### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC'TION AGENCY REGION IX AIR DIVISION

Evaluation for EPA's Proposed Rulemaking for California's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Emissions of Perchloroethylene from 

### Dry Cleaning and Water-Repelling Operations and Other Provisions

Prepared by: Mae Wang August 12,2010Agency: Califorr~ia Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board

Rule: Airborne Toxic Control Measurefor Emissions of Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning and Water-Repelling Operations, Requirements for Perc Manufacturers, and Requirementsfor Perc Distributors, sections 93109, 93109.1, and 93109.2, Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations

Became State law on December27, 2007, and submitted to EPA on July 15,2009

Previously Approved Rule:

Airborne Toxic Control Measurefor Emissions of Perchloroethylene .from Dry Cleaning Operations, section 93109, Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations

Submitted on July 10, 1995, and approved on May 21, 1996 (61 FR 25397)

BACKGROUND

Underthe Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112(1), EPA is authorized to delegate to State agencies the authorityto implement and enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). The Federal regulations governing EPA's approval of State rules or programs under section 112(1) are located at 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart E. Underthese regulations, a State hasthe option to request EPA's approvalto substitute a State rulefor the comparable NESHAP. Under this "rule substitution" option, EPA is requiredto make a detailed and thorough evaluation of the State's submittal to ensure that it meets the stringency and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. Upon approval, the State is given the authority to implement and enforce its rule in lieu of the NESHAP. On September 22, 1993, EPA promulgatedthe NESHAPfor perchloroethylene (perc) dry cleaning facilities, which has been codified in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart M, National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities (dry cleaning NESHAP) (see 58 FR 49354). On May 21, 1996, EPA approved a request submitted bythe California Air Resources Board (CARB) for approvalto implement and enforce California's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Emissions of Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning Operations (original dry cleaning ATCM) in lieu of the dry cleaning NESHAP (see 61 FR 25397).On July 27, 2006, EPA amended the dry cleaning NESHAP

# (see71 FR 42743). In2007, CARB revised the original dry cleaning ATCM (amended dry cleaning ATCM). On July 15, 2009, CARB submitted the amended dry cleaning ATCM to EPAfor approval under 40 CFR 63.93. CARB's request for approval includes only those provisions of the dry cleaning NESHAP that apply to area sources. On February4, 2010, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) requested to beexcluded from CARB's requestfor delegation.



### RULE SUMMARY

The amended dry cleaning ATCM is implementing a ban on the use of perc in dry cleaning operations in California. Since January 1,2008, there has been a prohibition on the installation or use of any perc dry cleaning machines at

new facilities. Existing facilities must meet equipment and operational requirements until the existing machines are phased out in accordance with the time frames established in the amended dry cleaning ATCM.



### EPA EVALUATION

When a State requests EPA's approval to substitute a State rule for the applicable CAA section 112 Federal rule, EPA is required to "make a detailed and thorough evaluation of the State's submittal to ensure that it meets the stringency and other requirements" of 40 C.F.R. section 63.93 

# (see58 FR 62274). During its evaluation, EPA identified the following differences between the dry cleaning NESHAP and the amended dry cleaningATCM requirements:

Secondary controls for dry cleaning systems installed after December21, 2005: The dry cleaning NESHAP requires dry cleaning systenis to have refrigerated condensers with carbon adsorbers (i.e., with secondary controls) by July 27, 2006, or at startup (40 C.F.R. 

## 5 63.322(0)(2)). The amended dry cleaning ATCM does not require secondary controls. Since the amended dry cleaningATCM bans the sale of perc machines as of January 1, 2008, the difference inthe two rules concerns systems installed between December 21,2005, and January I, 2008. However, since the original dry cleaning ATCM (currentlyfederally-enforceable) required systems installed afterApril 1996to have secondary controls, all systems installed between December 21, 2005, and January I, 2008, should have secondary controls.

Refrigerator condenser monitoring for non-secondary control dry cleaning systems: The dry cleaning NESHAP requires refrigerator condensers to be monitored weekly with a temperature sensor (40 C.F.R. 

## 5 63.323(a)(I)). The amended dry cleaning ATCM requires only secondary control machines to keep records of temperature, which must be recorded every regeneration (which itself is required at least weekly) (§ 93109(i)(2)(A)(2) and (j)(l)(C)). The amended dry cleaningATCM does not specify how often non-secondary control machines must monitor. However, since (i).theoriginal dry cleaning ATCM (currently federally-enforceable) required systems installed after April 1996 to have secondary controls, and (ii) the amended dry cleaning ATCM presently bans machines built beforeAugust 1995,the difference in the two rules is limitedto machines built between August 1995 and April 1996. This difference will be moot as of May 201 1, when all perc machines manufactured before May 1996 are banned.

Leakdetection: The dry cleaning NESHAP (i) defines a "vapor leak" as a perc vapor concentration exceeding 25 parts per million byvolume (ppmv) (50 ppmv as methane); (ii) requires weekly or bi-weekly inspectionsfor perceptible leaks; and (iii) requires monthly inspectionsfor vapor leaks using a halogenated hydrocarbon (HH) detector or perc gas analyzer capable of detecting perc vapor concentrations of 25 ppmv (40 C.F.R. 

### §§ 63.321 and 63.322(k), (I), (o)(l)). The amended dry cleaning ATCM (i) defines "vapor leak" as a perc vapor concentration exceeding 50 ppmv from a portable analyzer or, presumably, exceeding 25 ppmv from a HH detector; (ii) requires weekly inspectionsfor vapor leaks using a portable gas analyzer or HH detector; and (iii) requires annual inspections for vapor leaks using a portable detector that gives quantitative results with lessthan 10 percent uncertainty at 50 ppmv of perc 

### (§ 93109(d)(25) and (53), and (i)(3)(A)-(B)). Thus, if a gas analyzer is used to detect vapor leaks (rather than a HH detector), the amended dry cleaningATCM has a higher leak detection limitthan the dry cleaning NESHAP (50 ppmv as opposed to 25 ppmv), but requires more frequent gas analyzer inspections (weekly as opposed to monthly).

Some of the above differences in the rules will have little or no practical effect. Others may have some effect on emissions for a limited amount of time. However,the clear benefits interms of perc emission reductions from California's current ban on some perc dry cleaning systems and ultimate ban on all perc dry cleaning systems far outweighthe slight differences between the two rules. In addition to California's previous prohibition of transfer, vented, and self-service perc dry cleaning machines, the amended dry cleaning ATCM phases out other perc dry cleaning systems as follows:

By January 1,2008: Sale or new lease of any perc dry cleaning machine prohibited Installation or operation of any perc dry cleaning machine at a new facility prohibited Perc water-repelling operations at a new facility prohibited Perc drying cabinets and dip tanks prohibited

By July 1,2010: Perc converted machines prohibited Perc dry cleaning machines at co-residential locations prohibited Perc closed-loop machines older than 15years (i.e., manufactured beforeJuly 1995) or of uncertain age are prohibitedBetween July 1,201 0, and January 1,2023: Perc closed-loop machines manufactured on or after July 1995to be phased out based on age 

### - prohibition on perc closed-loop machines 15 years after date of manufacture

By January 1,2023: All perc dry cleaning machines prohibited

Unlikethe dry cleaning NESHAP, which prohibits or will eventually prohibit only a subset of dry cleaning systems (e.g.,transfer machines, co-residential dry cleaning machines), the amended dry cleaning ATCM will ultimately ban all perc dry cleaning systems in California. EPA believes that approval of the amended dry cleaning ATCM will result in emission reductions from each affected source that are no less stringent than would result from the dry cleaning NESHAP.

EPAACTION

After reviewing CARB's request for approval of its amended dry cleaning ATCM, EPA has determined that CARB's request meets allthe requirements necessary to qualify for approval under CAA section 112(1) and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. EPA staff 

### recon- mends granting California the authority to implement and enforce its amended dry cleaning ATCM in place of the dry cleaning NESHAP, with the following exceptions:

Major sources in California remain subject to the dry cleaning NESHAP Area sources in SCAQMD remain subject to EPA-approved SCAQMD Rule 1421 Provisions of the amended dry cleaning ATCM that allow for approval of alternative means of emission limitations must also receive EPA approval before the alternatives can be used (e.g., §93109(d)(27) and (38), and (i)(3)(A)(2)) Provisions of the amended dry cleaning ATCM regarding California's enforcement authorities or its collection of fees (§§ 93109.1 (c) and 93109.2(c) and (d)) are beyond the scope of the delegation

Although California would have primary implementation and enforcement responsibility, EPA would retain the right, pursuant to CAA section 112(1)(7),to enforce any applicable emission standard or requirement under CAA section 112. Upon approval, the amended dry cleaningATCM would bethe Federallyenforceable standard in California and would be enforceable by the Administrator and citizens under the CAA.