29528 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1Throughout this preamble, ‘‘we’’ refers to EPA. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037; FRL–9298–7] 

RIN 2060–AN33 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers Production. The proposed 

rule would establish emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants from 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymers 

production located at major and area 

sources. The proposed rule includes 

requirements to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the 

proposed emission standards. EPA is 

proposing standards that would apply at 

all times, including during periods of 

startup, shutdown, and malfunctions. 

The proposed standards also include 

continuous monitoring provisions and 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements. 

DATES: Comments. Comments must be 

received on or before July 19, 2011. 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

comments on the information collection 

provisions are best assured of having 

full effect if the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of 

your comments on or before June 20, 

2011. 

Public Hearing. We 1 will hold two 

public hearings concerning the 

proposed polyvinyl chloride and 

copolymers (PVC) production rules in 

the Houston, Texas area, and in Baton 

Rouge, Louisiana. Persons interested in 

presenting oral testimony at either 

public hearing should contact Ms. 

Teresa Clemons at (919) 541–0252 or at 

clemons.teresa@epa.gov by May 31, 

2011. If no one requests to speak at the 

public hearings by May 31, 2011, then 

the public hearings will be cancelled 

without further notice. We will specify 

the date and time of the public hearings 

on http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pvc/

pvcpg.html. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2002–0037 by one of the following 

methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• http://www.epa.gov/oar/ 

docket.html. Follow the instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. 

Attn: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2002–0037. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attn: Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. 

• Mail: By U.S. Postal Service, send 

your comments to: EPA Docket Center, 

EPA West Building (Air Docket), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attn: 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002– 

0037. Please include a total of two 

copies. In addition, please mail a copy 

of your comments on the information 

collection provisions to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, Attn: 

Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., 

Washington, DC 20503. 

• Hand Delivery: By courier, deliver 

your comments to: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

EPA West Building (Air Docket), Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20004, Attn: Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays), and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Information 

Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. 

Direct your comments to Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. EPA’s 

policy is that all comments received 

will be included in the public docket 

and may be made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be confidential 

business information (CBI), or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI, 

or otherwise protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or E-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an E-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your E-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket, and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment, and with 

any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties, and cannot 

contact you for clarification, EPA may 

not be able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Docket: EPA has established a docket 

for this action under Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, EPA West 

Building (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the EPA 

Docket Center is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Jodi Howard, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division (E143–01), Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; Telephone number: (919) 541– 

4607; Fax number: (919) 541–0246; Email address: howard.jodi@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Acronyms and Abbreviations. Several 

acronyms and terms are used in this 

preamble. While this may not be an 

exhaustive list, to ease the reading of 

this preamble and for reference 

purposes, the following terms and 

acronyms are defined here: 

CAA—Clean Air Act 

CBI—confidential business information 

CDD/CDF—chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins and 

furans 

CDX—Central Data Exchange 

CEMS—continuous emission monitoring 

system 

CPMS—continuous parameter monitoring 

system 

ERT—Emissions Reporting Tool 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29529 

Fe—fraction emitted 

GACT—generally available control 

technologies or management practices 

HAP—hazardous air pollutants 

HCl—hydrogen chloride 

HON—Hazardous Organic NESHAP 

ICR—information collection request 

K—kurtosis 

lbs/yr—pounds per year 

l/min—liters per minute 

MACT—maximum achievable control 

technology 

NESHAP—national emission standards for 

hazardous air pollutants 

ng/dscm—nanograms per dry standard cubic 

meter 

NTTAA—National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

OP—Office of Policy 

ppbv—parts per billion by volume 

ppbw—parts per billion by weight 

ppmv—parts per million by volume 

ppmw—parts per million by weight 

PRD—pressure relief device 

psia—pounds per square inch absolute 

PVC—polyvinyl chloride and copolymers 

PVCPU—PVC production process unit 

RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act 

RIN—Regulatory Information Number 

S—skewness 

SEK—standard error of kurtosis 

SES—standard error of skewness 

TCEQ—Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality 

TEF—toxic equivalency factor 

TEQ—toxic equivalent 

THC—total hydrocarbons 

TTN—Technology Transfer Network 

UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

UPL—upper prediction limit 

VCM—vinyl chloride monomer 

WWW—World Wide Web 

Organization of This Document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble. 

I. General Information 

A. Do these rules apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments to EPA? 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

II. Background Information for these 

Proposed Rules 

A. What is the statutory authority for the 

proposed PVC rule? 

B. What is the history of the PVC 

Production source category? 

C. Summary of Related Court Decisions 

D. What are the emission sources at PVC 

production facilities? 

E. What HAP are emitted from PVC 

production facilities? 

F. How did we gather information for the 

proposed PVC rule? 

III. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

A. What is the affected source for the 

proposed rule? 

B. What is the relationship between this 

proposed rule and the existing 40 CFR 

part 61 standards for PVCPU? 

C. How have we used subcategories in the 

proposed rule? 

D. What proposed emission limitations and 

work practice standards must I meet? 

E. When must I comply with the proposed 

standards? 

F. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements? 

G. What are the performance testing 

requirements for batch process 

operations? 

H. What are the notification, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements? 

I. What are the electronic data submittal 

requirements? 

J. What revisions are proposed for the area 

source rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

DDDDDD)? 

IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC Rule for 

Major and Area Sources (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HHHHHHH) 

A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC 

production? 

B. How did EPA select the emission points, 

format, and pollutants for the proposed 

rule? 

C. How did EPA determine the proposed 

emission standards for area sources? 

D. How did EPA determine the MACT 

floors for existing major sources? 

E. How did EPA determine the MACT 

floors for new major sources? 

F. How did EPA analyze beyond-the-floor 

options and determine MACT? 

G. How did EPA select the compliance and 

monitoring requirements for the 

proposed rule? 

H. How did EPA determine compliance 

times for the proposed rule? 

I. How did EPA determine the required 

records and reports for this proposed 

rule? 

J. What are the startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction provisions? 

V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule 

A. What are the air impacts? 

B. What are the cost impacts? 

C. What are the non-air quality health, 

environmental, and energy impacts? 

D. What are the economic impacts of the 

proposed standards? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

A redline version of the regulatory 

language that incorporates the changes 

in this proposed action to 40 CFR 63, 

subpart DDDDDD is available in the 

docket. 

I. General Information 

A. Do these rules apply to me? 

The proposed rules establish national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants (NESHAP) for PVC 

production. 

The regulated categories and entities 

potentially affected by the proposed 

PVC production standards include the 

following: 

Category NAICS1 Code Examples of potentially regulated entities 

Polyvinyl chloride resins manufacturing ..................................... 325211 Facilities that polymerize vinyl chloride monomer to produce 

polyvinyl chloride and/or copolymers products. 

1 North American Industry Classification System. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. To determine 

whether your facility, company, 

business, organization, etc., would be 

affected by this proposed action, you 

should examine the applicability 

criteria in the proposed 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HHHHHHH (National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production), and in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart DDDDDD (National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production Area Sources). 

Your PVC production process unit 

(PVCPU) is not subject to this subpart if 

it is a research and development facility, 

as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

the proposed action to a particular 

entity, contact the person listed in the 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29530 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments to EPA? 

Submitting CBI. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or E-mail. Send or 

deliver information identified as CBI to 

only the following address: Ms. Jodi 

Howard, c/o OAQPS Document Control 

Officer (Room C404–02), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2002–0037. 

Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information in a disk or CD– 

ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within 

the disk or CD–ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. If you 

submit a disk or CD–ROM that does not 

contain CBI, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM clearly that it does not 

contain CBI. Information marked as CBI 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

If you have any questions about CBI 

or the procedures for claiming CBI, 

please consult the person identified in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this 

proposed action will also be available 

on the World Wide Web (WWW) 

through the Technology Transfer 

Network (TTN). Following signature, a 

copy of the proposed action will be 

posted on the TTN’s policy and 

guidance page for newly proposed or 

promulgated rules at the following 

address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. 

The TTN provides information and 

technology exchange in various areas of 

air pollution control. 

II. Background Information for These 

Proposed Rules 

A. What is the statutory authority for the 

proposed PVC rule? 

Section 112(d) of the CAA requires us 

to establish NESHAP for source 

categories and subcategories of both 

major and area sources of hazardous air 

pollutants (HAP) that are listed for 

regulation under CAA section 112(c). A 

major source emits or has the potential 

to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more 

of any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of 

any combination of HAP. An area 

source is a HAP-emitting stationary 

source that is not a major source. 

Section 112(d) of the CAA requires 

EPA to set emissions standards for HAP 

emitted by major stationary sources 

based on performance of the maximum 

achievable control technology (MACT). 

The MACT standards for existing 

sources must be at least as stringent as 

the average emissions limitation 

achieved by the best performing 12 

percent of existing sources (for which 

the Administrator has emissions 

information) or the best performing five 

sources for source categories or 

subcategories with fewer than 30 

sources (CAA section 112(d)(3)(A) and 

(B)). This minimum level of stringency 

is called the MACT floor. For new 

sources, MACT standards must be at 

least as stringent as the control level 

achieved in practice by the best 

controlled similar source (CAA section 

112(d)(3)). EPA also must consider more 

stringent ‘‘beyond-the-floor’’ control 

options. When considering beyond-thefloor options, EPA must consider not 

only the maximum degree of reduction 

in emissions of HAP, but must take into 

account costs, energy, and non-air 

quality health and environmental 

impacts when doing so. 

Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA 

requires EPA to identify at least 30 HAP 

which, as a result of emissions from area 

sources, pose the greatest threat to 

public health in the largest number of 

urban areas. EPA implemented this 

provision in 1999 in the Integrated 

Urban Air Toxics Strategy (Strategy), (64 

FR 38715, July 19, 1999). Specifically, 

in the Strategy, EPA identified 30 HAP 

that pose the greatest potential health 

threat in urban areas, and these HAP are 

referred to as the ‘‘30 urban HAP.’’ CAA 

section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list 

sufficient categories or subcategories of 

area sources to ensure that area sources 

representing 90 percent of the emissions 

of the 30 urban HAP are subject to 

regulation. A primary goal of the 

Strategy is to achieve a 75-percent 

reduction in cancer incidence 

attributable to HAP emitted from 

stationary sources. 

EPA can set MACT standards for area 

sources. Section 112(d)(2). 

Alternatively, under CAA section 

112(d)(5), EPA can promulgate 

standards or requirements for area 

sources ‘‘which provide for the use of 

generally available control technologies 

[‘‘GACT’’] or management practices by 

such sources to reduce emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants.’’ Additional 

information on GACT is found in the 

Senate report on the legislation (Senate 

Report Number 101–228, December 20, 

1989), which describes GACT as: 

* * * methods, practices and techniques 

which are commercially available and 

appropriate for application by the sources in 

the category considering economic impacts 

and the technical capabilities of the firms to 

operate and maintain the emissions control 

systems. Consistent with the legislative 

history, we can consider costs and economic 

impacts in determining GACT. 

Determining what constitutes GACT 

involves considering the control 

technologies and management practices 

that are generally available to the area 

sources in the source category. We also 

consider the standards applicable to 

major sources in the analogous source 

category to determine if the control 

technologies and management practices 

are transferable and generally available 

to area sources. In appropriate 

circumstances, we may also consider 

technologies and practices at area and 

major sources in similar categories to 

determine whether such technologies 

and practices could be considered 

generally available for the area source 

categories at issue. Finally, as noted 

above, in determining GACT for a 

particular area source category, we 

consider the costs and economic 

impacts of available control 

technologies and management practices 

on that category. 

Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are 

required to ‘‘review, and revise as 

necessary (taking into account 

developments in practices, processes, 

and control technologies), emission 

standards promulgated under this 

section no less often than every 8 years.’’ 

We are proposing revised standards 

for vinyl chloride emissions from area 

sources under the authority of CAA 

section 112(d)(6). We are also proposing 

standards for dioxin, hydrogen chloride 

(HCl), and total HAP under CAA section 

112(d)(5). 

B. What is the history of the PVC 

Production source category? 

On July 16, 1992, PVC Production was 

listed as a major source category for 

regulation pursuant to section 112(c) of 

the CAA (57 FR 31576). A major source 

of HAP is a stationary source that has 

the potential to emit 10 tpy or more of 

any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of any 

combination of HAP. 

On June 26, 2002, PVC Production 

was listed as an area source category for 

regulation pursuant to sections 112(c)(3) 

and 112(k)(3)(B)(ii) of the CAA (67 FR 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29531 

43112). An area source is a stationary 

source of HAP that is not a major 

source. 

On July 10, 2002, EPA promulgated 

NESHAP for new and existing PVC 

production facilities that are major 

sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart J (67 

FR 45886, July 10, 2002) (referred to as 

the ‘‘part 63 NESHAP’’). In that 

rulemaking, EPA determined that 

compliance with the existing Vinyl 

Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, 

subpart F) (referred to as the ‘‘part 61 

NESHAP’’) reflected the application of 

MACT; thus, satisfying CAA section 

112(d), with the exception of adding 

requirements for equipment leaks at 

new sources. In the part 61 NESHAP 

and the associated part 63 NESHAP, 

EPA regulated vinyl chloride emissions 

as a surrogate for all HAP emitted from 

PVC production. For equipment leaks, 

the part 63 NESHAP required that new 

sources comply with 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU, National Emission 

Standards for Equipment Leaks— 

Control Level 2 Standards. 

In Mossville Environmental Action 

Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232 (DC Cir. 

2004), the petitioners argued that EPA 

failed to set emission standards for all 

HAP emitted by PVC plants. EPA had 

set emission standards for vinyl 

chloride as a surrogate for the remaining 

HAP, because it was the predominant 

HAP used and emitted at PVC plants. 

The Court ruled that EPA did not 

adequately explain the basis for its 

decision to use vinyl chloride as a 

surrogate for other HAP. The Court 

‘‘vacated and remanded [the rule in its 

entirety] to the Agency for it to 

reconsider or properly explain its 

methodology for regulating [HAP] 

emitted in PVC production other than 

vinyl chloride by use of a surrogate.’’ 

370 F.3d at 1243. This rule proposes 

NESHAP for PVC production major 

sources in response to the remand, and 

in accordance with section 112 of the 

CAA. 

On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930), 

EPA promulgated NESHAP for new and 

existing PVC production area sources in 

40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD. 

Subpart DDDDDD is based on GACT, 

and requires area sources to meet the 

requirements in the existing Vinyl 

Chloride NESHAP (part 61 NESHAP). 

The part 61 NESHAP requirements 

address only vinyl chloride emissions. 

In this rulemaking, we are fulfilling our 

obligation under section 112(d)(6) of the 

CAA to review, and revise, as necessary, 

the PVC production area source 

standards. We are coordinating our 

review of the area source standards with 

the development of major source MACT 

standards in response to the Court 

remand. 

C. Summary of Related Court Decisions 

In addition to Mossville 

Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 

summarized above, two other court 

decisions are relevant to this proposal. 

In March 2007, the District of Columbia 

Circuit Court issued an opinion (Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875 (DC Cir. 

2007) (Brick MACT)) vacating and 

remanding CAA section 112(d) MACT 

standards for the Brick and Structural 

Clay Ceramics source categories. Some 

key holdings in that case were: 

• MACT floors for existing sources 

must reflect the average emission 

limitation achieved by the best 

performing 12 percent of existing 

sources, not levels EPA considers to be 

achievable by all sources (479 F.3d at 

880–81); 

• EPA cannot set floors of ‘‘no 

control.’’ The Court reiterated its prior 

holdings, including National Lime 

Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625 (DC 

Cir. 2000), confirming that EPA must set 

floor standards for all HAP emitted by 

the major source, including those HAP 

that are not controlled by at-the-stack 

control devices (479 F.3d at 883); and 

• EPA cannot ignore non-technology 

factors that reduce HAP emissions, 

including when determining which 

sources are best performers for purposes 

of ascertaining the MACT floor. 

Specifically, the Court held that ‘‘EPA’s 

decision to base floors exclusively on 

technology even though non-technology 

factors affect emissions violates the 

Act.’’ (479 F.3d at 883). 

In addition, the fact that a specific 

level of performance is not being 

intentionally achieved by the source is 

not a legal basis for excluding the 

source’s performance from 

consideration. Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 

F.3d at 631–34; National Lime 

Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d at 640. 

The Brick MACT decision also stated 

that EPA may account for variability in 

setting floors. However, the Court found 

that EPA erred in assessing variability, 

because it relied on data from the worst 

performers to estimate best performers’ 

variability, and held that ‘‘EPA may not 

use emission levels of the worst 

performers to estimate variability of the 

best performers without a demonstrated 

relationship between the two’’ (479 F.3d 

at 882). 

A second Court opinion of relevance 

to this proposal is Sierra Club v. EPA, 

551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008). In that 

case, the Court vacated portions of two 

provisions contained in the General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). 

The regulations at issue were 40 CFR 

63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), which, 

when incorporated into CAA section 

112(d) regulations for specific source 

categories, exempt sources from the 

requirement to comply with the 

otherwise applicable CAA section 

112(d) emission standard during periods 

of startup, shutdown, and malfunction. 

D. What are the emission sources at PVC 

production facilities? 

PVC production includes the 

manufacture of PVC resins. The resins 

are then used to make a large number 

of commercial and industrial products. 

Producing these resins involves batch 

reactors where vinyl chloride monomer 

(VCM), along with initiators and 

inhibitors, is polymerized as a 

homopolymer, or copolymerized with 

varying amounts of a co-monomer, such 

as vinyl acetate. At most facilities, the 

resulting resins are in a slurry form and 

are then stripped to recover the 

unreacted VCM. The stripped resin is 

then dried into powders or granules. 

PVC resins are then either shipped 

offsite, or used to make final products 

in equipment and unit operations that 

are not covered under this source 

category. 

PVC is not a HAP, but the 

manufacture of PVC resin requires VCM, 

which is a HAP, as a primary feedstock. 

Unreacted VCM and other organic HAP 

present in feedstocks or formed during 

the polymerization process may be 

present in process components. HAP 

may be released from an opening or leak 

in a process component; or the residual 

HAP (i.e., unreacted VCM, and other 

organic compounds) in the resin may be 

released to the atmosphere as a result of 

drying or handling dry resin. Stripping 

the polymerized resin to recover 

unreacted VCM reduces the air 

emissions of vinyl chloride and other 

HAP from the resin slurry by reducing 

the amount of HAP present. Gaseous 

vent streams containing vinyl chloride 

and other HAP that originates from 

process equipment prior to, and 

including the resin stripper, are sent to 

a VCM recovery process before being 

routed to one or more control devices, 

such as an absorber, or thermal oxidizer, 

followed by a halogenated compound 

scrubber. Combustion controls greatly 

reduce vinyl chloride and other HAP 

emissions, but may create other HAP, in 

particular, chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins 

and furans (CDD/CDF), and HCl. 

Emission sources in the PVC 

production process include process 

components prior to, and including, the 

resin stripper(s) (e.g., the reactor, resin 

stripper, reactor used as a stripper, 

storage and feed vessels for raw 

materials, additives, initiators, and 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29532 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

2U.S. EPA, Integrated Risk Information System 

(IRIS). Available at http://www.epa.gov/IRIS/ 

index.html. 

inhibitors); VCM recovery systems (e.g., 

condenser or other vapor separation 

devices, holding tanks, gas holders); and 

process components downstream of the 

resin stripper(s) (e.g., centrifuges, 

concentrators, blend tanks, filters, 

dryers, conveyor air discharges, bagging 

operations, resin handling and 

conveyance equipment), and final resin 

storage tanks or storage silos. Additional 

emission sources at PVC production 

facilities include leaking equipment 

(e.g., pumps, valves, compressors); 

wastewater collection and treatment 

systems; heat exchange system 

components (e.g., cooling towers, heat 

exchangers, pumps, and other 

equipment associated with the heat 

exchange system); and other emission 

sources, such as opening a reactor and 

other components for maintenance and 

cleaning. 

E. What HAP are emitted from PVC 

production facilities? 

The HAP emitted from PVC 

production processes includes a wide 

variety of HAP. There are no metal HAP 

emitted from PVC production. In 

addition, combustion control devices 

emit HCl and CDD/CDF. Of the HAP 

emitted from PVC production processes, 

1,3-butadiene, benzene, CDD/CDF, and 

vinyl chloride have been classified as 

known human carcinogens.2 Several 

other compounds that may be emitted 

from PVC production processes have 

been classified as probable carcinogens, 

such as acetaldehyde, bis (2-ethylhexyl) 

phthalate, chloroform, chloroprene, 

ethylene dichloride, ethylidene 

dichloride, formaldehyde, iso-octane, 

methylene chloride, vinyl bromide, and 

vinylidene chloride.3Hydrogen chloride, 

along with other non-carcinogenic HAP 

(e.g., methanol), are also emitted from 

PVC production processes. 

F. How did we gather information for 

the proposed PVC rule? 

We gathered information on PVC 

production through review of 

previously collected information, 

current literature, data from the 

National Emissions Inventory, meetings 

and voluntary information submissions 

by industry and the industry trade 

association, and formal information 

collection pursuant to CAA section 114. 

There were two components to the 

information collection. First, we 

solicited information from eight PVC 

companies in the United States that 

manufacture PVC resin. The collection 

obtained available information on PVC 

production units at major and area 

sources (e.g., information on production 

processes, equipment, emission points, 

control techniques, operating practices, 

and emissions based on previous tests 

or calculations). Companies were also 

asked to provide data for other emission 

sources, including process component 

openings and cleanouts, handling of 

unstripped resin, filters, and gas 

holders. Second, we required the same 

companies to measure the HAP content 

in their PVC resins (both following 

stripping, but before drying, and after 

drying) and measure the HAP emissions 

at the inlet and outlet to their process 

vent control devices. The information 

collection is documented in the 

memorandum, Information Collection 

for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, and results of this information 

collection are available in the docket. 

III. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

This section summarizes and provides 

our rationale for the requirements 

proposed in this action. In section III of 

this preamble, the term ‘‘you’’ refers to 

owners and operators of sources affected 

by the proposed rule. 

A. What is the affected source for the 

proposed rule? 

The proposed rule applies to owners 

or operators of PVC PU located at, or 

that are part of, a major source or an 

area source as defined in 40 CFR 63.2. 

The affected source for this subpart is 

each individual PVCPU. An existing 

affected source is a PVCPU that is not 

a new affected source, as defined in 40 

CFR 63.11870 of the proposed rule. A 

new affected source is a PVCPU for 

which construction is commenced on or 

after May 20, 2011 at a major or area 

source. If components of an existing 

affected source are replaced such that 

the replacement meets the definition of 

reconstruction in 40 CFR 63.2 and the 

reconstruction commenced on or after 

May 20, 2011, then the existing source 

becomes a reconstructed source and is 

subject to the relevant standards for a 

new affected source. The reconstructed 

source must comply with the 

requirements for a new affected source 

upon initial startup of the reconstructed 

source, or by the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, whichever is later. 

A PVCPU is defined as a collection of 

process components that is assembled 

and connected by hard-piping or duct 

work that processes raw materials to 

manufacture PVC resin. A PVCPU 

includes, but is not limited to, 

polymerization reactors; resin strippers; 

blend tanks; centrifuges; dryers; product 

separators; recovery devices; feed, 

intermediate, and product storage 

vessels; finished product loading 

operations; heat exchange systems; 

wastewater strippers; wastewater 

treatment systems; connected ducts and 

piping; and equipment in HAP service, 

including pumps, compressors, 

agitators, pressure relief devices (PRD), 

sampling connection systems, openended valves or lines, valves, and 

connectors. 

B. What is the relationship between this 

proposed rule and the existing 40 CFR 

part 61 standards for PVCPU? 

PVCPU are currently subject to 

requirements in the part 61 NESHAP. 

This proposed rule includes 

requirements that are at least as 

stringent as the requirements in this 

existing rule. We, therefore, propose 

that once facilities are in compliance 

with the final PVCPU MACT, the 

requirements of the part 61 NESHAP 

would no longer apply. 

C. How have we used subcategories in 

the proposed rule? 

Most of the emissions sources subject 

to the proposed regulation have the 

same characteristics, and are addressed 

consistently, independent of process 

operations or products produced. We 

are proposing, however, three 

subcategories for our limits on the 

amount of HAP remaining in resins 

following polymerization and stripping 

(i.e., the stripped resin). These 

subcategories are based on the type of 

resin produced, and include: (1) Bulk 

resin, (2) dispersion resin, and (3) all 

other resin (e.g., suspension and 

solution resin). 

D. What proposed emission limitations 

and work practice standards must I 

meet? 

The proposed rule would establish 

the same requirements for affected 

sources located at major and area 

sources. We explain in section IV.C 

below our rationale for the standards 

proposed for area sources. 

1. Storage Vessels and Handling 

Operations 

Under 40 CFR 63.11910 and Table 4 

of the proposed rule, if you own or 

operate a storage vessel at a new or 

existing affected source, we are 

proposing that material with a 

maximum true vapor pressure of the 

stored liquid greater than 11.1 pounds 

per square inch absolute (psia) be stored 

in pressure vessels with no emissions to 

the atmosphere. During those times 

when purging is required, or when the 

pressure vessel is being loaded, the 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29533 

3Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) 

for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number 

One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, 

prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated 

by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645). 

4Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) 

for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number 

One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, 

prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated 

by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645). 

purged stream or the emission stream 

during loading would be required to be 

routed to a closed vent system and 

control device. The closed vent system 

and control device must meet the 

requirements specified in 40 CFR 

63.11925 of the proposed rule. You 

would also be required to equip all 

openings in the pressure vessel with 

closure devices that are designed to 

operate with no detectable emissions, as 

determined using procedures specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of the 

proposed rule. 

For storage vessels with a capacity 

greater than or equal to 40,000 gallons, 

storing material with a maximum true 

vapor pressure greater than or equal to 

0.75 psia, or storage vessels with a 

capacity greater than or equal to 20,000 

gallons (but less than 40,000 gallons), 

storing materials with a maximum true 

vapor pressure greater than or equal to 

4 psia, we are proposing two equivalent 

compliance options. We are proposing 

that material be stored in either: (1) A 

floating roof tank meeting the operating, 

inspection, and maintenance 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

WW, or (2) a fixed roof storage vessel 

that routes vent streams to a closed vent 

system and control device (meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925 of the 

proposed rule) capable of reducing inlet 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emissions by 95 or greater. 

We are proposing that all other 

storage vessels meet the operating, 

inspection, and maintenance 

requirements for fixed roof vessels of 40 

CFR 63.11910(a) of the proposed rule, or 

comply with either the controlled fixed 

roof or floating roof requirements 

discussed previously. 40 CFR 

63.11910(a)(1)(ii) and 40 CFR 

63.11910(a)(3)(i) of the proposed rule 

include requirements to equip each 

opening in the roof with a closure 

device, and to perform initial and 

annual inspections, and repair any 

defects found within the specified time 

period. Defects include, but are not 

limited to, visible cracks, holes, gaps, or 

other open spaces in the closure device 

or between the perimeter of the opening 

and the closure device; broken, cracked, 

or otherwise damaged seals or gaskets 

on closure devices; and broken or 

missing hatches, access covers, caps, or 

other closure devices. 

We are not proposing requirements 

for handling operations (unloading and 

transfer) for reasons explained in 

section IV.D of this preamble. 

2. Equipment Leaks 

In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing that existing and 

new affected sources comply with the 

leak detection and repair (LDAR) 

program requirements of the National 

Emission Standards for Equipment 

Leaks-Control Level 2 Standards, 

subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63, except for 

agitators, and rotating or reciprocating 

pumps and compressors. For gas and 

light liquid valves, subpart UU specifies 

a leak definition of 500 parts per million 

VOC, and a monitoring frequency that is 

dependent upon the number of leaking 

valves. Subpart UU also requires 

equipment specifications that prevent 

leaks for other pieces of equipment. 

We are proposing that rotating pumps 

be sealless, equipped with double seals, 

or equivalent. Reciprocating pumps, 

reciprocating and rotating compressors, 

and agitator must be equipped with 

double seals, or equivalent, as provided 

in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed 

rule. If double mechanical seals or 

double outboard seals are used, HAP 

emissions must be minimized by 

maintaining the pressure between the 

two seals so that the leak occurs into the 

pump, compressor, or agitator; by 

ducting any HAP between the two seals 

through a closed vent system to a 

control device meeting the process vent 

emission limits specified in 40 CFR 

63.11925 of the proposed rule; or by an 

equivalent method, as provided in 40 

CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule. 

We are proposing that a vinyl chloride 

monitoring system be operated for 

detection of major leaks and 

identification of the general area of the 

plant where a leak is located. A vinyl 

chloride monitoring system is a device 

that obtains air samples from one or 

more points continuously, and analyzes 

the samples with gas chromatography, 

infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion 

detection, or an equivalent or alternate 

method. 

In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed 

rule, we are also proposing that, in 

addition to operating with no detectable 

emissions, there be no discharge to the 

atmosphere from any PRD on any 

equipment in HAP service within the 

PVCPU. We are proposing that upon a 

discharge to the atmosphere from the 

PRD that the monitoring requirements 

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU 

for pressure releases from PRD be 

followed. 

3. Heat Exchange Systems 

In 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing that you 

implement a LDAR program to detect 

leaks of VOC into cooling water. For 

existing sources, we are proposing 

monthly monitoring for both closed 

loop and once-through heat exchange 

systems using either the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ) Modified El Paso Method 3 or 

EPA Method 8021B, Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas 

Chromatography Using Photoionization 

and/or Electrolytic Conductivity 

Detectors, with a leak action level of 38 

parts per billion by weight (ppbw) of 

total strippable VOC in the cooling 

water or 2.9 parts per million by volume 

(ppmv) of total strippable VOC in the 

stripping gas. For new sources, we are 

proposing twice-daily (12 hour 

intervals) monitoring for both closed 

loop and once-through heat exchange 

systems using either the TCEQ’s 

Modified El Paso Method 4 or EPA 

Method 8021B with a leak action level 

of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC in 

the cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas. The 

delay of repair action level for both new 

and existing sources is 380 ppbw of 

total strippable VOC in the cooling 

water or 29 ppmv of total strippable 

VOC in the stripping gas. When a leak 

is identified, additional monitoring 

must be performed to isolate the source 

of the leak. If the total strippable VOC 

concentration remains below the leak 

action level throughout the period of 

additional monitoring, then repairs are 

not required; otherwise, repairs must be 

completed within 45 days of identifying 

the leak. Repairs may be delayed if the 

concentration of total strippable VOC in 

the cooling water or stripping gas 

remains below the delay of repair action 

level and either: (1) It is technically 

infeasible to repair the leak without a 

shutdown, or (2) the necessary 

equipment, parts, or personnel are not 

available. 

4. Process Vents 

In 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing all the vent 

streams from: polymerization reactors, 

resin strippers, other process 

components prior to the resin stripper, 

VCM recovery systems, wastewater 

collection and treatment system, slip 

gauges, unloading and loading lines, 

and samples be routed through a closed 

vent system to a control device. We are 

proposing the emission limitations 

presented in Table 1 of this preamble for 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29534 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

the outlet of the control device. These 

emission limitations apply at all times. 

TABLE 1—EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR PROCESS VENTS a

Pollutant 

Emission Limitations b

Existing 

sources New sources 

Vinyl chloride ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.32 ppmv ....... 3.2 ppbv 

Hydrogen chloride ................................................................................................................................................. 150 ppmv ........ 0.17 ppmv 

Total organic HAP ................................................................................................................................................. 12 ppmv .......... 0.22 ppmv 

Dioxin/Furans (TEQ) ............................................................................................................................................. 0.023 ng/dscm 0.0087 ng/ 

dscm 

aProcess vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery systems, certain storage vessels, the wastewater collection and treatment 

system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples. b ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent O 2. ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent O 2. ng/dscm = nanograms per 

dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent O 2. 

5. Other Emission Sources 

Other emission sources include 

reactor and other component opening 

losses. When reactors or other 

components (including prepolymerization reactors used in the 

manufacture of bulk resins) are opened 

for cleaning, we are proposing in 40 

CFR 63.11955 of the proposed rule that 

emissions be minimized prior to 

opening. We are proposing that 

emissions from opening a 

polymerization reactor must not exceed 

0.04 pound vinyl chloride/ton of 

polyvinyl chloride product where the 

product means the gross product of prepolymerization and postpolymerization. We are proposing 

emissions from opening of process 

components for any reason be 

minimized by reducing the volume of 

vinyl chloride to an amount that 

occupies a volume of no more than 2.0 

percent of the component’s containment 

volume or 25 gallons, whichever is 

larger, at standard temperature and 

pressure. Any vinyl chloride removed 

from opening equipment must be 

ducted through a closed vent system to 

a control device meeting the 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925 

through 40 CFR 63.11950 of the 

proposed rule. The outlet of the control 

device must meet the emission 

limitations for process vents discussed 

in section III.D.4. 

6. Stripped Resin 

In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing emission 

limitations for residual vinyl chloride 

and total HAP in the stripped resin 

presented in Tables 2 and 3 of this 

preamble. The limits were developed for 

new and existing sources for three 

subcategories of PVC resins: (1) Bulk 

resins, (2) dispersion resins, and (3) all 

other resins. These emission limits 

would apply at all times. 

TABLE 2—LIMITS FOR STRIPPED RESIN AT EXISTING SOURCES

Pollutant 

Emission limits (ppmw) 

Bulk 

resins 

Dispersion 

resins 

All 

other 

resins 

Vinyl chloride ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 .1 55 0 .48 

Total HAP ......................................................................................................................................................... 170 110 76 

TABLE 3—LIMITS FOR STRIPPED RESIN AT NEW SOURCES

Pollutant 

Emission limitations (ppmw) 

Bulk 

resins 

Dispersion 

resins 

All 

other 

resins 

Vinyl chloride ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 .1 41 0 .20 

Total HAP ......................................................................................................................................................... 170 58 42 

7. Wastewater 

In 40 CFR 63.11965 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing that you must 

determine the vinyl chloride 

concentration for each wastewater 

stream at the point of wastewater 

generation. Streams with 10 ppmw 

vinyl chloride, or more, must be treated 

to reduce the concentration of vinyl 

chloride to a concentration of 0.11 

ppmw for existing sources, and 0.0060 

ppmw for new sources. The 10 ppmw 

determination applies before the 

wastewater stream is exposed to the 

atmosphere, stored, mixed with any 

other wastewater stream, and enters a 

wastewater treatment process, or is 

discharged untreated as a wastewater. 

We are also proposing that wastewater 

streams with flow rates greater than or 

equal to 10 liters per minute (l/min), 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29535 

5Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) 

for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number 

One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, 

prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated 

by reference—see 40 CFR 65.645). 

and the concentrations of HAP, as 

determined by Method 305 (as specified 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9) 

greater than or equal to 1,000 ppmw, 

meet the Hazardous Organic NESHAP 

(HON) wastewater requirements, as 

described in the sections of 40 CFR part 

63, subpart G, and specified in the 

proposed rule. 

Streams that contain less than 10 

ppmw vinyl chloride (at the point of 

generation), and streams that either 

contain less than 1,000 ppmw total 

HAP, or have a flow rate less than the 

10 l/min criteria (at the point of 

determination, as defined by 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart G), are not required to 

further reduce emissions, but must 

remain below these levels. 

E. When must I comply with the 

proposed standards? 

Existing affected sources would be 

required to comply with the proposed 

40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH no 

later than 3 years after publication of the 

final rule in the Federal Register. New 

affected sources would be required to 

comply on the effective date of the final 

rule, or upon startup, whichever is later. 

F. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements? 

In 40 CFR 63.11896 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing that, if you make 

a process change to an existing affected 

source that does not meet the criteria to 

become a new affected source in 40 CFR 

63.11870(c) of the proposed rule, you 

must demonstrate that any added 

emission points are in compliance with 

the applicable requirements for an 

existing affected source. If the process 

change results in a change in the 

characteristics of any emission point 

such that a different emission limit, 

operating parameter limit, or work 

practice standard applies, we are 

proposing that you demonstrate that the 

changed emission point complies with 

the applicable requirements for an 

existing affected source. You must 

demonstrate compliance with any 

applicable work practice standards 

upon startup of the changed emission 

point, and must demonstrate 

compliance with any emission limits 

and establish applicable operating limits 

by 180 days after the date of initial 

startup of the changed process unit. 

We are also proposing that, if you 

make a process change to a new affected 

source, you would demonstrate that any 

added emission point(s) is/are in 

compliance with the applicable work 

practice standards for a new affected 

source by start-up of the changed 

emission point. You must also 

demonstrate initial compliance with any 

emission limits and establish applicable 

operating limits by 180 days after the 

date of initial startup of the changed 

process unit. 

If you make a process change that 

adds or changes emission points, we are 

proposing that you demonstrate 

continuous compliance with your 

emission limits and standards, operating 

limits, and work practice standards 

according to the procedures and 

frequency in 40 CFR 63.11910 through 

40 CFR 63.11980 of this proposed rule, 

and submit a notification report 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11985 of the 

proposed rule. 

1. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for storage 

vessels? 

For each floating roof storage vessel, 

we are proposing that you meet the 

operating, inspection, repair, and 

maintenance requirements of 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart WW. For each fixed 

roof storage tank venting through a 

closed vent system to a control device 

achieving 95-percent reduction in total 

HAP emissions, we are proposing that 

you meet the requirements for closed 

vent systems and control devices in 40 

CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule, and 

summarized in section III.D.3 of this 

preamble. 

In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed 

rule, we are also proposing that, for each 

fixed roof tank, you install and maintain 

the tank with no visible cracks, holes, or 

other open spaces between roof section 

joints or between the interface of the 

roof edge and the tank wall. We are also 

proposing that you must install closure 

devices that you secure in the closed 

position except during periods when 

you need to have access to the interior 

of the fixed roof tank. The closure 

device may be opened when needed to 

provide access. The fixed roof tank and 

its closure device would be required to 

be inspected initially, and at least once 

per year. The inspection requirements 

would not be applicable to parts of the 

fixed roof that are determined to be 

unsafe to inspect if you document and 

explain why it is unsafe to inspect and 

develop a plan to conduct inspections 

when the tank is not in service. A first 

attempt to repair defects must be made 

no later than 5 calendar days after 

detection, and repairs would be 

required to be completed no later than 

45 days after detection, except as 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(4)(ii) of 

the proposed rule. 

In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed 

rule, for pressure vessels, we are 

proposing that all potential leak 

interfaces in the pressure vessel be 

monitored for leaks annually and 

repaired following the procedures of 40 

CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule. 

2. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for equipment 

leaks? 

For each applicable piece of 

equipment (e.g., valves, connectors) 

associated with your affected source, we 

are proposing that you meet the LDAR 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

UU. In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed 

rule, you would also be required to 

install electronic indicators on each 

PRD that would be able to identify and 

record the time and duration of each 

pressure release and notify operators 

that a pressure release has occurred. 

3. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for heat 

exchange systems? 

We are proposing that for each 

affected source, you must operate an 

equipment leak program, as specified in 

the proposed rule. Under the 

compliance requirements for heat 

exchange systems in 40 CFR 63.11920 of 

the proposed rule, an affected source 

would be required to conduct sampling 

and analyses using either the TCEQ 

Modified El Paso Method, Revision 

Number One, dated January 2003,5 or 

EPA Method 8021B, no less frequently 

than monthly for existing sources and 

twice-daily (12-hour intervals) for new 

sources, and fix any leaks detected. We 

are proposing different sampling 

locations for once-through and closed 

loop heat exchange systems as specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed 

rule. For once-through systems only, 

you may monitor at the cooling tower 

return line prior to exposure to the air. 

For once-through systems, you must 

monitor selected heat exchanger exit 

line(s) so that each heat exchanger or 

group of heat exchangers within a 

system is covered by the selected 

monitoring location. Monitoring of 

selected heat exchanger exit lines is also 

a monitoring option for closed loop 

systems. Additionally, for once-through 

systems, you may also monitor the inlet 

water feed line prior to any heat 

exchanger. If multiple heat exchange 

systems use the same water feed (i.e., 

inlet water from the same primary water 

source), you may monitor at one 

representative location and use the 

monitoring results for that sampling 

location for all heat exchange systems 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29536 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

that use that same water feed. We are 

proposing to exempt a heat exchange 

system from the monitoring 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.11920 if all 

heat exchangers within the heat 

exchange system operate with the 

minimum pressure on the cooling water 

side at least 35 kilopascals greater than 

the maximum pressure on the process 

side, or the heat exchange system does 

not contain any heat exchangers. 

Identified leaks must be repaired as 

soon as practicable, but within 45 days 

after identifying the leak. We are 

proposing delay of repair action levels 

as either a total strippable VOC 

concentration (as methane) in the 

stripping gas of 29 ppmv or a total 

strippable VOC concentration in the 

cooling water of 380 ppbw. Leaking heat 

exchanger repairs may be delayed if the 

repair is technically infeasible without a 

shutdown, or the necessary equipment, 

parts, or personnel are not available. To 

delay repairs in either case, the total 

strippable VOC must initially be, and 

remain less than, the delay of repair 

action level for all monitoring periods 

during the delay of repair. 

4. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for process 

vents? 

To demonstrate compliance for 

process vents, you would be required to 

meet the requirements of proposed 40 

CFR 63.11930 for each closed vent 

system that routes emissions from 

process vents subject to the HAP 

emission limits to a control device. You 

would be required to meet the initial 

and continuous compliance 

requirements for process vents specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR 

63.11935, the monitoring requirements 

for your process vent control device, as 

specified in proposed 40 CFR 63.11940, 

and the performance testing 

requirements for process vents in 40 

CFR 60.11945. You may not use a flare 

to comply with the emission limits of 

the proposed rule, as specified in 40 

CFR 63.11925(b). 

Closed vent systems. In 40 CFR 

63.11930 of the proposed rule, for 

closed vent systems, you would be 

required to meet specified design 

requirements and install flow indicators 

in the bypass lines, or meet other 

requirements to prevent and detect 

bypass of the control device. You must 

also follow the inspection, leak 

monitoring, and repair requirements in 

40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule 

for closed vent systems. Closed vent 

systems in vacuum service would be 

required to install alarms rather than 

performing leak inspection and 

monitoring. If you operate a closed vent 

system in vacuum service, you are not 

required to comply with the other 

closed vent system requirements in the 

proposed rule. 

Performance testing, continuous 

parameter monitoring system (CPMS), 

and continuous emission monitoring 

system (CEMS) requirements for process 

vents and associated control devices. 

Compliance would be demonstrated 

through a combination of performance 

testing (as specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 

and 40 CFR 63.11945) and/or 

monitoring using CEMS or CPMS that 

measure process vent control device 

operating parameters (as specified in 40 

CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR 63.11935, and 40 

CFR 63.11940). These sections also refer 

to Tables 1, 2, 6, and 7 of the proposed 

rule for emission limits, testing 

methods, and requirements. Below, we 

summarize the process vent testing and 

compliance requirements by pollutant. 

Each test would consist of three test 

runs. 

We are proposing that existing and 

new sources would be required to 

demonstrate initial and annual 

compliance with the total organic HAP 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 of the 

proposed rule by measuring total 

hydrocarbon (THC) at the outlet of the 

control device using EPA Method 25A, 

as specified in Table 9 of the proposed 

rule. The minimum test run duration 

would be 1 hour. 

During the initial compliance test, 

you would be required to establish 

values for the control device operating 

parameters specified in 40 CFR 

63.11935 and 40 CFR 63.11940 (e.g., 

incinerator temperature). You would 

then use a CPMS to continuously 

monitor that parameter to demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the total 

organic HAP limit. New and existing 

sources could elect to use THC CEMS 

instead of annual testing and CPMS for 

total organic HAP. All CEMS must meet 

the applicable performance 

specifications, procedures, and other 

calibration, accuracy, and operating and 

maintenance requirements, as specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed 

rule. For vinyl chloride, you would 

demonstrate compliance by conducting 

initial and annual performance tests 

using EPA Method 18. You would be 

required to establish monitoring 

parameters during the initial 

performance test, and continuously 

monitor control device operating 

parameters. 

For CDD/CDF, you would 

demonstrate compliance by conducting 

initial and annual performance tests 

using EPA Method 23. The minimum 

sampling volume collected would be 5 

cubic meters for Method 23. For HCl, 

you would demonstrate compliance by 

conducting an initial performance test 

using EPA Method 26 or 26A. The 

minimum sampling volumes collected 

would be 60 liters for EPA Method 26, 

or 1 cubic meter for EPA Method 26A. 

You would be required to establish 

monitoring parameters during the initial 

performance test, and continuously 

monitor control device operating 

parameters (e.g., liquid flow rate and pH 

for scrubbers, and temperature and 

carbon injection rate for activated 

carbon injection). After EPA publishes 

final performance specifications for 

CEMS for HCl and CDD/CDF, new 

sources would be required to use CEMS 

instead of annual testing for these 

pollutants, as required in 40 CFR 

63.11925 of the proposed rule. Existing 

sources could elect to use CEMS instead 

of annual testing and CPMS for these 

pollutants. All CEMS must meet the 

applicable performance specifications, 

procedures, and other calibration, 

accuracy, and operating and 

maintenance requirements, as specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed 

rule. 

We have included specific 

performance testing requirements, 

including the process operating 

conditions under which performance 

tests should be conducted, for 

continuous process vents and batch 

operations, as provided in 40 CFR 

63.11945 of the proposed rule, and 

discussed in section III.F and III.G of 

this preamble. 

All CPMS would be required to have 

data averaging periods of 3-hour block 

averages. All CPMS would be required 

to meet minimum accuracy and 

calibration frequency requirements, as 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and Table 

8 of the proposed rule. For each 

monitored parameter, you would 

establish a minimum, maximum, or a 

range that indicates proper operation of 

the control device, as specified in 40 

CFR 63.11935(d). The proposed rule 

specifies the parameters that would be 

monitored for each type of control 

device, including each incinerator, 

absorber, adsorber, condenser, sorbent 

injection system, fabric filter, or other 

control device. You must also install a 

flow indicator at the inlet of the control 

device to indicate periods of no flow to 

the control device. 

Some control devices would be 

subject to additional emission pointspecific performance testing 

requirements, as described in 40 CFR 

63.11945 of the proposed rule. We have 

included specific performance testing 

requirements for continuous process 

vents and batch operations, as provided 

in 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29537 

rule, and discussed in section III.F of 

this preamble. 

5. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for 

wastewater? 

As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965(a) of 

the proposed rule, we are proposing that 

you must conduct an initial test for 

wastewater streams from the affected 

source to determine the vinyl chloride 

concentration, the total HAP 

concentration (including all HAP listed 

in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), 

and the flow rate. The concentration 

tests would be conducted using EPA 

Method 107 in combination with 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA) Method SW–8260B and 

EPA Method 305. Prior to testing, you 

would be required to submit a test plan 

for EPA approval that includes your 

proposed method for analysis using 

these methods. We are proposing that 

you sample for vinyl chloride by 

collecting one grab sample at the point 

of generation. We are also proposing 

that you sample for total HAP by 

collecting one grab sample at the point 

of determination, as specified in 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart G. 

Wastewater streams that contain less 

than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at the 

point of generation), and wastewater 

streams that either contain less than 

1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a flow 

rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the 

point of determination, as defined by 40 

CFR part 63, subpart G), must remain 

below these levels. You would conduct 

periodic tests at the same locations, and 

using the same test methods described 

above to verify that the stream 

concentration stays below the vinyl 

chloride and total HAP concentration 

levels. Wastewater streams would be 

tested monthly. There are also proposed 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.11975(e)(2) 

of the proposed rule, for demonstrating 

that you remain below the 10 l/min flow 

rate criterion, based on flow rate 

measurements. 

If your wastewater stream contains 

vinyl chloride concentrations greater 

than or equal to 10 ppmw, you would 

be required to treat the wastewater 

stream to achieve a concentration of 

0.11 ppmw vinyl chloride at the 

wastewater stripper outlet for existing 

sources, and 0.0060 ppmw at new 

sources. You must conduct an initial 

compliance test and monthly testing to 

demonstrate compliance with these 

limits. We are proposing that you 

measure at the outlet of the wastewater 

stripper by collecting one grab sample. 

In addition, during your performance 

test, you would be required to establish 

operating ranges for your wastewater 

steam or vacuum stripper, including 

steam-to-feed ratios and stripper 

bottoms temperature, and also the 

vacuum level measured in the column 

for vacuum strippers. You would use a 

CPMS to continuously monitor control 

device operating parameters to 

demonstrate that you continuously meet 

these limits. 

If the wastewater stream exceeds the 

1,000 ppmw HAP concentration (based 

on the list of HAP in Table 9 of 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart G), and the 10-l/min 

flow rate, then you must comply with 

the 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Group 1, 

wastewater suppression and treatment 

requirements, and conduct the 

compliance testing and monitoring 

required in subpart G. 

For more information on the 

wastewater compliance requirements, 

see 40 CFR 63.11965, 40 CFR 63.11970, 

and 40 CFR 63.11975 of the proposed 

rule. 

6. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for stripped 

resins? 

In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed 

rule, we are proposing that you conduct 

initial performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed vinyl 

chloride and total HAP limits for 

stripped resin. We are also proposing 

that you conduct daily performance 

testing to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the proposed vinyl 

chloride limit, and monthly 

performance testing to demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the 

proposed total HAP limit. The tests 

would be conducted at the outlet of the 

resin stripper for continuous processes 

and immediately after stripping for 

batch processes. You would be required 

to use EPA Method 107 in combination 

with RCRA Method SW–8260B, and to 

include in your test plan a proposed 

method for analysis using these 

methods. You would be required to 

submit the test plan for EPA approval. 

In addition, during your initial 

performance test, you would be required 

to establish operating ranges for your 

resin steam or vacuum stripper, 

including steam-to-feed ratios, stripping 

temperature, and the vacuum level 

measured in the column for vacuum 

strippers. You would use a CPMS to 

continuously monitor resin stripper 

operating parameters. All CPMS would 

be required to calculate 3-hour block 

averages for the parameters measured. 

To demonstrate initial compliance 

with the total HAP limits, you would be 

required to collect one grab sample 

every 8 hours for a single grade, or one 

grab sample per grade of PVC resin 

produced, whichever is more frequent 

for each resin stripper over a 24-hour 

period. To determine initial compliance 

with the vinyl chloride limit, you would 

be required to collect one grab sample 

every 8 hours for a single grade, or one 

grab sample per grade of PVC resin 

produced, whichever is more frequent, 

for each resin stripper over a 24-hour 

period. You would be required to collect 

samples over a 24-hour period during 

which you are manufacturing the grade 

of resin, which you produce the most of, 

based on total mass of resin produced in 

the preceding month. 

To demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the vinyl chloride 

limit for a continuous process, you 

would be required to collect one grab 

sample from each resin stripper every 8 

hours for a single grade, or one grab 

sample per grade of PVC resin 

produced, whichever is more frequent. 

Grade is defined in 40 CFR 63.12010 of 

the proposed rule and is unchanged 

from the definition in the Part 61 

NESHAP other than the insertion of the 

term ‘‘PVC.’’ To demonstrate compliance 

with the vinyl chloride limit for a batch 

process, you would be required to 

collect one grab sample from each batch 

of resin produced. You must 

demonstrate compliance on a daily basis 

using a 24-hour average concentration 

weighted on production. 

To demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP limits 

for a continuous process, on a monthly 

basis you would be required to collect 

one grab sample every 8 hours for a 

single grade, or per grade of PVC resin 

produced, whichever is more frequent 

from each resin stripper over a 24-hour 

period. Individual sampling events may 

be 3 to 5 weeks apart, but you must 

conduct a minimum of 12 sampling 

events per calendar year. The 24-hour 

arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for each stripper for each 

resin grade produced during the 24-hour 

sampling period must be calculated 

using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab. 

Beginning 13 months following your 

initial demonstration of compliance, 

you must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, 

based on a 12-month rolling average 

concentration, calculated as the average 

of the 12 most recent 24-hour arithmetic 

average concentrations. 

To demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP limits 

for a batch process, on a monthly basis, 

you would be required to collect one 

grab sample for each batch of resin 

produced over a 24-hour period. You 

would be required to collect samples 

over a 24-hour period during which you 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29538 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

are producing the grade of resin, which 

you manufacture for a majority of the 

time during that month. You must 

demonstrate compliance on a monthly 

basis with the average concentration of 

the most recent 12 months of data. 

7. What are the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for other 

emission sources? 

To demonstrate compliance with the 

requirements for other emission sources, 

we are proposing that for reactors and 

other components prior to opening, you 

must follow the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements in 40 CFR 

63.11925. We are requesting comments 

on this compliance approach. 

G. What are the performance testing 

requirements for batch process 

operations? 

For batch process operations, 

performance tests would be conducted 

under the most challenging conditions 

that you would run your batch process 

operations to make sure that the control 

devices are operating at the level needed 

to demonstrate compliance with the 

appropriate emission limits. The 

Agency’s intent is to require testing of 

the performance of the control device 

under its most challenging conditions. 

Subsequent to the initial compliance 

test, continuous monitoring of operating 

parameters established during the initial 

test is a reasonable measure of 

continuous compliance with the 

efficiency requirement under all 

conditions. Presumably, the control 

device should function as well or better 

under conditions that are not as 

challenging. You would be required to 

develop an emission profile that 

describes the characteristics of the vent 

stream at the inlet to the control device 

under either absolute or hypothetical 

worst-case conditions. The emissions 

profile may be developed by process, by 

process component, or by capture and 

control device limitations, as specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11945(c)(3) of the 

proposed rule. We have provided 

methodologies to develop the emissions 

profile for each batch processing 

operation in proposed 40 CFR 63.11950, 

including methodologies for vapor 

displacement, gas sweep of a partially 

filled vessel, heating, depressurization, 

vacuum systems, gas evolution, air 

drying, and purging. All other HAP 

emissions for the emissions profile 

would be determined through an 

engineering assessment, or through 

testing approved by the Administrator. 

See 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed 

rule. 

H. What are the notification, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements? 

1. Notifications and Reports 

All new and existing sources would 

be required to comply with certain 

requirements of the General Provisions 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are 

identified in Table 5 of the proposed 40 

CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. The 

General Provisions include specific 

requirements for notifications, 

recordkeeping, and reporting. Reports 

include notifications of initial startup, 

initial notification, notification of 

compliance status, compliance reports, 

notification of performance test, 

notification of inspection, batch precompliance report, and other 

notifications and reports specified in 

proposed 40 CFR 63.11985. 

The notification of compliance status 

report required by 40 CFR 63.9(h) must 

include certifications of compliance 

with rule requirements. 

The excess emissions and continuous 

system performance report and 

summary report required by 40 CFR 

63.10(e)(3) of the NESHAP General 

Provisions (referred to in the rule as a 

compliance report) would be required to 

be submitted semi-annually for 

reporting periods during which there 

was: An exceedance of any emission 

limit or a monitored parameter; a 

deviation from any of the requirements 

in the rule occurred; or if any process 

changes occurred and compliance 

certifications were reevaluated. The 

proposed rule includes additional 

requirements for what you must include 

in these reports for each type of 

emission point. See 40 CFR 63.11985 of 

the proposed rule. 

2. Recordkeeping 

The proposed rule would require 

compiling and retaining records to 

demonstrate compliance with each 

emission limit and work practice 

standard. These recordkeeping 

requirements are specified either 

directly in the proposed rule, in the 

General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63, 

and in 40 CFR part 63, subparts UU and 

WW. Records that we are proposing that 

you keep include performance tests, 

records of CPMS and CEMS, records of 

malfunction, records of deviations, 

records specific to each emission point, 

and other records specified in proposed 

40 CFR 63.11990. The 40 CFR part 63 

General Provisions requirements that 

apply are listed in Table 5 of the 

proposed rule. We are proposing that 

records be kept for 5 years in a form 

suitable and readily available for EPA 

review. We are proposing that records 

be kept on-site for 2 years; you may 

keep the records off-site for the 

remaining 3 years. See 40 CFR 63.11990 

of the proposed rule. 

I. What are the electronic data submittal 

requirements? 

EPA must have performance test data 

to conduct effective reviews (e.g., risk 

assessment) of CAA section 112 

standards, as well as for many other 

purposes, including compliance 

determinations, emission factor 

development, and annual emission rate 

determinations. In conducting these 

reviews, EPA has found it ineffective 

and time consuming, not only for us, 

but also for regulatory agencies and 

source owners and operators to locate, 

collect, and submit emissions test data 

in paper form because of varied 

locations for data storage and varied 

data storage methods. In recent years, 

though, stack testing firms have 

typically collected performance test data 

in electronic format, making it possible 

to move to an electronic data submittal 

system that would increase the ease and 

efficiency of data submittal and improve 

data accessibility. 

In this action, EPA is proposing a step 

to increase the ease and efficiency of 

data submittal and improve data 

accessibility. Specifically, we are 

proposing that owners and operators of 

PVC production facilities would be 

required to submit electronic copies of 

reports of certain required performance 

test reports to EPA’s WebFIRE database. 

The WebFIRE database was constructed 

to store performance test data for use in 

developing emission factors. A 

description of the WebFIRE database is 

available at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ 

oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main. 

EPA solicits comment on the proposed 

electronic data submittal requirements. 

Data entry will be through an 

electronic emissions test report 

structure called the Electronic Reporting 

Tool (ERT). The ERT would be able to 

transmit the electronic report through 

EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX) 

network for storage in the WebFIRE 

database making submittal of data very 

straightforward and easy. A description 

of the ERT can be found at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html. 

The requirement to submit source test 

data electronically to EPA would only 

apply to those performance tests 

conducted using test methods that are 

supported by the ERT. The ERT 

contains a specific electronic data entry 

form for most of the commonly used 

EPA reference methods. A listing of the 

pollutants and test methods supported 

by the ERT is available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29539 

We believe that industry would benefit 

from this proposed approach to 

electronic data submittal. Having these 

data, EPA would be able to develop 

improved emission factors, make fewer 

information requests, and promulgate 

better regulations. 

One major advantage of submitting 

source test data through the ERT is that 

it will provide a standardized method to 

compile and store much of the 

documentation required to be reported 

by the proposed rule. Another 

advantage is that the ERT clearly states 

what testing information would be 

required. 

Another important benefit of 

submitting these data to EPA at the time 

the source test is conducted is that it 

should substantially reduce the effort 

involved in data collection activities in 

the future. When EPA has performance 

test data in hand, there will likely be 

fewer or less substantial data collection 

requests in conjunction with 

prospective required residual risk 

assessments or technology reviews. This 

would result in a reduced burden on 

both affected facilities (in terms of 

reduced manpower to respond to data 

collection requests) and EPA (in terms 

of preparing and distributing data 

collection requests and assessing the 

results). 

State, local, and Tribal agencies may 

also benefit from a more streamlined 

and accurate review process rather than 

a manual data assessment, making 

review and evaluation of the source 

provided data and calculations easier 

and more efficient. Finally, another 

benefit of the proposed data submittal to 

WebFIRE electronically is that these 

data would greatly improve the overall 

quality of existing and new emissions 

factors by supplementing the pool of 

emissions test data for establishing 

emissions factors, and by ensuring that 

the factors are more representative of 

current industry operational procedures. 

A common complaint heard from 

industry and regulators is that emission 

factors are outdated or not 

representative of a particular source 

category. With timely receipt and 

incorporation of data from most 

performance tests, EPA would be able to 

ensure that emission factors, when 

updated, represent the most current 

range of operational practices. In 

summary, consistent with Executive 

Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, issued on January 

18, 2011, in addition to supporting 

regulation development, control strategy 

development, and other air pollution 

control activities, having an electronic 

database populated with performance 

test data would save industry, State, 

local, Tribal agencies, and EPA 

significant time, money, and effort 

while also improving the quality of 

emission inventories and, as a result, air 

quality regulations. 

J. What revisions are proposed for the 

area source rule (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart DDDDDD)? 

We are proposing to revise the 

existing NESHAP for PVC production 

area sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

DDDDDD) to require that PVC 

production area sources comply with 

the proposed rule. Area sources would 

be required to continue to comply with 

the current provisions of subpart 

DDDDDD until they are in compliance 

with the proposed rule. After that date, 

existing and new area sources would no 

longer be subject to the requirements of 

subpart DDDDDD. 

IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC 

Rule for Major and Area Sources (40 

CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH) 

A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC 

production? 

The CAA allows EPA to divide source 

categories into subcategories, based on 

differences in class, type, or size. For 

example, differences between given 

types of units can lead to corresponding 

differences in the nature of emissions 

and the technical feasibility of applying 

emission control techniques. For the 

stripped resin limits, we are proposing 

three subcategories. 

In the United States, four different 

types of polymerization processes have 

been used to manufacture PVC: 

dispersion, suspension, solution, and 

bulk. The type of resin production 

process used is dictated by the end use 

of the product and the product’s 

required physical and chemical 

properties and function, such as the 

need for flexibility, rigidity, or the 

ability to be molded. For example, to 

make dispersion resins (as compared to 

other types of resins), different 

reactants, initiators, and surfactants are 

used in the manufacturing process. The 

differences in chemicals used for 

manufacturing, and the properties of the 

final product, result in products with 

different compositions. 

After the polymerization process is 

complete, the PVC resin is sent to a 

resin stripper, or the resin can be 

stripped directly in the reactor to 

remove residual HAP such as vinyl 

chloride. The vent streams from the 

resin stripper, polymerization reactors, 

other process components upstream of 

the resin stripper, and vents from the 

wastewater stripper are sent to recovery 

processes to recover unreacted VCM. 

After recovery, the vent stream 

containing unrecovered VCM is sent to 

a control device before being emitted to 

atmosphere. 

Dispersion resins have less porosity, 

mechanical stability, and heat stability 

than suspension or solution resins, 

resulting in more difficulty in stripping 

vinyl chloride. Consequently, the levels 

of vinyl chloride in the stripped 

dispersion resin products are not as low 

as those in the stripped suspension 

resin products. At bulk resin 

production, the product of the 

polymerization process results in a resin 

that is more of a solid than a slurry, 

which is unlike solution, dispersion, 

and suspension resins, and results in a 

different emissions profile at the resin 

stripper for organic HAP and vinyl 

chloride. We are unaware of any resin 

that is being manufactured using the 

solution process, and we do not have 

emissions data on this type of process. 

For purposes of the stripped resin 

limits, which serve to limit emissions 

from points downstream of the resin 

stripper, we are proposing to 

subcategorize PVCPU into three 

subcategories: bulk resins, dispersion 

resins, and all other resin types. In the 

absence of data on solution resin 

production facilities, we are 

incorporating them into the ‘‘other 

resins’’ subcategory, which also includes 

suspension resin. We are requesting 

comment on the proposed 

subcategorization, and the 

appropriateness of including suspension 

and solution resins in the same 

subcategory. 

We are not proposing to establish 

separate subcategories for any of the 

other emission points regulated by the 

proposed rule (process vents, equipment 

leaks, wastewater, storage vessels, other 

emission sources, and heat exchange 

systems by resin type). The same air 

pollution control devices, wastewater 

treatment processes, and work practices 

for these kinds of emission points are 

applicable and effective regardless of 

any potential differences in physical 

and chemical properties of the resin 

being produced. Therefore, EPA chose 

not to subcategorize in setting emission 

limitations and work practice standards 

for these emission points. 

B. How did EPA select the emission 

points, format, and pollutants for the 

proposed rule? 

1. How did EPA select the emission 

points covered? 

The emission points covered by the 

proposed rule were selected to ensure 

control of all sources of HAP emissions 

within the PVC production process. The 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29540 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

HAP emission points within PVCPU are 

process vents (e.g., process vents from 

polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the 

resin stripper, the VCM recovery 

system, slip gauges, loading and 

unloading lines, samples, the 

wastewater collection and treatment 

system that routes emissions through a 

closed vent system to a control device, 

and emission control devices), stripped 

resin, equipment leaks (e.g., valves, 

pumps, connectors, and PRD), 

wastewater collection and treatment 

systems, storage vessels, reactor and 

other process component openings, and 

heat exchange systems. 

EPA solicits comment on the emission 

points proposed for regulation. 

2. How did EPA select the format of the 

proposed rule? 

We are proposing to establish 

numerical emission limits in the form of 

concentration limits for process vents, 

stripped resin, and wastewater. We are 

establishing the process vent emission 

limits at the outlet of the control device. 

The process vent emissions are 

comprised of emissions from 

polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the 

resin stripper, the VCM recovery 

system, certain pressurized and fixed 

storage vessels, slip gauges, loading and 

unloading lines, samples, the 

wastewater collection and treatment 

system that routes emissions through a 

closed vent system to the control device, 

and emission control devices. 

The emission limits in the proposed 

rule provides flexibility for the 

regulated community by allowing a 

regulated source to choose any control 

technology or technique to meet the 

emission limits, rather than requiring 

each unit to use a prescribed control 

method that may not be appropriate in 

each case. We are proposing numerical 

emission rate limits as ppmv dry 

standardized to 3-percent oxygen for 

process vents. A concentration limit in 

units of ppmv is consistent with 

previous EPA and State regulations for 

PVC production facilities, and other 

processes controlled by combustion 

devices. 

We are proposing a concentration 

limit for HAP in the stripped resin in 

units of ppmw as a means to control 

HAP emissions from downstream 

sources (e.g. dryers, centrifuges, filters). 

We are proposing a concentration based 

limit because the HAP emissions from 

vents associated with processes 

downstream of the resin stripper are 

dependent on the concentration of HAP 

in the stripped resin. That is, the greater 

the HAP concentration in the stripped 

resin, the greater the HAP emissions 

from downstream process components. 

Similarly, the lower the HAP 

concentration in the stripped resin, the 

lower the HAP emissions from 

downstream process components. 

Consequently, limiting HAP in the 

stripped resin is the best means to 

control HAP emissions from 

downstream processes. This approach is 

consistent with current Federal and 

State regulations that are applicable to 

PVC production facilities. 

For wastewater streams that contain 

greater than or equal to 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride, and, accordingly, require 

treatment to reduce the vinyl chloride 

concentration, we are proposing a 

stripper outlet concentration. 

Wastewater streams with less than 10 

ppmw vinyl chloride must stay below 

that level. To address HAP emissions 

other than vinyl chloride, the proposed 

rule would require compliance with the 

HON requirements in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart G. 

We are proposing work practice 

standards to reduce emissions from 

storage vessels, equipment leaks, and 

heat exchange systems. 

CAA section 112(h)(1) states that the 

Administrator may prescribe a work 

practice standard or other requirements, 

consistent with the provisions of CAA 

sections 112(d) or (f), in those cases 

where, in the judgment of the 

Administrator, it is not feasible to 

enforce an emission standard. CAA 

section 112(h)(2) defines the phrase ‘‘not 

feasible to prescribe or enforce an 

emission standard’’ as follows: 

[A]ny situation in which the Administrator 

determines that (A) a hazardous air pollutant 

or pollutants cannot be emitted through a 

conveyance designed and constructed to emit 

or capture such pollutant, or that any 

requirement for, or use of, such a conveyance 

would be inconsistent with any Federal, 

State, or local law, or (B) the application of 

measurement methodology to a particular 

class of sources is not practicable due to 

technological and economic limitations. 

The work practice standards in this 

proposed rule are consistent with CAA 

section 112(h)(2)(B), because applying a 

measurement methodology to this class 

of sources is not technologically feasible 

due to the number of openings and 

possible emissions points. 

The proposed work standards for 

emissions from storage tanks are 

evaporative losses that result from 

barometric pressure and ambient 

temperature changes, as well as filling 

and emptying operations. The flow rate 

of vent emissions from a tank is very 

low, except during filling. The 

concentration of HAP in the vent stream 

varies with the degree of saturation of 

HAP in the tank vapor space. The 

degree of saturation depends on such 

factors as HAP vapor pressure, tank size, 

and liquid throughput. Low flow rate 

and varying concentration make 

emission measurement impractical. 

Emissions from equipment leaks are 

intermittent and fugitive in nature, so it 

is, therefore, not feasible to fully 

measure the mass emission rate from 

numerous potential leaks at an affected 

source. 

3. How did EPA determine the 

pollutants for which to set emission 

limits? 

The major HAP emitted from PVC 

production processes is the raw 

material, vinyl chloride. This is from the 

feed material processing prior to the 

reaction, and from post reaction 

processing (some of the VCM raw 

material remains unreacted during the 

polymerization process). For these 

reasons, we are setting emission limits 

for vinyl chloride. 

PVC production processes also emit a 

variety of other HAP that may be 

contained in initiators or inhibitors of 

polymerization, additives, copolymer 

feedstocks, impurities, or formed during 

the polymerization process. As 

discussed earlier, these HAP include 

1,3-butadiene, benzene, acetaldehyde, 

bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, chloroform, 

chloroprene, ethylene dichloride, 

ethylidene dichloride, formaldehyde, 

iso-octane, methylene chloride, vinyl 

bromide, and vinylidene chloride.3

PVCPU use different processes to 

produce a variety of resin products. 

Rather than setting individual emission 

limits for the wide variety of other HAP 

that can be found in PVC production 

processes, we are proposing a total HAP 

emission limit. A total HAP limit is 

appropriate because emissions from 

PVC facilities are comprised of mixtures 

of these HAP, and the control 

technologies used to control total HAP 

such as condensers and thermal 

oxidizers, achieve control of the 

individual HAP. Thermal oxidizers 

combust all organic HAP and convert 

them to carbon dioxide and water, with 

only trace amounts of organic 

compounds remaining. An acid gas 

scrubber removes any inorganic 

compounds that remain after 

combustion. Condensers, as a part of the 

vinyl chloride recovery system 

condense out organic compounds that 

are re-used in the process. 

Process vents are often controlled 

using thermal oxidizers because they are 

effective at reducing emissions of vinyl 

chloride and organic HAP. However, the 

combustion of halogenated organic 

compounds results in formation of 

hydrogen chloride, which is a HAP, and 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29541 

can also result in the formation of CDD/ 

CDF. We are proposing to set emission 

limits for HCl from process vents. 

We are authorized to regulate the 

CDD/CDF class of HAP. While 

dibenzofuran and 2,3,7,8–TCDD are 

identified by name as HAP in CAA 

section 112, all CDD/CDF are polycyclic 

organic matter, and, as such, we have 

the authority to regulate these 

compounds. Under CAA section 112(d), 

the MACT floor standards are to be 

based on the average emissions 

performance of the best performing 

units for which the Administrator has 

emissions information. We received a 

substantial amount of emissions test 

data for CDD/CDF emissions through 

the CAA section 114 information 

collection, in which we sought CDD/ 

CDF information from sampling runs 

that lasted about 4 hours each. While 

reported CDD/CDF emissions were 

below detectable levels in 

approximately 46 percent of the 

individual test runs for all CDD/CDF 

isomers reported, only 37 percent of 

three-run test averages were comprised 

of individual test runs where all runs 

were below detection limits. Therefore, 

a majority (63 percent) of the three-run 

tests detected some level of CDD/CDF. 

Furthermore, some of the emission tests 

detected most or all isomers at some 

level, and CDD/CDF emissions can be 

precisely measured for most control 

devices in the PVC production source 

category. Therefore, the statutory test for 

establishment of work practice 

standards—i.e., that measurement of 

emissions is impracticable due to 

technological and economic 

limitations—is not met. 

To make sure that the emission limits 

are set at a level that can be measured, 

we adjusted for variability using the 

upper prediction limit (UPL) approach, 

and we used the ‘‘three times MDL’’ 

approach (discussed elsewhere in this 

preamble) as a minimum level at which 

a CDD/CDF emission limit, on a toxic 

equivalency (TEQ) basis, is set. Rather 

than establishing work practice 

standards, but recognizing that 

emissions tend to be very low compared 

to more significant sources of CDD/CDF, 

such as incinerators, our approach to 

CDD/CDF requires an initial compliance 

test to demonstrate that the PVCPU meet 

the CDD/CDF standard, and additional 

compliance testing on an annual basis. 

Initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for process vents are 

discussed in section III.F.4 of this 

preamble. Furthermore, the CDD/CDF 

test method, EPA Method 23, requires 

that, for compliance purposes, nondetect values from runs should be 

reported and calculated as zeroes. 

Therefore, for purposes of compliance, 

there should be no concern about being 

unable to meet the standards because of 

the contribution of non-detect values. 

Consequently, we are proposing to set 

emission limits for CDD/CDF (on a TEQ 

basis) from process vents. 

Cooling towers may emit a variety of 

VOC, depending on which process 

components may be leaking into the 

heat exchange system. The most 

prevalent HAP that may leak into a heat 

exchange system is vinyl chloride, 

which is also a VOC. The proposed 

compliance method for heat exchange 

systems measures total VOC and not 

speciated compounds. A detection of 

total VOC in the cooling water indicates 

leakage of organic HAP (including vinyl 

chloride) into the heat exchange system. 

4. Solicitation of Comments 

EPA solicits comment on the emission 

points proposed for regulation and the 

format of the proposed standards. We 

also solicit comments on the pollutants 

that we have proposed for regulation 

and how we grouped pollutants such as 

total HAP and dioxin. 

C. How did EPA determine the proposed 

emission standards for area sources? 

Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are 

required to ‘‘* * * review, and revise as 

necessary (taking into account 

developments in practices, processes, 

and control technologies), emission 

standards promulgated under this 

section no less often than every 8 years.’’ 

With this rulemaking, we are fulfilling 

our obligation to review, and revise, as 

necessary, the PVC Production area 

source standards. The 2007 NESHAP for 

PVC production area sources (40 CFR, 

part 63, subpart DDDDDD) are based on 

GACT. The area source NESHAP only 

set emission limits for vinyl chloride, 

which was the pollutant for which we 

needed the PVC Production area source 

category to meet our 90-percent 

obligation in CAA section 112(c)(3) and 

(k)(3)(B). We are proposing to tighten 

emission standards for vinyl chloride 

under CAA section 112(d)(6). 

Under CAA section 112(d)(5), we may 

elect to promulgate standards or 

requirements for area sources ‘‘which 

provide for the use of generally 

available control technologies [‘‘GACT’’] 

or management practices by such 

sources to reduce emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants.’’ In this 

proposed rule, we have determined that 

area source emission limits should be 

set for total HAP, CDD/CDF, and HCl, in 

addition to vinyl chloride, that are 

emitted from PVC production processes. 

As explained in other area source rules, 

the Agency has discretion to set 

standards for all urban HAP, in this 

case, CDD/CDF and total HAP, and to 

not limit standards to only the urban 

HAP for which the area source category 

was listed (i.e., vinyl chloride). In 

addition to vinyl chloride, PVC 

production processes emit a variety of 

other HAP that may be contained in 

initiators or inhibitors of 

polymerization, additives, copolymer 

feedstocks, impurities, or formed during 

the polymerization process. The urban 

HAP reported to be emitted by the only 

existing PVC area source include 1,3- 

butadiene, ethylene dichloride, and 

methylene chloride. However, PVCPU 

can produce a variety of resin products 

over time which can influence the HAP 

emitted, so there is a potential that the 

area source could also emit other 

organic HAP reported at major source 

PVCPU (such as benzene, acetaldehyde, 

chloroform, and formaldehyde). Rather 

than setting individual emission limits 

for the wide variety of HAP that can be 

emitted by the area source PVC facility, 

we are proposing a total HAP emission 

limit (as we are for major sources). A 

total HAP limit is appropriate because 

emissions from the area source PVC 

facility are comprised of mixtures of 

these organic HAP, and the control 

technologies used to control total HAP 

achieve control of the individual 

organic HAP. 

Although we recognize that we have 

met the 90-percent requirement of CAA 

section 112(c)(3), nothing precludes the 

Agency from regulating beyond the 90 

percent with regard to the 30 urban 

HAP. We also believe it is appropriate 

to establish area source emission 

standards for HCl because, although not 

an urban HAP, it is formed as a product 

of combustion in controlling vents 

containing vinyl chloride and HAP. We 

solicit comment on our proposal to 

regulate these other HAP, beyond vinyl 

chloride since the Agency has already 

met its 90-percent statutory obligation 

under CAA section 112(c)(3) and 

112(k)(3)(B).The 2007 GACT standards 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD) 

generally required area sources to 

continue to comply with the vinyl 

chloride emission limits, and other 

requirements in the part 61 NESHAP, 

which had been promulgated in 1976 

(41 FR 46560, October 21, 1976). 

Therefore, the 2007 GACT standards did 

not achieve any emissions reductions. 

In determining what constitutes 

GACT for this proposed rule, we 

considered the control technologies and 

management practices that are generally 

available to PVC area sources by 

examining relevant data and 

information, including information 

collected from the only known PVC area 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29542 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

source. We also considered the 

standards proposed for major sources to 

determine if the control technologies 

and management practices are 

transferable and generally available to 

area sources. (See section III of this 

preamble for a summary of the MACT 

standards and sections IV.D through 

IV.F for further information on how the 

proposed MACT standards were 

determined.) As part of the GACT 

determination, we considered the costs 

and economic impacts of available 

control technologies and management 

practices on area sources. 

As explained in greater detail below, 

we determined that GACT standards for 

area sources should be the same as the 

major source MACT standards, based on 

the similarity between production 

processes, emission points, emissions, 

and control technologies that are 

characteristic of both major and area 

source PVC production facilities. Due to 

the nature of the PVC production 

process and as reported in the 

information collected, the one existing 

area source has the same kinds of 

emission points (process vents, stripped 

resin, wastewater, equipment leaks, 

storage, heat exchangers, and other 

emission sources) and emits the same 

types of pollutants (identified in section 

IV.B of this preamble) as major sources. 

From the information that we collected 

during this rule development, which 

includes stack testing and site visits at 

both major and area sources, we now 

know that area sources have the same 

types of emissions, emission sources, 

and controls (see control information 

below) as major sources. Information 

that we have collected to support 

development of these proposed 

standards indicates that the one area 

source would be major, based on its 

potential to emit, except that the source 

has an enforceable requirement to 

operate its thermal oxidizer, which 

keeps it below major source levels. We 

are not aware of any planned new area 

sources. 

In reviewing the data collected from 

major and area sources for development 

of the proposed rule, it is clear that the 

one PVC area source, like the major 

sources, is achieving vinyl chloride 

emission limits well below those 

required in the 2007 area source 

NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

DDDDDD) and the part 61 NESHAP. The 

data collected from major and area 

sources are discussed in the 

memorandum, Baseline Emission 

Estimates for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, which is available in the 

docket. The PVC area source uses the 

same control technologies as the major 

sources. For example, for process vents, 

the area source is using the same control 

technology (a thermal oxidizer in series 

with an acid gas scrubber) as most major 

sources. It is also using the same 

wastewater control (a wastewater 

stripper) used by major sources, and 

implementing the same type of 

equipment LDAR program as most 

major sources. The achievability of 

stripped resin HAP limits is a function 

of the resin-type subcategory (bulk, 

dispersion, or other) rather than the size 

of the PVCPU, or its location at a major 

or area source, and the PVC area source 

is already meting the proposed stripped 

resin MACT limits for the bulk PVC 

subcategory. In addition, the area source 

PVC plant is already meeting the 

proposed MACT limits for storage 

vessels and other emission sources 

(reactor and other component opening 

losses). Therefore, the control 

technologies and management practices 

used by major sources are generally 

available for area sources. In addition, 

the part 61 NESHAP for this industry 

requires all PVC production facilities to 

meet the same standards with no major 

or area source distinction, and because 

of the similarities between major and 

area sources, it is reasonable for them to 

meet the same emission standards under 

this proposed rule. 

As part of the GACT determination, 

we analyzed the cost and emissions 

reduction for the area source to meet the 

proposed GACT standards. The overall 

annual cost is $332,351, and the annual 

emission reduction is 17.23 tons of HAP 

per year. For information on the 

methodology and more detailed results 

of this analysis, see the memorandum, 

Costs and Emission Reductions of the 

Proposed Standards for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) 

Production Source Category, in the 

docket. The economic impact analysis 

(see section V.D of this preamble) 

showed that there are no significant 

economic impacts. 

For the aforementioned reasons, we 

have determined, pursuant to CAA 

sections 112(d)(5) and (6), that the 

control technologies and management 

practices necessary to meet the 

proposed major source emission 

standards are generally available for 

area sources in this source category. 

Accordingly, we are proposing the 

GACT level of control for area sources 

is the same as the MACT level of control 

for major sources, and that these area 

sources must meet the same standards 

as proposed in this rule for major 

sources. 

Because the compliance dates in the 

proposed rule are 3 years after 

promulgation for existing area sources, 

and startup or the date of promulgation, 

whichever is later, for new area sources, 

area sources must continue to comply 

with the current provisions of 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart DDDDDD until they are 

required to comply with 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HHHHHHH. However, on and 

after the proposed rule’s compliance 

dates, existing and new PVC production 

area sources would no longer be 

required to comply with subpart 

DDDDDD. The proposed amendments to 

subpart DDDDDD make this clear. 

Amending subpart DDDDDD in this 

manner allows for continuous 

compliance with emission standards for 

PVC production area sources, while 

avoiding duplicative or burdensome 

requirements under more than one 

subpart. 

EPA solicits comment on the 

proposed approach. We further solicit 

comment on whether we should issue 

MACT standards under CAA section 

112(d)(2) and (3) in lieu of GACT 

standards under CAA section 112(d)(5) 

given the significant amount of 

additional information on the one area 

source that was not available to EPA at 

the time of the 2007 area source GACT 

promulgation. 

D. How did EPA determine the MACT 

floors for existing major sources? 

There are less than 30 sources in this 

source category. Therefore, EPA has 

based the MACT floor on the average of 

the best performing five sources. The 

determination of the best performing 

sources is discussed below. 

In general, MACT floor analyses 

involve an assessment of the emissions 

from the best performing sources in a 

source category using the available 

emissions information. For each source 

category, the assessment involves a 

review of emissions data with an 

appropriate accounting for emissions 

variability. Various methods of 

estimating emissions can be used if the 

methods can be shown to provide 

reasonable estimates of the actual 

emissions performance of a source or 

sources. 

Process vents and stripped resin. To 

develop the MACT floor emission limits 

for process vents (which includes all the 

vent streams from polymerization 

reactors, resin strippers, other process 

components prior to the resin stripping 

operation, VCM recovery system, slip 

gauges, loading and unloading lines, 

samples, and the wastewater collection 

and treatment system that are sent to a 

control device) and stripped resin, we 

ranked all the available emission 

concentration or resin concentration 

data for each pollutant: vinyl chloride, 

HCl, CDD/CDF, and total HAP for 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29543 

process vents; and vinyl chloride and 

total HAP for stripped resin. For this 

ranking, EPA included all major sources 

and the one synthetic area source. In 

previous rulemakings (e.g., Brick 

NESHAP, 68 FR 26697–26698, May 16, 

2003), EPA determined that including 

synthetic area sources in calculating the 

MACT floor for major sources is 

consistent with CAA section 112(d). 

Concentration data for each pollutant 

were ranked from sources within the 

entire category (for process vents), or 

each subcategory (for resins) from 

lowest to highest. Based on information 

available to EPA, at all existing PVC 

production facilities, emissions from 

process vents are routed to a VCM 

recovery system. The vent stream from 

the recovery system is controlled either 

by a thermal oxidizer followed by a 

scrubber, or by an absorber. Emissions 

data were collected from emissions tests 

(consisting of three test runs) conducted 

at the outlet of the absorber, or the 

thermal oxidizer/scrubber control 

system. For each pollutant, the average 

of the three test runs was calculated for 

each facility. The average values (for 

each pollutant) from each facility were 

then ranked from lowest to highest to 

identify the best performing sources. 

The CAA section 114 information 

collection required each facility to take 

samples of the stripped resin being 

produced daily over a 30-day period at 

the outlets of the resin stripper(s) and 

the resin dryer(s). The facilities 

analyzed the samples for the 

concentration(s) of HAP present in the 

resin, and then calculated the 

corresponding mass of each HAP 

present in the stripped resin, based on 

the analysis of the concentration in each 

of the samples. Facilities were asked to 

report both the mass of each HAP 

present in the sampled resin, and also 

the production rate for that resin. The 

test results revealed that the methods 

used to convert the HAP concentration 

to mass varied across the industry 

making the emissions information 

incomparable. For example, some 

companies used the production rate 

from the entire plant, while others used 

the production rate from the production 

lines being sampled. We did not 

initially request the HAP concentration 

values for the analyzed resins, but 

because of the many discrepancies in 

the mass of each HAP in the stripped 

resin, these HAP concentrations values 

were provided in a subsequent data 

submittal by the industry trade 

association. The industry trade 

association also provided additional 

detail related to the detection levels and 

specific test methods used during the 

sampling and analysis required by our 

CAA section 114 information collection. 

The data used to calculate the MACT 

floors for stripped resin were the HAP 

concentration data, and not the mass 

loading data. To determine the stripped 

resin limits, we calculated the average 

concentration levels for each pollutant 

at each facility. They were then ranked 

from lowest to highest for each facility 

in the subcategory to identify the best 

performing sources. 

MACT floors were calculated for each 

pollutant regulated by the proposed 

rule. Because there are fewer than 30 

sources in the source category (for 

process vents) and each subcategory (for 

stripped resins), the MACT floor for 

each pollutant was calculated from the 

average of the best performing (i.e., 

lowest emitting) five sources. We took 

the numerical average of the five best 

performing sources, and accounted for 

variability, as discussed later in this 

section of the preamble. 

Wastewater. All PVC production 

facilities are currently subject to the part 

61 NESHAP inprocess wastewater 

standards. In the part 61 NESHAP, 

inprocess wastewater is defined as 

‘‘* * * water which, during 

manufacturing or processing, comes into 

direct contact with vinyl chloride or 

results from the production or use of 

any raw material, intermediate product, 

finished product, by-product, or waste 

product containing vinyl chloride or 

polyvinyl chloride, but which has not 

been discharged to a wastewater 

treatment process or discharged 

untreated as wastewater. Gasholder seal 

water is not wastewater until it is 

removed from the gasholder.’’ The part 

61 NESHAP requires control of 

inprocess wastewater streams with a 

concentration of 10 ppmw or more vinyl 

chloride at the point of generation, and 

all facilities achieve this control by 

using a wastewater steam stripper. The 

average annual vinyl chloride 

concentrations at the outlet of the 

stripper were provided in survey 

responses for 13 out of 17 facilities. The 

average values from each facility were 

then ranked from lowest to highest to 

identify the best performing sources 

(that controlled streams with vinyl 

chloride concentrations greater than 10 

ppmw at the point of generation). We 

took the numerical average of the five 

best performing sources, and accounted 

for variability, as discussed later in this 

section of the preamble. The 

predominant HAP in wastewater 

streams generated from this source 

category is vinyl chloride. All of the 

stripped wastewater streams contain 

vinyl chloride, which the survey data 

show comprises, on average, 95 percent 

of the HAP concentration in these 

streams. A review of the streams exiting 

the wastewater stripper, and streams 

that do not require control to meet the 

10 ppmw vinyl chloride requirements 

(from the part 61 NESHAP) at the point 

of generation, does not indicate that 

additional control is used to reduce 

those compounds that are not easily 

removed by the wastewater stripper. We 

have documented this analysis in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for 

the Polyvinyl Chloride and (PVC) 

Copolymers Production Source 

Category, which is available in the 

docket. However, as explained in 

section IV.F of this preamble, we are 

proposing additional control of 

wastewater streams, based on other HAP 

(in additional to vinyl chloride as a 

beyond-the-floor option, and have 

included total HAP limits in the 

proposed rule. 

Equipment leaks. For equipment 

leaks, we ranked the LDAR programs 

used at each affected PVC source from 

most stringent to least stringent, based 

on the leak definitions, monitoring 

frequencies, control requirements, and 

repair requirements. We then identified 

the LDAR programs employed by the 

best performing five sources. The results 

of this analysis showed that three out of 

the best performing five sources comply 

with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU level 

2 controls. The remaining sources 

comply with less stringent LDAR 

programs, such as 40 CFR part 61, 

subpart V. Additionally, existing 

sources are complying with the 

requirements of the part 61 NESHAP, 

that rotating pumps must be either 

sealless, equipped with double 

mechanical seals, or equivalent and all 

reciprocating pumps, rotating and 

reciprocating compressors, and agitators 

must be equipped with double 

mechanical seals or equivalent. If 

double mechanical seals or double 

outboard seals are used, HAP emissions 

must be minimized by maintaining the 

pressure between the two seals so that 

the leak occurs into the pump, 

compressor, or agitator by ducting any 

HAP between the two seals through a 

closed vent system to a control device. 

Therefore, we are proposing that 

existing and new affected sources 

comply with the LDAR program 

requirements of the National Emission 

Standards for Equipment Leaks-Control 

Level 2 Standards, subpart UU of 40 

CFR part 63, except for rotating or 

reciprocating pumps, compressors, and 

agitators. We are proposing that rotating 

pumps be sealless, equipped with 

double seals, or equivalent. 

Reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and 

rotating compressors, and agitator be 

equipped with double seals, or 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29544 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

equivalent, as provided in 40 CFR 

63.11915 of the proposed rule. 

The part 61 NESHAP also requires 

installation of a vinyl chloride 

monitoring system for detection of 

major leaks and identification of the 

general area of the plant where a leak is 

located. A vinyl chloride monitoring 

system is a device that obtains air 

samples from one or more points 

continuously, and analyzes the samples 

with gas chromatography, infrared 

spectrophotometry, flame ion detection, 

or an equivalent or alternate method. 

These requirements from the part 61 

NESHAP also constitute the MACT floor 

level of control. 

The MACT floor analysis is available 

in the docket in the memorandum, 

MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) 

Production Source Category. 

Storage vessels and handling 

operations. Two different types of 

storage vessels were identified from data 

collected from the PVC production 

industry: (1) Storage vessels storing 

material that are gases at ambient 

conditions (vapor pressures greater than 

14.7 psia), and (2) storage vessels storing 

all other materials. The information 

collected showed that materials with 

vapor pressures greater than 14.7 psia 

are stored under pressure. A closed vent 

system that is routed to a control device 

is used at all facilities when filling the 

tank or purging the tank. All other 

materials are stored at all facilities in 

fixed roof tanks ranging in size from less 

than 5,000 gallons up to 30,000 gallons. 

These tanks primarily store methanol. 

The responses to the CAA section 114 

information collection indicated that 

these tanks are not controlled. 

The part 61 NESHAP, which covers 

ethylene dichloride, vinyl chloride, and 

PVC plants, has specific emission 

standards for handling operations (i.e., 

loading and unloading of liquid 

products). However, PVC processes do 

not produce liquid products and do not 

have transfer rack loading operations. 

Handling a solid final product is 

unlikely to emit HAP, and the stripped 

resins limit already minimizes the HAP 

content of the final product. 

Consequently, no emission standards 

are being proposed for transfer 

operations. Unloading operations at 

PVC production facilities are considered 

part of process vents or storage, because 

emissions from unloading operations 

occur when charging storage vessels or 

reactor vessels, and any emissions are 

released from reactor vents or from the 

storage vessels. The emissions from 

these activities are subject to the process 

vent emission limits or storage vessel 

work practices. We are requesting 

comment on our proposed standards. 

Heat exchange systems. For heat 

exchange systems, we requested 

information on each heat exchange 

system at PVC production facilities, 

including closed loop and once-through 

systems, existing programs and 

procedures to identify leaks of HAP into 

cooling water, leak action levels, and 

estimates of emissions from cooling 

towers. We also requested information 

on the regulations applicable to PVC 

production facilities. Leak action levels 

are the concentration of pollutants in 

the cooling water that indicates one or 

more heat exchangers is leaking process 

fluid, or other HAP-containing fluid into 

the circulating cooling water. The HAP 

contained in the cooling water can then 

be emitted from a cooling tower once 

the cooling water is exposed to the 

atmosphere. We received leak action 

levels for vinyl chloride, ethylene 

dichloride, vinylidene chloride, VOC, 

and non-methane hydrocarbons from 

twelve facilities. From the data 

submitted by the best performing 

facilities discussed above, we 

determined that leak action levels 

ranged from 30 ppbw to 5,000 ppbw for 

VOC and non-methane hydrocarbons. 

The best performers had an average leak 

action level of 38 ppbw for total VOC, 

which corresponds to a total strippable 

VOC concentration of 2.9 ppmv in 

stripping gas. Therefore, we are 

proposing a leak action level of 38 ppbw 

of total strippable VOC in cooling water, 

or 2.9 ppmv total strippable VOC in 

stripping gas with monthly monitoring 

is the MACT floor for existing sources. 

While the data provided indicate that 

facilities monitor on a variety of 

different frequencies, we are proposing 

monthly monitoring. The majority 

perform either weekly or monthly 

monitoring. 

Other emission sources. The 

requirements from the part 61 NESHAP 

for reactor opening losses and 

component openings set numeric limits 

that must be met. The reactor opening 

loss from each reactor must not exceed 

0.04 pound vinyl chloride/ton of PVC 

product. This requirement does not 

apply to pre-polymerization reactors in 

the bulk process. This requirement does 

apply to post-polymerization reactors in 

the bulk process, where the product 

means the gross product of prepolymerization and postpolymerization. 

The part 61 NESHAP also require that 

emissions from opening of other 

components, including prepolymerization reactors used in the 

manufacture of bulk resins are to be 

minimized by reducing the volume of 

vinyl chloride to an amount which 

occupies a volume of no more than 2.0 

percent of the equipment’s containment 

volume, or 25 gallons, whichever is 

larger, at standard temperature and 

pressure. In the case of reactors used as 

strippers, the standard is based on the 

sum of allowable reactor opening losses, 

and the emissions limit for all 

downstream equipment (e.g., the 

stripped resin limits). Furthermore, 

exhaust gasses from reactors and any 

vinyl chloride removed from process 

components must be ducted through a 

control system meeting specified outlet 

concentration limits. These 

requirements from the part 61 NESHAP 

constitute the MACT floor level of 

control from these emission sources. 

1. Variability Calculation for MACT 

Floor Emission Limits Based on 

Emissions Test Data 

For process vents, facilities measured 

the concentration of HAP in the vent 

stream exiting the control device used to 

control process vent streams. For 

stripped resin, facilities measured the 

concentration of HAP in the resin slurry 

exiting the resin stripper. For 

wastewater, facilities measured the 

concentration of vinyl chloride in the 

wastewater exiting the wastewater 

stripper. We used the emission 

concentration, resin concentration, and 

wastewater concentration data from the 

best performing sources to determine 

the MACT floor emission limits, with an 

accounting for variability. Data were 

collected from the CAA section 114 

information collection, process vent 

emission testing results, resin sampling 

and analysis results, and additional data 

submissions by individual companies 

and the industry trade association that 

clarified, and/or corrected initial 

submissions, or that provided the same 

data in a different format (e.g., 

concentration instead of mass in the 

case of stripped resin analysis results). 

We account for variability of the bestcontrolled source in setting floors, not 

only because variability is an element of 

performance, but because it is 

reasonable to assess best performance 

over time. The District of Columbia 

Circuit Court of Appeals has recognized 

that EPA may consider variability in 

estimating the degree of emission 

reduction achieved by best performing 

sources, and in setting MACT floors. See 

Mossville Environmental Action Now v. 

EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1241–42 (DC Cir. 

2004). 

In determining the MACT floor limits 

for process vents, stripped resins, and 

wastewater, we first determined the 

MACT floor, which is the level achieved 

in practice by the average of the bestmstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29545 

performing five sources. We then 

assessed variability of the best 

performers by using a statistical formula 

designed to estimate a MACT floor level 

that is achieved by the average of the 

five best performing sources. 

Specifically, the MACT floor limit is an 

UPL calculated with the Student’s t-test 

using the TINV function in Microsoft 

Excel©. The UPL has also been used in 

other EPA rulemakings (e.g., the final 

NESHAP for Portland cement 

manufacturing, and the final NESHAP 

for industrial/commercial/institutional 

boilers) in accounting for variability. A 

prediction interval for a future 

observation is an interval that will, with 

a specified degree of confidence, 

contain the next (or some other prespecified) randomly selected 

observation from a population. In other 

words, the prediction interval estimates 

what future values will be based upon 

present or past background samples 

taken. Given this definition, the UPL 

represents the value that we can expect 

the mean of three future observations 

(three-run average) to fall below, based 

upon the results of an independent 

sample from the same population. In 

other words, if we were to randomly 

select a future test condition from any 

of these sources (i.e., average of three 

runs), we can be 99-percent confident 

that the reported level will fall at or 

below the UPL value. To calculate the 

UPL, we used the average (or sample 

mean) and sample standard deviation, 

which are two statistical measures 

calculated from the sample data. The 

average is the central value of a data set, 

and the standard deviation is the 

common measure of the dispersion of 

the data set around the average for a 

normally distributed data set. 

We first determined the distribution 

of the emissions data for the best 

performing five sources within the 

source category for process vents, and 

within each subcategory for resins prior 

to calculating UPL values. To evaluate 

the distribution of the best performing 

dataset, we first computed the skewness 

and kurtosis statistics, and then 

conducted the appropriate small-sample 

hypothesis tests. 

The skewness statistic (S) 

characterizes the degree of asymmetry of 

a given data distribution. Normally, 

distributed data have a skewness of 0. 

A skewness statistic that is greater (or 

less) than 0 indicates that the data are 

asymmetrically distributed with a right 

(or left) tail extending towards positive 

(or negative) values. Further, the 

standard error of the skewness statistic 

(SES) is given by SES = SQRT(6/N), 

where N is the sample size. According 

to the small sample skewness 

hypothesis test, if the skewness statistic 

(S) is greater than 2 times the SES, the 

data distribution can be considered nonnormal. 

The kurtosis statistic (K) characterizes 

the degree of peakedness or flatness of 

a given data distribution in comparison 

to a normal distribution. Normally, 

distributed data have a kurtosis of 0. A 

kurtosis statistic that is greater (or less) 

than 0 indicates a relatively peaked (or 

flat) distribution. Further, the standard 

error of the kurtosis statistic (SEK) is 

calculated by SEK = SQRT(24/N) where 

N is the sample size. According to the 

small sample kurtosis hypothesis test, if 

the kurtosis statistic (K) is greater than 

2 times the SEK, the data distribution is 

typically considered to be non-normal. 

We applied the skewness and kurtosis 

hypothesis tests to both the reported test 

values and the lognormal values of the 

reported test values. If the skewness (S) 

and kurtosis (K) statistics of the reported 

data set were both less than twice the 

SES and SEK, respectively, we classified 

the dataset as normally distributed. If 

neither of the skewness (S) and kurtosis 

(K) statistics, or only one of these 

statistics were less than twice the SES 

or SEK, respectively, then we conducted 

the skewness and kurtosis hypothesis 

tests for the natural log-transformed 

data. Then, we selected the distribution 

most similar to a log-normal distribution 

as the basis for calculating the UPL, 

based on EPA guidance documents. If 

both the reported values and the natural 

log-transformed reported values had 

skewness (S) and kurtosis (K) statistics 

that were greater than twice the SES or 

SEK, respectively, we selected the 

normally distributed dataset as the basis 

of the MACT floor to be conservative. If 

the results of the skewness and kurtosis 

hypothesis tests were mixed for the 

reported values, and the natural logtransformed reported values, we also 

chose the log-normal distribution to 

comply with EPA guidance. We believe 

this approach is more accurate and 

obtained more representative results 

than a more simplistic normal 

distribution assumption. 

Because compliance with the MACT 

floor emission limit is based on the 

average of a three-run test, the UPL is 

calculated by: 

Where: 

n = Number of test runs. 

m = Number of test runs in the compliance 

average. 

s = Standard deviation. 

x bar = Mean 

t (0.99,n¥1) = T-statistic for 99-percent 

significance, and a sample size of n. 

This calculation was performed using 

the following two Microsoft Excel©

functions: 

Normal distribution: 99-percent UPL 

= AVERAGE(Test Runs in Top 5) + 

[STDEV(Test Runs in Top 5)x TINV(2 x 

probability, n¥1 degrees of 

freedom)*SQRT((1/n)+(1⁄3))], for a onetailed t-value (with 2 x probability), 

probability of 0.01, and sample size of 

n. 

Lognormal distribution: 99-percent 

UPL = EXP{AVERAGE(Natural Log 

Values of Test Runs in Top 5) + 

[STDEV(Natural Log Values of Test 

Runs in Top 5) × TINV(2 × probability, 

n-1 degrees of freedom)* SQRT((1/n) + 

(1⁄3))]}, for a one-tailed t-value (with 2 x 

probability), probability of 0.01, and 

sample size of n. 

We followed these procedures for 

determining the variability of process 

vent emission limits (for vent streams 

from polymerization reactors, resin 

strippers, other process components 

prior to the resin stripper, VCM 

recovery system, and wastewater 

collection and treatment system). For 

the stripped resin variability analysis, 

the same procedures were followed with 

one change. The variability calculation 

for stripped resins uses the average of 

the sampling results for each day of the 

30-day sampling period (e.g., essentially 

30 runs instead of three runs for process 

vents). As a result, the 99-percent UPL 

equation uses a compliance average 

value of 30 instead of 3. 

For wastewater, we followed the same 

procedures for determining variability. 

A variability analysis was performed on 

the top five facilities. The skewness and 

kurtosis statistics were calculated 

(following the same procedure as for 

process vents and resins) to determine 

the top 5 data set distribution. The 99- 

percent UPL value was calculated for 

both the normal and log-normal 

distribution using the same formula as 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.044</GPH>
29546 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

6American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 

Reference Method Accuracy and Precision 

(ReMAPJ: Phase 1, Precision of Manual Stack). 

process vents and resins, except that the 

number of samples in the data set was 

set to 5 (the top 5 fraction remaining 

values), and the number of samples in 

the compliance average was set to 1 

(because the data provided by facilities 

only included one value for any 

wastewater concentration). 

2. Incorporation of Non-Detect Data 

Non-detect values constitute more 

than 50 percent of the process vent 

emissions data for CDD/CDF and HCl, 

and approximately 42 percent of the 

stripped resin data for all reported HAP. 

For these pollutants, we developed a 

methodology to account for the 

imprecision introduced by 

incorporating non-detect data into the 

MACT floor calculation. 

At very low emission levels for which 

emissions tests result in non-detect 

values, the inherent imprecision in the 

pollutant measurement method has a 

large influence on the reliability of the 

data underlying the MACT floor 

emission limit. Because of resin sample 

and emission matrix effects, laboratory 

techniques, sample size, and other 

factors, method detection levels 

normally vary from test to test for any 

specific test method and pollutant 

measurement. The confidence level that 

a value measured at the detection level 

is greater than zero is about 99 percent. 

The expected measurement imprecision 

for an emissions value occurring at or 

near the method detection level is about 

40 to 50 percent. Pollutant measurement 

imprecision decreases to a consistent 

level of 10 to 15 percent for values 

measured at a level about 3 times the 

method detection level.6

We are using an approach to account 

for measurement variability when 

significant numbers of non-detect 

measurements are included in the 

dataset that starts with defining a 

method detection level that is 

representative of the data used in the 

data pool. 

The first step in this approach is to 

identify the highest test-specific method 

detection level reported in a data set 

that is also equal to or less than the 

average emission calculated for the data 

set. This approach has the advantage of 

relying on the data collected to develop 

the MACT floor emission limit, while, 

to some degree, minimizing the effect of 

a test(s) with an inordinately high 

method detection level (e.g., the sample 

volume was too small, the laboratory 

technique was insufficiently sensitive, 

or the procedure for determining the 

detection level was other than that 

specified). 

The second step is to determine the 

value equal to 3 times the representative 

method detection level, and compare it 

to the calculated MACT floor emission 

limit. If 3 times the representative 

method detection level is less than the 

calculated MACT floor emission limit, 

we would conclude that measurement 

variability is adequately addressed, and 

we would not adjust the calculated 

MACT floor emission limit. If, on the 

other hand, the value equal to 3 times 

the representative method detection 

level is greater than the calculated 

MACT floor emission limit, we would 

conclude that the calculated MACT 

floor emission limit does not account 

entirely for measurement variability. 

We, therefore, use the value equal to 3 

times the method detection level, in 

place of the calculated MACT floor 

emission limit, to ensure that the MACT 

floor emission limit accounts for 

measurement variability and 

imprecision. The same procedures were 

followed for non-detect values for the 

resin information, but the analysis was 

done for 30 days worth of samples from 

each facility rather than three test runs. 

We request comment on this approach 

to incorporation of non-detect data in 

the MACT floor. 

We followed the following additional 

procedures for CDD/CDF TEQ basis 

limits. To calculate a limit on a TEQ 

basis, first, we identified non-detect 

values on an individual CDD/CDF 

congener basis. There are 17 CDD/CDF 

congeners used to calculate TEQ values. 

For facilities that reported some, but not 

all CDD/CDF congeners as non-detect, 

we calculated the mean of the nondetect values for each CDD/CDF 

congener. Then we multiplied the toxic 

equivalency factor (TEF) for each 

congener by the mean to determine the 

TEQ detection level for each CDD/CDF 

congener. For facilities that reported all 

CDD/CDF congeners as non-detect, we 

multiplied each non-detect value by the 

respective TEF factor. We used the sum 

of the detection level toxic 

equivalencies for each of the 17 CDD/ 

CDF congeners of interest to calculate a 

TEQ detection level sum value. The 

TEQ sum was then used as the detection 

limit for the test run. We used the 

second step discussed above to set the 

limit. The methodology is described in 

detail in the memorandum MACT Floor 

Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, and is available in the docket. 

We solicit comment on these 

procedures. For wastewater, non-detect 

values were not incorporated into the 

variability analysis because they were 

not included with the facility submitted 

survey information. 

3. Existing Source MACT Floor Results 

for Process Vents, Stripped Resins, and 

Wastewater 

We identified the best performing five 

sources in the category (for process 

vents and wastewater), or each 

subcategory (for stripped resins), and 

each pollutant (e.g., vinyl chloride, total 

HAP, HCl, and CDD/CDF). We then 

compiled the individual test run and 

sampling concentration data for these 

sources, and conducted a statistical 

analysis to calculate the average and 

account for variability, and, thereby, 

determine the MACT floor emission 

limit. 

Table 4 of this preamble summarizes 

results of the UPL analysis and the 

MACT floor emission limits for existing 

process vents for each pollutant. Table 

5 of this preamble presents the results 

for stripped resins. A detailed 

discussion of the MACT floor 

methodology is presented in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for 

the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

(PVC) Production Source Category, and 

is available in the docket. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT EXISTING SOURCES c,d

Pollutant (and units of measure) 99% UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

Vinyl chloride (ppmv) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .319 0 .32 

Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) ............................................................................................................................................. 140 .17 150 

Total HAP (ppmv) .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 .3 12 b

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29547 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT EXISTING SOURCES c,d— 

Continued 

Pollutant (and units of measure) 99% UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

CDD/CDF (TEQ) (ng/dscm) ........................................................................................................................................... 0 .0183 0 .023 b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures. 

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis. 

c ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ng/dscm = nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen. dProcess vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), certain storage vessels, VCM recovery systems, wastewater collection and treatment 

system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples. 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC STRIPPED RESINS AT EXISTING SOURCES (PPMW) 

Pollutant 

Bulk resins Dispersion resins All other resins 

99% 

UPL 

MACT 

floor 

emission 

limit a

99% 

UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

99% 

UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

Vinyl chloride ......................................................................................................... 7 .1 7 .1 54 .8 55 0 .471 0.48 

Total HAP .............................................................................................................. 167 .3 170 100 .1 110 33 .3 76 b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures. 

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis. 

For wastewater that exceeds the 10 

ppmw vinyl chloride limit at the point 

of generation, we determined that the 

99-percent UPL is 0.109 ppmw at the 

outlet of the wastewater stripper and the 

MACT floor level of control rounded up 

to two significant figures is 0.11 ppmw. 

The analysis is documented in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for 

the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

(PVC) Production Source Category, and 

is available in the docket. Wastewater 

streams below the 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride limit at the point of generation, 

must remain below the 10 ppmw limit. 

Results of the MACT floor analysis for 

heat exchange systems, storage vessels, 

equipment leaks, and other emission 

sources are discussed in section IV.D of 

this preamble. 

E. How did EPA determine the MACT 

floors for new major sources? 

Similar to the MACT floor process 

used for existing sources, the approach 

for determining the MACT floor for new 

sources is based on available emissions 

information. Using such an approach to 

develop the MACT floor emission limits 

for process vents and stripped resins for 

each pollutant, we ranked all the 

available emission concentration, 

stripped resin concentration, or 

wastewater concentration data for each 

pollutant from sources within the entire 

category (for process vents and 

wastewater), or each subcategory (for 

stripped resin) from lowest to highest. 

As discussed in section IV.D of this 

preamble, data from all major sources 

and the one synthetic area source were 

included in this ranking. See section 

IV.D of this preamble for more 

information about the emission 

concentration and resin concentration 

data. Based on this ranking, we 

calculated the MACT floor limits for 

each pollutant, and for the summation 

of pollutants making up the total HAP 

value, based on the performance (of the 

lowest emitting (best controlled)) source 

for each pollutant in the category or 

subcategory. 

We calculated the MACT floor limits 

accounting for variability for new 

sources using the same formula that we 

used for existing sources. As discussed 

in section IV.D of this preamble, we 

account for variability of the bestcontrolled source in setting floors, not 

only because variability is an element of 

performance, but also because it is 

reasonable to assess best performance 

over time. If we do not account for this 

variability, we would expect that even 

the best-controlled similar source would 

potentially exceed the floor emission 

levels part of the time, which would 

mean that their variability was not 

properly accounted for when setting the 

MACT floor. We calculated the MACT 

floor based on the UPL (upper 99th 

percentile), as described in section IV.D 

from the average performance, based on 

emission testing and resin sampling of 

the best controlled similar source, 

Students t-factor, the total variability of 

the best controlled source, and 

incorporating the non-detect 

procedures. 

This approach reasonably ensures that 

the emission limit selected as the MACT 

floor adequately represents the level of 

control actually achieved by the best 

controlled similar source, considering 

ordinary operational variability. Tables 

6 and 7 of this preamble present the 

analysis summaries, and the new source 

MACT floor limits for PVC process 

vents and stripped resins, respectively. 

A detailed discussion of the MACT 

floor methodology is presented in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for 

the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer 

(PVC) Production Source Category, and 

is available in the docket. 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT NEW SOURCES c,d

Pollutant (and unit of measure) 99% 

UPL 

MACT 

floor 

emission 

limit a

Vinyl chloride (ppbv) .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 .53 3 .2 b

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29548 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC PROCESS VENTS AT NEW SOURCES c,d—Continued 

Pollutant (and unit of measure) 99% 

UPL 

MACT 

floor 

emission 

limit a

Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .162 0 .17 

Total HAP (ppmv) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .217 0 .22 

CDD/CDF (TEQ)(ng/dscm) ........................................................................................................................................................ 0 .00428 0 .0087 b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures. 

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis. 

c ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen. ng/dscm = 

nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen. dProcess vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery systems, certain storage vessels, slip gauges, loading and unloading 

lines, samples, and the wastewater collection and treatment system. 

TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF MACT FLOOR EMISSION LIMITS FOR PVC STRIPPED RESINS AT NEW SOURCES (PPMW) 

Pollutant 

Bulk resins Dispersion resins All other resins 

99% 

UPL 

MACT 

floor 

emission 

limit a

99% 

UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

99% 

UPL 

MACT floor 

emission 

limit a

Vinyl chloride ........................................................................................................... 7 .1 7 .1 40 .3 41 0 .191 0.20 

Total HAP ................................................................................................................ 167 .3 170 57 .8 58 25 .1 42 b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures. 

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis. 

The best performing wastewater 

source is complying with the part 61 

NESHAP wastewater standards. The 

part 61 NESHAP requires that inprocess 

wastewater streams that exceed a vinyl 

chloride concentration limit of 10 

ppmw, at the point of generation, be 

controlled. The best-performing source 

achieves this control by using a 

wastewater steam stripper and achieves 

a vinyl chloride concentration at the 

outlet of the wastewater stripper of 

0.0060 ppmw. The analysis is 

documented in the memorandum, 

MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) 

Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. We are 

proposing that all new wastewater 

streams meet a vinyl chloride limit of 10 

ppmw, at the point of generation. We 

are also proposing that new wastewater 

streams that exceed the 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride limit at the point of generation, 

reduce vinyl chloride to a wastewater 

stripper outlet concentration of 0.0060 

ppmw. 

For equipment leaks, the best 

performing source complies with the 

LDAR requirements for 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU and the existing part 61 

NESHAP LDAR requirements for 

rotating and reciprocating pumps and 

compressors, and agitators. For storage 

vessels, the information collected 

showed that at all sources, including the 

best performing source, materials with 

vapor pressures greater than 14.7 psia 

are stored under pressure; a closed vent 

system that is routed to a control device 

is used at all facilities when filling the 

tank, or purging the tank. All other 

materials are stored at all facilities in 

fixed roof tanks. 

The current requirements from the 

part 61 NESHAP, for reactor opening 

losses and equipment openings, set 

standards that must be met. In the case 

of reactors used as strippers, the 

standard is based on the sum of 

allowable reactor opening losses, and 

the standard for all downstream 

equipment (e.g., the stripped resin 

limits). All affected sources are required 

to meet the part 61 NESHAP 

requirements. 

For heat exchange systems, the best 

performing source has a leak action 

level of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC 

in the cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas, 

with twice-daily monitoring, which is, 

therefore, the MACT floor for heat 

exchange systems at new sources. 

EPA solicits comment on the 

proposed MACT floors for new PVC 

production facilities. 

F. How did EPA analyze beyond-thefloor options and determine MACT? 

1. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for 

Existing Sources 

Once the MACT floor determinations 

were done for each category or 

subcategory, we considered various 

regulatory options more stringent than 

the MACT floor levels of control (e.g., 

control technologies or work practices 

that could result in lower emissions). A 

detailed description of the beyond-thefloor consideration is in the 

memorandum, Analysis of Beyond 

MACT Floor Controls for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymer (PVC) 

Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. 

We first identified regulatory 

requirements for each emission point 

that would be more stringent than the 

MACT floor level of control, and 

determined whether they were 

technically feasible. If the more 

stringent requirements were technically 

feasible, a cost and emission impacts 

analysis was conducted for applying 

them. 

Process Vents. The control 

technologies that would be needed to 

achieve the proposed MACT floor levels 

for process vents (e.g., enhanced vinyl 

chloride recovery, activated carbon 

injection, and fabric filters, in 

combination with existing controls, 

such as incinerators and acid gas 

scrubbers) are generally the most 

effective controls available for reducing 

vinyl chloride, HCl, total organic HAP, 

and dioxins/furans. Therefore, no 

beyond-the-floor regulatory options 

were identified for HAP from process 

vents. 

Equipment Leaks. For equipment 

leaks, we are proposing to require that 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29549 

facilities implement the LDAR program 

from 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, which 

is generally equivalent to the HON, and 

which we identified as the most 

effective control of emissions from 

equipment leaks. We are also proposing 

that facilities implement the equipment 

requirements for rotating and 

reciprocating pumps and compressors 

and agitators from part 61 NESHAP, 

which are leakless equipment. 

Therefore, no beyond-the-floor HAP 

emission reduction approaches were 

identified for equipment leaks. 

Heat Exchange Systems. For heat 

exchange systems, the proposed existing 

source MACT floor level of control is a 

LDAR program with a leak action level 

of 38 ppbw of total strippable VOC in 

the cooling water, or 2.9 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas and 

monthly monitoring. We analyzed a 

beyond-the-floor option of requiring a 

lower leak action level for the cooling 

water of 25 ppbw. Average costs and 

emission reductions were calculated on 

a per leak basis. The results of the 

analysis showed that 5.78 tpy of total 

VOC would be reduced for an annual 

cost of $175,630, resulting in a cost of 

$30,386 per ton of VOC reduced. 

Consequently, we determined it was not 

appropriate to go beyond-the-floor 

considering the cost and emission 

reductions of this option. 

Storage Vessels. For storage vessels, 

the CAA section 114 information 

collection data indicate that methanol is 

the primary material stored in fixed roof 

tanks ranging from 5,000 gallons to 

30,000 gallons associated with PVCPU. 

We analyzed a beyond-the-floor option 

of requiring storage vessels meeting 

specific vapor pressure and storage 

capacity parameters specified in 40 CFR 

part 60, subpart Kb to comply with the 

control requirements of 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart WW. The subpart Kb standard 

in 40 CFR 60.112(b), requires material 

be stored in controlled tanks if: (1) The 

material stored has a maximum true 

vapor pressure greater or equal to 0.75 

psia, and the storage vessel has a 

capacity equal to, or greater than 40,000 

gallons, or (2) the material stored has a 

maximum true vapor pressure greater or 

equal to 4 psia, and the storage vessel 

has a capacity equal to, or greater than 

20,000 gallons, but less than 40,000 

gallons. Subpart Kb also requires 

materials above 11.1 psia to be stored in 

pressure tanks. The beyond-the-floor 

controls include specific sealing 

mechanisms for internal or external 

floating roofs or routing streams from a 

fixed roof vessel through a closed vent 

system to a control device meeting a 95- 

percent or greater reduction in volatile 

organic emissions. We calculated the 

emission reduction and cost of 

retrofitting subpart WW controls on 

model fixed roof tanks meeting subpart 

Kb vapor pressure and size parameters. 

The results of the analysis showed that 

cost-effectiveness ranged from $2,000 to 

$12,000 per ton of HAP reduced by this 

option, depending on the number of 

turnovers assumed. Considering the cost 

and emissions reduction, we have 

determined that it is appropriate to 

propose this beyond-the-floor 

requirement for storage vessels. Based 

on information submitted by PVC 

production facilities, we are not aware 

of any storage vessels from affected 

sources that meet the capacity levels 

(20,000 gallons or 40,000 gallons), and 

store material that meet the vapor 

pressure levels. Therefore, we estimate 

that there are no additional costs and 

emission reductions for this option for 

storage vessels currently at PVCPU. 

However, the proposed beyond-the-floor 

standards for storage vessels will ensure 

that, if there are any storage vessels 

(now or in the future) that meet the 

capacity and vapor pressure criteria, 

they will be controlled. This analysis is 

documented in the memorandum, 

Analysis of Beyond MACT Floor 

Controls for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymer (PVC) Production Source 

Category, and is available in the docket. 

Five gas holders are currently in use 

by three facilities, and are a part of the 

vinyl chloride recovery system. In these 

recovery systems, process vents 

originating from polymerization 

reactors, resin strippers, and wastewater 

strippers (among others) are routed in 

closed vent systems to a separate 

process to recover unreacted VCM from 

the vent gasses. Gas holders provide 

intermediate storage of vent gasses 

which contain VCM before the VCM is 

recovered, compressed, and recycled 

back into the process. Gas holders are 

cylindrical tanks with a floating bell 

top. The tanks contain water that serves 

as a seal between the contained gas and 

the ambient air outside of the tank. The 

pressure inside the gas holder changes 

as gasses are fed to, or removed from, 

the tank. The water inside the gas 

holder is in constant contact with the 

vinyl chloride laden gas and can 

approach saturation. The primary 

source of emissions from gas holders is 

from the water seal on the gas holder 

that is continually exposed to the 

ambient atmosphere. In addition, as the 

gas holder bell rises, a thin film of water 

that contains vinyl chloride remains on 

the outer surface of the bell. Methods to 

reduce emissions may include keeping 

the gas holder water level at the lowest 

possible level, using either floating 

objects on the surface of the water seal 

or using a thin layer of oil, or using a 

windshield around the gas holder water 

seal. 

We do not have information from 

emission tests, control information, or 

cost information on gas holders. We are 

requesting comment and additional 

information on emissions, controls, and 

costs of controls for this emission 

source. 

Wastewater. For wastewater, EPA has 

previously determined for the HON that 

a beyond-the-floor option of treating 

streams with HAP concentrations 

greater than 1,000 ppmw (of 40 CFR part 

63, subpart G, Table 9 HAP), and annual 

average flow rates greater than 10 l/min 

measured at the point of determination 

(as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

G), is cost-effective ($670/ton in 2010 

dollars). The analysis previously 

conducted for the HON is applicable to 

PVC, because the cost-effectiveness of 

wastewater treatment depends on the 

wastewater flow and HAP 

concentration, not on the type of 

process unit from which the wastewater 

stream is generated. The same treatment 

systems (steam stripping or 

biotreatment), and the same measures to 

prevent atmospheric emissions from the 

systems conveying the wastewater 

streams to the treatment systems, are 

applicable to wastewater streams that 

meet these criteria. Furthermore, 35 

percent of PVC production facilities are 

co-located with chemical manufacturing 

process units that are subject to the 

HON, and could potentially route PVC 

wastewater streams (if any) that meet 

the total HAP criteria to existing HON 

wastewater treatment processes to meet 

these limits. Consequently, we are 

proposing that streams with HAP 

concentrations greater than 1,000 ppmw 

(of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9 

HAP), and annual average flow rates 

greater than 10 l/min be treated as 

specified in the HON requirement as a 

beyond-the-floor HAP emissions 

reduction approach. Based on 

information submitted by PVC 

production facilities, we are not aware 

of any wastewater streams from affected 

sources that are above these flow rate 

and concentration limits. Therefore, we 

estimate that there are no additional 

costs or emission reductions because all 

facilities are below the 1,000 ppmw 

total HAP concentration and 10 l/min 

flow rate limits. However, the limit will 

ensure that, if there are any wastewater 

streams meeting the total HAP and flow 

rate criteria, they will be controlled. 

Additionally, wastewater generated 

during maintenance activities is not 

currently regulated by 40 CFR part 61, 

subpart F. We requested and received 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29550 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

limited information on vinyl chloride 

and HAP concentrations in maintenance 

wastewater streams. We are requesting 

comment on whether maintenance 

wastewater should have separate limits 

from inprocess wastewater. We are also 

soliciting additional data relevant to 

setting a maintenance wastewater 

MACT standard. 

Other Emission Sources. We did not 

identify more stringent control 

requirements than what we are 

proposing to require at the MACT floor 

to reduce emissions from reactor and 

equipment openings. The proposed 

MACT standard requires that, prior to 

being opened, emissions from reactor 

and process component openings must 

be reduced to a specified level and 

ducted through a closed vent system 

and control device that would meet the 

proposed emission limits for process 

vents. We did identify an additional 

work practice that could be used to 

minimize emissions from all PVC 

production facilities. One facility 

identified placing filter bags, strainers, 

and other removable separation media 

in closed and sealed containers that 

remain closed and sealed unless being 

actively filled or emptied to minimize 

emissions. However, we do not have 

information on the costs and emission 

reductions of this work practice, or the 

procedures followed. We request 

comments, and any further information, 

including cost and performance data, on 

this practice, and other work practices 

that are being followed by the industry 

to minimize emissions from other 

emission sources. 

Stripped Resin. For stripped resins, 

we determined that facilities would use 

additional steam in existing equipment 

to reduce the concentrations of residual 

vinyl chloride and total HAP to meet the 

limits for resins being proposed. We 

believe that additional stripping in 

existing equipment beyond what would 

be required to meet the proposed limits 

would not be technically feasible as the 

incremental additional concentration 

reductions would be either negligible or 

zero, and existing sources may not be 

able to further reduce concentrations to 

the beyond-the-floor levels without 

degrading product. However, additional 

HAP emission reductions could be 

achieved by routing vents from process 

components downstream of the resin 

stripper (e.g., resin dryers and 

centrifuges) to an incinerator. We then 

determined the cost and emission 

reductions of applying a 98-percent 

efficient incinerator to the process vents 

downstream of the resin stripper (e.g., 

dryer and centrifuge vents). The results 

of the analysis are shown in Table 8. 

Summary of Beyond the Floor 

Analysis. Table 8 of this preamble 

summarizes the costs of the MACT floor 

emission level (referred to as option 1), 

and one beyond-the-floor option for 

stripped resins (option 2). Option 2 is 

the same as option 1 plus the 

installation of a thermal oxidizer on 

vent streams from processes 

downstream of the resin stripper. 

TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF COSTS FOR PVCPU TO COMPLY WITH MACT CONTROL OPTIONS FOR EXISTING SOURCES

(2010$) 

Option 

Total capital 

costs 

($million) 

Total 

annualized 

costs 

($million/Yr)a, b

1—MACT Floor ........................................................................................................................................................ 16 20 

2—Option 1 + additional control of resin ................................................................................................................. 370 129 

a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for costs for process vents, equipment leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor 

options for wastewater and storage vessels do not result in costs, because no sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability requirements for these emission points. b Calculated using a 7-percent discount factor. 

Table 9 of this preamble summarizes 

the emission reductions of each 

pollutant for the MACT control options 

analyzed. 

TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR PVCPU TO COMPLY WITH THE MACT CONTROL OPTIONS FOR

EXISTING SOURCES

Pollutant 

Option 1 

(MACT floor) 

(tpy) 

Option 2 

(Option 1 + 

additional control of stripped 

resin) 

(tpy)a

CDD/CDF TEQ ........................................................................................................................................................ 2.45E–08 2.45E–08 

HCl ........................................................................................................................................................................... 33 33 

Vinyl chloride ........................................................................................................................................................... 135 176 

Total HAP ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,570 2,618 

a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for process vents, equipment leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor options for 

wastewater and storage vessels do not result in emission reductions, because no sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability requirements for these emission points. 

The results provided in Tables 8 and 

9 of this preamble were calculated using 

data gathered for the PVC industry. We 

estimate that applying additional 

control to reduce emissions from 

stripped resins would result in a total 

annualized cost of $129 million, and 

would achieve vinyl chloride and total 

HAP reductions of 176 tpy and 2,618 

tpy, respectively. The incremental costeffectiveness of adding a thermal 

oxidizer to control emissions from 

process vents downstream of the resin 

stripper was estimated to be $2.7 

million per ton of vinyl chloride 

reduced, and over $100,000 per ton of 

total HAP reduced. Consequently, we 

determined it was not appropriate to go 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29551 

beyond the floor, considering the cost 

and emission reductions of this option. 

The results of the beyond-the-floor 

analysis are documented in the 

memorandum, Analysis of Beyond 

MACT Floor Controls for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) 

Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. Table 1 in this 

preamble summarizes the proposed 

emissions limits for existing PVCPU. 

2. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for New 

Sources 

Except for wastewater and storage 

vessels, we did not identify any 

technologies or methods to achieve HAP 

emission limits more stringent than the 

MACT floor limits, or work practices for 

new units, based on the best performing 

PVC facilities. The control technologies 

and work practices necessary to achieve 

the MACT floor levels are generally the 

most effective controls available. 

For wastewater, EPA has previously 

determined for the HON that a beyondthe-floor option of treating streams with 

HAP concentrations greater than 1,000 

ppmw (of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, 

Table 9 HAP), and annual average flow 

rates greater than 10 l/min is costeffective for new sources ($1,300/ton in 

2010 dollars for new sources). For the 

same reasons discussed in section IV.F.1 

of this preamble, the analysis previously 

conducted for HON is applicable to PVC 

because the cost- effectiveness of 

wastewater treatment depends on the 

wastewater flow and HAP 

concentration, not on the type of 

process unit the wastewater stream is 

coming from. As discussed in section 

IV.F.1 of this preamble, we are 

requesting comment on whether 

maintenance wastewater should have 

separate limits from inprocess 

wastewater, and requesting data 

relevant to setting a maintenance 

wastewater MACT standard. 

We also concluded, in section IV.F.1 

of this preamble, that it was costeffective ($2,000 to $12,000 per ton of 

HAP) to require floating roof tanks or 

fixed roof tanks routed to a closed vent 

system, and control device for storage 

vessels that (1) have a storage capacity 

equal to or greater than 40,000 gallons 

(151 cubic meters), and store material 

with maximum true vapor pressures 

greater or equal to 0.75 psia, or (2) have 

a storage capacity equal to or greater 

than 20,000 gallons, and less than 

40,000 gallons, and store material with 

maximum true vapor pressures greater 

or equal to 4 psia. Consequently, the 

beyond-the-floor options for wastewater 

and storage vessels are the only ones 

being proposed for new sources. Tables 

1 and 3 of this preamble summarizes the 

proposed emissions limits for new 

PVCPU. 

EPA solicits comment on the 

proposed beyond-the-floor 

determinations. 

G. How did EPA select the compliance 

and monitoring requirements for the 

proposed rule? 

We are proposing testing, monitoring, 

notification, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements that are adequate 

to assure continuous compliance with 

the requirements of the proposed rule. 

These requirements are described in 

detail in various sections in the 

proposed rule. We solicit comment on 

the proposed compliance and 

monitoring requirements. We selected 

these requirements based upon our 

examination of the information 

necessary to ensure that the emission 

standards and work practices are being 

followed, and that emission control 

devices and process components are 

maintained and operated properly. 

These proposed requirements impose on 

facilities the minimum burden that is 

necessary to ensure compliance with the 

proposed rule. 

1. How did we select the compliance 

and monitoring requirements for storage 

vessels? 

For storage vessels, we are proposing 

that you meet the operating, inspection, 

repair, and maintenance requirements 

in 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed 

rule, as discussed in section III.F.1 of 

this preamble. We are proposing work 

practice standards to ensure that 

pressure vessels and fixed roof storage 

tanks are being operated correctly and 

maintained. Pressure vessels, during 

purging and filling, are required to meet 

the closed vent system and control 

device requirements specified in 40 CFR 

63.11910(c)(1) of the proposed rule. 

Annual monitoring of potential leak 

interfaces on pressure vessels using EPA 

Method 21 is proposed to be used to 

verify there are no leaks. Any detectable 

emissions would be considered a 

violation of the rule. These 

requirements ensure that pressure 

vessels do not vent to the atmosphere. 

We are requesting comment on this 

requirement. 

Floating roof storage vessels would be 

required to comply with the operation, 

maintenance, and inspection 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63 subpart 

WW. The requirements of subpart WW 

are in many EPA standards, such as the 

Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON), 

and provide more current compliance 

requirements that better reflect the 

current state of operations for the 

industry. The subpart WW provisions 

for floating roof tanks would ensure that 

floating roof vessels operate correctly by 

requiring periodic inspection of the 

floating roofs. 

If you choose to route vent streams 

from fixed roof tanks to a closed vent 

system and control device, we are 

proposing that the control device must 

reduce the inlet VOC emissions by 95 

percent, or greater. This requirement is 

based on the provisions of 40 CFR part 

60, subpart Kb, which provides 

reduction requirements for fixed roof 

vessels routed to a closed vent system, 

and control device in 40 CFR 

60.112b(a)(3)(ii). These are achievable 

reductions for storage tanks that have 

been previously implemented, as in 

subpart Kb. You would also be required 

to meet the requirements for closed vent 

systems and control devices in 40 CFR 

63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11930 of the 

proposed rule. These requirements 

would limit the VOC emissions released 

to the atmosphere from storage tanks. 

All types of storage vessels are 

required to be equipped with closure 

devices. You would also be required to 

visually inspect the fixed roof tanks and 

their closure devices for defects 

initially, and at least once per calendar 

year, with the exception of parts of the 

fixed roof that you determine are unsafe 

to inspect. 

For parts that you have determined 

are unsafe to inspect, you would be 

required to prepare and maintain 

written documentation that identifies 

each part and explains why the part is 

unsafe to inspect, and to conduct 

inspections during times when it is safe 

to do so (as frequently as practicable, 

but not required more than once per 

calendar year). We have included 

provisions intended to clarify the 

required intervals between inspections, 

because we have received comments 

during development of prior rules that 

some requirements could be subject to 

different interpretations. For example, a 

requirement to conduct inspections 

‘‘annually’’ could be read to mean in 

every calendar year, no later than the 

date 1 year after the previous 

inspection, or in the same month every 

year. To address concerns about when 

inspections must be conducted if the 

storage vessel is out of service on the 

date when the inspection must be 

completed, instead of proposing to 

require inspections ‘‘annually,’’ we are 

proposing a requirement to conduct 

inspections at least ‘‘once per calendar 

year.’’ For fixed roof parts that are 

unsafe to inspect, an inspection may be 

delayed until an alternative storage 

vessel can be made available, and the 

vessel to be inspected can be emptied 

and temporarily removed from service. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29552 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

The inspection must be conducted 

before the fixed roof storage vessel is 

returned to service. These provisions are 

provided in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of 

the proposed rule. 

We have included fixed roof repair 

provisions in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(4) of 

the proposed rule for when a defect is 

identified. These requirements are based 

on the requirements in 40 CFR 

63.1063(e) of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

WW. We have made one clarification to 

the conditions under which delay of 

repair extensions are allowed. You must 

make a first attempt to repair the defect 

no later than 5 calendar days after 

detection, and complete the repair as 

soon as possible, but no later than 45 

calendar days after detection. The delay 

of repair provisions would allow delay 

beyond 45 calendar days if you 

determine that the repair requires 

emptying or temporary removal from 

service of the storage vessel, and no 

alternative storage capacity is available 

at the site. You would be required to 

repair the defect the next time 

alternative storage capacity becomes 

available, and the storage vessel can be 

emptied, or temporarily removed from 

service. 

Under 40 CFR 63.11910(c) of the 

proposed rule, pressure vessels, as 

defined in proposed 40 CFR 63.12010, 

may not vent to the atmosphere, but 

must instead be vented back into the 

process, or vented to a closed vent 

system and control device. These 

provisions have been included in 40 

CFR 63.11910(c) of the proposed rule to 

ensure that the pressure vessel stream is 

not inadvertently directed to the 

atmosphere. 

2. How did we select the compliance 

and monitoring requirements for 

equipment leaks? 

For equipment leaks, we are 

proposing in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the 

proposed rule, as discussed in section 

III.F.2 of this preamble, that you meet 

the LDAR requirements of 40 CFR part 

63, subpart UU, which defines leak 

thresholds and monitoring frequencies 

for each type of equipment. These 

requirements are already being used at 

several PVCPU and in other source 

categories, and have been shown to be 

effective in minimizing emissions from 

leaking equipment. 

Release events from PRD have the 

potential to emit large quantities of 

HAP. We are concerned that a large 

number of these releases that occur may 

not be identified and controlled in a 

timely manner and may be due to repeat 

problems that have not been corrected. 

The end result would be significant 

increases in annual HAP emissions. To 

address this issue, we are proposing that 

you be required to install electronic 

indicators on each PRD that would be 

able to identify and record the time and 

duration of each pressure release. 

3. How did we select the compliance 

and monitoring requirements for heat 

exchangers? 

For heat exchange systems, we are 

proposing in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the 

proposed rule to include requirements 

equivalent to the primary monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements that were finalized for 

heat exchange systems for Refinery 

MACT 1 sources (74 FR 55669), 

including a LDAR program that requires 

you to conduct sampling and analyses 

using the TCEQ Modified El Paso 

Method or EPA Method 8021B, no less 

frequently than monthly for existing 

sources and twice-daily (12-hour 

intervals) for new sources. We are 

proposing a leak action level of 38 ppbw 

of total strippable VOC in the cooling 

water, or 2.9 ppmv of total strippable 

VOC in the stripping gas for existing 

sources, and a leak action level of 30 

ppbw of total strippable VOC in the 

cooling water, or 2.3 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas for 

new sources. We are also proposing a 

delay of repair leak action level of 380 

ppbw of total strippable VOC in cooling 

water, or 29 ppmv of total strippable 

VOC in the stripping gas for new and 

existing sources. 

In contrast to a water sampling 

method such as EPA Method 601 or 624, 

the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method 

provides similar detection limits, as 

speciated water analysis and simulates 

the actual losses that might occur from 

cooling water. Further, the Modified El 

Paso Method helps overcome potential 

losses of highly VOC during water 

sampling. The sensitivity of the 

Modified El Paso Method using flame 

ionization detector (FID) analysis is 

typically 0.1 to 0.5 ppmv (as methane) 

in the stripped air, with 1.0 ppmv (as 

methane) being typical. We note that the 

Modified El Paso Method has been 

demonstrated at numerous sources as an 

effective means of identifying leaks in 

heat exchange systems, and the method 

has been used extensively for over 20 

years. 

We considered the variety of systems 

that may be monitored, and whether the 

Modified El Paso Method should be 

used exclusively. For the PVC 

Production source category, a limited 

number of compounds may be present 

in the process stream for which 

analytical methods are available that 

can detect these compounds at low 

concentrations. Additionally, for 

streams containing highly chlorinated 

organic compounds such as vinyl 

chloride, these alternative methods may 

provide lower detection limits and 

better sensitivity than using the 

Modified El Paso Method (which uses a 

flame ionization detector). We believe 

that the specific analytical method used 

is not critical to the emission limitations 

achieved, provided that the method can 

accurately quantify pollutant 

concentrations at levels far enough 

below the leak action level that the 

method could accurately indicate 

whether or not a leak exists. As such, 

we are proposing to include a direct 

water analysis method in the proposed 

rule. We are proposing different 

sampling locations and leak repair 

provisions for heat exchange systems, 

including a cooling tower (i.e., closedloop recirculation systems) and oncethrough heat exchange systems (e.g., 

river or brackish water), as specified in 

40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule. 

For closed-loop recirculation systems, 

sampling could be conducted at the 

combined return line at the inlet to the 

cooling tower prior to exposure to air. 

Alternatively, sampling could be 

conducted in the ‘‘exit’’ lines (i.e., water 

lines returning the water from the heat 

exchangers to the cooling tower) from 

an individual heat exchanger or bank of 

heat exchangers. Therefore, if the 

cooling tower services multiple heat 

exchangers, you could elect to monitor 

only the heat exchangers in HAP 

service, monitor at branch points that 

combine several heat exchanger exit 

lines, or monitor at the combined stream 

for the entire closed-loop recirculation 

system. These provisions allow 

flexibility and potentially reduce the 

cost of monitoring, while still ensuring 

leak detection. For closed-loop 

recirculation heat exchange systems, the 

impacts of the potential dilution of the 

leak from aggregation with other process 

cooling waters are minimized due to the 

physical limitations of quantity of water 

that can be processed by a single cooling 

tower. 

A once-through heat exchange system 

consists of one or more heat exchangers 

servicing an individual process unit and 

all water lines to and from the heat 

exchanger. As such, sampling for oncethrough heat exchange systems must be 

conducted in exit lines from individual 

heat exchangers, or group of heat 

exchangers associated with a single 

process unit. If once-through heat 

exchange systems are not limited to a 

single process unit, a once-through heat 

exchange system could include all heat 

exchangers at the entire facility. The 

potential to aggregate all cooling water 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29553 

at a facility prior to sampling would 

reduce the effectiveness of the leak 

monitoring methods, and would allow 

HAP leaks to remain undetected, based 

solely on the dilution effect from the 

large quantity of water processed at the 

facility. Commenters are encouraged to 

provide additional information and 

suggestions for sampling alternatives 

that would allow flexibility, but would 

include a small enough number of 

individual heat exchangers to provide 

meaningful measurements in oncethrough systems. 

We are also proposing to allow the 

owner or operator of a once-through 

heat exchange system to monitor both 

the inlet and outlet of an individual heat 

exchanger or group of heat exchangers 

associated with a single process unit, 

and compare the difference between 

those two measurements to the leak 

action level to determine if a leak is 

detected. The use of a differential leak 

is provided for once-through systems 

because the water supply for these 

systems (often river water or ocean 

water) may contain higher background 

concentrations of hydrocarbons than the 

purchased water that is used in closedloop recirculation systems. 

The proposed rule allows facilities to 

use more frequent or continuous 

monitoring as an alternative, but only 

requires monthly monitoring. 

4. How did we select the compliance 

and monitoring requirements for 

process vents? 

As described in section III.F.4 of this 

preamble, we are proposing in 40 CFR 

63.11925 through 40 CFR 63.11950 of 

the proposed rule, performance testing, 

CEMS, and CPMS monitoring 

requirements to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the limits 

in Tables 1 and 2 of the proposed rule 

for process vents. 

To demonstrate compliance with the 

total organic HAP emission limits, we 

are proposing in 40 CFR 63.11945, and 

in Table 9 of the proposed rule, to 

require initial and annual performance 

tests using EPA Method 25A to measure 

THC. Because measuring THC is more 

practical than measuring total organic 

HAP using available test methods, we 

are proposing to allow compliance with 

the total organic HAP limit to be 

determined by measuring THC. We 

calculated the THC level that equates to 

the total HAP limit from the THC data 

reported for the same best performing 

five sources used to calculate the total 

organic HAP limit. During the initial 

performance test, you would be required 

to establish an operating limit for the 

control device operating parameters 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and 40 

CFR 63.11940 (e.g., incinerator 

temperature). You would then 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the total HAP limit by staying 

within the operating limit established 

for each operating parameter. In 40 CFR 

63.11925 of the proposed rule, we are 

providing the option of using a THC 

CEMS meeting the specifications in 40 

CFR Part 60, appendix B, Performance 

Specification 8A as an alternative to 

CPMS. CEMS have been widely used to 

demonstrate that air pollution control 

devices are being operated correctly to 

ensure emission limitations are being 

met. 

To demonstrate initial compliance 

with the CDD/CDF and HCl emission 

limits, under 40 CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR 

63.11935, 40 CFR 63.11940, and 40 CFR 

63.11945 of the proposed rule, 

compliance would be determined by 

performance tests using EPA Method 18 

for vinyl chloride, EPA Method 23 for 

CDD/CDF, and either EPA Method 26 or 

26A for HCl. Continuous compliance 

with the vinyl chloride, CDD/CDF and 

HCl emission limits would be 

demonstrated using continuous 

monitoring of control device parameters 

(e.g., liquid flow rate and pH for 

scrubbers, and temperature and carbon 

injection rate for activated carbon 

injection, temperature for thermal 

oxidizers), and annual performance tests 

for CDD/CDF and vinyl chloride. While 

parameter monitoring has historically 

been a cost-effective monitoring option, 

CEMS are increasingly being used in 

many different situations, and provide 

more accurate data for demonstrating 

continuous compliance. As specified in 

proposed 40 CFR 63.11925, after EPA 

publishes final performance 

specifications for CEMS for HCl and 

CDD/CDF, new sources would be 

required to use CEMS instead of annual 

testing and CPMS for these pollutants, 

and existing sources would be given the 

option to use CEMS. 

To demonstrate compliance for 

process vents, we are also proposing in 

40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule 

that you must meet the requirements of 

proposed 40 CFR 63.11930 for each 

closed vent system, and proposed 40 

CFR 63.11940 for each control device, 

including each incinerator, absorber, 

adsorber, condenser, sorbent injection 

system, fabric filter, or other control 

device. 

The requirements we are proposing 

for closed vent systems are based on the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

SS, although we have revised and 

incorporated new requirements, as 

discussed below. 

The standards for closed vent systems 

in 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule 

include bypass monitoring 

requirements, and leak monitoring and 

inspection requirements. We are 

proposing that for all closed vent 

systems, except those systems in 

vacuum service, as defined in 40 CFR 

63.12010, for bypasses that do not 

contain an automatic flow control valve 

and have manual lock-and-key flow 

control valves, anytime the manual 

valve is opened, it would result in a 

violation. If you install and maintain a 

bypass flow indicator equipped with an 

automatic alarm system, then any 

indication of flow through the bypass is 

a violation, but the action of opening the 

valve is not a violation. These 

provisions are to ensure that any flow 

directed to a bypass is detected and 

addressed by the operator. We have not 

included monitoring exemptions for 

difficult-to-inspect, or unsafe-to-inspect 

equipment. Instead, we are proposing 

that you maintain and follow a written 

plan that requires inspecting the 

equipment designated as unsafe-toinspect as frequently as practical during 

safe-to-inspect times, but not more 

frequently than the otherwise applicable 

annual inspection schedule. 

For the leak monitoring and 

inspection requirements in 40 CFR 

63.11930 of the proposed rule, we have 

added provisions based on 40 CFR part 

60, subpart VVa, which require a 

calibration drift assessment for the leak 

detection instrument at the end of each 

monitoring day. The post-test 

calibration drift assessments constitute 

good practice, and are a useful quality 

assurance/quality control tool to 

validate the proper operation of the leak 

detection instrument during the 

monitoring period, and, hence, the 

measurement data. 

We are proposing that closed vent 

systems that operate in vacuum service, 

as defined in 40 CFR 63.12010 of the 

proposed rule, are not required to 

perform the leak monitoring and 

inspection requirements required for 

other closed vent systems. However, if 

you choose to operate in vacuum service 

under 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed 

rule, you would be required to install a 

pressure gauge and an automatic alarm 

system capable of alerting an operator 

immediately when the closed vent 

system is no longer in vacuum service. 

Unless you meet the monitoring and 

inspection requirements of 40 CFR 

63.11930 of the proposed rule for closed 

vent systems, which are not in vacuum 

service, if a loss of vacuum alarm is 

triggered, you would be in violation of 

the rule, and would be required to bring 

the closed vent system back into 

vacuum service. These requirements 

ensure that vacuum systems remain in 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29554 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

compliance with the rule and do not 

leak. 

For process vents that must 

demonstrate compliance using a control 

device and continuous monitoring using 

a CPMS, the parameters that would be 

monitored for each type of control 

device are specified in proposed 40 CFR 

63.11940. The monitoring requirements 

for each control device were primarily 

based on requirements from 40 CFR part 

63, subpart SS, and 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart FFFF, with additional 

requirements added for new control 

devices, and significant revisions for 

adsorbers, which are discussed in this 

section. 

In 40 CFR 63.11940 of the proposed 

rule, we have revised the former 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart SS requirements for 

‘‘carbon adsorbers’’ to apply to 

‘‘adsorbers,’’ and modified the 

applicability to pertain to adsorbers 

containing carbon, zeolite, adsorbing 

polymers, or any other adsorbents. This 

change reduces the need for owners and 

operators to request alternative controls, 

and for EPA to review these requests. 

The proposed rule has been written to 

address known performance issues for 

adsorbers, including the regeneration 

frequency of the adsorbent, the 

effectiveness of regeneration, the life of 

the adsorbent material before 

replacement is required, mechanical 

issues with the system operation, 

including valve sequencing, and for 

non-regenerative systems, the expected 

life of the bed before replacement. We 

are proposing several monitoring 

approaches for non-vacuum systems, 

regenerative adsorption systems, and 

non-regenerative adsorption systems, 

based on requirements from 40 CFR part 

63, subparts G, SS, GGG, MMM, FFFF, 

GGGGG, and BBBBBB, as well as 

approaches which have been reviewed 

and approved by EPA through 

alternative monitoring requests, and 

which we believe have universal 

applicability. 

Under 40 CFR 63.11925(b) of the 

proposed rule, we are not allowing 

process vents to be routed to a flare due 

to the potential for acid-gas formation 

from combustion of halogenated streams 

at PVCPU. We have included in 40 CFR 

63.11940 of the proposed rule 

compliance and monitoring 

requirements for control devices not 

covered by 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, 

including sorbent injection systems and 

fabric filters. The compliance 

requirements for sorbent injection 

systems were based on the NESHAP for 

the Portland cement manufacturing 

industry, and the compliance 

requirements for fabric filters were 

modeled after the Pesticide Active 

Ingredient Production NESHAP (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart MMM, as referenced by 

the MON), and the Portland Cement 

Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR part 

63, subpart LLL). 

We have also included requirements 

from the MON for batch processing 

operations, as discussed in section 

IV.G.8 of this preamble. 

5. How did we select the compliance 

requirements for wastewater? 

As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965 of 

the proposed rule, we are proposing that 

you must conduct an initial test for 

wastewater streams from the affected 

source to determine the vinyl chloride 

concentration, the total HAP 

concentration (including all HAP listed 

in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), 

and the flow rate. The concentration 

tests would be conducted using EPA 

Method 107 for sampling, in 

combination with RCRA Method SW– 

8260B, Volatile Organic Compounds by 

Gas Chromatography/Mass 

Spectrometry (GC/MS), and EPA 

Method 305, Measurement of Emission 

Potential of Individual Volatile Organic 

Compounds in Waste, for analysis. EPA 

Method 107 is commonly used in this 

source category as both a sampling and 

analytical method for vinyl chloride. We 

are proposing to require RCRA Method 

SW–8260B for analysis of HAP except 

for methanol because it provides 

concentrations for vinyl chloride, as 

well as other HAP. We are proposing to 

require EPA Method 305 for analysis of 

methanol. Prior to testing, you would be 

required to submit a test plan for EPA 

approval that includes your proposed 

method for analysis using these 

methods. 

For wastewater, you would be 

required to test for vinyl chloride at the 

point where the wastewater is 

generated, and test for Table 9 HAP at 

the point of determination, as defined in 

40 CFR part 63, subpart G. The HAP 

most prevalent in wastewater, and in 

the largest amounts for this source 

category, is vinyl chloride, which is 

volatile, and is easily stripped. Testing 

at the point of generation is necessary to 

get an accurate assessment of the 

amount of vinyl chloride in the 

wastewater stream before it potentially 

volatizes in the downstream wastewater 

processes. 

Wastewater streams that contain less 

than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at the 

point of generation), and wastewater 

streams that either contain less than 

1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a flow 

rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the 

point of determination, as defined by 40 

CFR part 63, subpart G), are not required 

to further reduce emissions, but must 

remain below these levels. You would 

test periodically at the same locations, 

and using the same test methods 

described above, to verify that the 

stream concentration stays below these 

levels. Wastewater streams would be 

tested monthly. We believe these are the 

least burdensome intervals to test for 

wastewater, considering the variety of 

resin grades that may be produced, 

while still ensuring compliance with the 

proposed emission limits. There are also 

proposed requirements in 40 CFR 

63.11975(d) of the rule for 

demonstrating that you remain below 

the 10 l/min flow rate criterion. These 

would be required for wastewater 

streams that are not required to apply 

additional control because they are 

below the 10 l/min flow rate criterion. 

The flow rate determination procedures 

are consistent with the HON, which is 

the basis of the flow rate criterion. 

Under 40 CFR 63.11970 and 40 CFR 

63.11975 of the proposed rule, you 

would conduct an initial compliance 

test and monthly testing to demonstrate 

compliance with the wastewater 

stripper outlet concentration limit. In 

addition, during your performance test, 

you would be required to establish 

operating ranges for your wastewater 

vacuum stripper, including steam-tofeed ratios and wastewater stripper 

temperature, and also the vacuum level 

measured in the column for wastewater 

vacuum strippers. These operating 

parameters are good indicators of 

wastewater stripper performance and 

proper operation. You would use a 

CPMS to continuously monitor control 

device operating parameters to 

demonstrate that you meet these 

operating parameter limits. 

If the wastewater stream exceeds the 

1,000 ppmw HAP concentration 

(measured at the point of determination, 

and based on the list of HAP in Table 

9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), and 

exceeds an annual average flow rate of 

10 l/min (as measured at the same point 

of determination), then you would be 

required, under 40 CFR 63.11970(a)(2) 

of the proposed rule, to comply with the 

subpart G Group 1, wastewater 

suppression and treatment 

requirements, and conduct the 

compliance testing and monitoring 

required in subpart G. As discussed in 

section IV.F of this preamble, this 

proposed requirement is a beyond-thefloor option selected because it was 

determined to be cost-effective in the 

HON. Consequently, we are proposing 

that you comply with the HON testing 

and monitoring requirements for these 

streams. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29555 

6. How did we select the compliance 

requirements for stripped resin? 

As discussed in section III.F.6 of this 

preamble, we are proposing in 40 CFR 

63.11960 of the proposed rule that you 

conduct initial and continuous 

performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed vinyl 

chloride limits and monthly 

performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed total 

HAP limits for stripped resin. The tests 

would be conducted at the outlet of the 

resin stripper as the stripped resin exits 

the stripper for continuous processes 

and immediately after stripping for 

batch processes. You would be required 

to use EPA Method 107 in combination 

with RCRA Method SW–8260B, and to 

include in your test plan a proposed 

method for analysis using these 

methods. Affected sources are currently 

measuring vinyl chloride using EPA 

Method 107 to comply with limits in the 

part 61 NESHAP, and would continue to 

do so under this proposed rule. Initial 

and subsequent sampling for vinyl 

chloride would follow the same 

requirements as those in part 61 

NESHAP. You would be required to 

sample for total HAP initially, and then 

on a monthly basis to demonstrate 

continuous compliance. We are 

proposing that RCRA Method SW– 

8260B also be used to analyze for 

concentrations of organic HAP in the 

stripped resin other than vinyl chloride. 

You would be required to submit the 

test plan for EPA approval. 

The MACT floor limits for total HAP 

were based on averages of 30 days of 

resin sampling. We are proposing that 

samples be taken monthly, and 

compliance be demonstrated, based on 

a 12 month rolling average of the 12 

most recent months. In the first 12 

months following your demonstration of 

initial compliance, you would be 

required to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit on a monthly basis, using the same 

procedures required for initial 

compliance. We request comment on 

adding an alternative to allow you, in 

these first 12 months, to use data 

collected in the year preceding your 

initial compliance to demonstrate 

continuous compliance. You would also 

be required to conduct your monthly 

monitoring for total HAP on a day that 

you are producing the resin grade of 

which you manufacture the most, based 

on total mass of resin produced in the 

month preceding the sampling event. To 

allow you flexibility in selecting this 

sampling day, sampling is required 

monthly, with a minimum of 12 

sampling events per year, but individual 

sampling events may be 3 to 5 weeks 

apart. 

In addition, during your initial 

performance test, you would be required 

to establish operating ranges for your 

resin steam or vacuum stripper, 

including steam-to-feed ratios and 

stripper temperature, and also the 

vacuum level measured in the 

component for vacuum strippers. You 

would use a CPMS to continuously 

monitor control device operating 

parameters. The proposed monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements are necessary to ensure 

compliance with the proposed emission 

limits. 

7. How did we select the compliance 

requirements for other emission 

sources? 

Other emission sources include 

reactor and other component opening 

losses. Reactor exhaust gas streams and 

any HAP removed from process 

component openings must be ducted 

through a closed vent system and 

control device. Therefore, we are 

proposing the same compliance 

requirements for these emission sources 

as those requirements for process vents. 

8. How did we select the compliance 

requirements for batch process 

operations? 

We are proposing compliance 

language, based on the MON, to 

accommodate batch process vents. The 

MON primarily references the batch 

process vent provisions in the 

Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG), but 

includes some changes and exceptions 

when specifying how to calculate 

uncontrolled emissions from batch 

process vents (including emission 

episode equations), as well as requiring 

performance testing under worst-case 

conditions. Although the MON uses a 

hierarchy to determine applicable 

requirements for combined emission 

streams (e.g., it allows you to comply 

with only the batch process vent 

requirements for combined batch and 

continuous process vents), 40 CFR 

63.11945(b)(3) of the proposed rule 

requires that you meet all requirements 

for each emission stream type in a 

combined emission stream (i.e., both 

continuous and batch process vent 

requirements must be met). The 

proposed rule is written in this way to 

ensure compliance for each emission 

stream. 

Additionally, we revised the purging 

emission episode equation included in 

40 CFR 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) (Equation 

12). This equation specifies that the 

partial pressure of HAP shall be 

assumed to be 25 percent of the 

saturated value if the purge flow rate is 

greater than 100 standard cubic feet per 

minute (scfm). We revised this 

requirement to incorporate iterative 

methodology equations from the 

Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing 

NESHAP (40 CFR 63.8050(c)(1)(ii)), 

requiring you to determine a HAPspecific saturation factor, and are calling 

the episode ‘‘gas sweep of a partially 

filled vessel,’’ in lieu of ‘‘purging.’’ This 

revision is in accordance with Volume 

II, Chapter 16 of the Emission Inventory 

Improvement Program (EIIP), issued 

August 2007. This change includes sitespecific values where possible, and 

ensures that the calculated emissions 

are more accurate. 

H. How did EPA determine compliance 

times for the proposed rule? 

Section 112 of the CAA provides 

limits for the dates by which affected 

sources must comply with the emission 

standards. New or reconstructed units 

must be in compliance with the final 

rule immediately upon startup, or the 

date the final rule is published in the 

Federal Register, whichever is later. 

The proposed rule allows existing 

sources 3 years to comply with the final 

rule, which is the maximum period 

allowed by the CAA. We believe that 3 

years for compliance is necessary to 

allow adequate time to design, install, 

and test control systems, as well as 

obtain permits for the use of add-on 

controls. We welcome comment on the 

proposed compliance dates. 

I. How did EPA determine the required 

records and reports for this proposed 

rule? 

Section 112 of the CAA requires the 

EPA to develop regulations that include 

requirements for reporting the results of 

testing and monitoring performed to 

determine compliance with the 

standards. You would be required to 

comply with the applicable 

requirements in the NESHAP General 

Provisions, subpart A of 40 CFR part 63, 

as referenced in Table 5 of the proposed 

rule. We evaluated the General 

Provisions requirements, and included 

those we determined to be the minimum 

notification, recordkeeping, and 

reporting necessary to ensure 

compliance with, and effective 

enforcement of, this rule, as proposed. 

The reports that we are proposing to be 

required are presented in 40 CFR 

63.11985 of the proposed rule. 

We also reviewed the necessary 

records that need to be kept to 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the proposed emission limits and 

work practice standards. These 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29556 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

recordkeeping requirements are 

specified either directly in the proposed 

rule, in the General Provisions to 40 

CFR part 63, or in other rules to which 

the proposed rule refers. Recordkeeping 

requirements are found in the proposed 

40 CFR 63.11990. We are proposing that 

records be kept for 5 years, in a form 

suitable and readily available for EPA 

review. We are proposing that records 

be kept on site for 2 years, and you can 

keep the records off site for the 

remaining 3 years. 

The General Provisions include 

specific requirements for notifications, 

recordkeeping, and reporting. The 

reports are specified in proposed 40 

CFR 63.11985. 

The notification of compliance status 

report required by 40 CFR 63.9(h) must 

include certifications of compliance 

with rule requirements. The excess 

emissions and continuous system 

performance report and summary report 

required by 40 CFR 63.10(e)(3) of the 

NESHAP General Provisions (referred to 

in the rule as a compliance report) 

would be required to be submitted 

semiannually for reporting periods 

during which there was an exceedance 

of any emission limit, or a monitored 

parameter, or a deviation from any of 

the requirements in the rule occurred, or 

if any process changes occurred, and 

compliance certifications were 

reevaluated. 

The part 61 NESHAP requires that, 

within 10 days of any discharge from a 

PRD to the atmosphere, the owners or 

operators must submit to the 

Administrator a report containing 

information on the source, nature, and 

cause of the discharge, the date and time 

of the discharge, duration of the 

discharge, the approximate emissions 

during the discharge, and the method 

used for determining the HAP emitted 

(i.e., the calculation method). The report 

must also include a description of the 

actions taken to prevent the discharge, 

and measures adopted to prevent future 

discharges. We are proposing to extend 

this recordkeeping and reporting 

requirement to violations associated 

with bypasses, pressure vessels and 

closed vent systems in vacuum service 

as discussed in section III.H of this 

preamble. We solicit comment on the 

proposed recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements. 

J. What are the startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction provisions? 

Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, 

551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008), EPA is 

proposing standards in this rule that 

apply at all times. In proposing the 

standards in this rule, EPA has taken 

into account startup and shutdown 

periods, and, for the reasons explained 

below, has not proposed different 

standards for those periods. We solicit 

comment on this approach. 

We expect facilities can meet the 

proposed emission standards during 

startup and shutdown. For process 

vents, control is achieved by routing 

vents to thermal oxidizers, or vent gas 

absorbers. During startup, it is common 

practice to start the thermal oxidizers 

using natural gas, before process vent 

emissions are routed to them, so that the 

oxidizers are at the required 

temperature prior to receiving the vent 

streams and will accomplish the same 

level of control that they would during 

normal operation. Vent gas absorbers 

operate such that vent streams can be 

routed to them at all times. For 

wastewater streams and stripped resins, 

we expect that during startup, streams 

normally fed to the wastewater stripper 

and resin stripper are recycled back to 

the process until the correct stripper 

steam to feed ratio is established. At 

such time, the feed streams are no 

longer recycled back to the process, and 

are then sent through the stripper to 

remove HAP to the required levels. For 

batch processes, startups and 

shutdowns are a part of their normal 

daily operations. For the other emission 

points, the proposed rule requires work 

practices that can be followed during 

startup and shutdown. Additionally, we 

are proposing that process components, 

such as reactors, cannot be opened 

except when the process or process 

component is shut down. The proposed 

rule includes several requirements to 

reduce emissions during openings. 

Periods of startup, normal operations, 

and shutdown are all predictable and 

routine aspects of a source’s operations. 

However, by contrast, malfunction is 

defined as a ‘‘sudden, infrequent, and 

not reasonably preventable failure of air 

pollution control and monitoring 

equipment, process equipment or a 

process to operate in a normal or usual 

manner * * *.’’ (40 CFR 63.2). EPA has 

determined that malfunctions should 

not be viewed as a distinct operating 

mode, and, therefore, any emissions that 

occur at such times do not need to be 

factored into development of CAA 

section 112(d) standards, which, once 

promulgated, apply at all times. In 

Mossville Environmental Action Now v. 

EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1242 (DC Cir. 

2004), the Court upheld as reasonable 

standards that had factored in 

variability of emissions under all 

operating conditions. However, nothing 

in CAA section 112(d) or in case law 

requires that EPA anticipate and 

account for the innumerable types of 

potential malfunction events in setting 

emission standards. See, Weyerhaeuser 

v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (DC Cir. 

1978) (‘‘In the nature of things, no 

general limit, individual permit, or even 

any upset provision can anticipate all 

upset situations. After a certain point, 

the transgression of regulatory limits 

caused by ‘uncontrollable acts of third 

parties,’ such as strikes, sabotage, 

operator intoxication or insanity, and a 

variety of other eventualities, must be a 

matter for the administrative exercise of 

case-by-case enforcement discretion, not 

for specification in advance by 

regulation.’’). 

Further, it is reasonable to interpret 

CAA section 112(d) as not requiring 

EPA to account for malfunctions in 

setting emissions standards. For 

example, we note that CAA section 112 

uses the concept of ‘‘best performing’’ 

sources in defining MACT, the level of 

stringency that major source standards 

must meet. Applying the concept of 

‘‘best performing’’ to a source that is 

malfunctioning presents significant 

difficulties. The goal of best performing 

sources is to operate in such a way as 

to avoid malfunctions of their units. 

Moreover, even if malfunctions were 

considered a distinct operating mode, 

we believe it would be impracticable to 

take malfunctions into account in 

setting CAA section 112(d) standards for 

PVC and copolymer production. As 

noted above, by definition, malfunctions 

are sudden and unexpected events, and 

it would be difficult to set a standard 

that takes into account the myriad 

different types of malfunctions that can 

occur across all sources in the category. 

Moreover, malfunctions can vary in 

frequency, degree, and duration, further 

complicating standard setting. 

In the event that a source fails to 

comply with the applicable CAA section 

112(d) standards, as a result of a 

malfunction event, EPA would 

determine an appropriate response 

based on, among other things, the good 

faith efforts of the source to minimize 

emissions during malfunction periods, 

including preventative and corrective 

actions, as well as root cause analyses 

to ascertain and rectify excess 

emissions. EPA would also consider 

whether the source’s failure to comply 

with the CAA section 112(d) standard 

was, in fact, ‘‘sudden, infrequent, not 

reasonably preventable,’’ and was not 

instead ‘‘caused in part by poor 

maintenance or careless operation.’’ 40 

CFR 63.2 (definition of malfunction). 

Finally, EPA recognizes that even 

equipment that is properly designed and 

maintained, can sometimes fail and that 

such failure can sometimes cause an 

exceedance of the relevant emission 

standard. (See, e.g., State 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29557 

Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding 

Excessive Emissions During 

Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown 

(Sept. 20, 1999); Policy on Excess 

Emissions During Startup, Shutdown, 

Maintenance, and Malfunctions (Feb. 

15, 1983)). EPA is therefore proposing to 

include an affirmative defense to civil 

penalties for exceedances of emission 

limits. See 40 CFR 63.12010 of the 

proposed rule (defining ‘‘affirmative 

defense’’ to mean, in the context of an 

enforcement proceeding, a response or 

defense put forward by a defendant, 

regarding which the defendant has the 

burden of proof, and the merits of which 

are independently and objectively 

evaluated in a judicial or administrative 

proceeding). We also are proposing 

other regulatory provisions to specify 

the elements that are necessary to 

establish this affirmative defense; the 

source must prove by a preponderance 

of the evidence that it has met all of the 

elements set forth in 40 CFR 63.11895 

of the proposed rule. (See 40 CFR 

22.24). The criteria ensure that the 

affirmative defense is available only 

where the event that causes an 

exceedance of the emission limit meets 

the narrow definition of malfunction in 

40 CFR 63.2 (sudden, infrequent, not 

reasonable preventable and not caused 

by poor maintenance and or careless 

operation). For example, to successfully 

assert the affirmative defense, the source 

must prove by a preponderance of the 

evidence that excess emissions ‘‘[w]ere 

caused by a sudden, infrequent, and 

unavoidable failure of air pollution 

control and monitoring equipment, 

process equipment, or a process to 

operate in a normal or usual manner 

* * *.’’ The criteria also are designed to 

ensure that steps are taken to correct the 

malfunction, to minimize emissions in 

accordance with 40 CFR 63.11895 of the 

proposed rule and to prevent future 

malfunctions. For example, the source 

must prove by a preponderance of the 

evidence that ‘‘[r]epairs were made as 

expeditiously as possible when the 

applicable emission limitations were 

being exceeded * * * ’’ and that ‘‘[a]ll 

possible steps were taken to minimize 

the impact of the excess emissions on 

ambient air quality, the environment 

and human health * * *.’’ In any 

judicial or administrative proceeding, 

the Administrator may challenge the 

assertion of the affirmative defense and, 

if the respondent has not met its burden 

of proving all of the requirements in the 

affirmative defense, appropriate 

penalties may be assessed in accordance 

with section 113 of the CAA (see also 40 

CFR 22.77). 

V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule 

The impacts presented in this section 

include the impacts for PVC production 

facilities to comply with the proposed 

rule, and with the requirements of other 

subparts referenced by the proposed 

rule. 

A. What are the air impacts? 

We have estimated the potential 

emission reductions that may be 

realized through implementation of the 

proposed emission standards. Table 10 

of this preamble summarizes the 

emission reductions for compliance for 

each pollutant and emission point. The 

analysis is documented in the 

memorandum, Costs and Emission 

Reductions of the Proposed Standards 

for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, and is available in the docket. 

TABLE 10—EMISSION REDUCTIONS OF THE PROPOSED PVC AND COPOLYMERS PRODUCTION STANDARDS

Emission point 

Pollutant emission reductions (tpy) 

Vinyl 

chloride Total HAP CDD/CDF (TEQ) HCl 

Process vents ...................................................................................................................... 0 .085 2 .26 a 2.45E–08 33 

Stripped resin ....................................................................................................................... 129 853 0 0 

Wastewater .......................................................................................................................... 0 .40 0 .40 0 0 

Equipment leaks .................................................................................................................. 0 680 0 0 

Storage vessels ................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 0 

Other emission sources ....................................................................................................... 0 0 0 0 

Heat exchange systems ...................................................................................................... 5 .3 35 0 0 

Total .............................................................................................................................. 135 1,570 2.45E–08 33 

aEmission reductions for process vents are stated as total organic HAP; this value does not include HCl reductions. 

We estimated emission reductions of 

the proposed rule for each emission 

point. For all emission points, we first 

calculated emissions at the current level 

of control for each facility (referred to as 

the baseline level of control), and at the 

proposed level of control. We calculated 

emission reductions as the difference 

between the proposed level and 

baseline. 

For process vents, we calculated 

baseline emissions from the measured 

HAP concentrations at the outlet of the 

control devices, and HAP emissions 

using the proposed emission limits, in 

combination with the vent stream flow 

rates measured during emission tests. 

For stripped resins, we calculated 

emissions assuming that all the HAP 

remaining in the resin would eventually 

be emitted from processes downstream 

of the resin stripper. This assumption 

results in a calculation of the potential 

emissions at the baseline stripped resin 

concentration levels, and proposed 

MACT concentration levels. Emissions 

were calculated from the HAP 

concentration in the stripped resin, and 

the resin production rate. 

For wastewater, we estimated the 

emissions from the HAP concentration 

in the uncontrolled wastewater streams, 

in the controlled wastewater streams, 

and the wastewater flow rates or 

generation rates. 

For equipment leaks, we estimated 

emissions for the baseline LDAR 

program in use at each facility, and the 

proposed equipment leaks requirements 

using model equipment counts, average 

emission factors for leaking equipment 

provided in previous EPA studies, and 

control efficiencies for LDAR programs 

provided in previous EPA studies. 

Model equipment counts were used 

because actual equipment counts were 

not collected in survey questionnaires 

sent to the industry. The survey 

requested information only on 

regulatory LDAR programs currently in 

place at each facility, and the costs for 

the facility to conduct the LDAR 

program. 

We calculated emissions from heat 

exchange systems from emissions 

information provided in information 

survey responses provided by affected 

sources. Emission reductions from heat 

exchange systems were calculated 

assuming that, once the LDAR program 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29558 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

was in effect, emissions would be 

eliminated due to the low leak action 

level that is being proposed. 

B. What are the cost impacts? 

We have estimated compliance costs 

for all existing sources to add the 

necessary controls, monitoring devices, 

inspections, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements to comply with 

the proposed rule. Based on this 

analysis, we anticipate an overall total 

capital investment of 15.6 million, with 

an associated total annualized cost of 

$19.7 million (using a discount rate of 

7 percent), in 2010 dollars, as shown in 

Table 11 of this preamble. We do not 

anticipate the construction of any new 

PVCPU in the next 5 years, and, 

therefore, there are no new source cost 

impacts. 

TABLE 11—COST IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PVC AND COPOLYMERS PRODUCTION STANDARDS

Emission Point 

Total capital 

cost (million 

2010$) 

Total annualized 

cost (million 

2010$/yr) 

Process vents ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 .5 3 .4 

Stripped resin ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 14 .5 

Wastewater .......................................................................................................................................................... 0 0 .791 

Equipment leaks .................................................................................................................................................. 3 .14 0 .638 

Storage vessels ................................................................................................................................................... 0 0 

Other emission sources ....................................................................................................................................... 0 0 

Heat exchange systems ...................................................................................................................................... 0 0 .309 

Total .............................................................................................................................................................. 15 .6 19 .7 

We calculated costs to meet the 

proposed level of control for each 

emission point. For process vents, we 

estimated costs to meet the proposed 

level of control for PVCPU that do not 

currently meet the proposed emission 

limit, based on reported data. For such 

PVCPU that currently use incinerators 

in combination with acid-gas scrubbers, 

we estimate the cost of compliance 

through the use of enhanced vinyl 

chloride recovery using a refrigerated 

condenser to reduce the quantity of 

vinyl chloride combusted to meet the 

vinyl chloride, HCl, and total organic 

HAP emission limits. If a PVCPU 

needed only to meet the HCl emission 

limit, we estimated the cost of 

compliance using a packed bed scrubber 

to reduce HCl emissions. To meet the 

CDD/CDF levels, costs were based on 

application of activated carbon injection 

in combination with a fabric filter. For 

PVCPU that currently use an absorber 

for vinyl chloride recovery, cost 

calculations were based on routing the 

vent gas from the absorber to existing 

incinerators. Costs calculations also 

included capital and annual costs for 

testing and monitoring of vinyl chloride, 

HCl, total organic HAP, and CDD/CDF. 

For PVCPU not currently meeting the 

proposed stripped resin limits, costs to 

meet the proposed level of control were 

based on additional steam being used in 

the resin stripper to further remove 

vinyl chloride and total HAP from the 

resin. Testing and monitoring costs were 

also included in the costs to meet the 

proposed level of control. We are aware 

that there may be concerns about 

applying additional heat to the resin 

because it might degrade the product. 

Therefore, we are requesting comment 

on this cost assumption. We are also 

requesting data on the performance of 

resin strippers when additional steam is 

added, and the limits that resin 

strippers can achieve without degrading 

the product. We note that the proposed 

limits for stripped resins were 

calculated, based on the resin analysis 

data provided by surveyed facilities, 

indicating that some facilities are 

already achieving the emission limits 

without affecting their products. 

For PVCPU not currently meeting the 

proposed wastewater stripper outlet 

concentration limit, costs to meet the 

proposed level of control were based on 

additional steam being used in the 

wastewater stripper to further remove 

vinyl chloride. Annual costs also 

include additional testing and 

monitoring required to meet the 

proposed level of control. 

For equipment leaks, annual costs to 

conduct LDAR programs were provided 

by PVC production facilities in 

responses to data collection surveys. 

The average cost difference between 

PVCPU complying with 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU and PVCPU complying with 

other equipment leak standards, such as 

40 CFR part 61, subpart V, was applied 

to each PVCPU that did not already 

meet the proposed level of control (i.e., 

40 CFR part 63, subpart UU). We 

estimated additional costs for an 

electronic PRD indicator, based on data 

collected for other EPA projects. We 

calculated costs for complying with the 

proposed level for heat exchange 

systems, based on information collected 

for other EPA projects. No costs were 

estimated for the remaining emission 

points, because all affected sources 

already meet the proposed levels of 

control for them. 

The analysis is documented in the 

memorandum, Costs and Emission 

Reductions of the Proposed Standards 

for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, and is available in the docket. 

C. What are the non-air quality health, 

environmental, and energy impacts? 

We anticipate affected sources would 

need to apply additional controls to 

meet the proposed emission limits. 

These controls, such as steam strippers 

and scrubbers, use water. We estimate 

an annual requirement of 380 million 

gallons per year of additional 

wastewater would be generated as a 

result of additional steam stripping of 

PVC resin and water used for scrubbers. 

We also anticipate 106 tpy of dust from 

activated carbon usage that will need to 

be disposed. 

The energy impacts associated with 

meeting the proposed emission limits 

would consist primarily of additional 

electricity needs to run added or 

improved air pollution control devices. 

By our estimate, we anticipate that an 

additional 5,900 megawatt-hours per 

year would be required for the 

additional and improved control 

devices. 

We anticipate secondary air impacts 

from adding controls to meet the 

standards. The combustion of fuel 

needed to generate additional electricity 

would yield slight increases in nitrogen 

oxide (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), 

and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions. 

Since NOX and SO2 emissions and 

electric generating units are covered by 

capped emissions trading programs, we 

do not estimate an increase in secondary 

air impacts for these pollutants for this 

rule form additional electricity demand. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29559 

The combustion of additional fuel from 

additional electrical usage and 

supplemental fuel for incineration 

devices would yield CO emissions of 1.3 

tpy. The analyses are documented in the 

memorandum, Secondary Impacts of 

MACT Level of Control for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymer (PVC) 

Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. 

D. What are the economic impacts of the 

proposed standards? 

We performed an economic impact 

analysis for PVC consumers and 

producers nationally, using the annual 

compliance costs estimated for this 

proposed rule. The impacts to producers 

affected by this proposed rule are 

annualized costs of less than 0.7 percent 

of their revenues, using the most current 

year available for revenue data. Prices 

and output for PVC should increase by 

no more than the impact on cost to 

revenues for producers; thus, PVC 

prices should increase by less than 0.7 

percent. Hence, the overall economic 

impact of this proposed rule should be 

low on the affected industries and their 

consumers. For more information, 

please refer to the Economic Impact 

Analysis for this proposed rulemaking 

that is in the docket (EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2002–0037). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because it 

raises novel legal or policy issues. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to OMB for review under Executive 

Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 

(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), and any 

changes made in response to OMB 

recommendations have been 

documented in the docket for this 

action. 

In addition, EPA prepared an analysis 

of the potential costs and benefits 

associated with this action. This 

analysis is contained in Cost and 

Impacts of the PVC and Copolymers 

Proposed Standard, in Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. A copy of 

the analysis is available in the docket 

for this action and the analysis is briefly 

summarized in section V.B of this 

preamble. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements in this proposed rule have 

been submitted for approval to OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The Information 

Collection Request (ICR) document 

prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA 

ICR No. 2432.01. 

The information requirements are 

based on notification, recordkeeping, 

and reporting requirements in the 

NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart A), which are 

mandatory for all operators subject to 

national emission standards. These 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements are specifically authorized 

by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). 

All information submitted to EPA 

pursuant to the recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements for which a 

claim of confidentiality is made is 

safeguarded according to Agency 

policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, 

subpart B. 

The proposed rule would require 

maintenance inspections of the control 

devices, and some notifications or 

reports beyond those required by the 

General Provisions. The recordkeeping 

requirements require only the specific 

information needed to determine 

compliance. The information collection 

activities in this ICR include the 

following: performance tests, 

wastewater sampling, resin sampling, 

LDAR monitoring, heat exchanger 

monitoring, PRD monitoring, operating 

parameter monitoring, preparation of a 

site-specific monitoring plan, 

monitoring and inspection, one-time 

and periodic reports, and the 

maintenance of records. Some 

information collection activities 

included in the NESHAP may occur 

within the first 3 years, and are 

presented in this burden estimate, but 

may not occur until 4 or 5 years 

following promulgation of the proposed 

standards for some affected sources. To 

be conservative in our estimate, the 

burden for these items is included in 

this ICR. An initial notification is 

required to notify the Designated 

Administrator of the applicability of this 

subpart, and to identify storage vessels, 

process vents, stripped resin, equipment 

leaks, wastewater, heat exchange 

systems, and other emission sources 

subject to this subpart. A notification of 

performance test must be submitted, 

and a site-specific test plan written for 

the performance test, along with a 

monitoring plan. Following the initial 

performance test, the owner or operator 

must submit a notification of 

compliance status that documents the 

performance test and the values for the 

operating parameters. A periodic report 

submitted every 6 months documents 

the values for the operating parameters 

and deviations; a notification of 

inspection of vessels and related 

inspection records; leaking and 

monitoring information for equipment 

leaks; and leaking and monitoring data 

for heat exchangers, if greater than leak 

definition. Owners or operators of PVC 

facilities are required to keep records of 

certain parameters and information for a 

period of 5 years. The annual testing, 

annual monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping burden for this collection 

(averaged over the first 3 years after the 

effective date of the standards) is 

estimated to be $2.5 million. This 

includes 3,200 labor hours per year at a 

total labor cost of $0.3 million per year, 

and total non-labor capital costs of $3.3 

million per year. This estimate includes 

initial and annual performance tests, 

conducting and documenting 

semiannual excess emission reports, 

maintenance inspections, developing a 

monitoring plan, notifications, and 

recordkeeping. Monitoring and testing 

cost were also included in the cost 

estimates presented in the control costs 

impacts estimates in section V of this 

preamble. The total burden for the 

Federal government (averaged over the 

first 3 years after the effective date of the 

standard) is estimated to be 1,098 hours 

per year, at a total labor cost of $50,482 

per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

When a malfunction occurs, sources 

must report them according to the 

applicable reporting requirements of 40 

CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. An 

affirmative defense to civil penalties for 

exceedances of emission limits that are 

caused by malfunctions is available to a 

source if it can demonstrate that certain 

criteria and requirements are satisfied. 

The criteria ensure that the affirmative 

defense is available only where the 

event that causes an exceedance of the 

emission limit meets the narrow 

definition of malfunction in 40 CFR 63.2 

(e.g., sudden, infrequent, not reasonably 

preventable and not caused by poor 

maintenance or careless operation) and 

where the source took necessary actions 

to minimize emissions. In addition, the 

source must meet certain notification 

and reporting requirements. For 

example, the source must prepare a 

written root cause analysis and submit 

a written report to the Administrator 

documenting that it has met the 

conditions and requirements for 

assertion of the affirmative defense. EPA 

considered whether there might be any 

burden associated with the notification, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements associated with the 

assertion of the affirmative defense. 

While recognizing that any such 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29560 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

burdens are only incurred if there has 

been a violation and a source chooses to 

take advantage of the affirmative 

defense. The PVC industry is currently 

required to comply with the part 61 

NESHAP requirement for releases from 

pressure relief valves and reactor 

manual vent valves, which does not 

allow a discharge into the atmosphere 

from these valves, except during an 

emergency. An emergency discharge 

means a ‘‘discharge which could not 

have been avoided by taking measures 

to prevent the discharge.’’ The owners or 

operators must, within 10 days of any 

release from a pressure relief valve or a 

reactor manual vent valve, submit a 

report to the Administrator. The report 

must include the ‘‘nature and cause of 

discharge, the date and time of the 

discharge, the approximate total vinyl 

chloride loss during the discharge, the 

method used for determining the vinyl 

chloride loss, the action that was taken 

to prevent the discharge, and measures 

adopted to prevent future discharges. 

The costs for these reports are already 

accounted for in the ICR burden 

estimate. Therefore, EPA estimates that 

there would be no additional costs for 

sources that choose to take advantage of 

the affirmative defense for malfunctions 

since it is already required for 

compliance with the rule. However, 

there may be other malfunctions that are 

not currently regulated under the part 

61 NESHAP that might prompt a source 

to take advantage of an affirmative 

defense. 

To provide the public with an 

estimate of the relative magnitude of the 

burden associated with an assertion of 

the affirmative defense position adopted 

by a source (for those not already 

regulated under the part 61 NESHAP), 

EPA is including in the ICR the 

notification, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements associated with 

the assertion of the affirmative defense 

might entail. EPA’s estimate for the 

required notification, reports, and 

records, including the root cause 

analysis, totals $3,141, and is based on 

the time and effort required of a source 

to review relevant data, interview plant 

employees, and document the events 

surrounding a malfunction that has 

caused an exceedance of an emission 

limit. The estimate also includes time to 

produce and retain the record and 

reports for submission to EPA. EPA 

provides this illustrative estimate of this 

burden because these costs are only 

incurred if there has been a violation 

and a source chooses to take advantage 

of the affirmative defense. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

To comment on the Agency’s need for 

this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates, and any 

suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, EPA has established 

a public docket for this rule, which 

includes this ICR, under Docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0037. 

Submit any comments related to the ICR 

to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice 

for where to submit comments to EPA. 

Send comments to OMB at the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. 

Since OMB is required to make a 

decision concerning the ICR between 30 

and 60 days after May 20, 2011, a 

comment to OMB is best assured of 

having its full effect if OMB receives it 

by June 20, 2011. The final rule will 

respond to any OMB or public 

comments on the information collection 

requirements contained in this proposal. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act, or any 

other statute, unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this proposed rule on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business, as defined by the Small 

Business Administration’s regulations at 

13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated, and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this proposed rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule will not impose any 

requirements on small entities. To 

EPA’s knowledge, there are no small 

entities subject to the proposed rule. We 

continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed rule 

on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or the private sector in any 

one year. The total annualized cost of 

this rule is estimated to be no more than 

$20 million (2010$) in any one year. 

Thus, this rule is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 or 205 of 

UMRA. 

This rule is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA, 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

rule only impacts PVC production 

facilities, and, thus, does not impact 

small governments uniquely or 

significantly. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

The action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. The proposed 

rule imposes requirements on owners 

and operators of specified major and 

area sources, and not on State or local 

governments. There are no PVC 

production facilities owned or operated 

by State or local governments. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, 

and consistent with EPA policy to 

promote communications between EPA 

and State and local governments, EPA 

specifically solicits comment on this 

proposed action from State and local 

officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have Tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). The proposed rule imposes 

requirements on owners and operators 

of specified area sources, and not Tribal 

governments. There are no PVC 

production facilities owned or operated 

by Indian Tribal governments. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. EPA specifically solicits 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29561 

additional comment on this proposed 

action from Tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying to those regulatory actions that 

concern health or safety risks, such that 

the analysis required under section 5– 

501 of the Executive Order has the 

potential to influence the regulation. 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045, because it is based solely 

on technology performance. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) 

because it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. EPA 

estimates that the requirements in this 

proposed action would cause most 

PVCPU to modify existing air pollution 

control devices (e.g., increase the 

horsepower of their wet scrubbers) or 

install and operate new control devices, 

resulting in approximately 92,000 

megawatt-hours per year of additional 

electricity being used. 

Given the negligible change in energy 

consumption resulting from this 

proposed action, EPA does not expect 

any significant price increase for any 

energy type. The cost of energy 

distribution should not be affected by 

this proposed action at all since the 

action would not affect energy 

distribution facilities. We also expect 

that any impacts on the import of 

foreign energy supplies, or any other 

adverse outcomes that may occur with 

regards to energy supplies, would not be 

significant. We, therefore, conclude that 

if there were to be any adverse energy 

effects associated with this proposed 

action, they would be minimal. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 

104–113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS) in its regulatory 

activities, unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. VCS are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable VCS. 

This proposed rulemaking involves 

technical standards. EPA proposes to 

use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, Flue 

and Exhaust Gas Analyses, as an 

acceptable alternative to EPA Method 

3B. This standard is available from the 

American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue, 

New York, NY 10016–5990. 

No applicable VCS were identified for 

EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 21, 

107, RCRA SW–846, PS–8, PS–9, and 

the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method. 

During the search, if the title or 

abstract (if provided) of the VCS 

described technical sampling and 

analytical procedures that are similar to 

EPA’s reference method, the EPA 

ordered a copy of the standard and 

reviewed it as a potential equivalent 

method. All potential standards were 

reviewed to determine the practicality 

of the VCS for this rule. This review 

requires significant method validation 

data that meet the requirements of EPA 

Method 301 for accepting alternative 

methods or scientific, engineering, and 

policy equivalence to procedures in 

EPA reference methods. EPA may 

reconsider determinations of 

impracticality when additional 

information is available for particular 

VCS. 

The search identified 17 other VCS 

that were potentially applicable for this 

rule in lieu of EPA reference methods. 

After reviewing the available standards, 

EPA determined that 17 candidate VCS 

(ASTM D3154–00 (2006), ASTM 

D3464–96 (2007), ASTM D3796–90 

(2004), ISO 10780:1994, ASME B133.9– 

1994 (2001), ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10– 

1981 Part 10, ISO 10396:1993 (2007), 

ISO 12039:2001, ASTM D5835–95 

(2007), ASTM D6522–00 (2005), CAN/ 

CSA Z223.2–M86 (1999), NIOSH 

Method 2010, Amines, Aliphatic, ASTM 

D6060–96 (2001), EN 1948–3 (1996), EN 

1911–1.2.3 (1998), ASTM D6735–01, 

ASTM D4855–97 (2002)) identified for 

measuring emissions of pollutants or 

their surrogates subject to emission 

standards in the rule would not be 

practical due to lack of equivalency, 

documentation, validation data and 

other important technical and policy 

considerations. 

EPA welcomes comments on this 

aspect of the proposed rulemaking, and, 

specifically, invites the public to 

identify potentially applicable VCS, and 

to explain why such standards should 

be used in this regulation. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations, 

because it increases the level of 

environmental protection for all affected 

populations without having any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any population, including any 

minority or low-income population. 

An analysis of demographic data 

shows that the average percentage of 

minorities, percentages of the 

population below the poverty level, and 

the percentages of the population 17 

years old and younger, in close 

proximity to the sources, are similar to 

the national averages, with percentage 

differences of 3, 1.8, and 1.7, 

respectively, at the 3-mile radius of 

concern. These differences in the 

absolute number of percentage points 

from the national average indicate a 9.4- 

percent, 14.4-percent, and 6.6-percent 

over-representation of minority 

populations, populations below the 

poverty level, and the percentages of the 

population 17 years old and younger, 

respectively. 

In determining the aggregate 

demographic makeup of the 

communities near affected sources, EPA 

used census data at the block group 

level to identify demographics of the 

populations considered to be living near 

affected sources, such that they have 

notable exposures to current emissions 

from these sources. In this approach, 

EPA reviewed the distributions of 

different socio-demographic groups in 

the locations of the expected emission 

reductions from this rule. The review 

identified those census block groups 

with centroids within a circular 

distance of a 0.5, 3, and 5 miles of 

affected sources, and determined the 

demographic and socio-economic 

composition (e.g., race, income, 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29562 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

7U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). 

Demographics of People Living Near Waste 

Facilities. Washington DC: Government Printing 

Office; 1995. 

8Mohai P, Saha R. Reassessing Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Environmental Justice 

Research. Demography. 2006;43(2): 383–399. 

9Mennis J. Using Geographic Information 

Systems to Create and Analyze Statistical Surfaces 

of Populations and Risk for Environmental Justice 

Analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 2002;83(1):281– 

297. 

10Bullard RD, Mohai P, Wright B, Saha R, et al. 

Toxic Waste and Race at Twenty 1987–2007. United 

Church of Christ. March, 2007. 

11The results of the demographic analysis are 

presented in Review of Environmental Justice 

Impacts: Polyvinyl Chloride, September 2010, a 

copy of which is available in the docket. 

education, etc.) of these census block 

groups. The radius of 3 miles (or 

approximately 5 kilometers) has been 

used in other demographic analyses 

focused on areas around potential 

sources.7 8 9 10 There was only one 

census block group with its centroids 

within 0.5 miles of any source affected 

by the proposed rule. EPA’s 

demographic analysis has shown that 

these areas, in aggregate, have similar 

proportions of American Indians, 

African-Americans, Hispanics, and 

‘‘Other and Multi-racial’’ populations to 

the national average. The analysis also 

showed that these areas, in aggregate, 

had similar proportions of families with 

incomes below the poverty level as the 

national average, and similar 

populations of children 17 years of age 

and younger.11

EPA defines Environmental Justice to 

include meaningful involvement of all 

people regardless of race, color, national 

origin, or income with respect to the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and polices. To promote 

meaningful involvement, EPA has 

developed a communication and 

outreach strategy to ensure that 

interested communities have access to 

this proposed rule, are aware of its 

content, and have an opportunity to 

comment during the comment period. 

During the comment period, EPA will 

publicize the rulemaking via 

environmental justice newsletters, 

Tribal newsletters, environmental 

justice listservs, and the Internet, 

including the EPA Office of Policy 

Rulemaking Gateway Web site (http:// 

yosemite.epa.gov/opei/RuleGate.nsf/). 

EPA will also conduct targeted outreach 

to environmental justice communities, 

as appropriate. Outreach activities may 

include providing general rulemaking 

fact sheets (e.g., why is this important 

for my community) for environmental 

justice community groups, and 

conducting conference calls with 

interested communities. In addition, 

State and Federal permitting 

requirements will provide State and 

local governments, and members of 

affected communities the opportunity to 

provide comments on the permit 

conditions associated with permitting 

the sources affected by the proposed 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: April 15, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations, is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 63—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 

Subpart DDDDDD—[Amended] 

2. Section 63.11140 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(2) and adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 63.11140 Am I subject to this subpart? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) An affected source is a new source 

under this subpart if you commenced 

construction or reconstruction of the 

affected source on or after October 6, 

2006 but prior to the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. An affected source 

that commences construction or 

reconstruction on and after the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register is not subject to 

this subpart and is required to comply 

with subpart HHHHHHH of this part. 

* * * * * 

(e) Each affected source that 

commences construction or 

reconstruction on and after the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register is required to 

comply with subpart HHHHHHH of this 

part by the compliance dates specified 

in subpart HHHHHHH. On and after the 

compliance date specified in subpart 

HHHHHHH of this part that applies to 

your affected source, the requirements 

in § 63.11140(d) and §§ 63.11141 

through 63.11145 of this subpart do not 

apply to the affected source. 

3. Part 63 is amended by adding a 

new subpart HHHHHHH to read as 

follows: 

Subpart HHHHHHH—National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production 

Sec. 

What This Subpart Covers 

§ 63.11860 What is the purpose of this 

subpart? 

§ 63.11865 Am I subject to the requirements 

in this subpart? 

§ 63.11870 What is the affected source of 

this subpart? 

§ 63.11871 What is the relationship to 40 

CFR part 61, subpart F? 

§ 63.11875 When must I comply with this 

subpart? 

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and 

Work Practice Standards 

§ 63.11880 What emission limits, operating 

limits, and standards must I meet? 

General Compliance Requirements 

§ 63.11885 What parts of the General 

Provisions apply to me? 

§ 63.11890 What are my additional general 

requirements for complying with this 

subpart? 

§ 63.11895 How do I establish an 

affirmative defense for exceedance of an 

emission limit during malfunction? 

§ 63.11896 What am I required to do if I 

make a process change to a PVCPU at my 

affected source? 

Testing and Compliance Requirements 

§ 63.11900 By what date must I conduct 

initial performance testing and 

monitoring, establish any applicable 

operating limits, and demonstrate initial 

compliance with my emission limits and 

work practice standards? 

§ 63.11905 When must I conduct 

subsequent performance testing and 

monitoring to demonstrate continuous 

compliance? 

§ 63.11910 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

storage vessels? 

§ 63.11915 What are my compliance 

requirements for equipment leaks? 

§ 63.11920 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

heat exchange systems? 

§ 63.11925 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

process vents? 

§ 63.11930 What requirements must I meet 

for closed vent systems? 

§ 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS 

requirements must I meet to demonstrate 

initial and continuous compliance with 

the emission standards for process vent 

control devices, resin strippers, and 

wastewater treatment processes? 

§ 63.11940 What continuous monitoring 

requirements must I meet for control 

devices required to install CPMS to meet 

the emission limits for process vents? 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29563 

§ 63.11945 What performance testing 

requirements must I meet for process 

vents? 

§ 63.11950 What emissions calculations 

must I use for an emission profile by 

process of my batch process operation? 

§ 63.11955 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

other emission sources? 

§ 63.11956 What are my compliance 

requirements for ambient monitoring? 

§ 63.11960 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

stripped resin? 

§ 63.11965 What are my general compliance 

requirements for wastewater? 

§ 63.11970 What are my initial compliance 

requirements for wastewater? 

§ 63.11975 What are my continuous 

compliance requirements for 

wastewater? 

§ 63.11980 What are my test methods and 

calculation procedures for wastewater? 

Notifications, Reports, and Records 

§ 63.11985 What notifications and reports 

must I submit and when? 

§ 63.11990 What records must I keep? 

§ 63.11995 In what form and how long must 

I keep my records? 

§ 63.12000 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Definitions 

§ 63.12005 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Tables to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63 

Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Emission Limits and Standards for 

Existing Affected Sources 

Table 2 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Emission Limits and Standards for New 

Affected Sources 

Table 3 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Emission Limits and Standards for 

Wastewater for New and Existing 

Affected Sources 

Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Summary of Control Requirements for 

Storage Vessels at New and Existing 

Sources 

Table 5 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Applicability of the General Provisions 

to Part 63 

Table 6 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Operating Parameters, Operating Limits, 

and Data Monitoring, Recording, and 

Compliance Frequencies for Process 

Vent Control Devices, Resin Strippers, 

and Wastewater Treatment Processes. 

Table 7 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Toxic Equivalency Factors 

Table 8 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Calibration and Accuracy Requirements 

for Continuous Parameter Monitoring 

Systems 

Table 9 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Methods and Procedures for Conducting 

Performance Tests for Process Vents 

Table 10 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63— 

Methods and Procedures for Conducting 

Performance Tests for Stripped Resin 

and Wastewater 

Subpart HHHHHHH—National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production 

What This Subpart Covers 

§ 63.11860 What is the purpose of this 

subpart? 

This subpart establishes national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants emitted from the production 

of polyvinyl chloride and copolymers. 

This subpart also establishes 

requirements to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the 

emission standards. 

§ 63.11865 Am I subject to the 

requirements in this subpart? 

You are subject to this subpart if you 

own or operate a polyvinyl chloride and 

copolymers process unit (PVCPU) as 

defined in § 63.12005 that is located at, 

or is part of, a major source or an area 

source as defined in § 63.2. Your PVCPU 

is not subject to this subpart if it is a 

research and development facility, as 

defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean 

Air Act. 

§ 63.11870 What is the affected source of 

this subpart? 

(a) The affected source for this subpart 

is each individual PVCPU. 

(b) An existing affected source is one 

for which construction was commenced 

before May 20, 2011 at a major or area 

source. 

(c) A new affected source is one for 

which construction is commenced on or 

after May 20, 2011 at a major or area 

source. 

(d) If components of an existing 

affected source are replaced such that 

the replacement meets the definition of 

reconstruction in § 63.2 and the 

reconstruction commenced on or after 

May 20, 2011, then the existing affected 

source becomes a reconstructed source 

and is subject to the relevant standards 

for a new affected source. The 

reconstructed source must comply with 

the requirements for a new affected 

source upon initial startup of the 

reconstructed source or by the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register, whichever is later. 

§ 63.11871 What is the relationship to 40 

CFR part 61, subpart F? 

After the applicable compliance date 

specified in § 63.11875(a), (b), or (c), an 

affected source that is also subject to the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F, 

is required to comply with the 

provisions of this subpart and not 40 

CFR part 61, subpart F. 

§ 63.11875 When must I comply with this 

subpart? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart no later than 

3 years after the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. On or after the date 3 

years after the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, any such existing 

affected source is no longer subject to 

the provisions of 40 CFR part 61, 

subpart F. 

(b) If you start up a new affected 

source on or before the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the provisions of this 

subpart no later than the effective date 

of publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. On or after the 

effective date of publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register, any such 

new affected source is not subject to the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F. 

(c) If you start up a new affected 

source after the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the provisions of this 

subpart upon startup of your affected 

source. Upon startup, any such new 

affected source is not subject to the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F. 

(d) You must meet the notification 

requirements in §§ 63.9 and 63.11985 

according to the dates specified in those 

sections. Some of the notifications must 

be submitted before you are required to 

comply with the emission limits and 

standards in this subpart. 

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and 

Work Practice Standards 

§ 63.11880 What emission limits, operating 

limits, and standards must I meet? 

(a) You must comply with each 

emission limit and standard specified in 

Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart that 

applies to your existing affected source, 

and you must comply with each 

emission limit and standard specified in 

Tables 2, 3, and 4 to this subpart that 

applies to your new affected source. 

(b) You must establish an operating 

limit for each operating parameter 

required to be monitored in §§ 63.11925, 

63.11960, 63.11970, and 63.11975. As 

specified in those sections, you must 

establish each operating limit as an 

operating range, minimum operating 

level, or maximum operating level. You 

must comply with each established 

operating limit. 

(c) You must comply with the 

emission limits and standards specified 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29564 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

in §§ 63.11910 through 63.11980 that 

apply to your affected source. 

General Compliance Requirements 

§ 63.11885 What parts of the General 

Provisions apply to me? 

Table 5 to this subpart specifies 

which parts of the General Provisions in 

subpart A of this part apply to you. 

§ 63.11890 What are my additional general 

requirements for complying with this 

subpart? 

(a) The emission limits, operating 

limits, and work practice standards 

specified in this subpart apply at all 

times, including periods of SSM. 

(b) At all times, you must operate and 

maintain your affected source, including 

associated air pollution control 

components and monitoring system 

components, in a manner consistent 

with safety and good air pollution 

control practices for minimizing 

emissions. Determination of whether 

acceptable operation and maintenance 

procedures are being used will be based 

on information available to the 

Administrator, which may include, but 

is not limited to, monitoring results, 

review of operation and maintenance 

procedures, review of operation and 

maintenance records, and inspection of 

the source. 

(c) You must install, calibrate, 

maintain, and operate all monitoring 

system components according to § 63.8, 

§ 63.11935(b) and (c), and paragraphs 

(c)(1) and (2) of this section. 

(1) Except for periods of monitoring 

system malfunctions, repairs associated 

with monitoring system malfunctions, 

and required monitoring system quality 

assurance or quality control activities 

(including, as applicable, calibration 

checks and required zero and span 

adjustments), you must operate the 

continuous monitoring system at all 

times the affected source is operating. A 

monitoring system malfunction is any 

sudden, infrequent, not reasonably 

preventable failure of the monitoring 

system to provide data. Monitoring 

system failures that are caused in part 

by poor maintenance or careless 

operation are not malfunctions. You are 

required to complete monitoring system 

repairs in response to monitoring 

system malfunctions and to return the 

monitoring system to operation as 

expeditiously as practicable. 

(2) You may not use data recorded 

during monitoring system malfunctions, 

repairs associated with monitoring 

system malfunctions, or required 

monitoring system quality assurance or 

control activities in calculations used to 

report emissions or operating levels. 

You must use all the data collected 

during all other required data collection 

periods in assessing the operation of the 

control device and associated control 

system. You must report any periods for 

which the monitoring system failed to 

collect required data. 

(d) A deviation means any of the cases 

listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through (7) of 

this section. 

(1) Any instance in which an affected 

source subject to this subpart, or an 

owner or operator of such a source, fails 

to meet any requirement or obligation 

established by this subpart, including, 

but not limited to, any emission limit, 

operating limit, or work practice 

standard. 

(2) When a performance test indicates 

that emissions of a pollutant in Table 1, 

2, or 3 to this subpart are exceeding the 

emission standard for the pollutant 

specified in Table 1, 2, or 3 to this 

subpart. 

(3) When a 3-hour block average from 

a continuous emissions monitor, as 

required by § 63.11925(c), exceeds an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. 

(4) When the average value of a 

monitored operating parameter, based 

on the data averaging period for 

compliance specified in Table 6 to this 

subpart, does not meet the operating 

limit established in § 63.11880(b). 

(5) When an affected source 

discharges to the atmosphere from any 

of the sources specified in paragraphs 

(d)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section. 

(i) A pressure relief device, as defined 

in § 63.12005. 

(ii) A bypass, as defined in 

§ 63.12005. 

(iii) A closed vent system in vacuum 

service. 

(iv) A closure device on a pressure 

vessel. 

(6) Any instance in which the affected 

source subject to this subpart, or an 

owner or operator of such a source, fails 

to meet any term or condition specified 

in paragraph (d)(6)(i) or (ii) of this 

section. 

(i) Any term or condition that is 

adopted to implement an applicable 

requirement in this subpart. 

(ii) Any term or condition that is 

included in the operating permit for any 

affected source required to obtain such 

a permit. 

(7) Any failure to collect required 

data, except for periods of monitoring 

system malfunctions, repairs associated 

with monitoring system malfunctions, 

and required monitoring system quality 

assurance or quality control activities 

(including, as applicable, calibration 

checks and required zero and span 

adjustments). 

§ 63.11895 How do I establish an 

affirmative defense for exceedance of an 

emission limit during malfunction? 

In response to an action to enforce the 

standards set forth in § 63.11880, you 

may assert an affirmative defense to a 

claim for civil penalties for exceedances 

of such standards that are caused by 

malfunction, as defined in § 63.2. 

Appropriate penalties may be assessed, 

however, if you fail to meet your burden 

of proving all of the requirements in the 

affirmative defense. The affirmative 

defense shall not be available for claims 

for injunctive relief. 

(a) To establish the affirmative 

defense in any action to enforce such a 

limit, you must timely meet the 

notification requirements in paragraph 

(b) of this section, and must prove by a 

preponderance of evidence that: 

(1) The excess emissions: 

(i) Were caused by a sudden, 

infrequent, and unavoidable failure of 

air pollution control and monitoring 

system devices, process components, or 

a process to operate in a normal or usual 

manner; and 

(ii) Could not have been prevented 

through careful planning, proper design, 

or better operation and maintenance 

practices; and 

(iii) Did not stem from any activity or 

event that could have been foreseen and 

avoided, or planned for; and 

(iv) Were not part of a recurring 

pattern indicative of inadequate design, 

operation, or maintenance; and 

(2) Repairs were made as 

expeditiously as possible when the 

applicable emission limitations were 

being exceeded. Off shift and overtime 

labor were used, to the extent 

practicable to make these repairs; and 

(3) The frequency, amount, and 

duration of the excess emissions 

(including any bypass) were minimized 

to the maximum extent practicable 

during periods of such emissions; and 

(4) If the excess emissions resulted 

from a bypass of control device 

components or a process, then the 

bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss 

of life, personal injury, or severe 

property damage; and 

(5) All possible steps were taken to 

minimize the impact of the excess 

emissions on ambient air quality, the 

environment, and human health; and 

(6) All emissions monitoring and 

control systems were kept in operation, 

if at all possible, consistent with safety 

and good air pollution control practices; 

and 

(7) All of the actions in response to 

the excess emissions were documented 

by properly signed, contemporaneous 

operating logs; and 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29565 

(8) At all times, the facility was 

operated in a manner consistent with 

good practices for minimizing 

emissions; and 

(9) A written root cause analysis has 

been prepared, the purpose of which is 

to determine, correct, and eliminate the 

primary causes of the malfunction and 

the excess emissions resulting from the 

malfunction event at issue. The analysis 

must also specify, using best monitoring 

methods and engineering judgment, the 

amount of excess emissions that were 

the result of the malfunction. 

(b) The owner or operator of the 

facility experiencing an exceedance of 

its emission limit(s) during a 

malfunction must notify the 

Administrator by telephone or facsimile 

(FAX) transmission as soon as possible, 

but no later than 2 working days after 

the initial occurrence of the 

malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself 

of an affirmative defense to civil 

penalties for that malfunction. The 

owner or operator seeking to assert an 

affirmative defense must also submit a 

written report to the Administrator 

within 45 days of the initial occurrence 

of the exceedance of the standard in 

§ 63.11880 to demonstrate, with all 

necessary supporting documentation, 

that it has met the requirements set forth 

in paragraph (a) of this section. The 

owner or operator may seek an 

extension of this deadline for up to 30 

additional days by submitting a written 

request to the Administrator before the 

expiration of the 45-day period. Until a 

request for an extension has been 

approved by the Administrator, the 

owner or operator is subject to the 

requirement to submit such report 

within 45 days of the initial occurrence 

of the exceedance. 

§ 63.11896 What am I required to do if I 

make a process change to a PVCPU at my 

affected source? 

If you make a process change to an 

existing affected source that does not 

meet the criteria to become a new 

affected source in § 63.11870(c), you 

must comply with the requirements in 

paragraph (a) of this section. If you 

make a process change to a new affected 

source, you must comply with the 

requirements in paragraph (b) of this 

section. If you must comply with the 

provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of this 

section, you must also meet the testing 

and reporting requirements in 

paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. 

Refer to § 63.12005 for the definition of 

process changes. 

(a) If you replace any components of 

an existing affected source or make a 

process change to an existing affected 

source resulting in a change to the 

characteristics of any emission point, 

such that a different emission limit, 

operating parameter limit, or work 

practice requirement applies, and the 

criteria to become a new affected source 

in § 63.11870(c) are not met, you must 

demonstrate that the changed or added 

emission point is in compliance with 

the applicable requirements for an 

existing affected source. You must 

demonstrate initial compliance with the 

emission limits and establish any 

applicable operating limits in 

§ 63.11880 within 180 days of the date 

of start-up of the changed process unit. 

You must demonstrate compliance with 

any applicable work practice standards 

upon startup of the changed process 

unit. 

(b) If you replace any components of 

a new affected source, or make a process 

change to a new affected source 

resulting in a change to the 

characteristics of any emission point, 

such that a different emission limit, 

operating parameter limit, or work 

practice requirement applies, you must 

demonstrate that all changed emission 

points are in compliance with the 

applicable requirements for a new 

affected source. You must demonstrate 

initial compliance with the emission 

limits and establish any applicable 

operating limits in § 63.11880 within 

180 days of the date of startup of the 

changed process unit. You must 

demonstrate compliance with any 

applicable work practice standards 

upon startup of the changed process 

unit. 

(c) For process changes, you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with your emission limits and 

standards, operating limits, and work 

practice standards according to the 

procedures and frequency in 

§§ 63.11910 through 63.11980. 

(d) For process changes, you must 

submit the report specified in 

§ 63.11985(b)(4)(iii). 

Testing and Compliance Requirements 

§ 63.11900 By what date must I conduct 

initial performance testing and monitoring, 

establish any applicable operating limits, 

and demonstrate initial compliance with my 

emission limits and work practice 

standards? 

(a) For existing affected sources, you 

must establish any applicable operating 

limits required in § 63.11880 and 

demonstrate initial compliance with the 

emission limits and standards specified 

in Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart, as 

applicable, no later than 180 days after 

the compliance date specified in 

§ 63.11875 and according to the 

applicable provisions in § 63.7(a)(2). 

(b) For existing affected sources, you 

must demonstrate initial compliance 

with any applicable work practice 

standards required in § 63.11880 no 

later than the compliance date specified 

in § 63.11875 and according to the 

applicable provisions in § 63.7(a)(2). 

(c) For new or reconstructed affected 

sources, you must establish any 

applicable operating limits required in 

§ 63.11880, and demonstrate initial 

compliance with the emission limits 

and standards specified in Tables 2, 3, 

and 4 to this subpart, as applicable, no 

later than 180 days after the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register or within 180 days 

after startup of the source, whichever is 

later, according to § 63.7(a)(2)(ix). 

(d) For new and reconstructed 

affected sources, you must demonstrate 

initial compliance with any applicable 

work practice standards required in 

§ 63.11880 no later than the startup date 

of the affected source or the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register, whichever is later, 

and according to the applicable 

provisions in § 63.7(a)(2). 

(e) If you demonstrate initial 

compliance using a performance test 

and a force majeure is about to occur, 

occurs, or has occurred for which you 

intend to assert a claim of force majeure, 

then you must follow the procedures in 

§ 63.7(a)(4). 

§ 63.11905 When must I conduct 

subsequent performance testing and 

monitoring to demonstrate continuous 

compliance? 

Following the date of your initial 

demonstration of compliance in 

§ 63.11900, you must conduct 

subsequent performance testing and 

monitoring to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with your emission limits, 

operating limits, and work practice 

standards according to the procedures 

and frequency in §§ 63.11910 through 

63.11980. If you make a process change 

as specified in § 63.11896, such that a 

different emission limit or operating 

parameter limit applies, you must 

conduct a performance test according to 

§ 63.11896. 

§ 63.11910 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

storage vessels? 

You must comply with the 

requirements specified in Table 4 to this 

subpart for each storage vessel. 

(a) For each fixed roof storage vessel 

used to comply with the requirements 

specified in Table 4 to this subpart, you 

must meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this 

section. If you elect to use a fixed roof 

storage vessel vented to a closed vent 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29566 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

system and control device, the closed 

vent system and control device must 

meet the requirements in §§ 63.11925 

through 63.11950. 

(1) Design requirements. (i) The fixed 

roof must be installed in a manner such 

that there are no visible cracks, holes, 

gaps, or other open spaces between roof 

section joints or between the interface of 

the roof edge and the tank wall. 

(ii) Each opening in the fixed roof 

must be equipped with a closure device 

designed to operate such that when the 

closure device is secured in the closed 

position there are no visible cracks, 

holes, gaps, or other open spaces in the 

closure device or between the perimeter 

of the opening and the closure device. 

(2) Operating requirements. (i) Except 

as specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this 

section, the fixed roof must be installed 

with each closure device secured in the 

closed position. 

(ii) Opening of closure devices or 

removal of the fixed roof is allowed 

under conditions specified in 

paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this 

section. 

(A) A closure device may be opened 

or the roof may be removed when 

needed to provide access. 

(B) A conservation vent that vents to 

the atmosphere is allowed during 

normal operations to maintain the tank 

internal operating pressure within tank 

design specifications. Normal operating 

conditions that may require these 

devices to open are during those times 

when the internal pressure of the 

storage vessel is outside the internal 

pressure operating range for the storage 

vessel as a result of loading or 

unloading operations or diurnal ambient 

temperature fluctuations. 

(3) Inspection and monitoring 

requirements. (i) Visually inspect the 

fixed roof and its closure devices for 

defects initially and at least once per 

calendar year except as specified in 

paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section. 

Defects include, but are not limited to, 

visible cracks, holes, or gaps in the roof 

sections or between the roof and the 

wall of the storage vessel; broken, 

cracked, or otherwise damaged seals or 

gaskets on closure devices; and broken 

or missing hatches, access covers, caps, 

or other closure devices. 

(ii) The inspection requirement 

specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this 

section does not apply to parts of the 

fixed roof that you determine are unsafe 

to inspect because operating personnel 

would be exposed to an imminent or 

potential danger as a consequence of 

complying with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of 

this section, provided you comply with 

the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this 

section. 

(A) You prepare and maintain at the 

plant site written documentation that 

identifies all parts of the fixed roof that 

are unsafe to inspect and explains why 

such parts are unsafe to inspect. 

(B) You develop and implement a 

written plan and schedule to conduct 

inspections the next time alternative 

storage capacity becomes available and 

the storage vessel can be emptied or 

temporarily removed from service, as 

necessary, to complete the inspection. 

The required inspections must be 

performed as frequently as practicable 

but do not need to be performed more 

than once per calendar year. You must 

maintain a copy of the written plan and 

schedule at the plant site. 

(4) Repair requirements. (i) Make first 

efforts to repair a defect no later than 5 

days after detection, and complete 

repair as soon as possible, but no later 

than 45 days after detection. You must 

comply with the requirements in this 

paragraph (a)(4)(i) except as provided in 

paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) Repair of a defect may be delayed 

beyond 45 days if you determine that 

repair of the defect requires emptying or 

temporary removal from service of the 

storage vessel and no alternative storage 

capacity is available at the site to accept 

the removed material. In this case, 

repair the defect the next time 

alternative storage capacity becomes 

available and the storage vessel can be 

emptied or temporarily removed from 

service. 

(b) If you elect to use an internal 

floating roof storage vessel or external 

floating roof storage vessel to comply 

with the requirements specified in Table 

4 to this subpart, you must meet all 

requirements of §§ 63.1060 through 

63.1067 of subpart WW of this part for 

internal floating roof storage vessels or 

external floating roof storage vessels, as 

applicable. 

(c) For each pressure vessel used to 

comply with the requirements specified 

in Table 4 to this subpart, you must 

meet the requirements in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (4) of this section. 

(1) Whenever the pressure vessel is in 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) service, 

you must operate the pressure vessel as 

a closed system that does not vent to the 

atmosphere, e.g., during filling, 

emptying, and purging. The vent stream 

during filling, emptying, and purging 

must meet the process vent emission 

limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, as 

applicable, by routing to a closed vent 

system and control device that is 

designed and operated in accordance 

with §§ 63.11925 through 63.11950. 

(2) Each opening in the pressure 

vessel must be equipped with a closure 

device designed to operate such that 

when the closure device is secured in 

the closed position there are no visible 

cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces 

in the closure device or between the 

perimeter of the opening and the closure 

device. 

(3) All potential leak interfaces must 

be monitored annually for leaks using 

the procedures specified in § 63.11915. 

You must comply with the 

recordkeeping provisions specified in 

§ 63.11990(b) and the reporting 

provisions specified in § 63.11985(a)(1), 

(b)(1), and (c)(8). For any leak detected, 

you must submit the report specified in 

paragraph (c)(4) of this section. 

(4) Pressure vessel closure devices 

must not discharge to the atmosphere. 

Any such release (e.g., leak) constitutes 

a violation of this rule. Within 10 days 

of any such release, you must submit to 

the Administrator the report specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required 

even if you elect to follow the 

procedures specified in § 63.11895 to 

establish an affirmative defense. 

§ 63.11915 What are my compliance 

requirements for equipment leaks? 

For equipment (as defined in 

§ 63.12005) in HAP service, you must 

comply with the requirements in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this 

section. 

(a) Requirement for certain equipment 

in subpart UU of this part. You must 

comply with §§ 63.1020 through 

63.1025, § 63.1027, and §§ 63.1029 

through 63.1039 of subpart UU of this 

part. 

(b) Requirements for pumps, 

compressors, and agitator seals. You 

must meet the requirements specified 

for each type of equipment in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this 

section. For each type of equipment 

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(5) of this section, you must also meet 

the requirements of paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(1) Rotating pumps. HAP emissions 

from seals on all rotating pumps in HAP 

service are to be minimized by installing 

sealless pumps, pumps with double 

mechanical seals or equivalent 

equipment, or procedures approved by 

the Administrator. If double mechanical 

seals are used, HAP emissions from the 

seals are to be minimized by 

maintaining the pressure between the 

two seals so that any leak that occurs is 

into the pump; by ducting any HAP 

between the two seals through a control 

system from which the concentration of 

HAP in the exhaust gases does not 

exceed 10 parts per million; or 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29567 

equivalent equipment or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. 

(2) Reciprocating pumps. HAP 

emissions from seals on all 

reciprocating pumps in HAP service are 

to be minimized by installing double 

outboard seals, or equivalent equipment 

or procedures approved by the 

Administrator. If double outboard seals 

are used, HAP emissions from the seals 

are to be minimized by maintaining the 

pressure between the two seals so that 

any leak that occurs is into the pump; 

by ducting any HAP between the two 

seals through a control system from 

which the concentration of HAP in the 

exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm; 

or equivalent equipment or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. 

(3) Rotating compressors. HAP 

emissions from seals on all rotating 

compressors in HAP service are to be 

minimized by installing compressors 

with double mechanical seals, or 

equivalent equipment, or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. If 

double mechanical seals are used, HAP 

emissions from the seals are to be 

minimized by maintaining the pressure 

between the two seals so that any leak 

that occurs is into the compressor; by 

ducting any HAP between the two seals 

through a control system from which 

the concentration of HAP in the exhaust 

gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or 

equivalent equipment or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. 

(4) Reciprocating compressors. HAP 

emissions from seals on all 

reciprocating compressors in HAP 

service are to be minimized by installing 

double outboard seals, or equivalent 

equipment, or procedures approved by 

the Administrator. If double outboard 

seals are used, HAP emissions from the 

seals are to be minimized by 

maintaining the pressure between the 

two seals so that any leak that occurs is 

into the compressor; by ducting any 

HAP between the two seals through a 

control system from which 

concentration of HAP in the exhaust 

gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or 

equivalent equipment or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. 

(5) Agitators. HAP emissions from 

seals on all agitators in HAP service are 

to be minimized by installing agitators 

with double mechanical seals, or 

equivalent equipment, or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. If 

double mechanical seals are used, HAP 

emissions from the seals are to be 

minimized by maintaining the pressure 

between the two seals so that any leak 

that occurs is into the agitated vessel; by 

ducting any HAP between the two seals 

through a control system from which 

the concentration of HAP in the exhaust 

gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or 

equivalent equipment or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. 

(c) Requirements for pressure relief 

devices. For pressure relief devices, you 

must meet the requirements of this 

paragraph (c) and paragraph (a) of this 

section. Any release to the atmosphere 

from a pressure relief device in HAP 

service, as defined in § 63.12005, 

constitutes a violation of this rule. You 

must install, maintain, and operate 

release indicators as specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section 

unless the pressure relief device meets 

the process vent emission limits in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart by routing 

to a closed vent system and control 

device designed and operated in 

accordance with the requirements in 

§§ 63.11925 through 63.11950. For any 

pressure relief devices, you must 

comply with the recordkeeping 

provisions in § 63.11990(c) and 

reporting provisions in 

§§ 63.11985(a)(2), (b)(2), and (c)(8). For 

any release, you must submit the report 

specified in § 63.11985(c)(8), as 

described in paragraph (c)(3) of this 

section. 

(1) A release indicator must be 

properly installed on each pressure 

relief device in such a way that it will 

indicate when an emission release has 

occurred. 

(2) Each indicator must be equipped 

with an alert system that will notify an 

operator immediately and automatically 

when the pressure relief device is open. 

The alert must be located such that the 

signal is detected and recognized easily 

by an operator. 

(3) For any instance that the release 

indicator indicates that a pressure relief 

device is open, you must notify 

operators that a pressure release has 

occurred, and, within 10 days of the 

release, you must submit to the 

Administrator the report specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required 

even if you elect to follow the 

procedures specified in § 63.11895(b) to 

establish an affirmative defense. 

§ 63.11920 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

heat exchange systems? 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, you must perform 

monitoring to identify leaks of total 

strippable volatile organic compounds 

from each heat exchange system subject 

to the requirements of this subpart 

according to the procedures in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this 

section. 

(1) Monitoring locations for closedloop recirculation heat exchange 

systems. You must collect and analyze 

a sample from the location(s) described 

in either paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this 

section. 

(i) Each cooling tower return line 

prior to exposure to air for each heat 

exchange system. 

(ii) Selected heat exchanger exit 

line(s) so that each heat exchanger or 

group of heat exchangers within a heat 

exchange system is covered by the 

selected monitoring location(s). 

(2) Monitoring locations for oncethrough heat exchange systems. You 

must collect and analyze a sample from 

the location(s) described in paragraph 

(a)(2)(i) of this section. You may also 

elect to collect and analyze an 

additional sample from the location(s) 

described in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this 

section. 

(i) Selected heat exchanger exit line(s) 

so that each heat exchanger or group of 

heat exchangers within a heat exchange 

system is covered by the selected 

monitoring location(s). 

(ii) The inlet water feed line for a 

once-through heat exchange system 

prior to any heat exchanger. If multiple 

heat exchange systems use the same 

water feed (i.e., inlet water from the 

same primary water source), you may 

monitor at one representative location 

and use the monitoring results for that 

sampling location for all heat exchange 

systems that use that same water feed. 

(3) Monitoring method. Determine the 

total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration at each 

monitoring location using the analytical 

method specified in either paragraph 

(a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section. 

(i) Determine the total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration (in parts per million by 

volume) as methane from the air 

stripping testing system using ‘‘Air 

Stripping Method (Modified El Paso 

Method) for Determination of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from 

Water Sources,’’ Revision Number One, 

dated January 2003, Sampling 

Procedures Manual, Appendix P: 

Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, January 31, 2003 (incorporated 

by reference, see § 63.14) using a flame 

ionization detector analyzer. 

(ii) Determine the total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration (in parts per billion by 

weight) in the cooling water using 

Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas 

Chromatography Using Photoionization 

and/or Electrolytic Conductivity 

Detectors,’’ dated December 1996 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14). 

The target list of compounds shall be 

generated based on a pre-survey sample 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29568 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

and analysis by gas chromatography/ 

mass spectrometry and process 

knowledge to include all compounds 

that can potentially leak into the cooling 

water. If Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas 

Chromatography Using Photoionization 

and/or Electrolytic Conductivity 

Detectors,’’ dated December 1996 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14) 

is not applicable for all compounds that 

can potentially leak into the cooling 

water for a given heat exchange system, 

you cannot use this monitoring method 

for that heat exchange system. 

(4) Monitoring frequency. Determine 

the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration at each 

monitoring location at the frequencies 

specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through 

(iii) of this section. 

(i) For heat exchange systems for 

which you have not delayed repair of 

any leaks, monitor at the frequencies 

specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(A) and 

(B) of this section. 

(A) For heat exchange systems at an 

existing affected source, monitor at least 

monthly. You may elect to monitor 

more frequently than the minimum 

frequency specified in this paragraph 

(a)(4)(i)(A). 

(B) For heat exchange systems at a 

new affected source, monitor at least 

once every 12 hours. You may elect to 

monitor more frequently than the 

minimum frequency specified in this 

paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B). 

(ii) For heat exchange systems for 

which you have delayed repair, as 

provided in paragraph (f) of this section, 

monitor at least monthly. You may elect 

to monitor more frequently than the 

minimum frequency specified in this 

paragraph (a)(4)(ii). 

(iii) If you elected to monitor the inlet 

water feed line for a once-through heat 

exchange system, as provided in 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, you 

must monitor the inlet water feed line 

at the same frequency used to monitor 

the heat exchange exit line(s), as 

required in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this 

section. 

(b) A heat exchange system is exempt 

from the monitoring requirements in 

paragraph (a) of this section if it meets 

the criteria in either paragraph (b)(1) or 

(2) of this section. 

(1) All heat exchangers within the 

heat exchange system operate with the 

minimum pressure on the cooling water 

side at least 35 kilopascals greater than 

the maximum pressure on the process 

side. 

(2) The heat exchange system does not 

contain any heat exchangers. 

(c) The leak action level is specified 

in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this 

section. 

(1) For a heat exchange system at an 

existing affected source, the leak action 

level is a total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (as methane) 

in the stripping gas of 2.9 parts per 

million by volume or a total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration in the cooling water of 38 

parts per billion by weight. 

(2) For a heat exchange system at a 

new affected source, the leak action 

level is a total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (as methane) 

in the stripping gas of 2.3 parts per 

million by volume or a total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration in the cooling water of 30 

parts per billion by weight. 

(d) A leak is defined as specified in 

paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section, as 

applicable. 

(1) For once-through heat exchange 

systems for which you monitor the inlet 

water feed, as described in paragraph 

(a)(2)(ii) of this section, a leak is 

detected if the difference in the 

measurement value of the sample taken 

from a location specified in paragraph 

(a)(2)(i) of this section and the 

measurement value of the 

corresponding sample taken from the 

location specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) 

of this section equals or exceeds the leak 

action level. 

(2) For all other heat exchange 

systems, a leak is detected if a 

measurement value taken according to 

the requirements in paragraph (a) of this 

section equals or exceeds the leak action 

level. 

(e) If a leak is detected, you must 

repair the leak to reduce the measured 

concentration to below the applicable 

action level as soon as practicable, but 

no later than 45 days after identifying 

the leak, except as specified in 

paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section. 

Repair includes re-monitoring as 

specified in paragraph (a) of this section 

to verify that the measured 

concentration is below the applicable 

action level. Actions that you can take 

to achieve repair include but are not 

limited to any action specified in 

paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) Physical modifications to the 

leaking heat exchanger, such as welding 

the leak or replacing a tube. 

(2) Blocking the leaking tube within 

the heat exchanger. 

(3) Changing the pressure so that 

water flows into the process fluid. 

(4) Replacing the heat exchanger or 

heat exchanger bundle. 

(5) Isolating, bypassing, or otherwise 

removing the leaking heat exchanger 

from service until it is otherwise 

repaired. 

(f) If you detect a leak when 

monitoring a cooling tower return line 

or heat exchanger exit line under 

paragraph (a) of this section, you may 

conduct additional monitoring 

following the requirements in paragraph 

(a) of this section to further isolate each 

heat exchanger or group of heat 

exchangers in regulated material service 

within the heat exchange system for 

which the leak was detected. If you do 

not detect any leaks when conducting 

additional monitoring for each heat 

exchanger or group of heat exchangers, 

the heat exchange system is excluded 

from repair requirements in paragraph 

(d) of this section. 

(g) The delay of repair action level is 

defined as either a total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration (as methane) in the 

stripping gas of 29 parts per million by 

volume or a total strippable volatile 

organic compounds concentration in the 

cooling water of 380 parts per billion by 

weight. You may delay the repair of a 

leaking heat exchanger when one of the 

conditions in paragraphs (g)(1) or (2) of 

this section is met. You must determine 

if a delay of repair is necessary as soon 

as practicable, but no later than 45 days 

after first identifying the leak. 

(1) If the repair is technically 

infeasible without a shutdown and the 

total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration is initially 

and remains less than the delay of repair 

action level for all monitoring periods 

during the delay of repair, you may 

delay repair until the next scheduled 

shutdown of the heat exchange system. 

If, during subsequent monitoring, the 

total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration is equal to or 

greater than the delay of repair action 

level, you must repair the leak within 30 

days of the monitoring event in which 

the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds was equal to or exceeded 

the delay of repair action level. 

(2) If the necessary equipment, parts, 

or personnel are not available and the 

total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (as methane) 

is initially and remains less than the 

delay of repair action level for all 

monitoring periods during the delay of 

repair, you may delay the repair for a 

maximum of 120 days from the day the 

leak was first identified. You must 

demonstrate that the necessary 

equipment, parts, or personnel were not 

available. If, during subsequent monthly 

monitoring, the total strippable volatile 

organic compounds concentration is 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29569 

equal to or greater than the delay of 

repair action level, you must repair the 

leak within 30 days of the monitoring 

event in which the leak was equal to or 

exceeded the total strippable volatile 

organic compounds delay of repair 

action level. 

(h) To delay the repair under 

paragraph (g) of this section, you must 

record the information in paragraphs 

(h)(1) through (h)(4) of this section. 

(1) The reason(s) for delaying repair. 

(2) A schedule for completing the 

repair as soon as practical. 

(3) The date and concentration of the 

leak as first identified and the results of 

all subsequent monitoring events during 

the delay of repair. 

(4) An estimate of the potential 

emissions from the leaking heat 

exchange system following the 

procedures in paragraphs (g)(4)(i) and 

(g)(4)(ii) of this section. 

(i) Determine the total strippable 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration in the cooling water, in 

parts per billion by weight. If the 

Modified El Paso Method is used, 

calculate the total strippable volatile 

organic compounds concentration in the 

cooling water using equation 7–1 from 

‘‘Air Stripping Method (Modified El 

Paso Method) for Determination of 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Water Sources,’’ Revision Number 

One, dated January 2003, Sampling 

Procedures Manual, Appendix P: 

Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, January 31, 2003 (incorporated 

by reference, see § 63.14) and the total 

strippable volatile organic compounds 

concentration measured in the stripped 

air. 

(ii) Calculate the emissions for the 

leaking heat exchange system by 

multiplying the volatile organic 

compounds concentration in the cooling 

water, parts per billion by weight, by the 

flow rate of the cooling water at the 

selected monitoring location and by the 

expected duration of the delay. The flow 

rate may be based on direct 

measurement, pump curves, heat 

balance calculations, or other 

engineering methods. 

§ 63.11925 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

process vents? 

Each process vent must meet the 

requirements of paragraphs (a) through 

(f) of this section. 

(a) Emission limits. Each process vent 

stream must meet the emission limits in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart prior to the 

vent stream being exposed to the 

atmosphere. The emission limits in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart apply at all 

times. 

(b) Closed vent systems and control 

devices. Each control device used to 

comply with paragraph (a) of this 

section must meet the requirements of 

§§ 63.11925 and 63.11940, and all 

process vent streams treated by the 

control device must be routed through 

a closed vent system meeting the 

requirements in § 63.11930. You must 

not use a flare to comply with the 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. 

(c) General monitoring requirements. 

Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (3) of this section, for each 

control device used to comply with the 

process vent emission limit specified in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you must 

install and operate a continuous 

parameter monitoring systemsCPMS to 

monitor each operating parameter 

specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i) to 

comply with your operating limit(s) 

required in § 63.11880(b) 

(1) Hydrogen chloride continuous 

emission monitoring system (CEMS). 

According to the schedule specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this 

section, respectively, new affected 

sources must comply with paragraph 

(c)(1)(i) of this section, and existing 

affected sources must comply with 

paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, in 

lieu of establishing operating limits in 

§ 63.11880(b) and using CPMS to 

comply with the operating limits, as 

specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i). 

(i) New affected sources, beginning no 

more than 6-months after the date of 

promulgation of a performance 

specification for hydrogen chloride 

CEMS, must install and operate a 

hydrogen chloride CEMS to demonstrate 

initial and continuous compliance with 

the hydrogen chloride emission limit for 

process vents, as specified in paragraphs 

(d)(2) through (4) and (e) of this section. 

(ii) Existing affected sources, upon 

promulgation of a performance 

specification for hydrogen chloride 

CEMS, have the option to install a 

hydrogen chloride CEMS to demonstrate 

initial and continuous compliance with 

the hydrogen chloride emission limit for 

process vents, as specified in paragraphs 

(d) and (e) of this section. 

(2) Dioxin/furan CEMS. According to 

the schedule specified in paragraphs 

(c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section, 

respectively, new affected sources must 

comply with paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this 

section, and existing affected sources 

must comply with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of 

this section, in lieu of establishing 

operating limits in § 63.11880(b) and 

using CPMS to comply with the 

operating limits as specified in 

§ 63.11940(a) through (i): 

(i) New affected sources, beginning no 

more than 6 months after the date of 

promulgation of a performance 

specification for dioxin/furan CEMS, 

must install and operate a dioxin/furan 

CEMS to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the dioxin/ 

furan emission limit for process vents, 

as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) through 

(4) and (e) of this section. 

(ii) Existing sources, upon 

promulgation of a performance 

specification for dioxin/furan CEMS, 

have the option to install a dioxin/furan 

CEMS to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the 

dioxins/furan emission limit for process 

vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) 

through (4) and (e) of this section. 

(3) Total hydrocarbon CEMS. In lieu 

of establishing operating limits in 

§ 63.11880(b) and using CPMS to 

comply with the operating limits as 

specified in § 63.11940(a) through (i), 

new and existing affected sources have 

the option to install a total hydrocarbon 

CEMS to demonstrate initial and 

continuous compliance with the total 

organic HAP emission limit for process 

vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) 

through (4) and (e) of this section. 

(d) Initial compliance. To demonstrate 

initial compliance with the process vent 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart, you must comply with 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) You must conduct an initial 

inspection as specified in § 63.11930(d) 

for each closed vent system. 

(2) For each CEMS and CPMS 

required or that you elect to use as 

specified in paragraph (c) of this 

section, you must prepare the quality 

control program and site-specific 

performance evaluation test plan 

specified in § 63.11935(b) and sitespecific monitoring plan specified in 

§ 63.11935(c), respectively. 

(3) For each CEMS and CPMS 

specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this 

section, you must install, operate, and 

maintain the CEMS and CPMS as 

specified in §§ 63.11935(b) and (c), 

respectively, and you must conduct an 

initial site-specific performance 

evaluation test according to your sitespecific monitoring plan and 

§§ 63.11935(b)(3) and (c)(4), 

respectively. 

(4) For each emission limit for which 

you use a CEMS to demonstrate 

compliance, you must demonstrate 

initial compliance with the emission 

limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart 

based on 3-hour block averages of CEMS 

data collected at the minimum 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29570 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

frequency specified in §§ 63.11935(b)(2) 

and 63.11890(c), and calculated using 

the data reduction method specified in 

§ 63.11935(e). For a CEMS used on a 

batch operation, you may use a data 

averaging period based on an operating 

block in lieu of the 3-hour averaging 

period. 

(5) For each emission limit for which 

you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate 

compliance, you must meet the 

requirements of paragraphs (d)(5)(i) 

through (iii) of this section. 

(i) You must conduct an initial 

performance test according to the 

requirements in § 63.11945 to 

demonstrate compliance with the total 

organic HAP, vinyl chloride, hydrogen 

chloride, or dioxin/furan emission limit 

in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. 

(ii) During the performance test 

specified in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of this 

section, for each CPMS installed and 

operated as specified in paragraph (d)(2) 

of this section, you must establish an 

operating limit as the operating 

parameter range, minimum operating 

parameter level, or maximum operating 

parameter level specified in 

§ 63.11935(d). Each operating limit must 

be based on the data averaging period 

for compliance specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart using data collected at the 

minimum frequency specified in 

§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and 

calculated using the data reduction 

method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a 

CPMS used on a batch operation, you 

may use a data averaging period based 

on an operating block in lieu of the 

averaging period specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart. 

(e) Continuous compliance. To 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the emission limits in Table 1 or 

2 to this subpart for each process vent, 

you must comply with paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (5) of this section. 

(1) You must meet the requirements 

in § 63.11930 for each closed vent 

system. 

(2) You must operate and maintain 

each CEMS and CPMS required in 

paragraph (c) of this section as specified 

in § 63.11935(b) and (c), respectively. 

(3) For each emission limit for which 

you use a CEMS to demonstrate 

compliance, you must meet the 

requirements in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and 

(ii) of this section. 

(i) You must conduct a periodic sitespecific CEMS performance evaluation 

test according to your quality control 

program and site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan specified in 

§ 63.11935(b)(1). 

(ii) You must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the emission limits in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based on 3- 

hour block averages of CEMS data, the 

minimum data collection frequency 

specified in §§ 63.11935(b)(2) and 

63.11890(c), and the data reduction 

method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a 

CEMS used on a batch operation, you 

may use a data averaging period based 

on an operating block in lieu of the 3- 

hour averaging period. 

(4) For each emission limit for which 

you do not use a CEMS to demonstrate 

compliance, you must meet the 

requirements of paragraphs (e)(4)(i) and 

(ii) of this section. 

(i) Except for hydrogen chloride, you 

must conduct an annual performance 

test according to the requirements in 

§ 63.11945 for each pollutant in Table 1 

or 2 to this subpart. 

(ii) For each CPMS operated and 

maintained as specified in paragraph 

(e)(2) of this section, you must meet the 

requirements specified in paragraphs 

(e)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section. 

(A) You must conduct periodic sitespecific CPMS performance evaluation 

tests according to your site-specific 

monitoring plan and § 63.11935(c). 

(B) For each control device being 

monitored, you must continuously 

collect CPMS data consistent with 

§ 63.11890(c) and your site-specific 

monitoring plan. You must 

continuously determine the average 

value of each monitored operating 

parameter based on the data collection 

and reduction methods specified in 

§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11935(e), and 

the applicable data averaging period for 

compliance specified in Table 6 to this 

subpart for all periods the process is 

operating. For a CPMS used on a batch 

operation, you may use a data averaging 

period based on an operating block in 

lieu of the averaging periods specified 

in Table 6 to this subpart. 

(C) You must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with each operating limit 

established in paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of 

this section using these average values 

calculated in paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(B) of 

this section.(5) Each closed vent systems 

and control device used to comply with 

an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart must be operated at all times 

when emissions are vented to, or 

collected by, these systems or devices. 

(f) To demonstrate compliance with 

the dioxin/furan toxic equivalency 

emission limit specified in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart, you must determine 

dioxin/furan toxic equivalency as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) 

of this section. 

(1) Measure the concentration of each 

dioxin/furan tetra-through 

octachlorinated-congener emitted using 

Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A–7. 

(2) For each dioxin/furan (tetrathrough octachlorinated) congener 

measured in accordance with paragraph 

(f)(1) of this section, multiply the 

congener concentration by its 

corresponding toxic equivalency factor 

specified in Table 7 to this subpart. 

(3) Sum the products calculated in 

accordance with paragraph (f)(2) of this 

section to obtain the total concentration 

of dioxins/furans emitted in terms of 

toxic equivalency. 

§ 63.11930 What requirements must I meet 

for closed vent systems? 

(a) General. To route emissions from 

process vents subject to the HAP 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart to a control device, you must 

use a closed vent system and meet the 

requirements of this section and all 

provisions referenced in this section. 

However, if you operate and maintain 

your closed vent system in vacuum 

service as defined in § 63.12005, you 

must meet the requirements in 

paragraph (h) of this section and are not 

required to meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (a) through (g) of this 

section. 

(b) Collection of emissions. Each 

closed vent system must be designed 

and operated to collect the HAP vapors 

from the process vent, and to route the 

collected vapors to a control device. 

(c) Bypass. For each closed vent 

system that contains a bypass as defined 

in § 63.12005 (e.g., diverting a vent 

stream away from the control device or 

causing air intrusion into the control 

device), you must not discharge to the 

atmosphere through the bypass. Any 

such release constitutes a violation of 

this rule. The use of any bypass diverted 

to the atmosphere during a performance 

test invalidates the performance test. 

You must comply with the provisions of 

either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this 

section for each closed vent system that 

contains a bypass that could divert a 

vent stream to the atmosphere. 

(1) Bypass flow indicator. Install, 

maintain, and operate a flow indicator 

as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) 

through (iv) of this section. 

(i) The flow indicator must be 

properly installed at the entrance to any 

bypass. 

(ii) The flow indicator must be 

equipped with an alarm system that will 

alert an operator immediately, and 

automatically when flow is detected in 

the bypass. The alarm must be located 

such that the alert is detected and 

recognized easily by an operator. 

(iii) If the alarm is triggered, you must 

immediately initiate procedures to 

identify the cause of the alarm. If any 

closed vent system has discharged to the 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29571 

atmosphere through a vent or bypass, 

you must initiate procedures to stop the 

bypass discharge. 

(iv) For any instances where the flow 

indicator alarm is triggered, you must 

submit to the Administrator within 10 

days of the discharge the report 

specified in § 63.11985(c)(8). This report 

is required even if you elect to follow 

the procedures specified in § 63.11895 

to establish an affirmative defense and 

submit the reports specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(4). 

(2) Bypass valve configuration. Secure 

the bypass valve in the non-diverting 

position with a car-seal or a lock-andkey type configuration. 

(i) You must visually inspect the seal 

or closure mechanism at least once 

every month to verify that the valve is 

maintained in the non-diverting 

position, and the vent stream is not 

diverted through the bypass. A broken 

seal or closure mechanism or a diverted 

valve constitutes a violation from the 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. You must maintain the records 

specified in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this 

section. 

(ii) For each seal or closure 

mechanism, you must comply with 

either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of 

this section. 

(A) For each instance that you change 

the bypass valve to the diverting 

position, you must submit to the 

Administrator within 10 days of the 

action the report specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required 

even if you elect to follow the 

procedures specified in § 63.11895 to 

establish an affirmative defense and 

submit the reports specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(4). 

(B) You must install, maintain, and 

operate a bypass flow indicator as 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) 

of this section and you must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) and 

(iv) of this section for each instance that 

the flow indicator alarm is triggered. 

(d) Closed vent system inspection and 

monitoring requirements. Except as 

provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, you must inspect each closed 

vent system as specified in paragraph 

(d)(1) or (2) of this section. 

(1) Hard-piping inspection. If the 

closed vent system is constructed of 

hard-piping, you must comply with the 

requirements specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) Conduct an initial inspection 

according to the procedures in 

paragraph (e) of this section. 

(ii) Conduct annual inspections for 

visible, audible, or olfactory indications 

of leaks. 

(2) Ductwork inspection. If the closed 

vent system is constructed of ductwork, 

you must conduct initial and annual 

inspections according to the procedures 

in paragraph (e) of this section. 

(3) Equipment that is unsafe to 

inspect. You may designate any parts of 

the closed vent system as unsafe to 

inspect if you determine that personnel 

would be exposed to an immediate 

danger as a consequence of complying 

with the initial and annual closed vent 

system inspection requirements of this 

subpart. 

(e) Closed vent system inspection 

procedures. Except as provided in 

paragraph (e)(4) of this section, you 

must comply with all provisions of 

paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3) of this 

section. 

(1) General. Inspections must be 

performed during periods when HAP is 

being collected by or vented through the 

closed vent system. A leak is indicated 

by an instrument reading greater than 

500 parts per million by volume above 

background or by visual inspection. 

(2) Inspection procedures. Each 

closed vent system subject to this 

paragraph (e)(2) must be inspected 

according to the procedures specified in 

paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (vii) of this 

section. 

(i) Inspections must be conducted in 

accordance with Method 21 at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A–7, except as 

otherwise specified in this section. 

(ii) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e)(2)(iii) of this section, the detection 

instrument must meet the performance 

criteria of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A–7, except the instrument 

response factor criteria in section 8.1.1.2 

of Method 21 must be for the 

representative composition of the 

process fluid and not of each individual 

volatile organic compound in the 

stream. For process streams that contain 

nitrogen, air, water, or other inerts that 

are not organic HAP or volatile organic 

compound, the representative stream 

response factor must be determined on 

an inert-free basis. You may determine 

the response factor at any concentration 

for which you will monitor for leaks. 

(iii) If no instrument is available at the 

plant site that will meet the 

performance criteria of Method 21 at 40 

CFR part 60, appendix A–7 specified in 

paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, the 

instrument readings may be adjusted by 

multiplying by the representative 

response factor of the process fluid, 

calculated on an inert-free basis as 

described in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this 

section. 

(iv) The detection instrument must be 

calibrated before use on each day of its 

use by the procedures specified in 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A–7. 

(v) Calibration gases must be as 

specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(v)(A) 

through (D) of this section. 

(A) Zero air (less than 10 parts per 

million by volume hydrocarbon in air). 

(B) Mixtures of methane in air at a 

concentration less than 10,000 parts per 

million by volume. A calibration gas 

other than methane in air may be used 

if the instrument does not respond to 

methane or if the instrument does not 

meet the performance criteria specified 

in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section. In 

such cases, the calibration gas may be a 

mixture of one or more of the 

compounds to be measured in air. 

(C) If the detection instrument’s 

design allows for multiple calibration 

scales, then the lower scale must be 

calibrated with a calibration gas that is 

no higher than 2,500 parts per million 

by volume. 

(D) Perform a calibration drift 

assessment, at a minimum, at the end of 

each monitoring day. Check the 

instrument using the same calibration 

gas(es) that were used to calibrate the 

instrument before use. Follow the 

procedures specified in Method 21 at 40 

CFR part 60, appendix A–7, Section 

10.1, except do not adjust the meter 

readout to correspond to the calibration 

gas value. Record the instrument 

reading for each scale used as specified 

in paragraph (g)(4) of this section. 

Divide these readings by the initial 

calibration values for each scale and 

multiply by 100 to express the 

calibration drift as a percentage. If any 

calibration drift assessment shows a 

negative drift of more than 10 percent 

from the initial calibration value, then 

all equipment monitored since the last 

calibration with instrument readings 

below the appropriate leak definition 

and above the leak definition multiplied 

by the value specified in paragraph 

(e)(2)(v)(D)(1) of this section must be remonitored. If any calibration drift 

assessment shows a positive drift of 

more than 10 percent from the initial 

calibration value, then, at your 

discretion, all equipment since the last 

calibration with instrument readings 

above the appropriate leak definition 

and below the leak definition multiplied 

by the value specified in paragraph 

(e)(2)(v)(D)(2) of this section may be remonitored. 

(1) 100 minus the percent of negative 

drift, divided by 100. 

(2) 100 plus the percent of positive 

drift, divided by 100. 

(vi) You may elect to adjust or not 

adjust instrument readings for 

background. If you elect not to adjust 

readings for background, all such 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29572 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

instrument readings must be compared 

directly to 500 parts per million by 

volume to determine whether there is a 

leak. If you elect to adjust instrument 

readings for background, you must 

measure background concentration 

using the procedures in this section. 

You must subtract the background 

reading from the maximum 

concentration indicated by the 

instrument. 

(vii) If you elect to adjust for 

background, the arithmetic difference 

between the maximum concentration 

indicated by the instrument and the 

background level must be compared 

with 500 parts per million by volume 

for determining whether there is a leak. 

(3) Instrument probe. The instrument 

probe must be traversed around all 

potential leak interfaces as described in 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A–7. 

(4) Unsafe-to-inspect written plan 

requirements. For equipment designated 

as unsafe to inspect according to the 

provisions of paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, you must maintain and follow 

a written plan that requires inspecting 

the equipment as frequently as practical 

during safe-to-inspect times, but not 

more frequently than the annual 

inspection schedule otherwise 

applicable. You must still repair unsafeto-inspect equipment according to the 

procedures in paragraph (f) of this 

section if a leak is detected. 

(f) Closed vent system leak repair 

provisions. The provisions of this 

paragraph (f) apply to closed vent 

systems collecting HAP from an affected 

source. 

(1) Leak repair general for hardpiping. If there are visible, audible, or 

olfactory indications of leaks at the time 

of the annual visual inspections 

required by paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this 

section, you must follow the procedure 

specified in either paragraph (f)(1)(i) or 

(ii) of this section. 

(i) You must eliminate the leak. 

(ii) You must monitor the equipment 

according to the procedures in 

paragraph (e) of this section and comply 

with the leak repair provisions in 

paragraph (f)(2) of this section. 

(2) Leak repair schedule. Leaks must 

be repaired as soon as practical, except 

as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section. 

(i) A first attempt at repair must be 

made no later than 5 days after the leak 

is detected. 

(ii) Except as provided in paragraph 

(f)(3) of this section, repairs must be 

completed no later than 15 days after 

the leak is detected or at the beginning 

of the next introduction of vapors to the 

system, whichever is later. 

(3) Delay of repair. Delay of repair of 

a closed vent system for which leaks 

have been detected is allowed if repair 

within 15 days after a leak is detected 

is technically infeasible or unsafe 

without a closed vent system shutdown, 

as defined in § 63.12005, or if you 

determine that emissions resulting from 

immediate repair would be greater than 

the emissions likely to result from delay 

of repair. Repair of such equipment 

must be completed as soon as practical, 

but not later than the end of the next 

closed vent system shutdown. 

(g) Closed vent system records. For 

closed vent systems, you must record 

the information specified in paragraphs 

(g)(1) through (5) of this section, as 

applicable. 

(1) Bypass records. For each closed 

vent system that contains a bypass that 

could divert a vent stream away from 

the control device and to the 

atmosphere, or cause air intrusion into 

the control device, you must keep a 

record of the information specified in 

either paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(i) You must maintain records of any 

alarms triggered because flow was 

detected in the bypass, including the 

date and time the alarm was triggered, 

the duration of the flow in the bypass, 

as well as records of the times of all 

periods when the vent stream is 

diverted from the control device or the 

flow indicator is not operating. 

(ii) Where a seal mechanism is used 

to comply with paragraph (c)(2) of this 

section, hourly records of flow are not 

required. In such cases, you must record 

that the monthly visual inspection of 

the seals or closure mechanisms has 

been done, and must record the 

occurrence of all periods when the seal 

mechanism is broken, the bypass valve 

position has changed, or the key for a 

lock-and-key type lock has been 

checked out, and records of any car-seal 

that has been broken. 

(2) Inspection records. For each 

instrumental or visual inspection 

conducted in accordance with 

paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section for 

closed vent systems collecting HAP 

from an affected source during which no 

leaks are detected, you must record that 

the inspection was performed, the date 

of the inspection, and a statement that 

no leaks were detected. 

(3) Leak records. When a leak is 

detected from a closed vent system 

collecting HAP from an affected source, 

the information specified in paragraphs 

(g)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section must 

be recorded and kept for 5 years. 

(i) The instrument and the equipment 

identification number and the operator 

name, initials, or identification number. 

(ii) The date the leak was detected 

and the date of the first attempt to repair 

the leak. 

(iii) The date of successful repair of 

the leak. 

(iv) The maximum instrument reading 

measured by the procedures in 

paragraph (e) of this section after the 

leak is successfully repaired. 

(v) Repair delayed and the reason for 

the delay if a leak is not repaired within 

15 days after discovery of the leak. You 

may develop a written procedure that 

identifies the conditions that justify a 

delay of repair. In such cases, reasons 

for delay of repair may be documented 

by citing the relevant sections of the 

written procedure. 

(vi) Copies of the compliance reports 

as specified in § 63.11985(b)(9), if 

records are not maintained on a 

computerized database capable of 

generating summary reports from the 

records. 

(4) Instrument calibration records. 

You must maintain records of the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(g)(4)(i) through (vi) of this section for 

monitoring instrument calibrations 

conducted according to sections 8.1.2 

and 10 of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A–7, and paragraph (e) of this 

section. 

(i) Date of calibration and initials of 

operator performing the calibration. 

(ii) Calibration gas cylinder 

identification, certification date, and 

certified concentration. 

(iii) Instrument scale(s) used. 

(iv) A description of any corrective 

action taken if the meter readout could 

not be adjusted to correspond to the 

calibration gas value in accordance with 

section 10.1 of Method 21 at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A–7. 

(v) Results of each calibration drift 

assessment required by paragraph 

(e)(2)(v)(D) of this section (i.e., 

instrument reading for calibration at end 

of the monitoring day and the calculated 

percent difference from the initial 

calibration value). 

(vi) If you make your own calibration 

gas, a description of the procedure used. 

(5) Unsafe-to-inspect records. If you 

designate equipment as unsafe-toinspect as specified in paragraph (d)(3) 

of this section, you must keep the 

records specified in paragraph (g)(5)(i) 

and (ii) of this section. 

(i) You must maintain the identity of 

unsafe-to-inspect equipment as 

specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section. 

(ii) You must keep a written plan for 

inspecting unsafe-to-inspect equipment 

as required by paragraph (e)(4) of this 

section and record all activities 

performed according to the written plan. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29573 

(h) Closed vent systems in vacuum 

service. If you operate and maintain a 

closed vent system in vacuum service as 

defined in § 63.12005, you must comply 

with the requirements in paragraphs 

(h)(1) through (3) of this section, and 

you are not required to comply with any 

other provisions of this section. Any 

incidence where a closed vent system 

designed to be in vacuum service is 

operating and not in vacuum service 

constitutes a violation of this rule, 

unless the closed vent system is meeting 

the requirements in paragraphs (a) 

through (g) of this section for closed 

vent systems that are not in vacuum 

service. Any such incidence during a 

performance test invalidates the 

performance test. 

(1) In vacuum service alarm. You 

must install, maintain, and operate a 

pressure gauge and alarm system that 

will alert an operator immediately and 

automatically when the pressure is such 

that the closed vent system no longer 

meets the definition of in vacuum 

service as defined in § 63.12005. The 

alarm must be located such that the alert 

is detected and recognized easily by an 

operator. 

(2) In vacuum service alarm 

procedures. If the alarm is triggered for 

a closed vent system operating in 

vacuum service as specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) of this section, you 

must immediately initiate procedures to 

identify the cause of the alarm. If the 

closed vent system is not in vacuum 

service, you must initiate procedures to 

get the closed vent system back in 

vacuum service as defined in 

§ 63.12005, or you must immediately 

comply with the requirements in 

paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section 

for closed vent systems that are not in 

vacuum service. 

(3) In vacuum service alarm records 

and reports. For any incidences where 

a closed vent system designed to be in 

vacuum service is not in vacuum 

service, you must submit to the 

Administrator within 10 days of the 

incident the report specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(8). This report is required 

even if you elect to follow the 

procedures specified in § 63.11895 to 

establish an affirmative defense and 

submit the reports specified in 

§ 63.11985(c)(4). 

§ 63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS 

requirements must I meet to demonstrate 

initial and continuous compliance with the 

emission standards for process vent 

control devices, resin strippers, and 

wastewater treatment processes? 

(a) General requirements for CEMS 

and CPMS. You must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (b) of this 

section for each CEMS specified in 

§ 63.11925(c) used to demonstrate 

compliance with the emission limits for 

process vents in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. You must meet the CPMS 

requirements in paragraph (c) of this 

section and establish your operating 

limits in paragraph (d) of this section for 

each operating parameter specified in 

Table 6 to this subpart for each process 

vent control device, resin stripper, or 

wastewater treatment process specified 

in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) For each control device specified 

in § 63.11925(c) that is used to comply 

with the emission limits for process 

vents in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, 

except that flow indicators specified in 

§ 63.11940(e) are not subject to the 

requirements of this section. 

(2) For each resin stripper specified in 

§ 63.11960(c) and used to comply with 

the emission limit for resin in Table 1 

or 2 to this subpart. 

(3) For each wastewater treatment 

process specified in § 63.11975(a) and 

used to comply with the emission limit 

for wastewater in Table 3 to this 

subpart. 

(b) CEMS. You must install, operate, 

and maintain each CEMS according to 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this 

section and continuously monitor 

emissions. 

(1) You must prepare your quality 

control program and site-specific 

performance evaluation test plan, as 

specified in § 63.8(d) and (e). You must 

submit your performance evaluation test 

plan to the Administrator for approval, 

as specified in § 63.8(e)(3). 

(2) The monitoring equipment must 

be capable of providing a continuous 

record, recording data at least once 

every 15 minutes. 

(3) You must conduct initial and 

periodic site-specific performance 

evaluations and any required tests of 

each CEMS according to your quality 

control program and site-specific 

performance evaluation test plan 

prepared as specified in § 63.8(d) and 

(e). 

(4) If supplemental gases are added to 

the control device, you must correct the 

measured concentrations in accordance 

with § 63.11945(d)(1). 

(5) You must operate and maintain 

the CEMS in continuous operation 

according to the quality control program 

and performance evaluation test plan. 

CEMS must record data at least once 

every 15 minutes. 

(6) CEMS must meet the minimum 

accuracy and calibration frequency 

requirements specified in the 

performance specifications specified in 

paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(i) A hydrogen chloride or dioxin/ 

furan CEMS must meet the requirements 

of the promulgated performance 

specification for the CEMS. 

(ii) A total hydrocarbon CEMS must 

meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 

60, Appendix B, performance 

specification 8A. 

(7) Before commencing or ceasing use 

of a CEMS system, you must notify the 

Administrator as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this 

section. 

(i) You must notify the Administrator 

1 month before starting use of the 

continuous emissions monitoring 

system. 

(ii) You must notify the Administrator 

1 month before stopping use of the 

continuous emissions monitoring 

system, in which case you must also 

conduct a performance test within 60 

days of ceasing operation of the system. 

(c) CPMS. You must install, maintain, 

and operate each CPMS as specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this 

section and continuously monitor 

operating parameters. 

(1) As part of your quality control 

program and site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan prepared as 

specified in § 63.8(d) and (e), you must 

prepare a site-specific monitoring plan 

that addresses the monitoring system 

design, data collection, and the quality 

assurance and quality control elements 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through 

(v) of this section and § 63.8(d). You are 

not required to submit the plan for 

approval unless requested by the 

Administrator. You may request 

approval of monitoring system quality 

assurance and quality control procedure 

alternatives to those specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of this 

section in your site-specific monitoring 

plan. 

(i) The performance criteria and 

design specifications for the monitoring 

system equipment, including the sample 

interface, detector signal analyzer, and 

data acquisition and calculations. 

(ii) Sampling interface (e.g., 

thermocouple) location such that the 

monitoring system will provide 

representative measurements. 

(iii) Equipment performance checks, 

calibrations, or other audit procedures. 

(iv) Ongoing operation and 

maintenance procedures in accordance 

with provisions in § 63.8(c)(1) and (3). 

(v) Ongoing reporting and 

recordkeeping procedures in accordance 

with provisions in § 63.10(c), (e)(1), and 

(e)(2)(i). 

(2) The monitoring equipment must 

be capable of providing a continuous 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29574 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

record, recording data at least once 

every 15 minutes. 

(3) You must install, operate, and 

maintain each CPMS required in this 

paragraph (c) according to the 

procedures and requirements in your 

site-specific monitoring plan. 

(4) You must conduct an initial and 

periodic site-specific performance 

evaluation tests of each CPMS according 

to your site-specific monitoring plan. 

(5) All CPMS must meet the specific 

parameter (e.g., minimum accuracy and 

calibration frequency) requirements 

specified in § 63.11940 and Table 8 to 

this subpart. 

(6) Monitoring equipment for 

temperature, pressure, volumetric flow 

rate, mass flow rate, and conductivity 

must be capable of measuring the 

appropriate parameter over a range that 

extends at least 20 percent beyond the 

normal expected operating range of 

values for that parameter. The data 

recording system associated with 

affected CPMS must have a resolution 

that is equal to or better than one-half 

of the required system accuracy. 

(d) Establish operating limit. For each 

operating parameter that must be 

monitored in § 63.11925(c) for process 

vent control devices, in § 63.11960(c) for 

resin strippers, and in § 63.11975(a) for 

wastewater treatment processes, you 

must establish an operating limit as 

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(6) of this section. You must establish 

each operating limit as an operating 

parameter range, minimum operating 

parameter level, or maximum operating 

parameter level as specified in Table 6 

to this subpart. Where this subpart does 

not specify which format to use for your 

operating limit (e.g., operating range or 

minimum operating level), you must 

determine which format is best to 

establish proper operation of the control 

device, resin stripper, or treatment 

process such that you are meeting the 

emission limits specified in Table 1, 2, 

or 3 to this subpart. 

(1) For process vent control devices, 

the operating limit established for each 

monitored parameter specified in 

§ 63.11940 must be based on the 

operating parameter values recorded 

during any performance test conducted 

to demonstrate compliance in 

§ 63.11925(d)(4) and (e)(4) and may be 

supplemented by engineering 

assessments and/or manufacturer’s 

recommendations. You are not required 

to conduct performance tests over the 

entire range of allowed operating 

parameter values. The established 

operating limit must represent the 

conditions for which the control device 

is meeting the emission limits specified 

in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. 

(2) For resin strippers, the operating 

limit established for each monitoring 

parameter specified in § 63.11960(c) 

must be based on the operating 

parameter values recorded during any 

resin sampling event specified in 

§ 63.11960(b)(2) or (4) or 

§ 63.11960(c)(3) or (5). You may use 

engineering assessments and/or 

manufacturer’s recommendations to 

supplement the initial performance test 

results when establishing the operating 

limit. The established operating limit 

must represent the conditions for which 

the resin stripper is meeting the 

emission limits specified in Table 1 or 

2 to this subpart. 

(3) For wastewater treatment 

processes treating a wastewater stream 

to achieve the vinyl chloride 

concentration specified in Table 3 to 

this subpart, the operating limit 

established for each monitored 

parameter specified in § 63.11975(a)(1) 

must be based on the operating 

parameter level recorded during any 

sampling event specified in 

§ 63.11970(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or 

§ 63.11975(a)(3). You may use 

engineering assessments and/or 

manufacturer’s recommendations to 

supplement the initial testing results 

when establishing the operating limit. 

The established operating limit must 

represent the conditions for which the 

treatment process is meeting the 

requirements specified in Table 3 to this 

subpart. 

(4) You must include as part of the 

notification of compliance status or the 

operating permit application or 

amendment, the information in 

paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iv) of this 

section, as applicable, for each process 

vent control device, resin stripper, and 

wastewater treatment process requiring 

operating limits. 

(i) Descriptions of monitoring devices 

and monitoring frequencies for each 

emission point and operating scenario. 

(ii) The established operating limit of 

the monitored parameter(s). 

(iii) The rationale for the established 

operating limit, including any data and 

calculations used to develop the 

operating limit and a description of why 

the operating limit indicates proper 

operation of the control device, resin 

stripper, or wastewater treatment 

process. 

(iv) The rationale used to determine 

which format to use for your operating 

limit (e.g., operating range, minimum 

operating level, or maximum operating 

level), where this subpart does not 

specify which format to use. 

(5) For batch processes, you may 

establish operating limits for individual 

batch emission episodes, including each 

distinct episode of process vent 

emissions or each individual type of 

batch process that generates wastewater, 

if applicable. You must provide 

rationale in a batch precompliance 

report as specified in § 63.11985(c)(2) 

instead of the notification of compliance 

status for the established operating 

limit. You must include any data and 

calculations used to develop the 

operating limits and a description of 

why each operating limit indicates 

proper operation of the control device 

during the specific batch emission 

episode, or of the wastewater treatment 

process or resin stripper during the 

individual batch operation generating 

wastewater or stripped resin. 

(6) If you elect to establish separate 

operating limits for different batch 

emission episodes within a batch 

process as specified in paragraph (d)(5) 

of this section, you must maintain daily 

records indicating each point at which 

you change from one operating limit to 

another, even if the monitoring duration 

for an operating limit is less than 15 

minutes. You must maintain a daily 

record according to § 63.11990(e)(4)(i). 

(e) Reduction of CPMS and CEMS 

data. You must reduce CEMS and CPMS 

data to 1-hour averages according to 

§ 63.8(g) to compute the average values 

for demonstrating compliance specified 

in §§ 63.11925(e)(3)(ii), 

63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 63.11960(c)(2), and 

63.11975(a)(2) for CEMS and CPMS, as 

applicable. 

§ 63.11940 What continuous monitoring 

requirements must I meet for control 

devices required to install CPMS to meet 

the emission limits for process vents? 

As required in § 63.11925(c), you 

must install and operate the applicable 

CPMS specified in paragraphs (a) 

through (i) of this section for each 

control device you use to comply with 

the emission limits for process vents in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. You must 

monitor, record, and calculate CPMS 

data averages as specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart. Paragraph (j) of this section 

provides an option to propose 

alternative monitoring parameters or 

procedures. 

(a) Flow indicator. If flow to a control 

device could be intermittent, you must 

install, calibrate, and operate a flow 

indicator at the inlet or outlet of the 

control device to identify periods of no 

flow. 

(b) Incinerator monitoring. If you are 

using an incinerator to meet an emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and 

you are required to use CPMS as 

specified in § 63.11925(c), you must 

equip the incinerator with the 

monitoring equipment specified in 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29575 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(1) If an incinerator other than a 

catalytic incinerator is used, you must 

install a temperature monitoring device 

in the fire box or in the ductwork 

immediately downstream of the fire box 

in a position before any substantial heat 

exchange occurs. 

(2) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b)(3) of this section, where a catalytic 

incinerator is used, you must install 

temperature monitoring devices in the 

gas stream immediately before and after 

the catalyst bed. You must monitor the 

temperature differential across the 

catalyst bed. 

(3) Instead of complying with 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section, and if 

the temperature differential between the 

inlet and outlet of the catalytic 

incinerator during normal operating 

conditions is less than 10 degrees 

Celsius (18 degrees Fahrenheit), you 

may elect to monitor the inlet 

temperature and conduct catalyst 

checks as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) You must conduct annual sampling 

and analysis of the catalyst activity (i.e., 

conversion efficiency) following the 

manufacturer’s or catalyst supplier’s 

recommended procedures. If problems 

are found during the catalyst activity 

test, you must replace the catalyst bed 

or take other corrective action consistent 

with the manufacturer’s 

recommendations within 15 days or by 

the next time any process vent stream is 

collected by the control device, 

whichever is sooner. 

(ii) You must conduct annual internal 

inspections of the catalyst bed to check 

for fouling, plugging, or mechanical 

breakdown. You must also inspect the 

bed for channeling, abrasion, and 

settling. If problems are found during 

the annual internal inspection of the 

catalyst, you must replace the catalyst 

bed or take other corrective action 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

recommendations within 15 days or by 

the next time any process vent stream is 

collected by the control device, 

whichever is later. If the catalyst bed is 

replaced and is not of like or better kind 

and quality as the old catalyst then you 

must conduct a new performance test 

according to § 63.11945 to determine 

destruction efficiency. If a catalyst bed 

is replaced and the replacement catalyst 

is of like or better kind and quality as 

the old catalyst, then a new performance 

test to determine destruction efficiency 

is not required. 

(c) Absorber and acid gas scrubber 

monitoring. If you are using an absorber 

or acid gas scrubber to meet an emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and 

you are required to use CPMS as 

specified in § 63.11925(c), you must 

install the monitoring equipment 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through 

(3) of this section. 

(1) Install and operate the monitoring 

equipment as specified in either 

paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. 

(i) A flow meter to monitor the 

absorber or acid gas scrubber influent 

liquid flow. 

(ii) A flow meter to monitor the 

absorber or acid gas scrubber influent 

liquid flow and the gas stream flow 

using one of the procedures specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(A), (B), or (C) of this 

section. You must monitor the liquid-togas ratio determined by dividing the 

flow rate of the absorber or acid gas 

scrubber influent by the gas flow rate. 

The units of measure must be consistent 

with those used to calculate this ratio 

during the performance test. 

(A) Determine gas stream flow using 

the design blower capacity, with 

appropriate adjustments for pressure 

drop. 

(B) Measure the gas stream flow at the 

absorber or acid gas scrubber inlet. 

(C) If you have previously determined 

compliance for a scrubber that requires 

a determination of the liquid-to-gas 

ratio, you may use the results of that test 

provided the test conditions are 

representative of current operation. 

(2) Install and operate the monitoring 

equipment as specified in either 

paragraph (c)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) Install and operate pressure gauges 

at the inlet and outlet of the absorber or 

acid gas scrubber to monitor the 

pressure drop through the absorber or 

acid gas scrubber. 

(ii) If the difference in the inlet gas 

stream temperature and the inlet liquid 

stream temperature is greater than 38 

degrees Celsius, you may install and 

operate a temperature monitoring device 

at the scrubber gas stream exit. 

(iii) If the difference between the 

specific gravity of the scrubber effluent 

scrubbing fluid and specific gravity of 

the scrubber inlet scrubbing fluid is 

greater than or equal to 0.02 specific 

gravity units, you may install and 

operate a specific gravity monitoring 

device on the inlet and outlet of the 

scrubber. 

(3) If the scrubbing liquid is a reactant 

(e.g., lime, ammonia hydroxide), you 

must install and operate one of the 

devices listed in either paragraph 

(c)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section. 

(i) A pH monitoring device to monitor 

the pH of the scrubber liquid effluent. 

(ii) A caustic strength monitoring 

device to monitor the caustic strength of 

the scrubber liquid effluent. 

(iii) A conductivity monitoring device 

to monitor the conductivity of the 

scrubber liquid effluent. 

(d) Regenerative adsorber monitoring. 

If you are using a regenerative adsorber 

to meet an emission limit in Table 1 or 

2 to this subpart and you are required 

to use CPMS as specified in 

§ 63.11925(c), you must install and 

operate the applicable monitoring 

equipment listed in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (5) of this section, and comply 

with the requirements in paragraphs 

(d)(6) and (7) of this section. If the 

adsorption system water is deemed as 

wastewater or process vents as specified 

in § 63.11935, it is subject to the 

requirements in this subpart. 

(1) For non-vacuum regeneration 

systems, an integrating regeneration 

stream flow monitoring device having 

an accuracy of ±10 percent, capable of 

recording the total regeneration stream 

mass for each regeneration cycle. For 

non-vacuum regeneration systems, an 

integrating regeneration stream flow 

monitoring device capable of 

continuously recording the total 

regeneration stream mass flow for each 

regeneration cycle. 

(2) For non-vacuum regeneration 

systems, an adsorber bed temperature 

monitoring device, capable of 

continuously recording the adsorber bed 

temperature after each regeneration and 

within 15 minutes of completing any 

temperature regulation (cooling or 

warming to bring bed temperature closer 

to vent gas temperature) portion of the 

regeneration cycle. 

(3) For non-vacuum and non-steam 

regeneration systems, an adsorber bed 

temperature monitoring device capable 

of continuously recording the bed 

temperature during regeneration, except 

during any temperature regulating 

(cooling or warming to bring bed 

temperature closer to vent gas 

temperature) portion of the regeneration 

cycle. 

(4) For a vacuum regeneration system, 

a pressure transmitter installed in the 

vacuum pump suction line capable of 

continuously recording the vacuum 

level for each minute during 

regeneration. You must establish a 

minimum target and a length of time at 

which the vacuum must be below the 

minimum target during regeneration. 

(5) A device capable of monitoring the 

regeneration frequency (i.e., operating 

time since last regeneration) and 

duration. 

(6) You must perform a verification of 

the adsorber during each day of 

operation. The verification must be 

through visual observation or through 

an automated alarm or shutdown system 

that monitors and records system 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29576 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

operational parameters. The verification 

must verify that the adsorber is 

operating with proper valve sequencing 

and cycle time. 

(7) You must conduct weekly 

measurements of the carbon bed outlet 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration, as specified in this 

paragraph (d)(7), over the last 5 minutes 

of an adsorption cycle for each carbon 

bed. For regeneration cycles longer than 

1 week, you must perform the 

measurement over the last 5 minutes of 

each adsorption cycle for each carbon 

bed. The outlet concentration of volatile 

organic compounds must be measured 

using a portable analyzer, in accordance 

with Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A–7, for open-ended lines. 

Alternatively, outlet concentration of 

HAP(s) may be measured using 

chromatographic analysis using Method 

18 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–6. 

(e) Non-regenerative adsorber 

monitoring. If you are using a nonregenerative adsorber, or canister type 

system that is sent off site for 

regeneration or disposal, to meet an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart and you are required to use 

CPMS as specified in § 63.11925(c), you 

must install a system of dual adsorber 

units in series and conduct the 

monitoring and bed replacement as 

specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through 

(4) of this section. 

(1) Establish the average adsorber bed 

life by conducting daily monitoring of 

the outlet volatile organic compound or 

HAP concentration, as specified in this 

paragraph (e)(1), of the first adsorber 

bed in series until breakthrough occurs 

for the first three adsorber bed changeouts. The outlet concentration of 

volatile organic compounds must be 

measured using a portable analyzer, in 

accordance with Method 21 at 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A–7, for open-ended 

lines. Alternatively, outlet concentration 

of HAP may be measured using 

chromatographic analysis using Method 

18 at 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A–6. 

Breakthrough of the bed is defined as 

the time when the level of HAP detected 

is at the highest concentration allowed 

to be discharged from the adsorber 

system. 

(2) Once the average life of the bed is 

determined, conduct ongoing 

monitoring as specified in paragraphs 

(e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. 

(i) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(e)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section, conduct 

daily monitoring of the adsorber bed 

outlet volatile organic compound or 

HAP concentration, as specified in 

paragraph (e)(1) of this section. 

(ii) You may conduct monthly 

monitoring if the adsorbent has more 

than 2 months of life remaining, as 

determined by the average primary 

adsorber bed life, established in 

paragraph (e)(1) of this section, and the 

date the adsorbent was last replaced. 

(iii) You may conduct weekly 

monitoring if the adsorbent has more 

than 2 weeks of life remaining, as 

determined by the average primary 

adsorber bed life, established in 

paragraph (e)(1) of this section, and the 

date the adsorbent was last replaced. 

(3) The first adsorber in series must be 

replaced immediately when 

breakthrough is detected between the 

first and second adsorber. The original 

second adsorber (or a fresh canister) will 

become the new first adsorber and a 

fresh adsorber will become the second 

adsorber. For purposes of this paragraph 

(e)(3), ‘‘immediately’’ means within 8 

hours of the detection of a breakthrough 

for adsorbers of 55 gallons or less, and 

within 24 hours of the detection of a 

breakthrough for adsorbers greater than 

55 gallons. 

(4) In lieu of replacing the first 

adsorber immediately, you may elect to 

monitor the outlet of the second canister 

beginning on the day the breakthrough 

between the first and second canister is 

identified and each day thereafter. This 

daily monitoring must continue until 

the first canister is replaced. If the 

constituent being monitored is detected 

at the outlet of the second canister 

during this period of daily monitoring, 

both canisters must be replaced within 

8 hours of the time of detection of 

volatile organic compounds or HAP at 

90 percent of the allowed level (90 

percent of breakthrough definition). 

(f) Condenser monitoring. If you are 

using a condenser to meet an emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and 

you are required to use CPMS as 

specified in § 63.11925(c), you must 

install and operate a condenser exit gas 

temperature monitoring device. 

(g) Sorbent injection monitoring. If 

you are using sorbent injection as an 

emission control technique to comply 

with an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart and you are required to 

use CPMS as specified in § 63.11925(c), 

you must equip sorbent injection 

systems with the monitoring equipment 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through 

(3) of this section, as applicable. You 

must also meet the requirements in 

paragraph (h) of this section for the 

fabric filters used for sorbent collection. 

(1) A flow meter to monitor the rate 

of sorbent injection. 

(2) A flow meter to monitor the 

sorbent injection system carrier gas flow 

rate. 

(3) You must install and operate a 

temperature monitoring device to 

monitor the temperature in the 

ductwork immediately downstream of 

the fire box of the combustion device. 

Also, if you are using a particulate 

matter control device upstream of the 

adsorbent injection system, you must 

install and operate a temperature 

monitoring device to monitor the 

temperature in the ductwork 

immediately downstream of the 

particulate matter control device. 

(h) Fabric filter monitoring. If you are 

using a fabric filter to meet an emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and 

you are required to use CPMS as 

specified in § 63.11925(c), you must 

equip the fabric filter with a bag leak 

detection system that meets the 

requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) 

through (11) of this section. You must 

conduct the performance evaluation 

specified in paragraph (h)(12) of this 

section. 

(1) Each bag leak detection system 

must be installed, operated, calibrated, 

and maintained in a manner consistent 

with the manufacturer’s written 

specifications and recommendations 

and in accordance with the guidance 

provided in Fabric Filter Bag Leak 

Detection Guidance, EPA–454/R–98– 

015, September 1997 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14) such that the 

alarm does not sound more than 5 

percent of the operating time during a 

6-month period. You must calculate the 

alarm time as specified in paragraphs 

(h)(1)(i) through (iv). 

(i) If inspection of the fabric filter 

demonstrates that no corrective action is 

required, no alarm time is counted. 

(ii) If corrective action is required, 

each alarm time shall be counted as a 

minimum of 1 hour. 

(iii) If you take longer than 1 hour to 

initiate corrective action, each alarm 

time (i.e., time that the alarm sounds) is 

counted as the actual amount of time 

taken by you to initiate corrective 

action. 

(iv) Your maximum alarm time is 

equal to 5 percent of the operating time 

during a 6-month period. 

(2) The bag leak detection system 

must be certified by the manufacturer to 

be capable of detecting particulate 

matter emissions at concentrations of 10 

milligrams per actual cubic meter or 

less. 

(3) The bag leak detection system 

sensor must provide output of relative 

or absolute particulate matter loadings. 

(4) The bag leak detection system 

must be equipped with a device to 

continuously record the output signal 

from the sensor. 

(5) The bag leak detection system 

must be equipped with an alarm system 

that will alert an operator automatically 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29577 

when an increase in particulate matter 

emissions over a preset level is detected. 

The alarm must be located such that the 

alert is detected and recognized easily 

by an operator. 

(6) For positive pressure fabric filter 

systems that do not duct all 

compartments of cells to a common 

stack, a bag leak detection system must 

be installed in each fabric filter 

compartment or cell. If a negative 

pressure or induced air filter is used, the 

bag leak detector must be installed 

downstream of the fabric filter. If 

multiple bag leak detectors are required, 

the system’s instrumentation and alarm 

may be shared among detectors. 

(7) Calibration of the bag leak 

detection system must, at a minimum, 

consist of establishing the relative 

baseline output level by adjusting the 

range and the averaging period of the 

device and establishing the alarm set 

points and the alarm delay time. 

(8) Following initial adjustment, you 

must not adjust the sensitivity or range, 

averaging period, alarm set points, or 

alarm delay time, except as established 

in an operation and maintenance plan 

required in paragraph (h)(10) of this 

section that is to be submitted with the 

notification of compliance status report. 

In no event may the sensitivity be 

increased more than 100 percent or 

decreased by more than 50 percent over 

a 365-day period unless such 

adjustment follows a complete baghouse 

inspection that demonstrates the 

baghouse is in good operating condition. 

(9) If the alert on a bag leak detection 

system is triggered, you must, within 1 

hour of an alarm, initiate the procedures 

to identify the cause of the alarm and 

take corrective action as specified in the 

corrective action plan required in 

paragraph (h)(11) of this section. 

(10) You must maintain an operation 

and maintenance plan describing the 

items in paragraphs (h)(10)(i) through 

(v) of this section. 

(i) Installation of the bag leak 

detection system. 

(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of 

the bag leak detection system, including 

how the alarm set-point will be 

established. 

(iii) Operation of the bag leak 

detection system, including quality 

assurance procedures. 

(iv) How the bag leak detection 

system will be maintained, including a 

routine maintenance schedule and spare 

parts inventory list. 

(v) How the bag leak detection system 

output will be recorded and stored. 

(11) You must maintain a corrective 

action plan describing corrective actions 

to be taken, and the timing of those 

actions when the particulate matter 

concentration exceeds the setpoint and 

activates the alarm. Corrective actions 

may include, but are not limited to the 

actions listed in paragraphs (h)(11)(i) 

through (vi) of this section. 

(i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air 

leaks, torn or broken bags or filter 

media, or any other conditions that may 

cause an increase in particulate matter 

emissions. 

(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter 

media. 

(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter 

media or otherwise repairing the control 

device. 

(iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter 

compartment. 

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection 

system probe or otherwise repairing the 

bag leak detection system. 

(vi) Shutting down the control device 

producing the particulate matter 

emissions. 

(12) You must conduct an initial 

performance evaluation of each 

continuous monitoring system and bag 

leak detection system, as applicable, in 

accordance with your quality control 

program site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan (or site-specific 

monitoring plan specified in 

§ 63.11935(c) for CPMS), according to 

§ 63.8(d). For the purposes of this 

subpart, the provisions of § 63.8(d), also 

apply to the bag leak detection system. 

(i) Other control devices. If you use a 

control device other than those listed in 

this subpart to comply with an emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and 

you are required to use CPMS as 

specified in § 63.11925(c), you must 

comply with the requirements as 

specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of 

this section. 

(1) Submit a description of the 

planned monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting procedures as required in 

§ 63.11985(b)(5)(iv). The Administrator 

will approve, deny, or modify the 

proposed monitoring, reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements as part of 

the review of the plan or through the 

review of the permit application or by 

other appropriate means. 

(2) You must establish operating 

limits for monitored parameters that are 

approved by the Administrator. To 

establish the operating limit, the 

information required in § 63.11935(d) 

must be submitted in the notification of 

compliance status report specified in 

§ 63.11985(a). 

(j) Alternatives to monitoring 

requirements. 

(1) You may request approval to use 

alternatives to the continuous operating 

parameter monitoring listed in this 

section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5). 

(2) You may request approval to 

monitor a different parameter than those 

established in § 63.11935(d) or to set 

unique monitoring parameters, as 

specified in § 63.11985(c)(6). Until 

permission to use an alternative 

monitoring procedure, method, or 

parameter has been granted by the 

Administrator, you remain subject to the 

requirements of this subpart. 

§ 63.11945 What performance testing 

requirements must I meet for process 

vents? 

(a) General. For each control device 

used to meet a total organic HAP, vinyl 

chloride, hydrogen chloride, and/or 

dioxin/furan emission limit for process 

vents in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you 

must conduct the initial and periodic 

performance tests required in 

§ 63.11925(d) and (e) and as specified in 

§ 63.11896 using the applicable test 

methods and procedures specified in 

Table 9 to this subpart and paragraphs 

(b) through (d) of this section. 

(b) Process operating conditions. You 

must conduct performance tests under 

the conditions specified in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (3) of this section, as 

applicable. Upon request, the owner or 

operator shall make available to the 

Administrator such records as may be 

necessary to determine the conditions of 

performance tests. 

(1) Continuous process vents. For 

continuous process vents, you must 

conduct all performance tests at 

maximum representative operating 

conditions for the process. For 

continuous compliance, you must 

operate the control device as close as 

possible to your operating limit(s) for 

the control device established during 

the initial or subsequent performance 

tests specified in § 63.11925(d) and (e). 

If an operating limit is a range, then you 

must operate the control device as close 

as possible to the maximum or 

minimum operating limit for the control 

device, whichever results in higher 

emissions (i.e., lower emission 

reduction). 

(2) Batch process operations. Testing 

must be conducted at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions as specified in 

paragraph (c) of this section. 

(3) Combination of both continuous 

and batch unit operations. You must 

conduct performance tests when the 

batch process vents are operating at 

absolute worst-case conditions or 

hypothetical worst-case conditions, as 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of 

this section, and at maximum 

representative operating conditions for 

the process. For continuous compliance, 

you must operate the control device as 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29578 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

close as possible to your operating 

limit(s) for the control device 

established during the initial or 

subsequent performance tests specified 

in § 63.11925 (d) and (e). If an operating 

limit is a range, then you must operate 

the control device as close as possible 

to the maximum or minimum operating 

limit for the control device, whichever 

results in higher emissions (i.e., lower 

emission reduction), unless the 

Administrator specifies or approves 

alternate operating conditions. 

(c) Batch worst-case conditions. The 

absolute worst-case conditions for batch 

process operations must be 

characterized by the criteria presented 

in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The 

hypothetical worst-case conditions for 

batch process operations must be 

characterized by the criteria presented 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. In all 

cases, a site-specific plan must be 

submitted to the Administrator for 

approval prior to testing in accordance 

with § 63.7(c). The test plan must 

include the emission profile described 

in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. 

(1) Absolute worst-case conditions. 

For batch process operations, absolute 

worst-case conditions are defined by the 

criteria presented in paragraph (c)(1)(i) 

of this section if the maximum load is 

the most challenging condition for the 

control device. Otherwise, absolute 

worst-case conditions are defined by the 

conditions in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this 

section. You must consider all relevant 

factors, including load and compoundspecific characteristics in defining 

absolute worst-case conditions. 

(i) A 1-hour period of time in which 

the inlet to the control device contains 

the highest HAP mass loading rate, in 

pounds per hour, capable of being 

vented to the control device. An 

emission profile as described in 

paragraph (c)(3) of this section must be 

used to identify the 1-hour period of 

maximum HAP loading. 

(ii) The period of time when the HAP 

loading or stream composition 

(including non-HAP) is most 

challenging for the control device. 

These conditions include, but are not 

limited to the following: 

(A) Periods when the stream contains 

the highest combined organic load, in 

pounds per hour, described by the 

emission profiles in paragraph (c)(3) of 

this section. 

(B) Periods when the streams contain 

HAP constituents that approach limits 

of solubility for scrubbing media. 

(C) Periods when the streams contain 

HAP constituents that approach limits 

of adsorptivity for adsorption systems. 

(2) Hypothetical worst-case 

conditions. For batch process 

operations, hypothetical worst-case 

conditions are simulated test conditions 

that, at a minimum, contain the highest 

hourly HAP load of emissions that 

would be predicted to be vented to the 

control device from the emissions 

profile described in paragraphs (c)(3)(ii) 

or (iii) of this section. 

(3) Emission profile. For batch process 

operations, you must develop an 

emission profile for the vent to the 

control device that describes the 

characteristics of the vent stream at the 

inlet to the control device under worstcase conditions. The emission profile 

must be developed based on any one of 

the procedures described in paragraphs 

(c)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section. 

(i) Emission profile by process. The 

emission profile must consider all batch 

emission episodes that could contribute 

to the vent stack for a period of time that 

is sufficient to include all processes 

venting to the stack and must consider 

production scheduling. The profile must 

describe the HAP load to the device that 

equals the highest sum of emissions 

from the episodes that can vent to the 

control device in any given hour. 

Emissions per episode must be 

calculated using the procedures 

specified in § 63.11950. Emissions per 

episode must be divided by the duration 

of the episode only if the duration of the 

episode is longer than 1 hour. 

(ii) Emission profile by equipment. 

The emission profile must consist of 

emissions that meet or exceed the 

highest emissions, in pounds per hour 

that would be expected under actual 

processing conditions. The profile must 

describe equipment configurations used 

to generate the emission events, 

volatility of materials processed in the 

equipment, and the rationale used to 

identify and characterize the emission 

events. The emissions may be based on 

using a compound more volatile than 

compounds actually used in the 

process(es), and the emissions may be 

generated from all equipment in the 

process(es) or only selected equipment. 

(iii) Emission profile by capture and 

control device limitation. The emission 

profile must consider the capture and 

control system limitations and the 

highest emissions, in pounds per hour 

that can be routed to the control device, 

based on maximum flowrate and 

concentrations possible because of 

limitations on conveyance and control 

equipment (e.g., fans and lower 

explosive level alarms). 

(d) Concentration correction 

calculation. If a combustion device is 

the control device and supplemental 

combustion air is used to combust the 

emissions, the concentration of total 

organic HAP, vinyl chloride, and 

hydrogen chloride must be corrected as 

specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of 

this section. If a control device other 

than a combustion device is used to 

comply with an outlet concentration 

emission limit for batch process vents, 

you must correct the actual 

concentration for supplemental gases as 

specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section. 

(1) Determine the concentration of 

total organic HAP, vinyl chloride, or 

hydrogen chloride corrected to 3- 

percent oxygen (Cc) using Equation 1 of 

this section. 

Where: 

Cc = Concentration of total organic HAP, 

vinyl chloride, or hydrogen chloride 

corrected to 3-percent oxygen, dry basis, 

parts per million by volume. 

Cm = Concentration of total organic HAP, 

vinyl chloride, or hydrogen chloride, dry 

basis, parts per million by volume. 

%O2d = Concentration of oxygen, dry basis, 

percentage by volume. 

(2) To determine the oxygen 

concentration, you must use the 

emission rate correction factor (or 

excess air), integrated sampling and 

analysis procedures of Method 3, 3A, or 

3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–2, or 

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, ‘‘Flue and 

Exhaust Gas Analyses’’ [Part 10, 

Instruments and Apparatus] 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14). 

(3) Correct the measured 

concentration for supplemental gases 

using Equation 2 of this section. Process 

knowledge and representative operating 

data may be used to determine the 

fraction of the total flow due to 

supplemental gas. 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.045</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29579 

Where: 

Ca = Corrected outlet concentration of HAP, 

dry basis, parts per million by volume 

(ppmv). 

Cm = Actual concentration of HAP measured 

at control device outlet, dry basis, ppmv. 

Qa = Total volumetric flow rate of all gas 

streams vented to the control device, 

except supplemental gases. 

Qs = total volumetric flow rate of 

supplemental gases. 

§ 63.11950 What emissions calculations 

must I use for an emission profile by 

process of my batch process operation? 

Except as specified in paragraph (i) of 

this section, if you choose to develop an 

emission profile by process for your 

batch process operation as specified in 

§ 63.11945(c)(3)(i) when determining 

your absolute worst-case conditions, 

you must calculate emissions from 

episodes caused by vapor displacement, 

purging a partially filled vessel, heating, 

depressurization, vacuum operations, 

gas evolution, air drying, or empty 

vessel purging, using the applicable 

procedures in paragraphs (a) through (h) 

of this section. 

(a) Vapor displacement. You must 

calculate emissions from vapor 

displacement due to transfer of material 

using Equation 3 of this section. 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP emitted. 

V = Volume of gas displaced from the vessel. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; 

absolute. 

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP. 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

(b) Gas sweep of a partially filled 

vessel. You must calculate emissions 

from purging a partially filled vessel 

using Equation 4 of this section. The 

pressure of the vessel vapor space may 

be set equal to 760 millimeters of 

mercury (mmHg). You must multiply 

the HAP partial pressure in Equation 4 

of this section by a HAP-specific 

saturation factor determined in 

accordance with Equations 5 through 7 

of this section. Solve Equation 5 of this 

section iteratively beginning with 

saturation factors (in the right-hand side 

of the equation) of 1.0 for each 

condensable compound. Stop iterating 

when the calculated saturation factors 

for all compounds are the same to two 

significant figures for subsequent 

iterations. Note that for multicomponent emission streams, saturation 

factors must be calculated for all 

condensable compounds, not just the 

HAP. 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP emitted. 

V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable 

gas at the temperature and pressure of 

the vessel vapor space. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; 

absolute. 

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

at saturated conditions. 

Pj = Partial pressure of individual 

condensable compounds (including 

HAP) at saturated conditions. 

PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space. 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP. 

t = Time of purge. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

j = Identifier for a condensable compound. 

m = Number of condensable compounds 

(including HAP) in the emission stream. 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.046</GPH> EP20MY11.047</GPH> EP20MY11.048</GPH>
29580 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Where: 

Si = Saturation factor for individual 

condensable compounds. 

Pi = Partial pressure of individual 

condensable compounds at saturated 

conditions. 

PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space. 

A = Surface area of liquid. 

V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable 

gas. 

Vi

sat = Volumetric flow rate of individual 

condensable compounds at saturated 

vapor pressure. 

Ki = Mass transfer coefficient of individual 

condensable compounds in the emission 

stream. 

Ko = Mass transfer coefficient of reference 

compound (e.g., 0.83 cm/s for water). 

Mo = Molecular weight of reference 

compound (e.g., 18.02 for water). 

Mi = Molecular weight of individual 

condensable compounds in the emission 

stream. 

n = Number of condensable compounds in 

the emission stream. 

(c) Heating. You must calculate 

emissions caused by the heating of a 

vessel to a temperature lower than the 

boiling point using the procedures in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section. If the 

contents of a vessel are heated to the 

boiling point, you must calculate 

emissions using the procedures in 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section. 

(1) If the final temperature to which 

the vessel contents are heated is lower 

than the boiling point of the HAP in the 

vessel, you must calculate the mass of 

HAP emitted per episode using 

Equation 8 of this section. The average 

gas space molar volume during the 

heating process is calculated using 

Equation 9 of this section. The 

difference in the number of moles of 

condensable in the vessel headspace 

between the initial and final 

temperatures is calculated using 

Equation 10 of this section. 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP vapor displaced from the 

vessel being heated. 

Navg = Average gas space molar volume 

during the heating process. 

PT = Total pressure in the vessel. 

Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

compounds at initial temperature (T1). 

Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

compounds at final temperature (T2). 

MWHAP = Average molecular weight of the 

HAP compounds calculated using 

Equation 13 of this section. 

ni,1 = Number of moles of condensable in the 

vessel headspace at initial temperature 

(T1). 

ni,2 = Number of moles of condensable in the 

vessel headspace at final temperature 

(T2). 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

ln = Natural logarithm. 

Where: 

Navg = Average gas space molar volume 

during the heating process. 

V = Volume of free space in vessel. 

PT = Total pressure in the vessel. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T1 = Initial temperature of the vessel. 

T2 = Final temperature of the vessel. 

Where: 

V = Volume of free space in vessel. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T1 = Initial temperature in the vessel. 

T2 = Final temperature in the vessel. 

Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

compounds at T1. 

Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

compounds at T2. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.049</GPH> EP20MY11.050</GPH> EP20MY11.051</GPH> EP20MY11.052</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29581 

(2) If the final temperature to which 

the vessel contents are heated is at the 

boiling point or higher, you must 

calculate emissions using the procedure 

in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this 

section. 

(i) To calculate the emissions from 

heating to the boiling point use 

Equations 11, 12, and 13 of this section. 

(Note that Pa2 = 0 in the calculation of 

Dh in Equation 12 of this section.) 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP emitted. 

Dh = The number of moles of 

noncondensable displaced from the 

vessel, as calculated using Equation 12 of 

this section. 

PT = Pressure in the receiver. 

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

determined at the exit temperature of the 

condenser or at the conditions of the 

dedicated receiver. 

Pj = Partial pressure of the individual 

condensable (including HAP) 

determined at the exit temperature of the 

condenser or at the conditions of the 

dedicated receiver. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

j = Identifier for a condensable compound. 

MWHAP = The average molecular weight of 

HAP in vapor exiting the dedicated 

receiver, as calculated using Equation 13 

of this section with partial pressures 

determined at the exit temperature and 

exit pressure conditions of the condenser 

or at the conditions of the dedicated 

receiver. 

m = Number of condensable compounds 

(including HAP) in the emission stream. 

Where: 

Dh = Number of moles of noncondensable gas 

displaced from the vessel. 

V = Volume of free space in the vessel. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T1 = Initial temperature of vessel contents, 

absolute. 

T2 = Final temperature of vessel contents, 

absolute. 

Pan = Partial pressure of noncondensable gas 

in the vessel headspace at initial (n=1) 

and final (n=2) temperature. 

MWHAP = The average molecular weight of 

HAP in vapor exiting the dedicated 

receiver. 

(Pi)Tn = Partial pressure of each HAP in the 

vessel headspace at initial (T1) and final 

(T2) temperature of the receiver. 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

(ii) While boiling, the vessel must be 

operated with a properly operated 

process condenser. An initial 

demonstration that a process condenser 

is properly operated must be conducted 

during the boiling operation and 

documented in the notification of 

compliance status report described in 

§ 63.11985(a). You must either measure 

the liquid temperature in the receiver or 

the temperature of the gas stream exiting 

the condenser and show it is less than 

the boiling or bubble point of the 

HAP(s) in the vessel; or perform a 

material balance around the vessel and 

condenser and show that at least 99 

percent of the recovered HAP vaporized 

while boiling is condensed. This 

demonstration is not required if the 

process condenser is followed by a 

condenser acting as a control device or 

if the control device is monitored using 

a CEMS. 

(d) Depressurization. You must 

calculate emissions from 

depressurization using Equation 14 of 

this section. 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.053</GPH> EP20MY11.054</GPH> EP20MY11.055</GPH> EP20MY11.056</GPH>
29582 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Where: 

E = Emissions. 

V = Free volume in vessel being 

depressurized. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T = Temperature of the vessel, absolute. 

P1 = Initial pressure in the vessel. 

P2 = Final pressure in the vessel. 

Pj = Partial pressure of the individual 

condensable compounds (including 

HAP). 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP compounds. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

m = Number of condensable compounds 

(including HAP) in the emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

j = Identifier for a condensable compound. 

ln = Natural logarithm. 

(e) Vacuum systems. You must 

calculate emissions from vacuum 

systems using Equation 15 of this 

section if the air leakage rate is known 

or can be approximated. The receiving 

vessel is part of the vacuum system for 

purposes of this subpart. 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP emitted. 

PT = Absolute pressure of receiving vessel or 

ejector outlet conditions, if there is no 

receiver. 

Pi = Partial pressure of the HAP at the 

receiver temperature or the ejector outlet 

conditions. 

Pj = Partial pressure of condensable 

(including HAP) at the receiver 

temperature or the ejector outlet 

conditions. 

La = Total air leak rate in the system, mass/ 

time. 

MWnc = Molecular weight of noncondensable 

gas. 

t = Time of vacuum operation. 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP in the emission stream, with HAP 

partial pressures calculated at the 

temperature of the receiver or ejector 

outlet, as appropriate. 

(f) Gas evolution. You must calculate 

emissions from gas evolution using 

Equation 15 in paragraph (e) of this 

section with mass flow rate of gas 

evolution, Wg, substituted for La. 

(g) Air drying. You must calculate 

emissions from air drying using 

Equation 16 of this section: 

Where: 

E = Mass of HAP emitted. 

B = Mass of dry solids. 

PS1 = HAP in material entering dryer, weight 

percent. 

PS2 = HAP in material exiting dryer, weight 

percent. 

(h) Empty vessel purging. You must 

calculate emissions from empty vessel 

purging using Equation 17 of this 

section (Note: The term e-Ft/v can be 

assumed to be 0): 

Where: 

V = Volume of empty vessel. 

R = Ideal gas law constant. 

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; 

absolute. 

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP 

at the beginning of the purge. 

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual 

HAP. 

F = Flow rate of the purge gas. 

t = Duration of the purge. 

n = Number of HAP compounds in the 

emission stream. 

i = Identifier for a HAP compound. 

(i) Engineering assessments. You must 

conduct an engineering assessment to 

calculate HAP emissions for each batch 

emission episode that is not due to 

vapor displacement, partially filled 

vessel purging, heating, 

depressurization, vacuum operations, 

gas evolution, air drying, or empty 

vessel purging. An engineering 

assessment may also be used to support 

a finding that the emissions estimation 

equations in this section are 

inappropriate. All data, assumptions, 

and procedures used in the engineering 

assessment must be documented, are 

subject to preapproval by the 

Administrator, and must be reported in 

the batch precompliance report. An 

engineering assessment may include, 

but is not limited to, the items listed in 

paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this 

section. 

(1) Previous test results provided the 

tests are representative of current 

operating practices at the process unit. 

(2) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data 

representative of the process under 

representative operating conditions. 

(3) Maximum flow rate, HAP emission 

rate, concentration, or other relevant 

parameter specified or implied within a 

permit limit applicable to the process 

vent. 

(4) Design analysis based on accepted 

chemical engineering principles, 

measurable process parameters, or 

physical or chemical laws or properties. 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.057</GPH> EP20MY11.058</GPH> EP20MY11.059</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29583 

Examples of analytical methods include, 

but are not limited to the following: 

(i) Use of material balances based on 

process stoichiometry to estimate 

maximum organic HAP concentrations. 

(ii) Estimation of maximum flow rate 

based on physical equipment design 

such as pump or blower capacities. 

(iii) Estimation of HAP concentrations 

based on saturation conditions. 

§ 63.11955 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

other emission sources? 

(a) For each process component 

(including pre-polymerization reactors 

used in the manufacture of bulk resins) 

that contains a gas, vapor, liquid, or 

solid material containing HAP, except 

for the process components specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this 

section, before opening the process 

component for any reason, the quantity 

of total HAP is to be reduced to an 

amount that occupies a volume of no 

more than 2.0 percent of the 

component’s containment volume or 25 

gallons, whichever is larger, at standard 

temperature and pressure. 

(1) Process components that, during 

opening, are vented to a closed vent 

system and control device meeting the 

requirements in §§ 63.11925 through 

63.11950. 

(2) Pressure relief devices meeting the 

requirements in § 63.11915(c). 

(3) Process vent bypasses meeting the 

requirements specified in § 63.11930(c). 

(b) Before opening a polymerization 

reactor for any reason, the quantity of 

vinyl chloride is not to exceed 0.04 

pounds per ton of PVC product, with 

the product determined on a dry solids 

basis. 

(c) Any gas or vapor HAP removed 

from a process component in 

accordance with paragraphs (a)(2) and 

(3) of this section is to be vented to a 

closed vent system and control device 

meeting the requirements in § 63.11925. 

§ 63.11956 What are my compliance 

requirements for ambient monitoring? 

You must operate a reliable and 

accurate vinyl chloride monitoring 

system for detection of major leaks and 

identification of the general area of the 

affected source where a leak is located. 

A vinyl chloride monitoring system 

means a device which obtains air 

samples from one or more points on a 

continuous sequential basis and 

analyzes the samples with gas 

chromatography or, if you assume that 

all hydrocarbons measured are vinyl 

chloride, analyzes the samples with 

infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion 

detection, or an equivalent or alternative 

method. You must operate the vinyl 

chloride monitoring system according to 

a program that you develop for your 

affected source. You must submit a 

description of the program to the 

Administrator within 45 days of your 

compliance date, unless a waiver of 

compliance is granted by the 

Administrator, or the program has been 

approved and the Administrator does 

not request a review of the program. 

Approval of a program will be granted 

by the Administrator provided the 

Administrator finds: 

(a) The location and number of points 

to be monitored and the frequency of 

monitoring provided for in the program 

are acceptable when they are compared 

with the number of pieces of equipment 

in vinyl chloride service and size and 

physical layout of the affected source. 

(b) It contains a definition of leak 

which is acceptable when compared 

with the background concentrations of 

vinyl chloride in the areas of the plant 

to be monitored by the vinyl chloride 

monitoring system. Measurements of 

background concentrations of vinyl 

chloride in the areas of the plant to be 

monitored by the vinyl chloride 

monitoring system are to be included 

with the description of the program. The 

definition of leak for a given plant may 

vary among the different areas within 

the plant and is also to change over time 

as background concentrations in the 

plant are reduced. 

(c) It contains an acceptable plan of 

action to be taken when a leak is 

detected. 

(d) It provides for an acceptable 

calibration and maintenance schedule 

for the vinyl chloride monitoring system 

and portable hydrocarbon detector. For 

the vinyl chloride monitoring system, a 

daily span check is to be conducted 

with a concentration of vinyl chloride 

equal to the concentration defined as a 

leak according to paragraph (b) of this 

section. The calibration is to be done 

with either: 

(1) A calibration gas mixture prepared 

from the gases specified in sections 

7.2.1 and 7.2.2 of Method 106 and in 

accordance with section 10.1 of Method 

106, or 

(2) A calibration gas cylinder standard 

containing the appropriate 

concentration of vinyl chloride. The gas 

composition of the calibration gas 

cylinder standard is to have been 

certified by the manufacturer. The 

manufacturer must have recommended 

a maximum shelf life for each cylinder 

so that the concentration does not 

change greater than ±5 percent from the 

certified value. The date of gas cylinder 

preparation, certified vinyl chloride 

concentration, and recommended 

maximum shelf life must have been 

affixed to the cylinder before shipment 

from the manufacturer to the buyer. If a 

gas chromatograph is used as the vinyl 

chloride monitoring system, these gas 

mixtures may be directly used to 

prepare a chromatograph calibration 

curve as described in Sections 8.1 and 

9.2 of Method 106. The requirements in 

Sections 7.2.3.1 and 7.2.3.2 of Method 

106 for certification of cylinder 

standards and for establishment and 

verification of calibration standards are 

to be followed. 

§ 63.11960 What are my initial and 

continuous compliance requirements for 

stripped resin? 

(a) Emission limits. You must meet 

the applicable vinyl chloride and total 

HAP emission limits for stripped resin 

specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. 

(b) Demonstration of initial 

compliance. For each stripped resin 

stream specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, you must meet the requirements 

in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this 

section to demonstrate initial 

compliance. You must demonstrate 

compliance for each resin stripper or for 

each group of resin strippers used to 

process the same type of resin. 

(1) For each resin stripper required to 

meet the emission limit for stripped 

resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you 

must prepare the site-specific 

monitoring plan specified in 

§ 63.11935(c)(1) for CPMS. You must 

install, operate, and maintain CPMS 

meeting the requirements of 

§ 63.11935(c) and capable of 

continuously monitoring the parameters 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section. You must conduct an initial 

site-specific performance evaluation test 

of each CPMS according to your sitespecific monitoring plan. 

(2) You must conduct an initial 

performance test for the resin stripper, 

measuring the concentration of vinyl 

chloride in the stripped resin at the 

outlet of each resin stripper as specified 

in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of 

this section. 

(i) Use the test method(s) and 

procedures specified in paragraph (d) of 

this section. 

(ii) Collect samples on a day when the 

PVCPU (or collection of PVCPUs, as 

applicable, if demonstrating compliance 

with a group of strippers) is producing 

the resin grade of which you 

manufacture the most, based on total 

mass of resin produced in the month 

preceding the sampling event. 

(iii) For continuous processes, collect 

1 grab sample for each 8 hours or per 

grade of PVC produced, whichever is 

more frequent, during a 24-hour 

sampling period. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29584 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

(iv) For batch processes, collect 1 grab 

sample for each batch during a 24-hour 

sampling period. Sampling must be 

completed immediately after stripping. 

(3) Demonstrate initial compliance 

with the vinyl chloride emission limit 

in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) 

of this section. 

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic 

average vinyl chloride concentration for 

each stripper for each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, using the vinyl chloride 

concentrations measured for the grab 

samples collected as specified in 

paragraph (b)(2)(iii) or (iv) of this 

section. 

(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the 

vinyl chloride emission limit in Table 1 

or 2 to this subpart based on the 24-hour 

arithmetic average concentration 

calculated in either paragraph 

(b)(3)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section. 

(A) If more than one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average vinyl chloride 

concentration for each stripper, or for 

each group of strippers used to process 

the same type of resin, using the 24- 

hour average vinyl chloride 

concentrations calculated in paragraph 

(b)(3)(i) of this section and the mass of 

each resin grade produced during the 

24-hour sampling period. 

(B) If only one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

event, use the 24-hour arithmetic 

average vinyl chloride concentration for 

the one resin grade in paragraph (b)(3)(i) 

of this section for each stripper or 

calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average 

vinyl chloride concentration for all 

strippers used to process the one grade 

of resin. 

(4) You must measure the 

concentration of total HAP in the 

stripped resin at the outlet of the resin 

stripper as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section. 

(i) Use the test method(s) and 

procedures specified in paragraph (d) of 

this section. 

(ii) Collect samples on a day when the 

PVCPU (or collection of PVCPUs, as 

applicable, if demonstrating compliance 

with a group of strippers) is producing 

the resin grade of which you 

manufacture the most, based on total 

mass of resin produced in the month 

preceding the sampling event. 

(iii) For continuous processes, you 

must collect 1 grab sample for each 8 

hours or per grade of PVC produced, 

whichever is more frequent, during a 

24-hour sampling period. 

(iv) For batch processes, you must 

collect 1 grab sample for each batch 

during a 24-hour sampling period. 

Sampling must be completed 

immediately after stripping. 

(5) Demonstrate initial compliance 

with the total HAP emission limit for 

stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic 

average total HAP concentration for 

each stripper for each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab 

samples collected in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) 

or (iv) of this section and the calculation 

procedures specified in paragraph (e) of 

this section. 

(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the 

total HAP emission limit for stripped 

resin in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart 

based on each 24-hour arithmetic 

average concentration calculated in 

either paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(A) or (B) of 

this section. 

(A) If more than one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for each stripper, or for 

each group of strippers used to process 

the same type of resin, using the 24- 

hour average total HAP concentrations 

calculated in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this 

section and the mass of each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period. 

(B) If only one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

event, use the 24-hour arithmetic 

average total HAP concentration for the 

one resin grade in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of 

this section for each stripper or 

calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average 

vinyl chloride concentration for all 

strippers used to process the one grade 

of resin. 

(6) During the initial vinyl chloride 

and total HAP performance tests 

specified in paragraphs (b)(2) and (4) of 

this section, you must collect the CPMS 

data specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this 

section. Using this CPMS data, you must 

establish an operating limit according to 

the procedures specified in 

§ 63.11935(d) for each applicable 

operating parameter specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this 

section. Each operating limit must be 

based on the data averaging period for 

compliance specified in Table 6 to this 

subpart using data collected at the 

minimum frequency specified in 

§§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and 

calculated using the data reduction 

method specified in § 63.11935(e). For a 

CPMS used on a batch operation, you 

may use a data averaging period based 

on an operating block in lieu of the 

averaging period specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart. 

(c) Demonstration of continuous 

compliance. For each stripped resin 

stream specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, you must meet the requirements 

in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this 

section to demonstrate continuous 

compliance. Compliance must be 

demonstrated for each resin stripper or 

for each group of resin strippers used to 

process the same type of resin. 

(1) For each resin stripper required to 

meet the emission limit for stripper 

resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you 

must operate and maintain CPMS 

meeting the requirements of 

§ 63.11935(c) and capable of 

continuously recording the operating 

parameters specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section, as 

applicable. You must conduct periodic 

site-specific CPMS performance 

evaluation tests according to your sitespecific monitoring plan and 

§ 63.11935(c). 

(i) For each resin steam stripper, you 

must monitor the ratio of steam feed rate 

to the flow rate of the resin entering the 

stripper and the temperature of the 

stripped resin exiting the stripper before 

any cooling process. The ratio of steam 

feed rate to entering resin flow rate is 

calculated by dividing the steam feed 

rate by the resin flow rate. 

(ii) For each resin vacuum stripper, 

you must monitor the vacuum level 

maintained in the column, the 

maximum flow rate of the resin entering 

the stripper, and the temperature of the 

stripped resin exiting the stripper before 

any cooling process. If steam is used, 

you must monitor the ratio of steam feed 

rate to the flow rate of the resin entering 

the resin stripper instead of the 

maximum flow rate of the resin entering 

the resin stripper. The ratio of steam 

feed rate to entering resin flow rate is 

calculated by dividing the steam feed 

rate by the resin flow rate. 

(iii) If you are using process 

components other than a steam or 

vacuum stripper to meet a vinyl 

chloride or total HAP level specified for 

stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart, you must request approval to 

use an alternative process component by 

submitting to the Administrator the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section. 

(A) A description of the proposed 

stripping process. 

(B) A description of the operating 

parameter(s) to be monitored to ensure 

the stripping process is operated in 

conformance with its design and 

achieves the performance level as 

specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29585 

and an explanation of the criteria used 

to select the operating parameter(s). 

(C) A description of the methods and 

procedures that will be used to 

demonstrate that the parameter 

specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(B) of 

this section indicates proper operation 

of the resin stripper, the schedule for 

this demonstration, and a statement that 

you will establish an operating limit for 

the monitored operating parameter as 

part of the notification of compliance 

status report specified in § 63.11935(d). 

(iv) Alternatives to monitoring 

requirements. 

(A) You may request approval to use 

alternatives to the continuous operating 

parameter monitoring listed in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this 

section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5). 

(B) You may request approval to 

monitor a different operating parameter 

than those established in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section or to 

set a unique monitoring parameter, as 

specified in § 63.11985(c)(6). 

(C) Until permission to use an 

alternative operating procedure, 

method, or operating parameter has 

been granted by the Administrator, you 

remain subject to the requirements of 

this subpart. 

(2) You must ensure that each 

operating parameter monitored in 

paragraph (c)(1) through (4) of this 

section for the stripper meets the 

operating limit established in paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section. You must 

continuously determine the average 

value of each monitored operating 

parameter based on the data collection 

and reduction methods specified in 

§ 63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and the 

applicable data averaging period for 

resin strippers specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart for all periods the process 

is operating. You must follow the data 

measurement and recording frequencies 

and data averaging periods specified in 

Table 6 to this subpart. For a CPMS 

used on a batch operation, you may use 

a data averaging period based on an 

operating block in lieu of the averaging 

periods specified in Table 6 to this 

subpart. 

(3) On a daily basis, you must 

measure the concentration of vinyl 

chloride in the stripped resin at the 

outlet of the resin stripper for 

continuous processes, or immediately 

after stripping for batch processes, using 

the test method(s) and procedures 

specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section, and the procedures specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this 

section. 

(4) You must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the vinyl chloride 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart on a daily basis using the 

procedures specified for initial 

compliance in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and 

(ii) of this section. 

(5) On a monthly basis, you must 

measure the concentration of total HAP 

in the stripped resin at the outlet of the 

resin stripper for continuous processes, 

or immediately after stripping for batch 

processes, as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section. 

Individual sampling events may be 3 to 

5 weeks apart, but you must conduct a 

minimum of 12 sampling events per 

calendar year. 

(6) You must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart as specified in 

paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic 

average total HAP concentration for 

each stripper for each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab 

samples collected as specified in 

paragraph (b)(4)(iii) or (iv) of this 

section and the calculation procedures 

specified in paragraph (e) of this 

section. 

(ii) In the first 12 months following 

your demonstration of initial 

compliance in paragraph (b)(4) and (5) 

of this section, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the total 

HAP emission limit for stripped resin in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart on a 

monthly basis as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4) and (5) of this section. 

(iii) Beginning 13 months following 

your initial demonstration of 

compliance in paragraph (b)(5) of this 

section, demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart based on a 12-month 

rolling average concentration, calculated 

as the average of the 12 most recent 24- 

hour arithmetic average concentrations 

in either paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(A) or (B) of 

this section. 

(A) If more than one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for each stripper, or for 

each group of strippers used to process 

the same type of resin, using the 24- 

hour average total HAP concentrations 

calculated in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this 

section and the mass of each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

period. 

(B) If only one resin grade was 

produced during the 24-hour sampling 

event, use the arithmetic average total 

HAP concentration for the one resin 

grade in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this 

section for each stripper or calculate the 

24-hour arithmetic average vinyl 

chloride concentration for all strippers 

used to process the one grade of resin. 

(d) Performance test methods and 

procedures for determining 

concentration of vinyl chloride and total 

HAP. You must determine the 

concentration of vinyl chloride and total 

HAP using the test methods and 

procedures specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1) through (5) of this section. Upon 

request, the owner or operator shall 

make available to the Administrator 

such records as may be necessary to 

determine the conditions of 

performance tests. 

(1) You must conduct performance 

tests during maximum representative 

operating conditions for the process and 

when the resin stripper is operating as 

close as possible to your operating 

limits established during the initial 

performance test, as required in 

§ 63.11935(d)(2), or during a subsequent 

performance test, as provided in 

§ 63.11935(d)(2). If an operating limit is 

a range, then you must operate the 

stripper as close as possible to the 

maximum or minimum operating limit 

for the resin stripper, whichever results 

in higher emissions (i.e., lower emission 

reduction). If the resin stripper will be 

operating at several different sets of 

operating conditions, you must 

supplement the testing with additional 

testing, modeling and/or engineering 

assessments to demonstrate compliance 

with the operating limit. Alternative 

operating conditions may be used if 

specified or approved by the 

Administrator. 

(2) For measuring total HAP, you 

must propose a method in your test plan 

prepared in § 63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for 

conducting sampling and analysis using 

the methods specified in paragraphs 

(d)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. You 

must submit the test plan for approval 

as specified in § 63.8(d) and (e). 

(i) Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, 

appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, and 

transport. 

(ii) Method 8260B Volatile Organic 

Compounds by Gas Chromatography/ 

Mass spectrometry (GC/MS) in ‘‘Test 

Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, 

Physical/Chemical Methods,’’ Revision 

3, February 2007, EPA Publication No. 

SW–846, Third Edition (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14) for sample 

analysis. 

(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you 

must use Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, 

appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, 

transport, and analysis. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29586 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

(4) When using the methods in 

paragraphs (d)(2) and (3) of this section, 

for sample collection, preservation, 

transport, and analysis, you must 

minimize loss of HAP and maintain 

sample integrity. 

(5) For batch process operations, you 

must obtain samples when the batch 

process is operating at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions, as specified in 

§ 63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and the stripper 

is operating at conditions for the 

monitored operating parameters that 

achieve normal emission reduction. For 

combined continuous and batch process 

operations, you must obtain sample 

when the batch processes are operating 

at absolute worst-case conditions and 

the stripper is operating at conditions 

for the monitored operating parameters 

that achieve normal emission reduction. 

(e) Method for calculating total HAP 

concentration. For each stripped resin 

sample measured using the methods 

specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section, calculate the sum of the 

measured individual HAP compound 

concentrations by using Equation 1 to 

this section. 

Where: 

CHAP = Concentration of total HAP 

compounds in the stripped resin, in 

parts per million by weight (ppmw). 

Ci = Concentration of each individually 

identified HAP compound in the 

stripped resin, in ppmw, where a value 

of zero should be used for any HAP 

concentration that is below the detection 

limit. 

§ 63.11965 What are my general 

compliance requirements for wastewater? 

(a) Initial control level determination. 

You must meet the control level (i.e., 

emission limit or standard) specified in 

Table 3 to this subpart for each 

wastewater stream. To determine the 

applicable control level for each 

wastewater stream, you must follow the 

procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) 

of this section. 

(1) You must measure the 

concentrations of vinyl chloride and 

total HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of this part as specified in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) You must collect wastewater 

samples at the location specified in 

paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) for vinyl chloride 

and paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) for total HAP 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this 

part. 

(A) For vinyl chloride, collect samples 

at the location that the wastewater 

stream is generated and prior to the 

wastewater stream being exposed to the 

atmosphere, stored, combined with any 

other liquid stream, treated (e.g., 

stripping, distillation, thin film 

evaporating), or discharged to a 

wastewater treatment plant. 

(B) For total HAP listed in Table 9 to 

subpart G of this part, collect samples at 

the point of determination, as defined in 

subpart G of this part. 

(ii) You must measure the 

concentration of vinyl chloride and total 

HAP (based on the HAP listed in Table 

9 to subpart G of this part) using the test 

methods and procedures specified in 

§ 63.11980(a) and Table 10 to this 

subpart and the calculation method 

specified in § 63.11980(b). 

(2) You must determine the annual 

average flow rate as specified in 

paragraph (d) of this section. 

(b) Requirements for wastewater 

streams that must be treated to reduce 

the vinyl chloride concentration. Each 

wastewater stream that has a vinyl 

chloride concentration equal to or 

greater than 10 parts per million by 

weight, determined pursuant to 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section must be 

treated to reduce the concentration of 

vinyl chloride at the outlet of the 

treatment process as specified in Table 

3 to this subpart. You must meet the 

wastewater treatment process 

requirements of either paragraph (b)(1) 

or (2) of this section. You must also 

meet the continuous compliance 

requirements specified in § 63.11975. 

(1) Route wastewater streams through 

hard piping from the point of generation 

directly to the treatment process and 

route the vent stream from the treatment 

process to a closed vent system and 

control device meeting the requirements 

of §§ 63.11925 through 63.11945. 

(2) Meet the requirements for 

wastewater tanks, surface 

impoundments, containers, individual 

drain systems, and oil/water separators 

used to manage the wastewater from the 

point of generation through the 

treatment process as specified in 

§§ 63.133 through 63.137 and all 

requirements of subpart G of this part 

referenced therein. 

(c) Requirements for wastewater 

streams that must be treated to reduce 

the concentration of the total HAP listed 

in Table 9 to subpart G of this part. For 

each wastewater stream that contains 

greater than or equal to 1,000 parts per 

million by weight total HAP in 

paragraph § 63.11970(a)(2) or 

§ 63.11975(d)(3), and has an annual 

average flow rate greater than or equal 

to 10 liters per minute in 

§ 63.11970(a)(2) or § 63.11975(e)(2), as 

determined pursuant to paragraphs 

(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section, you must 

meet the requirements in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (4) of this section. 

(1) Comply with the applicable 

requirements for wastewater tanks, 

surface impoundments, containers, 

individual drain systems, and oil/water 

separators as specified in §§ 63.133 

through 63.137. 

(2) Comply with the applicable 

requirements specified in § 63.138 for 

control of total HAP listed in Table 9 to 

subpart G of this part. Alternatively, you 

may elect to comply with the 

wastewater treatment provisions 

specified in § 63.132(g). 

(3) Comply with the applicable 

monitoring and inspection requirements 

specified in § 63.143. 

(4) Comply with the applicable 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements specified in §§ 63.146 and 

63.147. 

(d) Determination of the annual 

average flow rate. The annual average 

flow rate for the wastewater stream must 

be representative of actual or 

anticipated operation of the PVCPU 

generating the wastewater over a 

designated 12-month period. You must 

consider the total annual wastewater 

volume generated by the PVCPU. You 

must use one or more of the procedures 

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(3) of this section to determine the flow 

rate. Documentation to determine the 

annual average flow rate is not required 

for wastewater streams with an annual 

average flow rate of 10 liters per minute 

or greater. 

(1) Knowledge of the wastewater. You 

may use knowledge of the wastewater 

stream and/or the process to determine 

the annual average flow rate. You must 

use the maximum expected annual 

average production capacity of the 

process unit, knowledge of the process, 

and/or mass balance information to 

either: estimate directly the annual 

average wastewater flow rate; or 

estimate the total annual wastewater 

volume and then divide the total 

volume by 525,600 minutes in a year. 

When knowledge is used to determine 

the annual average flow rate, you must 

provide sufficient information to 

document the flow rate for wastewater 

streams determined to have an annual 

average flow rate of less than 10 liters 

per minute. 

(2) Historical records. You may use 

historical records to determine the 

annual average flow rate. Derive the 

highest annual average flow rate of 

wastewater from historical records 

representing the 5 most recent years of 

operation, or, if the process unit has 

been in service for less than 5 years but 

at least 1 year, from historical records 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.060</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29587 

representing the total operating life of 

the process unit. When historical 

records are used to determine the 

annual average flow rate, you must 

provide sufficient information to 

document the flow rate for wastewater 

streams determined to have an annual 

average flow rate of less than 10 liters 

per minute. 

(3) Measurements of flow rate. You 

may take measurements to determine 

the annual average flow rate. If you elect 

to measure flow rate, you must measure 

flow rate measurements at or near the 

point of determination, as defined in 

subpart G of this part. When 

measurement data are used to determine 

the annual average flow rate, you must 

provide sufficient information to 

document the flow rate measurements 

for wastewater streams determined to 

have an annual average flow rate of less 

than 10 liters per minute. 

§ 63.11970 What are my initial compliance 

requirements for wastewater? 

(a) Demonstration of initial 

compliance for wastewater streams that 

must be treated. For each wastewater 

stream that must be treated as specified 

in § 63.11965(b) and (c), you must meet 

the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (3) of this section, respectively, 

to demonstrate initial compliance. 

(1) For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated to reduce the vinyl 

chloride concentration limit specified in 

Table 3 to this subpart, and for which 

you elect to treat the stream according 

to § 63.11965(b)(1), you must follow the 

requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(i) 

through (iii) of this section. 

(i) For each wastewater treatment 

process, you must prepare the sitespecific monitoring plan specified in 

§ 63.11935(c) for CPMS. You must 

install, operate, and maintain CPMS 

meeting the requirements of § 63.11935 

and capable of continuously monitoring 

the parameters specified in 

§ 63.11975(a)(1). You must conduct an 

initial site-specific performance 

evaluation test of each CPMS according 

to your site-specific monitoring plan 

and § 63.11935(c)(2). 

(ii) You must conduct an initial 

performance test for the wastewater 

treatment process, measuring the 

concentration of vinyl chloride in the 

wastewater stream at the outlet of the 

wastewater treatment process before the 

wastewater is exposed to the 

atmosphere and using the test method(s) 

and procedures specified in 

§ 63.11980(a). 

(iii) During the initial performance 

test conducted as specified in paragraph 

(a)(1)(ii) of this section, you must use 

the CPMS data collected pursuant to 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section to 

establish an operating limit for the 

wastewater treatment process according 

to the procedures specified in 

§ 63.11935(d) for each operating 

parameter specified in § 63.11975(a)(1). 

Each operating limit must be based on 

the data averaging period for the 

wastewater treatment process specified 

in Table 6 to this subpart using data 

collected at the minimum frequency 

specified in §§ 63.11935(c)(2) and 

63.11890(c), and calculated using the 

data reduction method specified in 

§ 63.11935(e). For a CPMS used on a 

batch operation, you may use a data 

averaging period based on an operating 

block in lieu of the averaging period 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart. 

(2) For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated to meet the vinyl 

chloride emission limit in Table 3 to 

this subpart, and for which you elect to 

treat the stream according to 

§ 63.11965(b)(2), you must demonstrate 

initial compliance as specified in 

subpart G, as referenced in 

63.11965(b)(2). 

(3) For each wastewater stream that 

contains greater than or equal to 1,000 

parts per million by weight of total HAP 

and has an annual average flow rate 

greater than or equal to 10 liters per 

minute, determined using the 

procedures and methods specified in 

§ 63.11965(a)(1) and (2) respectively, 

you must demonstrate initial 

compliance as specified in subpart G, as 

referenced in § 63.11965(c). 

(b) Demonstration of initial 

compliance for wastewater streams that 

are not required to be treated for vinyl 

chloride. For each wastewater stream 

that has a vinyl chloride concentration 

less than 10 parts per million by weight, 

you must use the measurement 

specified in § 63.11965(a)(1) to 

demonstrate initial compliance. 

(c) Demonstration of initial 

compliance for wastewater streams that 

are not required to be treated for total 

HAP. You must follow the procedure in 

either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this 

section to demonstrate initial 

compliance. 

(1) For each wastewater stream that 

has a total HAP concentration of less 

than 1,000 parts per million by weight, 

you must use the measurement in 

§ 63.11965(a)(1)(i)(B) to demonstrate 

compliance. 

(2) For each wastewater stream that 

has an annual average flow rate of less 

than 10 liters per minute, you must use 

the flow rate initially determined as 

specified in § 63.11965(a)(2). 

§ 63.11975 What are my continuous 

compliance requirements for wastewater? 

For each wastewater stream that must 

be treated to reduce the concentration of 

vinyl chloride as specified in 

§ 63.11965(b)(1), you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in 

either paragraph (a) or (b) of this 

section. For each wastewater stream for 

which you initially determine in 

§ 63.11970(c) that treatment is not 

required to reduce total HAP 

concentration, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in 

paragraph (e) of this section. For each 

wastewater stream that must be treated 

to reduce the concentration of total HAP 

as specified in § 63.11965(c), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance as 

specified in paragraph (c) of this 

section. For each wastewater stream for 

which you initially determine in 

§ 63.11970(b) that treatment is not 

required to reduce the vinyl chloride 

concentration, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in 

paragraph (d) of this section. 

(a) For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated to reduce the 

concentration of vinyl chloride, and for 

which you elect to treat the stream 

according to § 63.11965(b)(1), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance as 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through 

(3) of this section. 

(1) For each wastewater treatment 

process, you must operate and maintain 

CPMS meeting the requirements of 

§ 63.11935(c) and capable of 

continuously recording the parameters 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through 

(iv) of this section, as applicable. You 

must conduct periodic site-specific 

CPMS performance evaluation tests 

according to your site-specific 

monitoring plan and § 63.11935(c). 

(i) For wastewater steam strippers, 

you must monitor the ratio of steam feed 

rate into the stripper to wastewater 

stream flow rate into the stripper and 

the temperature of the wastewater 

exiting the stripper before any cooling 

process. The steam feed to wastewater 

flow ratio is calculated by dividing the 

steam feed rate by the wastewater 

stream flow rate. You must follow the 

data measurement and recording 

frequencies and data averaging periods 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart. 

(ii) For wastewater vacuum strippers, 

you must monitor the vacuum level 

maintained in the column, the 

maximum flow rate of the wastewater 

stream, and the temperature of the 

wastewater exiting the stripper before 

any cooling process. If steam is used, 

you must monitor the ratio of steam feed 

rate into the stripper to wastewater 

stream flow rate into the stripper 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29588 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

instead of monitoring the flow rate of 

the wastewater stream. The steam feed 

to wastewater flow ratio is calculated by 

dividing the steam feed rate by the 

wastewater stream flow rate. You must 

follow the data measurement and 

recording frequencies and data 

averaging periods specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart. 

(iii) If you are using a wastewater 

treatment process other than a steam or 

vacuum stripper, you must submit the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section. 

(A) A description of the proposed 

treatment process. 

(B) A description of the parameter(s) 

to be monitored to ensure that the 

treatment process is operated in 

conformance with its design and that it 

achieves the emission standard 

specified in Table 3 to this subpart, and 

an explanation of the criteria used to 

select the parameter(s). 

(C) A description of the methods and 

procedures that will be used to 

demonstrate that the parameter 

specified in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(B) of 

this section indicates proper operation 

of the treatment process, the schedule 

for this demonstration, and a statement 

that you will establish an operating 

limit for the monitored operating 

parameter as part of the notification of 

compliance status report specified in 

§ 63.11935(d). 

(iv) Alternatives to monitoring 

requirements. 

(A) You may request approval to use 

alternatives to the continuous operating 

parameter monitoring listed in 

paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this 

section, as specified in § 63.11985(c)(5). 

(B) You may request approval to 

monitor a different parameter than those 

established in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) 

through (iii) of this section or to set 

unique monitoring parameter, as 

specified in § 63.11985(c)(6). 

(C) Until permission to use an 

alternative monitoring procedure, 

method, or parameter has been granted 

by the Administrator, you remain 

subject to the requirements of this 

subpart. 

(2) You must ensure that each 

operating parameter monitored in 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section for a 

treatment process meets the operating 

limit established in § 63.11970(a)(1)(iii). 

You must continuously determine the 

average value of each monitored 

operating parameter based on the data 

collection and reduction methods 

specified in § 63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and 

the applicable data averaging period for 

the wastewater treatment process 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart for 

all periods the process is operating. You 

must follow the data measurement and 

recording frequencies and data 

averaging periods specified in Table 6 to 

this subpart. For a CPMS used on a 

batch operation, you may use a data 

averaging period based on an operating 

block in lieu of the averaging periods 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart. 

(3) To demonstrate compliance with 

the emission limit for vinyl chloride 

specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you 

must follow the procedures specified in 

paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) Take monthly measurements of the 

vinyl chloride concentration using the 

procedures and methods for vinyl 

chloride specified in § 63.11965(a)(1). 

(ii) In the first 12 months following 

your demonstration of initial 

compliance in § 63.11970(a)(1), you 

must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the vinyl chloride 

emission limit in Table 3 to this subpart 

on a monthly basis, using the monthly 

concentration measurement specified in 

paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section. 

(iii) Beginning 13 months following 

your initial demonstration of 

compliance in § 63.11970(a)(1), 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the vinyl chloride emission limit 

in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly 

basis, using a 12-month rolling average 

concentration, calculated as the average 

of the 12 most recent monthly 

concentration measurements specified 

in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section. 

(b) For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated to reduce the 

concentration of vinyl chloride, and for 

which you elect to treat the stream 

according to § 63.11965(b)(2), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance as 

specified in subpart G of this part, as 

referenced in § 63.11965(b)(2). 

(c) For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated to reduce the 

concentration of total HAP as specified 

in § 63.11965(c), you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in 

subpart G of this part, as referenced in 

§ 63.11965(c). 

(d) For each wastewater stream for 

which you initially demonstrate in 

§ 63.11970(b) that treatment is not 

required to reduce the vinyl chloride 

concentration, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this 

section. 

(1) Conduct monthly performance 

tests, measuring the vinyl chloride 

concentration using the procedures and 

methods for vinyl chloride specified in 

§ 63.11965(a)(1). 

(2) In the first 12 months following 

your demonstration of initial 

compliance in § 63.11970(b), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the vinyl chloride emission limit 

in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly 

basis, using the monthly concentration 

measurement specified in paragraph 

(d)(1) of this section. 

(3) Beginning 13 months following 

your initial demonstration of 

compliance in § 63.11970(b), 

demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the vinyl chloride emission limit 

in Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly 

basis, using a 12-month rolling average 

concentration, calculated as the average 

of the 12 most recent monthly 

concentration measurements specified 

in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. 

(4) If any monthly performance test 

specified in paragraph (d)(2) or (3) of 

this section shows that the 

concentration of vinyl chloride in the 

wastewater stream is greater than or 

equal to the vinyl chloride emission 

limit in Table 3 to this subpart, then you 

must use a treatment process to reduce 

the vinyl chloride concentration as 

specified in § 63.11965(b) and you must 

demonstrate compliance as specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section. 

(e) For each wastewater stream for 

which you initially demonstrate in 

§ 63.11970(c) that treatment is not 

required to reduce the total HAP 

concentration, you must conduct 

monthly performance tests, following 

the procedure specified in paragraph 

(e)(1) or (2) of this section on a monthly 

basis. 

(1) Sample and measure the 

concentration of total HAP using the 

procedures and methods for total HAP 

specified in § 63.11965(a)(1) and 

demonstrate that the total HAP 

concentration (based on the HAP listed 

in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) is 

less than 1,000 parts per million by 

weight. The data-averaging period for 

demonstrating compliance is specified 

in subpart G of this part. 

(2) Re-establish that the annual 

average flow rate of the stream is less 

than 10 liters per minute, using the 

procedure and methods specified in 

§ 63.11965(a)(2). 

(3) If any monthly performance test 

specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this 

section shows that the concentration of 

total HAP is greater than or equal to 

1,000 parts per million by weight and 

the annual average flow rate measured 

in paragraph (e)(2) of this section is 

greater than or equal to 10 liters per 

minute, then you must use a treatment 

process to reduce the vinyl chloride 

concentration as specified in 

§ 63.11965(c) and you must demonstrate 

compliance as specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29589 

§ 63.11980 What are my test methods and 

calculation procedures for wastewater? 

(a) Performance test methods and 

procedures. You must determine the 

concentration of vinyl chloride and total 

HAP (based on the list of HAP in Table 

9 to subpart G of this part) using the test 

methods and procedures specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this 

section. Upon request, the owner or 

operator shall make available to the 

Administrator such records as may be 

necessary to determine the conditions of 

performance tests. 

(1) You must conduct performance 

tests during maximum representative 

operating conditions for the process and 

when the wastewater treatment process 

is operating as close as possible to your 

operating limits established during the 

performance test conducted to 

demonstrate initial compliance, as 

required in § 63.11970, or during a 

subsequent performance test conducted 

to demonstrate continuous compliance, 

as provided in § 63.11975. If an 

operating limit is a range, then you must 

operate the wastewater treatment 

process as close as possible to the 

maximum or minimum operating limit, 

whichever results in higher emissions 

(i.e., lower emission reduction). If the 

wastewater treatment process will be 

operating at several different sets of 

operating conditions, you must 

supplement the testing with additional 

testing, modeling and/or engineering 

assessments to demonstrate compliance 

with the operating limit. Alternative 

operating conditions may be used if 

specified or approved by the 

Administrator as specified in 

63.11940(j). 

(2) For measuring total HAP, you 

must propose a method in your test plan 

prepared in § 63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for 

conducting sampling and analysis using 

the methods specified in paragraphs 

(a)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. You 

must submit the test plan for approval 

as specified in § 63.8(d) and (e). 

(i) Using Method 107 at 40 CFR part 

61, appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, and 

transport. 

(ii) For sample analysis for total HAP 

except methanol, using Method 8260B 

Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas 

Chromatography/Mass spectrometry 

(GC/MS) in ‘‘Test Methods for 

Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ 

Chemical Methods,’’ Revision 3, 

February 2007, EPA Publication No. 

SW–846, Third Edition (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14) for sample 

analysis. 

(iii) For sample analysis for methanol, 

using Method 305 at 40 CFR 63, 

appendix A, Sections 6.0 and 7.0. 

(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you 

must use Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, 

appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, 

transport, and analysis. 

(4) When using the test methods in 

paragraph (a)(2) or (3) of this section, 

you must meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) Sample collection may consist of 

grab or composite samples. 

(ii) Samples must be taken before the 

wastewater stream is exposed to the 

atmosphere. 

(iii) You must ensure that sample 

collection, preservation, transport, and 

analysis minimizes loss of HAP and 

maintains sample integrity. 

(5) For batch process operations, you 

must obtain samples when the batch 

process is operating at absolute worstcase conditions or hypothetical worstcase conditions, as defined for process 

vents in § 63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and 

the wastewater treatment process is 

operating at conditions specified in 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section. For 

combined continuous and batch process 

operations, you must obtain sample 

when the batch processes are operating 

at absolute worst-case conditions and 

the wastewater treatment process is 

operating at conditions for the 

monitored operating parameters that 

achieve normal emission reduction. 

(b) Method for calculating total HAP 

concentration. For each wastewater 

stream measured using the methods 

specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, calculate the sum of the 

measured concentrations of individual 

HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of 

this part by using Equation 1 to this 

section. 

Where: 

CT9 = Concentration of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part, 

in the stream, in parts per million by 

weight (ppmw). 

Ci = Concentration of each individually 

identified HAP that is listed in Table 9 

to subpart G of this part, in ppmw. 

Notifications, Reports, and Records 

§ 63.11985 What notifications and reports 

must I submit and when? 

In addition to the notifications and 

reports required in subpart A of this 

part, as specified in Table 5 to this 

subpart, you must submit the additional 

information and reports specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(a) Notification of compliance status. 

When submitting the notification of 

compliance status required in § 63.9(h), 

you must also include the information 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through 

(9) of this section, as applicable. 

(1) You must include an identification 

of the storage vessels subject to this 

subpart, including the capacity and 

liquid stored for each vessel. You must 

submit the information specified in 

paragraph (a)(2) of this section for each 

pressure vessel. 

(2) You must include the information 

specified in § 63.1039(a) for equipment 

leaks. 

(3) You must include an identification 

of the heat exchange systems that are 

subject to the requirements of this 

subpart. 

(4) You must include the operating 

limit for each monitoring parameter 

identified for each control device, resin 

stripper, and wastewater treatment 

process used to meet the emission limits 

in Table 1, 2 or 3 to this subpart, as 

determined pursuant to § 63.11935(d). 

This report must include the 

information in § 63.11935(d), as 

applicable. 

(5) You must include the records 

specified in paragraphs (d)(5)(i) through 

(iv) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents. 

(i) You must include the performance 

test records specified in § 63.11990(f)(1), 

as applicable. These reports must 

include one complete test report for 

each test method used for each process 

vent. A complete test report must 

include a brief process description, 

sampling site description, description of 

sampling and analysis procedures and 

any modifications to standard 

procedures, quality assurance 

procedures, record of operating 

conditions during the test, record of 


mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP20MY11.061</GPH>
29590 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

preparation of standards, record of 

calibrations, raw data sheets for field 

sampling, raw data sheets for field and 

laboratory analyses, documentation of 

calculations, and any other information 

required by the test method. For 

additional tests performed for the same 

kind of emission point using the same 

method, the results and any other 

information required in applicable 

sections of this subpart must be 

submitted, but a complete test report is 

not required. 

(ii) You must include the information 

specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(ii)(A) 

through (C) of this section for batch 

process vent operations. 

(A) Descriptions of worst-case 

operating and/or testing conditions for 

control devices including results of 

emissions profiles. 

(B) Calculations used to demonstrate 

initial compliance according to 

§§ 63.11945 and 63.11950, including 

documentation of the proper operation 

of a process condenser(s) as specified in 

§ 63.11950(c)(2)(ii). 

(C) Data and rationale used to support 

an engineering assessment to calculate 

emissions in accordance with 

§ 63.11950(i). 

(iii) If you use a fabric filter, you must 

include the fabric filter operation and 

maintenance plan as specified in 

§ 63.11940(h)(10). You must submit 

analyses and supporting documentation 

demonstrating conformance with Fabric 

Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance, 

EPA–454/R–98–015, September 1997 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14) 

and specifications for bag leak detection 

systems as part of the notification of 

compliance status report. 

(iv) If you use a control device other 

than those listed in § 63.11940 for your 

process vent, you must include a 

description of the parameters to be 

monitored to ensure the control device 

is operated in conformance with its 

design and achieves the specified 

emission limitation and an explanation 

of the criteria used to select the 

parameter; and a description of the 

methods and procedures that will be 

used to demonstrate that the parameter 

indicates proper operation of the control 

device, the schedule for this 

demonstration, and a statement that you 

will establish an operating limit for the 

monitored parameter as specified in 

paragraph (a)(4) of this section. 

(6) [Reserved] 

(7) You must include the records 

specified in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through 

(iii) of this section, as applicable, for 

resin strippers. 

(i) You must include an identification 

of each resin stripper and resin type 

subject to the requirements of this 

subpart. 

(ii) You must include results of the 

initial testing used to determine the 

annual average concentration of vinyl 

chloride and the annual average flow 

rate and concentration of total HAP that 

are listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this 

part. 

(iii) You must record the approved 

test method specified in § 63.11980(a) 

for sample introduction, instrument 

calibration and sample analysis for the 

laboratory determination of vinyl 

chloride and the laboratory 

determination of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this 

part. 

(8) You must include the records 

specified in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through 

(vi) of this section, as applicable, for 

wastewater. 

(i) You must include an identification 

of each wastewater stream subject to the 

requirements of this subpart, and the 

control level required. You must also 

include a description of the treatment 

process to be used for each wastewater 

stream. 

(ii) You must include results of the 

initial sampling used to determine the 

annual average concentration of vinyl 

chloride and the annual average 

concentration of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this 

part. 

(iii) You must include the annual 

average flow rate calculated using the 

procedures in § 63.11965(d) for each 

wastewater stream that you have 

determined is not subject to treatment as 

specified in § 63.11970(b) because it has 

an annual average flow rate of less than 

10 liters per minute. 

(iv) You must record the test method 

specified in § 63.11980(a)(2) for sample 

introduction, instrument calibration and 

sample analysis for the laboratory 

determination of vinyl chloride and 

laboratory determination of total HAP 

that are listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of this part. 

(v) You must include any other 

applicable information that is required 

by the reporting requirements specified 

in § 63.146 of subpart G. 

(vi) If you use a wastewater treatment 

process other than a steam or vacuum 

stripper for wastewater, you must 

include a description of the parameters 

to be monitored to ensure the control 

measure is operated in conformance 

with its design and achieves the 

specified emission limitation and an 

explanation of the criteria used to select 

the parameter; and a description of the 

methods and procedures that will be 

used to demonstrate that the parameter 

indicates proper operation of the control 

device, the schedule for this 

demonstration, and a statement that you 

will establish an operating limit for the 

monitored parameter as specified in 

paragraph (a)(4) of this section. 

(9) You must include a certification of 

compliance, signed by a responsible 

official, as applicable that states the 

following: 

(i) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for storage 

vessels.’’ 

(ii) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for 

equipment leaks.’’ 

(iii) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for heat 

exchange systems.’’ 

(iv) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for HAP 

emissions from process vents.’’ 

(v) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for other 

emission sources.’’ 

(vi) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for the 

stripped resin.’’ 

(vii) ‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirements in this subpart for 

wastewater.’’ 

(b) Compliance reports. When 

submitting the excess emissions and 

continuous monitoring system 

performance report and summary report 

required in § 63.10(e)(3), you must also 

include the information specified in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (10) of this 

section, as applicable. This report is 

referred to in this subpart as your 

compliance report. 

(1) You must include a copy of the 

inspection record specified in 

§ 63.11990(b)(2) for each storage vessel 

when a defect, failure, or leak is 

detected. You must also include a copy 

of the applicable information specified 

in § 63.1039(b)(5) through (8) of subpart 

UU of this part for each pressure vessel. 

(2) You must include the information 

specified in § 63.1039(b) for equipment 

leaks, except for releases from pressure 

relief devices. For any releases from 

pressure relief devices, you must submit 

the report specified in paragraph (c)(8) 

of this section instead of the information 

specified in § 63.1039(b)(1) through (3) 

of subpart UU of this part. 

(3) You must include the information 

specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through 

(vi) of this section for heat exchange 

systems. 

(i) The number of heat exchangers. 

(ii) The number of heat exchangers 

found to be leaking. 

(iii) A summary of the monitoring 

data used to indicate a leak, including 

the number of leaks determined to be 

equal to or greater than the leak 

definition. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29591 

(iv) If applicable, the date a leak was 

identified, the date the source of the 

leak was identified, and the date of 

repair. 

(v) If applicable, a summary of each 

delayed repair, including the original 

date and reason for the delay and the 

date of repair, if repaired during the 

reporting period. 

(vi) If applicable, an estimate of total 

strippable volatile organic compounds 

emissions for each delayed repair over 

the reporting period. 

(4) You must include the records 

specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through 

(iii) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents, resin strippers, and 

wastewater. 

(i) Deviations using CEMS or CPMS. 

For each deviation from an emission 

limit or operating limit where a CEMS 

or CPMS is being used to comply with 

an emission limit in this rule, you must 

include the information in paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i)(A) through (E) of this section. 

(A) For CEMS, the 3-hour block 

average value calculated for any period 

when the value is higher than an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart or when the value does not meet 

the data availability requirements 

defined in § 63.11890(c). 

(B) For CPMS, the average value 

calculated for any day (based on the 

data averaging periods for compliance 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart) that 

does not meet your operating limit 

established according to § 63.11935(d) 

or that does not meet the data 

availability requirements specified in 

§ 63.11890(c). 

(C) The cause for the calculated 

emission level or operating parameter 

level do not meet the established 

emission limit or operating limit. 

(D) For deviations caused by lack of 

monitoring data, the duration of periods 

when monitoring data were not 

collected. 

(E) Operating logs of batch process 

operations for each day during which 

the deviation occurred, including a 

description of the operating scenario(s) 

during the deviation. 

(ii) New operating scenario. Include 

each new operating scenario that has 

been operated since the time period 

covered by the last compliance report 

and has not been submitted in the 

notification of compliance status report 

or a previous compliance report. For 

each new operating scenario, you must 

provide verification that the operating 

conditions for any associated control or 

treatment device have not been 

exceeded and constitute proper 

operation for the new operating 

scenario. You must provide any 

required calculations and engineering 

analyses that have been performed for 

the new operating scenario. For the 

purposes of this paragraph (b)(4)(ii), a 

revised operating scenario for an 

existing process is considered to be a 

new operating scenario when one or 

more of the data elements listed in 

§ 63.11990(e)(4) have changed. 

(iii) Process changes. You must 

document process changes, or changes 

made to any of the information 

submitted in the notification of 

compliance status report or a previous 

compliance report, that is not within the 

scope of an existing operating scenario, 

in the compliance report. The 

notification must include all of the 

information in paragraphs (b)(4)(iii)(A) 

through (C) of this section. 

(A) A description of the process 

change. 

(B) Revisions to any of the 

information reported in the original 

notification of compliance status report 

as provided in paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(C) Information required by the 

notification of compliance status report, 

as provided in paragraph (a) of this 

section, for changes involving the 

addition of processes or equipment at 

the affected source. 

(5) You must submit the applicable 

information specified in paragraphs 

(b)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section for 

process vents. 

(i) For catalytic incinerators for which 

you have selected the alternative 

monitoring specified in § 63.11940(b)(3), 

results of the annual catalyst sampling 

and inspections required by 

§ 63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii) including any 

subsequent corrective actions taken. 

(ii) For regenerative adsorbers, results 

of the adsorber bed outlet volatile 

organic compounds concentration 

measurements specified in 

§ 63.11940(d)(7). 

(iii) For non-regenerative adsorbers, 

results of the adsorber bed outlet 

volatile organic compounds 

concentration measurements specified 

in § 63.11940(e)(2). 

(iv) Other control device reporting 

provisions. If you are using a control 

device other than those listed in this 

subpart, you must submit the 

information as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(5)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section. 

(A) A description of the proposed 

control device. 

(B) A description of the parameter(s) 

to be monitored to ensure the control 

device is operated in conformance with 

its design and achieves the performance 

level as specified in this subpart and an 

explanation of the criteria used to select 

the parameter(s). 

(C) The frequency and content of 

monitoring, recording, and reporting if 

monitoring and recording is not 

continuous, or if compliance reports, as 

specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(A) of this 

section, will not contain 3-hour block 

average values when the monitored 

parameter value does not meet the 

established operating limit. The 

rationale for the proposed monitoring, 

recording, and reporting system must be 

included. 

(6) You must include the records 

specified in § 63.11990(j) for other 

emission sources. 

(7) For resin stripper operations, you 

must include results of monthly 

concentration measurements for each 

resin type discharged from the PVCPU 

that did not meet the control level 

requirements in Table 1 or 2, as 

applicable. 

(8) You must include the information 

specified in paragraphs (b)(8)(i) and (ii) 

of this section for your wastewater 

streams. 

(i) Results of monthly concentration 

measurements for each wastewater 

stream discharged from the affected 

source that did not meet the control 

level requirements in Table 3 to this 

subpart. 

(ii) If you must comply with 

§ 63.11965, you must include any other 

applicable information that is required 

by the reporting requirements specified 

in § 63.146. 

(9) For closed vent systems subject to 

the requirements of § 63.11930, you 

must include the information specified 

in paragraphs (b)(9)(i) through (iv) of 

this section, as applicable. 

(i) As applicable, records as specified 

in § 63.11930(g)(1)(i) for all times when 

flow was detected in the bypass line, the 

vent stream was diverted from the 

control device, or the flow indicator was 

not operating. 

(ii) As applicable, records as specified 

in § 63.11930(g)(1)(ii) for all occurrences 

of all periods when a bypass of the 

system was indicated (the seal 

mechanism is broken, the bypass line 

valve position has changed, or the key 

for a lock-and-key type lock has been 

checked out, and records of any car-seal 

that has been broken). 

(iii) Records of all times when 

monitoring of the system was not 

performed as specified in § 63.11930(d) 

and (e), or repairs were not performed 

as specified in § 63.11930(f), or records 

were not kept as specified in 

§ 63.11930(g)(2). 

(iv) Records of each time an alarm on 

a closed vent system operating in 

vacuum service is triggered as specified 

in § 63.11930(h) including the cause for 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29592 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

the alarm and the corrective action 

taken. 

(10) Overlap with title V reports. 

Information required by this subpart, 

which is submitted with a title V 

periodic report, does not need to be 

included in a subsequent compliance 

report required by this subpart or 

subpart referenced by this subpart. The 

title V report must be referenced in the 

compliance report required by this 

subpart. 

(c) Other notifications and reports. 

You must submit the other notification 

and reports, as specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (10) of this section, as 

applicable. 

(1) Notification of inspection. To 

provide the Administrator the 

opportunity to have an observer present, 

you must notify the Administrator at 

least 30 days before an inspection 

required by §§ 63.11910 through 

63.11920 and § 63.11930. If an 

inspection is unplanned and you could 

not have known about the inspection 30 

days in advance, then you must notify 

the Administrator at least 7 days before 

the inspection. Notification must be 

made by telephone immediately 

followed by written documentation 

demonstrating why the inspection was 

unplanned. Alternatively, the 

notification including the written 

documentation may be made in writing 

and sent so that it is received by the 

Administrator at least 7 days before the 

inspection. If a delegated State or local 

agency is notified, you are not required 

to notify the Administrator. A delegated 

State or local agency may waive the 

requirement for notification of 

inspections. 

(2) Batch precompliance report. You 

must submit a batch precompliance 

report at least 6 months prior to the 

compliance date of this subpart that 

includes a description of the test 

conditions, data, calculations, and other 

information used to establish operating 

limits according to § 63.11935(d) for all 

batch operations. If you use an 

engineering assessment as specified in 

§ 63.11950(i), you must also include 

data or other information supporting a 

finding that the emissions estimation 

equations in § 63.11950(a) through (h) 

are inappropriate. We will either 

approve or disapprove the report within 

90 days after we receive it. If we 

disapprove the report, you must still be 

in compliance with the emission 

limitations and work practice standards 

of this subpart by your compliance date. 

To change any of the information 

submitted in the report, you must notify 

us 60 days before you implement the 

planned change. 

(3) Notification of process change. If 

you change or add to your plant site or 

affected source, as discussed in 

§ 63.11896, you must submit a 

notification describing the change or 

addition. 

(4) Affirmative defense notification 

and report. 

(i) As specified in § 63.11895(b), if 

your affected source experiences an 

exceedance of its emission limit(s) 

during a malfunction, you must notify 

the Administrator by telephone or 

facsimile (fax) transmission as soon as 

possible, but no later than 2 business 

days after the initial occurrence of the 

malfunction, if you wish to avail 

yourself of an affirmative defense to 

civil penalties for that malfunction. 

(ii) If you seek to assert an affirmative 

defense, you must follow the procedures 

in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section and 

submit a written report as specified in 

§ 63.11895 to the Administrator within 

45 days of the initial occurrence of the 

exceedance of the standard in 

§ 63.11880 to demonstrate, with all 

necessary supporting documentation, 

that you have met the requirements set 

forth in § 63.11895(a). 

(5) Request for approval to use 

alternative monitoring methods. Prior to 

your initial notification of compliance 

status, you may submit requests for 

approval to use alternatives to the 

continuous operating parameter 

monitoring specified in this rule, as 

provided for in §§ 63.11940(j)(1), 

63.11960(c)(1)(iv)(A), and 

63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(A), following the 

same procedure as specified in § 63.8. 

The information specified in paragraphs 

(c)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section must be 

included. 

(i) A description of the proposed 

alternative system. 

(ii) Information justifying your request 

for an alternative method, such as the 

technical or economic infeasibility, or 

the impracticality, of the affected source 

using the required method. 

(6) Request for approval to monitor 

alternative parameters. Prior to your 

initial notification of compliance status, 

you may submit requests for approval to 

monitor a different parameter than those 

established in § 63.11935(d) and as 

provided for in §§ 63.11940(j)(2), 

63.11960(c) (1)(iv)(B), and 

63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(B), following the 

same procedure as specified for 

alternative monitoring methods in 

§ 63.8. The information specified in 

paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) of this 

section must be included in the request. 

(i) A description of the parameter(s) to 

be monitored to ensure the control 

technology or pollution prevention 

measure is operated in conformance 

with its design and achieves the 

specified emission limit and an 

explanation of the criteria used to select 

the parameter(s). 

(ii) A description of the methods and 

procedures that will be used to 

demonstrate that the parameter 

indicates proper operation of the control 

device, the schedule for this 

demonstration, and a statement that you 

will establish an operating limit for the 

monitored parameter(s) as part of the 

notification of compliance status if 

required under this subpart, unless this 

information has already been submitted. 

(iii) The frequency and content of 

monitoring, recording, and reporting, if 

monitoring and recording is not 

continuous. The rationale for the 

proposed monitoring, recording, and 

reporting system must be included. 

(7) [Reserved] 

(8) Pressure relief device, closed vent 

system in vacuum service, bypass 

deviation, or pressure vessel closure 

device deviation report. If any pressure 

relief device in HAP service or any 

piece of equipment or closed vent 

system has discharged to the 

atmosphere as specified in 

§§ 63.11910(c)(4), 63.11915(c), 

63.11930(c), or 63.11930(h), you must 

submit to the Administrator within 10 

days of the discharge the following 

information: 

(i) The source, nature, and cause of 

the discharge. 

(ii) The date, time, and duration of the 

discharge. 

(iii) An estimate of the quantity of 

vinyl chloride and total HAP emitted 

during the discharge and the method 

used for determining this quantity. 

(iv) The actions taken to prevent this 

discharge. 

(v) The measures adopted to prevent 

future such discharges. 

(9) Commencing and ceasing 

operation of continuous emissions 

monitoring systems. Before starting or 

stopping the use of CEMS you must 

notify the Administrator as specified in 

§ 63.11935(b)(7). 

(10) Data Submittal. 

(i) As of January 1, 2012, and within 

60 days after the date of completing 

each performance test (see § 60.8) 

required by this subpart, you must 

submit performance test data, except 

opacity data, electronically to EPA’s 

Central Data Exchange (CDX) by using 

the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) (see 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ 

ert_tool.html). Only data collected using 

test methods compatible with ERT are 

subject to this requirement to be 

submitted electronically to EPA’s CDX. 

(ii) Within 60 days after the date of 

completing each CEMS performance 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29593 

evaluation test (see § 60.13), you must 

submit the relative accuracy test audit 

data electronically into EPA’s CDX by 

using the ERT, as mentioned in 

paragraph (10)(i) of this section. Only 

data collected using test methods 

compatible with ERT are subject to this 

requirement to be submitted 

electronically to EPA’s CDX. 

(iii) All reports required by this 

subpart not subject to the requirements 

in paragraphs (c)(10)(i) and (ii) of this 

section must be sent to the 

Administrator at the appropriate 

address listed in § 63.13. The 

Administrator or the delegated authority 

may request a report in any form 

suitable for the specific case (e.g., by 

electronic media such as Excel 

spreadsheet, on CD or hard copy). The 

Administrator retains the right to 

require submittal of reports subject to 

paragraphs (10)(i) and (ii) of this section 

in paper format. 

§ 63.11990 What records must I keep? 

You must keep records as specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section, 

as applicable. 

(a) Copies of reports. You must keep 

a copy of each notification and report 

that you submit to comply with this 

subpart, including all documentation 

supporting any notification or report. 

You must also keep copies of the 

current versions of the site-specific 

performance evaluation test plan, sitespecific monitoring plan, and the 

equipment leak detection and repair 

plan. 

(b) Storage vessels. For storage 

vessels, you must maintain the records 

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(5) of this section. 

(1) You must keep a record of the 

dimensions of the storage vessel, an 

analysis of the capacity of the storage 

vessel, and an identification of the 

liquid stored. 

(2) Inspection records for fixed roofs 

complying with § 63.11910 including 

the information specified in paragraphs 

(b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) Record the date of each inspection 

required by § 63.11910(a)(3). 

(ii) For each defect detected during an 

inspection required by § 63.11910(a)(3), 

record the location of the defect, a 

description of the defect, the date of 

detection, and corrective action taken to 

repair the defect. In the event that repair 

of the defect is delayed in accordance 

with § 63.11910(a)(4)(ii), also record the 

reason for the delay and the date that 

completion of repair of the defect is 

expected. 

(3) For degassing and cleaning events, 

you must maintain the records specified 

in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this 

section. 

(i) Keep records of the storage vessel 

identification and date of each 

degassing and cleaning event. 

(ii) Estimate and keep records of the 

emissions from each degassing and 

cleaning event. 

(4) For pressure vessels, you must 

keep the records specified in paragraph 

(c) of this section for each pressure 

vessel. 

(5) For internal and external floating 

roof storage vessels, you must maintain 

the records required in § 63.1065 of 

subpart WW of this part. 

(c) Equipment leaks. For equipment 

leaks, you must maintain the records 

specified in § 63.1038 of subpart UU of 

this part for equipment leaks and a 

record of the information specified in 

§ 63.11930(g)(4) for monitoring 

instrument calibrations conducted 

according to § 63.11930(e)(2). 

(d) Heat exchange systems. For a heat 

exchange system subject to this subpart, 

you must keep the records specified in 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this 

section. 

(1) Identification of all heat 

exchangers at the facility and the 

measured or estimated average annual 

HAP concentration of process fluid or 

intervening cooling fluid processed in 

each heat exchanger. 

(2) Identification of all heat exchange 

systems. For each heat exchange system 

that is subject to this subpart, you must 

include identification of all heat 

exchangers within each heat exchange 

system, identification of the individual 

heat exchangers within each heat 

exchange system, and, for closed-loop 

recirculation systems, the cooling tower 

included in each heat exchange system. 

(3) Identification of all heat exchange 

systems that are exempt from the 

monitoring requirements according to 

the provisions in § 63.11920(b) and the 

provision under which the heat 

exchange system is exempt. 

(4) Results of the following 

monitoring data for each monitoring 

event. 

(i) Date/time of event. 

(ii) Heat exchange exit line flow or 

cooling tower return line flow at the 

sampling location, gal/min. 

(iii) Monitoring method employed. 

(iv) If the ‘‘Air Stripping Method 

(Modified El Paso Method) for 

Determination of Volatile Organic 

Compound Emissions from Water 

Sources,’’ Revision Number One, dated 

January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 

Monitoring, prepared by Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, 

January 31, 2003 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14) is used according 

to § 63.11920(a)(3)(i) or (h)(4)(i): 

(A) Barometric pressure. 

(B) El Paso air stripping apparatus 

water flow (ml/min) and air flow, ml/ 

min, and air temperature, °C. 

(C) FID reading (parts per million by 

volume). 

(D) Calibration information identified 

in Section 5.4.2 of the ‘‘Air Stripping 

Method (Modified El Paso Method) for 

Determination of Volatile Organic 

Compound Emissions from Water 

Sources,’’ Revision Number One, dated 

January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 

Monitoring, prepared by Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, 

January 31, 2003 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14). 

(v) If Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas 

Chromatography Using Photoionization 

and/or Electrolytic Conductivity 

Detectors,’’ dated December 1996 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14) 

is used according to § 65.610(a)(3)(ii): 

(A) The type of detector used. 

(B) The list of target analytes. 

(C) The measured cooling water 

concentration for each of target analyte 

(parts per billion by weight). 

(D) Calibration and surrogate recovery 

information identified in Section 8.0 of 

Method 8021B, ‘‘Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas 

Chromatography Using Photoionization 

and/or Electrolytic Conductivity 

Detectors,’’ dated December 1996 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14). 

(5) The date when a leak was 

identified and the date when the heat 

exchanger was repaired or taken out of 

service. 

(6) If a repair is delayed, the reason 

for the delay, the schedule for 

completing the repair, and the estimate 

of potential emissions for the delay of 

repair. 

(e) Process vents, resin strippers, and 

wastewater. You must include the 

records specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (4) of this section, as applicable, 

for process vents, resin strippers, and 

wastewater. 

(1) Continuous records. Where this 

subpart requires a continuous record 

using CEMS or CPMS, you must 

maintain, at a minimum, the records 

specified in § 63.10(b)(2)(vii)(A). 

(2) Excluded data. In any average 

computed to determine compliance, you 

must exclude monitoring data recorded 

during periods specified in paragraphs 

(e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. 

(i) Periods of non-operation of the 

process unit (or portion thereof), 

resulting in cessation of the emissions to 

which the monitoring applies. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29594 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Periods of no flow to a control 

device. 

(iii) Monitoring system malfunctions, 

repairs associated with monitoring 

system malfunctions, or required 

monitoring system quality assurance or 

control activities, as specified in 

§ 63.11890(c)(2). 

(3) Records of calculated emission 

and operating parameter values. You 

must retain for 5 years a record of CEMS 

and CPMS data as specified in 

paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this 

section, unless an alternative 

recordkeeping system has been 

requested and approved. 

(i) Except as specified in paragraphs 

(e)(3)(ii) of this section, retain for 5 

years the records of the average values 

for each continuously monitored 

operating parameter and pollutant 

specified in §§ 63.11925(e)(3)(ii), 

63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 63.11960(c)(2), and 

63.11975(a)(2) for CEMS and CPMS.(ii) 

In lieu of calculating and recording the 

average value specified in paragraphs 

(e)(3)(i) of this section, if all 1-hour 

averages specified in § 63.11935(e) 

demonstrate compliance with your 

parameter operating limit or the 

applicable pollutant emission limit in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for the block 

average period, you may record a 

statement that all recorded 1-hour 

averages met the operating limit or 

emission limit, as applicable, and retain 

for 5 years this statement and all 

recorded CPMS or CEMS data for the 

block average period. 

(4) Information to be included in 

records. You must keep records of each 

operating scenario as specified in 

paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (viii) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(i) You must keep a schedule or log 

of operating scenarios, updated each 

time a different operating scenario is put 

into effect. 

(ii) A description of the process and 

the type of process components used. 

(iii) An identification of related 

process vents, wastewater streams, or 

resin strippers including their 

associated emissions episodes. 

(iv) The applicable control 

requirements of this subpart for process 

vents, resin strippers, and/or treatment 

processes. 

(v) The control device, resin stripper, 

and/or treatment process, including a 

description of operating and testing 

conditions. 

(vi) Combined emissions that are 

routed to the same control device, resin 

stripper, and/or treatment process. 

(vii) The applicable monitoring 

requirements of this subpart and any 

operating limit that assures compliance 

for all emissions routed to the control 

device resin stripper, and/or treatment 

process. 

(viii) Calculations and engineering 

analyses required to demonstrate 

compliance. 

(f) Process vents. You must include 

the records specified in paragraphs (f)(1) 

and (2) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents. 

(1) Records of performance tests as 

required in § 63.10(b)(2)(viii). You must 

also collect the applicable control 

device operating parameters required in 

§ 63.11940 over the full period of the 

performance test. 

(2) If you use a control device to 

comply with this subpart and you are 

required to use CPMS, you must keep 

up-to-date and readily accessible 

records for your process vents as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through 

(vi) of this section, as applicable. 

(i) If you use a flow indicator, you 

must keep records of periods of no flow 

to the control device, including the start 

and stop time and dates of periods of 

flow and no flow. 

(ii) If you use a catalytic incinerator 

for which you have selected the 

alternative monitoring specified in 

§ 63.11940(b)(3), you must also maintain 

records of the results of the annual 

catalyst sampling and inspections 

required by § 63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii) 

including any subsequent corrective 

actions taken. 

(iii) If you use a regenerative adsorber 

as specified in § 63.11940(d), the 

records specified in paragraphs 

(f)(2)(iii)(A) through (H) of this section, 

as applicable, must be kept. 

(A) Records of total regeneration 

stream mass flow for each adsorber-bed 

regeneration cycle. 

(B) Records of the temperature of the 

adsorber bed after each regeneration and 

within 15 minutes of completing any 

cooling cycle. 

(C) For non-vacuum and non-steam 

regeneration systems, records of the 

temperature of the adsorber bed during 

each regeneration except during any 

temperature regulating (cooling or 

warming to bring bed temperature closer 

to vent gas temperature) portion of the 

regeneration cycle. 

(D) If adsorber regeneration vacuum is 

monitored pursuant to § 63.11940(d)(4), 

records of the vacuum profile over time 

and the amount of time the vacuum 

level is below the minimum vacuum 

target for each adsorber-bed 

regeneration cycle. 

(E) Records of the regeneration 

frequency and duration. 

(F) Daily records of the verification 

inspections, including the visual 

observations and/or any activation of an 

automated alarm or shutdown system 

with a written entry into a log book or 

other permanent form of record. 

(G) Records of the maximum volatile 

organic compound or HAP outlet 

concentration observed over the last 5 

minutes of the adsorption cycle for each 

adsorber bed. Records must be weekly 

or for every regeneration cycle if the 

regeneration cycle is greater than 1 

week. 

(H) Records of the date and time the 

adsorbent had last been replaced. 

(iv) If you use a non-regenerative 

adsorber as specified in § 63.11940(e), 

the records specified in paragraphs 

(f)(2)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section, 

as applicable, must be kept. 

(A) A record of the average life of the 

bed, as determined by § 63.11940(e)(1), 

including the date the average life was 

determined. 

(B) Daily, weekly, or monthly records 

of the maximum volatile organic 

compound or HAP outlet concentration, 

as specified by § 63.11940(e)(2). 

(C) Records of bed replacement 

including the date and time the 

adsorbent had last been replaced, and 

the date and time in which 

breakthrough is detected. 

(v) If you use sorbent injection as 

specified in § 63.11940(g), you must 

keep records of the type and brand of 

sorbent used. If the type or brand of 

sorbent is changed, you must maintain 

documentation that the substitute will 

provide the same or better level of 

control as the original sorbent. 

(vi) If you use a fabric filter as 

specified in § 63.11940(h), you must 

maintain the records specified in 

paragraphs (f)(2)(vi)(A) through (C) of 

this section for each bag leak detector 

used. 

(A) An operation and maintenance 

plan as described in § 63.11940(h)(10). 

(B) A corrective action plan as 

described in § 63.11940(h)(11). 

(C) Records of any bag leak detection 

system alarm, including the date and 

time, with a brief explanation of the 

cause of the alarm and the corrective 

action taken. 

(g) Closed vent systems. You must 

keep the records specified in paragraphs 

(g)(1) through (6) of this section, and 

you must record any additional 

information as specified in § 63.11930, 

as applicable. 

(1) Each alarm triggered because flow 

was detected in a bypass as specified in 

§ 63.11930(g)(1)(i). 

(2) Inspections of seals or closure 

mechanisms as specified in 

§ 63.11930(g)(1)(ii). 

(3) Copies of compliance reports for 

closed vent system leak inspections as 

specified in § 63.11985(b)(9) and 

§ 63.11930(g)(2) and (3). 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29595 

(4) Instrument calibration records as 

specified in § 63.11930(g)(4). 

(5) Unsafe-to-inspect equipment as 

specified in § 63.11930(g)(5). 

(6) Pressure alarms as specified by 

§ 63.11930(h)(2) and (3). 

(h) Resin stripper. For resin strippers, 

you must maintain the records specified 

in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) All sampling data, including 

monthly measurements of the 

concentration of vinyl chloride and total 

HAP compounds in the stripped resin 

exiting the resin stripper for each type 

of resin produced. 

(2) The applicable operating 

parameters required in § 63.11960(c) 

over the full period of the sampling. 

(3) The quantity (tons) of resin 

produced per grade per day. 

(i) Wastewater. For wastewater 

treatment processes, you must maintain 

the records specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 

through (6) of this section. 

(1) A description of the wastewater 

generation activities and treatment 

process. 

(2) Records of the control level 

determinations specified in 

§ 63.11965(a)(1)(i) and (ii) for each 

wastewater stream and the type of 

treatment applied if required in 

§ 63.11965(b) and (c). 

(3) Records of the initial performance 

test specified in § 63.11970(a) including 

the operating parameters monitored 

during testing and the average of each 

parameter, averaged over the testing 

period. 

(4) Records of the annual average flow 

rate as determined in § 63.11965(a)(2) 

and § 63.11975(e)(2), including 

documentation of how the average flow 

rate was determined. 

(5) All testing data, including monthly 

measurements of the concentrations of 

vinyl chloride and the concentration of 

total HAP that are listed in Table 9 to 

subpart G of this part in each 

wastewater stream required to be 

measured, as specified in § 63.11975. 

You must also record the applicable 

operating parameters required in 

§ 63.11975(a) over the full period of the 

sampling. 

(6) You must keep any other 

applicable records that are required by 

the recordkeeping requirements 

specified in § 63.147 of subpart G of this 

part. 

(j) Other emission sources. You must 

keep the records specified in paragraphs 

(j)(1) and (2) of this section. 

(1) All engineering calculations, 

testing, sampling, and monitoring 

results and data specified in § 63.11955. 

(2) Each occurrence that you do not 

comply with the requirements in 

§ 63.11955. 

§ 63.11995 In what form and how long 

must I keep my records? 

(a) You must keep records for 5 years 

in a form suitable and readily available 

for expeditious review, as specified in 

§ 63.10(b)(1). 

(b) You must keep each record on site 

for at least 2 years, as specified in 

§ 63.10(b)(1). You can keep the records 

off site for the remaining 3 years. 

Records may be maintained in hard 

copy or computer-readable format 

including, but not limited to, on paper, 

microfilm, hard disk drive, floppy disk, 

compact disk, magnetic tape, or 

microfiche. 

§ 63.12000 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the Administrator, as 

defined in § 63.2, or a delegated 

authority such as your state, local, or 

Tribal agency. If the Administrator has 

delegated authority to your state, local, 

or Tribal agency, then that agency (as 

well as the Administrator) has the 

authority to implement and enforce this 

subpart. You should contact your EPA 

Regional Office to find out if this 

subpart is delegated to your State, local, 

or Tribal agency. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a state, local, or Tribal agency, the 

authorities listed in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (4) of this section are retained 

by the Administrator and are not 

transferred to the state, local, or Tribal 

agency, however, the EPA retains 

oversight of this subpart and can take 

enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

(1) Approval of alternatives to the 

emission limits, operating limits, and 

work practice standards specified in this 

subpart. 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods, as defined in § 63.90, approval 

of any proposed analysis methods, and 

approval of any proposed test methods. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring, as defined in § 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping and reporting, as defined 

in § 63.90. 

Definitions 

§ 63.12005 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the Clean Air Act, in § 63.2, 

and in this section, as follows: 

Affirmative defense means, in the 

context of an enforcement proceeding, a 

response or defense put forward by a 

defendant, regarding which the 

defendant has the burden of proof, and 

the merits of which are independently 

and objectively evaluated in a judicial 

or administrative proceeding. 

Batch emission episode means a 

discrete venting episode that is 

associated with a single unit operation. 

A unit operation may have more than 

one batch emission episode. For 

example, a displacement of vapor 

resulting from the charging of a vessel 

with HAP will result in a discrete 

emission episode that will last through 

the duration of the charge and will have 

an average flowrate equal to the rate of 

the charge. If the vessel is then heated, 

there will also be another discrete 

emission episode resulting from the 

expulsion of expanded vapor. Both 

emission episodes may occur in the 

same vessel or unit operation. There are 

possibly other emission episodes that 

may occur from the vessel or other 

process components, depending on 

process operations. 

Batch operation means a 

noncontinuous operation involving 

intermittent or discontinuous feed into 

process components, and, in general, 

involves the emptying of the process 

components after the operation ceases 

and prior to beginning a new operation. 

Addition of raw material and 

withdrawal of product do not occur 

simultaneously in a batch operation. 

Batch process vent means a vent from 

a batch operation from a PVCPU or 

vents from multiple PVCPUs within a 

process that are manifolded together 

into a common header, through which 

a HAP-containing gas stream is, or has 

the potential to be, released to the 

atmosphere. Batch process vents also 

include vents with intermittent flow 

from continuous operations that are not 

combined with any stream that 

originated as a continuous gas stream 

from the same continuous process. 

Examples of batch process vents 

include, but are not limited to, vents on 

condensers used for product recovery, 

polymerization reactors, and process 

tanks. The following are not batch 

process vents for the purposes of this 

subpart: 

(1) Continuous process vents. 

(2) Bottoms receivers. 

(3) Surge control vessels. 

(4) A gas stream routed to other 

processes for reaction or other use in 

another process (i.e., for chemical value 

as a product, isolated intermediate, 

byproduct, coproduct, or for heat value). 

(5) Vents on storage tanks, wastewater 

emission sources, or pieces of process 

components subject to the emission 

limits and work practice standards for 

storage vessels, equipment leaks, and 

wastewater. 

(6) Drums, pails, and totes. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29596 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

(7) Vents from a pressure relief device 

having an actuation pressure of 2 psig 

or higher. 

Bottoms receiver means a tank that 

collects bottoms from continuous 

distillation before the stream is sent for 

storage or for further downstream 

processing. A rundown tank is an 

example of a bottoms receiver. 

Bulk process means a process for 

producing polyvinyl chloride resin that 

is characterized by a two-step 

anhydrous polymerization process: the 

formation of small resin particles in a 

pre-polymerization reactor using small 

amounts of vinyl chloride monomer, an 

initiator, and agitation; and the growth 

of the resin particles in a postpolymerization reactor using additional 

vinyl chloride monomer. Resins 

produced using the bulk process are 

referred to as bulk resins. 

Bypass means to direct a process vent 

or closed vent system stream to the 

atmosphere such that it does not first 

pass through an emission control 

device. 

Calendar year means the period 

between January 1 and December 31, 

inclusive for a given year. 

Capacity means the nominal figure or 

rating given by the manufacturer of the 

storage vessel, condenser, or other 

process component. 

Car-seal means a seal that is placed on 

a device that is used to change the 

position of a valve (e.g., from opened to 

closed) in such a way that the position 

of the valve cannot be changed without 

breaking the seal. 

Closed vent system means a system 

that is not open to the atmosphere and 

is composed of piping, ductwork, 

connections, and, if necessary, flow 

inducing devices that collect or 

transport gas or vapor from an emission 

point to a control device. 

Combustion device means an 

individual unit used for the combustion 

of organic emissions, such as a flare, 

incinerator, process heater, or boiler. 

Conservation vent means an 

automatically operated (e.g., weightloaded or spring-loaded) safety device 

used to prevent the operating pressure 

of a storage vessel from exceeding the 

maximum allowable working pressure 

of the process component. Conservation 

vents open and close to permit only the 

intake or outlet relief necessary to keep 

the storage vessel within permissible 

working pressures, and reseal 

automatically. 

Container means a portable unit in 

which a material can be stored, 

transported, treated, disposed of, or 

otherwise handled. Examples of 

containers include, but are not limited 

to, drums, pails, and portable cargo 

containers known as ‘‘portable tanks’’ or 

‘‘totes.’’ Container does not include 

transport vehicles or barges. 

Continuous emission monitoring 

system (CEMS) means the total 

equipment that may be required to meet 

the data acquisition and availability 

requirements of this subpart, used to 

sample, condition (if applicable), 

analyze, and provide a record of 

emissions. 

Continuous operation means any 

operation that is not a batch operation. 

Continuous parameter monitoring 

system (CPMS) means the total 

equipment that may be required to meet 

the data acquisition and availability 

requirements of this part, used to 

sample, condition (if applicable), 

analyze, and provide a record of process 

or control system parameters. 

Continuous record means 

documentation, either in hard copy or 

computer readable form, of data values 

measured at least once every 15 minutes 

and recorded at the frequency specified 

in § 63.11990(e)(1). 

Continuous process vent means the 

point of discharge to the atmosphere (or 

the point of entry into a control device, 

if any) of a gas stream if the gas stream 

has the following characteristics: 

(1) Some, or all, of the gas stream 

originates as a continuous flow from any 

continuous PVCPU operation during 

operation of the PVCPU. 

(2) The discharge to the atmosphere 

(with or without passing through a 

control device) meets at least one of the 

following conditions: 

(i) Is directly from any continuous 

operation. 

(ii) Is from any continuous operation 

after passing solely (i.e., without passing 

through any other unit operation for a 

process purpose) through one or more 

recovery devices within the PVCPU. 

(iii) Is from a device recovering only 

mechanical energy from a gas stream 

that comes either directly from any 

continuous operation, or from any 

continuous operation after passing 

solely (i.e., without passing through any 

other unit operation for a process 

purpose) through one or more recovery 

devices within the PVCPU. 

(3) The gas stream is in the gas phase 

from the point of origin at the 

continuous operation to the point of 

discharge to the atmosphere (or to the 

point of entry into a control device, if 

any). 

(4) The gas stream is discharged to the 

atmosphere either on site, off site, or 

both. If the gas stream is discharged to 

an off-site or on-site location that you do 

not own or operate, you must comply 

with the requirements in § 63.113(a)(i) 

of this part. 

(5) The gas stream is not any of the 

following items: 

(i) A pressure relief device discharge 

having an actuation pressure of 2 psig 

or higher. 

(ii) A leak from equipment subject to 

this subpart. 

(iii) A gas stream exiting a control 

device used to comply with the 

emission limits and work practice 

standards of this subpart. 

(v) A gas stream transferred to other 

processes (on site or off site) for reaction 

or other use in another process (i.e., for 

chemical value as a product, isolated 

intermediate, by-product, or co-product, 

or for heat value). 

(vi) A storage vessel vent or transfer 

operation vent subject to the provisions 

of this subpart. 

(vii) A vent from a waste management 

unit subject to the provisions of subpart 

G of this subpart, as specified in this 

subpart. 

(viii) A gas stream exiting an analyzer 

(but they must be controlled as sample 

purge). 

(6) The gas stream would meet the 

characteristics specified in paragraphs 

(1) through (6) of this definition, but, for 

purposes of avoiding applicability, has 

been deliberately interrupted, 

temporarily liquefied, or routed through 

any process component for no process 

purpose. 

Control device means, with the 

exceptions noted in this definition, a 

combustion device, recovery device, 

recapture device, or any combination of 

these devices used to comply with this 

subpart. Process condensers are not 

control devices. 

Control system means the 

combination of the closed vent system 

and the control devices used to collect 

and control vapors or gases from a 

regulated emission source. 

Cooling tower means a heat removal 

device used to remove the heat absorbed 

in circulating cooling water systems by 

transferring the heat to the atmosphere 

using natural or mechanical draft. 

Cooling tower return line means the 

main water trunk lines at the inlet to the 

cooling tower before exposure to the 

atmosphere. 

Corrective action plan means a 

description of all reasonable interim and 

long-term measures, if any, that are 

available, and an explanation of why the 

selected corrective action is the best 

alternative, including, but not limited 

to, any consideration of costeffectiveness. 

Day means a calendar day, unless 

otherwise specified in this subpart. 

Degassing means the process of 

removing HAP organic gases from a 

storage vessel. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29597 

Dioxin/furan means total tetrathrough octachlorinated dibenzo-pdioxins and dibenzofurans. 

Dispersion process means a process 

for producing polyvinyl chloride resin 

that is characterized by the formation of 

the polymers in soap micelles that 

contain small amounts of vinyl chloride 

monomer. Emulsifiers are used to 

disperse vinyl chloride monomer in the 

water phase. Initiators used in the 

dispersion process are soluble in water. 

Resins produced using the dispersion 

process are referred to as latex or 

dispersion resins. 

Empty or emptying means the partial 

or complete removal of stored liquid 

from a storage vessel. Storage vessels 

that contain liquid only as a result of the 

liquid clinging to the walls or bottoms, 

or resting in pools due to bottom 

irregularities, are considered completely 

empty. 

Equipment means each pump, 

compressor, agitator, pressure relief 

device, sampling connection system, 

open-ended valve or line, valve, 

connector, and instrumentation system 

in HAP service; and any control devices 

or systems used to comply with this 

subpart. 

Fill or filling means the introduction 

of liquid into a storage vessel, but not 

necessarily to capacity. 

First attempt at repair, for the 

purposes of this subpart, means to take 

action for the purpose of stopping or 

reducing leakage of organic material to 

the atmosphere, followed by monitoring 

as specified in § 63.11930(f) to verify 

whether the leak is repaired, unless the 

owner or operator determines by other 

means that the leak is not repaired. 

Fixed roof storage vessel means a 

vessel with roof that is mounted (i.e., 

permanently affixed) on a storage vessel 

and that does not move with 

fluctuations in stored liquid level. 

Flow indicator means a device that 

indicates whether gas flow is, or 

whether the valve position would allow 

gas flow to be, present in a line. 

Grade means the subdivision of PVC 

resin classification which describes it as 

a unique resin, i.e., the most exact 

description of a resin with no further 

subdivision. 

Heat exchange system means a device 

or collection of devices used to transfer 

heat from process fluids to water 

without intentional direct contact of the 

process fluid with the water (i.e., noncontact heat exchanger) and to transport 

and/or cool the water in a closed-loop 

recirculation system (cooling tower 

system) or a once-through system (e.g., 

river or pond water). For closed-loop 

recirculation systems, the heat exchange 

system consists of a cooling tower, all 

heat exchangers that are serviced by that 

cooling tower, and all water lines to and 

from the heat exchanger(s). For oncethrough systems, the heat exchange 

system consists of one or more heat 

exchangers servicing an individual 

process unit and all water lines to and 

from the heat exchanger(s). Intentional 

direct contact with process fluids results 

in the formation of a wastewater. 

In HAP service means that a process 

component either contains or contacts a 

liquid that is at least 5 percent HAP by 

weight or a gas that is at least 5 percent 

by volume HAP as determined 

according to the provisions of 

§ 63.180(d). The provisions of 

§ 63.180(d) also specify how to 

determine that a process component is 

not in HAP service. 

In vacuum service means that the 

process component is operating at an 

internal pressure that is at least 5 

kilopascals (kPa) (0.7 pounds per square 

inch absolute) below ambient pressure. 

Incinerator means an enclosed 

combustion device with an enclosed fire 

box that is used for destroying organic 

compounds. Auxiliary fuel may be used 

to heat waste gas to combustion 

temperatures. Any energy recovery 

section present is not physically formed 

into one manufactured or assembled 

unit with the combustion section; 

rather, the energy recovery section is a 

separate section following the 

combustion section and the two are 

joined by ducts or connections carrying 

flue gas. This energy recovery section 

limitation does not apply to an energy 

recovery section used solely to preheat 

the incoming vent stream or combustion 

air. 

Maximum representative operating 

conditions means process operating 

conditions that result in the most 

challenging condition for the control 

device. The most challenging condition 

for the control device may include, but 

is not limited to, the highest or lowest 

HAP mass loading rate to the control 

device, the highest or lowest HAP mass 

loading rate of constituents that 

approach the limits of solubility for 

scrubbing media, the highest or lowest 

HAP mass loading rate of constituents 

that approach limits of solubility for 

scrubbing media. 

Maximum true vapor pressure means 

the equilibrium partial pressure exerted 

by the total HAP in the stored or 

transferred liquid at the temperature 

equal to the highest calendar-month 

average of the liquid storage or transfer 

temperature for liquids stored or 

transferred above or below the ambient 

temperature or at the local maximum 

monthly average temperature as 

reported by the National Weather 

Service for liquids stored or transferred 

at the ambient temperature, as 

determined by any one of the following 

methods or references: 

(1) In accordance with methods 

described in American Petroleum 

Institute Publication 2517, Evaporative 

Loss From External Floating-Roof Tanks 

(incorporated by reference, see § 63.14). 

(2) As obtained from standard 

reference texts. 

(3) As determined by the American 

Society for Testing and Materials 

Method D2879–10 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14). 

(4) Any other method approved by the 

Administrator. 

Nonstandard batch means a batch 

process that is operated outside of the 

range of operating conditions that are 

documented in an existing operating 

scenario but is still a reasonably 

anticipated event. For example, a 

nonstandard batch occurs when 

additional processing or processing at 

different operating conditions must be 

conducted to produce a product that is 

normally produced under the 

conditions described by the standard 

batch. A nonstandard batch may be 

necessary as a result of a malfunction, 

but it is not itself a malfunction. 

Operating block means a period of 

time that is equal to the time from the 

beginning to end of batch process 

operations within a process. 

Operating day means a 24-hour 

period between 12 midnight and the 

following midnight during which PVC 

is produced at any time in the PVCPU. 

It is not necessary for PVC to be 

produced for the entire 24-hour period. 

Operating scenario means, for the 

purposes of reporting and 

recordkeeping, any specific operation of 

a regulated process as described by 

reports specified in § 63.11985(b)(3) and 

records specified in § 63.11990(e)(4). 

Plant site means all contiguous or 

adjoining property that is under 

common control including properties 

that are separated only by a road or 

other public right-of-way. Common 

control includes properties that are 

owned, leased, or operated by the same 

entity, parent entity, subsidiary, or any 

combination thereof. 

Polymerization reactor means any 

vessel in which vinyl chloride is 

partially or totally polymerized into 

polyvinyl chloride. For bulk processes, 

the polymerization reactor includes prepolymerization reactors and postpolymerization reactors. 

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) means a 

synthetic thermoplastic polymer that is 

derived from the polymerization of 

vinyl chloride and has the general 

chemical structure (–H2CCHCl–)n. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29598 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Polyvinyl chloride is typically a white 

powder or colorless granule. Polyvinyl 

chloride is produced by different 

processes, including (but not limited to), 

suspension, dispersion/emulsion, bulk, 

and solution processes. 

Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers 

production process unit or PVCPU 

means a collection of process 

components assembled and connected 

by hard-piping or duct work, used to 

process raw materials and to 

manufacture polyvinyl chloride and/or 

polyvinyl chloride copolymers. A 

PVCPU includes, but is not limited to, 

polymerization reactors; resin stripping 

operations; blend tanks; centrifuges; 

dryers; product separators; recovery 

devices; feed, intermediate, and product 

storage vessels such as reactant storage 

tanks, holding tanks, mixing and 

weighing tanks, and final product 

storage tanks or storage silos; finished 

product loading operations; heat 

exchange systems; wastewater strippers; 

wastewater treatment systems; 

connected ducts and piping; equipment 

components including pumps, 

compressors, agitators, pressure relief 

devices, sampling connection systems, 

open-ended valves or lines, valves, and 

connectors. A PVCPU does not include 

chemical manufacturing process units, 

as defined in § 63.101, that produce 

vinyl chloride monomer or other raw 

materials used in the PVC 

polymerization process. 

Polyvinyl chloride copolymer means a 

synthetic thermoplastic polymer that is 

derived from the simultaneous 

polymerization of vinyl chloride and 

another vinyl monomer such as vinyl 

acetate. Polyvinyl chloride copolymer is 

produced by different processes, 

including, but not limited to, 

suspension, dispersion/emulsion, bulk, 

and solution processes. 

Pressure relief device means a safety 

device used to prevent operating 

pressures from exceeding the maximum 

allowable working pressure of the 

process component. A common pressure 

relief device is a spring-loaded pressure 

relief valve. Devices that are actuated 

either by a pressure of less than or equal 

to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge or 

by a vacuum are not pressure relief 

devices. 

Pressure vessel means a vessel that is 

used to store liquids or gases and is 

designed not to vent to the atmosphere 

as a result of compression of the vapor 

headspace in the pressure vessel during 

filling of the pressure vessel to its 

design capacity. 

Process change means an addition to 

or change in a PVCPU and/or its 

associated process components that 

creates one or more emission points or 

changes the characteristics of an 

emission point such that a new or 

different emission limit, operating 

parameter limit, or work practice 

requirement applies to the added or 

changed emission points. Examples of 

process changes include, but are not 

limited to, changes in production 

capacity, production rate, or catalyst 

type, or whenever there is replacement, 

removal, or addition of recovery device 

components. For purposes of this 

definition, process changes do not 

include process upsets, changes that do 

not alter the process component 

configuration and operating conditions, 

and unintentional, temporary process 

changes. A process change does not 

include moving within a range of 

conditions identified in the standard 

batch, and a nonstandard batch does not 

constitute a process change. 

Process component means any unit 

operation or group of units operations or 

any part of a process or group of parts 

of a process that are assembled to 

perform a specific function (e.g., 

polymerization reactor, dryers, etc.). 

Process components include equipment, 

as defined in this section. 

Process condenser means a condenser 

whose primary purpose is to recover 

material as an integral part of a batch 

process. All condensers recovering 

condensate from a batch process at or 

above the boiling point or all 

condensers in line prior to a vacuum 

source are considered process 

condensers. Typically, a primary 

condenser or condensers in series are 

considered to be integral to the batch 

regulated process if they are capable of 

and normally used for the purpose of 

recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e., 

net positive heating value), use, reuse or 

for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. This 

definition does not apply to a condenser 

that is used to remove materials that 

would hinder performance of a 

downstream recovery device as follows: 

(1) To remove water vapor that would 

cause icing in a downstream condenser. 

(2) To remove water vapor that would 

negatively affect the adsorption capacity 

of carbon in a downstream carbon 

adsorber. 

(3) To remove high molecular weight 

organic compounds or other organic 

compounds that would be difficult to 

remove during regeneration of a 

downstream adsorber. 

Process tank means a tank or other 

vessel (e.g., pressure vessel) that is used 

within an affected source to both: (1) 

Collect material discharged from a 

feedstock storage vessel, process tank, or 

other PVCPU process component, and 

(2) discharge the material to another 

process tank, process component, 

byproduct storage vessel, or product 

storage vessel. 

Process unit means the process 

components assembled and connected 

by pipes or ducts to process raw and/or 

intermediate materials and to 

manufacture an intended product. For 

the purpose of this subpart, process unit 

includes, but is not limited to, polyvinyl 

chloride production process. 

Process vent means batch process vent 

or continuous process vent from process 

components including polymerization 

reactors, resin strippers, vinyl chloride 

monomer recovery systems, slip gauges, 

unloading and loading lines, samples, 

wastewater collection and treatment 

systems, and other process components 

prior to the resin stripper. 

Product means a polymer produced 

using the same monomers and varying 

in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators, 

etc.); catalysts; or in the relative 

proportions of monomers, that is 

manufactured by a process unit. With 

respect to polymers, more than one 

recipe may be used to produce the same 

product, and there can be more than one 

grade of a product. Product also means 

a chemical that is not a polymer, which 

is manufactured by a process unit. Byproducts, isolated intermediates, 

impurities, wastes, and trace 

contaminants are not considered 

products. 

Recipe means a specific composition, 

from among the range of possible 

compositions that may occur within a 

product, as defined in this section. A 

recipe is determined by the proportions 

of monomers and, if present, other 

reactants and additives that are used to 

make the recipe. 

Recovery device means an individual 

process component capable of and 

normally used for the purpose of 

recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e., 

net positive heating value), use, reuse or 

for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. 

Examples of process components that 

may be recovery devices include 

absorbers, adsorbers, condensers, oilwater separators or organic-water 

separators, or organic removal devices 

such as decanters, strippers (e.g., 

wastewater steam and vacuum 

strippers), or thin-film evaporation 

units. For purposes of this subpart, 

recovery devices are control devices. 

Repaired, for the purposes of this 

subpart, means equipment that is 

adjusted or otherwise altered to 

eliminate a leak as defined in the 

applicable sections of this subpart; and 

unless otherwise specified in applicable 

provisions of this subpart, is inspected 

as specified in § 63.11930(f) to verify 

that emissions from the equipment are 

below the applicable leak definition. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29599 

Resin stripper means a unit that 

removes organic compounds from a raw 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymer 

product. In the production of a polymer, 

stripping is a discrete step that occurs 

after the polymerization reaction and 

before drying or other finishing 

operations. Examples of types of 

stripping include steam stripping, 

vacuum stripping, or other methods of 

devolatilization. For the purposes of this 

subpart, devolatilization that occurs in 

dryers or other finishing operations is 

not resin stripping. Resin stripping may 

occur in a polymerization reactor or in 

a batch or continuous stripper separate 

from the polymerization reactor where 

resin stripping occurs. 

Root cause analysis means an 

assessment conducted through a process 

of investigation to determine the 

primary cause, and any other significant 

contributing cause(s), of a discharge of 

gases in excess of specified thresholds. 

Sensor means a device that measures 

a physical quantity or the change in a 

physical quantity, such as temperature, 

pressure, flow rate, pH, or liquid level. 

Slip gauge means a gauge that has a 

probe that moves through the gas/liquid 

interface in a storage vessel and 

indicates the level of product in the 

vessel by the physical state of the 

material the gauge discharges. 

Solution process means a process for 

producing polyvinyl chloride resin that 

is characterized by the anhydrous 

formation of the polymer through 

precipitation. Polymerization occurs in 

an organic solvent in the presence of an 

initiator where vinyl chloride monomer 

and co-monomers are soluble in the 

solvent, but the polymer is not. The PVC 

polymer is a granule suspended in the 

solvent, which then precipitates out of 

solution. Emulsifiers and suspending 

agents are not used in the solution 

process. PVC resins produced using the 

solution process are referred to as 

solution resins. 

Specific gravity monitoring device 

means a unit of equipment used to 

monitor specific gravity and having a 

minimum accuracy of ±0.02 specific 

gravity units. 

Standard procedure means a formal 

written procedure officially adopted by 

the plant owner or operator and 

available on a routine basis to those 

persons responsible for carrying out the 

procedure. 

Storage vessel means a tank or other 

vessel (e.g., pressure vessel) that is part 

of an affected source and is used to store 

a gaseous, liquid, or solid feedstock, 

byproduct, or product that contains 

organic HAP. Storage vessel does not 

include: 

(1) Vessels permanently attached to 

motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars, 

barges, or ships; 

(2) Process tanks; 

(3) Vessels with capacities smaller 

than 10,040 gallons; 

(4) Vessels storing organic liquids that 

contain organic HAP only as impurities; 

(5) Bottoms receiver tanks; 

(6) Surge control vessels; and 

(7) Wastewater storage tanks. 

Wastewater storage tanks are covered 

under the wastewater provisions. 

Stripped resin means the material 

exiting the resin stripper that contains 

polymerized vinyl chloride. 

Supplemental combustion air means 

the air that is added to a vent stream 

after the vent stream leaves the unit 

operation. Air that is part of the vent 

stream as a result of the nature of the 

unit operation is not considered 

supplemental combustion air. Air 

required to operate combustion device 

burner(s) is not considered 

supplemental combustion air. Air 

required to ensure the proper operation 

of catalytic oxidizers, to include the 

intermittent addition of air upstream of 

the catalyst bed to maintain a minimum 

threshold flow rate through the catalyst 

bed or to avoid excessive temperatures 

in the catalyst bed, is not considered to 

be supplemental combustion air. 

Surge control vessel means feed 

drums, recycle drums, and intermediate 

vessels used as a part of any continuous 

operation. Surge control vessels are 

used within an affected source when inprocess storage, mixing, or management 

of flow rates or volumes is needed to 

introduce material into continuous 

operations. 

Suspension process means a process 

for producing polyvinyl chloride resin 

that is characterized by the formation of 

the polymers in droplets of liquid vinyl 

chloride monomer or other comonomers suspended in water. The 

droplets are formed by agitation and the 

use of protective colloids or suspending 

agents. Initiators used in the suspension 

process are soluble in vinyl chloride 

monomer. Polyvinyl chloride resins 

produced using the suspension process 

are referred to as suspension resins. 

Treatment process means a specific 

technique or collection of techniques 

that remove or destroy the organics in 

a wastewater or residual stream such as 

a steam stripping unit, thin-film 

evaporation unit, waste incinerator, 

biological treatment unit, or any other 

process or collection of processes 

applied to wastewater streams or 

residuals to comply with §§ 63.11965 

and 63.11970. Most treatment processes 

are conducted in tanks. 

Type of resin means the broad 

classification of resin referring to the 

basic manufacturing process for 

producing that resin, including, but not 

limited to, suspension, dispersion/ 

emulsion, bulk, and solution processes. 

Unloading operations means the 

transfer of organic liquids from a 

transport vehicle, container, or storage 

vessel to process components within the 

affected source. 

Wastewater means water that comes 

into direct contact with HAP or results 

from the production or use of any raw 

material, intermediate product, finished 

product, by-product, or waste product 

containing HAP but that has not been 

discharged untreated as wastewater. 

Examples are product tank drawdown 

or feed tank drawdown; water formed 

during a chemical reaction or used as a 

reactant; water used to wash impurities 

from organic products or reactants; 

water used to cool or quench organic 

vapor streams through direct contact; 

water discarded from a control device; 

and condensed steam from jet ejector 

systems pulling vacuum on vessels 

containing organics. Gasholder seal 

water is not wastewater until it is 

removed from the gasholder. 

Work practice standard means any 

design, equipment, work practice, or 

operational standard, or combination 

thereof that is promulgated pursuant to 

section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act. 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES

For this type of emission 

point . . . And for this air pollutant . . . 

And for an affected source 

producing this type of PVC 

resin . . . 

You must meet this emission 

limit . . . 

Process vents 1 .................. Vinyl chloride .................................... All resin types ................................... 0.32 parts per million by volume at 

3-percent oxygen (ppmv). 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29600 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AFFECTED SOURCES— 

Continued 

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 . . . 

Total organic HAP ............................ All resin types ................................... 12 ppmv. 

(For compliance determination, demonstrate that total hydrocarbon is 

less than or equal to 2 ppmv 

measured as propane). 

Hydrogen chloride ............................ All resin types ................................... 150 ppmv. 

Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency 

basis).

All resin types ................................... 0.023 ng/dscm at 3-percent oxygen. 

Stripped resin ..................... Vinyl chloride .................................... Bulk ................................................... 7.1 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw). 

Dispersion ......................................... 55 ppmw. 

All other resins 2 ................................ 0.48 ppmw. 

Total HAP ......................................... Bulk ................................................... 170 ppmw. 

Dispersion ......................................... 110 ppmw. 

All other resins 2 ................................ 76 ppmw. 

Wastewater ........................ Vinyl chloride .................................... All resin types ................................... See Table 3 to this subpart. 

Total HAP ......................................... All resin types.

1Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis. 

2 Includes, but is not limited to, PVCPUs using the suspension process and solution process. 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR NEW AFFECTED SOURCES

For this type of emission 

point . . . And for this air pollutant . . . 

And for an affected source 

producing this type of PVC 

resin . . . 

You must meet this emission 

limit . . . 

Process vents 1 .................. Vinyl chloride .................................... All resin types ................................... 3.2 parts per billion by volume at 3- 

percent oxygen (ppbv). 

Total organic HAP ............................ All resin types ................................... 0.22 ppmv. 

(For compliance determination, demonstrate that total hydrocarbon is 

less than or equal to 2 ppmv 

measured as propane). 

Hydrogen chloride ............................ All resin types ................................... 0.17 ppmv. 

Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency 

basis).

All resin types ................................... 0.0087 ng/dscm at 3-percent oxygen. 

Stripped resin ..................... Vinyl chloride .................................... Bulk ................................................... 7.1 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw). 

Dispersion ......................................... 41 ppmw. 

All other resins 2 ................................ 0.20 ppmw 

Total HAP ......................................... Bulk ................................................... 170 ppmw. 

Dispersion ......................................... 58 ppmw. 

All other resins 2 ................................ 42 ppmw. 

Wastewater ........................ Vinyl chloride .................................... All resin types ................................... See Table 3 to this subpart. 

Total HAP ......................................... All resin types.

1Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis. 

2 Includes, but is not limited to, PVCPUs using the suspension process and solution process. 

TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER FOR NEW AND EXISTING

AFFECTED SOURCES

If a wastewater stream is determined to have 

a . . . Then . . . And the wastewater stream must meet the following limit or standard: 

Vinyl chloride concentration less than 10 parts 

per million by weight (ppmw) at the point of 

generation.

You are not required to use a wastewater 

treatment process to reduce your vinyl chloride emissions and compliance must be 

demonstrated as specified in § 63.11970(b).

Less than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride.1

HAP concentration (based on HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart G of this part) less than 

1,000 ppmw; or.

Annual average flow rate less than 10 liters per 

minute.

You are not required to use a wastewater 

treatment process to reduce your total HAP 

emissions (for HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) and compliance must be 

demonstrated as specified in § 63.11970(c).

Less than 1,000 ppmw of HAP listed in Table 

9 to subpart G of this part and less than 10 

liters per minute annual average flow rate.2

Vinyl chloride concentration greater than or 

equal to 10 ppmw at the point of generation.

You must use a wastewater treatment process and demonstrate compliance as specified in §§ 63.11965(b) and 63.11970(a), respectively 1.

Existing sources—0.11 ppmw vinyl chloride at 

the stripper outlet.1

New sources—0.0060 ppmw vinyl chloride at 

the stripper outlet.1

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29601 

TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH—EMISSION LIMITS AND STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER FOR NEW AND EXISTING

AFFECTED SOURCES—Continued 

If a wastewater stream is determined to have 

a . . . Then . . . And the wastewater stream must meet the following limit or standard: 

HAP concentration (based on HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart G of this part) greater 

than or equal to 1,000 ppmw; HAP and 

Annual average flow rate greater than or equal 

to 10 liters per minute.

You must use a wastewater treatment process and demonstrate compliance as specified in §§ 63.11965(c) and 63.11970(a), respectively.The provisions in subpart G of this part, as 

referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through (4).2

1 Refer to § 63.11975(a)(3) and (d) for the data averaging period for determining compliance. 

2 Refer to subpart G of this part for the data averaging period for determining compliance. 

TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—SUMMARY OF CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR STORAGE VESSELS AT

NEW AND EXISTING SOURCES

If the storage vessel capacity (gallons) is * * * And the vapor pressure 1 (psia) is * * * Then, you must use the following type of storage vessel: * * * 

≥ 20,000 but < 40,000 ........................................ ≥ 4 .................................................................... Internal floating roof, external floating roof, or 

fixed roof vented to a closed vent system 

and control device achieving 95 percent reduction.2

≥ 40,000 ............................................................. ≥ 0.75 ............................................................... Internal floating roof, external floating roof, or 

fixed roof vented to a closed vent system 

and control device achieving 95 percent reduction.2

Any capacity ....................................................... > 11.1 ............................................................... Pressure vessel.3

All other capacity and vapor pressure combinations ........................................................................ Fixed roof.4

1 Maximum true vapor pressure of total HAP at storage temperature. 

2 If using a fixed roof storage vessel vented to a closed vent system and control device, you must meet the requirements in § 63.11910(a) for 

fixed roof storage vessels. If using an internal floating roof storage vessel or external floating roof storage vessels, you must meet the requirements in § 63.11910(b) for internal floating roof storage vessels or external floating roof storage vessels, as applicable. 3 Meeting the requirements of § 63.11910(c) for pressure vessels. 

4 Meeting the requirements in § 63.11910(a) for fixed roof storage vessels. 

TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart HHHHHHH Explanation 

§ 63.1(a)(1)–(a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)– 

(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), 

(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).

Applicability .................................. Yes ...............................................

§ 63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)–(a)(9), (b)(2), 

(c)(3), (c)(4), (d).

Reserved ...................................... No .................................................

§ 63.2 ............................................... Definitions ..................................... Yes ............................................... Additional definitions are found in 

§ 63.12005. 

§ 63.3 ............................................... Units and abbreviations ............... Yes ...............................................

§ 63.4 ............................................... Prohibited activities and circumvention.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.5 ............................................... Preconstruction review and notification requirements.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), 

(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), (e)(1)(iii), 

(f)(2), (f)(3), (g), (i), (j).

Compliance with standards and 

maintenance requirements.

Yes ............................................... § 63.11875 specifies compliance 

dates. 

§ 63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), 

(e)(2), (e)(3)(ii), (h)(2)(ii), (h)(3), 

(h)(5)(iv).

[Reserved] .................................... No .................................................

§ 63.6(e)(1)(i), (e)(1)(ii), (e)(3), (f)(1) Startup, shutdown, and malfunction provisions.No. See § 63.11890(b) for general 

duty requirement.

§ 63.6(h)(1), (h)(2)(i), (h)(2)(iii), 

(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–(h)(5)(iii), 

(h)(5)(v), (h)(6)–(h)(9).

Compliance with opacity and visible emission standards.No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not 

specify opacity or visible emission standards. 

§ 63.7(a)(1), (a)(2)(ix), (a)(3), (a)(4), 

(b)–(d), (e)(2)–(e)(4), (f)–(h).

Performance testing requirements Yes ...............................................

§ 63.7(e)(1) ...................................... Performance testing ..................... No. See especially § 63.11945, 

63.11960(d), 63.11980(a).

§ 63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(4), (b), 

(c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), (c)(2)–(c)(4), 

(c)(6)–(c)(8).

Monitoring requirements .............. Yes ............................................... Except cross reference in 

§ 63.8(c)(1)(i) to § 63.6(e)(1) is 

replaced with a cross-reference 

to § 63.11890(b). 

§ 63.8(a)(3) ...................................... [Reserved] .................................... No .................................................

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29602 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63—Continued 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart HHHHHHH Explanation 

§ 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ................................. Requirement to develop SSM 

plan for continuous monitoring 

systems.

No .................................................

§ 63.8(c)(5) ...................................... Continuous opacity monitoring 

system minimum procedures.

No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not 

have opacity or visible emission 

standards. 

§ 63.8(d)(3) ...................................... Written procedures for continuous 

monitoring systems (CMS).

Yes, except for last sentence, 

which refers to an SSM plan. 

SSM plans are not required.

§ 63.8(g) .......................................... Reduction of monitoring data ....... Yes ............................................... Except that the minimum data 

collection requirements are 

specified in § 63.11890(e). 

§ 63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(4)(i), 

(b)(4)(v), (b)(5), (c)–(e), (g)(1), 

(g)(3), (h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6), 

(i), (j).

Notification requirements ............. Yes ...............................................

§ 63.9(f) ........................................... Notification of opacity and visible 

emission observations.

No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not 

have opacity or visible emission 

standards. 

§ 63.9(g)(2) ...................................... Use of continuous opacity monitoring system data.No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous 

opacity monitoring system. 

§ 63.9(b)(3), (b)(4)(ii)–(iv), (h)(4) ..... [Reserved] .................................... No .................................................

§ 63.10(a), (b)(1) ............................. Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(i) ................................. Recordkeeping of occurrence and 

duration of startups and shutdowns.

No .................................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(ii) ................................ Recordkeeping of malfunctions .... No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8) 

for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction. 

See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for 

deviation reporting.

§ 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ............................... Maintenance records .................... Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(iv), (b)(2)(v) ................ Actions taken to minimize emissions during SSM.No .................................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(vi) ............................... Recordkeeping for CMS malfunctions.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(vii)–(ix) ....................... Other CMS requirements ............. Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(b)(2)(xi)–(xiv) ...................... Other recordkeeping requirements.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(b)(3) .................................... Recordkeeping requirement for 

applicability determinations.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(c)(1), (c)(5), (c)(6) ............... Additional recordkeeping requirements for sources with continuous monitoring systems.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(c)(2)–(4), (c)(9) ................... [Reserved] 

§ 63.10(c)(7) .................................... Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying 

exceedances and excess emissions.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(c)(8) .................................... Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying 

exceedances and excess emissions.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(c)(10) .................................. Recording nature and cause of 

malfunctions.

No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8) 

for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction. 

See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for 

deviation reporting.

63.10(c)(11) ..................................... Recording corrective actions ........ No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8) 

for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction. 

See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for 

deviation reporting.

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29603 

TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PART 63—Continued 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart HHHHHHH Explanation 

§ 63.10(c)(13)–(14) .......................... Records of the total process operating time during the reporting period and procedures that 

are part of the continuous monitoring system quality control 

program.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(c)(15) .................................. Use SSM plan .............................. No .................................................

§ 63.10(d)(1) .................................... General reporting requirements ... Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(d)(2) .................................... Performance test results .............. Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(d)(3) .................................... Opacity or visible emissions observations.No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not 

specify opacity or visible emission standards. 

§ 63.10(d)(4) .................................... Progress reports ........................... Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(d)(5) .................................... SSM reports ................................. No. See 63.11985(c)(4) and (8) 

for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction. 

See also 63.11985(b)(4)(i), for 

deviation reporting.

§ 63.10(e)(1) .................................... Additional continuous monitoring 

system reports—general.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(e)(2)(i) ................................. Results of continuous monitoring 

system performance evaluations.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(e)(2)(ii) ................................ Results of continuous opacity 

monitoring system performance 

evaluations.

No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous 

opacity monitoring system. 

§ 63.10(e)(3) .................................... Excess emissions/continuous 

monitoring system performance 

reports.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.10(e)(4) .................................... Continuous opacity monitoring 

system data reports.

No ................................................. Subpart HHHHHHH does not require the use of continuous 

opacity monitoring system. 

§ 63.10(f) ......................................... Recordkeeping/reporting waiver .. Yes ...............................................

63.11(a) ........................................... Control device and work practice 

requirements—applicability.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.11(b) ........................................ Flares ........................................... No ................................................. Facilities subject to subpart 

HHHHHHH do not use flares 

as control devices, as specified 

in § 63.11925(b). 

§ 63.11(c)–(e) .................................. Alternative work practice for monitoring equipment for leaks.Yes ...............................................

§ 63.12 ............................................. State authority and delegations ... Yes ............................................... § 63.12000 identifies types of approval authority that are not 

delegated. 

§ 63.13 ............................................. Addresses .................................... Yes ...............................................

§ 63.14 ............................................. Incorporations by reference ......... Yes ............................................... Subpart HHHHHHH incorporates 

material by reference. 

§ 63.15 ............................................. Availability of information and 

confidentiality.

Yes ...............................................

§ 63.16 ............................................. Performance track provisions ...... Yes ...............................................

TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING, 

RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER

For these control devices, 

you must monitor these operating parameters . . . 

Establish the following operating 

limit during your initial performance test . . . 

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum 

frequencies 

Data measurement Data recording Data averaging period for 

compliance 

Process Vents 

Any Control device: 

Flow to/from the control device.N/A ............................................. Continuous ............... N/A ........................... Date and time of flow start and 

stop. 

Incinerators: 

Temperature (in fire 

box or downstream 

ductwork prior to 

heat exchange).

Minimum temperature ................ Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29604 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING, 

RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER—Continued 

For these control devices, 

you must monitor these operating parameters . . . 

Establish the following operating 

limit during your initial performance test . . . 

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum 

frequencies 

Data measurement Data recording Data averaging period for 

compliance 

Temperature differential across catalyst 

bed.

Minimum temperature differential.Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Inlet temperature to 

catalyst bed and 

catalyst condition.

Minimum inlet temperature and 

catalyst condition as specified 

in 63.11940(b)(3).

Continuous for temperature, annual 

for catalyst condition.

Every 15 minutes for 

temperature, annual for catalyst 

condition.

3-hour block average for temperature, annual for catalyst 

condition. 

Absorbers and Acid Gas 

Scrubbers: 

Influent liquid flow ...... Minimum inlet liquid flow ........... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Influent liquid flow and 

gas stream flow.

Minimum influent liquid flow to 

gas stream flow ratio.

Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Pressure drop ............. Minimum pressure drop ............. Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average.

Exhaust gas temperature.Maximum exhaust gas temperature.Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Change in specific 

gravity of scrubber 

liquid.

Minimum change in specific 

gravity.

Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

pH of effluent liquid .... Minimum pH .............................. Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Causticity of effluent 

liquid.

Minimum causticity .................... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Conductivity of effluent 

liquid.

Minimum conductivity ................ Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Regenerative Adsorber: 

Regeneration stream 

flow.

Minimum total flow per regeneration cycle.Continuous ............... N/A ........................... Total flow for each regeneration 

cycle. 

Adsorber bed temperature.Maximum temperature ............... Continuously after regeneration and 

within 15 minutes 

of completing any 

temperature regulation.

Every 15 minutes 

after regeneration 

and within 15 minutes of completing 

any temperature 

regulation.

3-hour block average. 

Adsorber bed temperature.Minimum temperature ................ Continuously during 

regeneration except during any 

temperature regulating portion of the 

regeneration cycle..

N/A ........................... Average of regeneration cycle. 

Vacuum and duration 

of regeneration.

Minimum vacuum and period of 

time for regeneration.

Continuous ............... N/A ........................... Average vacuum and duration 

of regeneration. 

Regeneration frequency.Minimum regeneration frequency and duration.Continuous ............... N/A ........................... Date and time of regeneration 

start and stop. 

Adsorber operation 

valve sequencing 

and cycle time.

Correct valve sequencing and 

minimum cycle time.

Daily ......................... Daily ......................... N/A. 

Non-Regenerative 

Adsorber: 

Average adsorber bed 

life.

N/A ............................................. Daily until breakthrough for 3 

adsorber bed 

change-outs.

N/A ........................... N/A. 

Outlet VOC concentration of the first 

adsorber bed in series.

Limits in Table 1 or 2 of this 

subpart.

Daily, except monthly 

(if more than 2 

months bed life remaining) or weekly 

(if more than 2 

weeks bed life remaining).

N/A ........................... Daily, weekly, or monthly. 

Condenser: 

Temperature ............... Maximum outlet temperature ..... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Sorbent injection monitoring: 

Sorbent injection rate Minimum injection rate .............. Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Sorbent injection carrier gas flow rate.Minimum carrier gas flow rate ... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Downstream firebox 

temperature.

Minimum temperature ................ Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29605 

TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—OPERATING PARAMETERS, OPERATING LIMITS, AND DATA MONITORING, 

RECORDING, AND COMPLIANCE FREQUENCIES FOR PROCESS VENTS, STRIPPED RESIN, AND WASTEWATER—Continued 

For these control devices, 

you must monitor these operating parameters . . . 

Establish the following operating 

limit during your initial performance test . . . 

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous compliance using these minimum 

frequencies 

Data measurement Data recording Data averaging period for 

compliance 

Upstream particulate 

matter control device downstream 

temperature.

Minimum temperature ................ Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... 3-hour block average. 

Fabric Filter: 

Alarm time .................. Maximum alarm time is not established on a site-specific 

basis but is specified in 

§ 63.11940(h)(1).

Continuous ............... N/A ........................... Maximum alarm time specified 

in § 63.11940(h)(1). 

Stripped Resin 

Stripper: 

Steam to feed ratio 1 .. Minimum steam to feed ratio ..... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Vacuum level .............. Minimum vacuum ...................... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Resin exit temperature Minimum temperature ................ Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Resin inlet flow rate ... Maximum flow rate .................... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Wastewater 

Stripper: 

Steam to feed ratio 1 .. Minimum steam to feed ratio ..... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Bottoms exit temperature.Minimum exit temperature ......... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Vacuum level .............. Minimum vacuum level .............. Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily. 

Wastewater inlet flow 

rate.

Maximum flow rate .................... Continuous ............... Every 15 minutes ..... Daily 

1Steam to feed ratio is calculated based on the steam feed rate into the stripper and the wastewater flow rate into the stripper. 

TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—TOXIC EQUIVALENCY FACTORS

Dioxin/furan congener Toxic equivalency 

factor 

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ............................................................................................................................................... 1 

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ........................................................................................................................................... 1 

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ......................................................................................................................................... 0 .1 

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ......................................................................................................................................... 0 .1 

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ......................................................................................................................................... 0 .1 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ..................................................................................................................................... 0 .01 

octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0003 

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .1 

2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran ................................................................................................................................................ 0 .3 

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran ................................................................................................................................................ 0 .03 

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran .............................................................................................................................................. 0 .1 

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran .............................................................................................................................................. 0 .1 

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran .............................................................................................................................................. 0 .1 

2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran .............................................................................................................................................. 0 .1 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .01 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .01 

octachlorodibenzofuran .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0003 

TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—CALIBRATION AND ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS

PARAMETER MONITORING SYSTEMS

If you monitor this parameter . . . Then your accuracy requirements are . . . And your inspection/calibration frequency requirements are . . . 

Temperature (non-cryogenic temperature 

ranges).

± 1 percent of temperature measured or 2.8 

degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit) 

whichever is greater.

Every 12 months. 

Temperature (cryogenic temperature ranges) ... ± 2.5 percent of temperature measured or 2.8 

degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit) 

whichever is greater.

Every 12 months. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29606 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—CALIBRATION AND ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS

PARAMETER MONITORING SYSTEMS—Continued 

If you monitor this parameter . . . Then your accuracy requirements are . . . And your inspection/calibration frequency requirements are . . . 

Liquid flow rate ................................................... ± 2 percent of the normal range of flow .......... Every 12 months. 

You must select a measurement location 

where swirling flow or abnormal velocity 

distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances at the point of measurement do not exist. 

Gas flow rate ...................................................... ± 5 percent of the flow rate or 10 cubic feet 

per minute, whichever is greater.

Every 12 months 

Check all mechanical connections for leakage 

at least annually. 

At least annually, conduct a visual inspection 

of all components of the flow CPMS for 

physical and operational integrity and all 

electrical connections for oxidation and galvanic corrosion if your flow CPMS is not 

equipped with a redundant flow sensor. 

pH or caustic strength ........................................ ± 0.2 pH units .................................................. Every 8 hours of process operation check the 

pH or caustic strength meter’s calibration 

on at least two points. 

Conductivity ........................................................ ± 5 percent of normal range ............................ Every 12 months. 

Mass flow rate .................................................... ± 5 percent of normal range ............................ Every 12 months. 

Pressure ............................................................. ± 5 percent or 0.12 kilopascals (0.5 inches of 

water column) whichever is greater.

Calibration is required every 12 months. 

Check all mechanical connections for leakage 

at least annually. At least annually perform 

a visual inspection of all components for integrity, oxidation and galvanic corrosion if 

CPMS is not equipped with a redundant 

pressure sensor. 

TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING PERFORMANCE TESTS

FOR PROCESS VENTS

For each control device used to meet the emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for the 

following pollutant . . .

You must . . . Using . . .

Total organic HAP .............................................. Measure the total hydrocarbon concentration 

at the outlet of the control device or in the 

stack.

Method 25A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. 

Conduct each test run for a minimum of 1 

hour. 

Vinyl chloride ...................................................... Measure the vinyl chloride concentration at 

the outlet of the control device or in the 

stack.

Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–6. 

Conduct each test run for a minimum of 1 

hour. 

Hydrogen chloride .............................................. Measure hydrogen chloride concentrations at 

the outlet of the control device or in the 

stack.

Method 26 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–8, 

collect 60 dry standard liters of gas per test 

run; or 

Method 26A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A– 

8, collect 1 dry standard cubic meter of gas 

per test run. 

Dioxin/furan ........................................................ Measure dioxin/furan concentrations on a 

toxic equivalency basis (and report total 

mass per isomer) at the outlet of the control 

device or in the stack.

Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–7 

and collect 5 dry standard cubic meters of 

gas per test run. 

Any pollutant from a continuous, batch, or combination of continuous and batch process 

vent(s).

Select sampling port locations and the number of traverse points.

Determine gas velocity and volumetric flow 

rate.

Method 1 or 1A at 40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A–1. 

Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A–1 and A–2. 

Conduct gas molecular weight analysis and 

correct concentrations the specified percent 

oxygen in Table 1 or 2 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. 

Measure gas moisture content ........................ Method 4 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–3. 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 29607 

TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHHHH OF PART 63—METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING PERFORMANCE TESTS

FOR STRIPPED RESIN AND WASTEWATER

For demonstrating 

. . . 

For the following emission points 

and types of 

processes 

. . . 

Collect samples according to the following schedule . . . 

Using the following test methods . . . 

Vinyl chloride . . . Total HAP . . . 

Each stripped resin stream 

Initial compliance .... Continuous .. During a 24 hour 

period, every 8 

hours or for each 

grade, whichever 

is more frequent.

During a 24 hour period, 1 grab sample 

every 8 hours or for each grade, 

whichever is more frequent.

For vinyl chloride Method 107; and 

For total HAP, your proposed method as 

specified in § 63.11960(d)(2), incorporating Method 107 and Method 

8260B. 

Batch ........... 1 grab sample for 

each batch produced during a 24 

hour period.

1 grab sample for each batch produced 

during a 24 hour period.

Continuous compliance.Continuous .. On a daily basis, 1 

grab sample 

every 8 hours or 

for each grade, 

whichever is more 

frequent.

On a monthly basis, 1 grab sample 

every 8 hours or for each grade, 

whichever is more frequent, during a 

24 hour period.

Batch ........... On a daily basis, 1 

grab sample for 

each batch produced during a 24 

hour period.

On a monthly basis, 1 grab sample for 

each batch produced during a 24 hour 

period.

Each wastewater stream 

Initial compliance .... N/A .............. 1 grab sample ........ If you are not required to use a treatment process, 1 grab sample; or.

If you are required to use a treatment 

process, the sampling frequency 

specified in subpart G of this part, as 

referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through 

(4).

If you are not required to use a treatment process, for vinyl chloride Method 107; and 

For total HAP, your proposed method as 

specified in 

§ 63.11980(a)(2),incorporating Methods 107, 305, and 8260B. For vinyl 

chloride, Method 107; or 

If you are required to use a treatment 

process, the test methods specified in 

subpart G of this part, as referenced 

in § 63.11965(c)(1) through (4). 

Continuous compliance.N/A .............. 1 grab sample per 

month.

If you are not required to use a treatment process, 1 grab sample per 

month; or.

If you are required to use a treatment 

process, the sampling frequency 

specified in subpart G of this part, as 

referenced in § 63.11965(c)(1) through 

(4).

[FR Doc. 2011–9838 Filed 5–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

mstockstill on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3