National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Reconsideration, 71490-71528 [2020-23387]
Download as PDF
71490
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037; FRL–10015–41–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AR73
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production
Reconsideration
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; reconsideration
of final rule.
AGENCY:
On April 17, 2012, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
promulgated National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) for Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production at major
and area sources. Subsequently, the
Administrator received and granted
petitions for reconsideration of the
emission limits in the 2012 final rules
for process vents, process wastewater,
and stripped resin for major and area
sources. In response to the petitions and
after gathering additional information
from PVC companies, the EPA is
proposing revisions to emission limits
in the 2012 major source rule for
process vents and process wastewater.
Although the EPA is not proposing
revisions to emission limits in the 2012
area source rule, the EPA is proposing
other amendments that affect both rules,
including technical corrections and
clarifications related to the standards for
stripped resin, storage vessels
(including the use of vapor balancing),
equipment leaks, and closed vent
systems. The EPA is also proposing to
clarify text and correct typographical
errors, grammatical errors, and crossreference errors in both rules. In
addition, the EPA is proposing to
remove the affirmative defense
provisions. We estimate that, if
finalized, these proposed amendments
would result in hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) emissions reductions of 34 tons
per year (tpy) with an annualized cost
of $0.39 million.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 8, 2021. Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA),
comments on the information collection
provisions are best assured of
consideration if the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
receives a copy of your comments on or
before December 9, 2020.
Public hearing. If anyone contacts us
requesting a public hearing on or before
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
November 16, 2020, we will hold a
virtual public hearing. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
information on requesting and
registering for a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0037, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov/ (our
preferred method). Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037 in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery or Courier (by
scheduled appointment only): EPA
Docket Center, WJC West Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket
Center’s hours of operation are 8:30
a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except
Federal holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Out of an abundance of
caution for members of the public and
our staff, the EPA Docket Center and
Reading Room are closed to the public,
with limited exceptions, to reduce the
risk of transmitting COVID–19. Our
Docket Center staff will continue to
provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. We
encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov/ or email, as there
may be a delay in processing mail and
faxes. For further information on EPA
Docket Center services and the current
status, please visit us online at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this proposed action,
contact Ms. Jennifer Caparoso, Sector
Policies and Programs Division (E143–
01), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: (919) 541–4063; fax number:
(919) 541–0516; and email address:
caparoso.jennifer@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Participation in virtual public
hearing. Please note that the EPA is
deviating from its typical approach
because the President has declared a
national emergency. Due to the current
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) recommendations, as
well as state and local orders for social
distancing to limit the spread of
COVID–19, the EPA cannot hold inperson public meetings at this time.
If requested, the virtual hearing will
be held on November 24, 2020. The
hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m.
Eastern Time (ET) and will conclude at
3:00 p.m. ET. The EPA may close a
session 15 minutes after the last preregistered speaker has testified if there
are not additional speakers. The EPA
will announce further details on the
virtual public hearing website at https://
www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-airpollution/polyvinyl-chloride-andcopolymers-production-nationalemission-0.
The EPA will begin pre-registering
speakers for the hearing upon
publication of this document in the
Federal Register. To register to speak at
the virtual hearing, please use the
online registration form available at:
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sourcesair-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-andcopolymers-production-nationalemission-0 or contact Ms. Virginia Hunt
at (919) 541–0832 or by email at
hunt.virginia@epa.gov. The last day to
pre-register to speak at the hearing will
be November 23, 2020. Prior to the
hearing, the EPA will post a general
agenda that will list pre-registered
speakers in approximate order at
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sourcesair-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-andcopolymers-production-nationalemission-0.
The EPA will make every effort to
follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing;
however, please plan for the hearing to
run either ahead of schedule or behind
schedule.
Each commenter will have 5 minutes
to provide oral testimony. The EPA
encourages commenters to provide the
EPA with a copy of their oral testimony
electronically by emailing it to
caparoso.jennifer@epa.gov. The EPA
also recommends submitting the text of
your oral testimony as written
comments to the rulemaking docket.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions
during the oral presentations but will
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
not respond to the presentations at that
time. Written statements and supporting
information submitted during the
comment period will be considered
with the same weight as oral testimony
and supporting information presented at
the public hearing.
Please note that any updates made to
any aspect of the hearing will be posted
online at https://www.epa.gov/
stationary-sources-air-pollution/
polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymersproduction-national-emission-0. While
the EPA expects the hearing to go
forward as set forth above, if requested,
please monitor our website or contact
Ms. Virginia Hunt at 919–541–0832 or
hunt.virginia@epa.gov to determine if
there are any updates. The EPA does not
intend to publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing updates.
If you require the services of a
translator or a special accommodation
such as audio description, please preregister for the hearing with Virginia
Hunt and describe your needs by
November 16, 2020. The EPA may not
be able to arrange accommodations
without advance notice.
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. All
documents in the docket are listed in
Regulations.gov. Although listed, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
electronically in Regulations.gov.
Instructions. Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037. The EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit electronically any
information that you consider to be CBI
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statue. This type of
information should be submitted by
mail as discussed below.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
The https://www.regulations.gov/
website allows you to submit your
comment anonymously, which means
the EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide
it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the
EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov/, your email
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, the EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
digital storage media you submit. If the
EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should not include
special characters or any form of
encryption and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about the EPA’s public docket, visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
The EPA is temporarily suspending
its Docket Center and Reading Room for
public visitors, with limited exceptions,
to reduce the risk of transmitting
COVID–19. Our Docket Center staff will
continue to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform.
We encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov/ as there may be a
delay in processing mail and faxes.
Hand deliveries or couriers will be
received by scheduled appointment
only. For further information and
updates on EPA Docket Center services,
please visit us online at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
The EPA continues to carefully and
continuously monitor information from
the CDC, local area health departments,
and our federal partners so that we can
respond rapidly as conditions change
regarding COVID–19.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit
information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov/ or
email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI.
For CBI information on any digital
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71491
storage media that you mail to the EPA,
mark the outside of the digital storage
media as CBI and then identify
electronically within the digital storage
media the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comments that
includes information claimed as CBI,
you must submit a copy of the
comments that does not contain the
information claimed as CBI directly to
the public docket through the
procedures outlined in Instructions
above. If you submit any digital storage
media that does not contain CBI, mark
the outside of the digital storage media
clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be
included in the public docket and the
EPA’s electronic public docket without
prior notice. Information marked as CBI
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 2. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI only to the following
address: OAQPS Document Control
Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2002–0037. Note that written
comments containing CBI and
submitted by mail may be delayed and
no hand deliveries will be accepted.
Preamble acronyms and
abbreviations. We use multiple
acronyms and terms in this preamble.
While this list may not be exhaustive, to
ease the reading of this preamble and for
reference purposes, the EPA defines the
following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDC Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
CEMS continuous emission monitoring
systems
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ET Eastern Time
GACT generally achievable control
technology
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
HON Hazardous Organic NESHAP
ICR Information Collection Request
LDAR leak detection and repair
MACT maximum achievable control
technology
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NESHAP national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants
NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ppm parts per million
ppmvd parts per million by volume dry
ppmw parts per million by weight
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71492
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
PRD pressure relief device
PVC polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
PVCPU PVC production process unit
RDL representative detection level
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SSM startup, shutdown, and malfunction
TEQ toxic equivalency
THC total hydrocarbons
TOHAP total non-vinyl chloride organic
HAP
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UPL upper prediction limit
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Organization of this document. The
information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. What is the source of authority for the
reconsideration action?
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
II. Background
III. Reconsideration Issues, Request for Public
Comments, and Other Proposed Changes
A. Process Vents
B. Process Wastewater
C. Stripped Resin
D. Storage Vessels
E. Affected Source
F. Equipment Leaks
G. Closed Vent Systems
H. Affirmative Defense
I. Other Technical Corrections and
Clarifications
IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and
Economic Impacts
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. What is the source of authority for
the reconsideration action?
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 112 and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
maximum achievable control
technology (MACT), thereby satisfying
CAA section 112(d), except for
B. Does this action apply to me?
equipment leaks at new sources. For
Regulated Entities. Categories and
equipment leaks, the EPA required that
entities potentially regulated by this
new sources comply with 40 CFR part
action are shown in Table 1 of this
63, subpart UU.
preamble.
In October 2003, Mossville
Environmental Action Now and Sierra
TABLE 1—INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CAT- Club argued in the United States Court
EGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS PRO- of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (the court) that the EPA had
POSED ACTION
failed to set emission standards for all
NESHAP and source
HAP emitted by PVC plants. See
1 code
NAICS
category
Mossville Environmental Action Now v.
EPA, 370 F.3d at 1232 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
Polyvinyl Chloride and CoThe EPA argued that it set emission
polymers Production .........
325211
standards for vinyl chloride as a
1 North
American Industry Classification surrogate for all HAP emitted from the
System.
source category because it was the
Table 1 of this preamble is not
predominant HAP used and emitted at
intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
PVC plants; however, the court ruled
provide a guide for readers regarding
that the EPA did not adequately explain
entities likely to be affected by this
the basis for its decision to use vinyl
action for the source categories listed.
chloride as a surrogate for the HAP
To determine whether your facility is
other than vinyl chloride. The court
affected, you should examine the
‘‘vacated and remanded [the rule in its
applicability criteria in the appropriate
entirety] to the Agency for it to
NESHAP. If you have any questions
reconsider or properly explain its
regarding the applicability of any aspect methodology for regulating [HAP]
of these NESHAP, please contact the
emitted in PVC production other than
person listed in the preceding FOR
vinyl chloride by use of a surrogate.’’ Id.
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of at 370 F.3d at 1243.
this preamble.
On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930), the
EPA
promulgated the NESHAP for new
C. Where can I get a copy of this
and existing PVC production area
document and other related
sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
information?
DDDDDD, based on generally achievable
In addition to being available in the
control technology (GACT) under CAA
docket, an electronic copy of this action section 112(d)(5), and required area
is available on the internet. Following
sources to meet the requirements in the
signature by the EPA Administrator, the existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40
EPA will post a copy of this proposed
CFR part 61, subpart F).
action at https://www.epa.gov/
On April 17, 2012 (77 FR 22848), in
stationary-sources-air-pollution/
response to the 2004 court remand in
polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymersMossville Environmental Action Now,
production-national-emission-0.
the EPA finalized the NESHAP for PVC
Following publication in the Federal
production at major sources under CAA
Register, the EPA will post the Federal
sections 112(d)(2) and (3). In the same
Register version of the proposal at this
rulemaking, the EPA revised the area
same website.
source standards under CAA section
A redline version of the regulatory
112(d)(6). The April 17, 2012, final
language that incorporates the proposed major and area source rules (herein
changes in this action and supporting
referred to as the ‘‘2012 final major and
technical documents are available in the area source rules’’) established emission
docket for this rulemaking.
limits and work practice standards for
total organic HAP, and also for three
II. Background
specific HAP: Vinyl chloride,
On July 10, 2002, the EPA
chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans
promulgated the NESHAP for new and
(dioxins and furans), and hydrogen
existing PVC production facilities
chloride (HCl).1 To determine the
located at major sources in 40 CFR part
63, subpart J (67 FR 45886). In that
1 The EPA did not set emission limits or work
rulemaking, the EPA regulated vinyl
practice standards for HCl from PVC area sources.
chloride as a surrogate for all HAP
Under CAA sections 112(c)(6) and 112(k), HCl was
not determined to be one of the top 30 urban air
emitted from PVC production and
toxics that pose the greatest potential health threat
determined that the existing Vinyl
in urban areas; thus, regulation as an area source
Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61,
is not warranted. For additional details, see https://
subpart F) reflected the application of
www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/area/arearules.html.
307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
(42 U.S.C. 7412 and 7607(d)(7)(B)).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
emissions limits and work practice
standards, the EPA gathered information
on PVC production through public
comment, 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. Also,
in the form of an electronic survey and
emission testing of HAP, the EPA
collected information from PVC
production facilities, as well as colocated ethylene dichloride and vinyl
chloride facilities. All Agency
correspondence related to the data
gathering activities is provided in the
docket for this rulemaking.
In June 2012, the EPA received four
petitions for reconsideration on the
2012 final major and area source rules
pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(7)(B)
from the following petitioners: One
petition from environmental groups
(i.e., Mossville Environmental Action
Now, Louisiana Environmental Action
Network, Air Alliance Houston, and
Sierra Club); and three petitions from
the regulated industry and their
representatives (i.e., PolyOne
Corporation, Saint-Gobain Corporation
and CertainTeed Corporation, and Vinyl
Institute, Inc.). Copies of the petitions
are provided in the docket for this
rulemaking (see Docket Item Nos. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2002–0037–0544, EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0037–0568, EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037–0217, and EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037–0569). At the same time, the
above petitioners, along with
OxyVinyls, LP, petitioned the court for
judicial review of the 2012 final major
and area source rules. The petitioners
primarily requested the EPA reconsider
the emission limits for process vents,
process wastewater, and stripped resin
because they argued that it was not
feasible to comment on the new data on
which the EPA based the final emission
limits. Petitioners also argued that they
were not afforded the opportunity to
comment on the subcategorization of
process vents and stripped resin.
Petitioners requested that the EPA
reconsider and/or make changes to
several other portions of the 2012 final
major and area source rules; including
requests that the EPA: (1) Set the
emission limits using data that
represents the entire industry; (2) allow
vapor balancing as a method to control
emissions from storage vessels; (3) allow
leak detection and repair (LDAR) of
pressure vessels; (4) revise emission
profile requirements; (5) remove the
requirement to install electronic
indicators on each pressure relief device
(PRD) that would be able to identify and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
record the time and duration of each
pressure release; and (6) remove certain
aspects of the bypass monitoring
requirements, and leak monitoring and
inspection requirements. In addition,
one petitioner said the EPA’s
assumption that emission levels vary to
the full extent of the 99th percent upper
prediction limit (UPL) is wrong and
unsupported by the record; and the
EPA’s decision to set MACT floors at 3
times the representative detection level
(RDL) when 3 times the RDL is greater
than the UPL is unlawful.
On September 28, 2012, the EPA sent
letters to petitioners (see Docket Item
Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037–0563
through EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037–
0566) informing them that: (1) The EPA
was granting reconsideration on at least
petitioners’ claims of inadequate
opportunity to comment on the
emission limits for process vents,
process wastewater, and stripped resin
for major and area sources; (2) the EPA
intended to issue a Federal Register
document initiating notice and
comment rulemaking on the issues for
which the Agency granted
reconsideration; and (3) the EPA was
continuing to review the other issues in
the petitions for reconsideration and
intended to take final action on all
issues no later than the date on which
the EPA takes final action on the
reconsidered issues.
In 2014, Mexichem Specialty Resins,
Inc., Vinyl Institute, Inc., Saint-Gobain
Corporation and CertainTeed
Corporation, and OxyVinyls, LP
(Industry petitioners) petitioned the
court to remove their case from
abeyance.2 The court removed the
industry petitioners’ cases from
abeyance and, on May 29, 2015, the
court rejected the Industry petitioners’
arguments and denied their petitions for
review. Mexichem Specialty Resins, Inc.
v. EPA, 787 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
Based on this court decision, we
consider all of the Industry petitioners’
reconsideration requests related to the
interaction between non-PVC and PVCcombined process vent limits and their
subcategorization, vent gas absorbers,
PRDs, and bypasses to be resolved, as
those issues were addressed by the
court.
Furthermore, on August 20, 2013, the
court issued its decision in National
Association of Clean Water Agencies v.
EPA, which involved challenges to the
EPA’s MACT standards for Sewage
2 The petition for judicial review filed on behalf
of Air Alliance Houston, Louisiana Environmental
Action Network, Mossville Environmental Action
Now, and Sierra Club, was severed from the
industry case and is in abeyance pending the EPA’s
action on reconsideration.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71493
Sludge Incineration, issued under CAA
section 129. See 734 F.3d 1115. In this
decision, the court remanded certain
aspects of the rule for further
explanation, including the question of
how the UPL represents the MACT floor
for new and existing units, as required
by the CAA. The Sewage Sludge
Incineration rule was issued on the
same day as the Boilers and Commercial
and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
rules, and used the same general
methodology for calculating the MACT
floors. For this reason, the EPA
requested an opportunity to supplement
the record in pending challenges to the
Boilers and Commercial and Industrial
Solid Waste Incineration rules, to
provide the explanation of the Agency’s
analysis of variability in setting the
MACT floor standards that the court
believed was needed in the record for
the Sewage Sludge Incineration rule.
The court granted the EPA’s motion for
a remand of the record on May 15, 2014.
Details of how the UPL is used to
calculate the average emissions
limitation achieved over time by the
best performing source or sources is
documented in the memorandum, Use
of the Upper Prediction Limit for
Calculating MACT Floors, which is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking. We also note that on July
29, 2016, the court determined our UPL
approach is reasonable in U.S. Sugar
Corp v. EPA, 830 F.3d 579, 639. Based
on these details, we consider all of the
petitioners’ requests related to the EPA’s
methodology used to set MACT floors to
be resolved.
We considered all other
reconsideration petition requests and
consolidated and grouped the issues for
which we are granting reconsideration
into distinct topics which are discussed
in section III of this preamble.
III. Reconsideration Issues, Request for
Public Comments, and Other Proposed
Changes
To address selected issues raised in
the four petitions for reconsideration
and not resolved by the May 29, 2015,
court decision (787 F.3d 544) as
described above, the EPA is proposing
revisions to the emission limits in the
2012 major source rule for process vents
and process wastewater. In addition, the
EPA is proposing other amendments to
the 2012 final major and area source
rules, including technical corrections
and clarifications related to the
standards for stripped resin, storage
vessels (including the use of vapor
balancing), equipment leaks, and closed
vent systems. The EPA is also proposing
to clarify text and correct typographical
errors, grammatical errors, and cross-
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71494
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
reference errors in both rules. In
addition, the EPA is proposing to
remove the affirmative defense
provisions. To ensure public
participation in its final decisions, the
EPA is requesting public comment on
only these specific issues as described
below. The EPA will not respond to any
comments addressing any other
provisions of the 2012 final major and
area source rules or any other rules or
issues.
A. Process Vents
Following the 2011 proposal (76 FR
29528), the EPA received comments and
additional emissions data about process
vents, and we used this information to
revise the process vent MACT floors and
impacts for the 2012 final major source
rule. Details regarding the post-proposal
data submittals are discussed in the
memorandum, Updated Information
Collection and Additional Data
Received for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, which is available in the
docket for this rulemaking (see Docket
Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037–
0197). In the 2012 final major and area
source rules, we established process
vent emission limits for vinyl chloride,
dioxins and furans, and total
hydrocarbons (THC) or total organic
HAP. For the 2012 final major source
rule, we also established process vent
emission limits for HCl as a surrogate
for all acid gas HAP and chlorine gas.
For the 2012 final area source rule, the
process vent emission limits are based
on the baseline level of control (i.e., the
control level that area sources were
meeting for existing and new sources)
and the testing and monitoring
requirements are the same as the 2012
final major source rule. To ensure that
batch process vent streams are tested at
worst-case conditions, in the 2012 final
major and area source rules, we required
that each batch process vent stream be
characterized under worst-case
conditions by developing an emission
profile. Also, in the 2012 final major
and area source rules, we clarified the
definitions for process vent, continuous
process vent, and batch process vent
and added a definition for
miscellaneous vent. Refer to the
preamble of the 2012 final major and
area source rules (see section III of the
2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22850) for
additional details about the process vent
standards.
Petitioners primarily argue that it was
not feasible to comment on the new data
on which the EPA based the final
process vent emission limits and
subcategories; and as previously
mentioned in section II of this preamble,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted
reconsideration on the process vent
emission limits. We request public
comments on the process vent emission
limits and subcategories. However, as
discussed later in this section of the
preamble, we are also proposing to
make changes to the process vent
emission limits and subcategories;
therefore, we also request public
comments on these changes. In
addition, a petitioner said the EPA did
not provide opportunity to comment on
the new, broader requirements for
emission profiles that we added to the
2012 final major and area source rules.
The petitioner also said the EPA did not
provide opportunity to comment on the
changes we made in the 2012 final
major and area source rules to the
definitions of process vent, continuous
process vent, and batch process vent or
the new definition for miscellaneous
vent. The EPA is granting
reconsideration on these other issues.
Although we are not making any
changes to the requirements in the 2012
final major and area source rules for
emission profiles or to the definitions of
process vent, continuous process vent,
batch process vent, and miscellaneous
vent, we request public comments on
these requirements and definitions for
the reasons set forth in the 2012 final
rules (see sections III.D.1 and V.I of the
2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22855 and
22890).
In response to the petitioner’s claims,
the EPA issued a CAA section 114
Information Collection Request (ICR) on
May 15, 2014, to PVC production
companies to gather data to inform the
reconsideration and potential revision
of the process vent emission limits in
the 2012 final major and area source
rules (see Docket Item Nos. EPA–OAR–
2002–0037–0600, EPA–OAR–2002–
0037–0601, EPA–OAR–2002–0037–
0602, EPA–OAR–2002–0037–0603,
EPA–OAR–2002–0037–0604, EPA–
OAR–2002–0037–0605, EPA–OAR–
2002–0037–0622, and EPA–OAR–2002–
0037–0623). The data collected are
discussed in the memorandum,
Technical Analysis and Documentation
to Support EPA’s Reconsideration of 40
CFR part 63 Subpart HHHHHHH
National Emission Standards for the
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
(PVC) Production Source Category,
which is available in the docket for this
rulemaking. After reviewing all of the
additional process vent data that we
collected since the promulgation of the
2012 final major and area source rules,
we are proposing changes to those rules.
First, we are proposing changes to the
2012 final major and area source rules
related to the two subcategories for
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
process vents (i.e., the ‘‘PVC-only
process vent’’ and ‘‘PVC-combined
process vent’’ subcategories). Although
we are not proposing to change our
justification for establishing these two
subcategories for process vents (see
section III.B of the 2012 final preamble,
77 FR 22850), we are proposing to
rename the ‘‘PVC-only process vent’’
subcategory the ‘‘PVC process vent’’
subcategory and revise the definition at
40 CFR 63.12005 such that a ‘‘PVC
process vent’’ means a process vent that
originates from a PVC production
process unit (PVCPU) and is not
combined with one or more process
vents originating from the production of
vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene
dichloride prior to being controlled or
emitted to the atmosphere. We are also
proposing to revise the definition of
‘‘PVC-combined process vent’’ at 40
CFR 63.12005 such that a ‘‘PVCcombined process vent’’ means a
process vent that originates from a
PVCPU and is combined with one or
more process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer
or ethylene dichloride prior to being
controlled or emitted to the atmosphere.
In other words, instead of a vent which
is combined with one or more process
vents originating from any other source
category (as is the case in the 2012 final
major and area source rules), we are
narrowing the definition of a ‘‘PVCcombined process vent’’ to refer to a
vent that is combined with one or more
process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer
or ethylene dichloride.3 4 These
proposed definition changes more
accurately reflect the additional process
vent data that we collected since the
promulgation of the 2012 final major
and area source rules, given that owners
and operators of some vinyl chloride
monomer or ethylene dichloride
production units combine their vinyl
chloride monomer, ethylene dichloride,
and PVC process vents into one stream
prior to control and these combined
streams have higher chlorinated loads
and flow rates than a PVC process vent
(as defined in this proposal). These
proposed definition changes will impact
3 We are also including a sentence in each of
these definitions to clarify that vent streams from
process components associated with the stripped
resin downstream of the resin stripper (e.g., dryers,
centrifuges, filters) are not considered a PVC
process vent or a PVC-combined process vent
because these vent streams are subject to the
stripped resin standards (see section III.C of this
preamble).
4 We note that although these proposed changes
are being made directly in the 2012 final major
source rule, these proposed changes also result in
revisions to the 2012 final area source rule because
40 CFR 63.11144(b) references 40 CFR 63.12005.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the subcategory designations of two PVC
facilities if finalized as proposed. Both
facilities currently are in the ‘‘PVCcombined process vent’’ subcategory
and with the proposed definition
changes, the facilities would be in the
‘‘PVC process vent’’ subcategory. The
impacts to the emission limits for each
of the proposed subcategories due to the
proposed definition changes are
discussed below.
Second, in light of the court’s
decision in Mexichem Specialty Resins,
Inc. v. EPA, 787 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir.
2015), we are clarifying at 40 CFR
63.11925(a) that if an applicable process
vent stream at a PVCPU is comingled
with a vent stream from one or more
non-PVCPU sources (e.g., a vent stream
from a vinyl chloride monomer,
ethylene dichloride production, or other
chemical manufacturing process unit
subject to the Hazardous Organic
NESHAP (HON), 40 CFR part 63,
subparts G, F, and H), and the
comingled streams are vented through a
shared control device, then each
emission standard (and subsequent
control device monitoring,
recordkeeping, reporting, and other
requirements) from both the PVC
NESHAP and any other NESHAP to
which the comingled vent stream is
subject applies. In Mexichem Specialty
Resins, Inc. v. EPA, the court ruled that
if ‘‘a PVC manufacturer chooses to
discharge combined emissions from
PVC and non-PVC processes through a
single vent, that manufacturer must
comply with limits applicable to both
and, where they differ, comply with the
more stringent of the two.’’ For this
reason, and to clarify what the rules are
intended to regulate, we are also
proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.11140(c)
by removing the last sentence and 40
CFR 63.11865 by removing the phrase
‘‘or to chemical manufacturing process
units, as defined in § 63.101, that
produce vinyl chloride monomer or
other raw materials used in the
production of polyvinyl chloride and
copolymers’’ and we are proposing at 40
CFR 63.12005 to remove the last
sentence in the definition of PVCPU. We
note that although the proposed changes
at 40 CFR 63.11925(a) and 40 CFR
63.12005 are being made directly in the
2012 final major source rule, these
proposed changes also result in revision
to the 2012 final area source rule
because 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8)
references 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR
63.11144 references 40 CFR 63.12005.
Third, given that we are proposing to
revise the definitions of ‘‘PVC process
vent’’ and ‘‘PVC-combined process
vent’’ as discussed above (and which are
referenced in the area source rule), we
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
are also proposing to amend the
emission limits for PVC-combined
process vents in the 2012 final area
source rule by eliminating the PVCcombined process vent limits in the area
source rule and instead require ‘‘PVCcombined process vents’’ at area sources
to meet the major source process vent
emission limits for ‘‘PVC-combined
process vents.’’ Based on the additional
process vent data that we collected
since the promulgation of the 2012 final
major and area source rules, we
determined that any facility producing
vinyl chloride monomer and/or
ethylene dichloride is a major source (as
defined in CAA section 112(a)) subject
to the HON. Therefore, taking into
consideration our proposed definition of
‘‘PVC-combined process vent,’’ we do
not believe that there is any scenario
where a PVC production area source can
combine its process vents with one or
more process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer
or ethylene dichloride and that
combined process vent be routed to a
control device being used to comply
with only an area source NESHAP. We
estimate that there would be no impact
on any facility for making this change
(i.e., to eliminate the emission limits for
PVC-combined process vents in the
2012 final area source rule and instead
require ‘‘PVC-combined process vents’’
at an area source meet the major source
process vent emission limits). We are
proposing at 40 CFR 63.11141(f) that all
affected area sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction on or
before May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with this change within 3
years after the date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. We
also are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11141(f)
that all affected area sources that
commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must
be in compliance with this change upon
the date of publication of the final rule
in the Federal Register or initial startup,
whichever is later. We are not aware of
any sources that have commenced
construction or reconstruction after May
20, 2011, which would be impacted by
the application of the changes.
Fourth, we are proposing to revise the
process vent emission limits in the 2012
final major source rule. As part of the
May 15, 2014, CAA section 114 ICR, we
asked for sampling and analysis of HAP
including vinyl chloride, HCl, dioxins/
furans, and THC from process vents
operating at maximum mass loading of
all HAP compounds under normal
operation at eight PVC production
facilities. Those data were incorporated
with the previously submitted data used
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71495
to support the 2012 final major source
rule process vent emission limits. We
then recalculated the process vent
emission limits for vinyl chloride, total
organic HAP, HCl, dioxins/furans, and
THC accounting for the additional data
received in response to the May 15,
2014, CAA section 114 ICR and also
accounting for the change in
subcategory for two PVC facilities based
on our proposed revisions to the process
vent subcategory definitions. To account
for variability, we calculated the
proposed MACT floors for vinyl
chloride, total organic HAP, HCl, and
dioxins/furans for existing and new
sources using a 99-percent UPL
calculation. Given the large amount of
data obtained, we calculated the
proposed MACT floors for THC for
existing and new sources using a 99percent upper limit calculation. Tables
2 and 3 of this preamble compare the
2012 final major source rule PVC
process vent emission limits and PVCcombined process vent emission limits,
respectively, to the process vent
emission limits that we are proposing in
this action. Also, as part of a beyondthe-floor analysis, we analyzed the cost
and emissions reductions for an existing
facility to install a refrigerated
condenser prior to the existing thermal
oxidizer and acid gas scrubber to meet
the proposed new source standards for
process vents; and we determined that
the overall annual cost would be $7.2
million, and the annual emissions
reductions would be 105 tons of HAP
per year (approximately $68,000/ton
cost effectiveness). Furthermore, the
only beyond-the-floor option we
identified for new sources is a
refrigerated condenser prior to the
thermal oxidizer and acid gas scrubber.
However, similar to the analysis for
existing sources, installing a refrigerated
condenser prior to the thermal oxidizer
and acid gas scrubber at a new source
to achieve beyond-the-MACT-floor level
of control would also not be cost
effective (i.e., higher cost with
potentially less HAP removal than
existing sources). We did not identify
any other measures or control
technologies to further reduce emissions
from process vents in the PVC
production industry. Based on this
analysis, we are proposing that it is not
cost effective to go beyond-the-floor for
process vents at existing or new sources.
Our emission limit calculations,
beyond-the-floor analysis, and the
methodology we used to calculate costs
and emission reductions are discussed
in the memorandum, Technical
Analysis and Documentation to Support
EPA’s Reconsideration of 40 CFR part
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71496
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
63 Subpart HHHHHHH National
Emission Standards for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production Source Category, which is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF 2012 FINAL MAJOR SOURCE EMISSION LIMITS AND PROPOSED EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC
PROCESS VENTS
2012 Final major rule
emission limits for pvc process
vents
Pollutant
Existing
sources
Vinyl Chloride 1 .................................................................................................
Total Organic HAP 1 .........................................................................................
HCl 1 .................................................................................................................
Dioxins/Furans 2 ...............................................................................................
THC 3 ................................................................................................................
1 Parts
New sources
6.0
56
78
0.038
9.7
0.56
5.5
0.17
0.038
7.0
Proposed emission
limits for pvc process
vents
Existing
sources
0.85
22
0.64
0.035
5.1
New sources
0.85
1.3
0.17
0.035
2.2
per million by volume dry (ppmvd) @3-percent (%) oxygen (O2).
per dry standard cubic meters (ng/dscm) @3% O2 toxic equivalency (TEQ).
as propane @3% O2.
2 Nanograms
3 ppmvd
TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2012 FINAL MAJOR SOURCE EMISSION LIMITS AND PROPOSED EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVCCOMBINED PROCESS VENTS
2012 final major rule
emission limits for PVCcombined process vents
Pollutant
Existing
sources
Vinyl Chloride 1 .................................................................................................
Total Organic HAP 1 .........................................................................................
HCl 1 .................................................................................................................
Dioxins/Furans 2 ...............................................................................................
THC 3 ................................................................................................................
New sources
1.1
9.8
380
0.051
4.2
0.56
5.5
1.4
0.034
2.3
Proposed emission limits
for PVC-combined process
vents
Existing
sources
0.85
9.7
3.9
0.68
9.1
New sources
0.85
5.9
1.4
0.051
2.2
1 ppmvd
@3% O2.
@3% O2 TEQ.
3 ppmvd as propane @3% O .
2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
2 ng/dscm
We are proposing the revised major
source process vent emission limits in
new Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH; and we are
proposing that all affected major sources
that commenced construction or
reconstruction on or before May 20,
2011, must be in compliance with these
changes within 3 years after the date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. We also are proposing
that all affected major sources that
commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must
be in compliance with these changes
upon the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register or initial
startup, whichever is later. We are not
aware of any major sources that have
commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011,
which would be impacted by the
application of the changes. See
proposed 40 CFR 63.11875(e). Also, at
any time before these compliance dates,
we are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11880(d)
that an affected major source may
choose to comply with the revised
emission limits in Tables 1b and 2b to
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
lieu of the emission limits in Tables 1
and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. Also, as previously
mentioned in section II of this preamble,
on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted
reconsideration on the emission limits.
We are not making any changes to the
process vent emission limits in the area
source rule; however, we request public
comments on these emission limits.
Finally, we are proposing to revise
several paragraphs throughout the 2012
final major and area source rules,
(including process vent related
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925
through 63.11950) to properly reference
the proposed Tables 1b and 2b to 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. For
example, for 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD, although 40 CFR 63.11925 is
referenced in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8), we
are proposing to revise the introduction
paragraph at 40 CFR 63.11142(f) to
ensure that whenever reference is made
to Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to 40 CFR part
63, subpart HHHHHHH, we mean Table
1 or 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD, for purposes of compliance
with the 2012 area source process vent
standards. We are also proposing several
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
other editorial corrections and
clarifications to the process vent
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925
through 63.11950. These proposed
amendments are discussed in section
III.I of this preamble.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e., the
revised subcategories for process vents,
the clarifications to 40 CFR 63.11140(c),
63.11865, 63.11925(a), and 63.12005
addressing comingled vent streams, the
elimination of the emission limits for
PVC-combined process vents in the
2012 final area source rule, the revised
major source process vent emission
limits, the compliance dates, and
whether there are any sources that
commenced construction after May 20,
2011). Except for the proposed major
source process vent emission limits, we
note (as previously mentioned) that all
of the other proposed changes discussed
in this section of the preamble are also
being proposed for the 2012 area source
rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8) through
(13) and 63.11144 because 40 CFR
63.11925 through 63.11950 and
63.12005 are referenced in those
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
requirements. If it is determined that
there are sources that have commenced
construction or reconstruction after May
20, 2011, then we will need to add
additional requirements.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Process Wastewater
The 2012 final major source rule
contains vinyl chloride and total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP (TOHAP)
emission limits for process wastewater.
For the 2012 final major source rule, the
vinyl chloride emission limits were
calculated based on one year of
sampling data provided post-proposal
by the industry. The major source
TOHAP emission limits were based on
information and data provided by
industry in response to the August 21,
2009, CAA section 114 ICR, corrections
to those data provided by the PVC
industry during the public comment
period, and supplemental wastewater
sampling data provided during the
public comment period by one PVC
manufacturer. The August 21, 2009,
CAA section 114 ICR is documented in
the memoranda, Information Collection
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category and Updated Information
Collection and Additional Data
Received for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category, which are available in the
docket for this rulemaking (see Docket
Item Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037–
0099 and EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037–
0197, respectively). Refer to the
preamble of the 2012 final major and
area source rules (see section III of the
2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22850) for
additional details about the emission
limits for process wastewater.5
Petitioners primarily argue that it was
not feasible to comment on the new data
on which the EPA based the final
process wastewater emission limits; and
as previously mentioned in section II of
this preamble, on September 28, 2012,
the EPA granted reconsideration on this
issue. The petitioners argued that the
EPA did not base the TOHAP emission
limits on emission levels actually
achieved by the best performing sources
in the source category. One of the
petitioners said that the EPA did not
provide rationale for why nine out of 18
5 We note that subsequent to the April 17, 2012,
rulemaking, PVC industry stakeholders notified the
EPA that the data used to set the new and existing
area source TOHAP process wastewater emission
limits were not based on data from the PVC
Production source category. The EPA agreed with
the PVC industry stakeholders and on February 4,
2015, the EPA issued a direct final rule (80 FR 5938,
February 4, 2015) withdrawing the TOHAP process
wastewater emission standards in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, for new and existing PVC
production area sources.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
facilities (for which it had data)
represented the top performing sources.
Other petitioners argued that the data
points do not reflect actual samples of
PVC facility process wastewater taken
during actual operations.
In response to the petitioner’s claims,
the EPA issued a CAA section 114 ICR
on November 8, 2012, to PVC
production companies to gather data to
inform the reconsideration and potential
revision of the process wastewater
emission limits in the 2012 final major
and area source rules. Also, the EPA
issued an additional CAA section 114
ICR on April 1, 2014, to two companies
that were not included in the November
8, 2012, CAA section 114 request. These
two CAA section 114 ICRs are available
in the docket for this rulemaking (see
Docket Item Nos. EPA–OAR–2002–
0037–0543, EPA–OAR–2002–0037–
0592, EPA–OAR–2002–0037–0593, and
EPA–OAR–2002–0037–0594). The data
collected are discussed in the
memorandum, Technical Analysis and
Documentation to Support EPA’s
Reconsideration of 40 CFR part 63
Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission
Standards for the Polyvinyl Chloride
and Copolymers (PVC) Production
Source Category, which is available in
the docket for this rulemaking. Each
owner or operator was required to take
one grab sample from each PVC process
wastewater treatment stream for 30
consecutive days and then analyze the
samples for specified HAP using the
prescribed EPA test methods. If a
facility had a batch PVC operation that
did not operate 30 consecutive days,
then it was required to collect samples
at least once for each day while any
batch wastewater treatment system was
operating such that at least 30 samples
were analyzed. Data were also collected
on other wastewater streams (i.e.,
streams not stripped and streams slated
for on-site or off-site biological
treatment units), including average flow
rate characteristics, origination, and
destination information. After reviewing
all of the additional process wastewater
data that we collected since the
promulgation of the 2012 final major
and area source rules, we are proposing
changes to the 2012 final major and area
source rules.
First, we are proposing to revise the
process wastewater vinyl chloride
emission limit for major sources. Under
the proposed amendments, process
wastewater streams at existing major
sources would be required to meet an
emission limit of 0.73 parts per million
by weight (ppmw) for vinyl chloride (in
lieu of the 6.8 ppmw vinyl chloride
process wastewater emission limit in
the 2012 major source rule for existing
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71497
affected sources) before being exposed
to the atmosphere or discharged from
the affected source (see proposed Table
1b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH). Process wastewater
streams at new major sources would be
required to meet an emission limit of
0.57 ppmw for vinyl chloride (in lieu of
the 0.28 ppmw vinyl chloride process
wastewater emission limit in the 2012
major source rule for new affected
sources) before being exposed to the
atmosphere or discharged from the
affected source (see proposed Table 2b
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH).
Given the large amount of data obtained,
we calculated these MACT floors (i.e.,
the proposed 0.73 ppmw and 0.57
ppmw vinyl chloride emission limits for
existing and new major sources,
respectively) using a 99-percent upper
limit calculation. Also, we analyzed a
beyond-the-floor option for controlling
vinyl chloride from process wastewater
at existing sources, specifically
evaluating the cost and emissions
reductions for an existing facility to
meet the level of control that we are
proposing for new sources, based on
replacement of their existing wastewater
steam stripper. We determined that the
overall annual cost (including
installation and operation) would be
about $11 million, and the annual
emissions reductions would be 1.3 tons
of HAP per year (approximately $8.6
million/ton cost effectiveness).
Furthermore, the only beyond-the-floor
option we identified for new sources is
a larger or secondary steam stripper.
However, similar to the analysis for
existing sources, installing a larger or
secondary steam stripper at a new
source to achieve beyond-the-MACTfloor level of control would also not be
cost effective (i.e., higher cost with
potentially less HAP removal than
existing sources). We did not identify
any other measures or control
technologies to further reduce emissions
from process wastewater in the PVC
production industry. Based on this
analysis, we are proposing that it is not
cost effective to go beyond-the-floor for
process wastewater at existing or new
sources. Our MACT floor emission limit
calculations, beyond-the-floor analysis,
and the methodology we used to
calculate costs and emission reductions
are discussed in the memorandum,
Technical Analysis and Documentation
to Support EPA’s Reconsideration of 40
CFR part 63 Subpart HHHHHHH
National Emission Standards for the
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
(PVC) Production Source Category,
which is available in the docket for this
rulemaking. Also, as previously
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71498
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
mentioned in section II of this preamble,
on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted
reconsideration on the emission limits.
We are not making any changes to the
wastewater emission limits in the area
source rule; however, we request public
comments on these emission limits.
Second, we are proposing to remove
the major source process wastewater
TOHAP emission limit and establish
vinyl chloride as a surrogate for TOHAP
for major and area sources. As noted
above, petitioners argue that the EPA
did not base the TOHAP emission limits
on emission levels actually achieved by
the best performing sources in the
source category. One of the petitioners
said that the EPA did not set the MACT
floor using data for the top performing
sources. Another petitioner argued that
the data points do not reflect actual
samples of PVC facility process
wastewater taken during actual
operations. We are proposing to
eliminate the process wastewater
TOHAP emission limit and to be more
fully responsive to the court’s original
request that the EPA ‘‘properly explain
its methodology for regulating [HAP]
emitted in PVC production other than
vinyl chloride by use of a surrogate.’’
See Mossville Environmental Action
Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d at 1232 (D.C. Cir.
2004). In this proposal, we have
redetermined and are further explaining
the basis for our conclusion that vinyl
chloride is a suitable surrogate for
establishing process wastewater
emission limits for organic HAP. We
note that the court (370 F.3d at 1242–
43) held that the EPA has authority to
use a surrogate ‘‘if it is reasonable to do
so[.]’’ For the reasons discussed below,
we have determined that vinyl chloride
is a reasonable surrogate for TOHAP
emitted from process wastewater at PVC
production facilities.
Steam stripping is an effective
wastewater treatment technology that
has been used as the basis of wastewater
emission control requirements in many
rules, including the 40 CFR part 63
MACT for chemical process industries,
such as the HON, Miscellaneous
Organic Chemical Manufacturing
NESHAP, and Polymers and Resins
NESHAP as well as the 40 CFR part 61
Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP.
The approach is based on the idea that
removal of pollutants from wastewater
prior to discharge into a facility’s
wastewater collection and treatment
system will limit air emissions resulting
from volatilization of these pollutants
from downstream process drains and
conveyances that are open to the
atmosphere, as well as from the
downstream biological treatment
system, including biological treatment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
units that are agitated and aerated to
supply the microorganisms with O2.
Conversely, those pollutants that are not
effectively removed by a steam stripper
will be even less likely to volatilize in
collection and treatment and will be
controlled in the facility’s biological
treatment system.
All PVC manufacturers have high
concentrations of vinyl chloride in their
process wastewater and steam stripping
is widely used by PVC manufacturers to
remove and recover vinyl chloride from
process wastewater streams. The best
performers that the MACT floor is based
on are those strippers that have the
lowest vinyl chloride concentrations in
the bottoms (outlet) stream exiting the
steam stripper; that is, the most effective
strippers are those that result in the
lowest concentration of vinyl chloride
in the bottoms stream.
Based on the data we received in
response to our CAA section 114 ICRs
of PVC manufacturers, 33 non-vinyl
chloride HAP are also present in the
bottoms of the stripped wastewater
streams. While many of these non-vinyl
chloride HAP are removed using steam
stripping, some are removed to a lesser
degree. The EPA thoroughly examined
the fundamentals of steam stripping
wastewater (including calculating the
HAP fraction removed (Fr) values 6 for
a model steam stripper and the fraction
emitted (Fe) values 7 for numerous HAP
from wastewater) during the original
rulemaking of the HON (see Legacy
Docket A–90–23). Based on this
information as well as the data we
received in response to our CAA section
114 ICRs, we determined that 25 of the
33 non-vinyl chloride HAP in the
stripped wastewater have lower
concentrations than the average vinyl
chloride concentration and have Fr
values of 0.99 which is the same Fr
6 The Fr is the mass fraction of a HAP that is
stripped from the wastewater. The Fr values for
individual HAP in a model steam stripper were
estimated using Henry’s Law Constants at 100
degrees Celsius during the development of the
HON. See 57 FR 62641, December 31, 1992; 59 FR
19443 and 4, April 22, 1994; and the memoranda,
Henry’s Law Constants for the 83 HAP’s Regulated
in the Proposed HON Wastewater Provisions; and
Efficiency of Steam Stripper Trays to Treat
Wastewater Streams: Prediction of the Fraction
Removed (Fr) for Specific Compounds, which are
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
7 The Fe is the mass fraction of a HAP that is
emitted from the wastewater collection and
downstream biological treatment system. The Fe
values for individual HAP were calculated during
the development of the HON. See 57 FR 62641,
December 31, 1992; 59 FR 19443 and 4, April 22,
1994; and the memorandum, Estimation of Air
Emissions from Model Wastewater Collection and
Treatment Plants Systems, which is available in the
docket for this rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
value for vinyl chloride.8 In other
words, vinyl chloride and most nonvinyl chloride HAP are effectively
removed from the wastewater stream
using steam stripping. We, therefore,
conclude that vinyl chloride is a
reasonable surrogate for these HAP.
Although the remaining eight non-vinyl
chloride HAP have stripper bottoms
concentrations higher than vinyl
chloride and have Fr values from 0.31
(methanol) to 0.99 (vinyl acetate),9 these
HAP are not likely to be emitted to the
atmosphere because these HAP have
low Fe values, significantly less than
that of vinyl chloride. The Fe values for
these compounds range from 0 (ethylene
glycol) to 0.59 (vinyl acetate), compared
to vinyl chloride’s Fe value of 0.97. As
a result, these HAP other than vinyl
chloride that remain in the stripped
wastewater are more likely to remain in
the wastewater collection system and
will be readily biodegraded in the
biological treatment unit. Furthermore,
we observed that non-vinyl chloride
HAP concentrations at the outlet of the
steam stripper are the result of varied
resin recipe slates in use throughout the
industry, and, therefore, do not correlate
with the effectiveness of the steam
stripper at removing vinyl chloride. For
example, resin grade recipes lower in
hard-to-strip TOHAP could allow for
poorer stripper performance if TOHAP
were being relied to determine MACT.
Therefore, the steam strippers that are
the best performers can be identified by
their low vinyl chloride concentrations
and not by the non-vinyl chloride HAP
concentrations in the stripper bottoms.
In summary, vinyl chloride serves as
an appropriate surrogate for determining
the MACT floor for process wastewater.
First, vinyl chloride is the predominant
HAP and is present in all process
wastewater streams. Second, the best
performing strippers are identified by
low vinyl chloride concentrations in the
stripper bottoms and are also the most
effective strippers at removing nonvinyl chloride HAP. The other nonvinyl chloride HAP present in the
stripper bottoms are a reflection of the
resin recipe and not the effectiveness of
the stripper. The non-vinyl chloride
HAP that are in the stripper bottoms
will not volatilize in collection systems
8 See the memorandum, Analysis of HAP in PVC
Process Wastewater, which is available in the
docket for this rulemaking.
9 Only three of 15 facilities reported data where
vinyl acetate concentrations in the stripper bottoms
were higher than vinyl chloride. One facility is no
longer in operation and the other two are vinyl
chloride/vinyl acetate copolymer producers.
Therefore, the higher vinyl acetate fraction is likely
the result of resin recipe influence rather than
stripper performance since vinyl chloride and vinyl
acetate have the same Fr value.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
and be effectively treated in the
biological treatment unit. The regulatory
objective of this rule is to control air
emissions of HAP from wastewater
streams and not to control HAP that are
in the wastewater streams. Focusing on
vinyl chloride rather than total organic
HAP for setting standards for PVC
process wastewater not only ensures
identification of the best performing
wastewater strippers for the primary
HAP emitted from the source category,
but also ensures the effective control of
air emissions of non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP from wastewater.10
Additional details about our proposed
surrogacy are provided in the
memorandum, Analysis of HAP in PVC
Process Wastewater, which is available
in the docket for this rulemaking.
We are proposing these changes (i.e.,
to revise the process wastewater vinyl
chloride emission limit and eliminate
the process wastewater TOHAP
emission limit) in new Tables 1b and 2b
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH;
and we are proposing that all affected
major sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction on or
before May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with these changes within 3
years after the date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. We
also are proposing that all affected major
sources that commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must
be in compliance with these changes
upon the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register or initial
startup, whichever is later. See
proposed 40 CFR 63.11875(e). We are
not aware of any major sources that
have commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011,
which would be impacted by the
application of the changes. Also, at any
time before these compliance dates, we
are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11880(d)
that an affected major source may
choose to comply with the revised
emission limits in Tables 1b and 2b to
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, in
lieu of the emission limits in Tables 1
and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH.
Finally, we are proposing to revise
several paragraphs throughout the major
source rule (including process
wastewater related requirements in 40
CFR 63.11965 through 63.11985) to
properly reference the proposed Tables
1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH, and to address the
elimination of the major source process
wastewater TOHAP emission limit; and
we are proposing to clarify in 40 CFR
63.11965(e) that only 40 CFR 63.105(b)
10 See
57 FR 62641, December 31, 1992.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
and (c) apply to maintenance
wastewater containing HAP listed in
Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. We are also proposing to
correct a typographical error in Table 9
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH,
to be consistent with the requirement at
40 CFR 63.11980(a)(4)(i). Specifically,
we are clarifying in Table 9 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, that
compliance with the wastewater
emission limit is based on the results
from one grab or composite sample.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e., the
revised process wastewater vinyl
chloride emission limits, the
elimination of the process wastewater
TOHAP emission limits, the compliance
dates, whether there are any sources
that commenced construction after May
20, 2011, the clarification to 40 CFR
63.11965(e), and the correction in Table
9 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH). We note that the proposed
clarification in 40 CFR 63.11965(e) is
also being proposed for the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17)
because 40 CFR 63.11965 is referenced
in those requirements; however, the
proposed process wastewater vinyl
chloride emission limits do not affect
the 2012 area source rule at 40 CFR
63.11142(f)(17). Although 40 CFR
63.11965 through 63.11980 are
referenced in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17),
we are proposing to revise the
introduction paragraph at 40 CFR
63.11142(f) to ensure that whenever
reference is made to Tables 1, 1b, 2, or
2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH, we mean Table 1 or 2 to 40
CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, for
purposes of compliance with the 2012
area source wastewater standards. If it is
determined that there are major sources
that have commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, then
we will need to add additional
requirements.
C. Stripped Resin
1. Subcategories and Emission Limits
Petitioners maintain that it was not
feasible to comment on the new data on
which the EPA based the final stripped
resin emission limits and subcategories;
and as previously mentioned in section
II of this preamble, on September 28,
2012, the EPA granted reconsideration
on the emission limits. We are not
making any changes to the stripped
resin emission limits and subcategories
in the 2012 final major and area source
rules; however, we request public
comments on these emission limits and
subcategories.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71499
2. Alternative Emission Limit Format for
Compliance With Stripped Resin
Standards
The existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP
(40 CFR part 61, subpart F) provides
emissions standards for the sources
following the stripper ‘‘stated in two
ways’’ (40 FR 59541, December 24,
1975). One of these two formats for
emissions standards is in ppmw of the
stripped resin at the outlet of the
stripper and is used in both 40 CFR part
61, subpart F, and the 2012 final major
and area source rules, as seen in 40 CFR
61.64(e)(1), Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart DDDDDD, and Tables 1
and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. The second format is a
mass emissions to the atmosphere,
which is given as gram (g) HAP per
kilogram (kg) of product resin on a dry
basis from the stripper (also given in
pound per ton format) and is only
currently available in 40 CFR
61.64(e)(2). The EPA originally offered
these two ‘‘ways’’ of presenting an
equivalent emission limit to
acknowledge that there were two
distinctively different techniques to
control these sources—add-on control
devices or improved stripping, and that
different measurement and enforcement
methods are applicable to each
technique (40 FR 59541).11 At the time,
we also acknowledged that stripping is
the primary control technology on
which the standards are based, lending
credence for including the ppmw format
resin standard in the 2012 final major
and area source rules. However, we
realize that some sources may find
compliance flexibility in complying
with a mass emissions limit instead of
a stripped resin content, especially if
centrifuges, blend tanks, and other
process components downstream of the
stripper are closed to the atmosphere,
controlled with closed vent systems,
and routed to a control device.
Therefore, we have calculated mass
emissions-formatted standards that are
equivalent to the resin content
standards of the 2012 final major and
area source rules using the conversion
methods used in the original 40 CFR
part 61, subpart F standards (i.e.,
11 The EPA noted that the two emission limits
‘‘are equivalent if it is assumed that all residual
vinyl chloride in the resin leaving a stripper is
emitted into the atmosphere at the polyvinyl
chloride plant.’’ While acknowledging that a small
proportion of vinyl chloride might be left in the
resin when it leaves the plant, the residual vinyl
chloride monomer left in the resin after stripping
would be emitted into the atmosphere at some
point, and, therefore, the EPA determined that the
residual vinyl chloride monomer in resin limits
serve as an emission limitation ‘‘specified in a form
which is compatible with the only practical method
for determining compliance.’’
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71500
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
converting the ppmw standard to g/kg,
or part per thousand by weight for the
equivalent mass emission rate), and we
are proposing to include these
alternative emission limits in Tables 1
and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD, and Tables 1b and 2b to 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. In
doing so in the same manner as the
original 40 CFR part 61, subpart F
standards, we are ensuring that the
alternate emission limits can be
implemented and enforced, will be clear
to sources, and most importantly, will
be equivalent to the level of control
required by the MACT standards. We
are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11960(b)(2)
that if the affected source chooses to
comply with the alternative mass
emission rates, then the process
components associated with the
stripped resin downstream of the resin
stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
must be enclosed and routed through a
closed vent system meeting the
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925
through 63.11950 for the closed vent
system and control device. We are also
proposing calculation procedures at 40
CFR 63.11960(g) and (h) that you must
use if you elect to demonstrate initial or
continuous compliance with the
alternative mass emissions rates. In
addition, we are proposing to clarify the
reporting and recordkeeping at 40 CFR
63.11985(b)(7) and 40 CFR
63.11990(h)(3) to reflect the proposed
option of complying with the alternative
mass emissions rates. The monitoring
requirements for sources using the
alternative emission limits would
include the same stack testing methods
and procedures required for process
vent performance testing instead of
resin sampling and concentration
analyses. By proposing these alternative
emission limits, we are providing the
same level of compliance flexibility
afforded by the Vinyl Chloride
NESHAP. Tables 4 and 5 of this
preamble present the proposed mass
emission limits for existing and new
sources, respectively. The EPA requests
comment on the proposed alternative
emission limits. We note that all of the
proposed changes discussed in this
section of the preamble (i.e., the
proposed changes to 40 CFR 63.11960,
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(7), and 40 CFR
63.11990(h)(3)) are also being proposed
for the 2012 area source rule at 40 CFR
63.11142(f)(16), (18), and (19) because
40 CFR 63.11960, 40 CFR 63.11985, and
40 CFR 63.11990 are referenced in those
requirements.
TABLE 4—PROPOSED EXISTING SOURCE STRIPPED RESIN ALTERNATIVE MASS EMISSION LIMITS
40 CFR part
63, subpart
HHHHHHH
vinyl chloride
emission limit
(g/kg)
Resin subcategory
Bulk resin .........................................................................................................
Dispersion resin ...............................................................................................
Suspension resin .............................................................................................
Suspension blending resin ..............................................................................
Copolymer resin ...............................................................................................
40 CFR part
63, subpart
HHHHHHH
non-vinyl
chloride
organic HAP
emission limit
(g/kg)
0.0071
1.3
0.037
0.14
0.79
40 CFR part
63, subpart
DDDDDD vinyl
chloride
emission limit
(g/kg)
0.17
0.24
0.67
0.50
1.9
0.0071
1.5
0.036
0.14
0.79
40 CFR part
63, subpart
DDDDDD
Non-vinyl
chloride
organic HAP
emission limit
(g/kg)
0.17
0.32
0.036
0.50
1.9
TABLE 5—PROPOSED NEW SOURCE STRIPPED RESIN ALTERNATIVE MASS EMISSION LIMITS
40 CFR part
63, subpart
HHHHHHH
vinyl chloride
emission limit
(g/kg)
Resin subcategory
Bulk resin .........................................................................................................
Dispersion resin ...............................................................................................
Suspension resin .............................................................................................
Suspension blending resin ..............................................................................
Copolymer resin ...............................................................................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
3. Clarification of Initial and Continuous
Monitoring of Non-Vinyl Chloride
Organic HAP
The EPA’s intent for demonstrating
compliance with the total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP emission limits
for stripped resin within 40 CFR
63.11960(b) (and as referenced in 40
CFR 63.11142(f)(16) for area sources) is
for facilities to develop and maintain a
specific list of non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP that are expected to be
present in each grade of resin produced
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:39 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
0.0071
0.48
0.0073
0.14
0.79
by the PVCPU. The current rule
language in 40 CFR 63.11960(b) is
potentially unclear on how this list of
HAP for each resin grade is updated and
used to demonstrate compliance and
how this list of HAP for each resin grade
relates to the list of HAP contained
within Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH. For example, in 40
CFR 63.11960(b), we are proposing to
replace ‘‘continuously updated’’ with
‘‘kept current’’ to clarify the
requirement that the facility-specific
HAP list is updated after any change
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR part
63, subpart
HHHHHHH
non-vinyl
chloride
organic HAP
emission limit
(g/kg)
40 CFR part
63, subpart
DDDDDD vinyl
chloride emission limit
(g/kg)
0.17
0.066
0.015
0.50
1.9
0.0071
1.5
0.036
0.14
0.79
40 CFR part
63, subpart
DDDDDD
non-vinyl
chloride
organic HAP
emission limit
(g/kg)
0.17
0.32
0.036
0.50
1.9
occurs that would impact the list of
HAP for the stripped resin, such as
using a new additive or changing a
vendor.
In addition, as discussed in the 2012
final major and area source rules (77 FR
22868), the EPA’s intent is for sources
to initially and continuously test for all
the HAP listed in Table 10 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, plus any
additional HAP not listed in Table 10 to
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, but
expected to be present in the resin grade
due to the owner or operator’s process
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
knowledge. That is, the facility-specific
HAP list comprises the 30 HAP in Table
10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH, plus any additional HAP
beyond those 30 that are expected to be
present based on the resin grades
produced. The EPA is proposing
clarifying amendments to 40 CFR
63.11960(b) and 40 CFR
63.11960(e)(1)(i) through (iv) related to
the specific HAP list, and we request
comment on this clarification.
Furthermore, we are proposing
amendments to 40 CFR 63.11960(b)(2)
that provide these clarifications on the
facility-specific HAP list for sources
opting to comply with the proposed
alternative mass emission limits that are
discussed in section III.C.2 of this
preamble. Finally, we are also proposing
to restructure 40 CFR 63.11960(c) to
improve readability. We are proposing
to remove duplicative language from 40
CFR 63.11960(c)(1)(iii) and (iv) and
revise 40 CFR 63.11960(c)(2)(i) and (ii)
to clarify the calculation requirements
for vinyl chloride and non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP.
We note that these amendments are
also being proposed for the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(16)
because 40 CFR 63.11960 is referenced
in those requirements.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Storage Vessels
We are proposing technical
corrections and clarifications related to
the standards for pressure vessels, the
use of vapor balancing, and the
standards for fixed roof and floating roof
storage vessels. See sections III.D.1, 2,
and 3 of this preamble, respectively for
a detailed discussion of these proposed
changes.
1. Pressure Vessels
A petitioner requested that the EPA
reconsider the requirements of 40 CFR
63.11910(c) and allow LDAR of all
pressure vessel leaks, including from
closure devices. The petitioner stated
that the rule should apply LDAR as a
work practice standard under CAA
section 112(h) for leaks from openings
on pressure vessels that are equipped
with closure devices since it is ‘‘not
feasible to prescribe or enforce an
emission standard.’’ The petitioner
stated that the best performing facilities
use LDAR to manage leaks from
pressure vessels and contended that an
allowance to make a repair once a leak
is found is a common approach for
managing leaks from pressure vessels
and is the only achievable approach.
The petitioner also stated it interprets
the 2012 final major and area source
rules to be that leaks from closure
devices are violations (according to 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
CFR 63.11910(c)(4)), while other
pressure vessel leaks are not violations
and are subject to leak repair provisions
(according to 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3)).
The petitioner requested that the EPA
allow for repair of leaks from closure
devices greater than 500 parts per
million (ppm) as a method of
compliance.
In the 2012 final major and area
source rules, pressure vessels in HAP
service are required to operate as ‘‘a
closed system that does not vent to the
atmosphere’’ and each opening must be
equipped with a closure device to
prevent discharges to the atmosphere
(40 CFR 63.11910(c)). In addition, in the
2012 final major and area source rules,
all potential leak interfaces on the vessel
(including closure devices) must be
monitored annually for leaks. The intent
of the 2012 final major and area source
rules was to require that pressure
vessels operate with no detectable
emissions (i.e., less than 500 ppm as
determined using EPA Method 21 of 40
CFR part 60, appendix A–7), and that
each opening, including all potential
leak interfaces, on pressure vessels be
monitored regularly to ensure that the
pressure vessels are operating with no
detectable emissions. While the 2012
final major and area source rules do
require potential leak interfaces to be
monitored annually for leaks using the
procedures specified in the equipment
leak requirements at 40 CFR 63.11915,
we recognize that the 2012 final major
and area source rules do not specify
how 40 CFR 63.11915 would
specifically apply to pressure vessels
and, thus, the petitioner interpreted the
rule to have two sets of leak
requirements (one for closure devices
and another for all other pressure vessel
leaks).
The EPA is granting reconsideration
of the pressure vessel standards of 40
CFR 63.11910(c) but does not agree with
the petitioner’s recommendations
regarding LDAR. Specifically, the EPA
is not allowing for repair of leaks greater
than 500 ppm as a method of
compliance. We are proposing to
maintain the pressure vessel leak
requirements of the 2012 rules, with
edits for clarity; pressure vessels must
operate with no detectable emissions
and any release greater than 500 ppm
above background is a violation. This
requirement applies equally to closure
device leaks and leaks from all other
leak interfaces on the pressure vessel.
To confirm there are no detectable
emissions, we are proposing to specify
(in lieu of generally pointing to the
LDAR requirements in 40 CFR
63.11915) that the affected source must
conduct annual monitoring of each
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71501
potential leak interface and each point
on the pressure vessel through which
HAP could potentially be emitted, using
the procedures specified in 40 CFR
63.1023(b) and (c). This approach to
regulating pressure vessel leaks is
similar to the Off-Site Waste and
Recovery Operations NESHAP (40 CFR
part 63, subpart DD), which stipulates
that tank openings must be equipped
with closure devices that are designed
to operate with no detectable emissions
(see 40 CFR 63.685(h)(2)). We also
propose to streamline and combine the
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3)
and (4) for clarity. Under the proposed
language, 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3)
includes the requirement to perform
annual monitoring and states a leak
greater than 500 ppm is a violation. We
are proposing to remove certain
language specific to pressure vessel
closure devices (which was previously
at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(4)), because
closure device leaks would be captured
by the proposed language at 40 CFR
63.11910(c)(3) (i.e., monitor each
potential leak interface and each point
on the pressure vessel through which
HAP could potentially be emitted). We
are also proposing to revise the language
at 40 CFR 63.11890(d)(5)(iv) to apply
more generally to pressure vessel leaks
instead of just closure devices; this edit
directly aligns with the proposed
language at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3). In
addition, we are proposing a definition
of ‘‘closure device’’ at 40 CFR 63.12005
to mean a cover, cap, hatch, lid, plug,
seal, valve, or other type of fitting that,
when the device is secured in the closed
position, prevents or reduces air
emissions to the atmosphere by blocking
an opening in a fixed roof storage vessel
or pressure vessel.
As part of the leak monitoring
revisions, we are proposing to revise 40
CFR 63.11990(b)(4) to clarify that the
pressure vessel leak records must
include the information already
required to be reported in the pressure
vessel closure device deviation report
pursuant to 40 CFR 63.11985(b)(10)(i)
through (v) (e.g., we are proposing to
keep records of the quantity of vinyl
chloride and total HAP released from
the closure device).
The EPA is also proposing to clarify
the requirements for filling, emptying,
and purging of pressure vessels at 40
CFR 63.11910(c)(1). The clarifications
are based on actual operations of PVC
production facilities and focus on the
underlying pressure vessel standard.
Importantly, we are emphasizing that
the underlying standard is that each
pressure vessel must be designed and
operated as a closed system without
emissions to the atmosphere. The
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71502
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
language at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1)
stating that the vent stream during
filling, emptying, and purging must
meet the requirements of 40 CFR
63.11925(a) and (b) may appear to
contradict the underlying standard that
pressure vessels must be designed and
operated as a closed system without
emissions to the atmosphere.
To better explain our intent in
clarifying the proposed language at 40
CFR 63.11910(c)(1), one must consider
where pressure vessels are used at PVC
production facilities, which is primarily
for vinyl chloride storage (the monomer
that is used as a reactant in the
polymerization reaction to produce
PVC). During filling operations, pressure
vessels are designed to operate as closed
systems, so there are no emissions from
these sources during these periods.
Once filled, pressure vessels storing
vinyl chloride are emptied by routing
the stored vinyl chloride to the process
to be used in the polymerization
reaction. Once routed to the process,
process vents may be created that are
subject to the process vent standards of
40 CFR 63.11925(a) and (b) which
include closed vent system
requirements. In the case of vent
streams that contain any unreacted
vinyl chloride, these streams are
typically routed to a recovery system
and vinyl chloride is recovered (to the
extent practical) and sent back to the
pressure vessel (which still operates as
a closed system without emissions to
the atmosphere). The remaining
(noncondensable) vent stream
containing small amounts of
unrecovered vinyl chloride (and
possibly other compounds) then must
be controlled in order to comply with
the process vent emission limits. This
was the intent of the language in the
2012 final major and area source rules.
Similarly, for purging operations, vinyl
chloride is typically sent to a recovery
system and the recovered vinyl chloride
is then sent to a different pressure vessel
also storing vinyl chloride (which
operates as a closed system without
emissions to the atmosphere). The
remaining stream from the recovery
system and the pressure vessel being
purged contains small amounts of
unrecovered vinyl chloride (and
possibly other compounds) and must be
controlled in order to comply with the
process vent emission limits. Thus,
excluding those emissions during
filling, purging, and emptying that
ultimately end up as process vents that
are routed to a closed vent system and
control device, there would still be no
emissions to the atmosphere directly
from pressure vessels. We are proposing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
to clarify at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1) that
for vent streams sent to the process from
pressure vessels, or purged from
pressure vessels, facilities must prepare
a design evaluation to demonstrate
certain conditions are met and meet the
requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925(a) and
(b) including the closed vent system
requirements. We also note that we are
proposing that facilities may elect to
comply with vapor balancing
requirements during filling operations.
Vapor balancing does not result in
emissions to the atmosphere from
pressure vessels and is a common
equivalent control option for PVC
production facilities during filling
operations (vapor balancing
requirements are discussed in greater
detail in section III.D.2 of this
preamble).
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e., the
proposed changes to the pressure vessel
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11910(c), 40
CFR 63.11985(b)(10), and 40 CFR
63.11990(b)(4)). We note that all of these
proposed changes are also being
proposed for the 2012 area source rule
at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5), (18), and (19)
because 40 CFR 63.11910, 40 CFR
63.11985, and 40 CFR 63.11990 are
referenced in those requirements.
2. Vapor Balancing
A petitioner asserted that in the 2012
final major and area source rules, the
EPA did not specifically allow vapor
balancing as a method to control
emissions from storage vessels. The
petitioner stated that vapor balancing is
widely used in the PVC industry,
indicated that 11 PVC production
facilities use vapor balancing, and
claimed it is virtually impossible to
unload a vinyl chloride railcar and not
have any HAP emissions without using
vapor balancing. The petitioner also
noted that vapor balancing is allowed by
the EPA in other MACT rules.
The EPA agrees with the petitioner
and is granting reconsideration on
allowing vapor balancing as a method to
control emissions from storage vessels.
The 2012 final major and area source
rules do not list vapor balancing as a
compliance option, but in responding to
comments in the 2012 final rules (refer
to National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production:
Summary of Public Comments and
Responses, Docket Item No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0037–0185), we stated that a
PVC production facility may request the
EPA’s approval to use vapor balancing
as an alternative means of emission
limitation under 40 CFR 63.6(g) of the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
General Provisions. The EPA
acknowledges that vapor balancing is a
proven method to control emissions
from storage vessel filling operations
and is already allowed by several MACT
standards including the HON (40 CFR
part 63, subpart G). Therefore, the EPA
is proposing vapor balancing
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(e) to
allow vapor balancing as an equivalent
option to no emissions from pressure
vessels during filling operations (see
proposed 40 CFR 63.11910(c)) and as an
optional equivalent control method for
fixed roof storage vessels complying
with the 95-percent control standard for
HAP emissions in Table 3 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, during
filling operations 12 (see proposed 40
CFR 63.11910(d)). The proposed vapor
balancing requirements at 40 CFR
63.11910(e) are similar to the HON
requirements and include operating,
monitoring, and certification
requirements and related recordkeeping
requirements.
We are also proposing operating
requirements for the vapor balancing
system. We are proposing that vapor
balancing systems be designed and
operated to route vapors displaced from
loading of the storage vessel to the
transport vehicle (i.e., railcar, tank
truck, barge) from which the storage
vessel is being loaded. For vapor
balancing of pressure vessels, we are
also proposing the transport vehicle
may then be depressurized by sending
the vapors to the process. We also
propose that fluid transfer from a
transport vehicle to a storage vessel
must be performed only when the
transport vehicle’s vapor collection
system is connected to the storage vessel
vapor balancing system. We are
proposing a definition of vapor
balancing system at 40 CFR 63.12005 to
mean a piping system that collects HAP
vapors displaced from transport
vehicles (i.e., railcar, tank truck, barge)
during storage vessel loading and routes
the collected vapors to the storage vessel
from which the HAP being loaded
originated or to another storage vessel
connected to a common header; or a
piping system that collects HAP vapors
12 We note that facilities that use vapor balancing
for filling operations for fixed roof storage vessels
that are required to route emissions to a closed vent
system and control device to comply with the 95percent control standard for HAP emissions must
comply with this standard at all times. In other
words, while vapor balancing fixed roof storage
vessels during filling operations would control
working loss emissions to at least the 95-percent
control standard, owners or operators still have an
obligation to control other emissions from these
fixed roof storage vessels to 95-percent control,
such as breathing losses and working losses that are
not vapor balanced.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
displaced from the loading of a storage
vessel and routes the collected vapors to
the transport vehicle from which the
storage vessel is filled.
In addition, we are proposing
monitoring requirements for equipment
on the vapor balancing system. We are
proposing that each PRD on a storage
vessel, transport vehicle, and vapor
return line must remain closed while
the storage vessel is being filled and
each PRD must be in compliance with
the rule’s existing PRD monitoring
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11915(c) (see
section III.F of this preamble for details
on clarifications we are proposing for
the rule’s existing PRD monitoring
requirements). PVC production facilities
commonly use vapor balancing to
unload vinyl chloride into pressure
vessels, and as such, we are also
proposing the vapor balancing system
must operate with no detectable
emissions, which is consistent with the
proposed pressure vessel requirements
at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3) (see section
III.D.1 of this preamble). To confirm
there are no detectable emissions, we
are proposing that the affected source
must conduct annual monitoring of each
potential leak interface and each point
on the vapor balancing system through
which HAP could potentially be
emitted, using the procedures specified
in 40 CFR 63.1023(b) and (c).
We are also proposing certification
and control requirements for transport
vehicles. Prior to unloading into a
storage vessel, we are proposing that
vapor balancing systems be designed
and operated to route vapors displaced
from filling of the storage vessel to the
transport vehicle (i.e., railcar, tank
truck, barge) from which the storage
vessel is being filled. We are proposing
that tank trucks and railcars must have
a current certification from the U.S.
Department of Transportation and
barges must have current certification of
vapor-tightness. To ensure the HAP that
is vapor balanced from the PVC storage
vessel to the transport vehicle is not
simply released to the air, we are also
proposing control and certification
requirements for reloading and cleaning
of the transport vehicle (see 40 CFR
63.11910(e)(6) and (7)).
Finally, we are proposing
recordkeeping requirements at 40 CFR
63.11990(b)(7) if the affected source
chooses to use this vapor balancing
option.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e., the
proposed vapor balancing requirements
in 40 CFR 63.11910(e) and 40 CFR
63.11990(b)(7)). We note that these
proposed vapor balancing requirements
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
are also being proposed for the 2012
area source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5)
and (19) because 40 CFR 63.11910 and
40 CFR 63.11990 are referenced in those
requirements.
3. Fixed Roof and Floating Roof Storage
Vessels
We are clarifying requirements for
fixed roof storage vessels using closed
vent systems and control devices that
are being used to meet the 95-percent
control standard for HAP emissions. To
improve readability, we are proposing to
move the requirements for fixed roof
storage vessels using a closed vent
system and control device to a separate
paragraph at 40 CFR 63.11910(d) and
clarify the corresponding requirements
in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. The 2012 final major and
area source rules included the closed
vent system and control device
requirements as part of the fixed roof
storage vessel requirements in 40 CFR
63.11910(a); however, our proposal to
separate the closed vent system and
control device requirements from the
fixed roof storage vessel requirements
provides clarity on what specific
requirements apply when a storage
vessel is using a closed vent system and
control device versus the specific
requirements that apply to a fixed roof
storage vessel. In addition, instead of
complying with the control device
requirements for process vents, we are
proposing that for each fixed roof
storage vessel that vents to a closed vent
system and control device, the affected
source must develop a control device
operating plan and operate the control
device according to the plan. The
proposed operating plan requirements
are based on the requirements in 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb (40 CFR 60.113b(c)),
because 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb,
formed the basis of the underlying
standard for fixed roof storage vessels
that are routed to a closed vent system
and control device. However, we are
also proposing the option to allow the
affected source to continue to comply
with the control device requirements for
process vents provided that the storage
vessel is vented to a closed vent system
and control device that is also used to
comply with the process vent emission
limits.
As an alternative for fixed roof storage
vessels using a closed vent system and
control device to comply with the 95percent control standard for HAP
emissions in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH, we are proposing
at 40 CFR 63.11910(d)(4) that fixed roof
storage vessel emissions may be routed
back to the process instead of a control
device. The proposed requirements at
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71503
40 CFR 63.11910(d)(4) include
preparing a design evaluation to
demonstrate certain conditions are met.
PVC production facilities also use vapor
balancing systems, and as discussed
previously (see section III.D.2 of this
preamble), we are proposing this as a
compliance method.
Finally, to improve readability, we are
proposing other miscellaneous revisions
to the fixed roof storage vessel
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(a) and
the floating roof storage vessel
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(b).
These proposed edits serve to clarify the
requirements and create consistency in
the language, without changing the
underlying standards.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e.,
clarifications to the fixed roof and
floating roof storage vessel
requirements). We note that these
proposed requirements are also being
proposed for the 2012 area source rule
at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5) because 40 CFR
63.11910 is referenced in those
requirements.
E. Affected Source
Petitioners maintain that it was not
feasible to comment on the revised
definitions of the affected source at 40
CFR 63.11140(b) and 40 CFR
63.11870(b). The EPA is granting
reconsideration on this issue. Although
we are not making any changes to the
definitions of the affected source in the
2012 final major and area source rules,
we request public comments on these
definitions for the reasons set forth in
the 2012 final rules (see section III.A of
the 2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22850).
F. Equipment Leaks
Following the promulgation of the
2012 final major and area source rules,
the Vinyl Institute requested several
clarifications on the equipment leak
provisions in 40 CFR 63.11915 in a
letter 13 dated April 5, 2013. The Vinyl
Institute said the requirements in the
2012 final major and area source rules
at 40 CFR 63.11915(a) are inconsistent
with the EPA’s conclusions discussed in
the preamble to the 2012 final rules (77
FR 22848) because the rule text only
references some of the requirements in
40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, despite the
fact that the preamble to the 2012 final
13 Refer to the letter titled Clarification on Certain
Provisions in the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride
and Copolymer Production (‘‘PVC MACT’’), from
the Vinyl Institute to Andrea Siefers, U.S. EPA,
dated April 5, 2013, available in the docket for this
rulemaking (see Docket Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0037–0560).
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71504
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
rules says that MACT (for equipment
leaks at existing and new major sources)
as well as GACT (for equipment leaks at
existing and new area sources) is
compliance with 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, for all equipment in HAP
service as defined in 40 CFR 63.12005.
Specifically, the Vinyl Institute said that
in referencing provisions of 40 CFR part
63, subpart UU, at 40 CFR 63.11915(a),
the EPA excluded 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, requirements for
applicability (40 CFR 63.1019), and
certain equipment, including: Pumps in
light liquid service (40 CFR 63.1026),
agitators in gas and vapor service and in
light liquid service (40 CFR 63.1028),
and open-ended valves or lines (40 CFR
63.1033). Additionally, the Vinyl
Institute said the compliance options at
40 CFR 63.11915(b) are confusing and
sometimes circular in relationship to the
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
UU. In particular, the Vinyl Institute
said the compliance options at 40 CFR
63.11915(b) allowing use of either
double (dual) mechanical seals or
sealless pumps to comply with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart UU, are redundant to
compliance options already allowed in
40 CFR 63.1026; therefore, the Vinyl
Institute requested that the EPA remove
this redundancy from 40 CFR
63.11915(b).
The EPA agrees with the Vinyl
Institute that the requirements in the
2012 final major and area source rules
at 40 CFR 63.11915(a) do not properly
reflect the EPA’s MACT and GACT
conclusions discussed in the preamble
to the 2012 final rules (77 FR 22848)
regarding compliance with 40 CFR part
63, subpart UU, for all equipment in
HAP service as defined in 40 CFR
63.12005. Therefore, for consistency
with the EPA’s MACT and GACT
conclusions discussed in the preamble
to the 2012 final major and area source
rules (77 FR 22848), we are proposing
to revise 40 CFR 63.11915(a) to include
the requirements from 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, that are inadvertently
missing from the 2012 final rules,
including: Applicability requirements
(40 CFR 63.1019(a), and (c) through (f)),
requirements for pumps in light liquid
service (40 CFR 63.1026), requirements
for agitators in gas and vapor service
and in light liquid service (40 CFR
63.1028), and requirements for openended valves or lines (40 CFR 63.1033).
Also, we are proposing to remove all
of the requirements in 40 CFR
63.11915(b) because we have
determined that these requirements
were inadvertently published in the
2012 final major and area source rules
in error. We agree with the Vinyl
Institute that the requirements in 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
CFR 63.11915(b) are confusing, and
sometimes redundant or circular, in
relationship to the requirements in 40
CFR part 63, subpart UU. In fact, the
preamble to the 2012 final major and
area source rules (77 FR 22848) makes
it clear that the ‘‘proposed requirement
(at 40 CFR 63.11915(b)) that
reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and
rotating compressors and agitators be
equipped with double seals, or
equivalent, was in error. In the final
rules, we have adopted the MACT floor
level of control for equipment leaks for
all components (which is compliance
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU),
which gives affected sources the option
of installing double seals, or equivalent,
or complying with the LDAR
requirements of the equipment leak
standards.’’
In addition, in a letter 14 dated May
27, 2020, the Vinyl Institute requested
that the EPA clarify whether the 2012
final major and area source rules require
a release indicator to be installed
directly on each PRD. More specifically,
the Vinyl Institute requested that the
EPA revise 40 CFR 63.11915(c)(1)(i) to
allow the installation of a release
indicator in series with the PRD or in
combination with other sensors and
monitoring systems in series with the
PRD (in lieu of requiring a release
indicator be installed directly on each
PRD). The Vinyl Institute argued that it
is not necessary for the release indicator
to be installed ‘‘directly’’ on the PRD in
order to determine whether an emission
release has occurred. The Vinyl Institute
said facilities use a variety of sensor
combinations and/or monitoring
systems (that are not always installed
‘‘directly’’ on the PRD, but rather in
series with the PRD) in order to
determine whether an emission release
from a PRD has occurred.
It was not our intent to require only
direct installation of a release indicator
on the PRD. Therefore, we are proposing
to revise 40 CFR 63.11915(c) to clarify
the PRD requirements that are beyond
those required in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU; and to clarify that a release
indicator may either be installed on
each PRD or installed on the associated
process or piping system in such a way
that it will indicate when an emission
release has occurred. We are proposing
that the release indicator device or
system can include, but is not limited
to, a rupture disk indicator, magnetic
sensor, motion detector on the pressure
relief valve stem, flow monitor, or
14 Refer to the letter titled RE: Description of
Pressure Relief Device Monitoring Practices for PVC
Facilities, from the Vinyl Institute to Jennifer
Caparoso, U.S. EPA, dated May 27, 2020, available
in the docket for this rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
pressure monitor. We are also clarifying
in 40 CFR 63.11915(c)(1)(i) that the
vinyl chloride monitoring system
required in 40 CFR 63.11956 is not
considered a release indicator for
purposes of complying with 40 CFR
63.11915(c)(1)(i).
Also, although 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, references the closed vent
system requirements in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart SS, we are proposing at 40 CFR
63.11915(d) that if the affected source
routes emissions from equipment in
HAP service through a closed vent
system to a control device, or back into
the process or a fuel gas system, then
the affected source must comply with 40
CFR 63.11930 in lieu of the closed vent
system requirements specified in 40
CFR 63.983 of subpart SS, and the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements associated with 40 CFR
63.983 of subpart SS do not apply.
Alternatively, we are proposing an
option that allows the affected source to
comply with the control device and
closed vent system requirements for
process vents, provided that the
emissions from equipment are vented to
the same closed vent system and control
device that is also used to comply with
the process vent emission limits. This
proposed change streamlines all closed
vent system requirements within the
rule by preventing an owner or operator
from having to comply with more than
one set of closed vent system
requirements (e.g., the current rule
requires owners or operators of
equipment to comply with the closed
vent system requirements at 40 CFR
63.983 pursuant to 40 CFR 63.1034, yet
owners or operators of a process vent
must comply with the closed vent
system requirements at 40 CFR
63.11930). Also, this proposed change
(i.e., to comply with 40 CFR 63.11930
for affected sources that route emissions
from equipment in HAP service through
a closed vent system to a control device,
or back into the process or a fuel gas
system) would not allow the affected
source to bypass the air pollution
control device at any time, and if a
bypass is used, then the affected source
would be required to estimate and
report the quantity of vinyl chloride and
total HAP released (see 40 CFR
63.11930(c) and 40 CFR 63.11985(b)(10),
respectively). We are proposing this
change because bypassing an air
pollution control device could result in
a release of regulated HAP to the
atmosphere and to be consistent with
Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C.
Cir. 2008), where the court determined
that standards under CAA section
112(d) must provide for compliance at
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
all times. We are also proposing at 40
CFR 63.11930(c) that any open-ended
valve or line in the closed vent system
that is equipped with a cap, blind
flange, plug, or second valve which
operates to seal the line at all times is
not subject to the bypass requirements.
Finally, we are proposing at 40 CFR
63.11915(e) to make references that are
related to startup, shutdown, and
malfunction (SSM) exemptions for
equipment leak requirements in 40 CFR
part 63, subparts SS and UU, no longer
applicable. Consistent with Sierra Club
v. EPA, we are proposing standards in
this rule that apply at all times. In its
2008 decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551
F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), the court
vacated portions of two provisions in
the EPA’s CAA section 112 regulations
governing the emissions of HAP during
periods of SSM. Specifically, the court
vacated the SSM exemptions contained
in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1), holding
that under section 302(k) of the CAA,
emissions standards or limitations must
be continuous in nature and that the
SSM exemptions violate the CAA’s
requirement that CAA section 112
standards apply continuously.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e.,
proposed changes to the equipment leak
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11915). We
note that all of these proposed changes
are also being proposed for the 2012
area source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(6)
because 40 CFR 63.11915 is referenced
in those requirements. Given that
owners and operators are already
complying with the control device and
closed vent system requirements for
process vents, we estimate that there
would be no impact on any facility for
making these changes. In other words, if
the affected source chooses to route
emissions from equipment in HAP
service through a closed vent system to
a control device (to comply with the
equipment leak standards), we believe
the affected source is likely to use the
same existing closed vent system and
control device being used to comply
with the process vent standards.
G. Closed Vent Systems
We are proposing amendments to the
closed vent system requirements in 40
CFR 63.11930 that clarify applicability.
The requirement at 40 CFR 63.11930(a)
is misleading because it states that the
closed vent system requirements in 40
CFR 63.11930 are exclusively for closed
vent systems used to route emissions
from process vents; however, as
specified elsewhere in the 2012 final
major and area source rules, closed vent
systems used to route emissions from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
other sources (e.g., stripped resin,
process wastewater, storage vessels) are
also subject to the closed vent system
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930.
Therefore, we are proposing to clarify 40
CFR 63.11930(a) to specify that if the
affected source uses a closed vent
system to comply with an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, or an emission limit
in Table 1, 1b, 2, 2b, or 3 to 40 CFR part
63, subpart HHHHHHH, or to comply
with the requirements in 40 CFR
63.11910, 40 CFR 63.11915, or 40 CFR
63.11955, then the affected source must
comply with the closed vent system
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930. In
other words, our proposal makes clear
that if a closed vent system is being
used to comply with any of the PVC
production standards (i.e., the process
vent, stripped resin, process wastewater,
storage vessel, equipment leak, or other
emission source standards in 40 CFR
part 63, subpart DDDDDD or
HHHHHHH), then 40 CFR 63.11930
applies. For the same reasons, we are
also proposing to amend 40 CFR
63.11930(b) (i.e., the requirement that
each closed vent system be designed
and operated to collect HAP vapors and
route the collected vapors to a control
device) applies to all emission sources
that route emissions through a closed
vent system to a control device, a fuel
gas system, or process.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all
of the proposed changes discussed in
this section of the preamble (i.e.,
proposed changes to the closed vent
system requirements in 40 CFR
63.11930). We note that all of these
proposed changes are also being
proposed for the 2012 area source rule
at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(9) because 40 CFR
63.11930 is referenced in those
requirements. Given that owners and
operators are already complying with 40
CFR 63.11930 for emissions sources
other than process vents (e.g., stripped
resin, process wastewater, and storage
tanks), we estimate that there would be
no impact on any facility for making
this change.
H. Affirmative Defense
In the 2012 final major and area
source rules, the EPA included an
affirmative defense to civil penalties for
violations caused by malfunctions (see
40 CFR 63.11895) in an effort to create
a system that incorporated some
flexibility, recognizing that there is a
tension, inherent in many types of air
regulation, to ensure adequate
compliance while simultaneously
recognizing that despite the most
diligent of efforts, emission standards
may be violated under circumstances
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71505
entirely beyond the control of the
source. Although the EPA recognized
that its case-by-case enforcement
discretion provides sufficient flexibility
in these circumstances, it included the
affirmative defense to provide a more
formalized approach and more
regulatory clarity. See Weyerhaeuser Co.
v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1057–58 (D.C.
Cir. 1978) (holding that an informal
case-by-case enforcement discretion
approach is adequate); but see Marathon
Oil Co. v. EPA, 564 F.2d 1253, 1272–73
(9th Cir. 1977) (requiring a more
formalized approach to consideration of
‘‘upsets beyond the control of the permit
holder.’’). Under the EPA’s regulatory
affirmative defense provisions, if a
source could demonstrate in a judicial
or administrative proceeding that it had
met the requirements of the affirmative
defense in the regulation, civil penalties
would not be assessed. However, the
court vacated the affirmative defense in
one of the EPA’s CAA section 112
regulations. NRDC v. EPA, 749 F.3d
1055 (D.C. Cir., 2014) (vacating
affirmative defense provisions in the
CAA section 112 rule establishing
emission standards for Portland cement
kilns). The court found that the EPA
lacked authority to establish an
affirmative defense for private civil suits
and held that under the CAA, the
authority to determine civil penalty
amounts in such cases lies exclusively
with the courts, not the EPA.
Specifically, the court found: ‘‘As the
language of the statute makes clear, the
courts determine, on a case-by-case
basis, whether civil penalties are
‘appropriate.’’’ See NRDC at 1063
(‘‘[U]nder this statute, deciding whether
penalties are ‘appropriate’ in a given
private civil suit is a job for the courts,
not EPA.’’).15 In light of NRDC, the EPA
is proposing to remove all of the
regulatory affirmative defense
provisions from 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD (i.e., the reference to
‘‘§ 63.11895’’ in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2)),
and 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH
(i.e., 40 CFR 63.11895 in its entirety and
all other rule text that references 40 CFR
63.11895). As explained above, if a
source is unable to comply with
emissions standards as a result of a
malfunction, the EPA may use its caseby-case enforcement discretion to
provide flexibility, as appropriate.
Further, as the court recognized, in an
EPA or citizen enforcement action, the
court has the discretion to consider any
15 The court’s reasoning in NRDC focuses on civil
judicial actions. The court noted that ‘‘EPA’s ability
to determine whether penalties should be assessed
for CAA violations extends only to administrative
penalties, not to civil penalties imposed by a
court.’’ Id.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71506
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
defense raised and determine whether
penalties are appropriate. Cf. NRDC, at
1064 (arguments that violation was
caused by unavoidable technology
failure can be made to the courts in
future civil cases when the issue arises).
The same is true for the presiding officer
in EPA administrative enforcement
actions.16
I. Other Technical Corrections and
Clarifications
There are a number of additional
revisions that we are proposing to 40
CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, and 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, to
clarify text and correct typographical
errors, grammatical errors, and crossreference errors; and we request public
comment on these revisions. These
proposed editorial corrections and
clarifications are summarized in Table 6
of this preamble. We note that although
these proposed changes are being made
directly in the major source rule, many
of these proposed changes also result in
revisions to the area source rule because
40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD,
references provisions in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED EDITORIAL AND MINOR CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART DDDDDD AND
40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART HHHHHHH
40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH provision
Proposed revision
Not applicable .........................................
Replace ‘‘are considered an existing affected source’’ with ‘‘must comply with
paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section’’ to clarify requirements.
Revise heading to ‘‘What is the relationship to other regulations?’’ to clarify content of 40 CFR 63.11872.
Clarify that 40 CFR part 63, subpart J, does not apply to any source that is subject to the requirements of this subpart. 40 CFR part 63, subpart J, was vacated by court action.
Revise first sentence to be consistent with the same phrasing used in 40 CFR
63.11896(a).
Replace ‘‘the effective date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register’’ with ‘‘compliance date specified in § 63.11875’’ to clarify compliance
dates.
Replace ‘‘startup date of the affected source or the effective date of publication
of the final rule in the Federal Register, whichever is later,’’ with ‘‘compliance
date specified in § 63.11875’’ to clarify compliance dates.
Change ‘‘Appendix A’’ to ‘‘Appendix B’’ to correct typographical error ..................
Replace ‘‘repair action level’’ with ‘‘delay of repair action level’’ in two instances
to clarify the requirement.
Change the unit of measurement for ‘‘Ddelay’’ from ‘‘days’’ to ‘‘hours’’ to correct
typographical error.
Replace ‘‘Each batch process vent, continuous process vent and miscellaneous
vent,’’ with ‘‘Each process vent as defined in § 63.12005,’’ to clarify the requirement applies to all process vents.
Remove the phrase ‘‘upon promulgation of a performance specification for hydrogen chloride CEMS,’’ because performance specification for hydrogen
chloride continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) has been promulgated at 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, performance specification 18.
Replace ‘‘For each CEMS and CPMS required or that you elect . . .’’ with ‘‘For
each CPMS required or CEMS that you elect . . .’’ to clarify CEMS is an option.
Refer to 40 CFR 63.11935 in its entirety instead of only paragraphs (b) and (c)
to correct typographical error.
Add ‘‘Toxic equivalency limit’’ to clarify title of paragraph ......................................
Remove ‘‘continuous process vent, miscellaneous vent and batch’’ to clarify the
requirement applies to all process vents.
Remove ‘‘(CHAP)’’ to correct typographical error and clarify vinyl chloride is excluded for purposes of compliance with the paragraph.
Remove the sentence ‘‘CEMS must record data at least once every 15 minutes.’’ because it is redundant with the requirement in 40 CFR 63.11935(b)(2).
Clarify the promulgated performance specification for HCl CEMS is 40 CFR part
60, appendix B, performance specification 18 as well as requirements of 40
CFR part 60, appendix F, procedure 6.
Replace ‘‘continuous emissions monitoring system’’ with the proper acronym
‘‘CEMS.’’.
Replace ‘‘continuous emissions monitoring system’’ with the proper acronym
‘‘CEMS.’’.
Replace ‘‘of’’ with ‘‘explaining’’ to clarify requirement ............................................
Replace ‘‘of’’ with ‘‘explaining’’ to clarify requirement ............................................
Replace ‘‘problems’’ with ‘‘any of the aforementioned conditions’’ to clarify requirement.
Replace first instance of ‘‘like or better kind and quality as’’ with ‘‘like type or
manufacturer as the old catalyst or is not as efficient as’’ to clarify requirement.
Replace second instance of ‘‘like or better kind and quality as’’ with ‘‘like type or
manufacturer as the old catalyst or is as efficient as or more efficient than’’ to
clarify requirement.
Add ‘‘(100.4 degrees Fahrenheit)’’ to clarify conversion of degrees Celsius in
degrees Fahrenheit.
40 CFR 63.11872 ...................................
40 CFR 63.11896(b) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11900(c) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11900(d) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11920(a)(3)(iii) ......................
40 CFR 63.11920(g) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11920(h)(4)(ii) .......................
40 CFR 63.11925(b) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11925(c)(1) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11925(d)(2) and (3), and
(e)(2).
40 CFR 63.11925(e)(2) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11925(f) ................................
40 CFR 63.11925(g) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11925(g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii) .........
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(5) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(6)(i) .......................
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(7)(i) .......................
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(7)(ii) .......................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40 CFR 63.11935(d)(2)(iii) ......................
40 CFR 63.11935(d)(3) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11940(b)(3)(ii) .......................
40 CFR 63.11940(c)(2)(ii) .......................
16 Although the NRDC case does not address the
EPA’s authority to establish an affirmative defense
to penalties that are available in administrative
enforcement actions, we are not including such an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD provision 1
affirmative defense in the proposed rule. As
explained above, such an affirmative defense is not
necessary. Moreover, assessment of penalties for
violations caused by malfunctions in administrative
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR 63.11140(b)(3).
Not applicable.
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(3).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(4).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(4).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(7).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(7).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(7).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(10).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(11).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(11).
proceedings and judicial proceedings should be
consistent. Cf. CAA section 113(e) (requiring both
the Administrator and the court to take specified
criteria into account when assessing penalties).
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
71507
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED EDITORIAL AND MINOR CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART DDDDDD AND
40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART HHHHHHH—Continued
40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH provision
Proposed revision
40 CFR 63.11940(d)(1) ...........................
Include ‘‘and,’’ and replace ‘‘mass’’ with ‘‘mass flow’’ in first sentence to clarify
requirement and remove the last sentence because it is redundant with the
first sentence.
Add requirement to record the process information that is necessary to document operating conditions during the test.
Clarify that each gasholder must be vented back into the process for reuse or
routed to a closed vent system and control device meeting the requirements
of 40 CFR 63.11925 through 63.11950. Most gasholders return recovered gas
back to an enclosed process for reuse in the manufacturing process.
Replace ‘‘maximum operating conditions’’ with ‘‘maximum representative operating conditions’’ to correct typographical error.
Revise reference from 40 CFR 63.11990(j) to 40 CFR 63.11990(j)(2) .................
Remove entire requirement to correct typographical error ....................................
Remove ‘‘but’’ to correct typographical error .........................................................
Change ‘‘§§ 63.11910(c)(4)’’ to ‘‘§ 63.11910(c)(3)’’ to correct typographical error.
Add ‘‘storage vessel’’ to clarify the type of equipment inspection that a delegated agency may waive the requirement for notifications.
Add comma to correct typographical error .............................................................
Replace entire paragraphs with standardized performance test reporting language.
Remove entire requirement to correct typographical error ....................................
Remove definition of ‘‘Container,’’ ‘‘Corrective action plan,’’ ‘‘Operating day,’’
‘‘Root cause analysis,’’ ‘‘Solution process,’’ and ‘‘Unloading operations’’ because the terms are not used in the rule.
Revise definition of ‘‘Batch process vent’’ and ‘‘Continuous process vent’’ to add
‘‘be’’ between ‘‘to’’ and ‘‘routed’’ to correct typographical error.
Revise definition of ‘‘Dispersion process’’ to mean a process for producing polyvinyl chloride resin using either emulsion or microsuspension. Emulsion polymerization uses water soluble initiators and is distinguished by metering in
surfactants as the reaction progresses. In microsuspension polymerization,
homogenizers are first mixed with a monomer outside of the polymerization
reactor and oil soluble initiators are then added before charging the reactor.
These two polymerization techniques produce fine particles, typically less
than 10 microns, with little or no porosity. Emulsifier levels vary but agitation
is very mild compared to other PVC polymerization processes. The final product is dried to powder form.
This change is being proposed to keep ‘‘dispersion’’ as a broad subcategory, as
some facilities make resins using both types of processes.
Revise definition of ‘‘First attempt at repair’’ to clarify that monitoring as specified in § 63.1023(b) and (c) may be applicable.
Revise definition of ‘‘Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production process unit
or PVCPU’’ to clarify that finished resin product is stored in a ‘‘vessel or storage silo’’ by removing the word ‘‘tank.’’.
Revise definition of ‘‘Polyvinyl chloride copolymer’’ to clarify that a copolymer is
comprised of one or more monomers and also distinguishes these monomers
from additives used for stabilization and/or particle size control. Also, remove
the word ‘‘emulsion’’ and ‘‘solution’’ from the definition and clarify each process.
Revise definition of ‘‘Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer’’ to remove the word
‘‘emulsion’’ from the definition and clarify each process.
Revise definition of ‘‘Process component’’ to replace ‘‘units operations’’ with
‘‘unit operation’’ to correct typographical error.
Revise definition of ‘‘Process component’’ to clarify that ‘‘Process components
include equipment, pressure vessels, process condensers, process tanks, recovery devices, and resin strippers, as defined in this section.’’.
Revise definition of ‘‘Process condenser’’ to clarify that can apply to batch or
continuous processes.
Revise definition of ‘‘Product’’ to mean a polymer produced using vinyl chloride
monomer and varying in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators, etc.); catalysts;
or in the relative proportions of vinyl chloride monomer with one or more other
monomers, and 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. By-products, isolated intermediates, impurities, wastes, and trace contaminants are
not considered products.
This change is being proposed to be consistent with the definitions of ‘‘Polyvinyl
chloride copolymer’’ and ‘‘Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer’’.
Revise definition of ‘‘Repaired’’ to clarify that inspections from another subpart
may be applicable.
Remove the word ‘‘emulsion’’ and ‘‘solution processes’’ from the definition of
‘‘Type of resin’’ because the term is not used in the rule.
40 CFR 63.11945(b) ...............................
40 CFR 63.11955(d)(1) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11980(a)(1) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(6) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(8)(ii) .......................
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(10) .........................
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(1) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(8) ...........................
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(9)(i) and (ii) ...........
40 CFR 63.11990(i)(5) ............................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
40 CFR 63.12005 ...................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD provision 1
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(11).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(12).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(14).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(19).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
40 CFR 63.11144(b).
09NOP2
71508
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED EDITORIAL AND MINOR CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART DDDDDD AND
40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART HHHHHHH—Continued
40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH provision
Proposed revision
40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD provision 1
Table 5 ....................................................
Revise flow to/from the control device of any control device to replace ‘‘Flow to/
from the control device’’ to ‘‘Presence or absence of flow to/for the control device if flow could be intermittent,’’ ‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Indication of absence of flow—
note that absence of flow can be determined when process is not operating
using simulated flow’’, ‘‘Continuous’’ with ‘‘Episodic,’’ ‘‘N/A to ‘‘Date and time
when flow stops during process operation and when flow begins after stopping during process operation,’’ and ‘‘Date and time of flow start and stop’’ to
‘‘Time period between flow stop and start’’ to clarify what operating limit to establish during the initial performance test, minimum data recording frequency,
and data averaging period for compliance, respectively.
Revise regeneration stream flow to regenerative adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’ with
‘‘Every 15 minutes’’ to clarify minimum data recording frequency.
Revise adsorber bed temperature, minimum temperature of regenerative
adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Every 15 minutes during regeneration cycle’’
to clarify minimum data recording frequency.
Replace ‘‘vacuum and duratio of regeneration’’ with ‘‘vacuum and duration of regeneration’’ to correct typographical error.
Revise vacuum and duration of regeneration of regenerative adsorber to replace
‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Every 15 minutes during regeneration cycle’’ to clarify minimum
data recording frequency.
Revise regeneration frequency of regenerative adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’ with
‘‘Date and time of regeneration start and stop’’ to clarify minimum data recording frequency.
Revise adsorber operation valve sequencing and cycle time of regenerative
adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Daily’’ to clarify data averaging period for
compliance.
Revise average adsorber bed life of non-regenerative adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’
with ‘‘Adsorber bed change-out time [N/A for initial performance test],’’ ‘‘N/A’’
with ‘‘Outlet VOC concentration,’’ and ‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Average time for three
adsorber bed change-outs’’ to clarify what operating limit to establish, minimum data recording frequency, and data averaging period for compliance, respectively.
Replace ‘‘Daily until breakthrough for 3 absorber bed change-outs’’ with ‘‘Daily
until breakthrough for three absorber bed change-outs’’ to correct typographical error.
Revise Outlet VOC concentration of the first adsorber bed in series of non-regenerative adsorber to replace ‘‘N/A’’ with ‘‘Outlet VOC concentration’’ to clarify data recording frequency.
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
Table 5 ....................................................
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11144(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2), (8), (10), and
(18).
1 Several of the proposed revisions described in this table for 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, are also being proposed for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD,
because the 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH provision, is referenced in the 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD provision, identified in this column.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental,
and Economic Impacts
We estimate that the proposed
amendments will result in HAP
emissions reductions of 34 tpy with an
overall total capital savings of $0.033
million and an associated total
annualized cost of $0.39 million. These
estimated emission reductions as well
as the increase in annualized costs are
a result of the proposed revisions to
emission limits in the 2012 major source
rule for process vents and process
wastewater (there is additional
operations and maintenance costs of the
control equipment and steam strippers
that are related to the proposed
emission limits). The estimated cost
savings are a result of our proposal to
eliminate the process wastewater
TOHAP emission limit in the 2012
major source rule (there is a decrease in
initial and annual costs of testing and
monitoring). The details of the cost
analyses and emissions reductions
estimates are provided in the
memorandum, Technical Analysis and
Documentation to Support EPA’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
Reconsideration of 40 CFR part 63
Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission
Standards for the Polyvinyl Chloride
and Copolymers (PVC) Production
Source Category, which is available in
the docket for this rulemaking.
Estimates of the economic impacts for
the proposal are estimated in terms of
the annualized cost of compliance as a
percent of the revenues for the six
ultimate parent owners of the 14
facilities expected to incur impacts as a
result of this proposal. No ultimate
parent owner is expected to incur
annualized cost of compliance of more
than 0.003 percent of their revenues.
The median cost to revenue impact is
about 0.001 percent. One ultimate
parent company is expected to
experience a savings in compliance
costs associated with the proposal. For
more information on these economic
impacts, refer to the Economic Impact
Analysis for the NESHAP for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production:
Reconsideration Proposal, which is in
the docket for this rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was, therefore, not
submitted to the OMB for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not expected to be an
Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant
under Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities
in these proposed rules have been
submitted for approval to OMB under
the PRA, as discussed for each rule
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
covered by this action in sections V.C.1
and 2 of this preamble.
1. PVC Major Source NESHAP
The ICR document that the EPA
prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2432.05. You can find a copy of
the ICR in the docket for this rule
(Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037), and it is briefly summarized here.
The EPA is proposing amendments to
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, to
address petitions for reconsideration as
described in section III of this preamble.
This ICR documents the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements and
incremental burden imposed by the
proposed amendments only. In
summary, there is a decrease in the
burden hours and cost in this ICR due
to the elimination of wastewater
TOHAP testing requirements that are
associated with our proposed revisions
to emission limits for process
wastewater.
Respondents/affected entities:
Owners or operators of PVC production
major source facilities.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH).
Estimated number of respondents: 14
(total).
Frequency of response: Semiannual
and annual.
Total estimated burden: Reduction of
2,170 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: Savings of
$388,000 (per year), which includes a
savings of $134,000 annualized capital
or operation and maintenance costs.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
2. PVC Area Source NESHAP
The ICR document that the EPA
prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2454.04. You can find a copy of
the ICR in the docket for this rule
(Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0037), and it is briefly summarized here.
The EPA is proposing amendments to
40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, to
address petitions for reconsideration as
described in section III of this preamble.
This ICR documents the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements and
incremental burden imposed by the
proposed amendments only. In
summary, there is a decrease in the
burden hours and cost in this ICR due
to the elimination of wastewater
TOHAP testing requirements that are
associated with our proposed revisions
to emission limits for process
wastewater.
Respondents/affected entities:
Owners or operators of PVC production
area source facilities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD).
Estimated number of respondents:
Three (total).
Frequency of response: Semiannual
and annual.
Total estimated burden: Reduction of
340 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: Savings of
$61,000 (per year), which includes a
savings of $21,000 annualized capital or
operation and maintenance costs.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the
Agency’s need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden
estimates, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden to
the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rule. You may also
send your ICR-related comments to
OMB’s Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs via email to IRA_
submission@omb.eop.gov, Attention:
Desk Officer for the EPA. Since OMB is
required to make a decision concerning
the ICR between 30 and 60 days after
receipt, OMB must receive comments no
later than December 9, 2020. The EPA
will respond to any ICR-related
comments in the final rule.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. There are no small entities
among those affected by this proposal.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain an
unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C.
1531–1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
While this action creates an enforceable
duty on the private sector, the annual
cost does not exceed $100 million or
more.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This 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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71509
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. It will not have substantial
new direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action does not involve any new
technical standards from those
contained in the 2012 final rules.
Therefore, the EPA did not consider the
use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
The SW–846 methods included in
§ 63.11960 were previously approved
for incorporation in that section and no
changes are proposed.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations, and/or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71510
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
The environmental justice finding in
the 2012 final major and area source
rules remains relevant in this action,
which seeks comments on proposed
amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subparts
DDDDDD and HHHHHHH, that are
mainly corrections to existing rule
requirements and major source emission
limits raised by stakeholders.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
§ 63.11141
dates?
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 63 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DDDDDD—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production Area Sources
2. Section 63.11140 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2) introductory
text, (b)(3) introductory text, and (c) to
read as follows:
■
Am I subject to this subpart?
*
What are my compliance
*
PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR
POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE
CATEGORIES
§ 63.11140
(3) If you are a new affected source as
specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section that commenced construction or
reconstruction between October 6, 2006,
and May 20, 2011, then after April 17,
2012, you must comply with paragraphs
(b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) This subpart does not apply to
research and development facilities, as
defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean
Air Act.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 63.11141 is amended by
adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Except as specified in paragraph
(b)(3) of this section, an affected source
is new if you commenced construction,
or reconstruction of the affected source
between October 6, 2006, and May 20,
2011.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(f) All affected sources that
commenced construction or
reconstruction on or before May 20,
2011, must be in compliance with
§ 63.11142(g) by [date 3 years after date
of publication of final rule in the
Federal Register]. All affected sources
that commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must
be in compliance with § 63.11142(g)
upon [date of publication of final rule in
the Federal Register] or initial startup,
whichever is later.
■ 4. Section 63.11142 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b), (f) introductory
text, and (f)(2) and (9) and adding
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 63.11142 What are the standards and
compliance requirements for new and
existing sources?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Except as specified in paragraph
(g) of this section, you must comply
with each emission limit and standard
specified in Table 1 to this subpart that
applies to your existing affected source,
and you must comply with each
emission limit and standard specified in
Table 2 to this subpart that applies to
your new affected source.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) You must meet the requirements of
the applicable sections of subpart
HHHHHHH of this part, as specified in
paragraphs (f)(1) through (19) of this
section, except for the purposes of
complying with this subpart, where the
applicable sections of subpart
HHHHHHH of this part, as specified in
paragraphs (f)(1) through (19) of this
section reference Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to
subpart HHHHHHH of this part,
reference is made to Table 1 or Table 2
to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) You must comply with the
requirements of § 63.11890(a) through
(d).
*
*
*
*
*
(9) If you use a closed vent system to
comply with paragraph (b) or (g) of this
section, or to comply with the
requirements in § 63.11910, § 63.11915,
or § 63.11955, then you must meet the
requirements of § 63.11930 for closed
vent systems.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Beginning no later than the
compliance dates specified in
§ 63.11141(f), the emission limits for
PVC-combined process vents in Tables
1 and 2 to this subpart no longer apply;
instead, you must comply with the
emission limits for PVC-combined
process vents in Tables 1b and 2b to
subpart HHHHHHH of this part. At any
time before the compliance dates
specified in § 63.11141(f), you may
choose to comply with the emission
limits for PVC-combined process vents
in Tables 1b and 2b to subpart
HHHHHHH of this part in lieu of the
emission limits for PVC-combined
process vents in Tables 1 and 2 to this
subpart.
■ 5. Table 1 to subpart DDDDDD of part
63 is revised to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART DDDDDD OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES
For this type of emission point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
PVC process vents a ...........................................
Vinyl chloride ............................
Total hydrocarbons ..................
Total organic HAP b ..................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
Vinyl chloride ............................
Total hydrocarbons ..................
Total organic HAP b ..................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
Vinyl chloride ............................
PVC-combined process vents a c ........................
Stripped resin ......................................................
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
All
All
All
All
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
All
All
All
All
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
Bulk resin .................................
Dispersion resin .......................
Suspension resin ......................
Suspension blending resin .......
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
You must meet this emission limit . . .
5.3 parts per million by volume (ppmv).
46 ppmv measured as propane.
140 ppmv.
0.13 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter
(ng/dscm).
0.56 ppmv.
2.3 ppmv measured as propane.
29 ppmv.
0.076 ng/dscm.
7.1 parts per million by weight (ppmw); or
0.0071 grams per kilogram of product resin,
dry basis (g/kg).
1,500 ppmw; or 1.5 g/kg.
36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
71511
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART DDDDDD OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES—
Continued
For this type of emission point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
Total non-vinyl chloride organic
HAP.
Process Wastewater ...........................................
Vinyl chloride ............................
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission limit . . .
Copolymer resin .......................
Bulk resin .................................
790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.
170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.
Dispersion resin .......................
Suspension resin ......................
Suspension blending resin .......
Copolymer resin .......................
All resin types ...........................
320 ppmw; or 0.32 g/kg.
36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/kg.
1,900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/kg.
2.1 ppmw.
a Emission
limits at 3-percent oxygen, dry basis.
b Affected sources have the option to comply with either the total hydrocarbon limit or the total organic HAP limit.
c Beginning on the date specified in § 63.11141(f), these limits no longer apply; instead as specified in § 63.11142(g), the limits in Table 1b to subpart HHHHHHH of
this part apply.
6. Table 2 to subpart DDDDDD of Part
63 is revised to read as follows:
■
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART DDDDDD OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR NEW AFFECTED SOURCES
For this type of emission point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
PVC process vents a ...........................................
Vinyl chloride ............................
Total hydrocarbons ..................
Total organic HAP b ..................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
Vinyl chloride ............................
Total hydrocarbons ..................
Total organic HAP b ..................
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
Vinyl chloride ............................
PVC-combined process vents a c ........................
Stripped resin ......................................................
Total non-vinyl chloride organic
HAP.
Process Wastewater ...........................................
Vinyl chloride ............................
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission limit . . .
All
All
All
All
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
All
All
All
All
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
Bulk resin .................................
5.3 parts per million by volume (ppmv).
46 ppmv measured as propane.
140 ppmv.
0.13 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter
(ng/dscm).
0.56 ppmv.
2.3 ppmv measured as propane.
29 ppmv.
0.076 ng/dscm.
Dispersion resin .......................
Suspension resin ......................
Suspension blending resin .......
Copolymer resin .......................
Bulk resin .................................
7.1 parts per million by weight (ppmw); or
0.0071 grams per kilogram of product resin,
dry basis (g/kg).
1,500 ppmw, or 1.5 g/kg.
36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.
790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.
170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.
Dispersion resin .......................
Suspension resin ......................
Suspension blending resin .......
Copolymer resin .......................
All resin types ...........................
320 ppmw; or 0.32 g/kg.
36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/kg.
1,900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/kg.
2.1 ppmw.
a Emission
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
sources have the option to comply with either the total hydrocarbon limit or the total organic HAP limit.
on the date specified in § 63.11141(f), these limits no longer apply; instead as specified in § 63.11142(g), the limits in Table 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of
this part apply.
b Affected
c Beginning
Subpart HHHHHHH—National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production
7. Section 63.11865 is revised to read
as follows:
apply to research and development
facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7)
of the Clean Air Act.
■ 8. Section 63.11872 is revised to read
as follows:
■
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 63.11865 Am I subject to the
requirements in this subpart?
You are subject to the requirements in
this subpart if you own or operate one
or more polyvinyl chloride and
copolymers production process units
(PVCPU) as defined in § 63.12005 that
are located at, or are part of, a major
source of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) emissions as defined in § 63.2.
The requirements of this subpart do not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
§ 63.11872 What is the relationship to
other regulations?
After the applicable compliance date
specified in § 63.11875(a), (b), or (c), an
affected source that is also subject to the
provisions of other subparts in 40 CFR
part 60 or this part is required to comply
with this subpart and any other
applicable subparts in 40 CFR part 60 or
this part, except subpart J of this part
does not apply to any source that is
subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
9. Section 63.11875 is amended by
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 63.11875
subpart?
When must I comply with this
*
*
*
*
*
(e) All affected sources that
commenced construction or
reconstruction on or before May 20,
2011, must be in compliance with
§ 63.11880(d) by [date 3 years after date
of publication of final rule in the
Federal Register]. All affected sources
that commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must
be in compliance with § 63.11880(d)
upon [date of publication of final rule in
the Federal Register] or initial startup,
whichever is later.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71512
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
§ 63.11896 What am I required to do if I
make a process change at my affected
source?
10. Section 63.11880 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) and adding
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 63.11880 What emission limits, operating
limits and standards must I meet?
(a) Except as specified in paragraph
(d) of this section, you must comply
with each emission limit and standard
specified in Table 1 to this subpart that
applies to your existing affected source,
and you must comply with each
emission limit and standard specified in
Table 2 to this subpart that applies to
your new affected source.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Beginning no later than the
compliance dates specified in
§ 63.11875(e), the emission limits
specified in Tables 1 and 2 to this
subpart no longer apply. Instead, you
must comply with each emission limit
and standard specified in Table 1b to
this subpart that applies to your existing
affected source, and you must comply
with each emission limit and standard
specified in Table 2b to this subpart that
applies to your new affected source. At
any time before the compliance dates
specified in § 63.11875(e), you may
choose to comply with the emission
limits in Tables 1b and 2b to this
subpart in lieu of the emission limits in
Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart.
■ 11. Section 63.11890 is amended by
revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (3) and
(d)(5)(iv) to read as follows:
§ 63.11890 What are my additional general
requirements for complying with this
subpart?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(2) When a performance test indicates
that emissions of a pollutant in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart are exceeding
the emission standard for the pollutant
specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
(3) When a 3-hour block average from
a continuous emissions monitor, as
required by § 63.11925(c)(1) through (3),
exceeds an emission limit in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(iv) A closure device and all other
leaks on a pressure vessel.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 63.11895
[Removed and Reserved]
12. Section 63.11895 is removed and
reserved.
■ 13. Section 63.11896 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read
as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
*
*
*
*
*
(a) You must demonstrate that the
changed process unit or component of
the affected facility 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 startup of the changed process unit or
component of the affected facility. You
must demonstrate compliance with any
applicable work practice standards
upon startup of the changed process
unit or component of the affected
facility.
(b) You must demonstrate that the
changed process unit or component of
the affected facility is 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 or
component of the affected facility. You
must demonstrate compliance with any
applicable work practice standards
upon startup of the changed process
unit or component of the affected
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. Section 63.11900 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to
read as follows:
§ 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 Table 1 or 1b to this subpart and
Table 3 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).
*
*
*
*
*
(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 Table 2 or 2b
to this subpart and Table 3 to this
subpart, as applicable, no later than 180
days after the compliance date specified
in § 63.11875 or within 180 days after
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
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 compliance
date specified in § 63.11875 and
according to the applicable provisions
in § 63.7(a)(2).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Section 63.11910 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)
introductory text, (a)(1) heading,
(a)(1)(ii), and (a)(2)(ii);
■ b. Removing paragraph (a)(2)(iii);
■ c. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii);
■ d. Adding paragraph (a)(3)(iii);
■ e. Revising paragraphs (b), (c)
introductory text, and (c)(1), (3), and (4);
and
■ f. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 63.11910 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
storage vessels?
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Fixed roof storage vessels. Except
as specified in paragraph (d) of this
section, for each fixed roof storage
vessel used to comply with the
requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (4) of this section.
(1) Closure requirements. * * *
(ii) Each opening in the fixed roof
must be equipped with a cover or other
type of 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) * * *
(ii) You may open closure devices or
remove the fixed roof under the
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 for manual
operations such as maintenance,
inspection, sampling, or cleaning.
(B) Opening of a conservation vent or
similar type of vent that vents to the
atmosphere (or allows air to enter the
storage vessel) is allowed during normal
operating conditions 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
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
vessel as a result of loading or
unloading operations or diurnal ambient
temperature fluctuations.
(3) * * *
(ii) If you determine parts of the roof
are unsafe to inspect because operating
personnel would be exposed to an
imminent or potential danger as a
consequence of such inspection, then
the requirements specified in paragraph
(a)(3)(i) of this section do not apply and
you must comply with the requirements
specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) You must prepare and maintain at
the plant site written documentation
that identifies all parts of the fixed roof
and any closure devices that are unsafe
to inspect and explains why such parts
are unsafe to inspect.
(B) You must 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. Keep a
copy of the written plan and schedule
at the plant site, as specified in
§ 63.11990(b).
(iii) Keep records of the date of each
inspection, as required in paragraph
(a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section.
Provide notification of each inspection
as specified in § 63.11985(c)(1).
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Floating roof storage vessels. For
each floating roof storage vessel used to
comply with the requirements specified
in Table 3 to this subpart, you must
meet all requirements of §§ 63.1060
through 63.1067 for internal floating
roof storage vessels or external floating
roof storage vessels, as applicable.
(c) Pressure vessels. For each pressure
vessel used to comply with the
requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (4) of this section.
(1) You must operate the pressure
vessel as a closed system without
emissions to the atmosphere. Vent
streams sent to the process from
pressure vessels, or purged from
pressure vessels, must meet the
requirements in paragraph (d)(4) of this
section and § 63.11925(a) and (b). You
may also elect to vapor balance the
pressure vessel during filling operations
and comply with the requirements in
paragraph (e) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) The pressure vessel must be
designed to operate with no detectable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
emissions, as indicated by an
instrument reading of less than 500 ppm
above background, at all times. Any
such release (e.g., leak) constitutes a
violation. You must conduct annual
monitoring of each potential leak
interface and each point on the pressure
vessel through which HAP could
potentially be emitted, using the
procedures specified in § 63.1023(b) and
(c) and paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) When § 63.1023(b)(5) refers to
‘‘when the equipment is in regulated
material service or is in use with any
other detectable material,’’ it means
‘‘when the pressure vessel is in HAP
service’’ for the purposes of this section.
(ii) Section 63.1023(b)(6) does not
apply for the purposes of this section.
(4) You must comply with the
recordkeeping provisions specified in
§ 63.11990(b)(4) and the reporting
provisions specified in § 63.11985(a)(1)
and (b)(1) and (10).
(d) Fixed roof storage vessels vented
to a closed vent system and control
device. For each fixed roof storage
vessel that vents to a closed vent system
and control device to comply with the
requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(3) and (d)(1) through (3) of this section.
In lieu of complying with the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(d)(1) through (3) of this section, you
may elect to route emissions back to the
process and comply with the
requirements in paragraph (d)(4) of this
section. During filling operations, in
lieu of complying with the requirements
specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(3) of this section, you may elect to
vapor balance the storage vessel and
comply with the requirements in
paragraph (e) of this section.
(1) Except as specified in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section, you must develop
a control device operating plan
containing the information listed in
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this
section and meet the requirements
specified in § 63.11930. You must then
operate the control device and monitor
the parameters of the control device in
accordance with the operating plan. You
must not use a flare to comply with the
95 weight percent HAP reduction
requirement in Table 3 to this subpart.
(i) The documentation demonstrating
that the control device will achieve the
required control efficiency during
maximum loading conditions is to
include a description of the gas stream
which enters the control device,
including flow and HAP content under
varying liquid level conditions
(dynamic and static) and manufacturer’s
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71513
design specifications for the control
device. If the control device or the
closed vent system receives vapors,
gases, or liquids other than fuels from
sources that are not fixed roof storage
vessels, then the efficiency
demonstration is to include
consideration of all vapors, gases, and
liquids received by the closed vent
capture system and control device. If an
enclosed combustion device with a
minimum residence time of 0.75
seconds and a minimum temperature of
816 degrees Celsius (1,501 degrees
Fahrenheit) is used to meet the 95percent requirement, documentation
that those conditions will exist is
sufficient to meet the requirements of
this paragraph (d)(1)(i).
(ii) A description of the parameter or
parameters to be monitored to ensure
that the control device will be operated
in conformance with its design and an
explanation of the criteria used for
selection of that parameter (or
parameters).
(2) If the storage vessel is vented to a
closed vent system and control device
that is also used to comply with the
process vent emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart and you are
meeting the requirements in §§ 63.11925
through 63.11950 for the closed vent
system and control device, then you are
not required to comply with the
requirements specified in paragraph
(d)(1) of this section.
(3) During periods of planned routine
maintenance of a control device, operate
the storage vessel in accordance with
paragraphs (d)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section. You must keep the records
specified in § 63.11990(b)(6).
(i) Do not add material to the storage
vessel during periods of planned routine
maintenance.
(ii) Limit periods of planned routine
maintenance for each control device to
no more than 360 hours per year.
(4) If you route emissions from a
storage vessel back to the process to
comply with the requirements specified
in Table 3 to this subpart, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs
(d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The HAP in the emissions must
meet one or more of the conditions
specified in paragraphs (d)(4)(i)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) Recycled and/or consumed in the
same manner as a material that fulfills
the same function in that process;
(B) Transformed by chemical reaction
into materials that are not HAP;
(C) Incorporated into a product; and/
or
(D) Recovered.
(ii) To demonstrate compliance with
paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section, you
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71514
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
must prepare a design evaluation (or
engineering assessment) that
demonstrates that one or more of the
conditions specified in paragraphs
(d)(4)(i)(A) through (D) of this section
are being met.
(iii) You must comply with the
requirements of § 63.11930.
(e) Vapor balancing. For each storage
vessel you elect to vapor balance during
filling operations to comply with the
requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (7) of this section.
(1) The vapor balancing system must
be designed and operated to route HAP
vapors displaced from loading of the
storage vessel to the railcar, tank truck,
or barge from which the storage vessel
is filled without emissions to the
atmosphere. You may depressurize the
railcar, tank truck, or barge by sending
the HAP vapors back to the process and
meet the requirements of paragraphs
(d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(2) Tank trucks and railcars must have
a current certification in accordance
with the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) qualification and
maintenance requirements of 49 CFR
part 180, subparts E (for cargo tanks)
and F (for tank cars). Barges must have
a current certification of vapor-tightness
through testing in accordance with
§ 63.565.
(3) HAP must only be unloaded from
tank trucks, railcars, or barges when
vapor collection systems are connected
to the storage vessel’s vapor collection
system.
(4) Pressure relief devices on the
storage vessel, railcar, tank truck, barge,
and vapor return line must not open
during storage vessel loading or as a
result of diurnal temperature changes
(breathing losses). You must comply
with the requirements in § 63.11915(c)
for each pressure relief device.
(5) The vapor balancing system must
be designed to operate with no
detectable emissions, as indicated by an
instrument reading of less than 500 ppm
above background, at all times. Any
such release (e.g., leak) constitutes a
violation of this rule. You must conduct
annual monitoring of each potential leak
interface and each point on the vapor
balancing system through which HAP
could potentially be emitted, using the
procedures specified in § 63.1023(b) and
(c) and paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) When § 63.1023(b)(5) refers to
‘‘when the equipment is in regulated
material service or is in use with any
other detectable material,’’ it means
‘‘when the vapor balancing system is in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
HAP service’’ for the purposes of this
section.
(ii) Section 63.1023(b)(6) does not
apply for the purposes of this section.
(6) Railcars, tank trucks, or barges that
deliver HAP to a storage vessel must be
reloaded or cleaned at a facility that
utilizes one of the control techniques
specified in paragraphs (e)(6)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) The railcar, tank truck, or barge
must be connected to a closed vent
system with a non-flare control device
that reduces inlet emissions of HAP by
95 percent by weight or greater.
Railcars, tank trucks, or barges that have
materials with a maximum true vapor
pressure greater than 11.1 psia must not
use the option in this paragraph (e)(6)(i).
(ii) A vapor balancing system
designed and operated to collect HAP
vapor displaced from the tank truck,
railcar, or barge during reloading must
be used to route the collected HAP
vapor to the storage vessel from which
the liquid being transferred originated.
(iii) The railcar, tank truck, or barge
must route its emissions back to the
process.
(7) The owner or operator of the
facility where the railcar, tank truck, or
barge is reloaded or cleaned must
comply with paragraphs (e)(7)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) Submit to the owner or operator of
the storage vessel and to the
Administrator a written certification
that the reloading or cleaning facility
will meet the requirements of
paragraphs (e)(7)(i) through (iv) of this
section. The certifying entity may
revoke the written certification by
sending a written statement to the
owner or operator of the storage vessel
giving at least 90 days’ notice that the
certifying entity is rescinding
acceptance of responsibility for
compliance with the requirements of
paragraph (e)(7) of this section.
(ii) If complying with paragraph
(e)(6)(i) of this section, comply with the
requirements for closed vent systems
and control devices specified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The
notification and reporting requirements
in § 63.11985 do not apply to the owner
or operator of the offsite cleaning or
reloading facility.
(iii) If complying with paragraph
(e)(6)(ii) of this section, keep the records
specified in § 63.11990(b)(7)(ii).
(iv) If complying with paragraph
(e)(6)(iii) of this section, comply with
the requirements in paragraphs (d)(4)(i)
and (iii) only and keep the records
specified in § 63.11990(b)(7)(iii).
(v) After the compliance dates
specified in § 63.11875 at an offsite
reloading or cleaning facility subject to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
paragraph (e) of this section, compliance
with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements of any other
subpart of this part constitutes
compliance with the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements of paragraphs (e)(7)(ii)
through (iv) of this section. You must
identify in your Notification of
Compliance Status report required by
§ 63.11985(a) the subpart to this part
with which the owner or operator of the
reloading or cleaning facility complies.
■ 16. Section 63.11915 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 63.11915 What are my compliance
requirements for equipment leaks?
For equipment in HAP service (as
defined in § 63.12005), you must
comply with the requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
section.
(a) Except as specified in paragraphs
(c) through (e) of this section, you must
comply with §§ 63.1019(a) and (c)
through (f) and 63.1020 through
63.1039.
(b) [Reserved]
(c) For pressure relief devices in HAP
service, as defined in § 63.12005, you
must meet the requirements of this
paragraph (c) in addition to the
requirements specified in paragraph (a)
of this section. You must also comply
with the recordkeeping requirements in
§ 63.11990(c) and the reporting
requirements in § 63.11985(a)(2), (b)(2),
and (c)(7).
(1) For pressure relief devices in HAP
service that discharge directly to the
atmosphere without first meeting the
process vent emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart by routing
the discharge to a closed vent system
and control device designed and
operated in accordance with the
requirements in §§ 63.11925 through
63.11950, you must install, maintain,
and operate release indicators as
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this section. Any release to the
atmosphere without meeting the process
vent emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2,
or 2b to this subpart, constitutes a
violation. You must submit the report
specified in § 63.11985(c)(7), as
described in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(i) A release indicator must be
properly installed on each pressure
relief device or associated process or
piping system in such a way that it will
indicate when an emission release has
occurred. Examples of these types of
devices and systems include, but are not
limited to, a rupture disk indicator,
magnetic sensor, motion detector on the
pressure relief valve stem, flow monitor,
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
or pressure monitor. A release indicator
does not include any monitoring system
used to meet the requirements of
§ 63.11956.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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)(7).
(2) Pressure relief devices in HAP
service that discharge directly to a
closed vent system and control device
designed and operated in accordance
with the requirements in §§ 63.11925
through 63.11950, are required to meet
process vent emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. Any release
to the atmosphere without meeting the
process vent emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, constitutes
a violation. 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)(7).
(d) If you route emissions from
equipment in HAP service through a
closed vent system to a control device,
or back into the process or a fuel gas
system, then you must comply with
paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) Comply with § 63.1034, except you
must comply with § 63.11930 in lieu of
the closed vent system requirements
specified in § 63.983, and the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements associated with § 63.983
do not apply.
(2) If emissions from equipment are
vented to a closed vent system and
control device that is also used to
comply with the process vent emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart and you are meeting the
requirements in §§ 63.11925 through
63.11950 for the closed vent system and
control device, then you are not
required to comply with the closed vent
system and control device requirements
specified in § 63.1034.
(e) The referenced provisions
specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through
(6) of this section do not apply when
demonstrating compliance with this
section.
(1) The phrase ‘‘except during periods
of start-up, shutdown and malfunction
as specified in the referencing subpart’’
in § 63.984(a)(1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
(2) Section 63.998(d)(3).
(3) The phrase ‘‘may be included as
part of the startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan, as required by the
referencing subpart for the source, or’’
from § 63.1024(f)(4)(i).
(4) The phrase ‘‘(except periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction)’’
from § 63.1026(e)(1)(ii)(A).
(5) The phrase ‘‘(except during
periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction)’’ from § 63.1028(e)(1)(i)(A).
(6) The phrase ‘‘(except during
periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction)’’ from § 63.1031(b)(1).
■ 17. Section 63.11920 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(3)(iii) and (g)
introductory text and revising parameter
‘‘Ddelay’’ of Equation 1 in paragraph
(h)(4)(ii) to read as follows:
§ 63.11920 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
heat exchange systems?
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Determine the vinyl chloride
concentration (in parts per billion by
weight) in the cooling water using
Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, appendix
B.
*
*
*
*
*
(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 39 parts per million by
volume or a total strippable volatile
organic compounds concentration in the
cooling water of 500 parts per billion by
weight or a vinyl chloride concentration
in the cooling water of 500 parts per
billion by weight. While you remain
below the delay of repair action level,
you may delay the repair of a leaking
heat exchanger only if one of the
conditions in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of
this section is met. If you exceed the
delay of repair action level you must
repair according to paragraph (e) of this
section. 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.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
Ddelay = Expected duration of the repair delay,
hours.
18. Section 63.11925 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c)
introductory text, (c)(1), (d) introductory
text, (d)(2) through (4), (d)(5)
introductory text, (d)(5)(i), (e)
introductory text, (e)(2), (e)(3)(ii),
(e)(4)(i), (e)(5), (f) introductory text, (g)
introductory text, (g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii),
(g)(3), and (h) to read as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71515
§ 63.11925 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
process vents?
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Emission limits. Each process vent
must meet the emission limits in Table
1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart prior to
the vent stream being exposed to the
atmosphere. The emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart
apply at all times. The emission limits
in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart
must not be met through dilution. If an
applicable process vent stream at a
PVCPU is comingled with a vent stream
from one or more non-PVCPU sources
and the comingled streams are vented
through a shared control device, then
each emission standard (and subsequent
control device, monitoring,
recordkeeping, reporting, and other
requirements) to which the comingled
vent stream is subject applies.
(b) Closed vent systems and control
devices. Each process vent as defined in
§ 63.12005, that is in HAP service must
be routed through a closed vent system
to a control device. All gas streams
routed to the closed vent system and
control device must be for a process
purpose and not for the purpose of
diluting the process vent to meet the
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart. Each control device used
to comply with paragraph (a) of this
section must meet the requirements of
§§ 63.11925 and 63.11940, and all
closed vent systems must meet the
requirements in § 63.11930. You must
not use a flare to comply with the
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you
must install and operate a continuous
parameter monitoring system (CPMS) to
monitor each operating parameter
specified in § 63.11940(a) through (h) to
comply with your operating limit(s)
required in § 63.11880(b).
(1) Hydrogen chloride continuous
emission monitoring system (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 (h),
new and existing sources 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.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71516
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(d) Initial compliance. To demonstrate
initial compliance with the emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart, you must comply with
paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) For each CPMS required, or CEMS
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 as specified in § 63.11935(b) and
site-specific monitoring plan specified
in § 63.11935(c), respectively.
(3) For each CPMS required, or CEMS
that you elect to use as specified in
paragraph (c) 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 site-specific 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 meet the
requirements specified in § 63.11890(c),
and you must demonstrate initial
compliance with the emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart
based on 3-hour block averages of CEMS
data collected at the minimum
frequency specified in § 63.11935(b)(2)
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 3hour averaging period.
(5) For each emission limit in Table
1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart for which
you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must meet the
requirements of paragraphs (d)(5)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct an initial
performance test according to the
requirements in § 63.11945 to
demonstrate compliance with the total
hydrocarbons or total organic HAP
emission limit, vinyl chloride emission
limit, hydrogen chloride emission limit,
and dioxin/furan emission limit in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Continuous compliance. To
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the emission limits in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart for each process
vent, you must comply with paragraphs
(e)(1) through (5) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) You must operate and maintain
each CPMS required, or CEMS that you
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
elect to use in paragraph (c) of this
section, as specified in § 63.11935.
(3) * * *
(ii) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart
based on 3-hour block averages of CEMS
data collected at the minimum
frequency specified in § 63.11935(b)(2),
and calculated using the data reduction
method specified in § 63.11935(e). You
must meet the requirements specified in
§ 63.11890(c). 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.
(4) * * *
(i) You must conduct a performance
test once every 5 years according to the
requirements in § 63.11945 for each
pollutant in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Each closed vent system and
control device used to comply with an
emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart must be operated at all
times when emissions are vented to, or
collected by, these systems or devices.
(f) Toxic equivalency limit. To
demonstrate compliance with the
dioxin/furan toxic equivalency emission
limit specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart, you must determine
dioxin/furan toxic equivalency as
specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3)
of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Emission profile. You must
characterize each process vent by
developing an emissions profile for each
contributing process vent according to
paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The total organic HAP
concentration shall be computed
according to Equation 1 of this section
except that only the organic HAP
species shall be summed. The list of
organic HAP is provided in Table 2 to
subpart F of this part, except vinyl
chloride shall be excluded for purposes
of compliance with this paragraph
(g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii).
*
*
*
*
*
(3) For miscellaneous process vents,
the emissions profile must be
determined according to paragraph
(g)(2)(iv) of this section.
(h) Process changes. Except for
temporary shutdowns for maintenance
activities, if you make a process change
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
such that, as a result of that change, you
are subject to a different process vent
limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart, then you must meet the
requirements of § 63.11896.
■ 19. Section 63.11930 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c)
introductory text, (c)(1)(iv), (c)(2)(i),
(c)(2)(ii)(A), and (h)(3) to read as
follows:
§ 63.11930 What requirements must I meet
for closed vent systems?
(a) General. If you use a closed vent
system to comply with an emission
limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, 2b, or 3 to this
subpart, or to comply with the
requirements in § 63.11910, § 63.11915,
or § 63.11955, then you must comply
with the requirements 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 HAP vapors and
route the collected vapors to a control
device, a fuel gas system, or process.
(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),
you must not discharge to the
atmosphere through the bypass. Any
such release constitutes a violation. 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. Any
open-ended valve or line in the closed
vent system that is equipped with a cap,
blind flange, plug, or second valve and
that operates to seal the open end at all
times is not subject to either paragraph
(c)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) * * *
(iv) For any instances where the flow
indicator alarm is triggered, you must
submit to the Administrator as part of
your compliance report, the information
specified in § 63.11985(b)(9) and (10).
(2) * * *
(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. You must
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
maintain the records specified in
paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section.
(ii) * * *
(A) For each instance that you change
the bypass valve to the diverting
position, you must submit to the
Administrator as part of your
compliance report, the information
specified in § 63.11985(b)(9) and (10).
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(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 as part of your
compliance report, the information
specified in § 63.11985(b)(10).
■ 20. Section 63.11935 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (b)(5), (b)(6)(i),
(b)(7)(i) and (ii), (d) introductory text,
(d)(1), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(3) to read as
follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS
requirements must I meet to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with the
emission standards for process vents?
(a) General requirements for CEMS
and CPMS. You must meet the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this
section for each CEMS specified in
§ 63.11925(c) used to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits for
process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b 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 5 to this subpart for each process
vent control device specified in
§ 63.11925(b) that is used to comply
with the emission limits for process
vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart, except that flow indicators
specified in § 63.11940(a) are not subject
to the requirements of this section.
(b) * * *
(5) You must operate and maintain
the CEMS in continuous operation
according to the quality control program
and performance evaluation test plan.
(6) * * *
(i) A hydrogen chloride CEMS must
meet the requirements of 40 CFR part
60, appendix B, performance
specification 18, as well as the
requirements of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F, procedure 6. A dioxin/
furan CEMS must meet the requirements
of the promulgated performance
specification for the CEMS.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) * * *
(i) You must notify the Administrator
1 month before starting use of the
CEMS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
(ii) You must notify the Administrator
1 month before stopping use of the
CEMS, in which case you must also
conduct a performance test within 60
days of ceasing operation of the system.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Establish operating limit. For each
operating parameter that must be
monitored in § 63.11925(c) for process
vent control devices, you must establish
an operating limit as specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) 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 7
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 such that you are meeting the
emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b 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 as required
by § 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
(2) * * *
(iii) The rationale for the established
operating limit, including any data and
calculations used to develop the
operating limit and a description
explaining why the operating limit
indicates proper operation of the control
device.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) For batch processes, you may
establish operating limits for individual
batch emission episodes, including each
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 pre-compliance
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
explaining why each operating limit
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71517
indicates proper operation of the control
device during the specific batch
emission episode.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 21. Section 63.11940 is amended by
revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (b) introductory text,
(b)(3)(ii), (c) introductory text, (c)(2)(ii),
(d) introductory text, (d)(1), (e)
introductory text, (f), and (g)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 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 (g) of this section for each
control device you use to comply with
the emission limits for process vents in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. You
must monitor, record, and calculate
CPMS data averages as specified in
Table 7 to this subpart. Paragraph (h) of
this section provides an option to
propose alternative monitoring
parameters or procedures.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Thermal oxidizer monitoring. If
you are using a thermal oxidizer to meet
an emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or
2b to this subpart and you are required
to use CPMS as specified in
§ 63.11925(c), you must equip the
thermal oxidizer with the monitoring
equipment specified in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (3) of this section, as applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(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 any of the aforementioned
conditions 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 type or manufacturer as the old
catalyst or is not as efficient 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
type or manufacturer as the old catalyst
or is as efficient as or more efficient
than the old catalyst, then a new
performance test to determine
destruction efficiency is not required.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71518
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart and 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.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(ii) If the difference in the inlet gas
stream temperature and the inlet liquid
stream temperature is greater than 38
degrees Celsius (100.4 degrees
Fahrenheit), you may install and operate
a temperature monitoring device at the
scrubber gas stream exit.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Regenerative adsorber monitoring.
If you are using a regenerative adsorber
to meet an emission limit in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b 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 wastewater
as defined in § 63.12005, then it is
subject to the requirements of
§ 63.11965.
(1) For non-vacuum regeneration
systems, an integrating regeneration
stream flow monitoring device having
an accuracy of ±10 percent and capable
of recording the total regeneration
stream mass flow for each regeneration
cycle.
*
*
*
*
*
(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, 1b, 2, or 2b
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.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Condenser monitoring. If you are
using a condenser to meet an emission
limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b 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) 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart and you are required to use
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
CPMS as specified in § 63.11925(c), you
must comply with the requirements as
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 22. Section 63.11945 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) and (b)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 63.11945 What performance testing
requirements must I meet for process
vents?
(a) General. For each control device
used to meet the emission limits for
process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b 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 8 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. You must record the process
information that documents operating
conditions during the test and include
in such record an explanation to
support how such conditions represent
the conditions specified in paragraphs
(b)(1) through (3) 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. In all cases, a sitespecific 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
profiles described in § 63.11925(g).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 23. Section 63.11955 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 63.11955 What are my initial and
continuous compliance requirements for
other emission sources?
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) Each gasholder must be vented
back into the process for reuse or routed
to a closed vent system and control
device meeting the requirements of
§§ 63.11925 through 63.11950.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 24. Section 63.11960 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b)
introductory text, and (b)(1)
introductory text;
■ b. Adding paragraph (b)(2);
■ c. Revising paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and
(iv), (c)(2) introductory text, (c)(2)(i),
and (c)(2)(ii) introductory text;
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
d. Revising parameter ‘‘CGi’’ of
Equation 1 in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A);
■ e. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(B),
(d)(3), (e)(1)(i) through (iv), and (f)
introductory text;
■ f. Revising parameter ‘‘Ci’’ of Equation
2 in paragraph (f); and
■ g. Adding paragraphs (g) and (h).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 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
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
emission limits for stripped resin
specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
(b) Determination of total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP. You must
develop a facility-specific list of HAP
that are expected to be present in each
grade of resin produced by your PVCPU
using the procedures specified for resin
concentration in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section or the alternative mass emission
rate limit as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section. This list must be
kept current and must be available for
inspection by the Administrator. This
list must include the identification of
each grade of resin produced, each HAP
expected to be present in that grade of
resin, and the CAS number for each
HAP.
(1) For the purposes of demonstrating
initial and continuous compliance as
required in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this
section, you must meet the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) For the purposes of demonstrating
initial and continuous compliance with
the alternative mass emission rates as
specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this section, you must meet the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The process components associated
with the stripped resin process must be
enclosed and routed through a closed
vent system meeting the requirements in
§§ 63.11925 through 63.11950 for the
closed vent system and control device.
(ii) You must sample the stack
emissions for all Table 10 HAP (as
defined in § 63.12005) using the
appropriate test methods specified in
Table 8 to this subpart and the
procedures specified in § 63.11945.
(iii) You must also sample the stack
emissions for any HAP that are not
Table 10 HAP but are expected to be
present based on your facility-specific
list of HAP using the appropriate test
methods specified in Table 8 to this
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
CGi = 24-hour average concentration of vinyl
chloride or total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP in resin grade Gi, ppmw.
For non-vinyl chloride organic HAP,
CTNVCH from paragraph (f) of this section
is used as CGi for each resin grade.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(B) If only one resin grade was
produced during the 24-hour sampling
event, use the 24-hour arithmetic
average vinyl chloride and total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP
concentrations for the one resin grade
calculated as specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section for each
stripper or calculate the 24-hour
arithmetic average vinyl chloride and
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentrations for all strippers used to
process the one grade of resin.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
(d) * * *
(3) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the vinyl chloride and
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
emission limit for stripped resin in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart as
specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) SW–846–8260B (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for analysis of
volatile organic compounds listed in
Table 10 of this subpart or the sitespecific HAP list.
(ii) SW–846–8270D (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for analysis of
semivolatile organic compounds listed
in Table 10 of this subpart or the sitespecific HAP list.
(iii) SW–846–8315A (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for analysis of
aldehyde compounds listed in Table 10
of this subpart or the site-specific HAP
list.
(iv) SW–846–8015C (incorporated by
reference, see § 63.14) for analysis of
alcohol compounds listed in Table 10 of
this subpart or the site-specific HAP list.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Method for calculating total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration. For each stripped resin
sample analyzed using the methods
specified in paragraph (e) of this
section, calculate the sum of the
measured concentrations of each HAP
analyzed as required in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section by using Equation 2 to
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
Ci = Concentration of individual HAP present
in the stripped resin sample analyzed
pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this
section excluding vinyl chloride, in
ppmw, where a value of zero should be
used for any HAP concentration that is
below the detection limit.
(g) Method for calculating alternative
mass emission rates. If you elect to
demonstrate initial or continuous
compliance with the alternative mass
emissions rates (g/kg) in Tables 1b and
2b of this subpart, calculate the mass of
the HAP emitted to the atmosphere of
vinyl chloride and each HAP analyzed
as required in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section by using Equation 3 of this
section.
Ei = HAP emissions for individual HAP i, g/
kg (lb/lb) product.
Ci = Concentration of HAP i according to
methods found in Table 8 to this subpart
and the procedures specified in
§ 63.11945, in ppmv. A value of zero
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
should be used for any HAP
concentration that is below the detection
limit.
Di = Density of HAP i at standard conditions,
kg/m3 (lb/ft3).
Q = Volumetric flow rate as determined by
Method 2 of appendix A to part 60 of
this chapter, at standard conditions, m3/
hr (ft3/hr).
K = Unit conversion factor, 1,000 g/kg (1 lb/
lb).
10 6 = Conversion factor for ppm.
Z = Production rate of dry resin, kg/hr (lb/
hr).
(h) Method for calculating total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP mass
emission rates. If you elect to
demonstrate initial or continuous
compliance with the alternative total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP mass
emissions rates (g/kg) in Tables 1b and
2b of this subpart, calculate the sum of
the mass emission rates of each HAP
required in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section using the results from paragraph
(g) and Equation 4 of this section.
ETNVCH = Mass emission rate of total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP compounds
in the stripped resin sample, in g/kg
product (lb/lb product).
Ei = Mass emission rate of individual HAP
present in the stripped resin sample
analyzed pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of
this section excluding vinyl chloride, in
g/kg product (lb/lb product).
25. Section 63.11965 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1)(i), (b)(2),
(c) through (e), (f) introductory text, and
(f)(1)(i) and (ii) to read as follows:
■
§ 63.11965 What are my general
compliance requirements for wastewater?
(a) Emission limits. You must meet
the emission limits specified in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart for each
process wastewater stream before being
mixed with any other process
wastewater stream, before being
exposed to the atmosphere, and before
being discharged from the affected
source.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For treated process wastewater
streams, you must collect process
wastewater samples at the outlet of the
treatment process and before the process
wastewater stream is mixed with any
other process wastewater stream
containing vinyl chloride or total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP
concentrations less than the applicable
emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart, before being
exposed to the atmosphere, and before
being discharged from the affected
source.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
EP09NO20.002 EP09NO20.005
subpart and the procedures specified in
§ 63.11945.
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) For continuous processes, during
a 24-hour sampling period, collect one
grab sample at intervals of 8 hours or
per grade of PVC produced, whichever
is more frequent. Each sample must be
taken as the resin flows out of the
stripper.
(iv) For batch processes, during a 24hour sampling period, for each batch of
each resin grade produced, collect one
grab sample. Each sample must be taken
immediately following the completion
of the stripping operation.
(2) Demonstrate initial compliance
with the vinyl chloride and total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart as specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Calculate the vinyl chloride 24hour arithmetic average for each
stripper using the vinyl chloride
measured for the grab samples collected
as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and
(iv) of this section and the calculation
procedure specified in either paragraph
(c)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.
(ii) Calculate the total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP 24-hour
arithmetic average for each stripper by
first using the total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP measured for the grab
samples collected as specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this
section and the calculation procedure
specified in paragraph (f) of this section
to determine the total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP concentration of
each sample (CTNVCH). Then, use the
CTNVCH and the calculation procedure
specified in either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)
or (B) of this section to calculate the
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
24-hour arithmetic average.
(A) * * *
71519
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71520
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(2) You must measure the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP, using the test methods
and procedures specified in § 63.11980.
(c) Requirements for process
wastewater streams that must be
treated. You must treat each process
wastewater stream that has a vinyl
chloride or total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentration equal to or
greater than the applicable emission
limits specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart as determined pursuant
to paragraph (b) of this section, to
reduce the concentration below the
applicable emission limits specified in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. You
must route wastewater streams through
hard-piping 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
63.11950. You must also meet the initial
and continuous compliance
requirements specified in §§ 63.11970(a)
and 63.11975(a) and (b).
(d) Requirements for process
wastewater streams that do not need to
be treated. For each process wastewater
stream that has a vinyl chloride or total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration less than the applicable
emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart as determined
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section,
you must meet the initial and
continuous compliance requirements
specified in §§ 63.11970(b) and
63.11975(c).
(e) Maintenance wastewater. You
must comply with the requirements
specified in § 63.105(b) and (c) for
maintenance wastewater containing
Table 10 HAP (as defined in
§ 63.12005).
(f) Determination of total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP. If you are subject
to the emission limits specified in Table
1 or 2 to this subpart, then you must
develop a facility-specific list of HAP
that are expected to be present in each
process wastewater stream at your
PVCPU and comply with paragraph
(f)(1) of this section. This list must be
continuously updated and must be
available for inspection by the
Administrator. This list must include
the identification of each HAP expected
to be present in each process wastewater
stream, and the CAS number for each
HAP.
(1) * * *
(i) You must analyze each process
wastewater sample for all Table 10 HAP
using the test methods specified in
§ 63.11980(a)(2) and (3).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
(ii) You must also analyze each
process wastewater sample for any HAP
that are not Table 10 HAP but are
expected to be present in that sample
based on your facility-specific list of
HAP using the appropriate test method
specified in § 63.11980(a)(2).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 26. Section 63.11970 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 63.11970 What are my initial compliance
requirements for process wastewater?
(a) Demonstration of initial
compliance for process wastewater
streams that must be treated. For each
process wastewater stream that must be
treated as specified in § 63.11965(b) and
(c), you must conduct an initial
performance test for the wastewater
treatment process, measuring the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP, in the wastewater stream
at the outlet of the wastewater treatment
process before the wastewater is
exposed to the atmosphere, mixed with
any other process stream, and before
being discharged from the affected
facility, using the test method and
procedures specified in § 63.11980(a).
(b) Demonstration of initial
compliance for process wastewater
streams that are not required to be
treated. For each process wastewater
stream that has a vinyl chloride or total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration less than the applicable
emission limits specified in Tables 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you must use
the collection and measurement
procedures specified in
§ 63.11965(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2) to
demonstrate initial compliance.
■ 27. Section 63.11975 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 63.11975 What are my continuous
compliance requirements for process
wastewater?
(a) For each process wastewater
stream that must be treated as specified
in § 63.11965(b) and (c), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance as
specified in paragraph (b) of this
section. For each process wastewater
stream for which you initially determine
in § 63.11970(b) that treatment is not
required, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) For each process wastewater
stream that must be treated according to
§ 63.11965(b) and (c), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance
with the emission limits specified in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart by
following the procedures specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(1) Following your demonstration of
initial compliance in § 63.11970(a),
make monthly measurements of the
vinyl chloride, and if applicable, total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP,
concentrations using the procedures and
methods specified in § 63.11965(b)(1)(i)
and (b)(2).
(2) You must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart on
a monthly basis, using the monthly
concentration measurement specified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(c) For each wastewater stream for
which you initially determine in
§ 63.11970(b) that treatment is not
required, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Conduct annual performance tests,
measuring the vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentrations using the
procedures and methods specified in
§ 63.11965(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2).
(2) If any annual performance test
conducted as specified in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section results in a
concentration of vinyl chloride or total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP in the
process wastewater stream that is
greater than or equal to the applicable
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart, then you must meet the
requirements of § 63.11965(c) and you
must demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance as specified in
§ 63.11970 and this section.
■ 28. Section 63.11980 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text, (a)(1), and (b) introductory text to
read as follows:
§ 63.11980 What are the test methods and
calculation procedures for process
wastewater?
(a) Performance test methods and
procedures. You must determine the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP, using the test methods
and procedures specified in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (4) 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 worst-case operating
conditions for the PVCPU when the
process wastewater treatment process is
operating as close as possible to
maximum representative operating
conditions. If the wastewater treatment
process will be operating at several
different sets of operating conditions,
you must supplement the testing with
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
additional testing, modeling, or
engineering assessments to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Method for calculating total nonvinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration. If you are subject to the
emission limits specified in Table 1 or
2 to this subpart, then for each process
wastewater stream analyzed using the
methods specified in paragraph (a) of
this section, calculate the sum of the
measured concentrations of each HAP
analyzed as required in § 63.11965(f)(1)
by using Equation 1 to this section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 29. Section 63.11985 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(7)(ii),
(a)(8)(i) and (ii), (b)(4)(i) introductory
text, (b)(4)(i)(A), (b)(6) through (8),
(b)(10) introductory text, and (b)(10)(v);
■ b. Removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(11); and
■ c. Revising paragraphs (b)(12), (c)(1),
(2), and (8) and (c)(9)(i) and (ii).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 63.11985 What notifications and reports
must I submit and when?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(4) You must include the operating
limit for each monitoring parameter
identified for each control device used
to meet the emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, as
determined pursuant to § 63.11935(d).
This report must include the
information in § 63.11935(d)(2), as
applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) * * *
(ii) You must include results of the
initial testing used to determine initial
compliance with the stripped resin
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
(8) * * *
(i) You must include an identification
of each process wastewater stream
subject to the requirements of this
subpart, and the results of your
determination for each stream as to
whether it must be treated to meet the
limits of Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart. You must also include a
description of the treatment process to
be used for each process wastewater
stream that requires treatment.
(ii) You must include results of the
initial sampling used to determine
initial compliance with the vinyl
chloride limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) Deviations using CEMS or CPMS.
For each deviation from an emission
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
limit or operating limit where a CEMS
or CPMS is being used to comply with
the process vent emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, 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, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart or when the value does
not meet the data availability
requirements defined in § 63.11890(c).
*
*
*
*
*
(6) You must include the records
specified in § 63.11990(j)(2) for other
emission sources.
(7) For resin stripper operations, you
must include the daily vinyl chloride
and/or monthly total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentration or
alternative mass emission rate results
for each resin type produced within the
PVCPU that did not meet the stripped
resin emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2,
or 2b to this subpart, as applicable.
(8) For wastewater operations, you
must include the results of monthly
vinyl chloride and, if applicable,
monthly total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentration results for
each process wastewater stream
discharged from the affected source that
did not meet the process wastewater
emission limits in Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) If any pressure vessel closure
device or closed vent system that
contains a bypass has directly
discharged to the atmosphere, or any
closed vent system that is designed to be
in vacuum service and is operating and
not in vacuum service, as specified in
§ 63.11910(c)(3) or § 63.11930(c) or (h),
you must submit to the Administrator
the following information:
*
*
*
*
*
(v) The measures adopted to prevent
future such discharges.
*
*
*
*
*
(12) 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) * * *
(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
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71521
required by § 63.11910(a)(3). 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 storage
vessel inspections.
(2) Batch pre-compliance report. You
must submit a batch pre-compliance
report at least 6 months prior to the
compliance date of this subpart (see
§ 63.11875) 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), then you
must also include data or other
information supporting a finding that
the emissions estimation equations in
§ 63.11950(a) through (h) are
inappropriate. If the EPA disapproves
the report, then you must still be in
compliance with the emission limits
and work practice standards of this
subpart by your compliance date. To
change any of the information submitted
in the report, you must notify the EPA
60 days before you implement the
planned change.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Commencing and ceasing
operation of CEMSs. Before starting or
stopping the use of CEMS, you must
notify the Administrator as specified in
§ 63.11935(b)(7).
(9) * * *
(i) Beginning on [date 60 days after
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register], within 60 days
after the date of completing each
performance test required by this
subpart, you must submit the results of
the performance test following the
procedures specified in paragraphs
(c)(9)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Data collected using test methods
supported by the EPA’s Electronic
Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the
EPA’s ERT website (https://
www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-airemissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert)
at the time of the test. Submit the results
of the performance test to the EPA via
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
71522
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the Compliance and Emissions Data
Reporting Interface (CEDRI), which can
be accessed through the EPA’s Central
Data Exchange (CDX) (https://
cdx.epa.gov/). The data must be
submitted in a file format generated
through the use of the EPA’s ERT.
Alternatively, you may submit an
electronic file consistent with the
extensible markup language (XML)
schema listed on the EPA’s ERT
website.
(B) Data collected using test methods
that are not supported by the EPA’s ERT
as listed on the EPA’s ERT website at
the time of the test. The results of the
performance test must be included as an
attachment in the ERT or an alternate
electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA’s ERT
website. Submit the ERT generated
package or alternative file to the EPA via
CEDRI.
(C) Confidential business information
(CBI). If you claim some of the
information submitted under paragraph
(a)(1) or (2) of this section is CBI, you
must submit a complete file, including
information claimed to be CBI, to the
EPA. The file must be generated through
the use of the EPA’s ERT or an alternate
electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA’s ERT
website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly
used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail
the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention:
Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404–02, 4930 Old Page Rd.,
Durham, NC 27703. The same file with
the CBI omitted must be submitted to
the EPA via the EPA’s CDX as described
in paragraphs (c)(9)(i)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(ii) Beginning on [date 60 days after
date of publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register], within 60 days
after the date of completing each CEMS
performance evaluation (as defined in
§ 63.2), you must submit the results of
the performance evaluation following
the procedures specified in paragraphs
(c)(9)(ii)(A) through (B) of this section.
(A) Performance evaluations of CEMS
measuring relative accuracy test audit
(RATA) pollutants that are supported by
the EPA’s ERT as listed on the EPA’s
ERT website at the time of the
evaluation. Submit the results of the
performance evaluation to the EPA via
CEDRI, which can be accessed through
the EPA’s CDX. The data must be
submitted in a file format generated
through the use of the EPA’s ERT.
Alternatively, you may submit an
electronic file consistent with the XML
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
schema listed on the EPA’s ERT
website.
(B) Performance evaluations of CEMS
measuring RATA pollutants that are not
supported by the EPA’s ERT as listed on
the EPA’s ERT website at the time of the
evaluation. The results of the
performance evaluation must be
included as an attachment in the ERT or
an alternate electronic file consistent
with the XML schema listed on the
EPA’s ERT website. Submit the ERT
generated package or alternative file to
the EPA via CEDRI.
(C) Confidential business information
(CBI). If you claim some of the
information submitted under paragraph
(a)(1) or (2) of this section is CBI, you
must submit a complete file, including
information claimed to be CBI, to the
EPA. The file must be generated through
the use of the EPA’s ERT or an alternate
electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA’s ERT
website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly
used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail
the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention:
Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404–02, 4930 Old Page Rd.,
Durham, NC 27703. The same file with
the CBI omitted must be submitted to
the EPA via the EPA’s CDX as described
in paragraphs (c)(9)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 30. Section 63.11990 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)
introductory text and (b)(4);
■ b. Adding paragraph (b)(7);
■ c. Revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) and
(h)(2);
■ d. Adding paragraph (h)(3);
■ e. Revising paragraph (i)(4); and
■ f. Removing paragraph (i)(5).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 63.11990
What records must I keep?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Storage vessels. For storage
vessels, you must maintain the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(7) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) For each pressure vessel, you must
keep records of the information
specified in § 63.11985(b)(10) and
paragraph (c) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) For storage vessels that use vapor
balancing, you must keep the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) A record of the certification
required by § 63.11910(e)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(ii) If complying with
§ 63.11910(e)(6)(ii), keep the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(ii)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) A record of the equipment to be
used and the procedures to be followed
when reloading the railcar, tank truck,
or barge and displacing vapors to the
storage vessel from which the liquid
originates.
(B) A record of each time the vapor
balancing system is used to comply with
§ 63.11910(e)(6)(ii).
(iii) If complying with
§ 63.11910(e)(6)(iii), you must keep
records that demonstrate one or more of
the conditions specified in
§ 63.11910(d)(4)(i)(A) through (D) are
met.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) In lieu of calculating and
recording the average value specified in
paragraph (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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart
for the block average period, you may
record a statement that all recorded 1hour 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.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) The total quantity (pounds) of each
resin grade produced per day and the
total quantity of resin processed by each
resin stripper or group of strippers,
identified by resin type and resin grade,
per day.
(3) If you elect to demonstrate initial
or continuous compliance with the
alternative mass emissions rates (g/kg)
in Table 1b or 2b to this subpart, you
must keep the records specified in
paragraphs (e) through (g) of this section
for process vents and closed vent
systems for equipment downstream of
the stripper.
(i) * * *
(4) All testing data, including monthly
measurements of the concentrations of
vinyl chloride, and if applicable, the
concentration of total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP in each process
wastewater stream required to be
measured, as specified in § 63.11975.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 31. Section 63.12005 is amended by:
■ a. Removing the definition for
‘‘Affirmative defense’’;
■ b. Revising the definition for ‘‘Batch
process vent’’;
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
c. Adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ‘‘Closure device’’;
■ d. Removing the definition for
‘‘Container’’;
■ e. Revising the definition for
‘‘Continuous process vent’’;
■ f. Removing the definition for
‘‘Corrective action plan’’;
■ g. Revising the definitions for
‘‘Dispersion process’’ and ‘‘First attempt
at repair’’;
■ h. Removing the definition for
‘‘Operating day’’;
■ i. Revising the definitions for
‘‘Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
production process unit or PVCPU,’’
‘‘Polyvinyl chloride copolymer,’’
‘‘Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer,’’
‘‘Process component,’’ ‘‘Process
condenser,’’ ‘‘Process vent,’’ ‘‘Product,’’
and ‘‘PVC-combined process vent’’;
■ j. Removing the definition for ‘‘PVConly process vent’’;
■ k. Adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ‘‘PVC process vent’’;
■ l. Revising the definition for
‘‘Repaired’’;
■ m. Removing the definitions for ‘‘Root
cause analysis’’ and ‘‘Solution process’’;
■ n. Revising the definitions for ‘‘Total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP’’ and
‘‘Type of resin’’;
■ o. Removing the definition for
‘‘Unloading operations’’; and
■ p. Adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ‘‘Vapor balancing
system.’’
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 63.12005
subpart?
What definitions apply to this
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
Batch process vent means a vent from
a batch operation from a PVCPU
through which a HAP-containing gas
stream has the potential to be released
to the atmosphere except that it is
required by this subpart to be routed to
a closed vent system and control device.
Emissions for all emission episodes
associated with the unit operation(s) are
part of the batch process vent. Batch
process vents also include vents with
intermittent flow from continuous
operations. Examples of batch process
vents include, but are not limited to,
vents on condensers used for product
recovery, polymerization reactors, and
process tanks.
*
*
*
*
*
Closure device means a cover, cap,
hatch, lid, plug, seal, valve, or other
type of fitting that, when the device is
secured in the closed position, prevents
or reduces air emissions to the
atmosphere by blocking an opening in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
fixed roof storage vessel or pressure
vessel.
*
*
*
*
*
Continuous process vent means a vent
from a continuous PVCPU operation
through which a HAP-containing gas
stream has the potential to be released
to the atmosphere except that it is
required by this subpart to be routed to
a closed vent system and control device
and has the following characteristics:
(1) The gas stream originates as a
continuous flow from any continuous
PVCPU operation during operation of
the PVCPU.
(2) The discharge into the closed vent
system and 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.
*
*
*
*
*
Dispersion process means a process
for producing polyvinyl chloride resin
that is characterized by either emulsion
or microsuspension polymerization.
Emulsion polymerization uses water
soluble initiators and is distinguished
by metering in surfactants as the
reaction progresses. In microsuspension
polymerization, homogenizers are first
mixed with a monomer outside of the
polymerization reactor and oil soluble
initiators are then added before charging
the reactor. These two polymerization
techniques produce fine particles,
typically less than 10 microns, with
little or no porosity. Emulsifier levels
vary but agitation is very mild compared
to other PVC polymerization processes.
The final product is dried to powder
form.
*
*
*
*
*
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) or
§ 63.1023(b) and (c), as applicable, to
verify whether the leak is repaired,
unless the owner or operator determines
by other means that the leak is not
repaired.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71523
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; resin blend tanks; resin
centrifuges; resin dryers; resin product
separators; recovery devices; reactant
and raw material charge vessels and
tanks, holding tanks, mixing and
weighing tanks; finished resin product
storage vessels or storage silos; finished
resin product loading operations;
connected ducts and piping; equipment
including pumps, compressors,
agitators, pressure relief devices,
sampling connection systems, openended valves or lines, valves and
connectors and instrumentation
systems.
Polyvinyl chloride copolymer means a
synthetic thermoplastic polymer that is
derived from the simultaneous
polymerization of vinyl chloride and
one or more additional monomers. The
additional monomers are reactive with
vinyl chloride and become part of the
polymer chain. Additives used in
polyvinyl chloride copolymer
polymerization for stabilization and/or
particle size control are not as reactive,
do not become part of the polymer
chain, and are not considered to be
monomers in the polymerization
process. Polyvinyl chloride copolymer
is produced by different processes,
including, but not limited to,
suspension process, dispersion process,
and suspension blending process.
Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer
means a synthetic thermoplastic
polymer that is derived from the
polymerization of vinyl chloride and
has the general chemical structure (H2CCHCl-)n. Polyvinyl chloride
homopolymer is typically a white
powder or colorless granule. Polyvinyl
chloride homopolymer is produced by
different processes, including, but not
limited to, suspension process,
dispersion process, suspension blending
process, and bulk process.
*
*
*
*
*
Process component means any unit
operation or group of unit 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,
pressure vessels, process condensers,
process tanks, recovery devices, and
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71524
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
resin strippers, as defined in this
section.
Process condenser means a condenser
whose primary purpose is to recover
material as an integral part of a batch or
continuous process. All condensers
recovering condensate from a batch or
continuous 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 or continuous 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 vent means a vent stream that
is the result of the manifolding of each
and all batch process vent, continuous
process vent, or miscellaneous vent
resulting from the affected facility into
a closed vent system and into a common
header that is routed to a control device.
The process vent standards apply at the
outlet of the control device. A process
vent is either a PVC process vent or a
PVC-combined process vent.
*
*
*
*
*
Product means a polymer produced
using vinyl chloride monomer and
varying in additives (e.g., initiators,
terminators, etc.); catalysts; or in the
relative proportions of vinyl chloride
monomer with one or more other
monomers, and 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.
PVC-combined process vent means a
process vent that originates from a
PVCPU and is combined with one or
more process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer
or ethylene dichloride prior to being
controlled or emitted to the atmosphere.
A vent stream originating from process
components associated with the
stripped resin downstream of the resin
stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
is not considered a PVC-combined
process vent.
PVC process vent means a process
vent that originates from a PVCPU and
is not combined with one or more
process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer
or ethylene dichloride prior to being
controlled or emitted to the atmosphere.
A vent stream originating from process
components associated with the
stripped resin downstream of the resin
stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
is not considered a PVC process vent.
*
*
*
*
*
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 or other
subpart referenced by this subpart, is
inspected as specified in § 63.11930(f) to
verify that emissions from the
equipment are below the applicable leak
definition.
*
*
*
*
*
Total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
means, for the purposes of this subpart,
the sum of the measured concentrations
of each HAP, as calculated according to
the procedures specified in
§§ 63.11960(f) and 63.11980(b) or the
sum of the mass emission rates of each
HAP, as calculated according to the
procedures specified in § 63.11960(h).
Type of resin means the broad
classification of PVC homopolymer and
copolymer resin referring to the basic
manufacturing process for producing
that resin, including, but not limited to,
suspension, dispersion, suspension
blending, and bulk.
Vapor balancing system means:
(1) A piping system that collects HAP
vapors displaced from transport
vehicles (i.e., railcar, tank truck, barge)
during storage vessel loading and routes
the collected vapors to the storage vessel
from which the HAP being loaded
originated or to another storage vessel
connected to a common header, without
emissions to the atmosphere; or
(2) A piping system that collects HAP
vapors displaced from the loading of a
storage vessel and routes the collected
vapors to the transport vehicle from
which the storage vessel is filled,
without emissions to the atmosphere.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 32. Table 1 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is amended by revising the table
heading and row 1.a to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES
NOT COMPLYING WITH § 63.11880(D)
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 . . .
1. PVC process vents a ....................................
a. Vinyl chloride ..........
All resin types .............
6.0 parts per million by volume (ppmv).
*
*
a Emission
*
*
*
*
*
*
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
33. Table 1b to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is added to read as follows:
■
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
*
71525
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1B TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES
COMPLYING WITH § 63.11880(D)
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 . . .
1. PVC process
vents a.
a. Vinyl chloride ......................
All resin types .........................
0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons ............
c. Total organic HAP b ............
d. Hydrogen chloride ..............
e. Dioxins/furans (toxic
equivalency basis).
a. Vinyl chloride ......................
All
All
All
All
5.1 ppmv measured as propane.
22 ppmv.
0.64 ppmv.
0.035 ng/dscm.
All resin types .........................
0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons ............
c. Total organic HAP b ............
d. Hydrogen chloride ..............
e. Dioxins/furans (toxic
equivalency basis).
a. Vinyl chloride ......................
All
All
All
All
9.1 ppmv measured as propane.
9.7 ppmv.
3.9 ppmv.
0.68 ng/dscm.
2. PVC-combined process
vents a.
3. Stripped resin
b. Total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP.
4. Process
Wastewater.
a. Vinyl chloride ......................
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
types
types
types
types
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
i. Bulk resin .............................
ii. Dispersion resin ..................
iii. Suspension resin ...............
iv. Suspension blending resin
v. Copolymer resin .................
i. Bulk resin .............................
7.1 ppmw; or 0.0071 grams per kilogram of product resin,
dry basis (g/kg).c
1300 ppmw; or 1.3 g/kg.c
37 ppmw; or 0.037 g/kg.c
140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.c
790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.c
170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.c
ii. Dispersion resin ..................
iii. Suspension resin ...............
iv. Suspension blending resin
v. Copolymer resin .................
All resin types .........................
240 ppmw; or 0.24
670 ppmw; or 0.67
500 ppmw; or 0.50
1900 ppmw; or 1.9
0.73 ppmw.
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
a Emission
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
organic HAP is alternative compliance limit for THC.
c If you elect to comply with the g/kg alternative mass emission limit for resins, you must comply with the requirements specified in
§ 63.11960(b)(2).
b Total
34. Table 2 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is amended by revising the table
■
heading and rows 1.a, 2.e, and 3.a.i. to
read as follows:
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR NEW AFFECTED SOURCES NOT
COMPLYING WITH § 63.11880(D)
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 . . .
1. PVC process vents a .......
a. Vinyl chloride .........................................
All resin types .....................
0.56 ppmv.
*
2. PVC-combined process
vents a.
*
3. Stripped resin ..................
*
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
*
e. Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis)
a. Vinyl chloride .........................................
*
a Emission
*
*
*
*
All resin types .....................
i. Bulk resin .........................
*
0.034 ng/dscm.
7.1 ppmw.
*
*
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
*
*
09NOP2
*
71526
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2B TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR NEW AFFECTED SOURCES
COMPLYING WITH § 63.11880(D)
And for an affected source
producing this type of PVC
resin . . .
You must meet this emission limit . . .
a. Vinyl chloride .......................
b. Total hydrocarbons ..............
c. Total organic HAP b .............
d. Hydrogen chloride ...............
e. Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
a. Vinyl chloride .......................
All
All
All
All
All
0.85 ppmv.
2.2 ppmv measured as propane.
1.3 ppmv.
0.17 ppmv.
0.035 ng/dscm.
All resin types ..........................
0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons ..............
c. Total organic HAP b .............
d. Hydrogen chloride ...............
e. Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency basis).
a. Vinyl chloride .......................
All
All
All
All
2.2 ppmv measured as propane.
5.9 ppmv.
1.4 ppmv.
0.051 ng/dscm.
For this type of emission
point . . .
And for this air pollutant . . .
1. PVC process vents a ............
2. PVC-combined process
vents a.
3. Stripped resin .......................
b. Total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP.
4. Process Wastewater ............
a. Vinyl chloride .......................
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
resin
types
types
types
types
types
types
types
types
types
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
i. Bulk resin ..............................
ii. Dispersion resin ...................
iii. Suspension resin ................
iv. Suspension blending resin ..
v. Copolymer—all resin types ..
i. Bulk resin ..............................
7.1 ppmw; or 0.0071 g/kg.c
480 ppmw; or 0.48 g/kg.c
7.3 ppmw; or 0.0073 g/kg.c
140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.c
790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.c
170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.c
ii. Dispersion resin ...................
iii. Suspension resin ................
iv. Suspension blending resin ..
v. Copolymer resin ..................
All resin types ..........................
66 ppmw; or 0.066
15 ppmw; or 0.015
500 ppmw; or 0.50
1900 ppmw; or 1.9
0.57 ppmw.
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
g/kg.c
a Emission
limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
organic HAP is alternative compliance limit for THC.
you elect to comply with the g/kg alternative mass emission limit for resins, you must comply with the requirements specified in
§ 63.11960(b)(2).
b Total
c If
36. Table 3 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is revised to read as follows:
■
TABLE 3 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 a
(psia) is . . .
≥20,000 but <40,000 ......
≥4
≥40,000 ..........................
Any capacity ...................
≥0.75
>11.1
All other capacity and vapor pressure
combinations.
a Maximum
Then, you must use . . .
an internal or external floating roof storage vessel and meet the requirements in § 63.11910(b) or a
fixed roof storage vessel vented to a closed vent system and control device achieving 95 weight
percent HAP reduction and meet the requirements of § 63.11910(d).
a pressure vessel and meet the requirements of § 63.11910(c).
a fixed roof and meet the requirements of § 63.11910(a).
true vapor pressure.
37. Table 4 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is amended by revising the
entries for ‘‘§ 63.10(b)(2)(ii)’’ and
■
‘‘§ 63.10(c)(10),’’ removing the entry
‘‘63.10(c)(11), (c)(12)’’ and adding the
entry ‘‘§ 63.10(c)(11), (c)(12)’’ in its
place, and revising the entry
‘‘§ 63.10(d)(5)’’ to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63
Citation
Subject
Applies to subpart
HHHHHHH
Comment
*
*
§ 63.10(b)(2)(ii) .............................
*
*
*
Recordkeeping of malfunctions ..........................................................
*
No ............................
*
........................
*
*
§ 63.10(c)(10) ...............................
*
*
*
Recording nature and cause of malfunctions .....................................
*
No ............................
*
........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
71527
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63—Continued
Citation
Subject
Applies to subpart
HHHHHHH
Comment
§ 63.10(c)(11), (c)(12) ..................
Recording corrective actions ..............................................................
No ............................
........................
*
*
§ 63.10(d)(5) .................................
*
*
*
SSM reports ........................................................................................
*
No ............................
*
........................
*
*
*
38. Table 5 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is amended by:
■
*
b. Revising the entries for
‘‘Regeneration stream flow’’ and
‘‘Adsorber bed temperature’’ (both
entries);
■ c. Removing the entry ‘‘Vacuum and
duratio of regeneration’’ and adding the
entry ‘‘Vacuum and duration of
regeneration’’ in its place;
■
a. Removing the entry for ‘‘Flow to/
from the control device’’ and adding the
entry ‘‘Presence or absence of flow to/
from the control device if flow could be
intermittent’’ in its place;
■
*
*
*
d. Revising the entries ‘‘Regeneration
frequency,’’ ‘‘Adsorber operation valve
sequencing and cycle time,’’ ‘‘Average
adsorber bed life,’’ and ‘‘Outlet VOC
concentration of the first adsorber bed
in series.’’
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS AND DATA MONITORING,
RECORDING AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS
For these control devices, you
must monitor these
operating
parameters . . .
Establish the following
operating limit during
your initial performance
test . . .
*
Presence or absence of flow
to/from the control device if
flow could be intermittent.
*
Regeneration stream flow ........
Data measurement
Data recording
Data averaging period for
compliance
*
*
Indication of absence of flow—
note that absence of flow
can be determined when
process is not operating
using simulated flow.
*
Episodic ...................................
*
*
Date and time when flow stops
during process operation
and when flow begins after
stopping during process operation.
*
Time period between flow stop
and start.
*
Continuous ...............................
*
*
Every 15 minutes .....................
Adsorber bed temperature .......
*
*
Minimum total flow per regeneration cycle.
Maximum temperature .............
Adsorber bed temperature .......
Minimum temperature ..............
Every 15 minutes after regeneration and within 15 minutes of completing any temperature regulation.
Every 15 minutes during regeneration cycle.
Vacuum and duration of regeneration.
Regeneration frequency ...........
Minimum vacuum and period
of time for regeneration.
Minimum regeneration frequency and duration.
Correct valve sequencing and
minimum cycle time.
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 ...............................
*
Total flow for each regeneration cycle.
3-hour block average.
Adsorber operation valve sequencing and cycle time.
*
Average adsorber bed life ........
Outlet VOC concentration of
the first adsorber bed in series.
*
*
Adsorber bed change-out time
[N/A for initial performance
test].
Limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
of this subpart.
*
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum
frequencies
*
39. Table 8 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 amended by revising the
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:39 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
Continuous ...............................
Daily .........................................
*
Daily until breakthrough for
three adsorber bed changeouts.
Daily, except monthly (if more
than 2 months bed life remaining) or weekly (if more
than 2 weeks bed life remaining).
*
*
Every 15 minutes during regeneration cycle.
Date and time of regeneration
start and stop.
Daily .........................................
Average vacuum and duration
of regeneration.
Date and time of regeneration
start and stop.
Daily
*
*
Outlet VOC concentration .......
*
Average time for three
adsorber bed change-outs
Outlet VOC concentration .......
Daily, weekly, or monthly.
*
*
heading to the first column and row 6.c
to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Average of regeneration cycle.
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
09NOP2
*
71528
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to
this subpart for the following pollutant . . .
You must . . .
*
*
6. Any pollutant from a continuous, batch,
or combination of continuous and batch
process vent(s).
*
Using . . .
*
*
*
*
*
*
c. Conduct gas molecular weight analysis and correct
concentrations the specified percent oxygen in Table
1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Method 3, 3A, or 3B at 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A–2, using the same sampling site and time as HAP samples.
*
*
*
40. Table 9 to subpart HHHHHHH of
part 63 is amended by revising rows 3
and 4 to read as follows:
■
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING SAMPLING OF STRIPPED RESIN AND
PROCESS WASTEWATER
For demonstrating . . .
*
*
3. Initial compliance ...............................
4. Continuous compliance .....................
For the following
emission points
and types of
processes . . .
Collect samples according to the following schedule . . .
Vinyl chloride . . .
Total non-vinyl chloride organic
HAP . . .
*
N/A ........................
N/A ........................
*
*
1 grab or composite sample .................
1 grab or composite sample per month
*
*
1 grab or composite sample.
1 grab or composite sample per
month.
Fmt 4701
09NOP2
[FR Doc. 2020–23387 Filed 11–6–20; 8:45 am]
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Nov 06, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\09NOP2.SGM
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 217 (Monday, November 9, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71490-71528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23387]
[[Page 71489]]
Vol. 85
Monday,
No. 217
November 9, 2020
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers Production Reconsideration; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 217 / Monday, November 9, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 71490]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037; FRL-10015-41-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR73
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Reconsideration
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; reconsideration of final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 17, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) promulgated National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)
Production at major and area sources. Subsequently, the Administrator
received and granted petitions for reconsideration of the emission
limits in the 2012 final rules for process vents, process wastewater,
and stripped resin for major and area sources. In response to the
petitions and after gathering additional information from PVC
companies, the EPA is proposing revisions to emission limits in the
2012 major source rule for process vents and process wastewater.
Although the EPA is not proposing revisions to emission limits in the
2012 area source rule, the EPA is proposing other amendments that
affect both rules, including technical corrections and clarifications
related to the standards for stripped resin, storage vessels (including
the use of vapor balancing), equipment leaks, and closed vent systems.
The EPA is also proposing to clarify text and correct typographical
errors, grammatical errors, and cross-reference errors in both rules.
In addition, the EPA is proposing to remove the affirmative defense
provisions. We estimate that, if finalized, these proposed amendments
would result in hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions reductions of
34 tons per year (tpy) with an annualized cost of $0.39 million.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 8, 2021. Under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the information
collection provisions are best assured of consideration if the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or
before December 9, 2020.
Public hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing
on or before November 16, 2020, we will hold a virtual public hearing.
See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on requesting and
registering for a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0037, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2002-0037 in the subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2002-0037.
Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery or Courier (by scheduled appointment only):
EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center's hours of operation
are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-Friday (except Federal holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. Out of an abundance of caution
for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and
Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited exceptions, to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will
continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and
webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ or email, as there may be a delay in processing
mail and faxes. For further information on EPA Docket Center services
and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed
action, contact Ms. Jennifer Caparoso, 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) 541-4063; fax number: (919) 541-0516;
and email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Participation in virtual public hearing. Please note that the EPA
is deviating from its typical approach because the President has
declared a national emergency. Due to the current Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations, as well as state and
local orders for social distancing to limit the spread of COVID-19, the
EPA cannot hold in-person public meetings at this time.
If requested, the virtual hearing will be held on November 24,
2020. The hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time (ET) and will
conclude at 3:00 p.m. ET. The EPA may close a session 15 minutes after
the last pre-registered speaker has testified if there are not
additional speakers. The EPA will announce further details on the
virtual public hearing website at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymers-production-national-emission-0.
The EPA will begin pre-registering speakers for the hearing upon
publication of this document in the Federal Register. To register to
speak at the virtual hearing, please use the online registration form
available at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymers-production-national-emission-0 or
contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541-0832 or by email at
[email protected]. The last day to pre-register to speak at the
hearing will be November 23, 2020. Prior to the hearing, the EPA will
post a general agenda that will list pre-registered speakers in
approximate order at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymers-production-national-emission-0.
The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the
hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.
Each commenter will have 5 minutes to provide oral testimony. The
EPA encourages commenters to provide the EPA with a copy of their oral
testimony electronically by emailing it to [email protected].
The EPA also recommends submitting the text of your oral testimony as
written comments to the rulemaking docket.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations
but will
[[Page 71491]]
not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and
supporting information submitted during the comment period will be
considered with the same weight as oral testimony and supporting
information presented at the public hearing.
Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the hearing will
be posted online at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymers-production-national-emission-0. While the EPA expects the hearing to go forward as set
forth above, if requested, please monitor our website or contact Ms.
Virginia Hunt at 919-541-0832 or [email protected] to determine if
there are any updates. The EPA does not intend to publish a document in
the Federal Register announcing updates.
If you require the services of a translator or a special
accommodation such as audio description, please pre-register for the
hearing with Virginia Hunt and describe your needs by November 16,
2020. The EPA may not be able to arrange accommodations without advance
notice.
Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. All documents in the docket are
listed in Regulations.gov. Although listed, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically in
Regulations.gov.
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2002-0037. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Do not submit electronically any information that you consider
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statue. This type of information should be submitted by mail as
discussed below.
The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
The https://www.regulations.gov/ website allows you to submit your
comment anonymously, which means the EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
https://www.regulations.gov/, your email 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, the EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification,
the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files
should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be
free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the
EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
The EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading
Room for public visitors, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk
of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to
provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We
encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ as there may be a delay in processing mail and
faxes. Hand deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled
appointment only. For further information and updates on EPA Docket
Center services, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the CDC, local area health departments, and our federal partners
so that we can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. Clearly mark the part or
all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on
any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of
the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically
within the digital storage media the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments
that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the
comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly
to the public docket through the procedures outlined in Instructions
above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain
CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does
not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the
public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior
notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the
following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. Note that
written comments containing CBI and submitted by mail may be delayed
and no hand deliveries will be accepted.
Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA
defines the following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CEMS continuous emission monitoring systems
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ET Eastern Time
GACT generally achievable control technology
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
HON Hazardous Organic NESHAP
ICR Information Collection Request
LDAR leak detection and repair
MACT maximum achievable control technology
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ppm parts per million
ppmvd parts per million by volume dry
ppmw parts per million by weight
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
[[Page 71492]]
PRD pressure relief device
PVC polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
PVCPU PVC production process unit
RDL representative detection level
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SSM startup, shutdown, and malfunction
TEQ toxic equivalency
THC total hydrocarbons
TOHAP total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UPL upper prediction limit
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration
action?
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
II. Background
III. Reconsideration Issues, Request for Public Comments, and Other
Proposed Changes
A. Process Vents
B. Process Wastewater
C. Stripped Resin
D. Storage Vessels
E. Affected Source
F. Equipment Leaks
G. Closed Vent Systems
H. Affirmative Defense
I. Other Technical Corrections and Clarifications
IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and
1 CFR Part 51
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration action?
The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections 112
and 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7412 and
7607(d)(7)(B)).
B. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action are shown in Table 1 of this preamble.
Table 1--Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Proposed Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NESHAP and source category NAICS \1\ code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production............ 325211
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action for the source categories listed. To determine
whether your facility is affected, you should examine the applicability
criteria in the appropriate NESHAP. If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of any aspect of these NESHAP, please contact the
person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this preamble.
C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this action is available on the internet. Following signature by the
EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and-copolymers-production-national-emission-0. Following
publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal
Register version of the proposal at this same website.
A redline version of the regulatory language that incorporates the
proposed changes in this action and supporting technical documents are
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
II. Background
On July 10, 2002, the EPA promulgated the NESHAP for new and
existing PVC production facilities located at major sources in 40 CFR
part 63, subpart J (67 FR 45886). In that rulemaking, the EPA regulated
vinyl chloride as a surrogate for all HAP emitted from PVC production
and determined that the existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61,
subpart F) reflected the application of maximum achievable control
technology (MACT), thereby satisfying CAA section 112(d), except for
equipment leaks at new sources. For equipment leaks, the EPA required
that new sources comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU.
In October 2003, Mossville Environmental Action Now and Sierra Club
argued in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (the court) that the EPA had failed to set emission
standards for all HAP emitted by PVC plants. See Mossville
Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d at 1232 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The
EPA argued that it set emission standards for vinyl chloride as a
surrogate for all HAP emitted from the source category because it was
the predominant HAP used and emitted at PVC plants; however, the court
ruled that the EPA did not adequately explain the basis for its
decision to use vinyl chloride as a surrogate for the HAP other than
vinyl chloride. 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.'' Id. at 370 F.3d at 1243.
On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930), the EPA promulgated the NESHAP
for new and existing PVC production area sources in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, based on generally achievable control technology (GACT)
under CAA section 112(d)(5), and required area sources to meet the
requirements in the existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61,
subpart F).
On April 17, 2012 (77 FR 22848), in response to the 2004 court
remand in Mossville Environmental Action Now, the EPA finalized the
NESHAP for PVC production at major sources under CAA sections 112(d)(2)
and (3). In the same rulemaking, the EPA revised the area source
standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). The April 17, 2012, final major
and area source rules (herein referred to as the ``2012 final major and
area source rules'') established emission limits and work practice
standards for total organic HAP, and also for three specific HAP: Vinyl
chloride, chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans (dioxins and furans),
and hydrogen chloride (HCl).\1\ To determine the
[[Page 71493]]
emissions limits and work practice standards, the EPA gathered
information on PVC production through public comment, 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. Also, in
the form of an electronic survey and emission testing of HAP, the EPA
collected information from PVC production facilities, as well as co-
located ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride facilities. All Agency
correspondence related to the data gathering activities is provided in
the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EPA did not set emission limits or work practice
standards for HCl from PVC area sources. Under CAA sections
112(c)(6) and 112(k), HCl was not determined to be one of the top 30
urban air toxics that pose the greatest potential health threat in
urban areas; thus, regulation as an area source is not warranted.
For additional details, see https://www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/area/arearules.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2012, the EPA received four petitions for reconsideration
on the 2012 final major and area source rules pursuant to CAA section
307(d)(7)(B) from the following petitioners: One petition from
environmental groups (i.e., Mossville Environmental Action Now,
Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Air Alliance Houston, and
Sierra Club); and three petitions from the regulated industry and their
representatives (i.e., PolyOne Corporation, Saint-Gobain Corporation
and CertainTeed Corporation, and Vinyl Institute, Inc.). Copies of the
petitions are provided in the docket for this rulemaking (see Docket
Item Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0544, EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0568, EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0037-0217, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0569). At the same time,
the above petitioners, along with OxyVinyls, LP, petitioned the court
for judicial review of the 2012 final major and area source rules. The
petitioners primarily requested the EPA reconsider the emission limits
for process vents, process wastewater, and stripped resin because they
argued that it was not feasible to comment on the new data on which the
EPA based the final emission limits. Petitioners also argued that they
were not afforded the opportunity to comment on the subcategorization
of process vents and stripped resin. Petitioners requested that the EPA
reconsider and/or make changes to several other portions of the 2012
final major and area source rules; including requests that the EPA: (1)
Set the emission limits using data that represents the entire industry;
(2) allow vapor balancing as a method to control emissions from storage
vessels; (3) allow leak detection and repair (LDAR) of pressure
vessels; (4) revise emission profile requirements; (5) remove the
requirement to install electronic indicators on each pressure relief
device (PRD) that would be able to identify and record the time and
duration of each pressure release; and (6) remove certain aspects of
the bypass monitoring requirements, and leak monitoring and inspection
requirements. In addition, one petitioner said the EPA's assumption
that emission levels vary to the full extent of the 99th percent upper
prediction limit (UPL) is wrong and unsupported by the record; and the
EPA's decision to set MACT floors at 3 times the representative
detection level (RDL) when 3 times the RDL is greater than the UPL is
unlawful.
On September 28, 2012, the EPA sent letters to petitioners (see
Docket Item Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0563 through EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-
0037-0566) informing them that: (1) The EPA was granting
reconsideration on at least petitioners' claims of inadequate
opportunity to comment on the emission limits for process vents,
process wastewater, and stripped resin for major and area sources; (2)
the EPA intended to issue a Federal Register document initiating notice
and comment rulemaking on the issues for which the Agency granted
reconsideration; and (3) the EPA was continuing to review the other
issues in the petitions for reconsideration and intended to take final
action on all issues no later than the date on which the EPA takes
final action on the reconsidered issues.
In 2014, Mexichem Specialty Resins, Inc., Vinyl Institute, Inc.,
Saint-Gobain Corporation and CertainTeed Corporation, and OxyVinyls, LP
(Industry petitioners) petitioned the court to remove their case from
abeyance.\2\ The court removed the industry petitioners' cases from
abeyance and, on May 29, 2015, the court rejected the Industry
petitioners' arguments and denied their petitions for review. Mexichem
Specialty Resins, Inc. v. EPA, 787 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2015). Based on
this court decision, we consider all of the Industry petitioners'
reconsideration requests related to the interaction between non-PVC and
PVC-combined process vent limits and their subcategorization, vent gas
absorbers, PRDs, and bypasses to be resolved, as those issues were
addressed by the court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The petition for judicial review filed on behalf of Air
Alliance Houston, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Mossville
Environmental Action Now, and Sierra Club, was severed from the
industry case and is in abeyance pending the EPA's action on
reconsideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, on August 20, 2013, the court issued its decision in
National Association of Clean Water Agencies v. EPA, which involved
challenges to the EPA's MACT standards for Sewage Sludge Incineration,
issued under CAA section 129. See 734 F.3d 1115. In this decision, the
court remanded certain aspects of the rule for further explanation,
including the question of how the UPL represents the MACT floor for new
and existing units, as required by the CAA. The Sewage Sludge
Incineration rule was issued on the same day as the Boilers and
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration rules, and used the
same general methodology for calculating the MACT floors. For this
reason, the EPA requested an opportunity to supplement the record in
pending challenges to the Boilers and Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration rules, to provide the explanation of the Agency's
analysis of variability in setting the MACT floor standards that the
court believed was needed in the record for the Sewage Sludge
Incineration rule. The court granted the EPA's motion for a remand of
the record on May 15, 2014. Details of how the UPL is used to calculate
the average emissions limitation achieved over time by the best
performing source or sources is documented in the memorandum, Use of
the Upper Prediction Limit for Calculating MACT Floors, which is
available in the docket for this rulemaking. We also note that on July
29, 2016, the court determined our UPL approach is reasonable in U.S.
Sugar Corp v. EPA, 830 F.3d 579, 639. Based on these details, we
consider all of the petitioners' requests related to the EPA's
methodology used to set MACT floors to be resolved.
We considered all other reconsideration petition requests and
consolidated and grouped the issues for which we are granting
reconsideration into distinct topics which are discussed in section III
of this preamble.
III. Reconsideration Issues, Request for Public Comments, and Other
Proposed Changes
To address selected issues raised in the four petitions for
reconsideration and not resolved by the May 29, 2015, court decision
(787 F.3d 544) as described above, the EPA is proposing revisions to
the emission limits in the 2012 major source rule for process vents and
process wastewater. In addition, the EPA is proposing other amendments
to the 2012 final major and area source rules, including technical
corrections and clarifications related to the standards for stripped
resin, storage vessels (including the use of vapor balancing),
equipment leaks, and closed vent systems. The EPA is also proposing to
clarify text and correct typographical errors, grammatical errors, and
cross-
[[Page 71494]]
reference errors in both rules. In addition, the EPA is proposing to
remove the affirmative defense provisions. To ensure public
participation in its final decisions, the EPA is requesting public
comment on only these specific issues as described below. The EPA will
not respond to any comments addressing any other provisions of the 2012
final major and area source rules or any other rules or issues.
A. Process Vents
Following the 2011 proposal (76 FR 29528), the EPA received
comments and additional emissions data about process vents, and we used
this information to revise the process vent MACT floors and impacts for
the 2012 final major source rule. Details regarding the post-proposal
data submittals are discussed in the memorandum, Updated Information
Collection and Additional Data Received for the Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, which is available in the
docket for this rulemaking (see Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-
0197). In the 2012 final major and area source rules, we established
process vent emission limits for vinyl chloride, dioxins and furans,
and total hydrocarbons (THC) or total organic HAP. For the 2012 final
major source rule, we also established process vent emission limits for
HCl as a surrogate for all acid gas HAP and chlorine gas. For the 2012
final area source rule, the process vent emission limits are based on
the baseline level of control (i.e., the control level that area
sources were meeting for existing and new sources) and the testing and
monitoring requirements are the same as the 2012 final major source
rule. To ensure that batch process vent streams are tested at worst-
case conditions, in the 2012 final major and area source rules, we
required that each batch process vent stream be characterized under
worst-case conditions by developing an emission profile. Also, in the
2012 final major and area source rules, we clarified the definitions
for process vent, continuous process vent, and batch process vent and
added a definition for miscellaneous vent. Refer to the preamble of the
2012 final major and area source rules (see section III of the 2012
final preamble, 77 FR 22850) for additional details about the process
vent standards.
Petitioners primarily argue that it was not feasible to comment on
the new data on which the EPA based the final process vent emission
limits and subcategories; and as previously mentioned in section II of
this preamble, on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted reconsideration
on the process vent emission limits. We request public comments on the
process vent emission limits and subcategories. However, as discussed
later in this section of the preamble, we are also proposing to make
changes to the process vent emission limits and subcategories;
therefore, we also request public comments on these changes. In
addition, a petitioner said the EPA did not provide opportunity to
comment on the new, broader requirements for emission profiles that we
added to the 2012 final major and area source rules. The petitioner
also said the EPA did not provide opportunity to comment on the changes
we made in the 2012 final major and area source rules to the
definitions of process vent, continuous process vent, and batch process
vent or the new definition for miscellaneous vent. The EPA is granting
reconsideration on these other issues. Although we are not making any
changes to the requirements in the 2012 final major and area source
rules for emission profiles or to the definitions of process vent,
continuous process vent, batch process vent, and miscellaneous vent, we
request public comments on these requirements and definitions for the
reasons set forth in the 2012 final rules (see sections III.D.1 and V.I
of the 2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22855 and 22890).
In response to the petitioner's claims, the EPA issued a CAA
section 114 Information Collection Request (ICR) on May 15, 2014, to
PVC production companies to gather data to inform the reconsideration
and potential revision of the process vent emission limits in the 2012
final major and area source rules (see Docket Item Nos. EPA-OAR-2002-
0037-0600, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0601, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0602, EPA-OAR-
2002-0037-0603, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0604, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0605, EPA-
OAR-2002-0037-0622, and EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0623). The data collected are
discussed in the memorandum, Technical Analysis and Documentation to
Support EPA's Reconsideration of 40 CFR part 63 Subpart HHHHHHH
National Emission Standards for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
(PVC) Production Source Category, which is available in the docket for
this rulemaking. After reviewing all of the additional process vent
data that we collected since the promulgation of the 2012 final major
and area source rules, we are proposing changes to those rules.
First, we are proposing changes to the 2012 final major and area
source rules related to the two subcategories for process vents (i.e.,
the ``PVC-only process vent'' and ``PVC-combined process vent''
subcategories). Although we are not proposing to change our
justification for establishing these two subcategories for process
vents (see section III.B of the 2012 final preamble, 77 FR 22850), we
are proposing to rename the ``PVC-only process vent'' subcategory the
``PVC process vent'' subcategory and revise the definition at 40 CFR
63.12005 such that a ``PVC process vent'' means a process vent that
originates from a PVC production process unit (PVCPU) and is not
combined with one or more process vents originating from the production
of vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene dichloride prior to being
controlled or emitted to the atmosphere. We are also proposing to
revise the definition of ``PVC-combined process vent'' at 40 CFR
63.12005 such that a ``PVC-combined process vent'' means a process vent
that originates from a PVCPU and is combined with one or more process
vents originating from the production of vinyl chloride monomer or
ethylene dichloride prior to being controlled or emitted to the
atmosphere. In other words, instead of a vent which is combined with
one or more process vents originating from any other source category
(as is the case in the 2012 final major and area source rules), we are
narrowing the definition of a ``PVC-combined process vent'' to refer to
a vent that is combined with one or more process vents originating from
the production of vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene
dichloride.3 4 These proposed definition changes more
accurately reflect the additional process vent data that we collected
since the promulgation of the 2012 final major and area source rules,
given that owners and operators of some vinyl chloride monomer or
ethylene dichloride production units combine their vinyl chloride
monomer, ethylene dichloride, and PVC process vents into one stream
prior to control and these combined streams have higher chlorinated
loads and flow rates than a PVC process vent (as defined in this
proposal). These proposed definition changes will impact
[[Page 71495]]
the subcategory designations of two PVC facilities if finalized as
proposed. Both facilities currently are in the ``PVC-combined process
vent'' subcategory and with the proposed definition changes, the
facilities would be in the ``PVC process vent'' subcategory. The
impacts to the emission limits for each of the proposed subcategories
due to the proposed definition changes are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ We are also including a sentence in each of these
definitions to clarify that vent streams from process components
associated with the stripped resin downstream of the resin stripper
(e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters) are not considered a PVC
process vent or a PVC-combined process vent because these vent
streams are subject to the stripped resin standards (see section
III.C of this preamble).
\4\ We note that although these proposed changes are being made
directly in the 2012 final major source rule, these proposed changes
also result in revisions to the 2012 final area source rule because
40 CFR 63.11144(b) references 40 CFR 63.12005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, in light of the court's decision in Mexichem Specialty
Resins, Inc. v. EPA, 787 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2015), we are clarifying
at 40 CFR 63.11925(a) that if an applicable process vent stream at a
PVCPU is comingled with a vent stream from one or more non-PVCPU
sources (e.g., a vent stream from a vinyl chloride monomer, ethylene
dichloride production, or other chemical manufacturing process unit
subject to the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON), 40 CFR part 63, subparts
G, F, and H), and the comingled streams are vented through a shared
control device, then each emission standard (and subsequent control
device monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting, and other requirements)
from both the PVC NESHAP and any other NESHAP to which the comingled
vent stream is subject applies. In Mexichem Specialty Resins, Inc. v.
EPA, the court ruled that if ``a PVC manufacturer chooses to discharge
combined emissions from PVC and non-PVC processes through a single
vent, that manufacturer must comply with limits applicable to both and,
where they differ, comply with the more stringent of the two.'' For
this reason, and to clarify what the rules are intended to regulate, we
are also proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.11140(c) by removing the last
sentence and 40 CFR 63.11865 by removing the phrase ``or to chemical
manufacturing process units, as defined in Sec. 63.101, that produce
vinyl chloride monomer or other raw materials used in the production of
polyvinyl chloride and copolymers'' and we are proposing at 40 CFR
63.12005 to remove the last sentence in the definition of PVCPU. We
note that although the proposed changes at 40 CFR 63.11925(a) and 40
CFR 63.12005 are being made directly in the 2012 final major source
rule, these proposed changes also result in revision to the 2012 final
area source rule because 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8) references 40 CFR
63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11144 references 40 CFR 63.12005.
Third, given that we are proposing to revise the definitions of
``PVC process vent'' and ``PVC-combined process vent'' as discussed
above (and which are referenced in the area source rule), we are also
proposing to amend the emission limits for PVC-combined process vents
in the 2012 final area source rule by eliminating the PVC-combined
process vent limits in the area source rule and instead require ``PVC-
combined process vents'' at area sources to meet the major source
process vent emission limits for ``PVC-combined process vents.'' Based
on the additional process vent data that we collected since the
promulgation of the 2012 final major and area source rules, we
determined that any facility producing vinyl chloride monomer and/or
ethylene dichloride is a major source (as defined in CAA section
112(a)) subject to the HON. Therefore, taking into consideration our
proposed definition of ``PVC-combined process vent,'' we do not believe
that there is any scenario where a PVC production area source can
combine its process vents with one or more process vents originating
from the production of vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene dichloride
and that combined process vent be routed to a control device being used
to comply with only an area source NESHAP. We estimate that there would
be no impact on any facility for making this change (i.e., to eliminate
the emission limits for PVC-combined process vents in the 2012 final
area source rule and instead require ``PVC-combined process vents'' at
an area source meet the major source process vent emission limits). We
are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11141(f) that all affected area sources that
commenced construction or reconstruction on or before May 20, 2011,
must be in compliance with this change within 3 years after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. We also are
proposing at 40 CFR 63.11141(f) that all affected area sources that
commenced construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with this change upon the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register or initial startup, whichever is later. We
are not aware of any sources that have commenced construction or
reconstruction after May 20, 2011, which would be impacted by the
application of the changes.
Fourth, we are proposing to revise the process vent emission limits
in the 2012 final major source rule. As part of the May 15, 2014, CAA
section 114 ICR, we asked for sampling and analysis of HAP including
vinyl chloride, HCl, dioxins/furans, and THC from process vents
operating at maximum mass loading of all HAP compounds under normal
operation at eight PVC production facilities. Those data were
incorporated with the previously submitted data used to support the
2012 final major source rule process vent emission limits. We then
recalculated the process vent emission limits for vinyl chloride, total
organic HAP, HCl, dioxins/furans, and THC accounting for the additional
data received in response to the May 15, 2014, CAA section 114 ICR and
also accounting for the change in subcategory for two PVC facilities
based on our proposed revisions to the process vent subcategory
definitions. To account for variability, we calculated the proposed
MACT floors for vinyl chloride, total organic HAP, HCl, and dioxins/
furans for existing and new sources using a 99-percent UPL calculation.
Given the large amount of data obtained, we calculated the proposed
MACT floors for THC for existing and new sources using a 99-percent
upper limit calculation. Tables 2 and 3 of this preamble compare the
2012 final major source rule PVC process vent emission limits and PVC-
combined process vent emission limits, respectively, to the process
vent emission limits that we are proposing in this action. Also, as
part of a beyond-the-floor analysis, we analyzed the cost and emissions
reductions for an existing facility to install a refrigerated condenser
prior to the existing thermal oxidizer and acid gas scrubber to meet
the proposed new source standards for process vents; and we determined
that the overall annual cost would be $7.2 million, and the annual
emissions reductions would be 105 tons of HAP per year (approximately
$68,000/ton cost effectiveness). Furthermore, the only beyond-the-floor
option we identified for new sources is a refrigerated condenser prior
to the thermal oxidizer and acid gas scrubber. However, similar to the
analysis for existing sources, installing a refrigerated condenser
prior to the thermal oxidizer and acid gas scrubber at a new source to
achieve beyond-the-MACT-floor level of control would also not be cost
effective (i.e., higher cost with potentially less HAP removal than
existing sources). We did not identify any other measures or control
technologies to further reduce emissions from process vents in the PVC
production industry. Based on this analysis, we are proposing that it
is not cost effective to go beyond-the-floor for process vents at
existing or new sources. Our emission limit calculations, beyond-the-
floor analysis, and the methodology we used to calculate costs and
emission reductions are discussed in the memorandum, Technical Analysis
and Documentation to Support EPA's Reconsideration of 40 CFR part
[[Page 71496]]
63 Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission Standards for the Polyvinyl
Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, which is
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
Table 2--Comparison of 2012 Final Major Source Emission Limits and Proposed Emission Limits for PVC Process
Vents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 Final major rule emission Proposed emission limits for
limits for pvc process vents pvc process vents
Pollutant ---------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Existing
sources New sources sources New sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vinyl Chloride \1\.............................. 6.0 0.56 0.85 0.85
Total Organic HAP \1\........................... 56 5.5 22 1.3
HCl \1\......................................... 78 0.17 0.64 0.17
Dioxins/Furans \2\.............................. 0.038 0.038 0.035 0.035
THC \3\......................................... 9.7 7.0 5.1 2.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Parts per million by volume dry (ppmvd) @3-percent (%) oxygen (O2).
\2\ Nanograms per dry standard cubic meters (ng/dscm) @3% O2 toxic equivalency (TEQ).
\3\ ppmvd as propane @3% O2.
Table 3--Comparison of 2012 Final Major Source Emission Limits and Proposed Emission Limits for PVC-Combined
Process Vents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 final major rule emission Proposed emission limits for
limits for PVC- combined PVC-combined process vents
process vents -------------------------------
Pollutant --------------------------------
Existing Existing New sources
sources New sources sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vinyl Chloride \1\.............................. 1.1 0.56 0.85 0.85
Total Organic HAP \1\........................... 9.8 5.5 9.7 5.9
HCl \1\......................................... 380 1.4 3.9 1.4
Dioxins/Furans \2\.............................. 0.051 0.034 0.68 0.051
THC \3\......................................... 4.2 2.3 9.1 2.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ppmvd @3% O2.
\2\ ng/dscm @3% O2 TEQ.
\3\ ppmvd as propane @3% O2.
We are proposing the revised major source process vent emission
limits in new Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH; and
we are proposing that all affected major sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction on or before May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with these changes within 3 years after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. We also are
proposing that all affected major sources that commenced construction
or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must be in compliance with these
changes upon the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register or initial startup, whichever is later. We are not aware of
any major sources that have commenced construction or reconstruction
after May 20, 2011, which would be impacted by the application of the
changes. See proposed 40 CFR 63.11875(e). Also, at any time before
these compliance dates, we are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11880(d) that an
affected major source may choose to comply with the revised emission
limits in Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, in lieu
of the emission limits in Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. Also, as previously mentioned in section II of this preamble,
on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted reconsideration on the emission
limits. We are not making any changes to the process vent emission
limits in the area source rule; however, we request public comments on
these emission limits.
Finally, we are proposing to revise several paragraphs throughout
the 2012 final major and area source rules, (including process vent
related requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925 through 63.11950) to properly
reference the proposed Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. For example, for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, although 40
CFR 63.11925 is referenced in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8), we are proposing
to revise the introduction paragraph at 40 CFR 63.11142(f) to ensure
that whenever reference is made to Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, we mean Table 1 or 2 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, for purposes of compliance with the 2012 area source
process vent standards. We are also proposing several other editorial
corrections and clarifications to the process vent requirements in 40
CFR 63.11925 through 63.11950. These proposed amendments are discussed
in section III.I of this preamble.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., the revised
subcategories for process vents, the clarifications to 40 CFR
63.11140(c), 63.11865, 63.11925(a), and 63.12005 addressing comingled
vent streams, the elimination of the emission limits for PVC-combined
process vents in the 2012 final area source rule, the revised major
source process vent emission limits, the compliance dates, and whether
there are any sources that commenced construction after May 20, 2011).
Except for the proposed major source process vent emission limits, we
note (as previously mentioned) that all of the other proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble are also being proposed for
the 2012 area source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(8) through (13) and
63.11144 because 40 CFR 63.11925 through 63.11950 and 63.12005 are
referenced in those
[[Page 71497]]
requirements. If it is determined that there are sources that have
commenced construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, then we
will need to add additional requirements.
B. Process Wastewater
The 2012 final major source rule contains vinyl chloride and total
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP (TOHAP) emission limits for process
wastewater. For the 2012 final major source rule, the vinyl chloride
emission limits were calculated based on one year of sampling data
provided post-proposal by the industry. The major source TOHAP emission
limits were based on information and data provided by industry in
response to the August 21, 2009, CAA section 114 ICR, corrections to
those data provided by the PVC industry during the public comment
period, and supplemental wastewater sampling data provided during the
public comment period by one PVC manufacturer. The August 21, 2009, CAA
section 114 ICR is documented in the memoranda, Information Collection
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source
Category and Updated Information Collection and Additional Data
Received for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production
Source Category, which are available in the docket for this rulemaking
(see Docket Item Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0099 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-
0037-0197, respectively). Refer to the preamble of the 2012 final major
and area source rules (see section III of the 2012 final preamble, 77
FR 22850) for additional details about the emission limits for process
wastewater.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ We note that subsequent to the April 17, 2012, rulemaking,
PVC industry stakeholders notified the EPA that the data used to set
the new and existing area source TOHAP process wastewater emission
limits were not based on data from the PVC Production source
category. The EPA agreed with the PVC industry stakeholders and on
February 4, 2015, the EPA issued a direct final rule (80 FR 5938,
February 4, 2015) withdrawing the TOHAP process wastewater emission
standards in 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, for new and existing
PVC production area sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioners primarily argue that it was not feasible to comment on
the new data on which the EPA based the final process wastewater
emission limits; and as previously mentioned in section II of this
preamble, on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted reconsideration on
this issue. The petitioners argued that the EPA did not base the TOHAP
emission limits on emission levels actually achieved by the best
performing sources in the source category. One of the petitioners said
that the EPA did not provide rationale for why nine out of 18
facilities (for which it had data) represented the top performing
sources. Other petitioners argued that the data points do not reflect
actual samples of PVC facility process wastewater taken during actual
operations.
In response to the petitioner's claims, the EPA issued a CAA
section 114 ICR on November 8, 2012, to PVC production companies to
gather data to inform the reconsideration and potential revision of the
process wastewater emission limits in the 2012 final major and area
source rules. Also, the EPA issued an additional CAA section 114 ICR on
April 1, 2014, to two companies that were not included in the November
8, 2012, CAA section 114 request. These two CAA section 114 ICRs are
available in the docket for this rulemaking (see Docket Item Nos. EPA-
OAR-2002-0037-0543, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0592, EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0593, and
EPA-OAR-2002-0037-0594). The data collected are discussed in the
memorandum, Technical Analysis and Documentation to Support EPA's
Reconsideration of 40 CFR part 63 Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission
Standards for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production
Source Category, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
Each owner or operator was required to take one grab sample from each
PVC process wastewater treatment stream for 30 consecutive days and
then analyze the samples for specified HAP using the prescribed EPA
test methods. If a facility had a batch PVC operation that did not
operate 30 consecutive days, then it was required to collect samples at
least once for each day while any batch wastewater treatment system was
operating such that at least 30 samples were analyzed. Data were also
collected on other wastewater streams (i.e., streams not stripped and
streams slated for on-site or off-site biological treatment units),
including average flow rate characteristics, origination, and
destination information. After reviewing all of the additional process
wastewater data that we collected since the promulgation of the 2012
final major and area source rules, we are proposing changes to the 2012
final major and area source rules.
First, we are proposing to revise the process wastewater vinyl
chloride emission limit for major sources. Under the proposed
amendments, process wastewater streams at existing major sources would
be required to meet an emission limit of 0.73 parts per million by
weight (ppmw) for vinyl chloride (in lieu of the 6.8 ppmw vinyl
chloride process wastewater emission limit in the 2012 major source
rule for existing affected sources) before being exposed to the
atmosphere or discharged from the affected source (see proposed Table
1b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH). Process wastewater streams at
new major sources would be required to meet an emission limit of 0.57
ppmw for vinyl chloride (in lieu of the 0.28 ppmw vinyl chloride
process wastewater emission limit in the 2012 major source rule for new
affected sources) before being exposed to the atmosphere or discharged
from the affected source (see proposed Table 2b to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH). Given the large amount of data obtained, we
calculated these MACT floors (i.e., the proposed 0.73 ppmw and 0.57
ppmw vinyl chloride emission limits for existing and new major sources,
respectively) using a 99-percent upper limit calculation. Also, we
analyzed a beyond-the-floor option for controlling vinyl chloride from
process wastewater at existing sources, specifically evaluating the
cost and emissions reductions for an existing facility to meet the
level of control that we are proposing for new sources, based on
replacement of their existing wastewater steam stripper. We determined
that the overall annual cost (including installation and operation)
would be about $11 million, and the annual emissions reductions would
be 1.3 tons of HAP per year (approximately $8.6 million/ton cost
effectiveness). Furthermore, the only beyond-the-floor option we
identified for new sources is a larger or secondary steam stripper.
However, similar to the analysis for existing sources, installing a
larger or secondary steam stripper at a new source to achieve beyond-
the-MACT-floor level of control would also not be cost effective (i.e.,
higher cost with potentially less HAP removal than existing sources).
We did not identify any other measures or control technologies to
further reduce emissions from process wastewater in the PVC production
industry. Based on this analysis, we are proposing that it is not cost
effective to go beyond-the-floor for process wastewater at existing or
new sources. Our MACT floor emission limit calculations, beyond-the-
floor analysis, and the methodology we used to calculate costs and
emission reductions are discussed in the memorandum, Technical Analysis
and Documentation to Support EPA's Reconsideration of 40 CFR part 63
Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission Standards for the Polyvinyl Chloride
and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, which is available in
the docket for this rulemaking. Also, as previously
[[Page 71498]]
mentioned in section II of this preamble, on September 28, 2012, the
EPA granted reconsideration on the emission limits. We are not making
any changes to the wastewater emission limits in the area source rule;
however, we request public comments on these emission limits.
Second, we are proposing to remove the major source process
wastewater TOHAP emission limit and establish vinyl chloride as a
surrogate for TOHAP for major and area sources. As noted above,
petitioners argue that the EPA did not base the TOHAP emission limits
on emission levels actually achieved by the best performing sources in
the source category. One of the petitioners said that the EPA did not
set the MACT floor using data for the top performing sources. Another
petitioner argued that the data points do not reflect actual samples of
PVC facility process wastewater taken during actual operations. We are
proposing to eliminate the process wastewater TOHAP emission limit and
to be more fully responsive to the court's original request that the
EPA ``properly explain its methodology for regulating [HAP] emitted in
PVC production other than vinyl chloride by use of a surrogate.'' See
Mossville Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d at 1232 (D.C. Cir.
2004). In this proposal, we have redetermined and are further
explaining the basis for our conclusion that vinyl chloride is a
suitable surrogate for establishing process wastewater emission limits
for organic HAP. We note that the court (370 F.3d at 1242-43) held that
the EPA has authority to use a surrogate ``if it is reasonable to do
so[.]'' For the reasons discussed below, we have determined that vinyl
chloride is a reasonable surrogate for TOHAP emitted from process
wastewater at PVC production facilities.
Steam stripping is an effective wastewater treatment technology
that has been used as the basis of wastewater emission control
requirements in many rules, including the 40 CFR part 63 MACT for
chemical process industries, such as the HON, Miscellaneous Organic
Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP, and Polymers and Resins NESHAP as well
as the 40 CFR part 61 Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP. The approach is
based on the idea that removal of pollutants from wastewater prior to
discharge into a facility's wastewater collection and treatment system
will limit air emissions resulting from volatilization of these
pollutants from downstream process drains and conveyances that are open
to the atmosphere, as well as from the downstream biological treatment
system, including biological treatment units that are agitated and
aerated to supply the microorganisms with O2. Conversely,
those pollutants that are not effectively removed by a steam stripper
will be even less likely to volatilize in collection and treatment and
will be controlled in the facility's biological treatment system.
All PVC manufacturers have high concentrations of vinyl chloride in
their process wastewater and steam stripping is widely used by PVC
manufacturers to remove and recover vinyl chloride from process
wastewater streams. The best performers that the MACT floor is based on
are those strippers that have the lowest vinyl chloride concentrations
in the bottoms (outlet) stream exiting the steam stripper; that is, the
most effective strippers are those that result in the lowest
concentration of vinyl chloride in the bottoms stream.
Based on the data we received in response to our CAA section 114
ICRs of PVC manufacturers, 33 non-vinyl chloride HAP are also present
in the bottoms of the stripped wastewater streams. While many of these
non-vinyl chloride HAP are removed using steam stripping, some are
removed to a lesser degree. The EPA thoroughly examined the
fundamentals of steam stripping wastewater (including calculating the
HAP fraction removed (Fr) values \6\ for a model steam stripper and the
fraction emitted (Fe) values \7\ for numerous HAP from wastewater)
during the original rulemaking of the HON (see Legacy Docket A-90-23).
Based on this information as well as the data we received in response
to our CAA section 114 ICRs, we determined that 25 of the 33 non-vinyl
chloride HAP in the stripped wastewater have lower concentrations than
the average vinyl chloride concentration and have Fr values of 0.99
which is the same Fr value for vinyl chloride.\8\ In other words, vinyl
chloride and most non-vinyl chloride HAP are effectively removed from
the wastewater stream using steam stripping. We, therefore, conclude
that vinyl chloride is a reasonable surrogate for these HAP. Although
the remaining eight non-vinyl chloride HAP have stripper bottoms
concentrations higher than vinyl chloride and have Fr values from 0.31
(methanol) to 0.99 (vinyl acetate),\9\ these HAP are not likely to be
emitted to the atmosphere because these HAP have low Fe values,
significantly less than that of vinyl chloride. The Fe values for these
compounds range from 0 (ethylene glycol) to 0.59 (vinyl acetate),
compared to vinyl chloride's Fe value of 0.97. As a result, these HAP
other than vinyl chloride that remain in the stripped wastewater are
more likely to remain in the wastewater collection system and will be
readily biodegraded in the biological treatment unit. Furthermore, we
observed that non-vinyl chloride HAP concentrations at the outlet of
the steam stripper are the result of varied resin recipe slates in use
throughout the industry, and, therefore, do not correlate with the
effectiveness of the steam stripper at removing vinyl chloride. For
example, resin grade recipes lower in hard-to-strip TOHAP could allow
for poorer stripper performance if TOHAP were being relied to determine
MACT. Therefore, the steam strippers that are the best performers can
be identified by their low vinyl chloride concentrations and not by the
non-vinyl chloride HAP concentrations in the stripper bottoms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Fr is the mass fraction of a HAP that is stripped from
the wastewater. The Fr values for individual HAP in a model steam
stripper were estimated using Henry's Law Constants at 100 degrees
Celsius during the development of the HON. See 57 FR 62641, December
31, 1992; 59 FR 19443 and 4, April 22, 1994; and the memoranda,
Henry's Law Constants for the 83 HAP's Regulated in the Proposed HON
Wastewater Provisions; and Efficiency of Steam Stripper Trays to
Treat Wastewater Streams: Prediction of the Fraction Removed (Fr)
for Specific Compounds, which are available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
\7\ The Fe is the mass fraction of a HAP that is emitted from
the wastewater collection and downstream biological treatment
system. The Fe values for individual HAP were calculated during the
development of the HON. See 57 FR 62641, December 31, 1992; 59 FR
19443 and 4, April 22, 1994; and the memorandum, Estimation of Air
Emissions from Model Wastewater Collection and Treatment Plants
Systems, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
\8\ See the memorandum, Analysis of HAP in PVC Process
Wastewater, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
\9\ Only three of 15 facilities reported data where vinyl
acetate concentrations in the stripper bottoms were higher than
vinyl chloride. One facility is no longer in operation and the other
two are vinyl chloride/vinyl acetate copolymer producers. Therefore,
the higher vinyl acetate fraction is likely the result of resin
recipe influence rather than stripper performance since vinyl
chloride and vinyl acetate have the same Fr value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, vinyl chloride serves as an appropriate surrogate for
determining the MACT floor for process wastewater. First, vinyl
chloride is the predominant HAP and is present in all process
wastewater streams. Second, the best performing strippers are
identified by low vinyl chloride concentrations in the stripper bottoms
and are also the most effective strippers at removing non-vinyl
chloride HAP. The other non-vinyl chloride HAP present in the stripper
bottoms are a reflection of the resin recipe and not the effectiveness
of the stripper. The non-vinyl chloride HAP that are in the stripper
bottoms will not volatilize in collection systems
[[Page 71499]]
and be effectively treated in the biological treatment unit. The
regulatory objective of this rule is to control air emissions of HAP
from wastewater streams and not to control HAP that are in the
wastewater streams. Focusing on vinyl chloride rather than total
organic HAP for setting standards for PVC process wastewater not only
ensures identification of the best performing wastewater strippers for
the primary HAP emitted from the source category, but also ensures the
effective control of air emissions of non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
from wastewater.\10\ Additional details about our proposed surrogacy
are provided in the memorandum, Analysis of HAP in PVC Process
Wastewater, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 57 FR 62641, December 31, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are proposing these changes (i.e., to revise the process
wastewater vinyl chloride emission limit and eliminate the process
wastewater TOHAP emission limit) in new Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part
63, subpart HHHHHHH; and we are proposing that all affected major
sources that commenced construction or reconstruction on or before May
20, 2011, must be in compliance with these changes within 3 years after
the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. We
also are proposing that all affected major sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with these changes upon the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register or initial startup, whichever is later.
See proposed 40 CFR 63.11875(e). We are not aware of any major sources
that have commenced construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011,
which would be impacted by the application of the changes. Also, at any
time before these compliance dates, we are proposing at 40 CFR
63.11880(d) that an affected major source may choose to comply with the
revised emission limits in Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH, in lieu of the emission limits in Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH.
Finally, we are proposing to revise several paragraphs throughout
the major source rule (including process wastewater related
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11965 through 63.11985) to properly reference
the proposed Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, and
to address the elimination of the major source process wastewater TOHAP
emission limit; and we are proposing to clarify in 40 CFR 63.11965(e)
that only 40 CFR 63.105(b) and (c) apply to maintenance wastewater
containing HAP listed in Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH.
We are also proposing to correct a typographical error in Table 9 to 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, to be consistent with the requirement at
40 CFR 63.11980(a)(4)(i). Specifically, we are clarifying in Table 9 to
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, that compliance with the wastewater
emission limit is based on the results from one grab or composite
sample.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., the revised process
wastewater vinyl chloride emission limits, the elimination of the
process wastewater TOHAP emission limits, the compliance dates, whether
there are any sources that commenced construction after May 20, 2011,
the clarification to 40 CFR 63.11965(e), and the correction in Table 9
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH). We note that the proposed
clarification in 40 CFR 63.11965(e) is also being proposed for the 2012
area source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17) because 40 CFR 63.11965 is
referenced in those requirements; however, the proposed process
wastewater vinyl chloride emission limits do not affect the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17). Although 40 CFR 63.11965 through
63.11980 are referenced in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(17), we are proposing to
revise the introduction paragraph at 40 CFR 63.11142(f) to ensure that
whenever reference is made to Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH, we mean Table 1 or 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD, for purposes of compliance with the 2012 area source wastewater
standards. If it is determined that there are major sources that have
commenced construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, then we
will need to add additional requirements.
C. Stripped Resin
1. Subcategories and Emission Limits
Petitioners maintain that it was not feasible to comment on the new
data on which the EPA based the final stripped resin emission limits
and subcategories; and as previously mentioned in section II of this
preamble, on September 28, 2012, the EPA granted reconsideration on the
emission limits. We are not making any changes to the stripped resin
emission limits and subcategories in the 2012 final major and area
source rules; however, we request public comments on these emission
limits and subcategories.
2. Alternative Emission Limit Format for Compliance With Stripped Resin
Standards
The existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, subpart F)
provides emissions standards for the sources following the stripper
``stated in two ways'' (40 FR 59541, December 24, 1975). One of these
two formats for emissions standards is in ppmw of the stripped resin at
the outlet of the stripper and is used in both 40 CFR part 61, subpart
F, and the 2012 final major and area source rules, as seen in 40 CFR
61.64(e)(1), Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, and
Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. The second format is
a mass emissions to the atmosphere, which is given as gram (g) HAP per
kilogram (kg) of product resin on a dry basis from the stripper (also
given in pound per ton format) and is only currently available in 40
CFR 61.64(e)(2). The EPA originally offered these two ``ways'' of
presenting an equivalent emission limit to acknowledge that there were
two distinctively different techniques to control these sources--add-on
control devices or improved stripping, and that different measurement
and enforcement methods are applicable to each technique (40 FR
59541).\11\ At the time, we also acknowledged that stripping is the
primary control technology on which the standards are based, lending
credence for including the ppmw format resin standard in the 2012 final
major and area source rules. However, we realize that some sources may
find compliance flexibility in complying with a mass emissions limit
instead of a stripped resin content, especially if centrifuges, blend
tanks, and other process components downstream of the stripper are
closed to the atmosphere, controlled with closed vent systems, and
routed to a control device. Therefore, we have calculated mass
emissions-formatted standards that are equivalent to the resin content
standards of the 2012 final major and area source rules using the
conversion methods used in the original 40 CFR part 61, subpart F
standards (i.e.,
[[Page 71500]]
converting the ppmw standard to g/kg, or part per thousand by weight
for the equivalent mass emission rate), and we are proposing to include
these alternative emission limits in Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, and Tables 1b and 2b to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH. In doing so in the same manner as the original 40 CFR part 61,
subpart F standards, we are ensuring that the alternate emission limits
can be implemented and enforced, will be clear to sources, and most
importantly, will be equivalent to the level of control required by the
MACT standards. We are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11960(b)(2) that if the
affected source chooses to comply with the alternative mass emission
rates, then the process components associated with the stripped resin
downstream of the resin stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
must be enclosed and routed through a closed vent system meeting the
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925 through 63.11950 for the closed vent
system and control device. We are also proposing calculation procedures
at 40 CFR 63.11960(g) and (h) that you must use if you elect to
demonstrate initial or continuous compliance with the alternative mass
emissions rates. In addition, we are proposing to clarify the reporting
and recordkeeping at 40 CFR 63.11985(b)(7) and 40 CFR 63.11990(h)(3) to
reflect the proposed option of complying with the alternative mass
emissions rates. The monitoring requirements for sources using the
alternative emission limits would include the same stack testing
methods and procedures required for process vent performance testing
instead of resin sampling and concentration analyses. By proposing
these alternative emission limits, we are providing the same level of
compliance flexibility afforded by the Vinyl Chloride NESHAP. Tables 4
and 5 of this preamble present the proposed mass emission limits for
existing and new sources, respectively. The EPA requests comment on the
proposed alternative emission limits. We note that all of the proposed
changes discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., the proposed
changes to 40 CFR 63.11960, 40 CFR 63.11985(b)(7), and 40 CFR
63.11990(h)(3)) are also being proposed for the 2012 area source rule
at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(16), (18), and (19) because 40 CFR 63.11960, 40
CFR 63.11985, and 40 CFR 63.11990 are referenced in those requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The EPA noted that the two emission limits ``are equivalent
if it is assumed that all residual vinyl chloride in the resin
leaving a stripper is emitted into the atmosphere at the polyvinyl
chloride plant.'' While acknowledging that a small proportion of
vinyl chloride might be left in the resin when it leaves the plant,
the residual vinyl chloride monomer left in the resin after
stripping would be emitted into the atmosphere at some point, and,
therefore, the EPA determined that the residual vinyl chloride
monomer in resin limits serve as an emission limitation ``specified
in a form which is compatible with the only practical method for
determining compliance.''
Table 4--Proposed Existing Source Stripped Resin Alternative Mass Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 40 CFR part
40 CFR part 63, subpart 40 CFR part 63, subpart
63, subpart HHHHHHH non- 63, subpart DDDDDD Non-
Resin subcategory HHHHHHH vinyl vinyl chloride DDDDDD vinyl vinyl chloride
chloride organic HAP chloride organic HAP
emission limit emission limit emission limit emission limit
(g/kg) (g/kg) (g/kg) (g/kg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bulk resin...................................... 0.0071 0.17 0.0071 0.17
Dispersion resin................................ 1.3 0.24 1.5 0.32
Suspension resin................................ 0.037 0.67 0.036 0.036
Suspension blending resin....................... 0.14 0.50 0.14 0.50
Copolymer resin................................. 0.79 1.9 0.79 1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Proposed New Source Stripped Resin Alternative Mass Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 40 CFR part
40 CFR part 63, subpart 40 CFR part 63, subpart
63, subpart HHHHHHH non- 63, subpart DDDDDD non-
Resin subcategory HHHHHHH vinyl vinyl chloride DDDDDD vinyl vinyl chloride
chloride organic HAP chloride organic HAP
emission limit emission limit emission limit emission limit
(g/kg) (g/kg) (g/kg) (g/kg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bulk resin...................................... 0.0071 0.17 0.0071 0.17
Dispersion resin................................ 0.48 0.066 1.5 0.32
Suspension resin................................ 0.0073 0.015 0.036 0.036
Suspension blending resin....................... 0.14 0.50 0.14 0.50
Copolymer resin................................. 0.79 1.9 0.79 1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Clarification of Initial and Continuous Monitoring of Non-Vinyl
Chloride Organic HAP
The EPA's intent for demonstrating compliance with the total non-
vinyl chloride organic HAP emission limits for stripped resin within 40
CFR 63.11960(b) (and as referenced in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(16) for area
sources) is for facilities to develop and maintain a specific list of
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP that are expected to be present in each
grade of resin produced by the PVCPU. The current rule language in 40
CFR 63.11960(b) is potentially unclear on how this list of HAP for each
resin grade is updated and used to demonstrate compliance and how this
list of HAP for each resin grade relates to the list of HAP contained
within Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. For example, in 40
CFR 63.11960(b), we are proposing to replace ``continuously updated''
with ``kept current'' to clarify the requirement that the facility-
specific HAP list is updated after any change occurs that would impact
the list of HAP for the stripped resin, such as using a new additive or
changing a vendor.
In addition, as discussed in the 2012 final major and area source
rules (77 FR 22868), the EPA's intent is for sources to initially and
continuously test for all the HAP listed in Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH, plus any additional HAP not listed in Table 10 to 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, but expected to be present in the resin
grade due to the owner or operator's process
[[Page 71501]]
knowledge. That is, the facility-specific HAP list comprises the 30 HAP
in Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, plus any additional HAP
beyond those 30 that are expected to be present based on the resin
grades produced. The EPA is proposing clarifying amendments to 40 CFR
63.11960(b) and 40 CFR 63.11960(e)(1)(i) through (iv) related to the
specific HAP list, and we request comment on this clarification.
Furthermore, we are proposing amendments to 40 CFR 63.11960(b)(2) that
provide these clarifications on the facility-specific HAP list for
sources opting to comply with the proposed alternative mass emission
limits that are discussed in section III.C.2 of this preamble. Finally,
we are also proposing to restructure 40 CFR 63.11960(c) to improve
readability. We are proposing to remove duplicative language from 40
CFR 63.11960(c)(1)(iii) and (iv) and revise 40 CFR 63.11960(c)(2)(i)
and (ii) to clarify the calculation requirements for vinyl chloride and
non-vinyl chloride organic HAP.
We note that these amendments are also being proposed for the 2012
area source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(16) because 40 CFR 63.11960 is
referenced in those requirements.
D. Storage Vessels
We are proposing technical corrections and clarifications related
to the standards for pressure vessels, the use of vapor balancing, and
the standards for fixed roof and floating roof storage vessels. See
sections III.D.1, 2, and 3 of this preamble, respectively for a
detailed discussion of these proposed changes.
1. Pressure Vessels
A petitioner requested that the EPA reconsider the requirements of
40 CFR 63.11910(c) and allow LDAR of all pressure vessel leaks,
including from closure devices. The petitioner stated that the rule
should apply LDAR as a work practice standard under CAA section 112(h)
for leaks from openings on pressure vessels that are equipped with
closure devices since it is ``not feasible to prescribe or enforce an
emission standard.'' The petitioner stated that the best performing
facilities use LDAR to manage leaks from pressure vessels and contended
that an allowance to make a repair once a leak is found is a common
approach for managing leaks from pressure vessels and is the only
achievable approach. The petitioner also stated it interprets the 2012
final major and area source rules to be that leaks from closure devices
are violations (according to 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(4)), while other
pressure vessel leaks are not violations and are subject to leak repair
provisions (according to 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3)). The petitioner
requested that the EPA allow for repair of leaks from closure devices
greater than 500 parts per million (ppm) as a method of compliance.
In the 2012 final major and area source rules, pressure vessels in
HAP service are required to operate as ``a closed system that does not
vent to the atmosphere'' and each opening must be equipped with a
closure device to prevent discharges to the atmosphere (40 CFR
63.11910(c)). In addition, in the 2012 final major and area source
rules, all potential leak interfaces on the vessel (including closure
devices) must be monitored annually for leaks. The intent of the 2012
final major and area source rules was to require that pressure vessels
operate with no detectable emissions (i.e., less than 500 ppm as
determined using EPA Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7), and
that each opening, including all potential leak interfaces, on pressure
vessels be monitored regularly to ensure that the pressure vessels are
operating with no detectable emissions. While the 2012 final major and
area source rules do require potential leak interfaces to be monitored
annually for leaks using the procedures specified in the equipment leak
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11915, we recognize that the 2012 final major
and area source rules do not specify how 40 CFR 63.11915 would
specifically apply to pressure vessels and, thus, the petitioner
interpreted the rule to have two sets of leak requirements (one for
closure devices and another for all other pressure vessel leaks).
The EPA is granting reconsideration of the pressure vessel
standards of 40 CFR 63.11910(c) but does not agree with the
petitioner's recommendations regarding LDAR. Specifically, the EPA is
not allowing for repair of leaks greater than 500 ppm as a method of
compliance. We are proposing to maintain the pressure vessel leak
requirements of the 2012 rules, with edits for clarity; pressure
vessels must operate with no detectable emissions and any release
greater than 500 ppm above background is a violation. This requirement
applies equally to closure device leaks and leaks from all other leak
interfaces on the pressure vessel. To confirm there are no detectable
emissions, we are proposing to specify (in lieu of generally pointing
to the LDAR requirements in 40 CFR 63.11915) that the affected source
must conduct annual monitoring of each potential leak interface and
each point on the pressure vessel through which HAP could potentially
be emitted, using the procedures specified in 40 CFR 63.1023(b) and
(c). This approach to regulating pressure vessel leaks is similar to
the Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations NESHAP (40 CFR part 63,
subpart DD), which stipulates that tank openings must be equipped with
closure devices that are designed to operate with no detectable
emissions (see 40 CFR 63.685(h)(2)). We also propose to streamline and
combine the requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3) and (4) for clarity.
Under the proposed language, 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3) includes the
requirement to perform annual monitoring and states a leak greater than
500 ppm is a violation. We are proposing to remove certain language
specific to pressure vessel closure devices (which was previously at 40
CFR 63.11910(c)(4)), because closure device leaks would be captured by
the proposed language at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3) (i.e., monitor each
potential leak interface and each point on the pressure vessel through
which HAP could potentially be emitted). We are also proposing to
revise the language at 40 CFR 63.11890(d)(5)(iv) to apply more
generally to pressure vessel leaks instead of just closure devices;
this edit directly aligns with the proposed language at 40 CFR
63.11910(c)(3). In addition, we are proposing a definition of ``closure
device'' at 40 CFR 63.12005 to mean a cover, cap, hatch, lid, plug,
seal, valve, or other type of fitting that, when the device is secured
in the closed position, prevents or reduces air emissions to the
atmosphere by blocking an opening in a fixed roof storage vessel or
pressure vessel.
As part of the leak monitoring revisions, we are proposing to
revise 40 CFR 63.11990(b)(4) to clarify that the pressure vessel leak
records must include the information already required to be reported in
the pressure vessel closure device deviation report pursuant to 40 CFR
63.11985(b)(10)(i) through (v) (e.g., we are proposing to keep records
of the quantity of vinyl chloride and total HAP released from the
closure device).
The EPA is also proposing to clarify the requirements for filling,
emptying, and purging of pressure vessels at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1). The
clarifications are based on actual operations of PVC production
facilities and focus on the underlying pressure vessel standard.
Importantly, we are emphasizing that the underlying standard is that
each pressure vessel must be designed and operated as a closed system
without emissions to the atmosphere. The
[[Page 71502]]
language at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1) stating that the vent stream during
filling, emptying, and purging must meet the requirements of 40 CFR
63.11925(a) and (b) may appear to contradict the underlying standard
that pressure vessels must be designed and operated as a closed system
without emissions to the atmosphere.
To better explain our intent in clarifying the proposed language at
40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1), one must consider where pressure vessels are
used at PVC production facilities, which is primarily for vinyl
chloride storage (the monomer that is used as a reactant in the
polymerization reaction to produce PVC). During filling operations,
pressure vessels are designed to operate as closed systems, so there
are no emissions from these sources during these periods. Once filled,
pressure vessels storing vinyl chloride are emptied by routing the
stored vinyl chloride to the process to be used in the polymerization
reaction. Once routed to the process, process vents may be created that
are subject to the process vent standards of 40 CFR 63.11925(a) and (b)
which include closed vent system requirements. In the case of vent
streams that contain any unreacted vinyl chloride, these streams are
typically routed to a recovery system and vinyl chloride is recovered
(to the extent practical) and sent back to the pressure vessel (which
still operates as a closed system without emissions to the atmosphere).
The remaining (noncondensable) vent stream containing small amounts of
unrecovered vinyl chloride (and possibly other compounds) then must be
controlled in order to comply with the process vent emission limits.
This was the intent of the language in the 2012 final major and area
source rules. Similarly, for purging operations, vinyl chloride is
typically sent to a recovery system and the recovered vinyl chloride is
then sent to a different pressure vessel also storing vinyl chloride
(which operates as a closed system without emissions to the
atmosphere). The remaining stream from the recovery system and the
pressure vessel being purged contains small amounts of unrecovered
vinyl chloride (and possibly other compounds) and must be controlled in
order to comply with the process vent emission limits. Thus, excluding
those emissions during filling, purging, and emptying that ultimately
end up as process vents that are routed to a closed vent system and
control device, there would still be no emissions to the atmosphere
directly from pressure vessels. We are proposing to clarify at 40 CFR
63.11910(c)(1) that for vent streams sent to the process from pressure
vessels, or purged from pressure vessels, facilities must prepare a
design evaluation to demonstrate certain conditions are met and meet
the requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925(a) and (b) including the closed
vent system requirements. We also note that we are proposing that
facilities may elect to comply with vapor balancing requirements during
filling operations. Vapor balancing does not result in emissions to the
atmosphere from pressure vessels and is a common equivalent control
option for PVC production facilities during filling operations (vapor
balancing requirements are discussed in greater detail in section
III.D.2 of this preamble).
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., the proposed changes
to the pressure vessel requirements in 40 CFR 63.11910(c), 40 CFR
63.11985(b)(10), and 40 CFR 63.11990(b)(4)). We note that all of these
proposed changes are also being proposed for the 2012 area source rule
at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5), (18), and (19) because 40 CFR 63.11910, 40
CFR 63.11985, and 40 CFR 63.11990 are referenced in those requirements.
2. Vapor Balancing
A petitioner asserted that in the 2012 final major and area source
rules, the EPA did not specifically allow vapor balancing as a method
to control emissions from storage vessels. The petitioner stated that
vapor balancing is widely used in the PVC industry, indicated that 11
PVC production facilities use vapor balancing, and claimed it is
virtually impossible to unload a vinyl chloride railcar and not have
any HAP emissions without using vapor balancing. The petitioner also
noted that vapor balancing is allowed by the EPA in other MACT rules.
The EPA agrees with the petitioner and is granting reconsideration
on allowing vapor balancing as a method to control emissions from
storage vessels. The 2012 final major and area source rules do not list
vapor balancing as a compliance option, but in responding to comments
in the 2012 final rules (refer to National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production: Summary of Public Comments and Responses, Docket Item No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0185), we stated that a PVC production facility
may request the EPA's approval to use vapor balancing as an alternative
means of emission limitation under 40 CFR 63.6(g) of the General
Provisions. The EPA acknowledges that vapor balancing is a proven
method to control emissions from storage vessel filling operations and
is already allowed by several MACT standards including the HON (40 CFR
part 63, subpart G). Therefore, the EPA is proposing vapor balancing
requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(e) to allow vapor balancing as an
equivalent option to no emissions from pressure vessels during filling
operations (see proposed 40 CFR 63.11910(c)) and as an optional
equivalent control method for fixed roof storage vessels complying with
the 95-percent control standard for HAP emissions in Table 3 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, during filling operations \12\ (see proposed
40 CFR 63.11910(d)). The proposed vapor balancing requirements at 40
CFR 63.11910(e) are similar to the HON requirements and include
operating, monitoring, and certification requirements and related
recordkeeping requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ We note that facilities that use vapor balancing for
filling operations for fixed roof storage vessels that are required
to route emissions to a closed vent system and control device to
comply with the 95-percent control standard for HAP emissions must
comply with this standard at all times. In other words, while vapor
balancing fixed roof storage vessels during filling operations would
control working loss emissions to at least the 95-percent control
standard, owners or operators still have an obligation to control
other emissions from these fixed roof storage vessels to 95-percent
control, such as breathing losses and working losses that are not
vapor balanced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing operating requirements for the vapor
balancing system. We are proposing that vapor balancing systems be
designed and operated to route vapors displaced from loading of the
storage vessel to the transport vehicle (i.e., railcar, tank truck,
barge) from which the storage vessel is being loaded. For vapor
balancing of pressure vessels, we are also proposing the transport
vehicle may then be depressurized by sending the vapors to the process.
We also propose that fluid transfer from a transport vehicle to a
storage vessel must be performed only when the transport vehicle's
vapor collection system is connected to the storage vessel vapor
balancing system. We are proposing a definition of vapor balancing
system at 40 CFR 63.12005 to mean a piping system that collects HAP
vapors displaced from transport vehicles (i.e., railcar, tank truck,
barge) during storage vessel loading and routes the collected vapors to
the storage vessel from which the HAP being loaded originated or to
another storage vessel connected to a common header; or a piping system
that collects HAP vapors
[[Page 71503]]
displaced from the loading of a storage vessel and routes the collected
vapors to the transport vehicle from which the storage vessel is
filled.
In addition, we are proposing monitoring requirements for equipment
on the vapor balancing system. We are proposing that each PRD on a
storage vessel, transport vehicle, and vapor return line must remain
closed while the storage vessel is being filled and each PRD must be in
compliance with the rule's existing PRD monitoring requirements at 40
CFR 63.11915(c) (see section III.F of this preamble for details on
clarifications we are proposing for the rule's existing PRD monitoring
requirements). PVC production facilities commonly use vapor balancing
to unload vinyl chloride into pressure vessels, and as such, we are
also proposing the vapor balancing system must operate with no
detectable emissions, which is consistent with the proposed pressure
vessel requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(c)(3) (see section III.D.1 of
this preamble). To confirm there are no detectable emissions, we are
proposing that the affected source must conduct annual monitoring of
each potential leak interface and each point on the vapor balancing
system through which HAP could potentially be emitted, using the
procedures specified in 40 CFR 63.1023(b) and (c).
We are also proposing certification and control requirements for
transport vehicles. Prior to unloading into a storage vessel, we are
proposing that vapor balancing systems be designed and operated to
route vapors displaced from filling of the storage vessel to the
transport vehicle (i.e., railcar, tank truck, barge) from which the
storage vessel is being filled. We are proposing that tank trucks and
railcars must have a current certification from the U.S. Department of
Transportation and barges must have current certification of vapor-
tightness. To ensure the HAP that is vapor balanced from the PVC
storage vessel to the transport vehicle is not simply released to the
air, we are also proposing control and certification requirements for
reloading and cleaning of the transport vehicle (see 40 CFR
63.11910(e)(6) and (7)).
Finally, we are proposing recordkeeping requirements at 40 CFR
63.11990(b)(7) if the affected source chooses to use this vapor
balancing option.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., the proposed vapor
balancing requirements in 40 CFR 63.11910(e) and 40 CFR
63.11990(b)(7)). We note that these proposed vapor balancing
requirements are also being proposed for the 2012 area source rule at
40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5) and (19) because 40 CFR 63.11910 and 40 CFR
63.11990 are referenced in those requirements.
3. Fixed Roof and Floating Roof Storage Vessels
We are clarifying requirements for fixed roof storage vessels using
closed vent systems and control devices that are being used to meet the
95-percent control standard for HAP emissions. To improve readability,
we are proposing to move the requirements for fixed roof storage
vessels using a closed vent system and control device to a separate
paragraph at 40 CFR 63.11910(d) and clarify the corresponding
requirements in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. The 2012
final major and area source rules included the closed vent system and
control device requirements as part of the fixed roof storage vessel
requirements in 40 CFR 63.11910(a); however, our proposal to separate
the closed vent system and control device requirements from the fixed
roof storage vessel requirements provides clarity on what specific
requirements apply when a storage vessel is using a closed vent system
and control device versus the specific requirements that apply to a
fixed roof storage vessel. In addition, instead of complying with the
control device requirements for process vents, we are proposing that
for each fixed roof storage vessel that vents to a closed vent system
and control device, the affected source must develop a control device
operating plan and operate the control device according to the plan.
The proposed operating plan requirements are based on the requirements
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb (40 CFR 60.113b(c)), because 40 CFR part
60, subpart Kb, formed the basis of the underlying standard for fixed
roof storage vessels that are routed to a closed vent system and
control device. However, we are also proposing the option to allow the
affected source to continue to comply with the control device
requirements for process vents provided that the storage vessel is
vented to a closed vent system and control device that is also used to
comply with the process vent emission limits.
As an alternative for fixed roof storage vessels using a closed
vent system and control device to comply with the 95-percent control
standard for HAP emissions in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH, we are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11910(d)(4) that fixed roof
storage vessel emissions may be routed back to the process instead of a
control device. The proposed requirements at 40 CFR 63.11910(d)(4)
include preparing a design evaluation to demonstrate certain conditions
are met. PVC production facilities also use vapor balancing systems,
and as discussed previously (see section III.D.2 of this preamble), we
are proposing this as a compliance method.
Finally, to improve readability, we are proposing other
miscellaneous revisions to the fixed roof storage vessel requirements
at 40 CFR 63.11910(a) and the floating roof storage vessel requirements
at 40 CFR 63.11910(b). These proposed edits serve to clarify the
requirements and create consistency in the language, without changing
the underlying standards.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., clarifications to the
fixed roof and floating roof storage vessel requirements). We note that
these proposed requirements are also being proposed for the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(5) because 40 CFR 63.11910 is
referenced in those requirements.
E. Affected Source
Petitioners maintain that it was not feasible to comment on the
revised definitions of the affected source at 40 CFR 63.11140(b) and 40
CFR 63.11870(b). The EPA is granting reconsideration on this issue.
Although we are not making any changes to the definitions of the
affected source in the 2012 final major and area source rules, we
request public comments on these definitions for the reasons set forth
in the 2012 final rules (see section III.A of the 2012 final preamble,
77 FR 22850).
F. Equipment Leaks
Following the promulgation of the 2012 final major and area source
rules, the Vinyl Institute requested several clarifications on the
equipment leak provisions in 40 CFR 63.11915 in a letter \13\ dated
April 5, 2013. The Vinyl Institute said the requirements in the 2012
final major and area source rules at 40 CFR 63.11915(a) are
inconsistent with the EPA's conclusions discussed in the preamble to
the 2012 final rules (77 FR 22848) because the rule text only
references some of the requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU,
despite the fact that the preamble to the 2012 final
[[Page 71504]]
rules says that MACT (for equipment leaks at existing and new major
sources) as well as GACT (for equipment leaks at existing and new area
sources) is compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, for all
equipment in HAP service as defined in 40 CFR 63.12005. Specifically,
the Vinyl Institute said that in referencing provisions of 40 CFR part
63, subpart UU, at 40 CFR 63.11915(a), the EPA excluded 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, requirements for applicability (40 CFR 63.1019), and
certain equipment, including: Pumps in light liquid service (40 CFR
63.1026), agitators in gas and vapor service and in light liquid
service (40 CFR 63.1028), and open-ended valves or lines (40 CFR
63.1033). Additionally, the Vinyl Institute said the compliance options
at 40 CFR 63.11915(b) are confusing and sometimes circular in
relationship to the requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU. In
particular, the Vinyl Institute said the compliance options at 40 CFR
63.11915(b) allowing use of either double (dual) mechanical seals or
sealless pumps to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, are redundant
to compliance options already allowed in 40 CFR 63.1026; therefore, the
Vinyl Institute requested that the EPA remove this redundancy from 40
CFR 63.11915(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Refer to the letter titled Clarification on Certain
Provisions in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Production (``PVC
MACT''), from the Vinyl Institute to Andrea Siefers, U.S. EPA, dated
April 5, 2013, available in the docket for this rulemaking (see
Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037-0560).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA agrees with the Vinyl Institute that the requirements in
the 2012 final major and area source rules at 40 CFR 63.11915(a) do not
properly reflect the EPA's MACT and GACT conclusions discussed in the
preamble to the 2012 final rules (77 FR 22848) regarding compliance
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, for all equipment in HAP service as
defined in 40 CFR 63.12005. Therefore, for consistency with the EPA's
MACT and GACT conclusions discussed in the preamble to the 2012 final
major and area source rules (77 FR 22848), we are proposing to revise
40 CFR 63.11915(a) to include the requirements from 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UU, that are inadvertently missing from the 2012 final rules,
including: Applicability requirements (40 CFR 63.1019(a), and (c)
through (f)), requirements for pumps in light liquid service (40 CFR
63.1026), requirements for agitators in gas and vapor service and in
light liquid service (40 CFR 63.1028), and requirements for open-ended
valves or lines (40 CFR 63.1033).
Also, we are proposing to remove all of the requirements in 40 CFR
63.11915(b) because we have determined that these requirements were
inadvertently published in the 2012 final major and area source rules
in error. We agree with the Vinyl Institute that the requirements in 40
CFR 63.11915(b) are confusing, and sometimes redundant or circular, in
relationship to the requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU. In
fact, the preamble to the 2012 final major and area source rules (77 FR
22848) makes it clear that the ``proposed requirement (at 40 CFR
63.11915(b)) that reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and rotating
compressors and agitators be equipped with double seals, or equivalent,
was in error. In the final rules, we have adopted the MACT floor level
of control for equipment leaks for all components (which is compliance
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU), which gives affected sources the
option of installing double seals, or equivalent, or complying with the
LDAR requirements of the equipment leak standards.''
In addition, in a letter \14\ dated May 27, 2020, the Vinyl
Institute requested that the EPA clarify whether the 2012 final major
and area source rules require a release indicator to be installed
directly on each PRD. More specifically, the Vinyl Institute requested
that the EPA revise 40 CFR 63.11915(c)(1)(i) to allow the installation
of a release indicator in series with the PRD or in combination with
other sensors and monitoring systems in series with the PRD (in lieu of
requiring a release indicator be installed directly on each PRD). The
Vinyl Institute argued that it is not necessary for the release
indicator to be installed ``directly'' on the PRD in order to determine
whether an emission release has occurred. The Vinyl Institute said
facilities use a variety of sensor combinations and/or monitoring
systems (that are not always installed ``directly'' on the PRD, but
rather in series with the PRD) in order to determine whether an
emission release from a PRD has occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Refer to the letter titled RE: Description of Pressure
Relief Device Monitoring Practices for PVC Facilities, from the
Vinyl Institute to Jennifer Caparoso, U.S. EPA, dated May 27, 2020,
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was not our intent to require only direct installation of a
release indicator on the PRD. Therefore, we are proposing to revise 40
CFR 63.11915(c) to clarify the PRD requirements that are beyond those
required in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU; and to clarify that a release
indicator may either be installed on each PRD or installed on the
associated process or piping system in such a way that it will indicate
when an emission release has occurred. We are proposing that the
release indicator device or system can include, but is not limited to,
a rupture disk indicator, magnetic sensor, motion detector on the
pressure relief valve stem, flow monitor, or pressure monitor. We are
also clarifying in 40 CFR 63.11915(c)(1)(i) that the vinyl chloride
monitoring system required in 40 CFR 63.11956 is not considered a
release indicator for purposes of complying with 40 CFR
63.11915(c)(1)(i).
Also, although 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, references the closed
vent system requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, we are
proposing at 40 CFR 63.11915(d) that if the affected source routes
emissions from equipment in HAP service through a closed vent system to
a control device, or back into the process or a fuel gas system, then
the affected source must comply with 40 CFR 63.11930 in lieu of the
closed vent system requirements specified in 40 CFR 63.983 of subpart
SS, and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with 40
CFR 63.983 of subpart SS do not apply. Alternatively, we are proposing
an option that allows the affected source to comply with the control
device and closed vent system requirements for process vents, provided
that the emissions from equipment are vented to the same closed vent
system and control device that is also used to comply with the process
vent emission limits. This proposed change streamlines all closed vent
system requirements within the rule by preventing an owner or operator
from having to comply with more than one set of closed vent system
requirements (e.g., the current rule requires owners or operators of
equipment to comply with the closed vent system requirements at 40 CFR
63.983 pursuant to 40 CFR 63.1034, yet owners or operators of a process
vent must comply with the closed vent system requirements at 40 CFR
63.11930). Also, this proposed change (i.e., to comply with 40 CFR
63.11930 for affected sources that route emissions from equipment in
HAP service through a closed vent system to a control device, or back
into the process or a fuel gas system) would not allow the affected
source to bypass the air pollution control device at any time, and if a
bypass is used, then the affected source would be required to estimate
and report the quantity of vinyl chloride and total HAP released (see
40 CFR 63.11930(c) and 40 CFR 63.11985(b)(10), respectively). We are
proposing this change because bypassing an air pollution control device
could result in a release of regulated HAP to the atmosphere and to be
consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008),
where the court determined that standards under CAA section 112(d) must
provide for compliance at
[[Page 71505]]
all times. We are also proposing at 40 CFR 63.11930(c) that any open-
ended valve or line in the closed vent system that is equipped with a
cap, blind flange, plug, or second valve which operates to seal the
line at all times is not subject to the bypass requirements.
Finally, we are proposing at 40 CFR 63.11915(e) to make references
that are related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) exemptions
for equipment leak requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subparts SS and UU,
no longer applicable. Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, we are
proposing standards in this rule that apply at all times. In its 2008
decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), the
court vacated portions of two provisions in the EPA's CAA section 112
regulations governing the emissions of HAP during periods of SSM.
Specifically, the court vacated the SSM exemptions contained in 40 CFR
63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1), holding that under section 302(k) of the CAA,
emissions standards or limitations must be continuous in nature and
that the SSM exemptions violate the CAA's requirement that CAA section
112 standards apply continuously.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., proposed changes to
the equipment leak requirements in 40 CFR 63.11915). We note that all
of these proposed changes are also being proposed for the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(6) because 40 CFR 63.11915 is
referenced in those requirements. Given that owners and operators are
already complying with the control device and closed vent system
requirements for process vents, we estimate that there would be no
impact on any facility for making these changes. In other words, if the
affected source chooses to route emissions from equipment in HAP
service through a closed vent system to a control device (to comply
with the equipment leak standards), we believe the affected source is
likely to use the same existing closed vent system and control device
being used to comply with the process vent standards.
G. Closed Vent Systems
We are proposing amendments to the closed vent system requirements
in 40 CFR 63.11930 that clarify applicability. The requirement at 40
CFR 63.11930(a) is misleading because it states that the closed vent
system requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930 are exclusively for closed vent
systems used to route emissions from process vents; however, as
specified elsewhere in the 2012 final major and area source rules,
closed vent systems used to route emissions from other sources (e.g.,
stripped resin, process wastewater, storage vessels) are also subject
to the closed vent system requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930. Therefore,
we are proposing to clarify 40 CFR 63.11930(a) to specify that if the
affected source uses a closed vent system to comply with an emission
limit in Table 1 or 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, or an emission
limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, 2b, or 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH,
or to comply with the requirements in 40 CFR 63.11910, 40 CFR 63.11915,
or 40 CFR 63.11955, then the affected source must comply with the
closed vent system requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930. In other words, our
proposal makes clear that if a closed vent system is being used to
comply with any of the PVC production standards (i.e., the process
vent, stripped resin, process wastewater, storage vessel, equipment
leak, or other emission source standards in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
DDDDDD or HHHHHHH), then 40 CFR 63.11930 applies. For the same reasons,
we are also proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.11930(b) (i.e., the
requirement that each closed vent system be designed and operated to
collect HAP vapors and route the collected vapors to a control device)
applies to all emission sources that route emissions through a closed
vent system to a control device, a fuel gas system, or process.
The EPA is soliciting comment on all of the proposed changes
discussed in this section of the preamble (i.e., proposed changes to
the closed vent system requirements in 40 CFR 63.11930). We note that
all of these proposed changes are also being proposed for the 2012 area
source rule at 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(9) because 40 CFR 63.11930 is
referenced in those requirements. Given that owners and operators are
already complying with 40 CFR 63.11930 for emissions sources other than
process vents (e.g., stripped resin, process wastewater, and storage
tanks), we estimate that there would be no impact on any facility for
making this change.
H. Affirmative Defense
In the 2012 final major and area source rules, the EPA included an
affirmative defense to civil penalties for violations caused by
malfunctions (see 40 CFR 63.11895) in an effort to create a system that
incorporated some flexibility, recognizing that there is a tension,
inherent in many types of air regulation, to ensure adequate compliance
while simultaneously recognizing that despite the most diligent of
efforts, emission standards may be violated under circumstances
entirely beyond the control of the source. Although the EPA recognized
that its case-by-case enforcement discretion provides sufficient
flexibility in these circumstances, it included the affirmative defense
to provide a more formalized approach and more regulatory clarity. See
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1057-58 (D.C. Cir. 1978)
(holding that an informal case-by-case enforcement discretion approach
is adequate); but see Marathon Oil Co. v. EPA, 564 F.2d 1253, 1272-73
(9th Cir. 1977) (requiring a more formalized approach to consideration
of ``upsets beyond the control of the permit holder.''). Under the
EPA's regulatory affirmative defense provisions, if a source could
demonstrate in a judicial or administrative proceeding that it had met
the requirements of the affirmative defense in the regulation, civil
penalties would not be assessed. However, the court vacated the
affirmative defense in one of the EPA's CAA section 112 regulations.
NRDC v. EPA, 749 F.3d 1055 (D.C. Cir., 2014) (vacating affirmative
defense provisions in the CAA section 112 rule establishing emission
standards for Portland cement kilns). The court found that the EPA
lacked authority to establish an affirmative defense for private civil
suits and held that under the CAA, the authority to determine civil
penalty amounts in such cases lies exclusively with the courts, not the
EPA. Specifically, the court found: ``As the language of the statute
makes clear, the courts determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether
civil penalties are `appropriate.''' See NRDC at 1063 (``[U]nder this
statute, deciding whether penalties are `appropriate' in a given
private civil suit is a job for the courts, not EPA.'').\15\ In light
of NRDC, the EPA is proposing to remove all of the regulatory
affirmative defense provisions from 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD
(i.e., the reference to ``Sec. 63.11895'' in 40 CFR 63.11142(f)(2)),
and 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH (i.e., 40 CFR 63.11895 in its
entirety and all other rule text that references 40 CFR 63.11895). As
explained above, if a source is unable to comply with emissions
standards as a result of a malfunction, the EPA may use its case-by-
case enforcement discretion to provide flexibility, as appropriate.
Further, as the court recognized, in an EPA or citizen enforcement
action, the court has the discretion to consider any
[[Page 71506]]
defense raised and determine whether penalties are appropriate. Cf.
NRDC, at 1064 (arguments that violation was caused by unavoidable
technology failure can be made to the courts in future civil cases when
the issue arises). The same is true for the presiding officer in EPA
administrative enforcement actions.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The court's reasoning in NRDC focuses on civil judicial
actions. The court noted that ``EPA's ability to determine whether
penalties should be assessed for CAA violations extends only to
administrative penalties, not to civil penalties imposed by a
court.'' Id.
\16\ Although the NRDC case does not address the EPA's authority
to establish an affirmative defense to penalties that are available
in administrative enforcement actions, we are not including such an
affirmative defense in the proposed rule. As explained above, such
an affirmative defense is not necessary. Moreover, assessment of
penalties for violations caused by malfunctions in administrative
proceedings and judicial proceedings should be consistent. Cf. CAA
section 113(e) (requiring both the Administrator and the court to
take specified criteria into account when assessing penalties).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Other Technical Corrections and Clarifications
There are a number of additional revisions that we are proposing to
40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, and 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, to
clarify text and correct typographical errors, grammatical errors, and
cross-reference errors; and we request public comment on these
revisions. These proposed editorial corrections and clarifications are
summarized in Table 6 of this preamble. We note that although these
proposed changes are being made directly in the major source rule, many
of these proposed changes also result in revisions to the area source
rule because 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD, references provisions in
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH.
Table 6--Summary of Proposed Editorial and Minor Corrections to 40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart DDDDDD and 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart HHHHHHH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 63,
40 CFR part 63, subpart Proposed revision subpart DDDDDD
HHHHHHH provision provision \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not applicable................ Replace ``are 40 CFR
considered an 63.11140(b)(3).
existing affected
source'' with ``must
comply with
paragraphs (b)(3)(i)
and (ii) of this
section'' to clarify
requirements.
40 CFR 63.11872............... Revise heading to Not applicable.
``What is the
relationship to other
regulations?'' to
clarify content of 40
CFR 63.11872.
Clarify that 40 CFR
part 63, subpart J,
does not apply to any
source that is
subject to the
requirements of this
subpart. 40 CFR part
63, subpart J, was
vacated by court
action.
40 CFR 63.11896(b)............ Revise first sentence 40 CFR
to be consistent with 63.11142(f)(3).
the same phrasing
used in 40 CFR
63.11896(a).
40 CFR 63.11900(c)............ Replace ``the 40 CFR
effective date of 63.11142(f)(4).
publication of the
final rule in the
Federal Register''
with ``compliance
date specified in
Sec. 63.11875'' to
clarify compliance
dates.
40 CFR 63.11900(d)............ Replace ``startup date 40 CFR
of the affected 63.11142(f)(4).
source or the
effective date of
publication of the
final rule in the
Federal Register,
whichever is later,''
with ``compliance
date specified in
Sec. 63.11875'' to
clarify compliance
dates.
40 CFR 63.11920(a)(3)(iii).... Change ``Appendix A'' 40 CFR
to ``Appendix B'' to 63.11142(f)(7).
correct typographical
error.
40 CFR 63.11920(g)............ Replace ``repair 40 CFR
action level'' with 63.11142(f)(7).
``delay of repair
action level'' in two
instances to clarify
the requirement.
40 CFR 63.11920(h)(4)(ii)..... Change the unit of 40 CFR
measurement for 63.11142(f)(7).
``Ddelay'' from
``days'' to ``hours''
to correct
typographical error.
40 CFR 63.11925(b)............ Replace ``Each batch 40 CFR
process vent, 63.11142(f)(8).
continuous process
vent and
miscellaneous vent,''
with ``Each process
vent as defined in
Sec. 63.12005,'' to
clarify the
requirement applies
to all process vents.
40 CFR 63.11925(c)(1)......... Remove the phrase 40 CFR
``upon promulgation 63.11142(f)(8).
of a performance
specification for
hydrogen chloride
CEMS,'' because
performance
specification for
hydrogen chloride
continuous emission
monitoring systems
(CEMS) has been
promulgated at 40 CFR
part 60, appendix B,
performance
specification 18.
40 CFR 63.11925(d)(2) and (3), Replace ``For each 40 CFR
and (e)(2). CEMS and CPMS 63.11142(f)(8).
required or that you
elect . . .'' with
``For each CPMS
required or CEMS that
you elect . . .'' to
clarify CEMS is an
option.
40 CFR 63.11925(e)(2)......... Refer to 40 CFR 40 CFR
63.11935 in its 63.11142(f)(8).
entirety instead of
only paragraphs (b)
and (c) to correct
typographical error.
40 CFR 63.11925(f)............ Add ``Toxic 40 CFR
equivalency limit'' 63.11142(f)(8).
to clarify title of
paragraph.
40 CFR 63.11925(g)............ Remove ``continuous 40 CFR
process vent, 63.11142(f)(8).
miscellaneous vent
and batch'' to
clarify the
requirement applies
to all process vents.
40 CFR Remove ``(CHAP)'' to 40 CFR
63.11925(g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii). correct typographical 63.11142(f)(8).
error and clarify
vinyl chloride is
excluded for purposes
of compliance with
the paragraph.
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(5)......... Remove the sentence 40 CFR
``CEMS must record 63.11142(f)(10)
data at least once .
every 15 minutes.''
because it is
redundant with the
requirement in 40 CFR
63.11935(b)(2).
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(6)(i)...... Clarify the 40 CFR
promulgated 63.11142(f)(10)
performance .
specification for HCl
CEMS is 40 CFR part
60, appendix B,
performance
specification 18 as
well as requirements
of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F, procedure
6.
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(7)(i)...... Replace ``continuous 40 CFR
emissions monitoring 63.11142(f)(10)
system'' with the .
proper acronym
``CEMS.''.
40 CFR 63.11935(b)(7)(ii)..... Replace ``continuous 40 CFR
emissions monitoring 63.11142(f)(10)
system'' with the .
proper acronym
``CEMS.''.
40 CFR 63.11935(d)(2)(iii).... Replace ``of'' with 40 CFR
``explaining'' to 63.11142(f)(10)
clarify requirement. .
40 CFR 63.11935(d)(3)......... Replace ``of'' with 40 CFR
``explaining'' to 63.11142(f)(10)
clarify requirement. .
40 CFR 63.11940(b)(3)(ii)..... Replace ``problems'' 40 CFR
with ``any of the 63.11142(f)(11)
aforementioned .
conditions'' to
clarify requirement.
Replace first instance
of ``like or better
kind and quality as''
with ``like type or
manufacturer as the
old catalyst or is
not as efficient as''
to clarify
requirement.
Replace second
instance of ``like or
better kind and
quality as'' with
``like type or
manufacturer as the
old catalyst or is as
efficient as or more
efficient than'' to
clarify requirement.
40 CFR 63.11940(c)(2)(ii)..... Add ``(100.4 degrees 40 CFR
Fahrenheit)'' to 63.11142(f)(11)
clarify conversion of .
degrees Celsius in
degrees Fahrenheit.
[[Page 71507]]
40 CFR 63.11940(d)(1)......... Include ``and,'' and 40 CFR
replace ``mass'' with 63.11142(f)(11)
``mass flow'' in .
first sentence to
clarify requirement
and remove the last
sentence because it
is redundant with the
first sentence.
40 CFR 63.11945(b)............ Add requirement to 40 CFR
record the process 63.11142(f)(12)
information that is .
necessary to document
operating conditions
during the test.
40 CFR 63.11955(d)(1)......... Clarify that each 40 CFR
gasholder must be 63.11142(f)(14)
vented back into the .
process for reuse or
routed to a closed
vent system and
control device
meeting the
requirements of 40
CFR 63.11925 through
63.11950. Most
gasholders return
recovered gas back to
an enclosed process
for reuse in the
manufacturing process.
40 CFR 63.11980(a)(1)......... Replace ``maximum 40 CFR
operating 63.11142(f)(17)
conditions'' with .
``maximum
representative
operating
conditions'' to
correct typographical
error.
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(6)......... Revise reference from 40 CFR
40 CFR 63.11990(j) to 63.11142(f)(18)
40 CFR 63.11990(j)(2). .
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(8)(ii)..... Remove entire 40 CFR
requirement to 63.11142(f)(18)
correct typographical .
error.
40 CFR 63.11985(b)(10)........ Remove ``but'' to 40 CFR
correct typographical 63.11142(f)(18)
error. .
Change ``Sec. Sec.
63.11910(c)(4)'' to
``Sec.
63.11910(c)(3)'' to
correct typographical
error..
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(1)......... Add ``storage vessel'' 40 CFR
to clarify the type 63.11142(f)(18)
of equipment .
inspection that a
delegated agency may
waive the requirement
for notifications.
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(8)......... Add comma to correct 40 CFR
typographical error. 63.11142(f)(18)
.
40 CFR 63.11985(c)(9)(i) and Replace entire 40 CFR
(ii). paragraphs with 63.11142(f)(18)
standardized .
performance test
reporting language.
40 CFR 63.11990(i)(5)......... Remove entire 40 CFR
requirement to 63.11142(f)(19)
correct typographical .
error.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Remove definition of 40 CFR
``Container,'' 63.11144(b).
``Corrective action
plan,'' ``Operating
day,'' ``Root cause
analysis,''
``Solution process,''
and ``Unloading
operations'' because
the terms are not
used in the rule.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Batch process 63.11144(b).
vent'' and
``Continuous process
vent'' to add ``be''
between ``to'' and
``routed'' to correct
typographical error.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Dispersion 63.11144(b).
process'' to mean a
process for producing
polyvinyl chloride
resin using either
emulsion or
microsuspension.
Emulsion
polymerization uses
water soluble
initiators and is
distinguished by
metering in
surfactants as the
reaction progresses.
In microsuspension
polymerization,
homogenizers are
first mixed with a
monomer outside of
the polymerization
reactor and oil
soluble initiators
are then added before
charging the reactor.
These two
polymerization
techniques produce
fine particles,
typically less than
10 microns, with
little or no
porosity. Emulsifier
levels vary but
agitation is very
mild compared to
other PVC
polymerization
processes. The final
product is dried to
powder form.
This change is being
proposed to keep
``dispersion'' as a
broad subcategory, as
some facilities make
resins using both
types of processes.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``First attempt at 63.11144(b).
repair'' to clarify
that monitoring as
specified in Sec.
63.1023(b) and (c)
may be applicable.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Polyvinyl chloride 63.11144(b).
and copolymers
production process
unit or PVCPU'' to
clarify that finished
resin product is
stored in a ``vessel
or storage silo'' by
removing the word
``tank.''.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Polyvinyl chloride 63.11144(b).
copolymer'' to
clarify that a
copolymer is
comprised of one or
more monomers and
also distinguishes
these monomers from
additives used for
stabilization and/or
particle size
control. Also, remove
the word ``emulsion''
and ``solution'' from
the definition and
clarify each process.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Polyvinyl chloride 63.11144(b).
homopolymer'' to
remove the word
``emulsion'' from the
definition and
clarify each process.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Process component'' 63.11144(b).
to replace ``units
operations'' with
``unit operation'' to
correct typographical
error.
Revise definition of
``Process component''
to clarify that
``Process components
include equipment,
pressure vessels,
process condensers,
process tanks,
recovery devices, and
resin strippers, as
defined in this
section.''.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Process condenser'' 63.11144(b).
to clarify that can
apply to batch or
continuous processes.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Product'' to mean a 63.11144(b).
polymer produced
using vinyl chloride
monomer and varying
in additives (e.g.,
initiators,
terminators, etc.);
catalysts; or in the
relative proportions
of vinyl chloride
monomer with one or
more other monomers,
and 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. By-
products, isolated
intermediates,
impurities, wastes,
and trace
contaminants are not
considered products.
This change is being
proposed to be
consistent with the
definitions of
``Polyvinyl chloride
copolymer'' and
``Polyvinyl chloride
homopolymer''.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Revise definition of 40 CFR
``Repaired'' to 63.11144(b).
clarify that
inspections from
another subpart may
be applicable.
40 CFR 63.12005............... Remove the word 40 CFR
``emulsion'' and 63.11144(b).
``solution
processes'' from the
definition of ``Type
of resin'' because
the term is not used
in the rule.
[[Page 71508]]
Table 5....................... Revise flow to/from 40 CFR
the control device of 63.11142(f)(2),
any control device to (8), (10), and
replace ``Flow to/ (18).
from the control
device'' to
``Presence or absence
of flow to/for the
control device if
flow could be
intermittent,'' ``N/
A'' with ``Indication
of absence of flow--
note that absence of
flow can be
determined when
process is not
operating using
simulated flow'',
``Continuous'' with
``Episodic,'' ``N/A
to ``Date and time
when flow stops
during process
operation and when
flow begins after
stopping during
process operation,''
and ``Date and time
of flow start and
stop'' to ``Time
period between flow
stop and start'' to
clarify what
operating limit to
establish during the
initial performance
test, minimum data
recording frequency,
and data averaging
period for
compliance,
respectively.
Table 5....................... Revise regeneration 40 CFR
stream flow to 63.11142(f)(2),
regenerative adsorber (8), (10), and
to replace ``N/A'' (18).
with ``Every 15
minutes'' to clarify
minimum data
recording frequency.
Table 5....................... Revise adsorber bed 40 CFR
temperature, minimum 63.11142(f)(2),
temperature of (8), (10), and
regenerative adsorber (18).
to replace ``N/A''
with ``Every 15
minutes during
regeneration cycle''
to clarify minimum
data recording
frequency.
Table 5....................... Replace ``vacuum and 40 CFR
duratio of 63.11142(f)(2),
regeneration'' with (8), (10), and
``vacuum and duration (18).
of regeneration'' to
correct typographical
error.
Revise vacuum and
duration of
regeneration of
regenerative adsorber
to replace ``N/A''
with ``Every 15
minutes during
regeneration cycle''
to clarify minimum
data recording
frequency.
Table 5....................... Revise regeneration 40 CFR
frequency of 63.11144(f)(2),
regenerative adsorber (8), (10), and
to replace ``N/A'' (18).
with ``Date and time
of regeneration start
and stop'' to clarify
minimum data
recording frequency.
Table 5....................... Revise adsorber 40 CFR
operation valve 63.11142(f)(2),
sequencing and cycle (8), (10), and
time of regenerative (18).
adsorber to replace
``N/A'' with
``Daily'' to clarify
data averaging period
for compliance.
Table 5....................... Revise average 40 CFR
adsorber bed life of 63.11142(f)(2),
non-regenerative (8), (10), and
adsorber to replace (18).
``N/A'' with
``Adsorber bed change-
out time [N/A for
initial performance
test],'' ``N/A'' with
``Outlet VOC
concentration,'' and
``N/A'' with
``Average time for
three adsorber bed
change-outs'' to
clarify what
operating limit to
establish, minimum
data recording
frequency, and data
averaging period for
compliance,
respectively.
Replace ``Daily until
breakthrough for 3
absorber bed change-
outs'' with ``Daily
until breakthrough
for three absorber
bed change-outs'' to
correct typographical
error.
Table 5....................... Revise Outlet VOC 40 CFR
concentration of the 63.11142(f)(2),
first adsorber bed in (8), (10), and
series of non- (18).
regenerative adsorber
to replace ``N/A''
with ``Outlet VOC
concentration'' to
clarify data
recording frequency.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Several of the proposed revisions described in this table for 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH, are also being proposed for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD, because the 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH provision,
is referenced in the 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD provision,
identified in this column.
IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts
We estimate that the proposed amendments will result in HAP
emissions reductions of 34 tpy with an overall total capital savings of
$0.033 million and an associated total annualized cost of $0.39
million. These estimated emission reductions as well as the increase in
annualized costs are a result of the proposed revisions to emission
limits in the 2012 major source rule for process vents and process
wastewater (there is additional operations and maintenance costs of the
control equipment and steam strippers that are related to the proposed
emission limits). The estimated cost savings are a result of our
proposal to eliminate the process wastewater TOHAP emission limit in
the 2012 major source rule (there is a decrease in initial and annual
costs of testing and monitoring). The details of the cost analyses and
emissions reductions estimates are provided in the memorandum,
Technical Analysis and Documentation to Support EPA's Reconsideration
of 40 CFR part 63 Subpart HHHHHHH National Emission Standards for the
Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category,
which is available in the docket for this rulemaking. Estimates of the
economic impacts for the proposal are estimated in terms of the
annualized cost of compliance as a percent of the revenues for the six
ultimate parent owners of the 14 facilities expected to incur impacts
as a result of this proposal. No ultimate parent owner is expected to
incur annualized cost of compliance of more than 0.003 percent of their
revenues. The median cost to revenue impact is about 0.001 percent. One
ultimate parent company is expected to experience a savings in
compliance costs associated with the proposal. For more information on
these economic impacts, refer to the Economic Impact Analysis for the
NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production:
Reconsideration Proposal, which is in the docket for this rulemaking.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the OMB for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771
regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in these proposed rules have
been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, as discussed for each
rule
[[Page 71509]]
covered by this action in sections V.C.1 and 2 of this preamble.
1. PVC Major Source NESHAP
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2432.05. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this
rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037), and it is briefly summarized
here.
The EPA is proposing amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH,
to address petitions for reconsideration as described in section III of
this preamble. This ICR documents the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements and incremental burden imposed by the proposed amendments
only. In summary, there is a decrease in the burden hours and cost in
this ICR due to the elimination of wastewater TOHAP testing
requirements that are associated with our proposed revisions to
emission limits for process wastewater.
Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of PVC
production major source facilities.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHHHH).
Estimated number of respondents: 14 (total).
Frequency of response: Semiannual and annual.
Total estimated burden: Reduction of 2,170 hours (per year). Burden
is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: Savings of $388,000 (per year), which
includes a savings of $134,000 annualized capital or operation and
maintenance costs.
2. PVC Area Source NESHAP
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2454.04. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this
rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037), and it is briefly summarized
here.
The EPA is proposing amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD,
to address petitions for reconsideration as described in section III of
this preamble. This ICR documents the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements and incremental burden imposed by the proposed amendments
only. In summary, there is a decrease in the burden hours and cost in
this ICR due to the elimination of wastewater TOHAP testing
requirements that are associated with our proposed revisions to
emission limits for process wastewater.
Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of PVC
production area source facilities.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDDD).
Estimated number of respondents: Three (total).
Frequency of response: Semiannual and annual.
Total estimated burden: Reduction of 340 hours (per year). Burden
is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: Savings of $61,000 (per year), which includes
a savings of $21,000 annualized capital or operation and maintenance
costs.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified
at the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related
comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via
email to [email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for the
EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR
between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no
later than December 9, 2020. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related
comments in the final rule.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. There are no
small entities among those affected by this proposal.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. While this action
creates an enforceable duty on the private sector, the annual cost does
not exceed $100 million or more.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This 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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial new direct effects
on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action does not involve any new technical standards from those
contained in the 2012 final rules. Therefore, the EPA did not consider
the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
The SW-846 methods included in Sec. 63.11960 were previously
approved for incorporation in that section and no changes are proposed.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
[[Page 71510]]
The environmental justice finding in the 2012 final major and area
source rules remains relevant in this action, which seeks comments on
proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subparts DDDDDD and HHHHHHH,
that are mainly corrections to existing rule requirements and major
source emission limits raised by stakeholders.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA proposes to
amend 40 CFR part 63 as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DDDDDD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area
Sources
0
2. Section 63.11140 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2)
introductory text, (b)(3) introductory text, and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11140 Am I subject to this subpart?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Except as specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, an
affected source is new if you commenced construction, or reconstruction
of the affected source between October 6, 2006, and May 20, 2011.
* * * * *
(3) If you are a new affected source as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section that commenced construction or reconstruction
between October 6, 2006, and May 20, 2011, then after April 17, 2012,
you must comply with paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) This subpart does not apply to research and development
facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 63.11141 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11141 What are my compliance dates?
* * * * *
(f) All affected sources that commenced construction or
reconstruction on or before May 20, 2011, must be in compliance with
Sec. 63.11142(g) by [date 3 years after date of publication of final
rule in the Federal Register]. All affected sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with Sec. 63.11142(g) upon [date of publication of final
rule in the Federal Register] or initial startup, whichever is later.
0
4. Section 63.11142 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (f)
introductory text, and (f)(2) and (9) and adding paragraph (g) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.11142 What are the standards and compliance requirements for
new and existing sources?
* * * * *
(b) Except as specified in paragraph (g) of this section, you must
comply with each emission limit and standard specified in Table 1 to
this subpart that applies to your existing affected source, and you
must comply with each emission limit and standard specified in Table 2
to this subpart that applies to your new affected source.
* * * * *
(f) You must meet the requirements of the applicable sections of
subpart HHHHHHH of this part, as specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through
(19) of this section, except for the purposes of complying with this
subpart, where the applicable sections of subpart HHHHHHH of this part,
as specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (19) of this section
reference Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of this part,
reference is made to Table 1 or Table 2 to this subpart.
* * * * *
(2) You must comply with the requirements of Sec. 63.11890(a)
through (d).
* * * * *
(9) If you use a closed vent system to comply with paragraph (b) or
(g) of this section, or to comply with the requirements in Sec.
63.11910, Sec. 63.11915, or Sec. 63.11955, then you must meet the
requirements of Sec. 63.11930 for closed vent systems.
* * * * *
(g) Beginning no later than the compliance dates specified in Sec.
63.11141(f), the emission limits for PVC-combined process vents in
Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart no longer apply; instead, you must
comply with the emission limits for PVC-combined process vents in
Tables 1b and 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of this part. At any time before
the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.11141(f), you may choose to
comply with the emission limits for PVC-combined process vents in
Tables 1b and 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of this part in lieu of the
emission limits for PVC-combined process vents in Tables 1 and 2 to
this subpart.
0
5. Table 1 to subpart DDDDDD of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart DDDDDD of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for Existing Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this
pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . . emission limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PVC process vents \a\................ Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 5.3 parts per million
by volume (ppmv).
Total hydrocarbons..... All resin types........ 46 ppmv measured as
propane.
Total organic HAP \b\.. All resin types........ 140 ppmv.
Dioxins/furans (toxic All resin types........ 0.13 nanograms per dry
equivalency basis). standard cubic meter
(ng/dscm).
PVC-combined process vents \a\ \c\... Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 0.56 ppmv.
Total hydrocarbons..... All resin types........ 2.3 ppmv measured as
propane.
Total organic HAP \b\.. All resin types........ 29 ppmv.
Dioxins/furans (toxic All resin types........ 0.076 ng/dscm.
equivalency basis).
Stripped resin....................... Vinyl chloride......... Bulk resin............. 7.1 parts per million
by weight (ppmw); or
0.0071 grams per
kilogram of product
resin, dry basis (g/
kg).
Dispersion resin....... 1,500 ppmw; or 1.5 g/
kg.
Suspension resin....... 36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
Suspension blending 140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.
resin.
[[Page 71511]]
Copolymer resin........ 790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.
Total non-vinyl Bulk resin............. 170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.
chloride organic HAP.
Dispersion resin....... 320 ppmw; or 0.32 g/kg.
Suspension resin....... 36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
Suspension blending 500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/kg.
resin.
Copolymer resin........ 1,900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/
kg.
Process Wastewater................... Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 2.1 ppmw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3-percent oxygen, dry basis.
\b\ Affected sources have the option to comply with either the total hydrocarbon limit or the total organic HAP
limit.
\c\ Beginning on the date specified in Sec. 63.11141(f), these limits no longer apply; instead as specified in
Sec. 63.11142(g), the limits in Table 1b to subpart HHHHHHH of this part apply.
0
6. Table 2 to subpart DDDDDD of Part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart DDDDDD of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for New Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this
pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . . emission limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PVC process vents \a\................ Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 5.3 parts per million
by volume (ppmv).
Total hydrocarbons..... All resin types........ 46 ppmv measured as
propane.
Total organic HAP \b\.. All resin types........ 140 ppmv.
Dioxins/furans (toxic All resin types........ 0.13 nanograms per dry
equivalency basis). standard cubic meter
(ng/dscm).
PVC-combined process vents \a\ \c\... Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 0.56 ppmv.
Total hydrocarbons..... All resin types........ 2.3 ppmv measured as
propane.
Total organic HAP \b\.. All resin types........ 29 ppmv.
Dioxins/furans (toxic All resin types........ 0.076 ng/dscm.
equivalency basis).
Stripped resin....................... Vinyl chloride......... Bulk resin............. 7.1 parts per million
by weight (ppmw); or
0.0071 grams per
kilogram of product
resin, dry basis (g/
kg).
Dispersion resin....... 1,500 ppmw, or 1.5 g/
kg.
Suspension resin....... 36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
Suspension blending 140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.
resin.
Copolymer resin........ 790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.
Total non-vinyl Bulk resin............. 170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.
chloride organic HAP.
Dispersion resin....... 320 ppmw; or 0.32 g/kg.
Suspension resin....... 36 ppmw; or 0.036 g/kg.
Suspension blending 500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/kg.
resin.
Copolymer resin........ 1,900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/
kg.
Process Wastewater................... Vinyl chloride......... All resin types........ 2.1 ppmw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
\b\ Affected sources have the option to comply with either the total hydrocarbon limit or the total organic HAP
limit.
\c\ Beginning on the date specified in Sec. 63.11141(f), these limits no longer apply; instead as specified in
Sec. 63.11142(g), the limits in Table 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of this part apply.
Subpart HHHHHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production
0
7. Section 63.11865 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11865 Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?
You are subject to the requirements in this subpart if you own or
operate one or more polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production
process units (PVCPU) as defined in Sec. 63.12005 that are located at,
or are part of, a major source of hazardous air pollutants (HAP)
emissions as defined in Sec. 63.2. The requirements of this subpart do
not apply to research and development facilities, as defined in section
112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act.
0
8. Section 63.11872 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11872 What is the relationship to other regulations?
After the applicable compliance date specified in Sec.
63.11875(a), (b), or (c), an affected source that is also subject to
the provisions of other subparts in 40 CFR part 60 or this part is
required to comply with this subpart and any other applicable subparts
in 40 CFR part 60 or this part, except subpart J of this part does not
apply to any source that is subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
0
9. Section 63.11875 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11875 When must I comply with this subpart?
* * * * *
(e) All affected sources that commenced construction or
reconstruction on or before May 20, 2011, must be in compliance with
Sec. 63.11880(d) by [date 3 years after date of publication of final
rule in the Federal Register]. All affected sources that commenced
construction or reconstruction after May 20, 2011, must be in
compliance with Sec. 63.11880(d) upon [date of publication of final
rule in the Federal Register] or initial startup, whichever is later.
[[Page 71512]]
0
10. Section 63.11880 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and adding
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11880 What emission limits, operating limits and standards
must I meet?
(a) Except as specified in paragraph (d) of this section, you must
comply with each emission limit and standard specified in Table 1 to
this subpart that applies to your existing affected source, and you
must comply with each emission limit and standard specified in Table 2
to this subpart that applies to your new affected source.
* * * * *
(d) Beginning no later than the compliance dates specified in Sec.
63.11875(e), the emission limits specified in Tables 1 and 2 to this
subpart no longer apply. Instead, you must comply with each emission
limit and standard specified in Table 1b to this subpart that applies
to your existing affected source, and you must comply with each
emission limit and standard specified in Table 2b to this subpart that
applies to your new affected source. At any time before the compliance
dates specified in Sec. 63.11875(e), you may choose to comply with the
emission limits in Tables 1b and 2b to this subpart in lieu of the
emission limits in Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart.
0
11. Section 63.11890 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (3)
and (d)(5)(iv) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11890 What are my additional general requirements for
complying with this subpart?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) When a performance test indicates that emissions of a pollutant
in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart are exceeding the emission
standard for the pollutant specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
(3) When a 3-hour block average from a continuous emissions
monitor, as required by Sec. 63.11925(c)(1) through (3), exceeds an
emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(iv) A closure device and all other leaks on a pressure vessel.
* * * * *
Sec. 63.11895 [Removed and Reserved]
0
12. Section 63.11895 is removed and reserved.
0
13. Section 63.11896 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.11896 What am I required to do if I make a process change at
my affected source?
* * * * *
(a) You must demonstrate that the changed process unit or component
of the affected facility 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 Sec. 63.11880 within 180 days of the
date of startup of the changed process unit or component of the
affected facility. You must demonstrate compliance with any applicable
work practice standards upon startup of the changed process unit or
component of the affected facility.
(b) You must demonstrate that the changed process unit or component
of the affected facility is 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 Sec. 63.11880 within 180 days of the date of
startup of the changed process unit or component of the affected
facility. You must demonstrate compliance with any applicable work
practice standards upon startup of the changed process unit or
component of the affected facility.
* * * * *
0
14. Section 63.11900 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (c), and
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec. 63.11880 and demonstrate
initial compliance with the emission limits and standards specified in
Table 1 or 1b to this subpart and Table 3 to this subpart, as
applicable, no later than 180 days after the compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.11875 and according to the applicable provisions in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
* * * * *
(c) For new or reconstructed affected sources, you must establish
any applicable operating limits required in Sec. 63.11880, and
demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and standards
specified in Table 2 or 2b to this subpart and Table 3 to this subpart,
as applicable, no later than 180 days after the compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.11875 or within 180 days after startup of the
source, whichever is later, according to Sec. 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 Sec. 63.11880 no later than the compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.11875 and according to the applicable provisions
in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
* * * * *
0
15. Section 63.11910 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(1) heading,
(a)(1)(ii), and (a)(2)(ii);
0
b. Removing paragraph (a)(2)(iii);
0
c. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(3)(iii);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (b), (c) introductory text, and (c)(1), (3), and
(4); and
0
f. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.11910 What are my initial and continuous compliance
requirements for storage vessels?
* * * * *
(a) Fixed roof storage vessels. Except as specified in paragraph
(d) of this section, for each fixed roof storage vessel used to comply
with the requirements specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) Closure requirements. * * *
(ii) Each opening in the fixed roof must be equipped with a cover
or other type of 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) * * *
(ii) You may open closure devices or remove the fixed roof under
the 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 for manual operations such as maintenance,
inspection, sampling, or cleaning.
(B) Opening of a conservation vent or similar type of vent that
vents to the atmosphere (or allows air to enter the storage vessel) is
allowed during normal operating conditions 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
[[Page 71513]]
vessel as a result of loading or unloading operations or diurnal
ambient temperature fluctuations.
(3) * * *
(ii) If you determine parts of the roof are unsafe to inspect
because operating personnel would be exposed to an imminent or
potential danger as a consequence of such inspection, then the
requirements specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section do not
apply and you must comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs
(a)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) You must prepare and maintain at the plant site written
documentation that identifies all parts of the fixed roof and any
closure devices that are unsafe to inspect and explains why such parts
are unsafe to inspect.
(B) You must 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. Keep a copy of
the written plan and schedule at the plant site, as specified in Sec.
63.11990(b).
(iii) Keep records of the date of each inspection, as required in
paragraph (a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section. Provide
notification of each inspection as specified in Sec. 63.11985(c)(1).
* * * * *
(b) Floating roof storage vessels. For each floating roof storage
vessel used to comply with the requirements specified in Table 3 to
this subpart, you must meet all requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.1060
through 63.1067 for internal floating roof storage vessels or external
floating roof storage vessels, as applicable.
(c) Pressure vessels. For each pressure vessel used to comply with
the requirements specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you must meet
the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) You must operate the pressure vessel as a closed system without
emissions to the atmosphere. Vent streams sent to the process from
pressure vessels, or purged from pressure vessels, must meet the
requirements in paragraph (d)(4) of this section and Sec. 63.11925(a)
and (b). You may also elect to vapor balance the pressure vessel during
filling operations and comply with the requirements in paragraph (e) of
this section.
* * * * *
(3) The pressure vessel must be designed to operate with no
detectable emissions, as indicated by an instrument reading of less
than 500 ppm above background, at all times. Any such release (e.g.,
leak) constitutes a violation. You must conduct annual monitoring of
each potential leak interface and each point on the pressure vessel
through which HAP could potentially be emitted, using the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.1023(b) and (c) and paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(i) When Sec. 63.1023(b)(5) refers to ``when the equipment is in
regulated material service or is in use with any other detectable
material,'' it means ``when the pressure vessel is in HAP service'' for
the purposes of this section.
(ii) Section 63.1023(b)(6) does not apply for the purposes of this
section.
(4) You must comply with the recordkeeping provisions specified in
Sec. 63.11990(b)(4) and the reporting provisions specified in Sec.
63.11985(a)(1) and (b)(1) and (10).
(d) Fixed roof storage vessels vented to a closed vent system and
control device. For each fixed roof storage vessel that vents to a
closed vent system and control device to comply with the requirements
specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (3) and (d)(1) through (3) of this section. In
lieu of complying with the requirements specified in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (3) of this section, you may elect to route emissions back to
the process and comply with the requirements in paragraph (d)(4) of
this section. During filling operations, in lieu of complying with the
requirements specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this
section, you may elect to vapor balance the storage vessel and comply
with the requirements in paragraph (e) of this section.
(1) Except as specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, you
must develop a control device operating plan containing the information
listed in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section and meet the
requirements specified in Sec. 63.11930. You must then operate the
control device and monitor the parameters of the control device in
accordance with the operating plan. You must not use a flare to comply
with the 95 weight percent HAP reduction requirement in Table 3 to this
subpart.
(i) The documentation demonstrating that the control device will
achieve the required control efficiency during maximum loading
conditions is to include a description of the gas stream which enters
the control device, including flow and HAP content under varying liquid
level conditions (dynamic and static) and manufacturer's design
specifications for the control device. If the control device or the
closed vent system receives vapors, gases, or liquids other than fuels
from sources that are not fixed roof storage vessels, then the
efficiency demonstration is to include consideration of all vapors,
gases, and liquids received by the closed vent capture system and
control device. If an enclosed combustion device with a minimum
residence time of 0.75 seconds and a minimum temperature of 816 degrees
Celsius (1,501 degrees Fahrenheit) is used to meet the 95-percent
requirement, documentation that those conditions will exist is
sufficient to meet the requirements of this paragraph (d)(1)(i).
(ii) A description of the parameter or parameters to be monitored
to ensure that the control device will be operated in conformance with
its design and an explanation of the criteria used for selection of
that parameter (or parameters).
(2) If the storage vessel is vented to a closed vent system and
control device that is also used to comply with the process vent
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart and you are
meeting the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.11925 through 63.11950 for
the closed vent system and control device, then you are not required to
comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section.
(3) During periods of planned routine maintenance of a control
device, operate the storage vessel in accordance with paragraphs
(d)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section. You must keep the records specified
in Sec. 63.11990(b)(6).
(i) Do not add material to the storage vessel during periods of
planned routine maintenance.
(ii) Limit periods of planned routine maintenance for each control
device to no more than 360 hours per year.
(4) If you route emissions from a storage vessel back to the
process to comply with the requirements specified in Table 3 to this
subpart, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) The HAP in the emissions must meet one or more of the
conditions specified in paragraphs (d)(4)(i)(A) through (D) of this
section.
(A) Recycled and/or consumed in the same manner as a material that
fulfills the same function in that process;
(B) Transformed by chemical reaction into materials that are not
HAP;
(C) Incorporated into a product; and/or
(D) Recovered.
(ii) To demonstrate compliance with paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this
section, you
[[Page 71514]]
must prepare a design evaluation (or engineering assessment) that
demonstrates that one or more of the conditions specified in paragraphs
(d)(4)(i)(A) through (D) of this section are being met.
(iii) You must comply with the requirements of Sec. 63.11930.
(e) Vapor balancing. For each storage vessel you elect to vapor
balance during filling operations to comply with the requirements
specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (7) of this section.
(1) The vapor balancing system must be designed and operated to
route HAP vapors displaced from loading of the storage vessel to the
railcar, tank truck, or barge from which the storage vessel is filled
without emissions to the atmosphere. You may depressurize the railcar,
tank truck, or barge by sending the HAP vapors back to the process and
meet the requirements of paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(2) Tank trucks and railcars must have a current certification in
accordance with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
qualification and maintenance requirements of 49 CFR part 180, subparts
E (for cargo tanks) and F (for tank cars). Barges must have a current
certification of vapor-tightness through testing in accordance with
Sec. 63.565.
(3) HAP must only be unloaded from tank trucks, railcars, or barges
when vapor collection systems are connected to the storage vessel's
vapor collection system.
(4) Pressure relief devices on the storage vessel, railcar, tank
truck, barge, and vapor return line must not open during storage vessel
loading or as a result of diurnal temperature changes (breathing
losses). You must comply with the requirements in Sec. 63.11915(c) for
each pressure relief device.
(5) The vapor balancing system must be designed to operate with no
detectable emissions, as indicated by an instrument reading of less
than 500 ppm above background, at all times. Any such release (e.g.,
leak) constitutes a violation of this rule. You must conduct annual
monitoring of each potential leak interface and each point on the vapor
balancing system through which HAP could potentially be emitted, using
the procedures specified in Sec. 63.1023(b) and (c) and paragraphs
(e)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) When Sec. 63.1023(b)(5) refers to ``when the equipment is in
regulated material service or is in use with any other detectable
material,'' it means ``when the vapor balancing system is in HAP
service'' for the purposes of this section.
(ii) Section 63.1023(b)(6) does not apply for the purposes of this
section.
(6) Railcars, tank trucks, or barges that deliver HAP to a storage
vessel must be reloaded or cleaned at a facility that utilizes one of
the control techniques specified in paragraphs (e)(6)(i) through (iii)
of this section.
(i) The railcar, tank truck, or barge must be connected to a closed
vent system with a non-flare control device that reduces inlet
emissions of HAP by 95 percent by weight or greater. Railcars, tank
trucks, or barges that have materials with a maximum true vapor
pressure greater than 11.1 psia must not use the option in this
paragraph (e)(6)(i).
(ii) A vapor balancing system designed and operated to collect HAP
vapor displaced from the tank truck, railcar, or barge during reloading
must be used to route the collected HAP vapor to the storage vessel
from which the liquid being transferred originated.
(iii) The railcar, tank truck, or barge must route its emissions
back to the process.
(7) The owner or operator of the facility where the railcar, tank
truck, or barge is reloaded or cleaned must comply with paragraphs
(e)(7)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Submit to the owner or operator of the storage vessel and to
the Administrator a written certification that the reloading or
cleaning facility will meet the requirements of paragraphs (e)(7)(i)
through (iv) of this section. The certifying entity may revoke the
written certification by sending a written statement to the owner or
operator of the storage vessel giving at least 90 days' notice that the
certifying entity is rescinding acceptance of responsibility for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (e)(7) of this section.
(ii) If complying with paragraph (e)(6)(i) of this section, comply
with the requirements for closed vent systems and control devices
specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The notification and
reporting requirements in Sec. 63.11985 do not apply to the owner or
operator of the offsite cleaning or reloading facility.
(iii) If complying with paragraph (e)(6)(ii) of this section, keep
the records specified in Sec. 63.11990(b)(7)(ii).
(iv) If complying with paragraph (e)(6)(iii) of this section,
comply with the requirements in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (iii) only and
keep the records specified in Sec. 63.11990(b)(7)(iii).
(v) After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.11875 at an
offsite reloading or cleaning facility subject to paragraph (e) of this
section, compliance with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements of any other subpart of this part constitutes compliance
with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of
paragraphs (e)(7)(ii) through (iv) of this section. You must identify
in your Notification of Compliance Status report required by Sec.
63.11985(a) the subpart to this part with which the owner or operator
of the reloading or cleaning facility complies.
0
16. Section 63.11915 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11915 What are my compliance requirements for equipment
leaks?
For equipment in HAP service (as defined in Sec. 63.12005), you
must comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
section.
(a) Except as specified in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this
section, you must comply with Sec. Sec. 63.1019(a) and (c) through (f)
and 63.1020 through 63.1039.
(b) [Reserved]
(c) For pressure relief devices in HAP service, as defined in Sec.
63.12005, you must meet the requirements of this paragraph (c) in
addition to the requirements specified in paragraph (a) of this
section. You must also comply with the recordkeeping requirements in
Sec. 63.11990(c) and the reporting requirements in Sec.
63.11985(a)(2), (b)(2), and (c)(7).
(1) For pressure relief devices in HAP service that discharge
directly to the atmosphere without first meeting the process vent
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart by routing the
discharge to a closed vent system and control device designed and
operated in accordance with the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.11925
through 63.11950, you must install, maintain, and operate release
indicators as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this
section. Any release to the atmosphere without meeting the process vent
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, constitutes a
violation. You must submit the report specified in Sec.
63.11985(c)(7), as described in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section.
(i) A release indicator must be properly installed on each pressure
relief device or associated process or piping system in such a way that
it will indicate when an emission release has occurred. Examples of
these types of devices and systems include, but are not limited to, a
rupture disk indicator, magnetic sensor, motion detector on the
pressure relief valve stem, flow monitor,
[[Page 71515]]
or pressure monitor. A release indicator does not include any
monitoring system used to meet the requirements of Sec. 63.11956.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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 Sec.
63.11985(c)(7).
(2) Pressure relief devices in HAP service that discharge directly
to a closed vent system and control device designed and operated in
accordance with the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.11925 through
63.11950, are required to meet process vent emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. Any release to the atmosphere without
meeting the process vent emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to
this subpart, constitutes a violation. 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 Sec.
63.11985(c)(7).
(d) If you route emissions from equipment in HAP service through a
closed vent system to a control device, or back into the process or a
fuel gas system, then you must comply with paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of
this section.
(1) Comply with Sec. 63.1034, except you must comply with Sec.
63.11930 in lieu of the closed vent system requirements specified in
Sec. 63.983, and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements
associated with Sec. 63.983 do not apply.
(2) If emissions from equipment are vented to a closed vent system
and control device that is also used to comply with the process vent
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart and you are
meeting the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.11925 through 63.11950 for
the closed vent system and control device, then you are not required to
comply with the closed vent system and control device requirements
specified in Sec. 63.1034.
(e) The referenced provisions specified in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (6) of this section do not apply when demonstrating compliance
with this section.
(1) The phrase ``except during periods of start-up, shutdown and
malfunction as specified in the referencing subpart'' in Sec.
63.984(a)(1).
(2) Section 63.998(d)(3).
(3) The phrase ``may be included as part of the startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan, as required by the referencing subpart for the
source, or'' from Sec. 63.1024(f)(4)(i).
(4) The phrase ``(except periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction)'' from Sec. 63.1026(e)(1)(ii)(A).
(5) The phrase ``(except during periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction)'' from Sec. 63.1028(e)(1)(i)(A).
(6) The phrase ``(except during periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction)'' from Sec. 63.1031(b)(1).
0
17. Section 63.11920 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3)(iii) and
(g) introductory text and revising parameter ``Ddelay'' of
Equation 1 in paragraph (h)(4)(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11920 What are my initial and continuous compliance
requirements for heat exchange systems?
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Determine the vinyl chloride concentration (in parts per
billion by weight) in the cooling water using Method 107 at 40 CFR part
61, appendix B.
* * * * *
(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 39 parts per million by volume or a total strippable
volatile organic compounds concentration in the cooling water of 500
parts per billion by weight or a vinyl chloride concentration in the
cooling water of 500 parts per billion by weight. While you remain
below the delay of repair action level, you may delay the repair of a
leaking heat exchanger only if one of the conditions in paragraph
(g)(1) or (2) of this section is met. If you exceed the delay of repair
action level you must repair according to paragraph (e) of this
section. 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.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
Ddelay = Expected duration of the repair delay, hours.
0
18. Section 63.11925 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c)
introductory text, (c)(1), (d) introductory text, (d)(2) through (4),
(d)(5) introductory text, (d)(5)(i), (e) introductory text, (e)(2),
(e)(3)(ii), (e)(4)(i), (e)(5), (f) introductory text, (g) introductory
text, (g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii), (g)(3), and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11925 What are my initial and continuous compliance
requirements for process vents?
* * * * *
(a) Emission limits. Each process vent must meet the emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart prior to the vent
stream being exposed to the atmosphere. The emission limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart apply at all times. The emission limits in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart must not be met through dilution.
If an applicable process vent stream at a PVCPU is comingled with a
vent stream from one or more non-PVCPU sources and the comingled
streams are vented through a shared control device, then each emission
standard (and subsequent control device, monitoring, recordkeeping,
reporting, and other requirements) to which the comingled vent stream
is subject applies.
(b) Closed vent systems and control devices. Each process vent as
defined in Sec. 63.12005, that is in HAP service must be routed
through a closed vent system to a control device. All gas streams
routed to the closed vent system and control device must be for a
process purpose and not for the purpose of diluting the process vent to
meet the emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. Each
control device used to comply with paragraph (a) of this section must
meet the requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.11925 and 63.11940, and all
closed vent systems must meet the requirements in Sec. 63.11930. You
must not use a flare to comply with the emission limits in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you must install and operate a
continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) to monitor each operating
parameter specified in Sec. 63.11940(a) through (h) to comply with
your operating limit(s) required in Sec. 63.11880(b).
(1) Hydrogen chloride continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS).
In lieu of establishing operating limits in Sec. 63.11880(b) and using
CPMS to comply with the operating limits, as specified in Sec.
63.11940(a) through (h), new and existing sources 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.
* * * * *
[[Page 71516]]
(d) Initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you must
comply with paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) For each CPMS required, or CEMS 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 as specified in Sec. 63.11935(b) and site-specific monitoring
plan specified in Sec. 63.11935(c), respectively.
(3) For each CPMS required, or CEMS that you elect to use as
specified in paragraph (c) of this section, you must install, operate,
and maintain the CEMS and CPMS as specified in Sec. 63.11935(b) and
(c), respectively, and you must conduct an initial site-specific
performance evaluation test according to your site-specific monitoring
plan and Sec. 63.11935(b)(3) and (c)(4), respectively.
(4) For each emission limit for which you use a CEMS to demonstrate
compliance, you must meet the requirements specified in Sec.
63.11890(c), and you must demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart based on 3-
hour block averages of CEMS data collected at the minimum frequency
specified in Sec. 63.11935(b)(2) and calculated using the data
reduction method specified in Sec. 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 in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart for which you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate compliance, you
must meet the requirements of paragraphs (d)(5)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) You must conduct an initial performance test according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.11945 to demonstrate compliance with the total
hydrocarbons or total organic HAP emission limit, vinyl chloride
emission limit, hydrogen chloride emission limit, and dioxin/furan
emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
* * * * *
(e) Continuous compliance. To demonstrate continuous compliance
with the emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart for
each process vent, you must comply with paragraphs (e)(1) through (5)
of this section.
* * * * *
(2) You must operate and maintain each CPMS required, or CEMS that
you elect to use in paragraph (c) of this section, as specified in
Sec. 63.11935.
(3) * * *
(ii) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart based on 3-hour block
averages of CEMS data collected at the minimum frequency specified in
Sec. 63.11935(b)(2), and calculated using the data reduction method
specified in Sec. 63.11935(e). You must meet the requirements
specified in Sec. 63.11890(c). 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.
(4) * * *
(i) You must conduct a performance test once every 5 years
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.11945 for each pollutant in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
* * * * *
(5) Each closed vent system and control device used to comply with
an emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart must be
operated at all times when emissions are vented to, or collected by,
these systems or devices.
(f) Toxic equivalency limit. To demonstrate compliance with the
dioxin/furan toxic equivalency emission limit specified in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart, you must determine dioxin/furan toxic
equivalency as specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this
section.
* * * * *
(g) Emission profile. You must characterize each process vent by
developing an emissions profile for each contributing process vent
according to paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The total organic HAP concentration shall be computed
according to Equation 1 of this section except that only the organic
HAP species shall be summed. The list of organic HAP is provided in
Table 2 to subpart F of this part, except vinyl chloride shall be
excluded for purposes of compliance with this paragraph
(g)(2)(iii)(B)(2)(ii).
* * * * *
(3) For miscellaneous process vents, the emissions profile must be
determined according to paragraph (g)(2)(iv) of this section.
(h) Process changes. Except for temporary shutdowns for maintenance
activities, if you make a process change such that, as a result of that
change, you are subject to a different process vent limit in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, then you must meet the requirements of
Sec. 63.11896.
0
19. Section 63.11930 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c)
introductory text, (c)(1)(iv), (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(ii)(A), and (h)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.11930 What requirements must I meet for closed vent systems?
(a) General. If you use a closed vent system to comply with an
emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, 2b, or 3 to this subpart, or to
comply with the requirements in Sec. 63.11910, Sec. 63.11915, or
Sec. 63.11955, then you must comply with the requirements in this
section. However, if you operate and maintain your closed vent system
in vacuum service as defined in Sec. 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 HAP vapors and route the collected
vapors to a control device, a fuel gas system, or process.
(c) Bypass. For each closed vent system that contains a bypass as
defined in Sec. 63.12005 (e.g., diverting a vent stream away from the
control device), you must not discharge to the atmosphere through the
bypass. Any such release constitutes a violation. 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. Any open-ended valve or line in the closed vent system that
is equipped with a cap, blind flange, plug, or second valve and that
operates to seal the open end at all times is not subject to either
paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) * * *
(iv) For any instances where the flow indicator alarm is triggered,
you must submit to the Administrator as part of your compliance report,
the information specified in Sec. 63.11985(b)(9) and (10).
(2) * * *
(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. You must
[[Page 71517]]
maintain the records specified in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section.
(ii) * * *
(A) For each instance that you change the bypass valve to the
diverting position, you must submit to the Administrator as part of
your compliance report, the information specified in Sec.
63.11985(b)(9) and (10).
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(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 as part of your
compliance report, the information specified in Sec. 63.11985(b)(10).
0
20. Section 63.11935 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(5),
(b)(6)(i), (b)(7)(i) and (ii), (d) introductory text, (d)(1),
(d)(2)(iii), and (d)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS requirements must I meet to
demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission
standards for process vents?
(a) General requirements for CEMS and CPMS. You must meet the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section for each CEMS specified
in Sec. 63.11925(c) used to demonstrate compliance with the emission
limits for process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b 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 5 to this subpart for each
process vent control device specified in Sec. 63.11925(b) that is used
to comply with the emission limits for process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2,
or 2b to this subpart, except that flow indicators specified in Sec.
63.11940(a) are not subject to the requirements of this section.
(b) * * *
(5) You must operate and maintain the CEMS in continuous operation
according to the quality control program and performance evaluation
test plan.
(6) * * *
(i) A hydrogen chloride CEMS must meet the requirements of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix B, performance specification 18, as well as the
requirements of 40 CFR part 60, appendix F, procedure 6. A dioxin/furan
CEMS must meet the requirements of the promulgated performance
specification for the CEMS.
* * * * *
(7) * * *
(i) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before starting use
of the CEMS.
(ii) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before stopping use
of the CEMS, in which case you must also conduct a performance test
within 60 days of ceasing operation of the system.
* * * * *
(d) Establish operating limit. For each operating parameter that
must be monitored in Sec. 63.11925(c) for process vent control
devices, you must establish an operating limit as specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) 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 7 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 such that you are
meeting the emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
(1) For process vent control devices, the operating limit
established for each monitored parameter specified in Sec. 63.11940
must be based on the operating parameter values recorded during any
performance test conducted to demonstrate compliance as required by
Sec. 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
(2) * * *
(iii) The rationale for the established operating limit, including
any data and calculations used to develop the operating limit and a
description explaining why the operating limit indicates proper
operation of the control device.
* * * * *
(3) For batch processes, you may establish operating limits for
individual batch emission episodes, including each 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 pre-compliance report as specified in Sec. 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 explaining why each
operating limit indicates proper operation of the control device during
the specific batch emission episode.
* * * * *
0
21. Section 63.11940 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(3)(ii), (c) introductory text,
(c)(2)(ii), (d) introductory text, (d)(1), (e) introductory text, (f),
and (g) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec. 63.11925(c), you must install and operate the
applicable CPMS specified in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section
for each control device you use to comply with the emission limits for
process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. You must
monitor, record, and calculate CPMS data averages as specified in Table
7 to this subpart. Paragraph (h) of this section provides an option to
propose alternative monitoring parameters or procedures.
* * * * *
(b) Thermal oxidizer monitoring. If you are using a thermal
oxidizer to meet an emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified in Sec.
63.11925(c), you must equip the thermal oxidizer with the monitoring
equipment specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section,
as applicable.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(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 any of
the aforementioned conditions 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 type or manufacturer as the
old catalyst or is not as efficient as the old catalyst then you must
conduct a new performance test according to Sec. 63.11945 to determine
destruction efficiency. If a catalyst bed is replaced and the
replacement catalyst is of like type or manufacturer as the old
catalyst or is as efficient as or more efficient than the old catalyst,
then a new performance test to determine destruction efficiency is not
required.
[[Page 71518]]
(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, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified
in Sec. 63.11925(c), you must install the monitoring equipment
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) If the difference in the inlet gas stream temperature and the
inlet liquid stream temperature is greater than 38 degrees Celsius
(100.4 degrees Fahrenheit), you may install and operate a temperature
monitoring device at the scrubber gas stream exit.
* * * * *
(d) Regenerative adsorber monitoring. If you are using a
regenerative adsorber to meet an emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or
2b to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified in
Sec. 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 wastewater as
defined in Sec. 63.12005, then it is subject to the requirements of
Sec. 63.11965.
(1) For non-vacuum regeneration systems, an integrating
regeneration stream flow monitoring device having an accuracy of 10 percent and capable of recording the total regeneration stream
mass flow for each regeneration cycle.
* * * * *
(e) Non-regenerative adsorber monitoring. If you are using a non-
regenerative adsorber, or canister type system that is sent off site
for regeneration or disposal, to meet an emission limit in Table 1, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified
in Sec. 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.
* * * * *
(f) Condenser monitoring. If you are using a condenser to meet an
emission limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart and you are
required to use CPMS as specified in Sec. 63.11925(c), you must
install and operate a condenser exit gas temperature monitoring device.
(g) 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS as
specified in Sec. 63.11925(c), you must comply with the requirements
as specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this section.
* * * * *
0
22. Section 63.11945 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11945 What performance testing requirements must I meet for
process vents?
(a) General. For each control device used to meet the emission
limits for process vents in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you
must conduct the initial and periodic performance tests required in
Sec. 63.11925(d) and (e) and as specified in Sec. 63.11896 using the
applicable test methods and procedures specified in Table 8 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. You must record the process information
that documents operating conditions during the test and include in such
record an explanation to support how such conditions represent the
conditions specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) 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. In all cases, a site-specific plan
must be submitted to the Administrator for approval prior to testing in
accordance with Sec. 63.7(c). The test plan must include the emission
profiles described in Sec. 63.11925(g).
* * * * *
0
23. Section 63.11955 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11955 What are my initial and continuous compliance
requirements for other emission sources?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) Each gasholder must be vented back into the process for reuse
or routed to a closed vent system and control device meeting the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.11925 through 63.11950.
* * * * *
0
24. Section 63.11960 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b) introductory text, and (b)(1)
introductory text;
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(2);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and (iv), (c)(2) introductory text,
(c)(2)(i), and (c)(2)(ii) introductory text;
0
d. Revising parameter ``CGi'' of Equation 1 in paragraph
(c)(2)(ii)(A);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(B), (d)(3), (e)(1)(i) through (iv),
and (f) introductory text;
0
f. Revising parameter ``Ci'' of Equation 2 in paragraph (f);
and
0
g. Adding paragraphs (g) and (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 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 non-vinyl chloride organic HAP emission limits for stripped
resin specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
(b) Determination of total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP. You must
develop a facility-specific list of HAP that are expected to be present
in each grade of resin produced by your PVCPU using the procedures
specified for resin concentration in paragraph (b)(1) of this section
or the alternative mass emission rate limit as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section. This list must be kept current and must be
available for inspection by the Administrator. This list must include
the identification of each grade of resin produced, each HAP expected
to be present in that grade of resin, and the CAS number for each HAP.
(1) For the purposes of demonstrating initial and continuous
compliance as required in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, you
must meet the requirements specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
* * * * *
(2) For the purposes of demonstrating initial and continuous
compliance with the alternative mass emission rates as specified in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section, you must meet the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The process components associated with the stripped resin
process must be enclosed and routed through a closed vent system
meeting the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.11925 through 63.11950 for
the closed vent system and control device.
(ii) You must sample the stack emissions for all Table 10 HAP (as
defined in Sec. 63.12005) using the appropriate test methods specified
in Table 8 to this subpart and the procedures specified in Sec.
63.11945.
(iii) You must also sample the stack emissions for any HAP that are
not Table 10 HAP but are expected to be present based on your facility-
specific list of HAP using the appropriate test methods specified in
Table 8 to this
[[Page 71519]]
subpart and the procedures specified in Sec. 63.11945.
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) For continuous processes, during a 24-hour sampling period,
collect one grab sample at intervals of 8 hours or per grade of PVC
produced, whichever is more frequent. Each sample must be taken as the
resin flows out of the stripper.
(iv) For batch processes, during a 24-hour sampling period, for
each batch of each resin grade produced, collect one grab sample. Each
sample must be taken immediately following the completion of the
stripping operation.
(2) Demonstrate initial compliance with the vinyl chloride and
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2,
or 2b to this subpart as specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) Calculate the vinyl chloride 24-hour arithmetic average for
each stripper using the vinyl chloride measured for the grab samples
collected as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this
section and the calculation procedure specified in either paragraph
(c)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.
(ii) Calculate the total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP 24-hour
arithmetic average for each stripper by first using the total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP measured for the grab samples collected as
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section and the
calculation procedure specified in paragraph (f) of this section to
determine the total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentration of
each sample (CTNVCH). Then, use the CTNVCH and
the calculation procedure specified in either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)
or (B) of this section to calculate the total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP 24-hour arithmetic average.
(A) * * *
CGi = 24-hour average concentration of vinyl chloride or
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP in resin grade Gi,
ppmw. For non-vinyl chloride organic HAP, CTNVCH from
paragraph (f) of this section is used as CGi for each
resin grade.
* * * * *
(B) If only one resin grade was produced during the 24-hour
sampling event, use the 24-hour arithmetic average vinyl chloride and
total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentrations for the one resin
grade calculated as specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section for each stripper or calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average
vinyl chloride and total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentrations
for all strippers used to process the one grade of resin.
(d) * * *
(3) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the vinyl
chloride and total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP emission limit for
stripped resin in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart as specified in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) SW-846-8260B (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) for
analysis of volatile organic compounds listed in Table 10 of this
subpart or the site-specific HAP list.
(ii) SW-846-8270D (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) for
analysis of semivolatile organic compounds listed in Table 10 of this
subpart or the site-specific HAP list.
(iii) SW-846-8315A (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) for
analysis of aldehyde compounds listed in Table 10 of this subpart or
the site-specific HAP list.
(iv) SW-846-8015C (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) for
analysis of alcohol compounds listed in Table 10 of this subpart or the
site-specific HAP list.
* * * * *
(f) Method for calculating total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration. For each stripped resin sample analyzed using the
methods specified in paragraph (e) of this section, calculate the sum
of the measured concentrations of each HAP analyzed as required in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section by using Equation 2 to this section.
* * * * *
Ci = Concentration of individual HAP present in the
stripped resin sample analyzed pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this
section excluding vinyl chloride, in ppmw, where a value of zero
should be used for any HAP concentration that is below the detection
limit.
(g) Method for calculating alternative mass emission rates. If you
elect to demonstrate initial or continuous compliance with the
alternative mass emissions rates (g/kg) in Tables 1b and 2b of this
subpart, calculate the mass of the HAP emitted to the atmosphere of
vinyl chloride and each HAP analyzed as required in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section by using Equation 3 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09NO20.002
Ei = HAP emissions for individual HAP i, g/kg (lb/lb)
product.
Ci = Concentration of HAP i according to methods found in
Table 8 to this subpart and the procedures specified in Sec.
63.11945, in ppmv. A value of zero should be used for any HAP
concentration that is below the detection limit.
Di = Density of HAP i at standard conditions, kg/m\3\ (lb/ft\3\).
Q = Volumetric flow rate as determined by Method 2 of appendix A to
part 60 of this chapter, at standard conditions, m\3\/hr (ft\3\/hr).
K = Unit conversion factor, 1,000 g/kg (1 lb/lb).
10\-6\ = Conversion factor for ppm.
Z = Production rate of dry resin, kg/hr (lb/hr).
(h) Method for calculating total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
mass emission rates. If you elect to demonstrate initial or continuous
compliance with the alternative total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
mass emissions rates (g/kg) in Tables 1b and 2b of this subpart,
calculate the sum of the mass emission rates of each HAP required in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section using the results from paragraph (g)
and Equation 4 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09NO20.005
ETNVCH = Mass emission rate of total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP compounds in the stripped resin sample, in g/kg product
(lb/lb product).
Ei = Mass emission rate of individual HAP present in the
stripped resin sample analyzed pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this
section excluding vinyl chloride, in g/kg product (lb/lb product).
0
25. Section 63.11965 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1)(i),
(b)(2), (c) through (e), (f) introductory text, and (f)(1)(i) and (ii)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11965 What are my general compliance requirements for
wastewater?
(a) Emission limits. You must meet the emission limits specified in
Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart for each process wastewater
stream before being mixed with any other process wastewater stream,
before being exposed to the atmosphere, and before being discharged
from the affected source.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For treated process wastewater streams, you must collect
process wastewater samples at the outlet of the treatment process and
before the process wastewater stream is mixed with any other process
wastewater stream containing vinyl chloride or total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentrations less than the applicable emission limits
specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, before being
exposed to the atmosphere, and before being discharged from the
affected source.
* * * * *
[[Page 71520]]
(2) You must measure the concentration of vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP, using the test
methods and procedures specified in Sec. 63.11980.
(c) Requirements for process wastewater streams that must be
treated. You must treat each process wastewater stream that has a vinyl
chloride or total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentration equal to
or greater than the applicable emission limits specified in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart as determined pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this section, to reduce the concentration below the applicable emission
limits specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. You must
route wastewater streams through hard-piping 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 Sec. Sec.
63.11925 through 63.11950. You must also meet the initial and
continuous compliance requirements specified in Sec. Sec. 63.11970(a)
and 63.11975(a) and (b).
(d) Requirements for process wastewater streams that do not need to
be treated. For each process wastewater stream that has a vinyl
chloride or total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentration less
than the applicable emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart as determined pursuant to paragraph (b) of this
section, you must meet the initial and continuous compliance
requirements specified in Sec. Sec. 63.11970(b) and 63.11975(c).
(e) Maintenance wastewater. You must comply with the requirements
specified in Sec. 63.105(b) and (c) for maintenance wastewater
containing Table 10 HAP (as defined in Sec. 63.12005).
(f) Determination of total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP. If you
are subject to the emission limits specified in Table 1 or 2 to this
subpart, then you must develop a facility-specific list of HAP that are
expected to be present in each process wastewater stream at your PVCPU
and comply with paragraph (f)(1) of this section. This list must be
continuously updated and must be available for inspection by the
Administrator. This list must include the identification of each HAP
expected to be present in each process wastewater stream, and the CAS
number for each HAP.
(1) * * *
(i) You must analyze each process wastewater sample for all Table
10 HAP using the test methods specified in Sec. 63.11980(a)(2) and
(3).
(ii) You must also analyze each process wastewater sample for any
HAP that are not Table 10 HAP but are expected to be present in that
sample based on your facility-specific list of HAP using the
appropriate test method specified in Sec. 63.11980(a)(2).
* * * * *
0
26. Section 63.11970 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11970 What are my initial compliance requirements for process
wastewater?
(a) Demonstration of initial compliance for process wastewater
streams that must be treated. For each process wastewater stream that
must be treated as specified in Sec. 63.11965(b) and (c), you must
conduct an initial performance test for the wastewater treatment
process, measuring the concentration of vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP, in the wastewater
stream at the outlet of the wastewater treatment process before the
wastewater is exposed to the atmosphere, mixed with any other process
stream, and before being discharged from the affected facility, using
the test method and procedures specified in Sec. 63.11980(a).
(b) Demonstration of initial compliance for process wastewater
streams that are not required to be treated. For each process
wastewater stream that has a vinyl chloride or total non-vinyl chloride
organic HAP concentration less than the applicable emission limits
specified in Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, you must use the
collection and measurement procedures specified in Sec.
63.11965(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2) to demonstrate initial compliance.
0
27. Section 63.11975 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11975 What are my continuous compliance requirements for
process wastewater?
(a) For each process wastewater stream that must be treated as
specified in Sec. 63.11965(b) and (c), you must demonstrate continuous
compliance as specified in paragraph (b) of this section. For each
process wastewater stream for which you initially determine in Sec.
63.11970(b) that treatment is not required, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) For each process wastewater stream that must be treated
according to Sec. 63.11965(b) and (c), you must demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limits specified in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart by following the procedures specified in paragraphs
(b)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Following your demonstration of initial compliance in Sec.
63.11970(a), make monthly measurements of the vinyl chloride, and if
applicable, total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP, concentrations using
the procedures and methods specified in Sec. 63.11965(b)(1)(i) and
(b)(2).
(2) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart on a monthly basis,
using the monthly concentration measurement specified in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section.
(c) For each wastewater stream for which you initially determine in
Sec. 63.11970(b) that treatment is not required, you must demonstrate
continuous compliance as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) Conduct annual performance tests, measuring the vinyl chloride,
and if applicable, total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP concentrations
using the procedures and methods specified in Sec. 63.11965(b)(1)(ii)
and (b)(2).
(2) If any annual performance test conducted as specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section results in a concentration of vinyl
chloride or total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP in the process
wastewater stream that is greater than or equal to the applicable
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, then you must
meet the requirements of Sec. 63.11965(c) and you must demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance as specified in Sec. 63.11970 and
this section.
0
28. Section 63.11980 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text, (a)(1), and (b) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11980 What are the test methods and calculation procedures
for process wastewater?
(a) Performance test methods and procedures. You must determine the
concentration of vinyl chloride, and if applicable, total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP, using the test methods and procedures specified
in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) 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 worst-case operating
conditions for the PVCPU when the process wastewater treatment process
is operating as close as possible to maximum representative operating
conditions. If the wastewater treatment process will be operating at
several different sets of operating conditions, you must supplement the
testing with
[[Page 71521]]
additional testing, modeling, or engineering assessments to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits.
* * * * *
(b) Method for calculating total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration. If you are subject to the emission limits specified in
Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, then for each process wastewater stream
analyzed using the methods specified in paragraph (a) of this section,
calculate the sum of the measured concentrations of each HAP analyzed
as required in Sec. 63.11965(f)(1) by using Equation 1 to this
section.
* * * * *
0
29. Section 63.11985 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(7)(ii), (a)(8)(i) and (ii),
(b)(4)(i) introductory text, (b)(4)(i)(A), (b)(6) through (8), (b)(10)
introductory text, and (b)(10)(v);
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(11); and
0
c. Revising paragraphs (b)(12), (c)(1), (2), and (8) and (c)(9)(i) and
(ii).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.11985 What notifications and reports must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) You must include the operating limit for each monitoring
parameter identified for each control device used to meet the emission
limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, as determined pursuant
to Sec. 63.11935(d). This report must include the information in Sec.
63.11935(d)(2), as applicable.
* * * * *
(7) * * *
(ii) You must include results of the initial testing used to
determine initial compliance with the stripped resin limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
(8) * * *
(i) You must include an identification of each process wastewater
stream subject to the requirements of this subpart, and the results of
your determination for each stream as to whether it must be treated to
meet the limits of Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart. You must also
include a description of the treatment process to be used for each
process wastewater stream that requires treatment.
(ii) You must include results of the initial sampling used to
determine initial compliance with the vinyl chloride limits in Table 1,
1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(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 the process vent emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b
to this subpart, 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, 1b,
2, or 2b to this subpart or when the value does not meet the data
availability requirements defined in Sec. 63.11890(c).
* * * * *
(6) You must include the records specified in Sec. 63.11990(j)(2)
for other emission sources.
(7) For resin stripper operations, you must include the daily vinyl
chloride and/or monthly total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP
concentration or alternative mass emission rate results for each resin
type produced within the PVCPU that did not meet the stripped resin
emission limits in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this subpart, as
applicable.
(8) For wastewater operations, you must include the results of
monthly vinyl chloride and, if applicable, monthly total non-vinyl
chloride organic HAP concentration results for each process wastewater
stream discharged from the affected source that did not meet the
process wastewater emission limits in Tables 1, 1b, 2, or 2b to this
subpart.
* * * * *
(10) If any pressure vessel closure device or closed vent system
that contains a bypass has directly discharged to the atmosphere, or
any closed vent system that is designed to be in vacuum service and is
operating and not in vacuum service, as specified in Sec.
63.11910(c)(3) or Sec. 63.11930(c) or (h), you must submit to the
Administrator the following information:
* * * * *
(v) The measures adopted to prevent future such discharges.
* * * * *
(12) 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) * * *
(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 Sec.
63.11910(a)(3). 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
storage vessel inspections.
(2) Batch pre-compliance report. You must submit a batch pre-
compliance report at least 6 months prior to the compliance date of
this subpart (see Sec. 63.11875) that includes a description of the
test conditions, data, calculations and other information used to
establish operating limits according to Sec. 63.11935(d) for all batch
operations. If you use an engineering assessment as specified in Sec.
63.11950(i), then you must also include data or other information
supporting a finding that the emissions estimation equations in Sec.
63.11950(a) through (h) are inappropriate. If the EPA disapproves the
report, then you must still be in compliance with the emission limits
and work practice standards of this subpart by your compliance date. To
change any of the information submitted in the report, you must notify
the EPA 60 days before you implement the planned change.
* * * * *
(8) Commencing and ceasing operation of CEMSs. Before starting or
stopping the use of CEMS, you must notify the Administrator as
specified in Sec. 63.11935(b)(7).
(9) * * *
(i) Beginning on [date 60 days after date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register], within 60 days after the date of
completing each performance test required by this subpart, you must
submit the results of the performance test following the procedures
specified in paragraphs (c)(9)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test. Submit the results of the
performance test to the EPA via
[[Page 71522]]
the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI), which
can be accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The data must be submitted in a file format generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT. Alternatively, you may submit an
electronic file consistent with the extensible markup language (XML)
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website.
(B) Data collected using test methods that are not supported by the
EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the test.
The results of the performance test must be included as an attachment
in the ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the ERT generated
package or alternative file to the EPA via CEDRI.
(C) Confidential business information (CBI). If you claim some of
the information submitted under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section
is CBI, you must submit a complete file, including information claimed
to be CBI, to the EPA. The file must be generated through the use of
the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as
described in paragraphs (c)(9)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(ii) Beginning on [date 60 days after date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register], within 60 days after the date of
completing each CEMS performance evaluation (as defined in Sec. 63.2),
you must submit the results of the performance evaluation following the
procedures specified in paragraphs (c)(9)(ii)(A) through (B) of this
section.
(A) Performance evaluations of CEMS measuring relative accuracy
test audit (RATA) pollutants that are supported by the EPA's ERT as
listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the evaluation. Submit
the results of the performance evaluation to the EPA via CEDRI, which
can be accessed through the EPA's CDX. The data must be submitted in a
file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT. Alternatively,
you may submit an electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed
on the EPA's ERT website.
(B) Performance evaluations of CEMS measuring RATA pollutants that
are not supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website
at the time of the evaluation. The results of the performance
evaluation must be included as an attachment in the ERT or an alternate
electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT
website. Submit the ERT generated package or alternative file to the
EPA via CEDRI.
(C) Confidential business information (CBI). If you claim some of
the information submitted under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section
is CBI, you must submit a complete file, including information claimed
to be CBI, to the EPA. The file must be generated through the use of
the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as
described in paragraphs (c)(9)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.
* * * * *
0
30. Section 63.11990 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(4);
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(7);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) and (h)(2);
0
d. Adding paragraph (h)(3);
0
e. Revising paragraph (i)(4); and
0
f. Removing paragraph (i)(5).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.11990 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(b) Storage vessels. For storage vessels, you must maintain the
records specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this section.
* * * * *
(4) For each pressure vessel, you must keep records of the
information specified in Sec. 63.11985(b)(10) and paragraph (c) of
this section.
* * * * *
(7) For storage vessels that use vapor balancing, you must keep the
records specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) A record of the certification required by Sec. 63.11910(e)(2).
(ii) If complying with Sec. 63.11910(e)(6)(ii), keep the records
specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) A record of the equipment to be used and the procedures to be
followed when reloading the railcar, tank truck, or barge and
displacing vapors to the storage vessel from which the liquid
originates.
(B) A record of each time the vapor balancing system is used to
comply with Sec. 63.11910(e)(6)(ii).
(iii) If complying with Sec. 63.11910(e)(6)(iii), you must keep
records that demonstrate one or more of the conditions specified in
Sec. 63.11910(d)(4)(i)(A) through (D) are met.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) In lieu of calculating and recording the average value
specified in paragraph (e)(3)(i) of this section, if all 1-hour
averages specified in Sec. 63.11935(e) demonstrate compliance with
your parameter operating limit or the applicable pollutant emission
limit in Table 1, 1b, 2, or 2b 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.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) The total quantity (pounds) of each resin grade produced per
day and the total quantity of resin processed by each resin stripper or
group of strippers, identified by resin type and resin grade, per day.
(3) If you elect to demonstrate initial or continuous compliance
with the alternative mass emissions rates (g/kg) in Table 1b or 2b to
this subpart, you must keep the records specified in paragraphs (e)
through (g) of this section for process vents and closed vent systems
for equipment downstream of the stripper.
(i) * * *
(4) All testing data, including monthly measurements of the
concentrations of vinyl chloride, and if applicable, the concentration
of total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP in each process wastewater
stream required to be measured, as specified in Sec. 63.11975.
* * * * *
0
31. Section 63.12005 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the definition for ``Affirmative defense'';
0
b. Revising the definition for ``Batch process vent'';
[[Page 71523]]
0
c. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Closure device'';
0
d. Removing the definition for ``Container'';
0
e. Revising the definition for ``Continuous process vent'';
0
f. Removing the definition for ``Corrective action plan'';
0
g. Revising the definitions for ``Dispersion process'' and ``First
attempt at repair'';
0
h. Removing the definition for ``Operating day'';
0
i. Revising the definitions for ``Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
production process unit or PVCPU,'' ``Polyvinyl chloride copolymer,''
``Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer,'' ``Process component,'' ``Process
condenser,'' ``Process vent,'' ``Product,'' and ``PVC-combined process
vent'';
0
j. Removing the definition for ``PVC-only process vent'';
0
k. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``PVC process vent'';
0
l. Revising the definition for ``Repaired'';
0
m. Removing the definitions for ``Root cause analysis'' and ``Solution
process'';
0
n. Revising the definitions for ``Total non-vinyl chloride organic
HAP'' and ``Type of resin'';
0
o. Removing the definition for ``Unloading operations''; and
0
p. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Vapor balancing
system.''
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.12005 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Batch process vent means a vent from a batch operation from a PVCPU
through which a HAP-containing gas stream has the potential to be
released to the atmosphere except that it is required by this subpart
to be routed to a closed vent system and control device. Emissions for
all emission episodes associated with the unit operation(s) are part of
the batch process vent. Batch process vents also include vents with
intermittent flow from continuous operations. Examples of batch process
vents include, but are not limited to, vents on condensers used for
product recovery, polymerization reactors, and process tanks.
* * * * *
Closure device means a cover, cap, hatch, lid, plug, seal, valve,
or other type of fitting that, when the device is secured in the closed
position, prevents or reduces air emissions to the atmosphere by
blocking an opening in a fixed roof storage vessel or pressure vessel.
* * * * *
Continuous process vent means a vent from a continuous PVCPU
operation through which a HAP-containing gas stream has the potential
to be released to the atmosphere except that it is required by this
subpart to be routed to a closed vent system and control device and has
the following characteristics:
(1) The gas stream originates as a continuous flow from any
continuous PVCPU operation during operation of the PVCPU.
(2) The discharge into the closed vent system and 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.
* * * * *
Dispersion process means a process for producing polyvinyl chloride
resin that is characterized by either emulsion or microsuspension
polymerization. Emulsion polymerization uses water soluble initiators
and is distinguished by metering in surfactants as the reaction
progresses. In microsuspension polymerization, homogenizers are first
mixed with a monomer outside of the polymerization reactor and oil
soluble initiators are then added before charging the reactor. These
two polymerization techniques produce fine particles, typically less
than 10 microns, with little or no porosity. Emulsifier levels vary but
agitation is very mild compared to other PVC polymerization processes.
The final product is dried to powder form.
* * * * *
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
Sec. 63.11930(f) or Sec. 63.1023(b) and (c), as applicable, to verify
whether the leak is repaired, unless the owner or operator determines
by other means that the leak is not repaired.
* * * * *
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; resin blend tanks; resin centrifuges; resin
dryers; resin product separators; recovery devices; reactant and raw
material charge vessels and tanks, holding tanks, mixing and weighing
tanks; finished resin product storage vessels or storage silos;
finished resin product loading operations; connected ducts and piping;
equipment including pumps, compressors, agitators, pressure relief
devices, sampling connection systems, open-ended valves or lines,
valves and connectors and instrumentation systems.
Polyvinyl chloride copolymer means a synthetic thermoplastic
polymer that is derived from the simultaneous polymerization of vinyl
chloride and one or more additional monomers. The additional monomers
are reactive with vinyl chloride and become part of the polymer chain.
Additives used in polyvinyl chloride copolymer polymerization for
stabilization and/or particle size control are not as reactive, do not
become part of the polymer chain, and are not considered to be monomers
in the polymerization process. Polyvinyl chloride copolymer is produced
by different processes, including, but not limited to, suspension
process, dispersion process, and suspension blending process.
Polyvinyl chloride homopolymer means a synthetic thermoplastic
polymer that is derived from the polymerization of vinyl chloride and
has the general chemical structure (-H2CCHCl-)n. Polyvinyl chloride
homopolymer is typically a white powder or colorless granule. Polyvinyl
chloride homopolymer is produced by different processes, including, but
not limited to, suspension process, dispersion process, suspension
blending process, and bulk process.
* * * * *
Process component means any unit operation or group of unit
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, pressure
vessels, process condensers, process tanks, recovery devices, and
[[Page 71524]]
resin strippers, as defined in this section.
Process condenser means a condenser whose primary purpose is to
recover material as an integral part of a batch or continuous process.
All condensers recovering condensate from a batch or continuous 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 or continuous 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 vent means a vent stream that is the result of the
manifolding of each and all batch process vent, continuous process
vent, or miscellaneous vent resulting from the affected facility into a
closed vent system and into a common header that is routed to a control
device. The process vent standards apply at the outlet of the control
device. A process vent is either a PVC process vent or a PVC-combined
process vent.
* * * * *
Product means a polymer produced using vinyl chloride monomer and
varying in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators, etc.); catalysts;
or in the relative proportions of vinyl chloride monomer with one or
more other monomers, and 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. By-products, isolated intermediates,
impurities, wastes, and trace contaminants are not considered products.
PVC-combined process vent means a process vent that originates from
a PVCPU and is combined with one or more process vents originating from
the production of vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene dichloride prior
to being controlled or emitted to the atmosphere. A vent stream
originating from process components associated with the stripped resin
downstream of the resin stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
is not considered a PVC-combined process vent.
PVC process vent means a process vent that originates from a PVCPU
and is not combined with one or more process vents originating from the
production of vinyl chloride monomer or ethylene dichloride prior to
being controlled or emitted to the atmosphere. A vent stream
originating from process components associated with the stripped resin
downstream of the resin stripper (e.g., dryers, centrifuges, filters)
is not considered a PVC process vent.
* * * * *
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 or other subpart referenced by
this subpart, is inspected as specified in Sec. 63.11930(f) to verify
that emissions from the equipment are below the applicable leak
definition.
* * * * *
Total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP means, for the purposes of
this subpart, the sum of the measured concentrations of each HAP, as
calculated according to the procedures specified in Sec. Sec.
63.11960(f) and 63.11980(b) or the sum of the mass emission rates of
each HAP, as calculated according to the procedures specified in Sec.
63.11960(h).
Type of resin means the broad classification of PVC homopolymer and
copolymer resin referring to the basic manufacturing process for
producing that resin, including, but not limited to, suspension,
dispersion, suspension blending, and bulk.
Vapor balancing system means:
(1) A piping system that collects HAP vapors displaced from
transport vehicles (i.e., railcar, tank truck, barge) during storage
vessel loading and routes the collected vapors to the storage vessel
from which the HAP being loaded originated or to another storage vessel
connected to a common header, without emissions to the atmosphere; or
(2) A piping system that collects HAP vapors displaced from the
loading of a storage vessel and routes the collected vapors to the
transport vehicle from which the storage vessel is filled, without
emissions to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
0
32. Table 1 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is amended by revising the
table heading and row 1.a to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for Existing Affected Sources not Complying
With Sec. 63.11880(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this
pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . . emission limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PVC process vents \a\............. a. Vinyl chloride...... All resin types........ 6.0 parts per million
by volume (ppmv).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
* * * * *
0
33. Table 1b to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is added to read as follows:
[[Page 71525]]
Table 1B to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for Existing Affected Sources Complying
With Sec. 63.11880(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this emission
. pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . limit . . .
.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PVC process vents \a\........... a. Vinyl chloride..... All resin types....... 0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons. All resin types....... 5.1 ppmv measured as
propane.
c. Total organic HAP All resin types....... 22 ppmv.
\b\.
d. Hydrogen chloride.. All resin types....... 0.64 ppmv.
e. Dioxins/furans All resin types....... 0.035 ng/dscm.
(toxic equivalency
basis).
2. PVC-combined process vents \a\.. a. Vinyl chloride..... All resin types....... 0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons. All resin types....... 9.1 ppmv measured as
propane.
c. Total organic HAP All resin types....... 9.7 ppmv.
\b\.
d. Hydrogen chloride.. All resin types....... 3.9 ppmv.
e. Dioxins/furans All resin types....... 0.68 ng/dscm.
(toxic equivalency
basis).
3. Stripped resin.................. a. Vinyl chloride..... i. Bulk resin......... 7.1 ppmw; or 0.0071 grams
per kilogram of product
resin, dry basis (g/
kg).\c\
ii. Dispersion resin.. 1300 ppmw; or 1.3 g/kg.\c\
iii. Suspension resin. 37 ppmw; or 0.037 g/kg.\c\
iv. Suspension 140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/kg.\c\
blending resin.
v. Copolymer resin.... 790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/kg.\c\
b. Total non-vinyl i. Bulk resin......... 170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/kg.\c\
chloride organic HAP.
ii. Dispersion resin.. 240 ppmw; or 0.24 g/kg.\c\
iii. Suspension resin. 670 ppmw; or 0.67 g/kg.\c\
iv. Suspension 500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/kg.\c\
blending resin.
v. Copolymer resin.... 1900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/kg.\c\
4. Process Wastewater.............. a. Vinyl chloride..... All resin types....... 0.73 ppmw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
\b\ Total organic HAP is alternative compliance limit for THC.
\c\ If you elect to comply with the g/kg alternative mass emission limit for resins, you must comply with the
requirements specified in Sec. 63.11960(b)(2).
0
34. Table 2 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is amended by revising the
table heading and rows 1.a, 2.e, and 3.a.i. to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for New Affected Sources not Complying With
Sec. 63.11880(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this
pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . . emission limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PVC process vents \a\............. a. Vinyl chloride...... All resin types........ 0.56 ppmv.
* * * * * * *
2. PVC-combined process vents \a\.... * * * *
e. Dioxins/furans All resin types........ 0.034 ng/dscm.
(toxic equivalency
basis).
3. Stripped resin.................... a. Vinyl chloride...... i. Bulk resin.......... 7.1 ppmw.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
* * * * *
0
35. Table 2b to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is added to read as follows:
[[Page 71526]]
Table 2B to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Emission Limits and Standards for New Affected Sources Complying With
Sec. 63.11880(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for an affected
For this type of emission point . . . And for this air source producing this You must meet this
pollutant . . . type of PVC resin . . . emission limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PVC process vents \a\............. a. Vinyl chloride...... All resin types........ 0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons.. All resin types........ 2.2 ppmv measured as
propane.
c. Total organic HAP All resin types........ 1.3 ppmv.
\b\.
d. Hydrogen chloride... All resin types........ 0.17 ppmv.
e. Dioxins/furans All resin types........ 0.035 ng/dscm.
(toxic equivalency
basis).
2. PVC-combined process vents \a\.... a. Vinyl chloride...... All resin types........ 0.85 ppmv.
b. Total hydrocarbons.. All resin types........ 2.2 ppmv measured as
propane.
c. Total organic HAP All resin types........ 5.9 ppmv.
\b\.
d. Hydrogen chloride... All resin types........ 1.4 ppmv.
e. Dioxins/furans All resin types........ 0.051 ng/dscm.
(toxic equivalency
basis).
3. Stripped resin.................... a. Vinyl chloride...... i. Bulk resin.......... 7.1 ppmw; or 0.0071 g/
kg.\c\
ii. Dispersion resin... 480 ppmw; or 0.48 g/
kg.\c\
iii. Suspension resin.. 7.3 ppmw; or 0.0073 g/
kg.\c\
iv. Suspension blending 140 ppmw; or 0.14 g/
resin. kg.\c\
v. Copolymer--all resin 790 ppmw; or 0.79 g/
types. kg.\c\
b. Total non-vinyl i. Bulk resin.......... 170 ppmw; or 0.17 g/
chloride organic HAP. kg.\c\
ii. Dispersion resin... 66 ppmw; or 0.066 g/
kg.\c\
iii. Suspension resin.. 15 ppmw; or 0.015 g/
kg.\c\
iv. Suspension blending 500 ppmw; or 0.50 g/
resin. kg.\c\
v. Copolymer resin..... 1900 ppmw; or 1.9 g/
kg.\c\
4. Process Wastewater................ a. Vinyl chloride...... All resin types........ 0.57 ppmw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.
\b\ Total organic HAP is alternative compliance limit for THC.
\c\ If you elect to comply with the g/kg alternative mass emission limit for resins, you must comply with the
requirements specified in Sec. 63.11960(b)(2).
0
36. Table 3 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is revised to read as
follows:
Table 3 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Summary of Control Requirements for Storage Vessels at New and Existing
Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the vapor
If the storage vessel capacity (gallons) pressure \a\
is . . . (psia) is . . Then, you must use . . .
.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=20,000 but <40,000..................... >=4 an internal or external floating roof storage vessel
and meet the requirements in Sec. 63.11910(b) or a
fixed roof storage vessel vented to a closed vent
system and control device achieving 95 weight
percent HAP reduction and meet the requirements of
Sec. 63.11910(d).
>=40,000................................. >=0.75
Any capacity............................. >11.1 a pressure vessel and meet the requirements of Sec.
63.11910(c).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All other capacity and vapor pressure combinations....... a fixed roof and meet the requirements of Sec.
63.11910(a).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Maximum true vapor pressure.
0
37. Table 4 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is amended by revising the
entries for ``Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)'' and ``Sec. 63.10(c)(10),''
removing the entry ``63.10(c)(11), (c)(12)'' and adding the entry
``Sec. 63.10(c)(11), (c)(12)'' in its place, and revising the entry
``Sec. 63.10(d)(5)'' to read as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Applicability of the General Provisions to Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject HHHHHHH Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)................ Recordkeeping of malfunctions. No...................... ..............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)................... Recording nature and cause of No...................... ..............
malfunctions.
[[Page 71527]]
Sec. 63.10(c)(11), (c)(12).......... Recording corrective actions.. No...................... ..............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.10(d)(5).................... SSM reports................... No...................... ..............
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
38. Table 5 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the entry for ``Flow to/from the control device'' and
adding the entry ``Presence or absence of flow to/from the control
device if flow could be intermittent'' in its place;
0
b. Revising the entries for ``Regeneration stream flow'' and ``Adsorber
bed temperature'' (both entries);
0
c. Removing the entry ``Vacuum and duratio of regeneration'' and adding
the entry ``Vacuum and duration of regeneration'' in its place;
0
d. Revising the entries ``Regeneration frequency,'' ``Adsorber
operation valve sequencing and cycle time,'' ``Average adsorber bed
life,'' and ``Outlet VOC concentration of the first adsorber bed in
series.''
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Operating Parameters, Operating Limits and Data Monitoring, Recording and
Compliance Frequencies for Process Vents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establish the Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance
following using these minimum frequencies
For these control devices, you operating limit -----------------------------------------------------------
must monitor these operating during your
parameters . . . initial Data averaging
performance test . Data measurement Data recording period for
. . compliance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Presence or absence of flow to/ Indication of Episodic.......... Date and time when Time period
from the control device if flow absence of flow-- flow stops during between flow stop
could be intermittent. note that absence process operation and start.
of flow can be and when flow
determined when begins after
process is not stopping during
operating using process operation.
simulated flow.
* * * * * * *
Regeneration stream flow........ Minimum total flow Continuous........ Every 15 minutes.. Total flow for
per regeneration each regeneration
cycle. cycle.
Adsorber bed temperature........ Maximum Continuously after Every 15 minutes 3-hour block
temperature. regeneration and after average.
within 15 minutes regeneration and
of completing any within 15 minutes
temperature of completing any
regulation. temperature
regulation.
Adsorber bed temperature........ Minimum Continuously Every 15 minutes Average of
temperature. during during regeneration
regeneration regeneration cycle.
except during any cycle.
temperature
regulating
portion of the
regeneration
cycle.
Vacuum and duration of Minimum vacuum and Continuous........ Every 15 minutes Average vacuum and
regeneration. period of time during duration of
for regeneration. regeneration regeneration.
cycle.
Regeneration frequency.......... Minimum Continuous........ Date and time of Date and time of
regeneration regeneration regeneration
frequency and start and stop. start and stop.
duration.
Adsorber operation valve Correct valve Daily............. Daily............. Daily
sequencing and cycle time. sequencing and
minimum cycle
time.
* * * * * * *
Average adsorber bed life....... Adsorber bed Daily until Outlet VOC Average time for
change-out time breakthrough for concentration. three adsorber
[N/A for initial three adsorber bed change-outs
performance test]. bed change-outs.
Outlet VOC concentration of the Limits in Table 1, Daily, except Outlet VOC Daily, weekly, or
first adsorber bed in series. 1b, 2, or 2b of monthly (if more concentration. monthly.
this subpart. than 2 months bed
life remaining)
or weekly (if
more than 2 weeks
bed life
remaining).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
39. Table 8 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 amended by revising the
heading to the first column and row 6.c to read as follows:
[[Page 71528]]
Table 8 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, 1b, 2, or 2b to this You must . . . Using . . .
subpart for the following
pollutant . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
6. Any pollutant from a * * * * *
continuous, batch, or
combination of continuous and
batch process vent(s).
c. Conduct gas Method 3, 3A, or
molecular weight 3B at 40 CFR
analysis and correct part 60,
concentrations the appendix A-2,
specified percent using the same
oxygen in Table 1, sampling site
1b, 2, or 2b to this and time as HAP
subpart. samples.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
40. Table 9 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 is amended by revising rows 3
and 4 to read as follows:
Table 9 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Procedures for Conducting Sampling of Stripped Resin and Process
Wastewater
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collect samples according to the following
For the following schedule . . .
emission points and -------------------------------------------------
For demonstrating . . . types of processes . . Total non-vinyl
. Vinyl chloride . . . chloride organic HAP .
. .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
3. Initial compliance................ N/A.................... 1 grab or composite 1 grab or composite
sample. sample.
4. Continuous compliance............. N/A.................... 1 grab or composite 1 grab or composite
sample per month. sample per month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2020-23387 Filed 11-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P