treat the stream according
to § 63.11965(b)(1), you must follow the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(i)
through (iii) of this section.
(i) For each wastewater treatment
process, you must prepare the sitespecific monitoring plan specified in
§ 63.11935(c) for CPMS. You must
install, operate, and maintain CPMS
meeting the requirements of § 63.11935
and capable of continuously monitoring
the parameters specified in
§ 63.11975(a)(1). You must conduct an
initial site-specific performance
evaluation test of each CPMS according
to your site-specific monitoring plan
and § 63.11935(c)(2).
(ii) You must conduct an initial
performance test for the wastewater
treatment process, measuring the
concentration of vinyl chloride in the
wastewater stream at the outlet of the
wastewater treatment process before the
wastewater is exposed to the
atmosphere and using the test method(s)
and procedures specified in
§ 63.11980(a).
(iii) During the initial performance
test conducted as specified in paragraph
(a)(1)(ii) of this section, you must use
the CPMS data collected pursuant to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section to
establish an operating limit for the
wastewater treatment process according
to the procedures specified in
§ 63.11935(d) for each operating
parameter specified in § 63.11975(a)(1).
Each operating limit must be based on
the data averaging period for the
wastewater treatment process specified
in Table 6 to this subpart using data
collected at the minimum frequency
specified in §§ 63.11935(c)(2) and
63.11890(c), and calculated using the
data reduction method specified in
§ 63.11935(e). For a CPMS used on a
batch operation, you may use a data
averaging period based on an operating
block in lieu of the averaging period
specified in Table 6 to this subpart.
(2) For each wastewater stream that
must be treated to meet the vinyl
chloride emission limit in Table 3 to
this subpart, and for which you elect to
treat the stream according to
§ 63.11965(b)(2), you must demonstrate
initial compliance as specified in
subpart G, as referenced in
63.11965(b)(2).
(3) For each wastewater stream that
contains greater than or equal to 1,000
parts per million by weight of total HAP
and has an annual average flow rate
greater than or equal to 10 liters per
minute, determined using the
procedures and methods specified in
§ 63.11965(a)(1) and (2) respectively,
you must demonstrate initial
compliance as specified in subpart G, as
referenced in § 63.11965(c).
(b) Demonstration of initial
compliance for wastewater streams that
are not required to be treated for vinyl
chloride. For each wastewater stream
that has a vinyl chloride concentration
less than 10 parts per million by weight,
you must use the measurement
specified in § 63.11965(a)(1) to
demonstrate initial compliance.
(c) Demonstration of initial
compliance for wastewater streams that
are not required to be treated for total
HAP. You must follow the procedure in
either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this
section to demonstrate initial
compliance.
(1) For each wastewater stream that
has a total HAP concentration of less
than 1,000 parts per million by weight,
you must use the measurement in
§ 63.11965(a)(1)(i)(B) to demonstrate
compliance.
(2) For each wastewater stream that
has an annual average flow rate of less
than 10 liters per minute, you must use
the flow rate initially determined as
specified in § 63.11965(a)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29587
§ 63.11975 What are my continuous
compliance requirements for wastewater?
For each wastewater stream that must
be treated to reduce the concentration of
vinyl chloride as specified in
§ 63.11965(b)(1), you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
either paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section. For each wastewater stream for
which you initially determine in
§ 63.11970(c) that treatment is not
required to reduce total HAP
concentration, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
paragraph (e) of this section. For each
wastewater stream that must be treated
to reduce the concentration of total HAP
as specified in § 63.11965(c), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance as
specified in paragraph (c) of this
section. For each wastewater stream for
which you initially determine in
§ 63.11970(b) that treatment is not
required to reduce the vinyl chloride
concentration, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(a) For each wastewater stream that
must be treated to reduce the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and for
which you elect to treat the stream
according to § 63.11965(b)(1), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance as
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(3) of this section.
(1) For each wastewater treatment
process, you must operate and maintain
CPMS meeting the requirements of
§ 63.11935(c) and capable of
continuously recording the parameters
specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through
(iv) of this section, as applicable. You
must conduct periodic site-specific
CPMS performance evaluation tests
according to your site-specific
monitoring plan and § 63.11935(c).
(i) For wastewater steam strippers,
you must monitor the ratio of steam feed
rate into the stripper to wastewater
stream flow rate into the stripper and
the temperature of the wastewater
exiting the stripper before any cooling
process. The steam feed to wastewater
flow ratio is calculated by dividing the
steam feed rate by the wastewater
stream flow rate. You must follow the
data measurement and recording
frequencies and data averaging periods
specified in Table 6 to this subpart.
(ii) For wastewater vacuum strippers,
you must monitor the vacuum level
maintained in the column, the
maximum flow rate of the wastewater
stream, and the temperature of the
wastewater exiting the stripper before
any cooling process. If steam is used,
you must monitor the ratio of steam feed
rate into the stripper to wastewater
stream flow rate into the stripper
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29588
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
instead of monitoring the flow rate of
the wastewater stream. The steam feed
to wastewater flow ratio is calculated by
dividing the steam feed rate by the
wastewater stream flow rate. You must
follow the data measurement and
recording frequencies and data
averaging periods specified in Table 6 to
this subpart.
(iii) If you are using a wastewater
treatment process other than a steam or
vacuum stripper, you must submit the
information specified in paragraphs
(a)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) A description of the proposed
treatment process.
(B) A description of the parameter(s)
to be monitored to ensure that the
treatment process is operated in
conformance with its design and that it
achieves the emission standard
specified in Table 3 to this subpart, and
an explanation of the criteria used to
select the parameter(s).
(C) A description of the methods and
procedures that will be used to
demonstrate that the parameter
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(B) of
this section indicates proper operation
of the treatment process, the schedule
for this demonstration, and a statement
that you will establish an operating
limit for the monitored operating
parameter as part of the notification of
compliance status report specified in
§ 63.11935(d).
(iv) Alternatives to monitoring
requirements.
(A) You may request approval to use
alternatives to the continuous operating
parameter monitoring listed in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5).
(B) You may request approval to
monitor a different parameter than those
established in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)
through (iii) of this section or to set
unique monitoring parameter, as
specified in § 63.11985(c)(6).
(C) Until permission to use an
alternative monitoring procedure,
method, or parameter has been granted
by the Administrator, you remain
subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
(2) You must ensure that each
operating parameter monitored in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section for a
treatment process meets the operating
limit established in § 63.11970(a)(1)(iii).
You must continuously determine the
average value of each monitored
operating parameter based on the data
collection and reduction methods
specified in § 63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and
the applicable data averaging period for
the wastewater treatment process
specified in Table 6 to this subpart for
all periods the process is operating. You
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
must follow the data measurement and
recording frequencies and data
averaging periods specified in Table 6 to
this subpart. For a CPMS used on a
batch operation, you may use a data
averaging period based on an operating
block in lieu of the averaging periods
specified in Table 6 to this subpart.
(3) To demonstrate compliance with
the emission limit for vinyl chloride
specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you
must follow the procedures specified in
paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Take monthly measurements of the
vinyl chloride concentration using the
procedures and methods for vinyl
chloride specified in § 63.11965(a)(1).
(ii) In the first 12 months following
your demonstration of initial
compliance in § 63.11970(a)(1), you
must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the vinyl chloride
emission limit in Table 3 to this subpart
on a monthly basis, using the monthly
concentration measurement specified in
paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section.
(iii) Beginning 13 months following
your initial demonstration of
compliance in § 63.11970(a)(1),
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the vinyl chloride emission limit
in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly
basis, using a 12-month rolling average
concentration, calculated as the average
of the 12 most recent monthly
concentration measurements specified
in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section.
(b) For each wastewater stream that
must be treated to reduce the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and for
which you elect to treat the stream
according to § 63.11965(b)(2), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance as
specified in subpart G of this part, as
referenced in § 63.11965(b)(2).
(c) For each wastewater stream that
must be treated to reduce the
concentration of total HAP as specified
in § 63.11965(c), you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
subpart G of this part, as referenced in
§ 63.11965(c).
(d) For each wastewater stream for
which you initially demonstrate in
§ 63.11970(b) that treatment is not
required to reduce the vinyl chloride
concentration, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Conduct monthly performance
tests, measuring the vinyl chloride
concentration using the procedures and
methods for vinyl chloride specified in
§ 63.11965(a)(1).
(2) In the first 12 months following
your demonstration of initial
compliance in § 63.11970(b), you must
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the vinyl chloride emission limit
in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly
basis, using the monthly concentration
measurement specified in paragraph
(d)(1) of this section.
(3) Beginning 13 months following
your initial demonstration of
compliance in § 63.11970(b),
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the vinyl chloride emission limit
in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly
basis, using a 12-month rolling average
concentration, calculated as the average
of the 12 most recent monthly
concentration measurements specified
in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(4) If any monthly performance test
specified in paragraph (d)(2) or (3) of
this section shows that the
concentration of vinyl chloride in the
wastewater stream is greater than or
equal to the vinyl chloride emission
limit in Table 3 to this subpart, then you
must use a treatment process to reduce
the vinyl chloride concentration as
specified in § 63.11965(b) and you must
demonstrate compliance as specified in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(e) For each wastewater stream for
which you initially demonstrate in
§ 63.11970(c) that treatment is not
required to reduce the total HAP
concentration, you must conduct
monthly performance tests, following
the procedure specified in paragraph
(e)(1) or (2) of this section on a monthly
basis.
(1) Sample and measure the
concentration of total HAP using the
procedures and methods for total HAP
specified in § 63.11965(a)(1) and
demonstrate that the total HAP
concentration (based on the HAP listed
in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) is
less than 1,000 parts per million by
weight. The data-averaging period for
demonstrating compliance is specified
in subpart G of this part.
(2) Re-establish that the annual
average flow rate of the stream is less
than 10 liters per minute, using the
procedure and methods specified in
§ 63.11965(a)(2).
(3) If any monthly performance test
specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this
section shows that the concentration of
total HAP is greater than or equal to
1,000 parts per million by weight and
the annual average flow rate measured
in paragraph (e)(2) of this section is
greater than or equal to 10 liters per
minute, then you must use a treatment
process to reduce the vinyl chloride
concentration as specified in
§ 63.11965(c) and you must demonstrate
compliance as specified in paragraph (b)
of this section.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(a) Performance test methods and
procedures. You must determine the
concentration of vinyl chloride and total
HAP (based on the list of HAP in Table
9 to subpart G of this part) using the test
methods and procedures specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this
section. Upon request, the owner or
operator shall make available to the
Administrator such records as may be
necessary to determine the conditions of
performance tests.
(1) You must conduct performance
tests during maximum representative
operating conditions for the process and
when the wastewater treatment process
is operating as close as possible to your
operating limits established during the
performance test conducted to
demonstrate initial compliance, as
required in § 63.11970, or during a
subsequent performance test conducted
to demonstrate continuous compliance,
as provided in § 63.11975. If an
operating limit is a range, then you must
operate the wastewater treatment
process as close as possible to the
maximum or minimum operating limit,
whichever results in higher emissions
(i.e., lower emission reduction). If the
wastewater treatment process will be
operating at several different sets of
operating conditions, you must
supplement the testing with additional
testing, modeling and/or engineering
assessments to demonstrate compliance
Where:
CT9 = Concentration of total HAP that are
listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part,
in the stream, in parts per million by
weight (ppmw).
Ci = Concentration of each individually
identified HAP that is listed in Table 9
to subpart G of this part, in ppmw.
Notifications, Reports, and Records
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11985 What notifications and reports
must I submit and when?
In addition to the notifications and
reports required in subpart A of this
part, as specified in Table 5 to this
subpart, you must submit the additional
information and reports specified in
paragraphs (a) through (c) of this
section, as applicable.
(a) Notification of compliance status.
When submitting the notification of
compliance status required in § 63.9(h),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
with the operating limit. Alternative
operating conditions may be used if
specified or approved by the
Administrator as specified in
63.11940(j).
(2) For measuring total HAP, you
must propose a method in your test plan
prepared in § 63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for
conducting sampling and analysis using
the methods specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. You
must submit the test plan for approval
as specified in § 63.8(d) and (e).
(i) Using Method 107 at 40 CFR part
61, appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample
collection, preservation, storage, and
transport.
(ii) For sample analysis for total HAP
except methanol, using Method 8260B
Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas
Chromatography/Mass spectrometry
(GC/MS) in ‘‘Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods,’’ Revision 3,
February 2007, EPA Publication No.
SW–846, Third Edition (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for sample
analysis.
(iii) For sample analysis for methanol,
using Method 305 at 40 CFR 63,
appendix A, Sections 6.0 and 7.0.
(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you
must use Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61,
appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample
collection, preservation, storage,
transport, and analysis.
(4) When using the test methods in
paragraph (a)(2) or (3) of this section,
you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Sample collection may consist of
grab or composite samples.
(ii) Samples must be taken before the
wastewater stream is exposed to the
atmosphere.
(iii) You must ensure that sample
collection, preservation, transport, and
analysis minimizes loss of HAP and
maintains sample integrity.
(5) For batch process operations, you
must obtain samples when the batch
process is operating at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions, as defined for process
vents in § 63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and
the wastewater treatment process is
operating at conditions specified in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section. For
combined continuous and batch process
operations, you must obtain sample
when the batch processes are operating
at absolute worst-case conditions and
the wastewater treatment process is
operating at conditions for the
monitored operating parameters that
achieve normal emission reduction.
(b) Method for calculating total HAP
concentration. For each wastewater
stream measured using the methods
specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, calculate the sum of the
measured concentrations of individual
HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of
this part by using Equation 1 to this
section.
you must also include the information
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(9) of this section, as applicable.
(1) You must include an identification
of the storage vessels subject to this
subpart, including the capacity and
liquid stored for each vessel. You must
submit the information specified in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section for each
pressure vessel.
(2) You must include the information
specified in § 63.1039(a) for equipment
leaks.
(3) You must include an identification
of the heat exchange systems that are
subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
(4) You must include the operating
limit for each monitoring parameter
identified for each control device, resin
stripper, and wastewater treatment
process used to meet the emission limits
in Table 1, 2 or 3 to this subpart, as
determined pursuant to § 63.11935(d).
This report must include the
information in § 63.11935(d), as
applicable.
(5) You must include the records
specified in paragraphs (d)(5)(i) through
(iv) of this section, as applicable, for
process vents.
(i) You must include the performance
test records specified in § 63.11990(f)(1),
as applicable. These reports must
include one complete test report for
each test method used for each process
vent. A complete test report must
include a brief process description,
sampling site description, description of
sampling and analysis procedures and
any modifications to standard
procedures, quality assurance
procedures, record of operating
conditions during the test, record of
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
EP20MY11.061</GPH>
§ 63.11980 What are my test methods and
calculation procedures for wastewater?
29589
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29590
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
preparation of standards, record of
calibrations, raw data sheets for field
sampling, raw data sheets for field and
laboratory analyses, documentation of
calculations, and any other information
required by the test method. For
additional tests performed for the same
kind of emission point using the same
method, the results and any other
information required in applicable
sections of this subpart must be
submitted, but a complete test report is
not required.
(ii) You must include the information
specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(ii)(A)
through (C) of this section for batch
process vent operations.
(A) Descriptions of worst-case
operating and/or testing conditions for
control devices including results of
emissions profiles.
(B) Calculations used to demonstrate
initial compliance according to
§§ 63.11945 and 63.11950, including
documentation of the proper operation
of a process condenser(s) as specified in
§ 63.11950(c)(2)(ii).
(C) Data and rationale used to support
an engineering assessment to calculate
emissions in accordance with
§ 63.11950(i).
(iii) If you use a fabric filter, you must
include the fabric filter operation and
maintenance plan as specified in
§ 63.11940(h)(10). You must submit
analyses and supporting documentation
demonstrating conformance with Fabric
Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance,
EPA–454/R–98–015, September 1997
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14)
and specifications for bag leak detection
systems as part of the notification of
compliance status report.
(iv) If you use a control device other
than those listed in § 63.11940 for your
process vent, you must include a
description of the parameters to be
monitored to ensure the control device
is operated in conformance with its
design and achieves the specified
emission limitation and an explanation
of the criteria used to select the
parameter; and a description of the
methods and procedures that will be
used to demonstrate that the parameter
indicates proper operation of the control
device, the schedule for this
demonstration, and a statement that you
will establish an operating limit for the
monitored parameter as specified in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(6) [Reserved]
(7) You must include the records
specified in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through
(iii) of this section, as applicable, for
resin strippers.
(i) You must include an identification
of each resin stripper and resin type
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
(ii) You must include results of the
initial testing used to determine the
annual average concentration of vinyl
chloride and the annual average flow
rate and concentration of total HAP that
are listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this
part.
(iii) You must record the approved
test method specified in § 63.11980(a)
for sample introduction, instrument
calibration and sample analysis for the
laboratory determination of vinyl
chloride and the laboratory
determination of total HAP that are
listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this
part.
(8) You must include the records
specified in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through
(vi) of this section, as applicable, for
wastewater.
(i) You must include an identification
of each wastewater stream subject to the
requirements of this subpart, and the
control level required. You must also
include a description of the treatment
process to be used for each wastewater
stream.
(ii) You must include results of the
initial sampling used to determine the
annual average concentration of vinyl
chloride and the annual average
concentration of total HAP that are
listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this
part.
(iii) You must include the annual
average flow rate calculated using the
procedures in § 63.11965(d) for each
wastewater stream that you have
determined is not subject to treatment as
specified in § 63.11970(b) because it has
an annual average flow rate of less than
10 liters per minute.
(iv) You must record the test method
specified in § 63.11980(a)(2) for sample
introduction, instrument calibration and
sample analysis for the laboratory
determination of vinyl chloride and
laboratory determination of total HAP
that are listed in Table 9 to subpart G
of this part.
(v) You must include any other
applicable information that is required
by the reporting requirements specified
in § 63.146 of subpart G.
(vi) If you use a wastewater treatment
process other than a steam or vacuum
stripper for wastewater, you must
include a description of the parameters
to be monitored to ensure the control
measure is operated in conformance
with its design and achieves the
specified emission limitation and an
explanation of the criteria used to select
the parameter; and a description of the
methods and procedures that will be
used to demonstrate that the parameter
indicates proper operation of the control
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
device, the schedule for this
demonstration, and a statement that you
will establish an operating limit for the
monitored parameter as specified in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(9) You must include a certification of
compliance, signed by a responsible
official, as applicable that states the
following:
(i) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for storage
vessels.’’
(ii) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for
equipment leaks.’’
(iii) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for heat
exchange systems.’’
(iv) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for HAP
emissions from process vents.’’
(v) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for other
emission sources.’’
(vi) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for the
stripped resin.’’
(vii) ‘‘This facility complies with the
requirements in this subpart for
wastewater.’’
(b) Compliance reports. When
submitting the excess emissions and
continuous monitoring system
performance report and summary report
required in § 63.10(e)(3), you must also
include the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (10) of this
section, as applicable. This report is
referred to in this subpart as your
compliance report.
(1) You must include a copy of the
inspection record specified in
§ 63.11990(b)(2) for each storage vessel
when a defect, failure, or leak is
detected. You must also include a copy
of the applicable information specified
in § 63.1039(b)(5) through (8) of subpart
UU of this part for each pressure vessel.
(2) You must include the information
specified in § 63.1039(b) for equipment
leaks, except for releases from pressure
relief devices. For any releases from
pressure relief devices, you must submit
the report specified in paragraph (c)(8)
of this section instead of the information
specified in § 63.1039(b)(1) through (3)
of subpart UU of this part.
(3) You must include the information
specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through
(vi) of this section for heat exchange
systems.
(i) The number of heat exchangers.
(ii) The number of heat exchangers
found to be leaking.
(iii) A summary of the monitoring
data used to indicate a leak, including
the number of leaks determined to be
equal to or greater than the leak
definition.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(iv) If applicable, the date a leak was
identified, the date the source of the
leak was identified, and the date of
repair.
(v) If applicable, a summary of each
delayed repair, including the original
date and reason for the delay and the
date of repair, if repaired during the
reporting period.
(vi) If applicable, an estimate of total
strippable volatile organic compounds
emissions for each delayed repair over
the reporting period.
(4) You must include the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through
(iii) of this section, as applicable, for
process vents, resin strippers, and
wastewater.
(i) Deviations using CEMS or CPMS.
For each deviation from an emission
limit or operating limit where a CEMS
or CPMS is being used to comply with
an emission limit in this rule, you must
include the information in paragraphs
(b)(4)(i)(A) through (E) of this section.
(A) For CEMS, the 3-hour block
average value calculated for any period
when the value is higher than an
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart or when the value does not meet
the data availability requirements
defined in § 63.11890(c).
(B) For CPMS, the average value
calculated for any day (based on the
data averaging periods for compliance
specified in Table 6 to this subpart) that
does not meet your operating limit
established according to § 63.11935(d)
or that does not meet the data
availability requirements specified in
§ 63.11890(c).
(C) The cause for the calculated
emission level or operating parameter
level do not meet the established
emission limit or operating limit.
(D) For deviations caused by lack of
monitoring data, the duration of periods
when monitoring data were not
collected.
(E) Operating logs of batch process
operations for each day during which
the deviation occurred, including a
description of the operating scenario(s)
during the deviation.
(ii) New operating scenario. Include
each new operating scenario that has
been operated since the time period
covered by the last compliance report
and has not been submitted in the
notification of compliance status report
or a previous compliance report. For
each new operating scenario, you must
provide verification that the operating
conditions for any associated control or
treatment device have not been
exceeded and constitute proper
operation for the new operating
scenario. You must provide any
required calculations and engineering
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
analyses that have been performed for
the new operating scenario. For the
purposes of this paragraph (b)(4)(ii), a
revised operating scenario for an
existing process is considered to be a
new operating scenario when one or
more of the data elements listed in
§ 63.11990(e)(4) have changed.
(iii) Process changes. You must
document process changes, or changes
made to any of the information
submitted in the notification of
compliance status report or a previous
compliance report, that is not within the
scope of an existing operating scenario,
in the compliance report. The
notification must include all of the
information in paragraphs (b)(4)(iii)(A)
through (C) of this section.
(A) A description of the process
change.
(B) Revisions to any of the
information reported in the original
notification of compliance status report
as provided in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(C) Information required by the
notification of compliance status report,
as provided in paragraph (a) of this
section, for changes involving the
addition of processes or equipment at
the affected source.
(5) You must submit the applicable
information specified in paragraphs
(b)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section for
process vents.
(i) For catalytic incinerators for which
you have selected the alternative
monitoring specified in § 63.11940(b)(3),
results of the annual catalyst sampling
and inspections required by
§ 63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii) including any
subsequent corrective actions taken.
(ii) For regenerative adsorbers, results
of the adsorber bed outlet volatile
organic compounds concentration
measurements specified in
§ 63.11940(d)(7).
(iii) For non-regenerative adsorbers,
results of the adsorber bed outlet
volatile organic compounds
concentration measurements specified
in § 63.11940(e)(2).
(iv) Other control device reporting
provisions. If you are using a control
device other than those listed in this
subpart, you must submit the
information as specified in paragraphs
(b)(5)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) A description of the proposed
control device.
(B) A description of the parameter(s)
to be monitored to ensure the control
device is operated in conformance with
its design and achieves the performance
level as specified in this subpart and an
explanation of the criteria used to select
the parameter(s).
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29591
(C) The frequency and content of
monitoring, recording, and reporting if
monitoring and recording is not
continuous, or if compliance reports, as
specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(A) of this
section, will not contain 3-hour block
average values when the monitored
parameter value does not meet the
established operating limit. The
rationale for the proposed monitoring,
recording, and reporting system must be
included.
(6) You must include the records
specified in § 63.11990(j) for other
emission sources.
(7) For resin stripper operations, you
must include results of monthly
concentration measurements for each
resin type discharged from the PVCPU
that did not meet the control level
requirements in Table 1 or 2, as
applicable.
(8) You must include the information
specified in paragraphs (b)(8)(i) and (ii)
of this section for your wastewater
streams.
(i) Results of monthly concentration
measurements for each wastewater
stream discharged from the affected
source that did not meet the control
level requirements in Table 3 to this
subpart.
(ii) If you must comply with
§ 63.11965, you must include any other
applicable information that is required
by the reporting requirements specified
in § 63.146.
(9) For closed vent systems subject to
the requirements of § 63.11930, you
must include the information specified
in paragraphs (b)(9)(i) through (iv) of
this section, as applicable.
(i) As applicable, records as specified
in § 63.11930(g)(1)(i) for all times when
flow was detected in the bypass line, the
vent stream was diverted from the
control device, or the flow indicator was
not operating.
(ii) As applicable, records as specified
in § 63.11930(g)(1)(ii) for all occurrences
of all periods when a bypass of the
system was indicated (the seal
mechanism is broken, the bypass line
valve position has changed, or the key
for a lock-and-key type lock has been
checked out, and records of any car-seal
that has been broken).
(iii) Records of all times when
monitoring of the system was not
performed as specified in § 63.11930(d)
and (e), or repairs were not performed
as specified in § 63.11930(f), or records
were not kept as specified in
§ 63.11930(g)(2).
(iv) Records of each time an alarm on
a closed vent system operating in
vacuum service is triggered as specified
in § 63.11930(h) including the cause for
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29592
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the alarm and the corrective action
taken.
(10) Overlap with title V reports.
Information required by this subpart,
which is submitted with a title V
periodic report, does not need to be
included in a subsequent compliance
report required by this subpart or
subpart referenced by this subpart. The
title V report must be referenced in the
compliance report required by this
subpart.
(c) Other notifications and reports.
You must submit the other notification
and reports, as specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (10) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) Notification of inspection. To
provide the Administrator the
opportunity to have an observer present,
you must notify the Administrator at
least 30 days before an inspection
required by §§ 63.11910 through
63.11920 and § 63.11930. If an
inspection is unplanned and you could
not have known about the inspection 30
days in advance, then you must notify
the Administrator at least 7 days before
the inspection. Notification must be
made by telephone immediately
followed by written documentation
demonstrating why the inspection was
unplanned. Alternatively, the
notification including the written
documentation may be made in writing
and sent so that it is received by the
Administrator at least 7 days before the
inspection. If a delegated State or local
agency is notified, you are not required
to notify the Administrator. A delegated
State or local agency may waive the
requirement for notification of
inspections.
(2) Batch precompliance report. You
must submit a batch precompliance
report at least 6 months prior to the
compliance date of this subpart that
includes a description of the test
conditions, data, calculations, and other
information used to establish operating
limits according to § 63.11935(d) for all
batch operations. If you use an
engineering assessment as specified in
§ 63.11950(i), you must also include
data or other information supporting a
finding that the emissions estimation
equations in § 63.11950(a) through (h)
are inappropriate. We will either
approve or disapprove the report within
90 days after we receive it. If we
disapprove the report, you must still be
in compliance with the emission
limitations and work practice standards
of this subpart by your compliance date.
To change any of the information
submitted in the report, you must notify
us 60 days before you implement the
planned change.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(3) Notification of process change. If
you change or add to your plant site or
affected source, as discussed in
§ 63.11896, you must submit a
notification describing the change or
addition.
(4) Affirmative defense notification
and report.
(i) As specified in § 63.11895(b), if
your affected source experiences an
exceedance of its emission limit(s)
during a malfunction, you must notify
the Administrator by telephone or
facsimile (fax) transmission as soon as
possible, but no later than 2 business
days after the initial occurrence of the
malfunction, if you wish to avail
yourself of an affirmative defense to
civil penalties for that malfunction.
(ii) If you seek to assert an affirmative
defense, you must follow the procedures
in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section and
submit a written report as specified in
§ 63.11895 to the Administrator within
45 days of the initial occurrence of the
exceedance of the standard in
§ 63.11880 to demonstrate, with all
necessary supporting documentation,
that you have met the requirements set
forth in § 63.11895(a).
(5) Request for approval to use
alternative monitoring methods. Prior to
your initial notification of compliance
status, you may submit requests for
approval to use alternatives to the
continuous operating parameter
monitoring specified in this rule, as
provided for in §§ 63.11940(j)(1),
63.11960(c)(1)(iv)(A), and
63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(A), following the
same procedure as specified in § 63.8.
The information specified in paragraphs
(c)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section must be
included.
(i) A description of the proposed
alternative system.
(ii) Information justifying your request
for an alternative method, such as the
technical or economic infeasibility, or
the impracticality, of the affected source
using the required method.
(6) Request for approval to monitor
alternative parameters. Prior to your
initial notification of compliance status,
you may submit requests for approval to
monitor a different parameter than those
established in § 63.11935(d) and as
provided for in §§ 63.11940(j)(2),
63.11960(c) (1)(iv)(B), and
63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(B), following the
same procedure as specified for
alternative monitoring methods in
§ 63.8. The information specified in
paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) of this
section must be included in the request.
(i) A description of the parameter(s) to
be monitored to ensure the control
technology or pollution prevention
measure is operated in conformance
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
with its design and achieves the
specified emission limit and an
explanation of the criteria used to select
the parameter(s).
(ii) A description of the methods and
procedures that will be used to
demonstrate that the parameter
indicates proper operation of the control
device, the schedule for this
demonstration, and a statement that you
will establish an operating limit for the
monitored parameter(s) as part of the
notification of compliance status if
required under this subpart, unless this
information has already been submitted.
(iii) The frequency and content of
monitoring, recording, and reporting, if
monitoring and recording is not
continuous. The rationale for the
proposed monitoring, recording, and
reporting system must be included.
(7) [Reserved]
(8) Pressure relief device, closed vent
system in vacuum service, bypass
deviation, or pressure vessel closure
device deviation report. If any pressure
relief device in HAP service or any
piece of equipment or closed vent
system has discharged to the
atmosphere as specified in
§§ 63.11910(c)(4), 63.11915(c),
63.11930(c), or 63.11930(h), you must
submit to the Administrator within 10
days of the discharge the following
information:
(i) The source, nature, and cause of
the discharge.
(ii) The date, time, and duration of the
discharge.
(iii) An estimate of the quantity of
vinyl chloride and total HAP emitted
during the discharge and the method
used for determining this quantity.
(iv) The actions taken to prevent this
discharge.
(v) The measures adopted to prevent
future such discharges.
(9) Commencing and ceasing
operation of continuous emissions
monitoring systems. Before starting or
stopping the use of CEMS you must
notify the Administrator as specified in
§ 63.11935(b)(7).
(10) Data Submittal.
(i) As of January 1, 2012, and within
60 days after the date of completing
each performance test (see § 60.8)
required by this subpart, you must
submit performance test data, except
opacity data, electronically to EPA’s
Central Data Exchange (CDX) by using
the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) (see
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/
ert_tool.html). Only data collected using
test methods compatible with ERT are
subject to this requirement to be
submitted electronically to EPA’s CDX.
(ii) Within 60 days after the date of
completing each CEMS performance
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
evaluation test (see § 60.13), you must
submit the relative accuracy test audit
data electronically into EPA’s CDX by
using the ERT, as mentioned in
paragraph (10)(i) of this section. Only
data collected using test methods
compatible with ERT are subject to this
requirement to be submitted
electronically to EPA’s CDX.
(iii) All reports required by this
subpart not subject to the requirements
in paragraphs (c)(10)(i) and (ii) of this
section must be sent to the
Administrator at the appropriate
address listed in § 63.13. The
Administrator or the delegated authority
may request a report in any form
suitable for the specific case (e.g., by
electronic media such as Excel
spreadsheet, on CD or hard copy). The
Administrator retains the right to
require submittal of reports subject to
paragraphs (10)(i) and (ii) of this section
in paper format.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.11990
What records must I keep?
You must keep records as specified in
paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section,
as applicable.
(a) Copies of reports. You must keep
a copy of each notification and report
that you submit to comply with this
subpart, including all documentation
supporting any notification or report.
You must also keep copies of the
current versions of the site-specific
performance evaluation test plan, sitespecific monitoring plan, and the
equipment leak detection and repair
plan.
(b) Storage vessels. For storage
vessels, you must maintain the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(5) of this section.
(1) You must keep a record of the
dimensions of the storage vessel, an
analysis of the capacity of the storage
vessel, and an identification of the
liquid stored.
(2) Inspection records for fixed roofs
complying with § 63.11910 including
the information specified in paragraphs
(b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Record the date of each inspection
required by § 63.11910(a)(3).
(ii) For each defect detected during an
inspection required by § 63.11910(a)(3),
record the location of the defect, a
description of the defect, the date of
detection, and corrective action taken to
repair the defect. In the event that repair
of the defect is delayed in accordance
with § 63.11910(a)(4)(ii), also record the
reason for the delay and the date that
completion of repair of the defect is
expected.
(3) For degassing and cleaning events,
you must maintain the records specified
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Keep records of the storage vessel
identification and date of each
degassing and cleaning event.
(ii) Estimate and keep records of the
emissions from each degassing and
cleaning event.
(4) For pressure vessels, you must
keep the records specified in paragraph
(c) of this section for each pressure
vessel.
(5) For internal and external floating
roof storage vessels, you must maintain
the records required in § 63.1065 of
subpart WW of this part.
(c) Equipment leaks. For equipment
leaks, you must maintain the records
specified in § 63.1038 of subpart UU of
this part for equipment leaks and a
record of the information specified in
§ 63.11930(g)(4) for monitoring
instrument calibrations conducted
according to § 63.11930(e)(2).
(d) Heat exchange systems. For a heat
exchange system subject to this subpart,
you must keep the records specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this
section.
(1) Identification of all heat
exchangers at the facility and the
measured or estimated average annual
HAP concentration of process fluid or
intervening cooling fluid processed in
each heat exchanger.
(2) Identification of all heat exchange
systems. For each heat exchange system
that is subject to this subpart, you must
include identification of all heat
exchangers within each heat exchange
system, identification of the individual
heat exchangers within each heat
exchange system, and, for closed-loop
recirculation systems, the cooling tower
included in each heat exchange system.
(3) Identification of all heat exchange
systems that are exempt from the
monitoring requirements according to
the provisions in § 63.11920(b) and the
provision under which the heat
exchange system is exempt.
(4) Results of the following
monitoring data for each monitoring
event.
(i) Date/time of event.
(ii) Heat exchange exit line flow or
cooling tower return line flow at the
sampling location, gal/min.
(iii) Monitoring method employed.
(iv) If the ‘‘Air Stripping Method
(Modified El Paso Method) for
Determination of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Water
Sources,’’ Revision Number One, dated
January 2003, Sampling Procedures
Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower
Monitoring, prepared by Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality,
January 31, 2003 (incorporated by
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29593
reference, see § 63.14) is used according
to § 63.11920(a)(3)(i) or (h)(4)(i):
(A) Barometric pressure.
(B) El Paso air stripping apparatus
water flow (ml/min) and air flow, ml/
min, and air temperature, °C.
(C) FID reading (parts per million by
volume).
(D) Calibration information identified
in Section 5.4.2 of the ‘‘Air Stripping
Method (Modified El Paso Method) for
Determination of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Water
Sources,’’ Revision Number One, dated
January 2003, Sampling Procedures
Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower
Monitoring, prepared by Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality,
January 31, 2003 (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14).
(v) If Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and
Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization
and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors,’’ dated December 1996
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14)
is used according to § 65.610(a)(3)(ii):
(A) The type of detector used.
(B) The list of target analytes.
(C) The measured cooling water
concentration for each of target analyte
(parts per billion by weight).
(D) Calibration and surrogate recovery
information identified in Section 8.0 of
Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and
Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization
and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors,’’ dated December 1996
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14).
(5) The date when a leak was
identified and the date when the heat
exchanger was repaired or taken out of
service.
(6) If a repair is delayed, the reason
for the delay, the schedule for
completing the repair, and the estimate
of potential emissions for the delay of
repair.
(e) Process vents, resin strippers, and
wastewater. You must include the
records specified in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (4) of this section, as applicable,
for process vents, resin strippers, and
wastewater.
(1) Continuous records. Where this
subpart requires a continuous record
using CEMS or CPMS, you must
maintain, at a minimum, the records
specified in § 63.10(b)(2)(vii)(A).
(2) Excluded data. In any average
computed to determine compliance, you
must exclude monitoring data recorded
during periods specified in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Periods of non-operation of the
process unit (or portion thereof),
resulting in cessation of the emissions to
which the monitoring applies.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29594
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(ii) Periods of no flow to a control
device.
(iii) Monitoring system malfunctions,
repairs associated with monitoring
system malfunctions, or required
monitoring system quality assurance or
control activities, as specified in
§ 63.11890(c)(2).
(3) Records of calculated emission
and operating parameter values. You
must retain for 5 years a record of CEMS
and CPMS data as specified in
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section, unless an alternative
recordkeeping system has been
requested and approved.
(i) Except as specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(ii) of this section, retain for 5
years the records of the average values
for each continuously monitored
operating parameter and pollutant
specified in §§ 63.11925(e)(3)(ii),
63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 63.11960(c)(2), and
63.11975(a)(2) for CEMS and CPMS.(ii)
In lieu of calculating and recording the
average value specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(i) of this section, if all 1-hour
averages specified in § 63.11935(e)
demonstrate compliance with your
parameter operating limit or the
applicable pollutant emission limit in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for the block
average period, you may record a
statement that all recorded 1-hour
averages met the operating limit or
emission limit, as applicable, and retain
for 5 years this statement and all
recorded CPMS or CEMS data for the
block average period.
(4) Information to be included in
records. You must keep records of each
operating scenario as specified in
paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (viii) of this
section, as applicable.
(i) You must keep a schedule or log
of operating scenarios, updated each
time a different operating scenario is put
into effect.
(ii) A description of the process and
the type of process components used.
(iii) An identification of related
process vents, wastewater streams, or
resin strippers including their
associated emissions episodes.
(iv) The applicable control
requirements of this subpart for process
vents, resin strippers, and/or treatment
processes.
(v) The control device, resin stripper,
and/or treatment process, including a
description of operating and testing
conditions.
(vi) Combined emissions that are
routed to the same control device, resin
stripper, and/or treatment process.
(vii) The applicable monitoring
requirements of this subpart and any
operating limit that assures compliance
for all emissions routed to the control
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
device resin stripper, and/or treatment
process.
(viii) Calculations and engineering
analyses required to demonstrate
compliance.
(f) Process vents. You must include
the records specified in paragraphs (f)(1)
and (2) of this section, as applicable, for
process vents.
(1) Records of performance tests as
required in § 63.10(b)(2)(viii). You must
also collect the applicable control
device operating parameters required in
§ 63.11940 over the full period of the
performance test.
(2) If you use a control device to
comply with this subpart and you are
required to use CPMS, you must keep
up-to-date and readily accessible
records for your process vents as
specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through
(vi) of this section, as applicable.
(i) If you use a flow indicator, you
must keep records of periods of no flow
to the control device, including the start
and stop time and dates of periods of
flow and no flow.
(ii) If you use a catalytic incinerator
for which you have selected the
alternative monitoring specified in
§ 63.11940(b)(3), you must also maintain
records of the results of the annual
catalyst sampling and inspections
required by § 63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii)
including any subsequent corrective
actions taken.
(iii) If you use a regenerative adsorber
as specified in § 63.11940(d), the
records specified in paragraphs
(f)(2)(iii)(A) through (H) of this section,
as applicable, must be kept.
(A) Records of total regeneration
stream mass flow for each adsorber-bed
regeneration cycle.
(B) Records of the temperature of the
adsorber bed after each regeneration and
within 15 minutes of completing any
cooling cycle.
(C) For non-vacuum and non-steam
regeneration systems, records of the
temperature of the adsorber bed during
each regeneration except during any
temperature regulating (cooling or
warming to bring bed temperature closer
to vent gas temperature) portion of the
regeneration cycle.
(D) If adsorber regeneration vacuum is
monitored pursuant to § 63.11940(d)(4),
records of the vacuum profile over time
and the amount of time the vacuum
level is below the minimum vacuum
target for each adsorber-bed
regeneration cycle.
(E) Records of the regeneration
frequency and duration.
(F) Daily records of the verification
inspections, including the visual
observations and/or any activation of an
automated alarm or shutdown system
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
with a written entry into a log book or
other permanent form of record.
(G) Records of the maximum volatile
organic compound or HAP outlet
concentration observed over the last 5
minutes of the adsorption cycle for each
adsorber bed. Records must be weekly
or for every regeneration cycle if the
regeneration cycle is greater than 1
week.
(H) Records of the date and time the
adsorbent had last been replaced.
(iv) If you use a non-regenerative
adsorber as specified in § 63.11940(e),
the records specified in paragraphs
(f)(2)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section,
as applicable, must be kept.
(A) A record of the average life of the
bed, as determined by § 63.11940(e)(1),
including the date the average life was
determined.
(B) Daily, weekly, or monthly records
of the maximum volatile organic
compound or HAP outlet concentration,
as specified by § 63.11940(e)(2).
(C) Records of bed replacement
including the date and time the
adsorbent had last been replaced, and
the date and time in which
breakthrough is detected.
(v) If you use sorbent injection as
specified in § 63.11940(g), you must
keep records of the type and brand of
sorbent used. If the type or brand of
sorbent is changed, you must maintain
documentation that the substitute will
provide the same or better level of
control as the original sorbent.
(vi) If you use a fabric filter as
specified in § 63.11940(h), you must
maintain the records specified in
paragraphs (f)(2)(vi)(A) through (C) of
this section for each bag leak detector
used.
(A) An operation and maintenance
plan as described in § 63.11940(h)(10).
(B) A corrective action plan as
described in § 63.11940(h)(11).
(C) Records of any bag leak detection
system alarm, including the date and
time, with a brief explanation of the
cause of the alarm and the corrective
action taken.
(g) Closed vent systems. You must
keep the records specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (6) of this section, and
you must record any additional
information as specified in § 63.11930,
as applicable.
(1) Each alarm triggered because flow
was detected in a bypass as specified in
§ 63.11930(g)(1)(i).
(2) Inspections of seals or closure
mechanisms as specified in
§ 63.11930(g)(1)(ii).
(3) Copies of compliance reports for
closed vent system leak inspections as
specified in § 63.11985(b)(9) and
§ 63.11930(g)(2) and (3).
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(4) Instrument calibration records as
specified in § 63.11930(g)(4).
(5) Unsafe-to-inspect equipment as
specified in § 63.11930(g)(5).
(6) Pressure alarms as specified by
§ 63.11930(h)(2) and (3).
(h) Resin stripper. For resin strippers,
you must maintain the records specified
in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) All sampling data, including
monthly measurements of the
concentration of vinyl chloride and total
HAP compounds in the stripped resin
exiting the resin stripper for each type
of resin produced.
(2) The applicable operating
parameters required in § 63.11960(c)
over the full period of the sampling.
(3) The quantity (tons) of resin
produced per grade per day.
(i) Wastewater. For wastewater
treatment processes, you must maintain
the records specified in paragraphs (i)(1)
through (6) of this section.
(1) A description of the wastewater
generation activities and treatment
process.
(2) Records of the control level
determinations specified in
§ 63.11965(a)(1)(i) and (ii) for each
wastewater stream and the type of
treatment applied if required in
§ 63.11965(b) and (c).
(3) Records of the initial performance
test specified in § 63.11970(a) including
the operating parameters monitored
during testing and the average of each
parameter, averaged over the testing
period.
(4) Records of the annual average flow
rate as determined in § 63.11965(a)(2)
and § 63.11975(e)(2), including
documentation of how the average flow
rate was determined.
(5) All testing data, including monthly
measurements of the concentrations of
vinyl chloride and the concentration of
total HAP that are listed in Table 9 to
subpart G of this part in each
wastewater stream required to be
measured, as specified in § 63.11975.
You must also record the applicable
operating parameters required in
§ 63.11975(a) over the full period of the
sampling.
(6) You must keep any other
applicable records that are required by
the recordkeeping requirements
specified in § 63.147 of subpart G of this
part.
(j) Other emission sources. You must
keep the records specified in paragraphs
(j)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) All engineering calculations,
testing, sampling, and monitoring
results and data specified in § 63.11955.
(2) Each occurrence that you do not
comply with the requirements in
§ 63.11955.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
§ 63.11995 In what form and how long
must I keep my records?
(a) You must keep records for 5 years
in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, as specified in
§ 63.10(b)(1).
(b) You must keep each record on site
for at least 2 years, as specified in
§ 63.10(b)(1). You can keep the records
off site for the remaining 3 years.
Records may be maintained in hard
copy or computer-readable format
including, but not limited to, on paper,
microfilm, hard disk drive, floppy disk,
compact disk, magnetic tape, or
microfiche.
§ 63.12000 Who implements and enforces
this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented
and enforced by the Administrator, as
defined in § 63.2, or a delegated
authority such as your state, local, or
Tribal agency. If the Administrator has
delegated authority to your state, local,
or Tribal agency, then that agency (as
well as the Administrator) has the
authority to implement and enforce this
subpart. You should contact your EPA
Regional Office to find out if this
subpart is delegated to your State, local,
or Tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and
enforcement authority of this subpart to
a state, local, or Tribal agency, the
authorities listed in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (4) of this section are retained
by the Administrator and are not
transferred to the state, local, or Tribal
agency, however, the EPA retains
oversight of this subpart and can take
enforcement actions, as appropriate.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the
emission limits, operating limits, and
work practice standards specified in this
subpart.
(2) Approval of a major change to test
methods, as defined in § 63.90, approval
of any proposed analysis methods, and
approval of any proposed test methods.
(3) Approval of a major change to
monitoring, as defined in § 63.90.
(4) Approval of a major change to
recordkeeping and reporting, as defined
in § 63.90.
Definitions
§ 63.12005
subpart?
What definitions apply to this
Terms used in this subpart are
defined in the Clean Air Act, in § 63.2,
and in this section, as follows:
Affirmative defense means, in the
context of an enforcement proceeding, a
response or defense put forward by a
defendant, regarding which the
defendant has the burden of proof, and
the merits of which are independently
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29595
and objectively evaluated in a judicial
or administrative proceeding.
Batch emission episode means a
discrete venting episode that is
associated with a single unit operation.
A unit operation may have more than
one batch emission episode. For
example, a displacement of vapor
resulting from the charging of a vessel
with HAP will result in a discrete
emission episode that will last through
the duration of the charge and will have
an average flowrate equal to the rate of
the charge. If the vessel is then heated,
there will also be another discrete
emission episode resulting from the
expulsion of expanded vapor. Both
emission episodes may occur in the
same vessel or unit operation. There are
possibly other emission episodes that
may occur from the vessel or other
process components, depending on
process operations.
Batch operation means a
noncontinuous operation involving
intermittent or discontinuous feed into
process components, and, in general,
involves the emptying of the process
components after the operation ceases
and prior to beginning a new operation.
Addition of raw material and
withdrawal of product do not occur
simultaneously in a batch operation.
Batch process vent means a vent from
a batch operation from a PVCPU or
vents from multiple PVCPUs within a
process that are manifolded together
into a common header, through which
a HAP-containing gas stream is, or has
the potential to be, released to the
atmosphere. Batch process vents also
include vents with intermittent flow
from continuous operations that are not
combined with any stream that
originated as a continuous gas stream
from the same continuous process.
Examples of batch process vents
include, but are not limited to, vents on
condensers used for product recovery,
polymerization reactors, and process
tanks. The following are not batch
process vents for the purposes of this
subpart:
(1) Continuous process vents.
(2) Bottoms receivers.
(3) Surge control vessels.
(4) A gas stream routed to other
processes for reaction or other use in
another process (i.e., for chemical value
as a product, isolated intermediate,
byproduct, coproduct, or for heat value).
(5) Vents on storage tanks, wastewater
emission sources, or pieces of process
components subject to the emission
limits and work practice standards for
storage vessels, equipment leaks, and
wastewater.
(6) Drums, pails, and totes.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29596
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(7) Vents from a pressure relief device
having an actuation pressure of 2 psig
or higher.
Bottoms receiver means a tank that
collects bottoms from continuous
distillation before the stream is sent for
storage or for further downstream
processing. A rundown tank is an
example of a bottoms receiver.
Bulk process means a process for
producing polyvinyl chloride resin that
is characterized by a two-step
anhydrous polymerization process: the
formation of small resin particles in a
pre-polymerization reactor using small
amounts of vinyl chloride monomer, an
initiator, and agitation; and the growth
of the resin particles in a postpolymerization reactor using additional
vinyl chloride monomer. Resins
produced using the bulk process are
referred to as bulk resins.
Bypass means to direct a process vent
or closed vent system stream to the
atmosphere such that it does not first
pass through an emission control
device.
Calendar year means the period
between January 1 and December 31,
inclusive for a given year.
Capacity means the nominal figure or
rating given by the manufacturer of the
storage vessel, condenser, or other
process component.
Car-seal means a seal that is placed on
a device that is used to change the
position of a valve (e.g., from opened to
closed) in such a way that the position
of the valve cannot be changed without
breaking the seal.
Closed vent system means a system
that is not open to the atmosphere and
is composed of piping, ductwork,
connections, and, if necessary, flow
inducing devices that collect or
transport gas or vapor from an emission
point to a control device.
Combustion device means an
individual unit used for the combustion
of organic emissions, such as a flare,
incinerator, process heater, or boiler.
Conservation vent means an
automatically operated (e.g., weightloaded or spring-loaded) safety device
used to prevent the operating pressure
of a storage vessel from exceeding the
maximum allowable working pressure
of the process component. Conservation
vents open and close to permit only the
intake or outlet relief necessary to keep
the storage vessel within permissible
working pressures, and reseal
automatically.
Container means a portable unit in
which a material can be stored,
transported, treated, disposed of, or
otherwise handled. Examples of
containers include, but are not limited
to, drums, pails, and portable cargo
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
containers known as ‘‘portable tanks’’ or
‘‘totes.’’ Container does not include
transport vehicles or barges.
Continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS) means the total
equipment that may be required to meet
the data acquisition and availability
requirements of this subpart, used to
sample, condition (if applicable),
analyze, and provide a record of
emissions.
Continuous operation means any
operation that is not a batch operation.
Continuous parameter monitoring
system (CPMS) means the total
equipment that may be required to meet
the data acquisition and availability
requirements of this part, used to
sample, condition (if applicable),
analyze, and provide a record of process
or control system parameters.
Continuous record means
documentation, either in hard copy or
computer readable form, of data values
measured at least once every 15 minutes
and recorded at the frequency specified
in § 63.11990(e)(1).
Continuous process vent means the
point of discharge to the atmosphere (or
the point of entry into a control device,
if any) of a gas stream if the gas stream
has the following characteristics:
(1) Some, or all, of the gas stream
originates as a continuous flow from any
continuous PVCPU operation during
operation of the PVCPU.
(2) The discharge to the atmosphere
(with or without passing through a
control device) meets at least one of the
following conditions:
(i) Is directly from any continuous
operation.
(ii) Is from any continuous operation
after passing solely (i.e., without passing
through any other unit operation for a
process purpose) through one or more
recovery devices within the PVCPU.
(iii) Is from a device recovering only
mechanical energy from a gas stream
that comes either directly from any
continuous operation, or from any
continuous operation after passing
solely (i.e., without passing through any
other unit operation for a process
purpose) through one or more recovery
devices within the PVCPU.
(3) The gas stream is in the gas phase
from the point of origin at the
continuous operation to the point of
discharge to the atmosphere (or to the
point of entry into a control device, if
any).
(4) The gas stream is discharged to the
atmosphere either on site, off site, or
both. If the gas stream is discharged to
an off-site or on-site location that you do
not own or operate, you must comply
with the requirements in § 63.113(a)(i)
of this part.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(5) The gas stream is not any of the
following items:
(i) A pressure relief device discharge
having an actuation pressure of 2 psig
or higher.
(ii) A leak from equipment subject to
this subpart.
(iii) A gas stream exiting a control
device used to comply with the
emission limits and work practice
standards of this subpart.
(v) A gas stream transferred to other
processes (on site or off site) for reaction
or other use in another process (i.e., for
chemical value as a product, isolated
intermediate, by-product, or co-product,
or for heat value).
(vi) A storage vessel vent or transfer
operation vent subject to the provisions
of this subpart.
(vii) A vent from a waste management
unit subject to the provisions of subpart
G of this subpart, as specified in this
subpart.
(viii) A gas stream exiting an analyzer
(but they must be controlled as sample
purge).
(6) The gas stream would meet the
characteristics specified in paragraphs
(1) through (6) of this definition, but, for
purposes of avoiding applicability, has
been deliberately interrupted,
temporarily liquefied, or routed through
any process component for no process
purpose.
Control device means, with the
exceptions noted in this definition, a
combustion device, recovery device,
recapture device, or any combination of
these devices used to comply with this
subpart. Process condensers are not
control devices.
Control system means the
combination of the closed vent system
and the control devices used to collect
and control vapors or gases from a
regulated emission source.
Cooling tower means a heat removal
device used to remove the heat absorbed
in circulating cooling water systems by
transferring the heat to the atmosphere
using natural or mechanical draft.
Cooling tower return line means the
main water trunk lines at the inlet to the
cooling tower before exposure to the
atmosphere.
Corrective action plan means a
description of all reasonable interim and
long-term measures, if any, that are
available, and an explanation of why the
selected corrective action is the best
alternative, including, but not limited
to, any consideration of costeffectiveness.
Day means a calendar day, unless
otherwise specified in this subpart.
Degassing means the process of
removing HAP organic gases from a
storage vessel.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Dioxin/furan means total tetrathrough octachlorinated dibenzo-pdioxins and dibenzofurans.
Dispersion process means a process
for producing polyvinyl chloride resin
that is characterized by the formation of
the polymers in soap micelles that
contain small amounts of vinyl chloride
monomer. Emulsifiers are used to
disperse vinyl chloride monomer in the
water phase. Initiators used in the
dispersion process are soluble in water.
Resins produced using the dispersion
process are referred to as latex or
dispersion resins.
Empty or emptying means the partial
or complete removal of stored liquid
from a storage vessel. Storage vessels
that contain liquid only as a result of the
liquid clinging to the walls or bottoms,
or resting in pools due to bottom
irregularities, are considered completely
empty.
Equipment means each pump,
compressor, agitator, pressure relief
device, sampling connection system,
open-ended valve or line, valve,
connector, and instrumentation system
in HAP service; and any control devices
or systems used to comply with this
subpart.
Fill or filling means the introduction
of liquid into a storage vessel, but not
necessarily to capacity.
First attempt at repair, for the
purposes of this subpart, means to take
action for the purpose of stopping or
reducing leakage of organic material to
the atmosphere, followed by monitoring
as specified in § 63.11930(f) to verify
whether the leak is repaired, unless the
owner or operator determines by other
means that the leak is not repaired.
Fixed roof storage vessel means a
vessel with roof that is mounted (i.e.,
permanently affixed) on a storage vessel
and that does not move with
fluctuations in stored liquid level.
Flow indicator means a device that
indicates whether gas flow is, or
whether the valve position would allow
gas flow to be, present in a line.
Grade means the subdivision of PVC
resin classification which describes it as
a unique resin, i.e., the most exact
description of a resin with no further
subdivision.
Heat exchange system means a device
or collection of devices used to transfer
heat from process fluids to water
without intentional direct contact of the
process fluid with the water (i.e., noncontact heat exchanger) and to transport
and/or cool the water in a closed-loop
recirculation system (cooling tower
system) or a once-through system (e.g.,
river or pond water). For closed-loop
recirculation systems, the heat exchange
system consists of a cooling tower, all
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
heat exchangers that are serviced by that
cooling tower, and all water lines to and
from the heat exchanger(s). For oncethrough systems, the heat exchange
system consists of one or more heat
exchangers servicing an individual
process unit and all water lines to and
from the heat exchanger(s). Intentional
direct contact with process fluids results
in the formation of a wastewater.
In HAP service means that a process
component either contains or contacts a
liquid that is at least 5 percent HAP by
weight or a gas that is at least 5 percent
by volume HAP as determined
according to the provisions of
§ 63.180(d). The provisions of
§ 63.180(d) also specify how to
determine that a process component is
not in HAP service.
In vacuum service means that the
process component is operating at an
internal pressure that is at least 5
kilopascals (kPa) (0.7 pounds per square
inch absolute) below ambient pressure.
Incinerator means an enclosed
combustion device with an enclosed fire
box that is used for destroying organic
compounds. Auxiliary fuel may be used
to heat waste gas to combustion
temperatures. Any energy recovery
section present is not physically formed
into one manufactured or assembled
unit with the combustion section;
rather, the energy recovery section is a
separate section following the
combustion section and the two are
joined by ducts or connections carrying
flue gas. This energy recovery section
limitation does not apply to an energy
recovery section used solely to preheat
the incoming vent stream or combustion
air.
Maximum representative operating
conditions means process operating
conditions that result in the most
challenging condition for the control
device. The most challenging condition
for the control device may include, but
is not limited to, the highest or lowest
HAP mass loading rate to the control
device, the highest or lowest HAP mass
loading rate of constituents that
approach the limits of solubility for
scrubbing media, the highest or lowest
HAP mass loading rate of constituents
that approach limits of solubility for
scrubbing media.
Maximum true vapor pressure means
the equilibrium partial pressure exerted
by the total HAP in the stored or
transferred liquid at the temperature
equal to the highest calendar-month
average of the liquid storage or transfer
temperature for liquids stored or
transferred above or below the ambient
temperature or at the local maximum
monthly average temperature as
reported by the National Weather
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
29597
Service for liquids stored or transferred
at the ambient temperature, as
determined by any one of the following
methods or references:
(1) In accordance with methods
described in American Petroleum
Institute Publication 2517, Evaporative
Loss From External Floating-Roof Tanks
(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14).
(2) As obtained from standard
reference texts.
(3) As determined by the American
Society for Testing and Materials
Method D2879–10 (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14).
(4) Any other method approved by the
Administrator.
Nonstandard batch means a batch
process that is operated outside of the
range of operating conditions that are
documented in an existing operating
scenario but is still a reasonably
anticipated event. For example, a
nonstandard batch occurs when
additional processing or processing at
different operating conditions must be
conducted to produce a product that is
normally produced under the
conditions described by the standard
batch. A nonstandard batch may be
necessary as a result of a malfunction,
but it is not itself a malfunction.
Operating block means a period of
time that is equal to the time from the
beginning to end of batch process
operations within a process.
Operating day means a 24-hour
period between 12 midnight and the
following midnight during which PVC
is produced at any time in the PVCPU.
It is not necessary for PVC to be
produced for the entire 24-hour period.
Operating scenario means, for the
purposes of reporting and
recordkeeping, any specific operation of
a regulated process as described by
reports specified in § 63.11985(b)(3) and
records specified in § 63.11990(e)(4).
Plant site means all contiguous or
adjoining property that is under
common control including properties
that are separated only by a road or
other public right-of-way. Common
control includes properties that are
owned, leased, or operated by the same
entity, parent entity, subsidiary, or any
combination thereof.
Polymerization reactor means any
vessel in which vinyl chloride is
partially or totally polymerized into
polyvinyl chloride. For bulk processes,
the polymerization reactor includes prepolymerization reactors and postpolymerization reactors.
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) means a
synthetic thermoplastic polymer that is
derived from the polymerization of
vinyl chloride and has the general
chemical structure (–H2CCHCl–)n.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
29598
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Polyvinyl chloride is typically a white
powder or colorless granule. Polyvinyl
chloride is produced by different
processes, including (but not limited to),
suspension, dispersion/emulsion, bulk,
and solution processes.
Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
production process unit or PVCPU
means a collection of process
components assembled and connected
by hard-piping or duct work, used to
process raw materials and to
manufacture polyvinyl chloride and/or
polyvinyl chloride copolymers. A
PVCPU includes, but is not limited to,
polymerization reactors; resin stripping
operations; blend tanks; centrifuges;
dryers; product separators; recovery
devices; feed, intermediate, and product
storage vessels such as reactant storage
tanks, holding tanks, mixing and
weighing tanks, and final product
storage tanks or storage silos; finished
product loading operations; heat
exchange systems; wastewater strippers;
wastewater treatment systems;
connected ducts and piping; equipment
components including pumps,
compressors, agitators, pressure relief
devices, sampling connection systems,
open-ended valves or lines, valves, and
connectors. A PVCPU does not include
chemical manufacturing process units,
as defined in § 63.101, that produce
vinyl chloride monomer or other raw
materials used in the PVC
polymerization process.
Polyvinyl chloride copolymer means a
synthetic thermoplastic polymer that is
derived from the simultaneous
polymerization of vinyl chloride and
another vinyl monomer such as vinyl
acetate. Polyvinyl chloride copolymer is
produced by different processes,
including, but not limited to,
suspension, dispersion/emulsion, bulk,
and solution processes.
Pressure relief device means a safety
device used to prevent operating
pressures from exceeding the maximum
allowable working pressure of the
process component. A common pressure
relief device is a spring-loaded pressure
relief valve. Devices that are actuated
either by a pressure of less than or equal
to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge or
by a vacuum are not pressure relief
devices.
Pressure vessel means a vessel that is
used to store liquids or gases and is
designed not to vent to the atmosphere
as a result of compression of the vapor
headspace in the pressure vessel during
filling of the pressure vessel to its
design capacity.
Process change means an addition to
or change in a PVCPU and/or its
associated process components that
creates one or more emission points or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
changes the characteristics of an
emission point such that a new or
different emission limit, operating
parameter limit, or work practice
requirement applies to the added or
changed emission points. Examples of
process changes include, but are not
limited to, changes in production
capacity, production rate, or catalyst
type, or whenever there is replacement,
removal, or addition of recovery device
components. For purposes of this
definition, process changes do not
include process upsets, changes that do
not alter the process component
configuration and operating conditions,
and unintentional, temporary process
changes. A process change does not
include moving within a range of
conditions identified in the standard
batch, and a nonstandard batch does not
constitute a process change.
Process component means any unit
operation or group of units operations or
any part of a process or group of parts
of a process that are assembled to
perform a specific function (e.g.,
polymerization reactor, dryers, etc.).
Process components include equipment,
as defined in this section.
Process condenser means a condenser
whose primary purpose is to recover
material as an integral part of a batch
process. All condensers recovering
condensate from a batch process at or
above the boiling point or all
condensers in line prior to a vacuum
source are considered process
condensers. Typically, a primary
condenser or condensers in series are
considered to be integral to the batch
regulated process if they are capable of
and normally used for the purpose of
recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e.,
net positive heating value), use, reuse or
for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. This
definition does not apply to a condenser
that is used to remove materials that
would hinder performance of a
downstream recovery device as follows:
(1) To remove water vapor that would
cause icing in a downstream condenser.
(2) To remove water vapor that would
negatively affect the adsorption capacity
of carbon in a downstream carbon
adsorber.
(3) To remove high molecular weight
organic compounds or other organic
compounds that would be difficult to
remove during regeneration of a
downstream adsorber.
Process tank means a tank or other
vessel (e.g., pressure vessel) that is used
within an affected source to both: (1)
Collect material discharged from a
feedstock storage vessel, process tank, or
other PVCPU process component, and
(2) discharge the material to another
process tank, process component,
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
byproduct storage vessel, or product
storage vessel.
Process unit means the process
components assembled and connected
by pipes or ducts to process raw and/or
intermediate materials and to
manufacture an intended product. For
the purpose of this subpart, process unit
includes, but is not limited to, polyvinyl
chloride production process.
Process vent means batch process vent
or continuous process vent from process
components including polymerization
reactors, resin strippers, vinyl chloride
monomer recovery systems, slip gauges,
unloading and loading lines, samples,
wastewater collection and treatment
systems, and other process components
prior to the resin stripper.
Product means a polymer produced
using the same monomers and varying
in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators,
etc.); catalysts; or in the relative
proportions of monomers, that is
manufactured by a process unit. With
respect to polymers, more than one
recipe may be used to produce the same
product, and there can be more than one
grade of a product. Product also means
a chemical that is not a polymer, which
is manufactured by a process unit. Byproducts, isolated intermediates,
impurities, wastes, and trace
contaminants are not considered
products.
Recipe means a specific composition,
from among the range of possible
compositions that may occur within a
product, as defined in this section. A
recipe is determined by the proportions
of monomers and, if present, other
reactants and additives that are used to
make the recipe.
Recovery device means an individual
process component capable of and
normally used for the purpose of
recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e.,
net positive heating value), use, reuse or
for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse.
Examples of process components that
may be recovery devices include
absorbers, adsorbers, condensers, oilwater separators or organic-water
separators, or organic removal devices
such as decanters, strippers (e.g.,
wastewater steam and vacuum
strippers), or thin-film evaporation
units. For purposes of this subpart,
recovery devices are control devices.
Repaired, for the purposes of this
subpart, means equipment that is
adjusted or otherwise altered to
eliminate a leak as defined in the
applicable sections of this subpart; and
unless otherwise specified in applicable
provisions of this subpart, is inspected
as specified in § 63.11930(f) to verify
that emissions from the equipment are
below the applicable leak definition.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Resin stripper means a unit that
removes organic compounds from a raw
polyvinyl chloride and copolymer
product. In the production of a polymer,
stripping is a discrete step that occurs
after the polymerization reaction and
before drying or other finishing
operations. Examples of types of
stripping include steam stripping,
vacuum stripping, or other methods of
devolatilization. For the purposes of this
subpart, devolatilization that occurs in
dryers or other finishing operations is
not resin stripping. Resin stripping may
occur in a polymerization reactor or in
a batch or continuous stripper separate
from the polymerization reactor where
resin stripping occurs.
Root cause analysis means an
assessment conducted through a process
of investigation to determine the
primary cause, and any other significant
contributing cause(s), of a discharge of
gases in excess of specified thresholds.
Sensor means a device that measures
a physical quantity or the change in a
physical quantity, such as temperature,
pressure, flow rate, pH, or liquid level.
Slip gauge means a gauge that has a
probe that moves through the gas/liquid
interface in a storage vessel and
indicates the level of product in the
vessel by the physical state of the
material the gauge discharges.
Solution process means a process for
producing polyvinyl chloride resin that
is characterized by the anhydrous
formation of the polymer through
precipitation. Polymerization occurs in
an organic solvent in the presence of an
initiator where vinyl chloride monomer
and co-monomers are soluble in the
solvent, but the polymer is not. The PVC
polymer is a granule suspended in the
solvent, which then precipitates out of
solution. Emulsifiers and suspending
agents are not used in the solution
process. PVC resins produced using the
solution process are referred to as
solution resins.
Specific gravity monitoring device
means a unit of equipment used to
monitor specific gravity and having a
minimum accuracy of ±0.02 specific
gravity units.
Standard procedure means a formal
written procedure officially adopted by
the plant owner or operator and
available on a routine basis to those
persons responsible for carrying out the
procedure.
Storage vessel means a tank or other
vessel (e.g., pressure vessel) that is part
of an affected source and is used to store
a gaseous, liquid, or solid feedstock,
byproduct, or product that contains
organic HAP. Storage vessel does not
include:
(1) Vessels permanently attached to
motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars,
barges, or ships;
(2) Process tanks;
(3) Vessels with capacities smaller
than 10,040 gallons;
(4) Vessels storing organic liquids that
contain organic HAP only as impurities;
(5) Bottoms receiver tanks;
(6) Surge control vessels; and
(7) Wastewater storage tanks.
Wastewater storage tanks are covered
under the wastewater provisions.
Stripped resin means the material
exiting the resin stripper that contains
polymerized vinyl chloride.
Supplemental combustion air means
the air that is added to a vent stream
after the vent stream leaves the unit
operation. Air that is part of the vent
stream as a result of the nature of the
unit operation is not considered
supplemental combustion air. Air
required to operate combustion device
burner(s) is not considered
supplemental combustion air. Air
required to ensure the proper operation
of catalytic oxidizers, to include the
intermittent addition of air upstream of
the catalyst bed to maintain a minimum
threshold flow rate through the catalyst
bed or to avoid excessive temperatures
in the catalyst bed, is not considered to
be supplemental combustion air.
Surge control vessel means feed
drums, recycle drums, and intermediate
vessels used as a part of any continuous
operation. Surge control vessels are
used within an affected source when inprocess storage, mixing, or management
of flow rates or volumes is needed to
introduce material into continuous
operations.
Suspension process means a process
for producing polyvinyl chloride resin
that is characterized by the formation of
the polymers in droplets of liquid vinyl
chloride monomer or other co-
29599
monomers suspended in water. The
droplets are formed by agitation and the
use of protective colloids or suspending
agents. Initiators used in the suspension
process are soluble in vinyl chloride
monomer. Polyvinyl chloride resins
produced using the suspension process
are referred to as suspension resins.
Treatment process means a specific
technique or collection of techniques
that remove or destroy the organics in
a wastewater or residual stream such as
a steam stripping unit, thin-film
evaporation unit, waste incinerator,
biological treatment unit, or any other
process or collection of processes
applied to wastewater streams or
residuals to comply with §§ 63.11965
and 63.11970. Most treatment processes
are conducted in tanks.
Type of resin means the broad
classification of resin referring to the
basic manufacturing process for
producing that resin, including, but not
limited to, suspension, dispersion/
emulsion, bulk, and solution processes.
Unloading operations means the
transfer of organic liquids from a
transport vehicle, container, or storage
vessel to process components within the
affected source.
Wastewater means water that comes
into direct contact with HAP or results
from the production or use of any raw
material, intermediate product, finished
product, by-product, or waste product
containing HAP but that has not been
discharged untreated as wastewater.
Examples are product tank drawdown
or feed tank drawdown; water formed
during a chemical reaction or used as a
reactant; water used to wash impurities
from organic products or reactants;
water used to cool or quench organic
vapor streams through direct contact;
water discarded from a control device;
and condensed steam from jet ejector
systems pulling vacuum on vessels
containing organics. Gasholder seal
water is not wastewater until it is
removed from the gasholder.
Work practice standard means any
design, equipment, work practice, or
operational standard, or combination
thereof that is promulgated pursuant to
section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES
For this type of emission
point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission
limit . . .
Process vents 1 ..................
Vinyl chloride ....................................
All resin types ...................................
0.32 parts per million by volume at
3-percent oxygen (ppmv).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29600
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES—
Continued
Stripped resin .....................
And for this air pollutant . . .
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission
limit . . .
Total organic HAP ............................
For this type of emission
point . . .
All resin types ...................................
Hydrogen chloride ............................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency
basis).
Vinyl chloride ....................................
All resin types ...................................
All resin types ...................................
12 ppmv.
(For compliance determination, demonstrate that total hydrocarbon is
less than or equal to 2 ppmv
measured as propane).
150 ppmv.
0.023 ng/dscm at 3-percent oxygen.
Total HAP .........................................
Wastewater ........................
1 Emission
2 Includes,
Vinyl chloride ....................................
Total HAP .........................................
Bulk ...................................................
Dispersion .........................................
All other resins 2 ................................
Bulk ...................................................
Dispersion .........................................
All other resins 2 ................................
All resin types ...................................
All resin types.
7.1 parts per million by weight
(ppmw).
55 ppmw.
0.48 ppmw.
170 ppmw.
110 ppmw.
76 ppmw.
See Table 3 to this subpart.
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
but is not limited to, PVCPUs using the suspension process and solution process.
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR NEW AFFECTED SOURCES
For this type of emission
point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission
limit . . .
Process vents 1 ..................
Vinyl chloride ....................................
All resin types ...................................
Total organic HAP ............................
All resin types ...................................
Hydrogen chloride ............................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency
basis).
Vinyl chloride ....................................
All resin types ...................................
All resin types ...................................
3.2 parts per billion by volume at 3percent oxygen (ppbv).
0.22 ppmv.
(For compliance determination, demonstrate that total hydrocarbon is
less than or equal to 2 ppmv
measured as propane).
0.17 ppmv.
0.0087 ng/dscm at 3-percent oxygen.
7.1 parts per million by weight
(ppmw).
41 ppmw.
0.20 ppmw
170 ppmw.
58 ppmw.
42 ppmw.
See Table 3 to this subpart.
Stripped resin .....................
Total HAP .........................................
Wastewater ........................
1 Emission
2 Includes,
Vinyl chloride ....................................
Total HAP .........................................
Bulk ...................................................
Dispersion .........................................
All other resins 2 ................................
Bulk ...................................................
Dispersion .........................................
All other resins 2 ................................
All resin types ...................................
All resin types.
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
but is not limited to, PVCPUs using the suspension process and solution process.
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER FOR NEW AND EXISTING
AFFECTED SOURCES
Then . . .
And the wastewater stream must meet the following limit or standard:
Vinyl chloride concentration less than 10 parts
per million by weight (ppmw) at the point of
generation.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
If a wastewater stream is determined to have
a. . .
You are not required to use a wastewater
treatment process to reduce your vinyl chloride emissions and compliance must be
demonstrated as specified in § 63.11970(b).
You are not required to use a wastewater
treatment process to reduce your total HAP
emissions (for HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) and compliance must be
demonstrated as specified in § 63.11970(c).
You must use a wastewater treatment process and demonstrate compliance as specified in §§ 63.11965(b) and 63.11970(a), respectively 1.
Less than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride.1
HAP concentration (based on HAP listed in
Table 9 to subpart G of this part) less than
1,000 ppmw; or.
Annual average flow rate less than 10 liters per
minute.
Vinyl chloride concentration greater than or
equal to 10 ppmw at the point of generation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Less than 1,000 ppmw of HAP listed in Table
9 to subpart G of this part and less than 10
liters per minute annual average flow rate.2
Existing sources—0.11 ppmw vinyl chloride at
the stripper outlet.1
New sources—0.0060 ppmw vinyl chloride at
the stripper outlet.1
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29601
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER FOR NEW AND EXISTING
AFFECTED SOURCES—Continued
If a wastewater stream is determined to have
a. . .
Then . . .
And the wastewater stream must meet the following limit or standard:
HAP concentration (based on HAP listed in
Table 9 to subpart G of this part) greater
than or equal to 1,000 ppmw; HAP and
Annual average flow rate greater than or equal
to 10 liters per minute.
You must use a wastewater treatment process and demonstrate compliance as specified in §§ 63.11965(c) and 63.11970(a), respectively.
The provisions in subpart G of this part, as
referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through (4).2
1 Refer
2 Refer
to § 63.11975(a)(3) and (d) for the data averaging period for determining compliance.
to subpart G of this part for the data averaging period for determining compliance.
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—SUMMARY OF CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR STORAGE VESSELS AT
NEW AND EXISTING SOURCES
If the storage vessel capacity (gallons) is * * *
And the vapor pressure 1 (psia) is * * *
Then, you must use the following type of storage vessel: * * *
≥ 20,000 but < 40,000 ........................................
≥ 4 ....................................................................
≥ 40,000 .............................................................
≥ 0.75 ...............................................................
Any capacity .......................................................
> 11.1 ...............................................................
Internal floating roof, external floating roof, or
fixed roof vented to a closed vent system
and control device achieving 95 percent reduction.2
Internal floating roof, external floating roof, or
fixed roof vented to a closed vent system
and control device achieving 95 percent reduction.2
Pressure vessel.3
All other capacity and vapor pressure combinations ........................................................................
Fixed roof.4
1 Maximum
true vapor pressure of total HAP at storage temperature.
using a fixed roof storage vessel vented to a closed vent system and control device, you must meet the requirements in § 63.11910(a) for
fixed roof storage vessels. If using an internal floating roof storage vessel or external floating roof storage vessels, you must meet the requirements in § 63.11910(b) for internal floating roof storage vessels or external floating roof storage vessels, as applicable.
3 Meeting the requirements of § 63.11910(c) for pressure vessels.
4 Meeting the requirements in § 63.11910(a) for fixed roof storage vessels.
2 If
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63
Citation
Subject
Applies to subpart HHHHHHH
§ 63.1(a)(1)–(a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)–
(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1),
(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).
§ 63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)–(a)(9), (b)(2),
(c)(3), (c)(4), (d).
§ 63.2 ...............................................
Applicability ..................................
Yes ...............................................
Reserved ......................................
No .................................................
Definitions .....................................
Yes ...............................................
Units and abbreviations ...............
Prohibited activities and circumvention.
Preconstruction review and notification requirements.
Compliance with standards and
maintenance requirements.
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
[Reserved] ....................................
No .................................................
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction provisions.
Compliance with opacity and visible emission standards.
No. See § 63.11890(b) for general
duty requirement.
No .................................................
Performance testing requirements
Yes ...............................................
Performance testing .....................
§ 63.3 ...............................................
§ 63.4 ...............................................
§ 63.5 ...............................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.6(a),
(b)(1)–(b)(5),
(b)(7),
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), (e)(1)(iii),
(f)(2), (f)(3), (g), (i), (j).
§ 63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d),
(e)(2), (e)(3)(ii), (h)(2)(ii), (h)(3),
(h)(5)(iv).
§ 63.6(e)(1)(i), (e)(1)(ii), (e)(3), (f)(1)
§ 63.6(h)(1),
(h)(2)(i),
(h)(2)(iii),
(h)(4),
(h)(5)(i)–(h)(5)(iii),
(h)(5)(v), (h)(6)–(h)(9).
§ 63.7(a)(1), (a)(2)(ix), (a)(3), (a)(4),
(b)–(d), (e)(2)–(e)(4), (f)–(h).
§ 63.7(e)(1) ......................................
Explanation
Additional definitions are found in
§ 63.12005.
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
(a)(4), (b),
(c)(2)–(c)(4),
Monitoring requirements ..............
No. See especially § 63.11945,
63.11960(d), 63.11980(a).
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.8(a)(3) ......................................
[Reserved] ....................................
§ 63.11875 specifies compliance
dates.
Subpart HHHHHHH does not
specify opacity or visible emission standards.
No .................................................
§ 63.8(a)(1), (a)(2),
(c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii),
(c)(6)–(c)(8).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
Except
cross
reference
in
§ 63.8(c)(1)(i) to § 63.6(e)(1) is
replaced with a cross-reference
to § 63.11890(b).
20MYP3
29602
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63—Continued
Citation
Subject
Applies to subpart HHHHHHH
§ 63.8(c)(1)(iii) .................................
Requirement to develop SSM
plan for continuous monitoring
systems.
Continuous opacity monitoring
system minimum procedures.
No .................................................
§ 63.8(d)(3) ......................................
Written procedures for continuous
monitoring systems (CMS).
§ 63.8(g) ..........................................
Reduction of monitoring data .......
Yes, except for last sentence,
which refers to an SSM plan.
SSM plans are not required.
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(4)(i),
(b)(4)(v), (b)(5), (c)–(e), (g)(1),
(g)(3), (h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6),
(i), (j).
§ 63.9(f) ...........................................
Notification requirements .............
Yes ...............................................
Notification of opacity and visible
emission observations.
No .................................................
§ 63.9(g)(2) ......................................
Use of continuous opacity monitoring system data.
No .................................................
§ 63.9(b)(3), (b)(4)(ii)–(iv), (h)(4) .....
§ 63.10(a), (b)(1) .............................
[Reserved] ....................................
Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Recordkeeping of occurrence and
duration of startups and shutdowns.
Recordkeeping of malfunctions ....
No .................................................
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.8(c)(5) ......................................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(i) .................................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(ii) ................................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ...............................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(iv), (b)(2)(v) ................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(vi) ...............................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(vii)–(ix) .......................
§ 63.10(b)(2)(xi)–(xiv) ......................
§ 63.10(b)(3) ....................................
§ 63.10(c)(1), (c)(5), (c)(6) ...............
Maintenance records ....................
Actions taken to minimize emissions during SSM.
Recordkeeping for CMS malfunctions.
Other CMS requirements .............
Other
recordkeeping
requirements.
Recordkeeping requirement for
applicability determinations.
Additional recordkeeping requirements for sources with continuous monitoring systems.
No .................................................
§ 63.10(c)(8) ....................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 63.10(c)(10) ..................................
63.10(c)(11) .....................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Subpart HHHHHHH does not
have opacity or visible emission
standards.
Except that the minimum data
collection requirements are
specified in § 63.11890(e).
Subpart HHHHHHH does not
have opacity or visible emission
standards.
Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous
opacity monitoring system.
No .................................................
No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8)
for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction.
See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for
deviation reporting.
Yes ...............................................
No .................................................
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.10(c)(2)–(4), (c)(9) ...................
§ 63.10(c)(7) ....................................
Explanation
[Reserved]
Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying
exceedances and excess emissions.
Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying
exceedances and excess emissions.
Recording nature and cause of
malfunctions.
Recording corrective actions ........
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8)
for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction.
See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for
deviation reporting.
No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8)
for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction.
See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for
deviation reporting.
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29603
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63—Continued
Citation
Subject
Applies to subpart HHHHHHH
§ 63.10(c)(13)–(14) ..........................
Records of the total process operating time during the reporting period and procedures that
are part of the continuous monitoring system quality control
program.
Use SSM plan ..............................
General reporting requirements ...
Performance test results ..............
Opacity or visible emissions observations.
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.10(c)(15) ..................................
§ 63.10(d)(1) ....................................
§ 63.10(d)(2) ....................................
§ 63.10(d)(3) ....................................
§ 63.10(d)(4) ....................................
§ 63.10(d)(5) ....................................
Progress reports ...........................
SSM reports .................................
§ 63.10(e)(1) ....................................
Additional continuous monitoring
system reports—general.
Results of continuous monitoring
system performance evaluations.
Results of continuous opacity
monitoring system performance
evaluations.
Excess
emissions/continuous
monitoring system performance
reports.
Continuous opacity monitoring
system data reports.
§ 63.10(e)(2)(i) .................................
§ 63.10(e)(2)(ii) ................................
§ 63.10(e)(3) ....................................
§ 63.10(e)(4) ....................................
§ 63.10(f) .........................................
63.11(a) ...........................................
§ 63.11(b) ........................................
§ 63.11(c)–(e) ..................................
Recordkeeping/reporting waiver ..
Control device and work practice
requirements—applicability.
Flares ...........................................
No .................................................
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
No .................................................
Explanation
Subpart HHHHHHH does not
specify opacity or visible emission standards.
Yes ...............................................
No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8)
for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction.
See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for
deviation reporting.
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
No .................................................
Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous
opacity monitoring system.
Yes ...............................................
No .................................................
Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous
opacity monitoring system.
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
No .................................................
§ 63.12 .............................................
Alternative work practice for monitoring equipment for leaks.
State authority and delegations ...
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.13 .............................................
§ 63.14 .............................................
Addresses ....................................
Incorporations by reference .........
Yes ...............................................
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.15 .............................................
Availability of information and
confidentiality.
Performance track provisions ......
Facilities subject to subpart
HHHHHHH do not use flares
as control devices, as specified
in § 63.11925(b).
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.16 .............................................
Yes ...............................................
§ 63.12000 identifies types of approval authority that are not
delegated.
Subpart HHHHHHH incorporates
material by reference.
Yes ...............................................
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING,
RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
For these control devices,
you must monitor these operating parameters . . .
Establish the following operating
limit during your initial performance test . . .
Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum
frequencies
Data measurement
Data recording
Data averaging period for
compliance
Process Vents
Any Control device:
Flow to/from the control device.
Incinerators:
Temperature (in fire
box or downstream
ductwork prior to
heat exchange).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
N/A .............................................
Continuous ...............
N/A ...........................
Date and time of flow start and
stop.
Minimum temperature ................
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29604
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING,
RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER—Continued
For these control devices,
you must monitor these operating parameters . . .
Temperature differential across catalyst
bed.
Inlet temperature to
catalyst bed and
catalyst condition.
Absorbers and Acid Gas
Scrubbers:
Influent liquid flow ......
Influent liquid flow and
gas stream flow.
Pressure drop .............
Exhaust gas temperature.
Change in specific
gravity of scrubber
liquid.
pH of effluent liquid ....
Causticity of effluent
liquid.
Conductivity of effluent
liquid.
Regenerative Adsorber:
Regeneration stream
flow.
Adsorber bed temperature.
Establish the following operating
limit during your initial performance test . . .
Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum
frequencies
Data averaging period for
compliance
Data measurement
Data recording
Minimum temperature differential.
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Minimum inlet temperature and
catalyst condition as specified
in 63.11940(b)(3).
Continuous for temperature, annual
for catalyst condition.
Every 15 minutes for
temperature, annual for catalyst
condition.
3-hour block average for temperature, annual for catalyst
condition.
Minimum inlet liquid flow ...........
Minimum influent liquid flow to
gas stream flow ratio.
Minimum pressure drop .............
Maximum exhaust gas temperature.
Minimum change in specific
gravity.
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
3-hour block average.
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
3-hour block average.
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Minimum pH ..............................
Minimum causticity ....................
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
3-hour block average.
Minimum conductivity ................
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Minimum total flow per regeneration cycle.
Maximum temperature ...............
Continuous ...............
N/A ...........................
Continuously after regeneration and
within 15 minutes
of completing any
temperature regulation.
Continuously during
regeneration except during any
temperature regulating portion of the
regeneration cycle..
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes
after regeneration
and within 15 minutes of completing
any temperature
regulation.
N/A ...........................
Total flow for each regeneration
cycle.
3-hour block average.
N/A ...........................
Continuous ...............
N/A ...........................
Daily .........................
Daily .........................
Average vacuum and duration
of regeneration.
Date and time of regeneration
start and stop.
N/A.
N/A ...........................
N/A.
N/A ...........................
Daily, weekly, or monthly.
Minimum temperature ................
Vacuum and duration
of regeneration.
Regeneration frequency.
Adsorber operation
valve sequencing
and cycle time.
Non-Regenerative
Adsorber:
Average adsorber bed
life.
Minimum vacuum and period of
time for regeneration.
Minimum
regeneration
frequency and duration.
Correct valve sequencing and
minimum cycle time.
Outlet VOC concentration of the first
adsorber bed in series.
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Adsorber bed temperature.
Limits in Table 1 or 2 of this
subpart.
Daily until breakthrough for 3
adsorber bed
change-outs.
Daily, except monthly
(if more than 2
months bed life remaining) or weekly
(if more than 2
weeks bed life remaining).
Maximum outlet temperature .....
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Minimum injection rate ..............
Minimum carrier gas flow rate ...
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
3-hour block average.
Minimum temperature ................
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Condenser:
Temperature ...............
Sorbent injection monitoring:
Sorbent injection rate
Sorbent injection carrier gas flow rate.
Downstream firebox
temperature.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
N/A .............................................
19:19 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
Average of regeneration cycle.
20MYP3
29605
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING,
RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER—Continued
For these control devices,
you must monitor these operating parameters . . .
Establish the following operating
limit during your initial performance test . . .
Upstream particulate
matter control device downstream
temperature.
Fabric Filter:
Alarm time ..................
Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum
frequencies
Data averaging period for
compliance
Data measurement
Data recording
Minimum temperature ................
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
3-hour block average.
Maximum alarm time is not established on a site-specific
basis but is specified in
§ 63.11940(h)(1).
Continuous ...............
N/A ...........................
Maximum alarm time specified
in § 63.11940(h)(1).
Every
Every
Every
Every
.....
.....
.....
.....
Daily.
Daily.
Daily.
Daily.
Stripped Resin
Stripper:
Steam to feed ratio 1 ..
Vacuum level ..............
Resin exit temperature
Resin inlet flow rate ...
Minimum steam to feed ratio .....
Minimum vacuum ......................
Minimum temperature ................
Maximum flow rate ....................
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
...............
...............
...............
...............
15
15
15
15
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
Wastewater
Stripper:
Steam to feed ratio 1 ..
Bottoms exit temperature.
Vacuum level ..............
Wastewater inlet flow
rate.
1 Steam
Minimum steam to feed ratio .....
Minimum exit temperature .........
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
Daily.
Daily.
Minimum vacuum level ..............
Maximum flow rate ....................
Continuous ...............
Continuous ...............
Every 15 minutes .....
Every 15 minutes .....
Daily.
Daily
to feed ratio is calculated based on the steam feed rate into the stripper and the wastewater flow rate into the stripper.
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—TOXIC EQUIVALENCY FACTORS
Toxic equivalency
factor
Dioxin/furan congener
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ...............................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ...........................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin .........................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin .........................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin .........................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin .....................................................................................................................................
octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ............................................................................................................................................................
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran .....................................................................................................................................................
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran ................................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran ................................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran ..............................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran ..............................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran ..............................................................................................................................................
2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran ..............................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran ..........................................................................................................................................
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran ..........................................................................................................................................
octachlorodibenzofuran ..................................................................................................................................................................
1
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.0003
0.1
0.3
0.03
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.0003
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—CALIBRATION AND ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS
PARAMETER MONITORING SYSTEMS
Then your accuracy requirements are . . .
If you monitor this parameter . . .
Temperature
ranges).
(non-cryogenic
temperature
Temperature (cryogenic temperature ranges) ...
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
And your inspection/calibration frequency requirements are . . .
± 1 percent of temperature measured or 2.8
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit)
whichever is greater.
± 2.5 percent of temperature measured or 2.8
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit)
whichever is greater.
Every 12 months.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Every 12 months.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
29606
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—CALIBRATION AND ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS
PARAMETER MONITORING SYSTEMS—Continued
If you monitor this parameter . . .
Then your accuracy requirements are . . .
And your inspection/calibration frequency requirements are . . .
Liquid flow rate ...................................................
± 2 percent of the normal range of flow ..........
Gas flow rate ......................................................
± 5 percent of the flow rate or 10 cubic feet
per minute, whichever is greater.
pH or caustic strength ........................................
± 0.2 pH units ..................................................
Conductivity ........................................................
Mass flow rate ....................................................
Pressure .............................................................
± 5 percent of normal range ............................
± 5 percent of normal range ............................
± 5 percent or 0.12 kilopascals (0.5 inches of
water column) whichever is greater.
Every 12 months.
You must select a measurement location
where swirling flow or abnormal velocity
distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances at the point of measurement do not exist.
Every 12 months
Check all mechanical connections for leakage
at least annually.
At least annually, conduct a visual inspection
of all components of the flow CPMS for
physical and operational integrity and all
electrical connections for oxidation and galvanic corrosion if your flow CPMS is not
equipped with a redundant flow sensor.
Every 8 hours of process operation check the
pH or caustic strength meter’s calibration
on at least two points.
Every 12 months.
Every 12 months.
Calibration is required every 12 months.
Check all mechanical connections for leakage
at least annually. At least annually perform
a visual inspection of all components for integrity, oxidation and galvanic corrosion if
CPMS is not equipped with a redundant
pressure sensor.
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING PERFORMANCE TESTS
FOR PROCESS VENTS
For each control device used to meet the emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for the
following pollutant . . .
Total organic HAP ..............................................
Vinyl chloride ......................................................
Hydrogen chloride ..............................................
Dioxin/furan ........................................................
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Any pollutant from a continuous, batch, or combination of continuous and batch process
vent(s).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
You must . . .
Using . . .
Measure the total hydrocarbon concentration
at the outlet of the control device or in the
stack.
Measure the vinyl chloride concentration at
the outlet of the control device or in the
stack.
Measure hydrogen chloride concentrations at
the outlet of the control device or in the
stack.
Method 25A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.
Conduct each test run for a minimum of 1
hour.
Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–6.
Conduct each test run for a minimum of 1
hour.
Method 26 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–8,
collect 60 dry standard liters of gas per test
run; or
Method 26A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–
8, collect 1 dry standard cubic meter of gas
per test run.
Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–7
and collect 5 dry standard cubic meters of
gas per test run.
Measure dioxin/furan concentrations on a
toxic equivalency basis (and report total
mass per isomer) at the outlet of the control
device or in the stack.
Select sampling port locations and the number of traverse points.
Determine gas velocity and volumetric flow
rate.
Conduct gas molecular weight analysis and
correct concentrations the specified percent
oxygen in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
Measure gas moisture content ........................
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Method 1 or 1A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A–1.
Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G at 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A–1 and A–2.
Method 3, 3A, or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–2 using the same sampling site
and time as HAP samples.
Method 4 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–3.
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
29607
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING PERFORMANCE TESTS
FOR STRIPPED RESIN AND WASTEWATER
For demonstrating
. . .
For the following emission points
and types of
processes
. . .
Collect samples according to the following schedule . . .
Using the following test methods . . .
Vinyl chloride . . .
Total HAP . . .
Each stripped resin stream
Initial compliance ....
Continuous ..
Batch ...........
Continuous compliance.
Continuous ..
Batch ...........
During a 24 hour
period, every 8
hours or for each
grade, whichever
is more frequent.
1 grab sample for
each batch produced during a 24
hour period.
On a daily basis, 1
grab sample
every 8 hours or
for each grade,
whichever is more
frequent.
On a daily basis, 1
grab sample for
each batch produced during a 24
hour period.
During a 24 hour period, 1 grab sample
every 8 hours or for each grade,
whichever is more frequent.
For vinyl chloride Method 107; and
For total HAP, your proposed method as
specified in § 63.11960(d)(2), incorporating Method 107 and Method
8260B.
1 grab sample for each batch produced
during a 24 hour period.
On a monthly basis, 1 grab sample
every 8 hours or for each grade,
whichever is more frequent, during a
24 hour period.
On a monthly basis, 1 grab sample for
each batch produced during a 24 hour
period.
Each wastewater stream
Initial compliance ....
N/A ..............
1 grab sample ........
If you are not required to use a treatment process, 1 grab sample; or.
If you are required to use a treatment
process, the sampling frequency
specified in subpart G of this part, as
referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through
(4).
Continuous compliance.
N/A ..............
1 grab sample per
month.
If you are not required to use a treatment process, for vinyl chloride Method 107; and
For total HAP, your proposed method as
specified
in
§ 63.11980(a)(2),incorporating Methods 107, 305, and 8260B. For vinyl
chloride, Method 107; or
If you are required to use a treatment
process, the test methods specified in
subpart G of this part, as referenced
in § 63.11965(c)(1) through (4).
If you are not required to use a treatment process, 1 grab sample per
month; or.
If you are required to use a treatment
process, the sampling frequency
specified in subpart G of this part, as
referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through
(4).
[FR Doc. 2011–9838 Filed 5–19–11; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 May 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM
20MYP3
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29528-29607]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9838]
[[Page 29527]]
Vol. 76
Friday,
No. 98
May 20, 2011
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 29528]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037; FRL-9298-7]
RIN 2060-AN33
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production. The
proposed rule would establish emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants from polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production located at
major and area sources. The proposed rule includes requirements to
demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the proposed
emission standards. EPA is proposing standards that would apply at all
times, including during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunctions.
The proposed standards also include continuous monitoring provisions
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before July 19, 2011.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the information
collection provisions are best assured of having full effect if the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments
on or before June 20, 2011.
Public Hearing. We \1\ will hold two public hearings concerning the
proposed polyvinyl chloride and copolymers (PVC) production rules in
the Houston, Texas area, and in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Persons
interested in presenting oral testimony at either public hearing should
contact Ms. Teresa Clemons at (919) 541-0252 or at
clemons.teresa@epa.gov by May 31, 2011. If no one requests to speak at
the public hearings by May 31, 2011, then the public hearings will be
cancelled without further notice. We will specify the date and time of
the public hearings on https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pvc/pvcpg.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Throughout this preamble, ``we'' refers to EPA.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0037 by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
https://www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2002-0037.
Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-
0037.
Mail: By U.S. Postal Service, send your comments to: EPA
Docket Center, EPA West Building (Air Docket), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. Please
include a total of two copies. In addition, please mail a copy of your
comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Hand Delivery: By courier, deliver your comments to: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, EPA West Building
(Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20004, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays), and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: All submissions must include agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket and may be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be confidential business information
(CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise
protected through https://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an E-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your
E-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket, and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment, and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties, and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. All documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available
either electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA West Building (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202)
566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jodi Howard, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (E143-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; Telephone number: (919) 541-4607; Fax
number: (919) 541-0246; E-mail address: howard.jodi@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Acronyms and Abbreviations. Several acronyms and terms are used in
this preamble. While this may not be an exhaustive list, to ease the
reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the following
terms and acronyms are defined here:
CAA--Clean Air Act
CBI--confidential business information
CDD/CDF--chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins and furans
CDX--Central Data Exchange
CEMS--continuous emission monitoring system
CPMS--continuous parameter monitoring system
ERT--Emissions Reporting Tool
[[Page 29529]]
Fe--fraction emitted
GACT--generally available control technologies or management
practices
HAP--hazardous air pollutants
HCl--hydrogen chloride
HON--Hazardous Organic NESHAP
ICR--information collection request
K--kurtosis
lbs/yr--pounds per year
l/min--liters per minute
MACT--maximum achievable control technology
NESHAP--national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
ng/dscm--nanograms per dry standard cubic meter
NTTAA--National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OP--Office of Policy
ppbv--parts per billion by volume
ppbw--parts per billion by weight
ppmv--parts per million by volume
ppmw--parts per million by weight
PRD--pressure relief device
psia--pounds per square inch absolute
PVC--polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
PVCPU--PVC production process unit
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIN--Regulatory Information Number
S--skewness
SEK--standard error of kurtosis
SES--standard error of skewness
TCEQ--Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
TEF--toxic equivalency factor
TEQ--toxic equivalent
THC--total hydrocarbons
TTN--Technology Transfer Network
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UPL--upper prediction limit
VCM--vinyl chloride monomer
WWW--World Wide Web
Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.
I. General Information
A. Do these rules apply to me?
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?
C. Where can I get a copy of this document?
II. Background Information for these Proposed Rules
A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed PVC rule?
B. What is the history of the PVC Production source category?
C. Summary of Related Court Decisions
D. What are the emission sources at PVC production facilities?
E. What HAP are emitted from PVC production facilities?
F. How did we gather information for the proposed PVC rule?
III. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. What is the affected source for the proposed rule?
B. What is the relationship between this proposed rule and the
existing 40 CFR part 61 standards for PVCPU?
C. How have we used subcategories in the proposed rule?
D. What proposed emission limitations and work practice
standards must I meet?
E. When must I comply with the proposed standards?
F. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements?
G. What are the performance testing requirements for batch
process operations?
H. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
I. What are the electronic data submittal requirements?
J. What revisions are proposed for the area source rule (40 CFR
part 63, subpart DDDDDD)?
IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC Rule for Major and Area Sources
(40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH)
A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC production?
B. How did EPA select the emission points, format, and
pollutants for the proposed rule?
C. How did EPA determine the proposed emission standards for
area sources?
D. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for existing major
sources?
E. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for new major sources?
F. How did EPA analyze beyond-the-floor options and determine
MACT?
G. How did EPA select the compliance and monitoring requirements
for the proposed rule?
H. How did EPA determine compliance times for the proposed rule?
I. How did EPA determine the required records and reports for
this proposed rule?
J. What are the startup, shutdown, and malfunction provisions?
V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule
A. What are the air impacts?
B. What are the cost impacts?
C. What are the non-air quality health, environmental, and
energy impacts?
D. What are the economic impacts of the proposed standards?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
A redline version of the regulatory language that incorporates the
changes in this proposed action to 40 CFR 63, subpart DDDDDD is
available in the docket.
I. General Information
A. Do these rules apply to me?
The proposed rules establish national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for PVC production.
The regulated categories and entities potentially affected by the
proposed PVC production standards include the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category NAICS\1\ Code potentially regulated
entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Polyvinyl chloride resins 325211 Facilities that
manufacturing. polymerize vinyl
chloride monomer to
produce polyvinyl
chloride and/or
copolymers products.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. To determine whether your facility, company, business,
organization, etc., would be affected by this proposed action, you
should examine the applicability criteria in the proposed 40 CFR part
63, subpart HHHHHHH (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production), and in 40
CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD (National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area
Sources).
Your PVC production process unit (PVCPU) is not subject to this
subpart if it is a research and development facility, as defined in
section 112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of the proposed action to a particular
entity, contact the person listed in the
[[Page 29530]]
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information that you consider to be
CBI electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. Send
or deliver information identified as CBI to only the following address:
Ms. Jodi Howard, c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room C404-02),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037.
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to
be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA,
mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. If you submit a disk or CD-ROM that
does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM clearly
that it does not contain CBI. Information marked as CBI will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
C. Where can I get a copy of this document?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this proposed action will also be available on the World Wide Web (WWW)
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a
copy of the proposed action will be posted on the TTN's policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the following
address: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN provides information
and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
II. Background Information for These Proposed Rules
A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed PVC rule?
Section 112(d) of the CAA requires us to establish NESHAP for
source categories and subcategories of both major and area sources of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) that are listed for regulation under CAA
section 112(c). A major source emits or has the potential to emit 10
tons per year (tpy) or more of any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any
combination of HAP. An area source is a HAP-emitting stationary source
that is not a major source.
Section 112(d) of the CAA requires EPA to set emissions standards
for HAP emitted by major stationary sources based on performance of the
maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The MACT standards for
existing sources must be at least as stringent as the average emissions
limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of existing
sources (for which the Administrator has emissions information) or the
best performing five sources for source categories or subcategories
with fewer than 30 sources (CAA section 112(d)(3)(A) and (B)). This
minimum level of stringency is called the MACT floor. For new sources,
MACT standards must be at least as stringent as the control level
achieved in practice by the best controlled similar source (CAA section
112(d)(3)). EPA also must consider more stringent ``beyond-the-floor''
control options. When considering beyond-the-floor options, EPA must
consider not only the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP,
but must take into account costs, energy, and non-air quality health
and environmental impacts when doing so.
Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA requires EPA to identify at least
30 HAP which, as a result of emissions from area sources, pose the
greatest threat to public health in the largest number of urban areas.
EPA implemented this provision in 1999 in the Integrated Urban Air
Toxics Strategy (Strategy), (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999). Specifically,
in the Strategy, EPA identified 30 HAP that pose the greatest potential
health threat in urban areas, and these HAP are referred to as the ``30
urban HAP.'' CAA section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list sufficient
categories or subcategories of area sources to ensure that area sources
representing 90 percent of the emissions of the 30 urban HAP are
subject to regulation. A primary goal of the Strategy is to achieve a
75-percent reduction in cancer incidence attributable to HAP emitted
from stationary sources.
EPA can set MACT standards for area sources. Section 112(d)(2).
Alternatively, under CAA section 112(d)(5), EPA can promulgate
standards or requirements for area sources ``which provide for the use
of generally available control technologies [``GACT''] or management
practices by such sources to reduce emissions of hazardous air
pollutants.'' Additional information on GACT is found in the Senate
report on the legislation (Senate Report Number 101-228, December 20,
1989), which describes GACT as:
* * * methods, practices and techniques which are commercially
available and appropriate for application by the sources in the
category considering economic impacts and the technical capabilities
of the firms to operate and maintain the emissions control systems.
Consistent with the legislative history, we can consider costs and
economic impacts in determining GACT.
Determining what constitutes GACT involves considering the control
technologies and management practices that are generally available to
the area sources in the source category. We also consider the standards
applicable to major sources in the analogous source category to
determine if the control technologies and management practices are
transferable and generally available to area sources. In appropriate
circumstances, we may also consider technologies and practices at area
and major sources in similar categories to determine whether such
technologies and practices could be considered generally available for
the area source categories at issue. Finally, as noted above, in
determining GACT for a particular area source category, we consider the
costs and economic impacts of available control technologies and
management practices on that category.
Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are required to ``review, and
revise as necessary (taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies), emission standards promulgated
under this section no less often than every 8 years.''
We are proposing revised standards for vinyl chloride emissions
from area sources under the authority of CAA section 112(d)(6). We are
also proposing standards for dioxin, hydrogen chloride (HCl), and total
HAP under CAA section 112(d)(5).
B. What is the history of the PVC Production source category?
On July 16, 1992, PVC Production was listed as a major source
category for regulation pursuant to section 112(c) of the CAA (57 FR
31576). A major source of HAP is a stationary source that has the
potential to emit 10 tpy or more of any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of
any combination of HAP.
On June 26, 2002, PVC Production was listed as an area source
category for regulation pursuant to sections 112(c)(3) and
112(k)(3)(B)(ii) of the CAA (67 FR
[[Page 29531]]
43112). An area source is a stationary source of HAP that is not a
major source.
On July 10, 2002, EPA promulgated NESHAP for new and existing PVC
production facilities that are major sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
J (67 FR 45886, July 10, 2002) (referred to as the ``part 63 NESHAP'').
In that rulemaking, EPA determined that compliance with the existing
Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, subpart F) (referred to as the
``part 61 NESHAP'') reflected the application of MACT; thus, satisfying
CAA section 112(d), with the exception of adding requirements for
equipment leaks at new sources. In the part 61 NESHAP and the
associated part 63 NESHAP, EPA regulated vinyl chloride emissions as a
surrogate for all HAP emitted from PVC production. For equipment leaks,
the part 63 NESHAP required that new sources comply with 40 CFR part
63, subpart UU, National Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks--
Control Level 2 Standards.
In Mossville Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232 (DC
Cir. 2004), the petitioners argued that EPA failed to set emission
standards for all HAP emitted by PVC plants. EPA had set emission
standards for vinyl chloride as a surrogate for the remaining HAP,
because it was the predominant HAP used and emitted at PVC plants. The
Court ruled that EPA did not adequately explain the basis for its
decision to use vinyl chloride as a surrogate for other HAP. The Court
``vacated and remanded [the rule in its entirety] to the Agency for it
to reconsider or properly explain its methodology for regulating [HAP]
emitted in PVC production other than vinyl chloride by use of a
surrogate.'' 370 F.3d at 1243. This rule proposes NESHAP for PVC
production major sources in response to the remand, and in accordance
with section 112 of the CAA.
On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930), EPA promulgated NESHAP for new
and existing PVC production area sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD. Subpart DDDDDD is based on GACT, and requires area sources to
meet the requirements in the existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (part 61
NESHAP). The part 61 NESHAP requirements address only vinyl chloride
emissions. In this rulemaking, we are fulfilling our obligation under
section 112(d)(6) of the CAA to review, and revise, as necessary, the
PVC production area source standards. We are coordinating our review of
the area source standards with the development of major source MACT
standards in response to the Court remand.
C. Summary of Related Court Decisions
In addition to Mossville Environmental Action Now v. EPA,
summarized above, two other court decisions are relevant to this
proposal. In March 2007, the District of Columbia Circuit Court issued
an opinion (Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875 (DC Cir. 2007) (Brick
MACT)) vacating and remanding CAA section 112(d) MACT standards for the
Brick and Structural Clay Ceramics source categories. Some key holdings
in that case were:
MACT floors for existing sources must reflect the average
emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of
existing sources, not levels EPA considers to be achievable by all
sources (479 F.3d at 880-81);
EPA cannot set floors of ``no control.'' The Court
reiterated its prior holdings, including National Lime Association v.
EPA, 233 F.3d 625 (DC Cir. 2000), confirming that EPA must set floor
standards for all HAP emitted by the major source, including those HAP
that are not controlled by at-the-stack control devices (479 F.3d at
883); and
EPA cannot ignore non-technology factors that reduce HAP
emissions, including when determining which sources are best performers
for purposes of ascertaining the MACT floor. Specifically, the Court
held that ``EPA's decision to base floors exclusively on technology
even though non-technology factors affect emissions violates the Act.''
(479 F.3d at 883).
In addition, the fact that a specific level of performance is not
being intentionally achieved by the source is not a legal basis for
excluding the source's performance from consideration. Sierra Club v.
EPA, 479 F.3d at 631-34; National Lime Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d at
640.
The Brick MACT decision also stated that EPA may account for
variability in setting floors. However, the Court found that EPA erred
in assessing variability, because it relied on data from the worst
performers to estimate best performers' variability, and held that
``EPA may not use emission levels of the worst performers to estimate
variability of the best performers without a demonstrated relationship
between the two'' (479 F.3d at 882).
A second Court opinion of relevance to this proposal is Sierra Club
v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008). In that case, the Court vacated
portions of two provisions contained in the General Provisions (40 CFR
part 63, subpart A). The regulations at issue were 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1)
and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), which, when incorporated into CAA section 112(d)
regulations for specific source categories, exempt sources from the
requirement to comply with the otherwise applicable CAA section 112(d)
emission standard during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
D. What are the emission sources at PVC production facilities?
PVC production includes the manufacture of PVC resins. The resins
are then used to make a large number of commercial and industrial
products. Producing these resins involves batch reactors where vinyl
chloride monomer (VCM), along with initiators and inhibitors, is
polymerized as a homopolymer, or copolymerized with varying amounts of
a co-monomer, such as vinyl acetate. At most facilities, the resulting
resins are in a slurry form and are then stripped to recover the
unreacted VCM. The stripped resin is then dried into powders or
granules. PVC resins are then either shipped offsite, or used to make
final products in equipment and unit operations that are not covered
under this source category.
PVC is not a HAP, but the manufacture of PVC resin requires VCM,
which is a HAP, as a primary feedstock. Unreacted VCM and other organic
HAP present in feedstocks or formed during the polymerization process
may be present in process components. HAP may be released from an
opening or leak in a process component; or the residual HAP (i.e.,
unreacted VCM, and other organic compounds) in the resin may be
released to the atmosphere as a result of drying or handling dry resin.
Stripping the polymerized resin to recover unreacted VCM reduces the
air emissions of vinyl chloride and other HAP from the resin slurry by
reducing the amount of HAP present. Gaseous vent streams containing
vinyl chloride and other HAP that originates from process equipment
prior to, and including the resin stripper, are sent to a VCM recovery
process before being routed to one or more control devices, such as an
absorber, or thermal oxidizer, followed by a halogenated compound
scrubber. Combustion controls greatly reduce vinyl chloride and other
HAP emissions, but may create other HAP, in particular, chlorinated
dibenzo-dioxins and furans (CDD/CDF), and HCl.
Emission sources in the PVC production process include process
components prior to, and including, the resin stripper(s) (e.g., the
reactor, resin stripper, reactor used as a stripper, storage and feed
vessels for raw materials, additives, initiators, and
[[Page 29532]]
inhibitors); VCM recovery systems (e.g., condenser or other vapor
separation devices, holding tanks, gas holders); and process components
downstream of the resin stripper(s) (e.g., centrifuges, concentrators,
blend tanks, filters, dryers, conveyor air discharges, bagging
operations, resin handling and conveyance equipment), and final resin
storage tanks or storage silos. Additional emission sources at PVC
production facilities include leaking equipment (e.g., pumps, valves,
compressors); wastewater collection and treatment systems; heat
exchange system components (e.g., cooling towers, heat exchangers,
pumps, and other equipment associated with the heat exchange system);
and other emission sources, such as opening a reactor and other
components for maintenance and cleaning.
E. What HAP are emitted from PVC production facilities?
The HAP emitted from PVC production processes includes a wide
variety of HAP. There are no metal HAP emitted from PVC production. In
addition, combustion control devices emit HCl and CDD/CDF. Of the HAP
emitted from PVC production processes, 1,3-butadiene, benzene, CDD/CDF,
and vinyl chloride have been classified as known human carcinogens.\2\
Several other compounds that may be emitted from PVC production
processes have been classified as probable carcinogens, such as
acetaldehyde, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, chloroform, chloroprene,
ethylene dichloride, ethylidene dichloride, formaldehyde, iso-octane,
methylene chloride, vinyl bromide, and vinylidene chloride.\3\Hydrogen
chloride, along with other non-carcinogenic HAP (e.g., methanol), are
also emitted from PVC production processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. EPA, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).
Available at https://www.epa.gov/IRIS/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. How did we gather information for the proposed PVC rule?
We gathered information on PVC production through review of
previously collected information, current literature, data from the
National Emissions Inventory, meetings and voluntary information
submissions by industry and the industry trade association, and formal
information collection pursuant to CAA section 114.
There were two components to the information collection. First, we
solicited information from eight PVC companies in the United States
that manufacture PVC resin. The collection obtained available
information on PVC production units at major and area sources (e.g.,
information on production processes, equipment, emission points,
control techniques, operating practices, and emissions based on
previous tests or calculations). Companies were also asked to provide
data for other emission sources, including process component openings
and cleanouts, handling of unstripped resin, filters, and gas holders.
Second, we required the same companies to measure the HAP content in
their PVC resins (both following stripping, but before drying, and
after drying) and measure the HAP emissions at the inlet and outlet to
their process vent control devices. The information collection is
documented in the memorandum, Information Collection for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, and results
of this information collection are available in the docket.
III. Summary of the Proposed Rule
This section summarizes and provides our rationale for the
requirements proposed in this action. In section III of this preamble,
the term ``you'' refers to owners and operators of sources affected by
the proposed rule.
A. What is the affected source for the proposed rule?
The proposed rule applies to owners or operators of PVC PU located
at, or that are part of, a major source or an area source as defined in
40 CFR 63.2. The affected source for this subpart is each individual
PVCPU. An existing affected source is a PVCPU that is not a new
affected source, as defined in 40 CFR 63.11870 of the proposed rule. A
new affected source is a PVCPU for which construction is commenced on
or after May 20, 2011 at a major or area source. If components of an
existing affected source are replaced such that the replacement meets
the definition of reconstruction in 40 CFR 63.2 and the reconstruction
commenced on or after May 20, 2011, then the existing source becomes a
reconstructed source and is subject to the relevant standards for a new
affected source. The reconstructed source must comply with the
requirements for a new affected source upon initial startup of the
reconstructed source, or by the effective date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register, whichever is later.
A PVCPU is defined as a collection of process components that is
assembled and connected by hard-piping or duct work that processes raw
materials to manufacture PVC resin. A PVCPU includes, but is not
limited to, polymerization reactors; resin strippers; blend tanks;
centrifuges; dryers; product separators; recovery devices; feed,
intermediate, and product storage vessels; finished product loading
operations; heat exchange systems; wastewater strippers; wastewater
treatment systems; connected ducts and piping; and equipment in HAP
service, including pumps, compressors, agitators, pressure relief
devices (PRD), sampling connection systems, open-ended valves or lines,
valves, and connectors.
B. What is the relationship between this proposed rule and the existing
40 CFR part 61 standards for PVCPU?
PVCPU are currently subject to requirements in the part 61 NESHAP.
This proposed rule includes requirements that are at least as stringent
as the requirements in this existing rule. We, therefore, propose that
once facilities are in compliance with the final PVCPU MACT, the
requirements of the part 61 NESHAP would no longer apply.
C. How have we used subcategories in the proposed rule?
Most of the emissions sources subject to the proposed regulation
have the same characteristics, and are addressed consistently,
independent of process operations or products produced. We are
proposing, however, three subcategories for our limits on the amount of
HAP remaining in resins following polymerization and stripping (i.e.,
the stripped resin). These subcategories are based on the type of resin
produced, and include: (1) Bulk resin, (2) dispersion resin, and (3)
all other resin (e.g., suspension and solution resin).
D. What proposed emission limitations and work practice standards must
I meet?
The proposed rule would establish the same requirements for
affected sources located at major and area sources. We explain in
section IV.C below our rationale for the standards proposed for area
sources.
1. Storage Vessels and Handling Operations
Under 40 CFR 63.11910 and Table 4 of the proposed rule, if you own
or operate a storage vessel at a new or existing affected source, we
are proposing that material with a maximum true vapor pressure of the
stored liquid greater than 11.1 pounds per square inch absolute (psia)
be stored in pressure vessels with no emissions to the atmosphere.
During those times when purging is required, or when the pressure
vessel is being loaded, the
[[Page 29533]]
purged stream or the emission stream during loading would be required
to be routed to a closed vent system and control device. The closed
vent system and control device must meet the requirements specified in
40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule. You would also be required to
equip all openings in the pressure vessel with closure devices that are
designed to operate with no detectable emissions, as determined using
procedures specified in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of the proposed rule.
For storage vessels with a capacity greater than or equal to 40,000
gallons, storing material with a maximum true vapor pressure greater
than or equal to 0.75 psia, or storage vessels with a capacity greater
than or equal to 20,000 gallons (but less than 40,000 gallons), storing
materials with a maximum true vapor pressure greater than or equal to 4
psia, we are proposing two equivalent compliance options. We are
proposing that material be stored in either: (1) A floating roof tank
meeting the operating, inspection, and maintenance requirements of 40
CFR part 63, subpart WW, or (2) a fixed roof storage vessel that routes
vent streams to a closed vent system and control device (meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule) capable of
reducing inlet volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions by 95 or
greater.
We are proposing that all other storage vessels meet the operating,
inspection, and maintenance requirements for fixed roof vessels of 40
CFR 63.11910(a) of the proposed rule, or comply with either the
controlled fixed roof or floating roof requirements discussed
previously. 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(1)(ii) and 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3)(i) of
the proposed rule include requirements to equip each opening in the
roof with a closure device, and to perform initial and annual
inspections, and repair any defects found within the specified time
period. Defects include, but are not limited to, visible cracks, holes,
gaps, or other open spaces in the closure device or between the
perimeter of the opening and the closure device; broken, cracked, or
otherwise damaged seals or gaskets on closure devices; and broken or
missing hatches, access covers, caps, or other closure devices.
We are not proposing requirements for handling operations
(unloading and transfer) for reasons explained in section IV.D of this
preamble.
2. Equipment Leaks
In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule, we are proposing that
existing and new affected sources comply with the leak detection and
repair (LDAR) program requirements of the National Emission Standards
for Equipment Leaks-Control Level 2 Standards, subpart UU of 40 CFR
part 63, except for agitators, and rotating or reciprocating pumps and
compressors. For gas and light liquid valves, subpart UU specifies a
leak definition of 500 parts per million VOC, and a monitoring
frequency that is dependent upon the number of leaking valves. Subpart
UU also requires equipment specifications that prevent leaks for other
pieces of equipment.
We are proposing that rotating pumps be sealless, equipped with
double seals, or equivalent. Reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and
rotating compressors, and agitator must be equipped with double seals,
or equivalent, as provided in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule. If
double mechanical seals or double outboard seals are used, HAP
emissions must be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two
seals so that the leak occurs into the pump, compressor, or agitator;
by ducting any HAP between the two seals through a closed vent system
to a control device meeting the process vent emission limits specified
in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule; or by an equivalent method, as
provided in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule.
We are proposing that a vinyl chloride monitoring system be
operated for detection of major leaks and identification of the general
area of the plant where a leak is located. A vinyl chloride monitoring
system is a device that obtains air samples from one or more points
continuously, and analyzes the samples with gas chromatography,
infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion detection, or an equivalent or
alternate method.
In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule, we are also proposing
that, in addition to operating with no detectable emissions, there be
no discharge to the atmosphere from any PRD on any equipment in HAP
service within the PVCPU. We are proposing that upon a discharge to the
atmosphere from the PRD that the monitoring requirements specified in
40 CFR part 63, subpart UU for pressure releases from PRD be followed.
3. Heat Exchange Systems
In 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule, we are proposing that you
implement a LDAR program to detect leaks of VOC into cooling water. For
existing sources, we are proposing monthly monitoring for both closed
loop and once-through heat exchange systems using either the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Modified El Paso Method \3\
or EPA Method 8021B, Aromatic and Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization and/or Electrolytic Conductivity
Detectors, with a leak action level of 38 parts per billion by weight
(ppbw) of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 2.9 parts per
million by volume (ppmv) of total strippable VOC in the stripping gas.
For new sources, we are proposing twice-daily (12 hour intervals)
monitoring for both closed loop and once-through heat exchange systems
using either the TCEQ's Modified El Paso Method \4\ or EPA Method 8021B
with a leak action level of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC in the
cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total strippable VOC in the stripping gas.
The delay of repair action level for both new and existing sources is
380 ppbw of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 29 ppmv of
total strippable VOC in the stripping gas. When a leak is identified,
additional monitoring must be performed to isolate the source of the
leak. If the total strippable VOC concentration remains below the leak
action level throughout the period of additional monitoring, then
repairs are not required; otherwise, repairs must be completed within
45 days of identifying the leak. Repairs may be delayed if the
concentration of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or stripping
gas remains below the delay of repair action level and either: (1) It
is technically infeasible to repair the leak without a shutdown, or (2)
the necessary equipment, parts, or personnel are not available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water
Sources, Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling
Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by
TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference--see 40 CFR
65.645).
\4\ Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water
Sources, Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling
Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by
TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference--see 40 CFR
65.645).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Process Vents
In 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule, we are proposing all the
vent streams from: polymerization reactors, resin strippers, other
process components prior to the resin stripper, VCM recovery systems,
wastewater collection and treatment system, slip gauges, unloading and
loading lines, and samples be routed through a closed vent system to a
control device. We are proposing the emission limitations presented in
Table 1 of this preamble for
[[Page 29534]]
the outlet of the control device. These emission limitations apply at
all times.
Table 1--Emission Limitations for Process Vents a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission Limitations \b\
Pollutant -----------------------------------------
Existing sources New sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vinyl chloride................ 0.32 ppmv.......... 3.2 ppbv
Hydrogen chloride............. 150 ppmv........... 0.17 ppmv
Total organic HAP............. 12 ppmv............ 0.22 ppmv
Dioxin/Furans (TEQ)........... 0.023 ng/dscm...... 0.0087 ng/dscm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which
controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin
strippers, other process components prior to the resin stripper(s),
VCM recovery systems, certain storage vessels, the wastewater
collection and treatment system, slip gauges, unloading and loading
lines, and samples.
\b\ ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent O \2\. ppmv =
parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent O \2\. ng/dscm =
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent O \2\.
5. Other Emission Sources
Other emission sources include reactor and other component opening
losses. When reactors or other components (including pre-polymerization
reactors used in the manufacture of bulk resins) are opened for
cleaning, we are proposing in 40 CFR 63.11955 of the proposed rule that
emissions be minimized prior to opening. We are proposing that
emissions from opening a polymerization reactor must not exceed 0.04
pound vinyl chloride/ton of polyvinyl chloride product where the
product means the gross product of pre-polymerization and post-
polymerization. We are proposing emissions from opening of process
components for any reason be minimized by reducing the volume of vinyl
chloride to an amount that occupies a volume of no more than 2.0
percent of the component's containment volume or 25 gallons, whichever
is larger, at standard temperature and pressure. Any vinyl chloride
removed from opening equipment must be ducted through a closed vent
system to a control device meeting the requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925
through 40 CFR 63.11950 of the proposed rule. The outlet of the control
device must meet the emission limitations for process vents discussed
in section III.D.4.
6. Stripped Resin
In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed rule, we are proposing emission
limitations for residual vinyl chloride and total HAP in the stripped
resin presented in Tables 2 and 3 of this preamble. The limits were
developed for new and existing sources for three subcategories of PVC
resins: (1) Bulk resins, (2) dispersion resins, and (3) all other
resins. These emission limits would apply at all times.
Table 2--Limits for Stripped Resin at Existing Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limits (ppmw)
-------------------------------
Pollutant All
Bulk Dispersion other
resins resins resins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vinyl chloride.......................... 7.1 55 0.48
-------------------------------
Total HAP........................... 170 110 76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Limits for Stripped Resin at New Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limitations (ppmw)
-------------------------------
Pollutant All
Bulk Dispersion other
resins resins resins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vinyl chloride.......................... 7.1 41 0.20
-------------------------------
Total HAP........................... 170 58 42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Wastewater
In 40 CFR 63.11965 of the proposed rule, we are proposing that you
must determine the vinyl chloride concentration for each wastewater
stream at the point of wastewater generation. Streams with 10 ppmw
vinyl chloride, or more, must be treated to reduce the concentration of
vinyl chloride to a concentration of 0.11 ppmw for existing sources,
and 0.0060 ppmw for new sources. The 10 ppmw determination applies
before the wastewater stream is exposed to the atmosphere, stored,
mixed with any other wastewater stream, and enters a wastewater
treatment process, or is discharged untreated as a wastewater.
We are also proposing that wastewater streams with flow rates
greater than or equal to 10 liters per minute (l/min),
[[Page 29535]]
and the concentrations of HAP, as determined by Method 305 (as
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9) greater than or equal
to 1,000 ppmw, meet the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) wastewater
requirements, as described in the sections of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
G, and specified in the proposed rule.
Streams that contain less than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at the point
of generation), and streams that either contain less than 1,000 ppmw
total HAP, or have a flow rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the
point of determination, as defined by 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), are
not required to further reduce emissions, but must remain below these
levels.
E. When must I comply with the proposed standards?
Existing affected sources would be required to comply with the
proposed 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH no later than 3 years after
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. New affected
sources would be required to comply on the effective date of the final
rule, or upon startup, whichever is later.
F. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements?
In 40 CFR 63.11896 of the proposed rule, we are proposing that, if
you make a process change to an existing affected source that does not
meet the criteria to become a new affected source in 40 CFR 63.11870(c)
of the proposed rule, you must demonstrate that any added emission
points are in compliance with the applicable requirements for an
existing affected source. If the process change results in a change in
the characteristics of any emission point such that a different
emission limit, operating parameter limit, or work practice standard
applies, we are proposing that you demonstrate that the changed
emission point complies with the applicable requirements for an
existing affected source. You must demonstrate compliance with any
applicable work practice standards upon startup of the changed emission
point, and must demonstrate compliance with any emission limits and
establish applicable operating limits by 180 days after the date of
initial startup of the changed process unit.
We are also proposing that, if you make a process change to a new
affected source, you would demonstrate that any added emission point(s)
is/are in compliance with the applicable work practice standards for a
new affected source by start-up of the changed emission point. You must
also demonstrate initial compliance with any emission limits and
establish applicable operating limits by 180 days after the date of
initial startup of the changed process unit.
If you make a process change that adds or changes emission points,
we are proposing that you demonstrate continuous compliance with your
emission limits and standards, operating limits, and work practice
standards according to the procedures and frequency in 40 CFR 63.11910
through 40 CFR 63.11980 of this proposed rule, and submit a
notification report specified in 40 CFR 63.11985 of the proposed rule.
1. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements for
storage vessels?
For each floating roof storage vessel, we are proposing that you
meet the operating, inspection, repair, and maintenance requirements of
40 CFR part 63, subpart WW. For each fixed roof storage tank venting
through a closed vent system to a control device achieving 95-percent
reduction in total HAP emissions, we are proposing that you meet the
requirements for closed vent systems and control devices in 40 CFR
63.11925 of the proposed rule, and summarized in section III.D.3 of
this preamble.
In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed rule, we are also proposing
that, for each fixed roof tank, you install and maintain the tank with
no visible cracks, holes, or other open spaces between roof section
joints or between the interface of the roof edge and the tank wall. We
are also proposing that you must install closure devices that you
secure in the closed position except during periods when you need to
have access to the interior of the fixed roof tank. The closure device
may be opened when needed to provide access. The fixed roof tank and
its closure device would be required to be inspected initially, and at
least once per year. The inspection requirements would not be
applicable to parts of the fixed roof that are determined to be unsafe
to inspect if you document and explain why it is unsafe to inspect and
develop a plan to conduct inspections when the tank is not in service.
A first attempt to repair defects must be made no later than 5 calendar
days after detection, and repairs would be required to be completed no
later than 45 days after detection, except as specified in 40 CFR
63.11910(a)(4)(ii) of the proposed rule.
In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed rule, for pressure vessels, we
are proposing that all potential leak interfaces in the pressure vessel
be monitored for leaks annually and repaired following the procedures
of 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule.
2. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements for
equipment leaks?
For each applicable piece of equipment (e.g., valves, connectors)
associated with your affected source, we are proposing that you meet
the LDAR requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU. In 40 CFR 63.11915
of the proposed rule, you would also be required to install electronic
indicators on each PRD that would be able to identify and record the
time and duration of each pressure release and notify operators that a
pressure release has occurred.
3. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements for heat
exchange systems?
We are proposing that for each affected source, you must operate an
equipment leak program, as specified in the proposed rule. Under the
compliance requirements for heat exchange systems in 40 CFR 63.11920 of
the proposed rule, an affected source would be required to conduct
sampling and analyses using either the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method,
Revision Number One, dated January 2003,\5\ or EPA Method 8021B, no
less frequently than monthly for existing sources and twice-daily (12-
hour intervals) for new sources, and fix any leaks detected. We are
proposing different sampling locations for once-through and closed loop
heat exchange systems as specified in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed
rule. For once-through systems only, you may monitor at the cooling
tower return line prior to exposure to the air. For once-through
systems, you must monitor selected heat exchanger exit line(s) so that
each heat exchanger or group of heat exchangers within a system is
covered by the selected monitoring location. Monitoring of selected
heat exchanger exit lines is also a monitoring option for closed loop
systems. Additionally, for once-through systems, you may also monitor
the inlet water feed line prior to any heat exchanger. If multiple heat
exchange systems use the same water feed (i.e., inlet water from the
same primary water source), you may monitor at one representative
location and use the monitoring results for that sampling location for
all heat exchange systems
[[Page 29536]]
that use that same water feed. We are proposing to exempt a heat
exchange system from the monitoring requirements in 40 CFR 63.11920 if
all heat exchangers within the heat exchange system operate with the
minimum pressure on the cooling water side at least 35 kilopascals
greater than the maximum pressure on the process side, or the heat
exchange system does not contain any heat exchangers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water
Sources, Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling
Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by
TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference--see 40 CFR
65.645).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identified leaks must be repaired as soon as practicable, but
within 45 days after identifying the leak. We are proposing delay of
repair action levels as either a total strippable VOC concentration (as
methane) in the stripping gas of 29 ppmv or a total strippable VOC
concentration in the cooling water of 380 ppbw. Leaking heat exchanger
repairs may be delayed if the repair is technically infeasible without
a shutdown, or the necessary equipment, parts, or personnel are not
available. To delay repairs in either case, the total strippable VOC
must initially be, and remain less than, the delay of repair action
level for all monitoring periods during the delay of repair.
4. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements for
process vents?
To demonstrate compliance for process vents, you would be required
to meet the requirements of proposed 40 CFR 63.11930 for each closed
vent system that routes emissions from process vents subject to the HAP
emission limits to a control device. You would be required to meet the
initial and continuous compliance requirements for process vents
specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11935, the monitoring
requirements for your process vent control device, as specified in
proposed 40 CFR 63.11940, and the performance testing requirements for
process vents in 40 CFR 60.11945. You may not use a flare to comply
with the emission limits of the proposed rule, as specified in 40 CFR
63.11925(b).
Closed vent systems. In 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule, for
closed vent systems, you would be required to meet specified design
requirements and install flow indicators in the bypass lines, or meet
other requirements to prevent and detect bypass of the control device.
You must also follow the inspection, leak monitoring, and repair
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule for closed vent
systems. Closed vent systems in vacuum service would be required to
install alarms rather than performing leak inspection and monitoring.
If you operate a closed vent system in vacuum service, you are not
required to comply with the other closed vent system requirements in
the proposed rule.
Performance testing, continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS),
and continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) requirements for
process vents and associated control devices.
Compliance would be demonstrated through a combination of
performance testing (as specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR
63.11945) and/or monitoring using CEMS or CPMS that measure process
vent control device operating parameters (as specified in 40 CFR
63.11925, 40 CFR 63.11935, and 40 CFR 63.11940). These sections also
refer to Tables 1, 2, 6, and 7 of the proposed rule for emission
limits, testing methods, and requirements. Below, we summarize the
process vent testing and compliance requirements by pollutant. Each
test would consist of three test runs.
We are proposing that existing and new sources would be required to
demonstrate initial and annual compliance with the total organic HAP
emission limits in Table 1 or 2 of the proposed rule by measuring total
hydrocarbon (THC) at the outlet of the control device using EPA Method
25A, as specified in Table 9 of the proposed rule. The minimum test run
duration would be 1 hour.
During the initial compliance test, you would be required to
establish values for the control device operating parameters specified
in 40 CFR 63.11935 and 40 CFR 63.11940 (e.g., incinerator temperature).
You would then use a CPMS to continuously monitor that parameter to
demonstrate continuous compliance with the total organic HAP limit. New
and existing sources could elect to use THC CEMS instead of annual
testing and CPMS for total organic HAP. All CEMS must meet the
applicable performance specifications, procedures, and other
calibration, accuracy, and operating and maintenance requirements, as
specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed rule. For vinyl chloride,
you would demonstrate compliance by conducting initial and annual
performance tests using EPA Method 18. You would be required to
establish monitoring parameters during the initial performance test,
and continuously monitor control device operating parameters.
For CDD/CDF, you would demonstrate compliance by conducting initial
and annual performance tests using EPA Method 23. The minimum sampling
volume collected would be 5 cubic meters for Method 23. For HCl, you
would demonstrate compliance by conducting an initial performance test
using EPA Method 26 or 26A. The minimum sampling volumes collected
would be 60 liters for EPA Method 26, or 1 cubic meter for EPA Method
26A. You would be required to establish monitoring parameters during
the initial performance test, and continuously monitor control device
operating parameters (e.g., liquid flow rate and pH for scrubbers, and
temperature and carbon injection rate for activated carbon injection).
After EPA publishes final performance specifications for CEMS for HCl
and CDD/CDF, new sources would be required to use CEMS instead of
annual testing for these pollutants, as required in 40 CFR 63.11925 of
the proposed rule. Existing sources could elect to use CEMS instead of
annual testing and CPMS for these pollutants. All CEMS must meet the
applicable performance specifications, procedures, and other
calibration, accuracy, and operating and maintenance requirements, as
specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed rule.
We have included specific performance testing requirements,
including the process operating conditions under which performance
tests should be conducted, for continuous process vents and batch
operations, as provided in 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed rule, and
discussed in section III.F and III.G of this preamble.
All CPMS would be required to have data averaging periods of 3-hour
block averages. All CPMS would be required to meet minimum accuracy and
calibration frequency requirements, as specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and
Table 8 of the proposed rule. For each monitored parameter, you would
establish a minimum, maximum, or a range that indicates proper
operation of the control device, as specified in 40 C
