16636 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA-HQ-OAR–2006–0897; FRL–8293–2] 

RIN 2060-AN44 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area 

Sources: Acrylic and Modacrylic 

Fibers Production, Carbon Black 

Production, Chemical Manufacturing: 

Chromium Compounds, Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Production and 

Fabrication, Lead Acid Battery 

Manufacturing, and Wood Preserving 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing six national 

emissions standards for hazardous air 

pollutants for seven area source 

categories. The proposed emissions 

standards and associated requirements 

for two area source categories (Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Production and 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Fabrication) are combined in one 

subpart. The proposed emissions 

standards for new and existing sources 

are based on EPA’s proposed 

determination as to what constitutes the 

generally available control technology 

or management practices for each area 

source category. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 4, 2007, unless a public 

hearing is requested by April 16, 2007. 

If a hearing is requested on the proposed 

rules, written comments must be 

received by May 21, 2007. Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on 

the information collection provisions 

must be received by OMB on or before 

May 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2006–0897 by one of the following 

methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area 

Sources: Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production, Carbon Black Production, 

Chemical Manufacturing: Chromium 

Compounds, Flexible Polyurethane 

Foam Production and Fabrication, Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing, and Wood 

Preserving Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 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 (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for 

EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 

20503. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 

Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered 

damage due to flooding during the last week 

of June 2006. The Docket Center is 

continuing to operate. However, during the 

cleanup, there will be temporary changes to 

Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, 

and hours of operation for people who wish 

to make hand deliveries or visit the Public 

Reading Room to view documents. Consult 

EPA’s Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147 

(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm for 

current information on docket operations, 

locations and telephone numbers. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006– 

0897. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

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 www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The 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 www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, 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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the 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 in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area 

Sources: Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production, Carbon Black Production, 

Chemical Manufacturing: Chromium 

Compounds, Flexible Polyurethane 

Foam Production and Fabrication, Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing, and Wood 

Preserving Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

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 Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Sharon Nizich, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards (D243–02), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, telephone number: (919) 541– 

2825; fax number: (919) 541–3207; email address: nizich.sharon@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

The regulated categories and entities 

potentially affected by the proposed 

standards include: 

Category NAICS code 1 Examples of regulated entities 

Industry: 

Acrylic and modacrylic fibers production.325222 Area source facilities that manufacture polymeric organic fibers using acrylonitrile 

as a primary monomer. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16637 

Category NAICS code 1 Examples of regulated entities 

Carbon black production ................... 325182 Area source facilities that manufacture carbon black using the furnace, thermal, or 

acetylene decomposition process. 

Chemical manufacturing: chromium 

compounds.

325188 Area source facilities that produce chromium compounds, principally sodium dichromate, chromic acid, and chromic oxide, from chromite ore. 

Flexible polyurethane foam production.326150 Area source facilities that manufacture foam made from a polyurethane polymer. 

Flexible polyurethane foam fabrication operations.326150 Area source facilities that cut or bond flexible polyurethane foam pieces together or 

to other substrates. 

Lead acid battery manufacturing ....... 335911 Area source facilities that manufacture lead acid storage batteries made from lead

alloy ingots and lead oxide. 

Wood preserving ............................... 321114 Area source facilities that treat wood such as lumber, ties, poles, posts, or pilings 

with a preservative. 

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 would be 

regulated by this action, you should 

examine the applicability criteria in 40 

CFR 63.11393 of subpart LLLLLL 

(NESHAP for Acrylic and Modacrylic 

Fibers Production Area Sources), 40 

CFR 63.11400 of subpart MMMMMM 

(NESHAP for Carbon Black Production 

Area Sources), 40 CFR 63.11407 of 

subpart NNNNNN (NESHAP for 

Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources: 

Chromium Compounds), 40 CFR 

63.11414 of subpart OOOOOO 

(NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane 

Foam Production and Fabrication Area 

Sources), 40 CFR 63.11421 of subpart 

PPPPPP (NESHAP for Lead Acid Battery 

Manufacturing Area Sources), or 40 CFR 

63.11428 of subpart QQQQQQ 

(NESHAP for Wood Preserving Area 

Sources). If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult either the 

air permit authority for the entity or 

your EPA regional representative as 

listed in 40 CFR 63.13 of subpart A 

(General Provisions). 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments to EPA? 

Do not submit information containing 

CBI to EPA through 

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

deliver information identified as CBI 

only to the following address: Roberto 

Morales, OAQPS Document Control 

Officer (C404–02), Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention 

Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR–2006–0897. 

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. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

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 Worldwide Web (WWW) through 

the Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN). Following signature, a copy of 

this 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. 

D. When would a public hearing occur? 

If anyone contacts EPA requesting to 

speak at a public hearing concerning the 

proposed rules by April 16, 2007, we 

will hold a public hearing on April 19, 

2007. If you are interested in attending 

the public hearing, contact Ms. Pamela 

Garrett at (919) 541–7966 to verify that 

a hearing will be held. 

E. How is this document organized? 

The supplementary information 

presented in this preamble is organized 

as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action 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? 

D. When would a public hearing occur? 

E. How is this document organized? 

II. Background Information for Proposed Area 

Source Standards 

III. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture acrylic and modacrylic 

fibers? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

IV. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Carbon Black Production 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture carbon black? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

V. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Chemical Manufacturing: Chromium 

Compounds 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture chromium compounds? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

VI. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 

and Fabrication 

A. What area source categories are affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points for flexible 

polyurethane foam and fabrication? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

VII. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture lead acid batteries? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16638 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

1An area source is a stationary source of HAP 

emissions that is not a major source. A major source 

is a stationary source that emits or has the potential 

to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of any HAP 

or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP. 

2Since its publication in the Integrated Urban Air 

Toxics Strategy in 1999, the area source category 

list has undergone several amendments. 

VIII. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Wood Preserving 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What are the production processes and 

emissions points at wood preserving 

facilities? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

IX. Proposed Exemption of Certain Area 

Source Categories From Title V 

Permitting Requirements 

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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 and 

Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

II. Background Information for 

Proposed Area Source Standards 

Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) requires EPA to identify at 

least 30 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) 

that pose the greatest potential health 

threat in urban areas, and section 

112(c)(3) requires EPA to regulate the 

area source 1 categories that represent 90 

percent of the emissions of the 30 

‘‘listed’’ HAP (‘‘urban HAP’’). We 

implemented these listing requirements 

through the Integrated Urban Air Toxics 

Strategy (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999).2

Sierra Club sued EPA, alleging a failure 

to complete standards for the source 

categories listed pursuant to CAA 

section 112(c)(3) within the timeframe 

specified by the statute. See Sierra Club 

v. Johnston, No. 01–1537, (D.D.C.). On 

March 31, 2006, the court issued an 

order requiring EPA to promulgate 

standards under CAA section 112(d) for 

those area source categories listed 

pursuant to CAA section 112(c)(3). 

Among other things, the order 

requires that, by June 15, 2007, EPA 

complete standards for six area source 

categories. We have selected seven area 

source categories to meet this obligation 

even though standards are required for 

only six area sources categories. The 

seven area source categories that we 

have selected to meet this obligation are: 

(1) Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production; (2) Carbon Black 

Production; (3) Chemical 

Manufacturing: Chromium Compounds; 

(4) Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Production; (5) Flexible Polyurethane 

Foam Fabrication Operations; (6) Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing; and (7) 

Wood Preserving. 

We listed Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Fabrication Operations as an area source 

category under CAA section 112(c)(3) as 

part of the 1999 Integrated Urban 

Strategy (64 FR 38721, July 19, 1999). 

On June 26, 2002, we amended the area 

source category list by adding source 

categories, including Acrylic and 

Modacrylic Fibers Production, Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Production, Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing, and Wood 

Preserving (67 FR 43112, 43113). On 

November 22, 2002, we added Carbon 

Black Production and Chemical 

Manufacturing: Chromium Compounds 

to the area source category list (67 FR 

70427, 70428). 

The inclusion of each of these source 

categories on the section 112(c)(3) area 

source category list is based on 1990 

emissions data, as EPA used 1990 as the 

baseline year for that listing. The 

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers area 

source category listing was based on 

emissions of the HAP acrylonitrile (AN). 

Emissions of chromium were the basis 

for the listing of the Chemical 

Manufacturing: Chromium Compounds 

source category. The Lead Acid Battery 

Manufacturing area source category 

listing was based on emissions of lead 

and cadmium. The listing of Carbon 

Black Production was based on HAP 

emissions of polycyclic organic matter 

(POM). The listings of Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Production and 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication 

Operations were based on HAP 

emissions of methylene chloride, and 

the listing of Wood Preserving was 

based on HAP emissions of arsenic, 

chromium, methylene chloride, and 

dioxin. 

Under CAA section 112(d)(5), the 

Administrator may, in lieu of standards 

requiring maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) under section 

112(d)(2), elect to promulgate standards 

or requirements for area sources ‘‘which 

provide for the use of generally 

available control technologies or 

management practices by such sources 

to reduce emissions of hazardous air 

pollutants.’’ Under section 112(d)(5), the 

Administrator has the discretion to use 

generally available control technology 

or management practices (GACT) in lieu 

of MACT. Pursuant to section 112(d)(5), 

we have decided not to issue MACT 

standards and concluded that GACT is 

appropriate for these seven source 

categories. 

Legislative history describes GACT as 

standards or requirements reflecting 

application of generally available 

control technology or management 

practices, that is, ‘‘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’’ (Senate 

Report Number 101–228, December 20, 

1989). Consistent with the legislative 

history, in addition to considering 

technical capabilities of the facilities 

and the availability of control measures, 

we may consider costs and economic 

impacts in determining GACT, which is 

particularly important when developing 

regulations for source categories that 

may have few establishments and many 

small businesses, or when determining 

whether additional control is necessary 

for sources with emissions that are 

already well controlled as a result of 

other existing or applicable standards. 

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 same industrial 

sector 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 

category 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. 

Existing facilities in the area source 

categories at issue in this proposal are 

currently well controlled as a result of 

State and national standards and 

permitting requirements for criteria 

pollutants that obtain co-control of 

HAP. There is only one area source 

plant in the U.S. in the Acrylic and 

Modacrylic Fibers Production area 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16639 

source category, and this plant is 

currently subject to State permit 

requirements. The two area source 

plants that manufacture chromium 

compounds and the one area source 

plant in the Carbon Black Production 

area source category are well controlled 

as a result of title V permit requirements 

for the control of criteria pollutants, 

which provide co-control of urban HAP. 

We believe that all of the 58 area source 

plants in the Lead Acid Battery 

Manufacturing area source category can 

achieve the requirements of the new 

source performance standard (NSPS) for 

lead-acid battery manufacturing plants 

at 40 CFR part 60, subpart KK. Facilities 

constructed, reconstructed, or modified 

after 1982 are already subject to the 

NSPS. 

There are hundreds of facilities in the 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 

and Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Fabrication area source categories, 

which were listed because of the use of 

methylene chloride. The vast majority of 

these facilities no longer use methylene 

chloride in the processes for several 

reasons, including State air emissions 

standards and worker exposure limits 

established by the Occupational Safety 

and Health Administration (OSHA). 

There are approximately 400 area 

source facilities in the wood preserving 

area source category. All of these 

facilities are well controlled in terms of 

metal HAP (i.e., chromium and arsenic) 

emissions and dioxin emissions. These 

facilities have also discontinued the use 

of methylene chloride. 

III. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production area source category consists 

of facilities engaged in the manufacture 

of synthetic fibers made from AN. 

Acrylic fibers are synthetic fibers in 

which the fiber-forming substance is 

any long-chain synthetic polymer 

composed of at least 85 percent by 

weight of AN. Modacrylic fibers are 

composed of 35 to 85 percent by weight 

of AN. 

There are currently four plants in the 

U.S. that are known to produce acrylic 

and modacrylic fibers. Three of these 

plants are major sources. The fourth 

plant is an area source and is located in 

an urban area (Decatur, Alabama). The 

area source plant produces 

polyacrylonitrile that is primarily used 

as a feed stock for the production of 

carbon fibers. 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture acrylic and modacrylic 

fibers? 

Acrylonitrile is the only urban HAP 

that was reported to be released during 

the production of acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers at the one known 

existing area source plant. The AN is fed 

to a polymerization reactor where the 

reaction (polymerization) takes place. 

The area source plant uses a suspension 

process in which insoluble beads of 

polymer are formed in the reactor. 

Residual unreacted AN is removed from 

the polymer in a monomer recovery 

column and is recycled to the process. 

After removal of the residual AN, the 

resulting polymer is spun into fibers. 

Fibers are formed by forcing the viscous 

polymer solution, referred to as ‘‘dope,’’

through the small orifices of a 

spinnerette and immediately solidifying 

or precipitating the resulting filaments. 

At the area source plant, two 100,000 

gallon storage tanks that receive the 

purchased AN monomer are controlled 

by internal floating roofs and are subject 

to the NSPS for volatile organic liquids 

(40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb). A packed 

column scrubber controls emissions 

from the polymerization process 

equipment, including storage tanks, 

recovered monomer tanks, monomer 

measuring tanks, monomer preparation 

tanks, monomer feed tanks, slurry 

receiver tanks, polymerization reactors, 

and drum filters. A second packed 

column scrubber controls emissions 

from the monomer recovery process, 

including polymer holding tanks, 

polymer buffer tanks, the monomer 

vacuum pump flush drum, and the 

drum filter vacuum pump flush drum. 

Many of the pumps which move AN 

at this facility are canned motor pumps, 

which have no shaft protrusion to seal. 

The common leak point on other types 

of pumps is the seal for the shaft 

protrusion; consequently, canned motor 

pumps by design reduce leakage. Most 

of the piping is connected by welding 

rather than flanges, which reduces 

emissions from pipe connectors. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

These proposed NESHAP apply to 

any existing or new acrylic or 

modacrylic fibers production plant that 

is an area source. We are proposing that 

owners or operators of existing sources 

comply with all the requirements of the 

area source NESHAP by 6 months after 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. A new affected 

source would be required to comply by 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register or upon initial 

startup, whichever is later. 

2. Proposed Emissions Standards 

Existing sources. The proposed 

standards for existing area sources apply 

to process vents from the 

polymerization process, process vents 

from monomer recovery, spinning lines 

at plants that do not have a monomer 

recovery process, and AN storage tanks. 

We are proposing to adopt the State 

permit requirements applicable to the 

one existing area source as the NESHAP 

for existing acrylic and modacrylic fiber 

production area sources. The State 

operating permit for the existing area 

source establishes numerical limits for 

AN emissions from the control devices 

for polymerization process equipment 

and monomer recovery process 

equipment. The permit also establishes 

operating limits for the scrubbers. 

The control device for polymerization 

process equipment would be subject to 

an AN emissions limit of 0.2 pound per 

hour (lb/hr). A control device operating 

limit would require a minimum daily 

average water flow rate to the scrubber 

of 50 liters per minute (l/min). The 

control device for emissions from the 

monomer recovery process equipment 

would be subject to an AN emissions 

limit of 0.05 lb/hr, and the daily average 

water flow rate must not drop below 30 

l/min. 

This proposed rule does not include 

requirements for spinning lines for 

existing sources that remove residual 

AN using a monomer recovery process 

prior to spinning. (See section D.1 of 

this preamble.) However, existing 

sources that do not have a monomer 

recovery process prior to spinning must 

meet the requirements for spinning lines 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY. 

This proposed NESHAP for existing 

sources would require that AN storage 

tanks meeting certain capacity/vapor 

pressure conditions comply with one of 

three control options: (1) A fixed roof in 

combination with an internal floating 

roof, (2) an external floating roof, or (3) 

a closed vent system and control device. 

New sources. The proposed standards 

for new area sources apply to process 

vents, fiber spinning lines, AN storage 

tanks, process wastewater, maintenance 

wastewater, and equipment leaks. The 

proposed process vent requirements 

apply to each vent stream with an AN 

concentration of 50 parts per million by 

volume (ppmv) or greater and a flow 

rate of 0.005 cubic meters per minute or 

greater. The owner or operator would be 

required to control AN emissions from 

process vents meeting this applicability 

criteria by reducing uncontrolled 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16640 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

3These assessments are used to determine which 

process vents and wastewater streams must be 

controlled. 

emissions by 98 weight percent or 

meeting an emissions limit (20 ppmv) 

by venting vapors through a closed vent 

system to a recovery device, control 

device, or flare. The owner or operator 

would be required to determine which 

process vents meet the applicability 

criteria by using the procedures and 

methods in § 63.1104 of subpart YY. 

The closed vent system, recovery or 

control device, and flare would be 

subject to the applicable testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart SS. The owner or operator 

would be required to submit a 

monitoring plan if another type of 

control device is used. 

The proposed emissions limits for 

fiber spinning lines at new sources 

require the owner or operator to: (1) 

Reduce AN emissions by 85 weightpercent (e.g., by venting emissions from 

a total enclosure through a closed vent 

system to a control device that meets the 

requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

SS), (2) reduce AN emissions from the 

spinning line to 0.5 pounds of AN per 

ton (lb/ton) of acrylic and modacrylic 

fiber produced, or (3) reduce the AN 

concentration of the spin dope to less 

than 100 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw). The requirements in 

63.1103(b)(4) of subpart YY would 

apply to an enclosure for a fiber 

spinning line. 

For all AN storage vessels at a new 

area source, the owner or operator 

would be required to: (1) Reduce AN 

emissions by 98 weight-percent by 

venting emissions through a closed vent 

system to any combination of control 

devices as specified in § 63.982(a)(1) of 

subpart SS or reduce AN emissions by 

95 weight-percent or greater by venting 

emissions through a closed system to a 

recovery device as specified in § 63.993 

of subpart SS; or (2) comply with the 

equipment standards for internal or 

external floating roofs in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart WW. 

Process wastewater and maintenance 

wastewater at new sources would be 

subject to the requirements in 

§ 63.1106(a) and (b) of subpart YY. The 

owner or operator would also be 

required to comply with the equipment 

leak requirements in subpart YY. 

Subpart YY applies the requirements in 

either subpart TT or UU to equipment 

that contains or contacts 10 percent by 

weight or greater of AN and that 

operates at least 300 hours per year. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

We are proposing to include in this 

proposed NESHAP the monitoring, 

testing, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the State operating 

permit for the existing area source. 

Continuous parameter monitoring 

systems (CPMS) would be required to 

measure and record the scrubber water 

flow rates at least every 15 minutes. The 

owner or operator would determine 

compliance with the daily average 

operating limits for the scrubber water 

flow rates on a monthly basis and 

submit quarterly compliance reports to 

EPA or the delegated authority. 

Compliance with the operating limits 

would be determined on a monthly 

basis; quarterly compliance reports also 

would be required. The owner or 

operator would be required to keep 

records of each monthly compliance 

determination and retain the records for 

at least 2 years following the date of 

each compliance determination. If the 

daily average water flow rate falls below 

the operating limit, the owner or 

operator must notify EPA or the 

delegated authority within 10 days of 

the identification of the exceedance. 

The owner or operator of an existing 

source would be required to conduct a 

performance test for each control device 

for polymerization process equipment 

and monomer recovery process 

equipment. A performance test would 

not be required for an existing source if 

a prior performance test has been 

conducted using the methods required 

by this rule, which are the requirements 

contained in § 63.1104 of subpart YY, 

and either no process changes have been 

made since the test, or the owner or 

operator can demonstrate that the 

results of the performance test, with or 

without adjustments, reliably 

demonstrate compliance despite process 

changes. 

For AN storage tanks at existing 

sources, the owner or operator would be 

required to comply with the applicable 

testing, inspection, and notification 

procedures in 40 CFR 60.113b(a) and 

the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in 40 CFR 60.115b and 

60.116b of subpart Kb. The testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 

65, subpart C would apply if the owner 

or operator selected to comply with the 

part 65 control option for AN storage 

tanks. See 40 CFR 60.110b(e). 

The owner or operator of an existing 

area source would be required to 

comply with certain notification 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 of the 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A). These requirements would 

include a notification of applicability 

and a notification of compliance status. 

We are also proposing that the owner or 

operator comply with the requirements 

for startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

(SSM) plans, reports, and records in 40 

CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

In the notification of compliance 

status required in 40 CFR 63.9(h), the 

owner or operator of an existing source 

may certify initial compliance with the 

emissions limits based on a previous 

performance test if applicable. The 

owner or operator must also certify 

initial compliance with the NSPS 

requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart 

Kb. 

The owner or operator of a new area 

source would be required to perform 

assessments 3 to identify affected 

process vents, equipment, and 

wastewater streams; conduct initial 

performance tests and/or compliance 

demonstrations; and comply with the 

monitoring, inspection, recordkeeping, 

and reporting requirements in each 

applicable subpart. The testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the subparts 

described above, which we are adopting 

in this proposed rule, vary according to 

the emissions point and control option 

(e.g., subpart SS for process vents). The 

owner or operator of a new area source 

would also be required to comply with 

all of the NESHAP General Provisions 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart A), including 

requirements for notifications; 

performance tests and reports; SSM 

plans and reports; recordkeeping, and 

reporting. We have identified in the 

proposed NESHAP the General 

Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 applicable 

to existing and new sources. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

Existing sources. The process vents at 

the existing area source plant are 

controlled by packed bed scrubbers and 

are subject to emissions limits 

established in the State operating 

permit. Emissions from the 

polymerization process equipment are 

limited to 0.2 lb/hr. This process 

equipment includes process storage 

tanks, recovered monomer tanks, 

monomer measuring tanks, monomer 

preparation tanks, monomer feed tanks, 

the polymerization reactors, and drum 

filter. Emissions from the monomer 

recovery process equipment are limited 

to 0.05 lb/hr. These process units 

include the polymer holding tank, 

polymer buffer tank, monomer vacuum 

pump flush drum, and the drum filter 

vacuum pump flush drum. Test data for 

these two process vents show that the 

vents are well controlled because the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16641 

4This is also the level of control that major 

sources must meet for process vents. 

facility achieves the level of control 

required for major sources subject to 40 

CFR part 63, subpart YY. We have 

determined that the State operating 

permit limits are GACT for process 

vents at existing area sources. 

The fiber spinning line at the existing 

area source plant is not a source of AN 

emissions because the residual 

monomer is stripped from the polymer 

in a monomer recovery column prior to 

spinning. However, other existing 

facilities might become area sources in 

the future, and they might not have a 

monomer recovery process. 

Consequently, we are proposing that 

any existing source without a monomer 

recovery process must reduce the 

residual AN concentration in the 

polymer by removing residual monomer 

prior to spinning or install an enclosure 

for the spinning line and vent the 

emissions to a control device. Existing 

area sources without a monomer 

recovery process must meet 

requirements for fiber spinning lines in 

40 CFR part 63, subpart YY. We have 

determined that the requirements in 40 

CFR part 63, subpart YY are GACT for 

existing area sources without a 

monomer recovery process. 

The AN storage tanks at the existing 

area source plant are subject to the 

NSPS for volatile organic liquids (40 

CFR part 60, subpart Kb). The NSPS 

requires that a storage tank meeting 

certain capacity/vapor pressure 

conditions comply with either the 

requirements for storage vessels in 

subpart C of 40 CFR part 65 

(Consolidated Federal Air Rules) or the 

NSPS requirements for a fixed roof in 

combination with an internal floating 

roof, an external floating roof, or a 

closed vent system and control device. 

The AN storage tanks at the existing 

area source are equipped with internal 

floating roofs to comply with the NSPS 

requirements. The controls in the NSPS 

are currently being applied to AN 

storage tanks and are the types of 

controls generally applied to tanks 

storing volatile organic liquids. 

Consequently, we determined that the 

controls required by the NSPS are GACT 

for storage tanks at existing sources. 

The potential for emissions from 

equipment leaks is low at the existing 

area source plant because of the use of 

canned motor pumps and pipes 

connected in large part by welding 

rather than flanges. A fugitive emissions 

survey using EPA’s protocol for 

estimating emissions from equipment 

leaks coupled with capture and 

measurement of leaks resulted in 

estimated emissions of only 0.5 tpy of 

AN (assuming any leak that was 

detected emitted for the full year). A 

leak detection and repair program for 

this plant would cost several thousand 

dollars in labor and in capital for the 

monitoring equipment. After 

considering the low level of current 

emissions, the additional costs, and the 

small emissions reduction that would be 

achieved by a leak detection and repair 

program, we propose that GACT for 

existing area sources is no additional 

control for equipment leaks. 

Wastewater at the existing plant is 

sent to a biological treatment unit to 

degrade AN. Emissions of organic 

compounds from wastewater can be 

reduced by steam stripping the 

wastewater to remove and recover the 

organics. We estimate that the capital 

cost of steam stripping to remove AN 

from the wastewater at the existing area 

source plant is $700,000 with a total 

annualized cost of $630,000 per year. 

Even assuming 90 percent removal by 

the steam stripper, the emissions 

reduction would be 7 tons per year. We 

propose to conclude that pretreatment 

using steam stripping is not GACT 

because of the high cost effectiveness of 

processing a low concentration stream 

with a high volumetric flow rate. This 

conclusion is consistent with previous 

cost effectiveness analyses such as those 

performed for major sources where EPA 

determined that it is not cost effective 

to apply controls to wastewater below 

certain cutoffs (e.g., a concentration less 

than 1,000 ppmw and a flow rate less 

than 10 liters per minute (57 FR 62608, 

December 31, 1992). The process 

wastewater at the existing area source is 

below these cutoffs. Consequently, we 

are not proposing additional controls for 

wastewater at the existing area source 

plant and conclude that GACT is the 

current level of control. 

We are alternatively proposing that 

GACT for this existing area source is no 

further emission reduction. We request 

comment on the basis, consistent with 

section 112(d)(5), for asserting that 

GACT is no further control for the 

existing source. We request comment on 

this issue because the standard 

proposed above will not result in any 

emission reductions beyond what is 

already required by the State permit to 

which the existing facility is already 

subject. 

New Sources. Test results for the 

control devices applied to process vents 

at the existing area source show that a 

standard of 98 weight-percent reduction 

or an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv 

or less has been achieved by the 

controls we propose as GACT at the 

existing source.4 Consequently, we are 

proposing that GACT for process vents 

at a new area source is a 98 weightpercent reduction of AN emissions, an 

outlet concentration of 20 ppmv or less, 

or venting emissions to a flare. This 

format of the proposed standard is more 

appropriate for new sources than a 

process vent limit expressed in lb/hr (as 

applied to the existing area source) 

because we do not know what the size, 

configuration, or emissions potential of 

a new source might be. 

As discussed earlier, the fiber 

spinning line at the existing area source 

plant is not a source of AN emissions 

because the residual monomer is 

stripped from the polymer in a 

monomer recovery column prior to 

spinning. However, we cannot be 

certain what process configuration a 

new source might use or that it would 

have a monomer recovery system. 

Consequently, we are proposing that a 

new source must reduce the residual 

AN concentration in the polymer by 

removing residual monomer prior to 

spinning or install an enclosure for the 

spinning line and vent the emissions to 

a control device. Data from acrylic and 

modacrylic fiber production indicates 

that a monomer recovery system can 

reduce the AN concentration in the spin 

dope to less than 100 ppmw, which we 

are proposing as GACT for new area 

sources. We are proposing alternatives 

to the AN residual concentration limit 

for new sources that are the same as the 

alternatives that are available for major 

sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY. 

One alternative is to reduce AN 

emissions from the spinning line by 85 

weight-percent or more. The second 

alternative is to reduce AN emissions 

from the spinning line to less than or 

equal to 0.5 lb/ton of acrylic and 

modacrylic fiber produced. 

For storage tanks at new area sources, 

we are proposing to adopt the 

requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

YY. These requirements have been 

applied to AN storage tanks at other 

acrylic and modacrylic fiber plants and 

represent GACT for new sources 

because they are cost effective and can 

be easily included in the design and 

construction of a new source. 

We also evaluated emissions controls 

and management practices for 

equipment leaks at new sources. We 

know that equipment leaks are well 

controlled at the existing area source 

facility; however, we do not know with 

assurance that a new source will have 

primarily leakless equipment. In 

addition, our studies of synthetic 

organic chemical plants indicate that 

leak inspection and repair requirements 

are cost effective and not overly 

burdensome. Consequently, we are 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16642 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

proposing that new area sources be 

subject to the same equipment leak 

provisions as those applied to major 

sources in 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY. 

For wastewater streams at new area 

sources, we do not know what flow 

rates, concentrations and emissions 

potential might occur, but our studies of 

wastewater treatment controls indicate 

that it is cost effective to control these 

emissions when the concentration of 

AN is high. For example, at most acrylic 

and modacrylic fiber plants, all 

wastewater streams with a 

concentration of 10,000 parts per 

million by weight (ppmw) or more must 

be controlled, as well as streams with 

both a concentration of 1,000 ppmw or 

more and a flow rate of 10 l/min or 

more. Controls are not required for 

wastewater streams below these cutoffs 

because they are not cost effective. Thus 

we are proposing that GACT for new 

sources is the control of wastewater 

streams that exceed the cutoffs of 

concentration and/or flow rate as 

specified in subpart YY. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We have reviewed the compliance 

requirements in the State operating 

permit, the NSPS for volatile organic 

liquid storage tanks, and other 

requirements that apply to the existing 

area source plant, and we propose that 

these requirements are sufficient to 

ensure compliance with the proposed 

emissions standards. Therefore, we are 

proposing to include the inspection, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements that apply to the 

existing area source plant in this 

proposed rule for existing sources. 

We are proposing to require that an 

existing area source be subject to certain 

notification requirements in the 

NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart A). Because permit 

information for the existing facility does 

not identify requirements for an SSM 

plan, we are also proposing to require 

the owner or operator of an existing area 

source to comply with the SSM 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). We 

are proposing to allow additional time 

(6 months after promulgation) to allow 

for preparation of the plan. 

We have also reviewed the 

compliance requirements in the 

subparts of part 63 that would apply to 

process vents, storage tanks, equipment 

leaks, and wastewater at new area 

sources as a result of this proposed rule. 

These requirements are sufficient to 

ensure compliance with the proposed 

emissions limits and management 

practices. Therefore, we are proposing 

to include the testing, monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in each applicable subpart 

in this proposed rule for new sources. 

We are also proposing to apply to new 

sources the notification, testing, 

monitoring, operation and maintenance, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). 

The General Provisions are necessary for 

effective application of the standard for 

new area sources and are, therefore, 

incorporated into the proposed rule. We 

propose that these requirements are 

sufficient to ensure compliance with the 

proposed emissions limits and 

management practices for new sources. 

IV. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Carbon Black Production 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Carbon Black Production area 

source category includes any facility 

that produces carbon black by the 

furnace black process, thermal black 

process, or the acetylene decomposition 

process. Carbon black is used primarily 

as a reinforcing agent for rubber and is 

used largely in the manufacturing of 

automotive tires. It is also used as a 

colorant in inks, paints, plastics, and 

paper. 

Currently, there are 20 carbon black 

production facilities operating in the 

U.S. Nineteen of these facilities are 

major sources of HAP emissions and are 

subject to NESHAP requirements for 

carbon black production in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart YY. According to the 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI) and 

the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), one 

carbon black production facility is an 

area source of HAP emissions. We are 

requesting comments on whether there 

are any other area sources in this source 

category. 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture carbon black? 

A carbon black unit (CBU) consists of 

the equipment used to produce carbon 

black by either the furnace, thermal or 

acetylene decomposition processes. The 

major components of the CBU include: 

(1) Feedstock and raw material storage 

tanks; (2) production unit reactors; (3) 

separation filters; (4) wet or dry 

pelletization equipment and 

densification equipment; (5) final 

product silos and packaging for pellets 

and powders; and (6) shipping storage 

areas. 

Carbon black is produced by the 

furnace black process via thermaloxidative decomposition in a closed 

system. The feedstock is primarily 

aromatic oils based on crude oil. 

Feedstock is injected into the reactor 

and is converted to carbon black. The 

reactor is heated by a fuel, usually 

natural gas. 

The thermal black process produces 

carbon black via thermal decomposition 

in a cyclic process. The primary 

feedstock is natural gas. The process 

generally includes two vertical reactors 

in parallel. While one reactor is heating, 

the other reactor is in the decomposition 

cycle. 

The acetylene black process uses an 

acetylene feedstock to produce carbon 

black via thermal decomposition in a 

continuous process. The acetylene black 

reactor is similar to the reactor for the 

thermal black process; however, since it 

is a continuous process, usually only 

one reactor is used. 

The remaining processes for the 

furnace black, thermal black and 

acetylene black production processes 

are similar. The carbon black and tailgas 

stream from the reactor is cooled in a 

heat exchanger. Energy from the carbon 

black and tailgas stream is used to 

preheat combustion air for the reactor. 

Following the heat exchanger, a 

secondary quench chamber is used to 

further cool the carbon black and tailgas 

stream. 

Carbon black is separated from the 

tailgas in the main separation filter. 

Tailgas may be collected and used as 

fuel in the dryer (if present), burned to 

preheat the feedstock (if a preheater is 

present), vented to the atmosphere, or 

vented to a combustion device for 

destruction. 

Carbon black is separated from the 

conveying air in the process filter. Solid 

contaminants (e.g., coke particles, 

abraded particles from the refractory 

lining of the furnace, or rust particles) 

are removed from the carbon black in 

the grit separator. 

Initial densification of the carbon 

black takes place in the surge tank, 

which also acts as a buffer to maintain 

constant production levels. Carbon 

black is processed into pellets in either 

a wet pelletizer or a dry pelletizer. In 

the wet pelletization process, water, and 

sometimes additives, is injected into the 

pelletizer and the carbon black leaves as 

wet pellets and are dried in the dryer. 

Tailgas may be used as fuel in the dryer 

for external heating. Carbon black and 

steam from the dryer exhaust are 

separated in the purge filter and the 

carbon black is recycled to the process 

filter. 

In the dry pelletization process, the 

pelletizer is a rotating drum. A portion 

of the pelletized carbon black is 

recycled to the inlet of the drum to act 

as seeds for the new pellets. Pelletized 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16643 

carbon black is housed in the storage 

silo until it is discharged to trucks or 

rail cars, intermediate bulk storage, or 

packaging. 

The Carbon Black Production area 

source category was listed for regulation 

due to emissions of the urban HAP 

POM. Benzene is another urban HAP 

emitted from the CBU. The HAP are 

released into the atmosphere from the 

tailgases from the reactors. The carbon 

black and tailgas stream is sent to a 

baghouse where the carbon black is 

separated from the tailgas. After 

separation of the carbon black product, 

the tailgas is either emitted to the 

atmosphere or sent to a combustion 

control device. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP applies to 

each new or existing carbon black 

production facility that is an area source 

of HAP. Because the one existing area 

source is already meeting requirements 

that are the same as those in this 

proposed NESHAP, we are proposing 

that an existing affected source comply 

by the date of publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register. A new 

affected source would be required to 

comply by the date of publication of the 

final rule in the Federal Register or 

upon initial startup, whichever is later. 

2. Proposed Emissions Standards 

We are proposing that the owner or 

operator of an existing or new source be 

required to control HAP emissions from 

each carbon black production main unit 

filter process vent that has a HAP 

concentration equal to or greater than 

260 ppmv. The specific control 

requirements are: (1) Reduce emissions 

of HAP by using a flare meeting all the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

SS; or (2) reduce total HAP emissions by 

98 weight-percent or to a concentration 

of 20 ppmv, whichever is less, by 

venting emissions through a closed vent 

system to any combination of control 

devices meeting the requirements 40 

CFR 63.982(a)(2). 

3. Compliance Requirements 

For existing and new area sources, we 

are proposing to adopt the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in subpart YY. 

Compliance with the proposed 

emissions limit for existing and new 

area sources would be demonstrated by 

monitoring the operating parameters of 

the control device or devices selected to 

comply with the requirements of the 

NESHAP. The proposed NESHAP 

specifies requirements for the initial 

notification, the notification of 

compliance status, periodic reporting, 

and SSM requirements. 

The owner or operator of an existing 

or new area source would be required to 

comply with the subpart YY notification 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.1110. In the 

notification of compliance status 

required in 40 CFR 63.1110(d), the 

owner or operator of an existing source 

may demonstrate initial compliance 

with the proposed HAP emissions 

standards based on the results of a 

performance test that has been 

previously conducted provided certain 

conditions are met (e.g., using the same 

methods as the test methods in the 

proposed rule). 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

Based on information in the NEI and 

TRI, we identified only one existing 

carbon black production facility that is 

an area source. We are requesting 

comments on whether there are any 

other area sources in this source 

category. This carbon black production 

facility operates emissions control 

systems that capture and control 

tailgases from their four CBUs. The 

tailgases from each CBU are routed to 

control devices (two are routed to a flare 

and two are routed to a thermal 

incinerator) that achieve high-efficiency 

removal of volatile organic compounds 

(VOC), including polycyclic organic 

matter (POM) and benzene. 

The existing area source is currently 

operating under a title V permit, which 

requires a 98 weight-percent VOC 

emissions reduction. The facility’s 

ability to demonstrate compliance with 

their title V permit emissions limits on 

a long-term basis indicates that the 

facility owner has the technical and 

economic capabilities to continue to 

reduce VOC emissions (including POM 

and benzene) sufficiently to achieve 

these limits. Further, although the 

existing area source facility utilizes the 

furnace black production process, a 98 

weight-percent emissions reduction 

would apply equally to all types of 

production processes. Consequently, we 

do not distinguish between the different 

carbon black production processes. 

After reviewing the existing facility’s 

title V permit requirements, we 

concluded that the permit requirements 

are equivalent to the provisions of 40 

CFR 63, subpart YY, which is the rule 

to which major source carbon black 

facilities are subject. Further, the facility 

has applied for renewal of their title V 

permit to specifically include the 

requirements of subpart YY for their 

CBU. Because control technologies to 

reduce VOC emissions also reduce POM 

and benzene emissions, the 98 weightpercent VOC emission reduction in their 

title V permit is equivalent to the 98 

weight-percent HAP level of control 

specified in subpart YY. We have no 

reason to believe that this emissions 

reduction is infeasible or inappropriate 

for all area sources in this category. 

Therefore, we have determined that a 98 

weight-percent HAP emissions 

reduction is GACT for existing and new 

carbon black production area source 

facilities, which may be achieved using 

one or more control devices or a flare 

subject to § 63.11 of the NESHAP 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A). 

In addition to the 98 weight-percent 

level of control, we have established 

that for low concentration streams (e.g., 

streams with concentrations less than 

about 1,000 ppmv), a 98 weight-percent 

reduction may not be achievable for all 

process vents from the main unit filter 

(65 FR 76423). Therefore, we have 

determined that a HAP concentration 

limit of 20 ppmv (corrected to 3 percent 

oxygen if a combustion device is the 

control device and supplemental 

combustion air is used to combust the 

emissions) is appropriate as GACT for 

low-concentration streams. 

The subpart YY NESHAP also include 

a 260-ppmv control applicability cutoff. 

This cutoff represents the lowest control 

device inlet concentration reported at 

one of the best-controlled facilities. We 

do not have available information to 

indicate that the single existing area 

source controls process vent emissions 

streams with concentrations below this 

level. Therefore, we have included the 

260-ppmv control applicability cutoff in 

this proposed area source NESHAP. 

We are alternatively proposing that 

GACT for this existing area source is no 

further emission reduction. We request 

comment on the basis, consistent with 

section 112(d)(5), for asserting that 

GACT is no further control for the 

existing source. We request comment on 

this issue because the standard 

proposed above will not result in any 

emission reductions beyond what is 

already required by the Federal permit 

to which the existing facility is already 

subject. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

The existing carbon black area source 

facility’s title V permit requires 

operating parameter monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and periodic reporting. 

We reviewed these compliance 

requirements and concluded that they 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16644 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

are sufficient to ensure compliance with 

the proposed emissions standards for 

existing and new sources. Because these 

requirements are equivalent to those in 

40 CFR part 63, subpart YY, we have 

adopted the subpart YY compliance 

requirements in this proposed rule. 

These requirements include operating 

parameter monitoring, initial 

performance testing, notifications, and 

periodic reports. 

Because permit information for the 

existing facility does not identify 

requirements for an SSM plan, we are 

proposing that the owner or operator of 

an existing area source comply with the 

SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.1111. 

Section 63.1111(a)(1) of subpart YY 

requires that the title V permit for a 

source include provisions for an SSM 

plan. 

V. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Chemical Manufacturing: Chromium 

Compounds 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The area source category, ‘‘Chemical 

Manufacturing: Chromium 

Compounds,’’ includes facilities that 

use chromite ore as the basic feedstock 

to manufacture chromium compounds, 

primarily sodium dichromate, chromic 

acid, and chromic oxide. There are only 

two plants in this area source category, 

and both are located in urban areas. One 

plant is located in Castle Hayne, North 

Carolina (near Wilmington) and the 

other is in Corpus Christi, Texas. 

Most of the sodium dichromate 

produced by the two plants is used to 

make chromic acid. Sodium dichromate 

is also used in leather tanning, chromic 

oxide production, pigments 

manufacture, textile dyeing, and in the 

manufacture of numerous other 

products. Chromic acid is used in the 

metal finishing industry to produce 

resistant coatings for a variety of base 

metals. Other uses include decorative 

plating, conversion coatings, and metal 

coloring compounds. The two main uses 

of chromic oxide are in pigments and 

refractories. 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture chromium compounds? 

Although the basic processes at the 

two plants are similar, there are some 

subtle differences in the processing 

steps, and the two plants have 

somewhat different emissions points 

and control configurations. 

Consequently, separate profiles of the 

processes and emissions controls are 

provided in sections V.B.1 through 

V.B.4 of this preamble. 

1. Sodium Chromate Production 

The main feedstock for the 

manufacturing process is chromite ore 

imported from South Africa and 

Finland, typically containing about 45 

percent or more chromium oxide. At the 

Texas plant, the chromite ore is dried 

and ground in a ball mill. The ground 

ore is mixed with alkaline material 

(soda ash, sodium bicarbonate, and 

sodium hydroxide) and fed to a rotary 

kiln where it is heated to about 2,000 

degrees Fahrenheit (°F). This process 

(known as ‘‘roasting’’) oxidizes the 

chromite ore, converting the majority of 

the chromium in the ore from trivalent 

to hexavalent chromium. Baghouses on 

the ore drying and grinding unit control 

emissions. Baghouses also control 

emissions from the rotary kiln during 

roasting. After roasting, the material 

typically contains 20 to 40 percent 

hexavalent chromium as sodium 

chromate and 10 to 20 percent trivalent 

chromium. The material exiting the 

rotary kiln is quenched with water in 

quench tanks. The quenching process is 

controlled by a wet scrubber and wet 

electrostatic precipitator. 

The resulting ore slurry goes through 

a belt filter to filter and purify the 

sodium chromate. The filters remove 

solid aluminum, vanadium, and 

calcium residues. Sodium dichromate is 

added to the ore slurry to aid in the 

removal of aluminum. Calcium 

hydroxide (lime) is added to remove 

vanadium. Soda ash solution is added to 

remove calcium. A baghouse on the 

impurity treatment and filtration units 

controls emissions. 

Some of the impurities from the 

impurity treatment and filtration unit 

are placed in a secondary roasting kiln 

with sodium hydroxide and additional 

chromite ore for another round of 

chromium recovery. Roasted and 

quenched material from the secondary 

kiln travels to impurity treatment and 

filtration units for the same purification 

process described above for materials 

from the primary roasting unit. A 

baghouse on the secondary kiln and wet 

scrubber on the quench system control 

emissions. 

At the North Carolina plant, the 

chromite ore is dried in rotary dryers 

and then pulverized in ball mills. The 

pulverized ore is prepared for roasting 

by mixing the ore with lime, soda ash, 

and recycled residue from the roasting 

kilns. Emissions from the ore drying and 

grinding units are controlled by 

cyclones and dry electrostatic 

precipitators. The kiln feed is fed to one 

of three rotary kilns in which the 

chromite ore is roasted. The hot gases 

generated in the kilns are sent to waste 

heat boilers for energy recovery. 

Emissions from the waste heat boilers 

travel to dry electrostatic precipitators 

and are vented through the main stack. 

The dry electrostatic precipitators 

process several gas streams, including 

emissions from the ore drying and 

grinding units, the roasting kiln waste 

heat boilers, the ore mixing unit and 

roasting kiln, and the post-leach ore 

residue drying unit. 

After exiting the kiln, the hot kiln 

roast is quenched and leached with hot 

water in tanks to dissolve the watersoluble sodium chromate and form a 

sodium chromate slurry. The sodium 

chromate slurry is sent to a recycle unit 

where hydroclones separate 

unconverted ore residue from the 

sodium chromate solution. The ore 

residue is washed and filtered on a filter 

belt, dried, and recycled to the kiln. A 

system of cyclonic scrubbers and wet 

electrostatic precipitators on the quench 

tanks and filter unit are used to control 

emissions. Emissions from the ore 

residue dryer are controlled by a 

cyclone and the dry electrostatic 

precipitators described earlier. 

2. Sodium Dichromate Production 

At the Texas plant, the purified 

sodium chromate solution travels from 

the impurity treatment and filtration 

system to the electrolytic cell system for 

electrolytic acidification. Water is added 

to the electrolytic cells as well. This 

process converts the sodium chromate 

solution to sodium dichromate solution. 

Fiber bed filters on the electrolytic cell 

system control emissions. The sodium 

dichromate can be sold or used on-site 

in the production of chromic oxide or 

chromic acid. 

Some sodium chromate solution is 

sent to a sodium chromate 

crystallization, evaporation, and drying 

unit to produce sodium chromate 

crystals. These crystals are then 

packaged for sale. Some sodium 

dichromate solution is also sent to a 

sodium dichromate crystallization, 

evaporation, and drying unit for 

production of sodium dichromate 

crystals. The crystals are sent to a 

packaging unit for packaging before sale. 

The emissions from the crystallization, 

evaporation, and drying units for the 

sodium chromate and sodium 

dichromate solutions are controlled by 

an entrainment separator and wet 

scrubber. 

At the North Carolina plant, the 

sodium chromate product stream 

proceeds through a series of pH 

adjustment and filtration steps using 

sodium carbonate and sulfuric acid to 

remove impurities such as iron, 

aluminum, and other oxides from the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16645 

sodium chromate solution. The sodium 

chromate solution is neutralized to a pH 

of 8.5 to precipitate and allow filtration 

of the remaining ore residues. The 

sodium chromate liquor is mixed with 

a soda ash solution in the calcium 

precipitator unit to precipitate the 

calcium as calcium carbonate. The 

sodium chromate liquor is then filtered 

to remove the calcium carbonate. In the 

acidification unit, the filtered raw 

sodium chromate liquor is acidified to 

a pH of 4.0 with sulfuric acid to produce 

sodium dichromate. This solution is 

partially evaporated to 85 percent 

concentration and then centrifuged to 

separate sodium sulfate (salt cake) from 

the sodium dichromate solution. After 

separation from the salt cake, the 

sodium dichromate product solution is 

either stored in tanks from which, after 

dilution to the appropriate 

concentration, it is either sold as 

sodium dichromate product liquor or 

used as feedstock in the chromic acid 

plant. Some of the sodium dichromate 

solution is crystallized, centrifuged, and 

dried to form sodium dichromate 

crystalline product. Emissions from the 

crystallization area are controlled by an 

impingement plate scrubber and 

demister. 

3. Chromic Acid Production 

At the Texas plant, the production of 

chromic acid is performed by 

electrolytic reaction of sodium 

dichromate solution through a series of 

cells. Sodium dichromate solution is 

introduced into the anode side of an 

electrolytic cell, and water is introduced 

to the cathode side. Direct current 

causes a reaction on the anode side of 

the cell, producing chromic acid, 

sodium ions, and oxygen gas. Sodium 

ions migrate to the cathode side (water) 

of the cell through a membrane, which 

produces sodium hydroxide and 

hydrogen gas. The sodium dichromate/ 

chromic acid solution (anode side) is 

withdrawn to be used as influent for the 

next cell line. The effluent from the 

anode side of the last stage is 

crystallized, centrifuged, dried, and 

packaged. 

Three scrubbers are used to control 

emissions from chromic acid 

production. Emissions from the 

electrolytic cells are controlled by two 

scrubbers; one scrubber controls oxygen 

gas and hexavalent chromium emitted 

from the anode side of the cells and one 

controls hydrogen gas and hexavalent 

chromium from the cathode side of the 

cell. Drying, storage, and packaging 

operations are vented to the same wet 

scrubber. 

At the North Carolina plant, the 

sodium dichromate liquor is further 

acidified with sulfuric acid to produce 

chromic acid crystals. The acidified 

slurry is filtered to recover the chromic 

acid and the filtrate is recycled to the 

sodium dichromate process. The 

chromic acid crystals are fed to a reactor 

where they are melted. The melted 

chromic acid produced in the reactor is 

cooled and then sent to a flaking process 

to produce the chromic acid flakes 

which are packaged and sold as final 

products. Emissions from the chromic 

acid area are controlled by a packed bed 

scrubber and demister. 

4. Chromic Oxide and Chromium 

Hydrate Production 

The Texas plant is the only facility 

producing chromic oxide and chromium 

hydrate. In the production of chromic 

oxide, ammonium sulfate and sodium 

dichromate solution that has been 

concentrated by evaporation are mixed 

and fed to a rotary roasting kiln to 

produce chromic oxide, sodium sulfate 

and nitrogen gas. The roast is quenched 

with water in which the chromic oxide 

is insoluble and the sodium sulfate is 

soluble. The mixture is washed in 

countercurrent thickeners, filtered, 

dried, milled, and packaged. To produce 

metallurgic grade chromic oxide and 

certain other grades, the chromic oxide 

is re-roasted in a secondary rotary kiln, 

quenched, filtered, dried, milled, and 

packaged. 

The chromic oxide plant uses 

baghouses and scrubbers for emissions 

control; this production area has 10 bag 

houses and 11 scrubbers. Four 

baghouses control emissions from the 

ammonium sulfate storage and grinding 

area. Emissions from mixing of the 

sodium dichromate and ammonium 

sulfate are vented to a wet cyclone. Wet 

scrubbers control emissions from the 

quench tanks of both the primary and 

secondary roasting kilns. A baghouse, 

wet scrubber, and a mist eliminator 

control emissions from the primary 

roasting kiln. A wet scrubber controls 

emissions from the secondary roasting 

kiln. Filtration steps after both primary 

and secondary roasting are each vented 

to separate wet scrubbers. The dryer 

vents to a bag filter. Chromic oxide 

storage, grinding, and packaging steps 

are vented to six baghouses. 

In the production of chromium 

hydrate, boric acid and concentrated 

sodium dichromate are mixed and fed to 

a furnace to produce a chromium 

hydrate ‘‘clinker’’ and sodium borate. 

The clinker is quenched with water. The 

mixture is then leached in tanks and 

filter presses to form chromium hydrate, 

then filtered, dried, milled, and 

packaged. Emissions controls include 

baghouses for boric acid grinding, 

chromium hydrate roasting, and 

chromium hydrate grinding and 

packaging. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP apply to the 

owner or operator of a new or existing 

area source that manufactures 

chromium compounds. We are 

proposing that owners or operators of 

existing sources comply with all the 

requirements of the area source 

NESHAP by 6 months after the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. A new affected source 

would be required to comply by the date 

of publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register or upon initial startup, 

whichever is later. 

2. Proposed Emissions Standards 

The proposed NESHAP requires new 

and existing facilities to operate a 

capture system that collects gases and 

fumes from each emissions source and 

conveys the gases to a PM control 

device. Emissions limits for PM, in lb/ 

hr format, would be established based 

on the process rate of the emissions 

unit. These PM emissions limits would 

apply to more than 20 emissions units 

in the production of chromium 

compounds, including sodium 

chromate, sodium dichromate, chromic 

acid, chromic oxide, and chromium 

dehydrate at new and existing sources. 

3. Compliance Requirements for 

Existing Area Sources 

The control devices used at these 

facilities include baghouses, dry 

electrostatic precipitators, wet 

electrostatic precipitators, and wet 

scrubbers. The proposed monitoring 

requirements for existing area sources 

consist of inspection and maintenance 

requirements specific to the type of 

control device. 

For a baghouse, this proposed 

NESHAP requires monthly visual 

inspections of the system ductwork and 

baghouse units for leaks. The plant 

owner or operator would also be 

required to conduct an annual 

inspection of the interior of each 

baghouse for structural integrity and 

condition of the filter fabric. For 

electrostatic precipitators, plants would 

be required to conduct: (1) A daily 

check to verify that the electronic 

controls for corona power and rapper 

operation are functioning, that the 

corona wires are energized, and that 

adequate air pressure is present on the 

rapper manifold; (2) a monthly visual 

inspection of the system ductwork, 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16646 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

cyclones (if applicable), housing unit, 

and hopper for leaks; and (3) a biennial 

internal inspection to determine the 

condition and integrity of corona wires, 

collection plates, plate rappers, hopper, 

and air diffuser plates. For wet 

electrostatic precipitators, plants would 

also be required to conduct a daily 

check to verify water flow and a 

biennial internal inspection to 

determine the condition and integrity of 

plate wash spray heads. For wet 

scrubbers, plants would be required to 

conduct: (1) A daily check to verify 

water flow to the scrubber; (2) a 

monthly visual inspection of the system 

ductwork and scrubber unit for leaks; 

and (3) an annual internal inspection for 

structural integrity and condition of the 

demister and spray nozzle. 

The owner or operator of an existing 

plant would be required to record the 

results of each inspection, the results of 

any maintenance performed on the 

control device, and the date and time of 

each recorded action. The results of 

inspections and maintenance of control 

equipment would be recorded in a 

logbook (written or electronic). The 

logbook would be kept onsite and made 

available to the permitting authority 

upon request. The owner or operator of 

an existing plant would be required to 

report any deviations from the 

emissions limits or monitoring 

requirements in a semiannual report 

submitted to the permitting authority. 

The owner or operator of an existing 

area source would be required to submit 

an initial notification of applicability 

and a notification of compliance status 

according to the requirements in 40 CFR 

63.9 of the General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart A). A performance test 

would not be required if a performance 

test has been conducted within the past 

5 years using the specified test methods 

and either no process changes have been 

made since the test, or the owner or 

operator can demonstrate that the 

results of the performance test, with or 

without adjustments, reliably 

demonstrate compliance despite process 

changes. We are also proposing that the 

owner or operator comply with either 

the requirements for SSM plans and 

reports in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) or with the 

malfunction requirements in this 

proposed rule that are based on the title 

V permit requirements. The permit 

requires a report if an event occurs that 

results in emissions in excess of a PM 

limit and lasts for more than 4 hours. 

4. Compliance Requirements for New 

Area Sources 

The owner or operator of a new 

source would be required to install and 

operate a bag leak detection system for 

each baghouse used to comply with a 

PM emissions limit. The requirements 

for the bag leak detection system are set 

forth in proposed section 63.11410(g). 

For additional information on bag leak 

detection systems that operate on the 

triboelectric effect, see ‘‘Fabric Filter 

Bag Leak Detection Guidance’’, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, September 1997, EPA–454/ 

R–98–015, NTIS publication number 

PB98164676. This document is available 

from the National Technical Information 

Service (NTIS), 5385 Port Royal Road, 

Springfield, VA 22161. 

The owner or operator of a new 

source that uses a control device other 

than a baghouse must submit a 

monitoring plan to the permitting 

authority for approval. The plan must 

describe the control device, the 

parameters to be monitored, and the 

operating limits for the parameters 

established during a performance test. 

The owner or operator of a new 

source would be required to 

demonstrate initial compliance with 

each applicable PM emissions limit by 

conducting a performance test according 

to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.7. EPA 

Method 5 or 5D (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A), as applicable, would be 

used to determine the PM emissions. All 

of the testing, monitoring, operation and 

maintenance, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements of the part 63 

General Provisions would apply to a 

new area source. We have identified in 

the proposed NESHAP the General 

Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 applicable 

to existing and new sources. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of PM as a Surrogate for 

Chromium 

The PM emissions from the various 

processes used for manufacturing 

chromium compounds contain the 

urban HAP chromium, and emissions 

control equipment that is designed and 

operated to control PM emissions also 

control chromium emissions. Both 

plants have title V operating permits 

that require PM emissions controls and 

establish emissions limits for PM. For 

these reasons, we decided to establish 

standards using PM as a surrogate for 

chromium emissions, which is the 

urban HAP that was the basis for the 

listing. Controlling PM emissions will 

control chromium emissions since they 

are contained within the PM—they are 

in the particulate form as opposed to the 

gaseous form. PM controls used at 

existing chromium plants are the same 

controls available to control particulate 

HAP metals such as chromium. These 

controls capture particulate HAP metals 

non-preferentially along with other PM, 

thus making PM a reasonable surrogate 

for chromium. We have used this 

approach in several other NESHAP in 

which PM was determined to be a 

surrogate for the HAP metals in the PM. 

2. Selection of Proposed Standards 

The two existing chromium 

compound production facilities 

currently hold title V operating permits 

issued by their respective State 

permitting agencies. Both permits 

contain PM emissions limits for all 

processes used to produce chromium 

compounds. We determined that the PM 

emissions limits applicable to these 

emissions sources are consistent with 

the expected performance of similar 

operations controlled by well-operated 

and maintained emission control 

devices. These control devices 

(baghouses, wet scrubbers, and wet and 

dry electrostatic precipitators) are 

widely used to control the emissions 

from both primary and secondary 

production of many different metals, 

they have been demonstrated to be 

effective at controlling emissions of 

metal HAP, they are cost effective, and 

they represent GACT for new and 

existing area sources in the chromium 

compounds manufacturing industry. 

We reviewed the PM limits in the title 

V operating permits for both plants. The 

North Carolina plant has PM limits that 

are expressed in an equation as a 

function of process throughput. For 

example, as the process throughput 

decreases, the PM emissions limit in lb/ 

hr also decreases. This equation is 

applied to each of the production 

processes for chromium compounds, 

and the allowable emissions limit based 

on throughput accounts for changes in 

production levels, which affects the 

level of emissions control that can be 

achieved. The Texas plant has 

emissions limits that are fixed in terms 

of allowable lb/hr and are independent 

of process throughput. A format that is 

fixed in lb/hr is not an appropriate 

approach for other existing plants or for 

new plants because it does not account 

for differences in size or capacity. 

We determined that the format used 

in the title V permit for the North 

Carolina plant was appropriate for a 

national standard for new and existing 

area sources. This mechanism for 

determining the emissions limit 

accounts for differences in process rates 

at different plants and it accounts for 

changes in the process rate at a given 

plant over time. We have also 

determined that the Texas plant can 

achieve the proposed emissions limits 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16647 

based on process throughput using their 

existing emissions control equipment. 

Consequently, we are proposing to 

apply this equation to determine 

emissions limits for each of the 

production processes at all new and 

existing area source plants for this 

national standard. 

We are alternatively proposing that 

GACT for these existing area sources is 

no further emission reduction. We 

request comment on the basis, 

consistent with section 112(d)(5), for 

asserting that GACT is no further 

control for these existing sources. We 

request comment on this issue because 

the standard proposed above will not 

result in any emission reductions 

beyond what is already required by the 

Federal permits to which the existing 

facilities are already subject. 

3. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We are proposing to base the 

compliance requirements for existing 

area sources on the operation and 

maintenance, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the title V 

permit of the area source located in 

North Carolina. The title V permit 

includes requirements for inspections 

and maintenance of each type of control 

device, semiannual reports of any 

deviation, and records of control device 

inspections and maintenance. In 

contrast, the compliance requirements 

for the Texas plant include very little 

with respect to monitoring or 

maintaining emissions control 

equipment. The requirements we are 

proposing are necessary to ensure 

emissions controls are maintained and 

operated properly on a continuing basis. 

The requirements do not pose a 

significant additional burden for the 

Texas plant that must implement them. 

We are allowing 6 additional months for 

existing area sources to prepare a 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

plan and implement the inspection and 

maintenance requirements for control 

devices. 

We would require that the existing 

plants comply with limited initial 

notification requirements in 40 CFR 

63.9 of the NESHAP General Provisions 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart A). In the 

notification of compliance status 

required by 40 CFR 63.9(h), the owner 

or operator would certify that 

equipment has been installed and is 

operating for each regulated emissions 

point and that the plant will comply 

with the inspection and maintenance 

requirements. The plant would be 

required to conduct a performance test 

to demonstrate initial compliance if a 

performance test has not been 

conducted in the past five years. 

We are proposing to require bag leak 

detection systems for baghouses used at 

new area sources; a monitoring plan 

would be required if another type of 

control device is used. Bag leak 

detection systems are typical 

requirements for new sources of the size 

and complexity of chromium compound 

manufacturing facilities. In addition, 

these systems can be incorporated into 

the design and operation for new 

sources and would not require 

retrofitting or duplicative monitoring as 

would be the case if they were applied 

to existing sources. 

For new area sources, we are also 

proposing to apply the notification, 

testing, monitoring, operation and 

maintenance, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the part 63 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A). The General Provisions are 

necessary for effective application of the 

standard for new area sources. We 

propose that these requirements are 

sufficient to ensure compliance with the 

proposed emissions limits for 

equipment at new area sources. 

VI. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 

and Fabrication 

A. What area source categories are 

affected by the proposed NESHAP? 

This proposed NESHAP applies to 

two area source categories: Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Production and 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication 

Operations. We are addressing these two 

area source categories in a single 

NESHAP due to similarity of their 

operations and because they are often 

co-located. 

The Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Production area source category 

includes any facility which 

manufactures foam made from a 

polymer containing a plurality of 

carbamate linkages in the chain 

backbone (polyurethane). Polyurethane 

is commonly made by reacting a 

polyisocyanate with an organic 

polyhydroxyl material in the presence 

of water. Application of blowing agents, 

catalysts, surfactants, and fillers 

transform the polyurethane into a foam 

with specialized properties. 

There are three types of polyurethane 

foam production facilities: slabstock 

flexible polyurethane foam (slabstock 

foam), molded flexible polyurethane 

foam (molded foam), and rebond foam. 

Slabstock foam is produced in large 

continuous ‘‘buns’’ that are then cut into 

the desired size and shape. Slabstock 

foam is used in a wide variety of 

applications, including furniture and 

mattresses. Molded foam is produced by 

‘‘shooting’’ the foam mixture into a 

mold of the desired shape and size. 

Molded foam is used in office furniture, 

automobile seats, novelties, and many 

other applications. Rebond foam is 

made from scrap foam that is converted 

into a material primarily used for carpet 

underlay. 

Prior to the promulgation of the 

NESHAP for major sources of foam 

production (40 CFR part 63, subpart III) 

in 1998, we estimated that there were 78 

slabstock foam facilities in the U.S. and 

228 molded foam production facilities. 

A recent estimate is that there are 36 

rebond foam facilities. 

The Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Fabrication Operations area source 

category includes processes engaged in 

cutting, bonding, and/or laminating 

pieces of flexible polyurethane foam 

together or to other substrates. Typical 

bonding techniques include gluing, 

taping, and flame lamination. 

Foam fabrication adhesive use 

operations may use methylene chloridebased adhesives to adhere pieces of 

foam together. Most foam fabrication 

adhesives are applied by workers using 

spray guns. It is typically performed in 

large open rooms, with work stations 

spaced along a conveyor which moves 

the pieces of foam to be glued together. 

Loop slitter adhesive use is a 

specialized type of foam fabrication 

adhesive use. Loop slitters are 

equipment at slabstock foam production 

and fabrication facilities that are used to 

slice large foam buns into thin sheets. 

Adhesive is used to attach the ends of 

the foam buns to one another before 

they are mounted on the loop slitter. 

The amount of adhesive used for loop 

slitters is relatively low because the 

adhesive is not applied continuously, 

just once or twice per shift when the 

foam buns are loaded onto the loop 

slitter. 

Flame lamination refers to the 

bonding of foam to other substrates (i.e., 

cloth, foam, plastic, and other materials) 

where the bonding agent is scorched or 

melted foam. Thin sheets of foam are 

passed under a flame which scorches 

the foam surface and makes it sticky. 

The tacky foam sheet is then applied to 

a foam or fabric substrate. 

All slabstock foam production plants 

perform foam fabrication, but there are 

also independently operated foam 

fabrication facilities. There is no foam 

fabrication trade association, so we do 

not have a good estimate of the number 

of foam fabrication facilities in the U.S. 

Prior to the promulgation of subpart III, 

EPA estimated that there were loop 

slitters at 40 slabstock foam production 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16648 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

facilities in the U.S. and 21 flame 

lamination facilities. 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points for flexible 

polyurethane foam production and 

fabrication? 

Both the Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Production and Flexible Polyurethane 

Fabrication Operations area source 

categories were listed for regulation due 

to emissions of the urban HAP 

methylene chloride. Historically, 

methylene chloride was the only urban 

HAP used at foam production and foam 

fabrication facilities. Slabstock foam 

production facilities used methylene 

chloride as an auxiliary blowing agent 

(ABA) to control the density and other 

properties of the foam as it expanded 

during the pouring process. Methylene 

chloride was also used as an equipment 

cleaner, in particular for mix heads. 

Currently, almost all slabstock foam 

producers have discontinued any use of 

methylene chloride. A small number of 

molded and rebond foam facilities 

previously used methylene chloride in 

mold release agents and some molded 

foam facilities used it as a mix-head 

cleaner. 

Foam fabricators used methylene 

chloride-based adhesives to adhere 

pieces of foam to one another. Flame 

laminators have never used methylene 

chloride. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

This proposed NESHAP applies to 

both new and existing flexible foam 

production and flexible foam fabrication 

plants that are area sources. The owner 

or operator of an existing source would 

be required to comply with the area 

source NESHAP by the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. The owner or operator 

of a new source would be required to 

comply with the area source NESHAP 

by the date of publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register or at 

startup, whichever is later. 

2. Proposed Emission Standards 

Table 1 of this preamble summarizes 

the various foam production and 

fabrication area sources covered by this 

proposed rule and the corresponding 

proposed regulatory strategies. As 

shown in Table 1 of this preamble, 

slabstock foam producers may still use 

limited amounts of methylene chloride 

as an auxiliary blowing agent. The 

technologies determined to be GACT for 

this industry significantly reduce, but 

do not always eliminate the use of 

methylene chloride as an auxiliary 

blowing agent. Methylene chloride use 

is prohibited for other uses at foam 

production and foam fabrication 

facilities. 

TABLE 1.—FOAM PRODUCTION AND FABRICATION PROCESSES AND CORRESPONDING PROPOSED REGULATIONS

Area source types Proposed regulation 

1. Slabstock polyurethane foam 

production.

a. Emission limits for methylene chloride used as an auxiliary blowing agent (ABA); 

b. Controls on storage vessels; 

c. Management practices for equipment leaks; and 

d. Prohibition on use of methylene chloride as an equipment cleaner. 

OR 

Eliminate use of methylene chloride in slabstock foam production processes. 

2. Molded polyurethane foam production.Prohibit use of methylene chloride as mold release agent or equipment cleaner. 

3. Rebond foam production ............ Prohibit use of methylene chloride as mold release agent. 

4. Foam fabrication adhesive use .. Prohibit use of methylene chloride adhesives. 

For slabstock foam production area 

sources, we are proposing emissions 

limits and management practices to 

reduce methylene chloride emissions 

from the production line, storage tanks, 

leaking equipment, and equipment 

cleaning. Emissions limits for 

methylene chloride used as an ABA are 

based on a formula which varies 

depending on the grades of foam being 

produced. Vapor balance systems or 

carbon beds would be required for 

methylene chloride storage vessels. The 

proposed management practices require 

plants to identify and correct leaking 

pumps and other equipment in 

methylene chloride service. 

Specifically, owners or operators would 

check periodically for equipment leaks 

(from quarterly for pumps and valves to 

annual for connectors) using EPA 

Method 21 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A). Leaks, which are defined as a 

reading of 10,000 parts per million 

(ppm) or greater, must be corrected 

within 15 days of when they are 

detected. The use of methylene chloride 

to clean mix heads and other equipment 

would be prohibited. 

Slabstock foam facilities that do not 

use any methylene chloride at the 

facility would not be subject to these 

emission limitations and management 

practices. Such facilities would only 

need to submit a one-time report. 

This proposed rule prohibits the use 

of methylene chloride-based mold 

release agents at molded and rebond 

foam facilities, methylene chloridebased equipment cleaners at molded 

foam facilities, and methylene chloridebased adhesives for foam fabrication. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

Slabstock foam area sources 

continuing to use methylene chloride 

would be required to monitor the HAP 

added at slabstock production mixheads 

and the HAP contained in and added to 

HAP ABA storage tanks. Plants using 

carbon adsorber systems to control 

emissions from HAP ABA storage tanks 

would be required to monitor the HAP 

content of exhaust streams from outlet 

vents. Plants using a recovery device to 

reduce methylene chloride emissions 

would be required to comply with a 

recovered HAP ABA monitoring and 

recordkeeping program. 

The owner or operator would be 

required to submit semiannual reports 

containing information on allowable 

and actual HAP ABA emissions, carbon 

adsorbers on storage tanks, and 

equipment leaks. Owners and operators 

would also be required to submit annual 

compliance certifications. Records 

would be required to demonstrate 

compliance, including a daily operating 

log of foam runs containing the grades 

of foam produced and related data, and 

records related to storage tanks and 

equipment leaks. This proposed 

NESHAP also includes a simpler 

facility-wide compliance option that 

only requires that the facility measure 

the total amount of methylene chloride 

used at the facility. Slabstock foam 

plants that do not use any methylene 

chloride would be required to submit a 

one-time certification as part of their 

notification of compliance status. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16649 

5Flame lamination foam fabrication facilities 

have never used, and thus never emitted, any 

methylene chloride and were not included in the 

listed category. Therefore, this proposed rule does 

not contain any emissions limitations for flame 

lamination facilities. 

Molded foam, rebond foam, and foam 

fabrication facilities which operate loop 

slitters would be required to prepare, 

and keep on file, compliance 

certifications which certify that the 

facility is not using the prohibited 

methylene-chloride based products and 

will not use them in the future. The 

plants would also maintain records 

documenting that the products they are 

using for the specific purposes do not 

contain any methylene chloride. These 

can be records that would be kept in the 

absence of this proposed rule such as 

adhesive usage information and 

Material Safety Data Sheets. Foam 

fabrication plants which do not operate 

loop slitters would have no compliance 

certification or recordkeeping 

requirements. 

The owner or operator of each 

slabstock foam affected source that 

continues to use methylene chloride 

and, therefore, would be subject to the 

methylene chloride emissions limits, 

would be required to comply with 

several requirements of the General 

Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A. 

However, because of the intermittent 

nature of the slabstock foam process, we 

are not proposing to require that 

affected sources comply with the 

requirements for SSM plans and reports 

in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

When the NESHAP for major sources 

of polyurethane foam production in 40 

CFR part 63, subpart III was 

promulgated in 1998, we estimated that 

there were 78 slabstock foam facilities, 

and that all of these facilities were major 

sources. The NESHAP requirements, 

along with the revisions to the 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) permissible 

exposure and short-term exposure limits 

for methylene chloride (63 FR 50711, 

September 22, 1998), caused slabstock 

foam facilities to investigate, evaluate, 

and install technologies to reduce or 

eliminate the use of methylene chloride 

as an ABA at their facilities. These 

technologies include alternative 

formulations to reduce the amount of 

methylene chloride ABA needed, 

alternative non-HAP ABAs (acetone, 

liquid carbon dioxide), controlled or 

variable pressure foaming, and forced 

cooling. Based on recent contacts with 

the industry, we have verified that every 

known slabstock facility has converted 

their process to utilize one of these 

technologies. In many cases, these 

changes were instituted prior to the 

compliance date for subpart III, making 

the facilities area sources. As these 

technologies have been universally 

applied to major and area source 

slabstock foam production facilities, we 

have no reason to believe that these 

emissions reduction technologies are 

infeasible or inappropriate for area 

sources. Consequently, we propose to 

conclude that emissions limitations 

based on the application of these 

technologies are generally available 

control technology (GACT) for new and 

existing area sources. 

Because the installation and operation 

of several of these pollution prevention 

technologies have resulted in the near 

total elimination of the use of and 

emissions of methylene chloride at 

slabstock foam production facilities, we 

have included a provision in this 

proposed rule that allows slabstock 

facilities that do not use any methylene 

chloride to submit a one-time report 

certifying that they do not use, and will 

not use in the future, any methylene 

chloride. We included this provision to 

reduce the recordkeeping and reporting 

burden for these facilities. 

We are also aware that methylene 

chloride usage has been eliminated at 

many molded foam and rebond foam 

production facilities. Therefore, we have 

no reason to believe that the use of nonmethylene chloride mold release agents 

and cleaners at molded and rebond 

foam production facilities is infeasible 

or inappropriate for area sources. 

Therefore, we determined that a 

prohibition of methylene chloride mold 

release agents and cleaners at molded 

and rebond foam production facilities is 

GACT for new and existing sources. 

While we are not aware of any area 

source molded foam or rebond foam 

facility that is currently using 

methylene chloride-based mold release 

agents or cleaners, we believe that it is 

appropriate to propose a prohibition on 

the use of these products to ensure that 

no methylene chloride is emitted from 

these facilities in the future.5

The changes to the OSHA permissible 

exposure and short-term worker 

exposure limits for methylene chloride 

had an even more significant impact on 

the flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication source category, as it made it 

infeasible to continue to use methylene 

chloride-based adhesives for most foam 

fabrication operations. Current 

information indicates that owners and 

operators of foam fabrication sources 

have eliminated the use of methylene 

chloride-based adhesives. (Additional 

details are provided in the background 

information for this industry in Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0897.) The 

most common alternatives being used 

are acetone-based and water-based 

adhesives. Therefore, we have no reason 

to believe that the use of non-methylene 

chloride-based adhesives for foam 

fabrication applications is infeasible or 

inappropriate for area sources as a 

generally available management 

practice. In addition, because of the 

nature of the adhesives application 

process described above, we are not 

aware of control technologies or 

management practices that could be 

employed to limit methylene chloride 

emissions in foam fabrication 

operations. Consequently, we are 

proposing that a prohibition of the use 

of adhesives containing methylene 

chloride is GACT for foam fabrication 

operations. We are requesting comments 

on this proposed prohibition. 

Among other things, we are asking for 

comment on the availability of cost 

effective alternatives to methylene 

chloride adhesives. We are also 

requesting comments on whether and 

under what circumstances methylene 

chloride-based adhesives (e.g., in small 

specialty applications) are being used or 

might be used by the foam fabrication 

industry, and what quantities are or 

might be involved in such applications. 

We also request information on any 

control technologies or management 

practices used to limit emissions of 

methylene chloride in the application of 

the methylene chloride-based adhesives 

and any cost information associated 

with such control approaches. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

For slabstock foam production 

facilities that continue to use methylene 

chloride, we concluded that 

requirements for monitoring and 

recording the amount of methylene 

chloride used are sufficient to ensure 

compliance with the proposed 

emissions limitations. 

For slabstock foam production 

facilities that have eliminated the use of 

methylene chloride and are exempt 

from the emissions limitations in this 

proposed rule, we are proposing to 

require that owners or operators submit 

a one-time notification certifying that 

they do not use any methylene chloride 

and will not use it in the future as their 

notification of compliance status report. 

In order to demonstrate compliance 

with the prohibition of the use of 

methylene chloride based mold release 

agents and cleaners for molded and 

rebond processes, we are proposing to 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16650 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

require preparation of a compliance 

certification, signed by a responsible 

official and kept on file, indicating that 

the facility has ceased the use of these 

prohibited products. The plant owner or 

operator would be required to maintain 

adhesive usage records and Material 

Safety Data Sheets or other 

documentation to show that no 

methylene chloride-based products are 

being used. 

Currently available information from 

the foam fabrication industry and 

adhesive manufacturers suggests that it 

is not possible for typical foam 

fabrication operations to use methylene 

chloride-based adhesives and comply 

with OSHA permissible exposure and 

short-term worker exposure limits for 

methylene chloride. Because we assume 

that compliance with these OSHA 

standards is being achieved through the 

elimination of the use of methylene 

chloride-based adhesives, we do not 

believe that additional reporting or 

recordkeeping is necessary to 

demonstrate compliance with the 

proposed prohibition of the use of 

methylene-chloride based adhesives. 

Therefore, this proposed rule contains 

no compliance requirements for most 

foam fabrication affected sources. 

However, unlike typical foam 

fabrication applications, we believe it 

may be possible for loop slitters to use 

methylenechloride— based adhesives 

and still comply with the OSHA worker 

exposure limits. This is because loop 

slitter adhesive application is brief and 

intermittent, typically not occurring 

more than once during a single shift. As 

a result, worker exposure is also brief 

and intermittent. Thus, it is possible 

that some loop slitter facilities could 

meet the OSHA time-weighted average 

exposure limitation without changing 

any of their normal procedures. 

Additionally, we believe that if 

compliance with the OSHA 

requirements could not be achieved 

without changing normal operating 

procedures, there are feasible measures 

that could be implemented to achieve 

compliance. For instance, the loop 

slitter adhesive could be applied by 

workers wearing respiration equipment, 

or a hood or other ventilation 

equipment could be added to the 

adhesive application station. Because of 

these possibilities, loop slitter 

operations using methylene chloride 

adhesives have the potential to meet the 

worker exposure limits set by OSHA, 

but still use and emit methylene 

chloride. 

Due to this possibility, we are 

proposing to require that flexible 

polyurethane foam fabrication affected 

sources operating loop slitters prepare 

and keep on file a compliance 

certification, signed by a responsible 

official, indicating that the facility does 

not use any methylene chloride and will 

not use it in the future. 

We are not proposing to apply the 

SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) 

to flexible polyurethane foam 

production and fabrication area sources. 

For slabstock facilities that elect not to 

use any methylene chloride, and for 

molded facilities, rebond facilities, and 

loop slitters that are prohibited from 

using methylene chloride-based 

products, SSM periods will have no 

impact on methylene chloride 

emissions. 

There are also fundamental problems 

in applying the General Provision 

requirements for SSM to slabstock foam 

production facilities that continue to 

use methylene chloride. The rationale 

for not subjecting area source slabstock 

foam plants to the SSM requirements 

was laid out at promulgation of subpart 

III, which exempted major sources from 

these provisions. 

The fundamental problem in applying 

the General Provisions SSM provisions 

to flexible polyurethane foam 

production facilities is defining a 

startup and a shutdown. The foam 

production process is intermittent in 

nature and, based on the EPA’s 

knowledge of the industry, every foam 

production process will undergo at least 

one routine ‘‘startup’’ and one routine 

‘‘shutdown’’ per day. The EPA never 

intended that these routine activities be 

addressed by the SSM requirements. 

The intent of the SSM plan is to 

identify methods to reduce excess 

emissions that occur during these events 

when air pollution is emitted in 

quantities greater than the standard 

allows. Given the comprehensive 

approach of the adopted sections of 

subpart III to regulate emissions by 

restricting the amount of HAP used, 

EPA does not believe that, for foam 

production facilities, periods of SSM 

provide the opportunity for emissions 

not already anticipated. 

VII. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for 

Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing 

area source category includes plants that 

manufacture batteries from lead, lead 

oxide paste, and sulfuric acid. These 

may be either of two types of batteries: 

(1) Starting, lighting, and ignition (SLI) 

batteries primarily used in automobiles, 

or (2) industrial and traction batteries. 

Industrial batteries include those used 

for uninterruptible power supplies and 

traction batteries are used to power 

electric vehicles such as forklifts. 

We estimate that there are 

approximately 58 lead acid battery 

manufacturing area sources operating in 

the U.S. Many of these area sources are 

subject to the NSPS for lead acid battery 

manufacturing plants in 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart KK. Subpart KK applies to all 

lead acid battery manufacturing plants 

constructed or modified since 1982 if 

they produce or have the design 

capacity to produce in one day batteries 

containing an amount of lead equal to 

or greater than 5.9 megagrams (6.5 tons). 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points at facilities that 

manufacture lead acid batteries? 

The lead acid battery manufacturing 

process includes preparing battery grids 

through stamping or casting lead. Lead 

oxide paste is added to the grids in the 

grid pasting operation creating plates 

that are cured and assembled into a 

battery. Batteries are then charged using 

sulfuric acid in the forming operations. 

Lead oxide may be prepared by the 

battery manufacturer, as is the case for 

many larger battery manufacturing 

plants, or may be purchased from a 

supplier. 

The lead acid battery manufacturing 

area source category was listed for 

regulation due to emissions of the urban 

HAP lead, which is used as a primary 

component of a battery. Cadmium, 

another urban HAP emitted in trace 

amounts, was also identified in the 

listing of the lead acid battery 

manufacturing area source category. 

Cadmium and other trace urban HAP 

metals that are emitted by lead acid 

battery manufacturing plants (arsenic, 

beryllium, chromium, manganese, and 

nickel) are controlled by the same 

devices that control lead emissions. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP apply to both 

new and existing lead acid battery 

manufacturing plants that are area 

sources. We are not aware of any major 

source lead acid battery manufacturing 

plants. We are proposing that owners or 

operators of existing sources comply 

with all the requirements of the area 

source NESHAP no later than 1 year 

after the date of publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register. The owner 

or operator of a new source would be 

required to comply with the area source 

NESHAP on the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register or 

at startup, whichever is later. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16651 

2. Proposed Emissions Standards 

We are proposing to adopt as the 

NESHAP for the lead acid battery 

manufacturing area source category the 

numerical emissions limits for grid 

casting, paste mixing, three-process 

operation, lead oxide manufacturing, 

lead reclamation, and other lead 

emitting processes in 40 CFR 60.372 of 

the NSPS for lead acid batteries. These 

lead discharge limits are: 

• 0.40 milligram of lead per dry 

standard cubic meter of exhaust (mg/m3) 

from grid casting facilities, 

• 1.00 mg/m3 from paste mixing 

facilities, 

• 1.00 mg/m3 from three-process 

operations, 

• 5.0 mg per kilogram of lead feed 

from lead oxide manufacturing 

facilities, 

• 4.50 mg/m3 from lead reclamation 

facilities, and 

• 1.0 mg/m3 from any other leademitting operations. 

We are also proposing to adopt as the 

NESHAP for the lead acid battery 

manufacturing area source category the 

opacity limits from the lead acid battery 

NSPS. The opacity must be no greater 

than 5 percent from lead reclamation 

facilities and no greater than 0 percent 

from any affected facility except lead 

reclamation facilities. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

We are proposing to include in this 

proposed NESHAP the monitoring, 

testing, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the NSPS for lead acid 

batteries. This proposed NESHAP 

requires controls for lead emissions 

from the paste mixing, three-process 

operation, lead oxide manufacturing, 

grid casting, lead reclamation processes, 

and other lead-emitting processes. The 

owner or operator would be required to 

submit quarterly reports containing 

information on emissions that exceed 

the applicable limits. Records would be 

required to demonstrate compliance. We 

are also proposing to adopt the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the part 60 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, 

subpart A) and the initial notification 

and notification of compliance 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). 

We have explicitly identified in the 

proposed NESHAP the applicable 

General Provisions of both 40 CFR parts 

60 and 63. 

The proposed NESHAP allows 

existing plants to utilize previously 

conducted performance tests, when they 

are representative of current conditions, 

to demonstrate compliance. Plants 

without representative prior 

performance tests are required to 

conduct performance tests by 180 days 

after the compliance date. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

The NSPS applies to all lead acid 

battery manufacturing plants 

constructed or modified since 1982 if 

they produce or have the design 

capacity to produce in one day batteries 

containing an amount of lead equal to 

or greater than 5.9 megagrams (6.5 tons). 

Many existing lead acid battery facilities 

are subject to the NSPS and use fabric 

filters and impingement scrubbers to 

meet the lead emissions limits in the 

NSPS. In addition, through discussions 

with the industry trade organization, we 

have concluded that the existing 

facilities, whether they are subject to the 

NSPS or not, have installed fabric filters 

or other control devices that will allow 

them to meet the standard. 

Therefore, we have no reason to 

believe that the conventional control 

techniques employed to meet the 

emissions limits in the NSPS are 

infeasible or inappropriate for new or 

existing area sources. We have 

determined that the emissions control 

requirements in the NSPS for lead acid 

battery manufacturing are GACT for 

new and existing sources in the lead 

acid battery manufacturing area source 

category. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We have reviewed the compliance 

requirements in the NSPS for lead acid 

batteries and the NSPS General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A) 

applicable to this proposed NESHAP 

and concluded that these requirements 

are sufficient to ensure compliance with 

the proposed emissions limit standards. 

Therefore, we are proposing to adopt the 

NSPS testing, monitoring, and 

recordkeeping requirements in this 

proposed rule. 

The part 60 General Provisions are 

necessary for effective application of the 

lead acid battery NSPS and are therefore 

incorporated into this proposed rule as 

well. We are also incorporating certain 

provisions in the NESHAP General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) 

to address aspects of this proposed rule 

not covered by the part 60 General 

Provisions. 

VIII. Proposed Area Source NESHAP 

for Wood Preserving 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Wood Preserving area source 

category includes facilities that use 

pressure or thermal processes to 

impregnate chemicals into wood to a 

depth that will provide effective longterm resistance to attack by fungi, 

bacteria, insects, and marine borers. As 

most sources in this source category are 

minor sources, few are subject to State 

air emissions regulations or permit 

requirements. 

Existing facilities in the wood 

preserving source category are currently 

well controlled in terms of emissions of 

the urban HAP metals chromium and 

arsenic as a result of a voluntary 

decision by the industry to discontinue 

certain specified uses of chromated 

copper arsenate (CCA). The 

discontinued uses include dimensional 

lumber and wood used in play 

structures, decks, picnic tables, 

landscaping timbers, residential fencing, 

patios, walkways, and boardwalks. The 

voluntary agreement has reduced the 

usage and emissions of arsenic and 

chromium compounds from CCA 

treatment facilities by more than 80 

percent. On March 17, 2003, pursuant to 

section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), a cancellation order was signed 

in response to the use terminations and 

cancellations voluntarily requested by 

the registrants of wood preservative 

pesticide products containing CCA). 

Under the cancellation order, as of 

December 31, 2003, newly produced 

CCA may only be used for preservative 

treatment of a limited number of use 

categories of forest products (e.g., 

lumber and timber for marine 

construction for salt water use; wood for 

highway construction; piles; poles; 

agricultural posts; and treated wood 

used as structural members on farms). 

The use of CCA has been effectively 

eliminated from household 

commodities such as decking as a result 

of the FIFRA cancellation order. 

Household commodities such as 

decking are now generally treated with 

waterborne copper-based wood 

preservative systems known as 

ammoniacal copper quat (ACQ) or 

copper azole (CA). These preservatives 

do not contain arsenic or chromium, or 

any other urban HAP as active 

ingredients. (See Docket Item 0001 

‘‘Background on the Wood Preserving 

Industry’’ in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OAR–2006–0897.) 

With regard to dioxin emissions, 

pursuant to FIFRA, EPA issued a notice 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16652 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

on the wood preservative uses of 

pentachlorophenol to establish reliable 

and enforceable methods for 

implementing certified limits for 

hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (HxCDD) 

and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 

(2,3,7,8–TCDD or dioxin) (52 FR 140, 

January 2, 1987). Per the EPA notice, 

levels of 2,3,7,8–TCDD are not allowed 

to exceed 1 part per billion (ppb) in any 

product, and any manufacturing-use 

pentachlorophenol has to have HxCDD 

levels below an average of 2 ppm over 

a monthly release or a batch level limit 

of 4 ppm. The pentachlorophenol 

registrant has to submit monthly 

analyses to EPA to demonstrate 

compliance with these requirements. 

Industry representatives have 

reported there is no current use of 

methylene chloride by the wood 

preserving industry. In 1992, its use as 

a solvent system was removed from the 

standards of the American Wood 

Preservers’ Association, which govern 

the treatment of wood products. 

All wood preserving plants currently 

in operation are area sources. We 

estimate that there are approximately 

393 wood preserving area sources 

operating in the U.S. and expect that 

new facilities will be built in the coming 

years. In this rule, we are proposing 

standards for both new and existing area 

sources. 

B. What are the production processes 

and emissions points at wood 

preserving facilities? 

Wood preserving or treatment is 

accomplished by either pressure or 

thermal processes. To initiate either 

process, wood products are debarked, 

sawed, and conditioned. More than 95 

percent of all treated wood is preserved 

through pressurized processes. These 

processes are performed inside an 

enclosed vessel and involve the 

application of pneumatic or hydrostatic 

pressure to expedite the movement of 

preservative liquid into the wood. 

In a thermal treatment process, the 

wood is exposed to the preservative in 

an open vessel. The thermal process 

involves exposing wood to a heated 

preservative for 6 to 12 hours followed 

by exposure to the preservative at 

ambient temperature for 2 to 4 hours. 

According to industry representatives, 

there are currently only three facilities 

using the thermal process to treat the 

bottom portion (i.e., the 6 to 8 feet that 

will be below ground) on certain types 

of utility poles. 

There are two general classes of wood 

preservatives: oils, such as creosote and 

petroleum solutions of 

pentachlorophenol (also called ‘‘penta’’

or ‘‘PCP’’) and copper naphthanate, and 

waterborne salts that are applied as 

water solutions. Treated wood is used 

throughout the U.S. in a variety of 

capacities, including utility poles, 

lumber and timber, railroad ties, fence 

posts, marine pilings, plywood, and 

other miscellaneous products. By 

extending the service life of available 

wood through treatment with chemicals, 

wood treatment reduces the demands on 

forestry resources, reduces operating 

costs in industries such as utilities and 

railroads, and helps ensure safe working 

conditions where timbers are used as 

support structures. 

The urban HAP emitted from wood 

preserving operations that were the 

basis for the source category listing are 

arsenic, chromium, methylene chloride, 

and dioxins. These HAP may be 

released from the treatment process or 

an opening or leak in the process 

equipment. Significant effort is made by 

the industry to minimize any excess 

preservative that might contribute to 

emissions because the preservative can 

be as much as one-third of the total 

product cost. As a result, almost all 

wood preservation employing a pressure 

process takes place in a closed retort. A 

retort is an airtight pressure vessel, 

typically a long horizontal cylinder, 

used for the pressure impregnation of 

wood products with a liquid wood 

preservative. Proper use of a retort or 

similar vessel minimizes the loss of 

excess preservative and thereby limits 

HAP emissions. 

All of the thermal treatment processes 

that have been identified by industry 

utilize air scavenging systems to capture 

and control emissions coming from the 

process treatment vessel during the 

treatment process. 

After the preservative has been 

impregnated in the wood, the treated 

wood is set out to dry over a drip pad 

to collect preservative not absorbed 

during the treatment process. 

Regulations promulgated pursuant to 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act prohibit the presence of 

any free preservative drippage from 

products after they leave the process 

drip pad. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP apply to both 

new and existing wood preserving 

plants that are area sources. Because 

existing area sources are already 

complying with the proposed standards, 

we are proposing that owners or 

operators of existing sources comply 

with all the requirements of the area 

source NESHAP by the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. The owner or operator 

of a new source would be required to 

comply with the area source NESHAP 

by the date of publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register or at 

startup, whichever is later. 

2. Proposed Standards 

We are proposing to adopt as the 

NESHAP for the Wood Preserving area 

source category the control technologies 

and management practices currently 

used by most facilities within the wood 

preserving industry. Facilities using a 

pressure treatment process would be 

required to use a retort or similarly 

enclosed vessel for the preservative 

treatment of wood involving any wood 

preservatives containing chromium, 

arsenic, dioxins, or methylene chloride. 

Facilities using a thermal treatment 

process involving any wood 

preservatives containing chromium, 

arsenic, dioxins, or methylene chloride 

would be required to use process 

treatment tanks equipped with air 

scavenging systems to capture and 

control air emissions. 

These proposed standards would also 

require facility operators to minimize 

emissions from process tanks and 

equipment (e.g., retorts, other enclosed 

vessels, and thermal treatment tanks), as 

well as storage, handling, and transfer 

operations. These standards would have 

to be documented in a management 

practices plan that must include, but not 

be limited to, the following activities: 

• Minimizing preservative usage; 

• Maintaining records on the type of 

treatment process and types and 

amounts of wood preservatives used at 

the facility; 

• For the pressure treatment process, 

maintaining charge records identifying 

pressure reading(s) inside the retorts (or 

similarly enclosed vessels, if 

applicable); 

• For the thermal treatment process, 

maintaining records that an air 

scavenging system is installed and 

operated properly during the treatment 

process; 

• For the pressure treatment process, 

fully draining the retort prior to opening 

the retort door; 

• Storing treated wood product on 

drip pads or in a primary containment 

area to convey preservative drippage to 

a collection system until drippage has 

ceased; 

• Promptly collecting any spills; and 

• Performing relevant corrective 

actions or preventative measures in the 

event of a malfunction before resuming 

operations. 

Existing written standard operating 

procedures may be used as the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16653 

management practices plan if those 

procedures include the minimum 

activities required for a management 

practices plan. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

Plants would be required to comply 

with limited notification requirements 

in the part 63 General Provisions (40 

CFR part 63, subpart A). This proposed 

rule establishes the content and 

deadlines for submission of the 

notifications. We have explicitly 

identified in the proposed NESHAP the 

applicable General Provisions of 40 CFR 

part 63. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

Over the past 15 years, the wood 

preserving industry has undergone 

several changes related to the types of 

preservatives used for certain 

applications and the associated 

emissions with wood preservatives. 

Prior to 2003, much of the urban HAP 

metal emissions from the wood 

preservation area source category came 

from the preservative treatment of wood 

using CCA. 

In determining GACT for the wood 

preserving source category, we 

identified different management 

practices and control technologies used 

to reduce air emissions from pressure 

treatment processes and thermal 

treatment processes. Under section 

112(d)(1) of the CAA, EPA may 

‘‘distinguish among classes, types, and 

sizes of sources within a category or 

subcategory in establishing such 

standards * * *.’’ There are basic 

differences between the two treatment 

processes in the type of process vessel 

used, the mechanisms affecting the 

potential generation of air emissions 

(pressure versus thermal), and the way 

emissions are controlled. Consequently, 

we are proposing a GACT standard for 

the pressure treatment subcategory and 

a GACT standard for the thermal 

treatment subcategory. 

For wood treatment facilities using 

pressure treatment processes, any metal 

HAP that are included as part of the 

wood preservative formulation (such as 

CCA) are impregnated into the wood 

product inside a pressurized vessel 

(retort), and, therefore, significant air 

emissions do not occur during the 

process. After the retort is returned to 

ambient pressure, excess preservative is 

drained back into the storage tanks and 

the treated product is stored on drip 

pads prior to shipment. Metal HAP are 

normally released into the environment 

as PM and will not enter the air during 

the drying process. As demonstrated by 

the 2004 TRI for this industry, 

nationwide air emissions of all metal 

HAP are negligible (i.e., arsenic = 0.0002 

pounds and chromium compounds = 

0.0003 pounds). We have not identified 

any other management practices or 

control technologies that would provide 

additional emissions reductions in a 

cost effective manner. Therefore, GACT 

for pressure treatment processes is the 

management practices described above 

that are being used to minimize 

emissions from the process equipment 

and manufacturing operations. 

The same type of retort process used 

in the application of CCA is used for 

most wood preservatives containing 

pentachlorophenol and emissions of 

dioxin are likewise limited as a result. 

Dioxin also has a very low vapor 

pressure, making it less likely to 

volatilize into the air during the drying 

process. In fact, the 2004 TRI shows less 

than 0.005 grams of dioxin reported 

nationwide for the wood preserving 

industry. We have not identified any 

other management practices or control 

technologies that would provide 

additional emissions reductions in a 

cost effective manner for facilities using 

pressure treatment processes. Therefore, 

the management practices that are being 

used to minimize emissions from the 

retort or other similarly enclosed 

process equipment associated with the 

pressure treatment processes are GACT. 

For wood treatment facilities using 

thermal processes, the wood product is 

placed inside a treatment tank that may 

contain wood preservative with one of 

the urban HAP for which this category 

was listed. At the three existing 

facilities using the thermal process, air 

emissions are captured and controlled 

by an air scavenging system, which 

consists of a capture system (e.g., 

skirting around the tank) vented to a 

vapor recovery tank that collects 

condensate from the vapors. Therefore, 

no significant air emissions occur 

during the thermal treatment process. 

We have not identified any other 

management practices or control 

technologies that would provide 

additional emissions reductions in a 

cost effective manner for thermal 

treatment processes. Therefore, GACT 

for thermal treatment facilities entails 

using air scavenging systems to control 

emissions from the process treatment 

tanks associated with thermal processes 

consistent with the practices described 

above. 

Industry representatives also 

informed us that methylene chloride 

was replaced in their processes several 

years ago with different solvent carriers. 

The use of methylene chloride as a 

solvent system was removed from the 

standards of the American Wood 

Preservers’ Association in 1992. (See 

Docket Item 2006–0897–0001, 

‘‘Background on the Wood Preserving 

Industry’’ in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OAR–2006–0897.) There have been no 

emissions of methylene chloride 

reported in the TRI for the industry 

since 1992. However, because we 

cannot be certain that a new use for 

methylene chloride will not be 

developed in the future, we are 

proposing to require the same standards 

for a preservative containing methylene 

chloride. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

industry emissions and not being able to 

identify other cost effective management 

practices or control technologies that 

would provide additional emissions 

reductions involving chromium, 

arsenic, dioxins, or methylene chloride, 

we are proposing to establish standards 

based on current management practices 

and control technologies to minimize air 

emissions. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

The proposed standards require a 

minimal level of monitoring and 

recordkeeping to demonstrate 

compliance. For this reason, we are 

proposing to base the compliance 

requirements for new and existing area 

sources on certain notification 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions. The initial notification of 

applicability required by 40 CFR 

63.9(b)(2) would require the owner or 

operator to identify the plant as an area 

source subject to the standards. The 

notification of compliance status would 

require the owner or operator to certify 

compliance with the standards. No 

other recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements in the General Provisions 

would apply. 

IX. Proposed Exemption of Certain 

Area Source Categories From Title V 

Permitting Requirements 

Section 502(a) of the CAA provides 

that EPA may exempt one or more area 

sources from the requirements of title V 

if EPA finds that compliance with such 

requirements is ‘‘impracticable, 

infeasible, or unnecessarily 

burdensome’’ on such area sources. EPA 

must determine whether to exempt an 

area source from title V at the time we 

issue the relevant section 112 standard 

(40 CFR 70.3(b)(2)). We are proposing in 

this action to exempt acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers production, flexible 

polyurethane foam production and 

fabrication, lead acid battery 

manufacturing, and wood preserving 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16654 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

6The legislative history of section 502(a) of the 

Clean Air Act suggests that EPA should not grant 

title V exemptions where doing so would adversely 

affect public health, welfare, or the environment. 

(See Chafee-Baucus Statement of Senate Managers, 

Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division 

1990 CAA Leg. Hist. 905, compiled November 

1993.) 

area source categories from the 

requirements of title V. These area 

source categories would not be required 

to obtain title V permits solely as a 

function of being the subject of the 

proposed NESHAP; however, if they 

were otherwise required to obtain title 

V permits, such requirement(s) would 

not be affected by the proposed 

exemption. 

Consistent with the statute, EPA has 

found that compliance with title V 

permitting is ‘‘unnecessarily 

burdensome’’ for acrylic and modacrylic 

fibers production, flexible polyurethane 

foam production and fabrication, lead 

acid battery manufacturing, and wood 

preserving area sources. EPA’s inquiry 

into whether this criterion was satisfied 

was based primarily upon consideration 

of the following four factors: (1) 

Whether title V would result in 

significant improvements to the 

compliance requirements that we are 

proposing for these area source 

categories; (2) whether title V permitting 

would impose a significant burden on 

these area sources and whether that 

burden would be aggravated by any 

difficulty these sources may have in 

obtaining assistance from permitting 

agencies; (3) whether the costs of title V 

permitting for these area sources would 

be justified, taking into consideration 

any potential gains in compliance likely 

to occur for such sources; and (4) 

whether there are implementation and 

enforcement programs in place that are 

sufficient to assure compliance with 

these NESHAP without relying on title 

V permits. 

EPA also considered, consistent with 

the guidance provided by the legislative 

history of CAA section 502(a),6 whether 

exempting area source categories would 

adversely affect public health, welfare 

or the environment. We have considered 

the factors above in determining 

whether to include an exemption from 

title V in the proposed NESHAP for 

acrylic and modacrylic fibers 

production, flexible polyurethane foam 

production and fabrication, lead acid 

battery manufacturing, and wood 

preserving area sources. 

The first factor is whether title V 

would result in significant 

improvements to the compliance 

requirements we are proposing for these 

area source categories. We looked at the 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed NESHAP to see if they were 

substantially equivalent to the 

monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements of title V (see 40 

CFR 70.6 and 71.6) that we believe are 

important for assuring compliance with 

the NESHAP. The purpose of this 

review was to determine if title V is 

‘‘unnecessary’’ to improve compliance 

with these NESHAP. A finding that title 

V would not result in significant 

improvements to the compliance 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP 

would support a conclusion that title V 

permitting is ‘‘unnecessary’’ for area 

sources in these categories. One way 

that title V may improve compliance is 

by requiring monitoring (including 

recordkeeping designed to serve as 

monitoring) to assure compliance with 

the emissions limitations and control 

technology requirements imposed in the 

standard. The authority for adding new 

monitoring in the permit is in the 

‘‘periodic monitoring’’ provisions of 40 

CFR 70.6(a)(3)(i)(B) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3)(i)(B), which allow new 

monitoring to be added to the permit 

when the underlying standard does not 

already require ‘‘periodic testing or 

instrumental or noninstrumental 

monitoring (which may consist of 

recordkeeping designed to serve as 

monitoring).’’ In addition, title V 

imposes a number of recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements that may be 

important for assuring compliance. 

These include requirements for a 

monitoring report at least every 6 

months, prompt reports of deviations, 

and an annual compliance certification. 

See 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3), 40 CFR 70.6(c)(1) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(1), and 40 CFR 70.6(c)(5) and 40 

CFR 71.6(c)(5). 

We examined the first factor for each 

of the source categories and determined 

that a title V permit would not result in 

significant improvements to the 

compliance requirements that we are 

proposing. The following paragraphs 

discuss each source category separately. 

To determine whether title V permits 

would add significant compliance 

requirements for the Acrylic and 

Modacrylic Fibers Production area 

source category, we compared the title 

V monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements mentioned 

above to those requirements in the 

proposed NESHAP, which adopts the 

compliance requirements in the Stateissued permit for the one area source 

plant currently in operation. The 

proposed NESHAP requires CPMS to 

measure and record the water flow rate 

to the control device (wet scrubber) 

every 15 minutes and to determine the 

daily average flow rate. Periodic visual 

inspections of AN storage tanks 

equipped with a fixed roof in 

combination with an internal floating 

roof must be conducted according to the 

NSPS requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart Kb. Because both the 

continuous and noncontinuous 

monitoring methods required by the 

proposed NESHAP would provide 

periodic monitoring, title V would not 

add any monitoring to the proposed 

NESHAP. 

We also considered the extent to 

which title V could enhance compliance 

through recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements, including title V 

requirements for a 6-month monitoring 

report, deviation reports, and an annual 

compliance certification in 40 CFR 70.6 

and 71.6. The proposed NESHAP for 

acrylic and modacrylic fibers 

production requires the plant to 

determine compliance with daily 

average operating limits for the water 

flow rates to each control device on a 

monthly basis and to submit compliance 

reports to EPA or the delegated 

authority on a quarterly basis. Should 

the daily average water flow rate to a 

wet scrubber control device fall below 

the operating limits, the plant must 

notify EPA or the delegated authority in 

writing within 10 days of the 

identification of the exceedance. All 

area source plants would be required to 

comply with the requirements for 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

plans, reports, and records in 40 CFR 

63.6(e)(3). 

Records are required to demonstrate 

compliance with the NSPS inspection 

and repair requirements for storage 

tanks in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb. The 

information required in the proposed 

NESHAP is similar to the information 

that must be provided in the deviation 

reports and semiannual monitoring 

reports required under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) 

and 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3). 

The proposed NESHAP does not 

require an annual compliance 

certification report, which is a 

requirement of a title V permit. See 40 

CFR 70.5(c)(9)(iii) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(5)(i). EPA believes that the 

annual certification reporting 

requirement is not necessary because 

the quarterly reports are adequate to 

ensure compliance for existing sources. 

New sources would submit notifications 

and reports required by the part 63 

General Provisions. 

The monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements in the proposed 

NESHAP for the Acrylic and Modacrylic 

Fibers Production area source category 

are substantially equivalent to such 

requirements under title V. Therefore, 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16655 

we conclude that title V would not 

result in significant improvements to 

the compliance requirements we are 

proposing for this area source category. 

To determine whether title V permits 

would add significant compliance 

requirements to the proposed NESHAP 

for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing, 

we also compared the title V 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements to those 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP, 

which adopts the compliance 

requirements in the NSPS. The NSPS 

requires that a facility using a scrubbing 

system install, calibrate, maintain, and 

operate a monitoring device that 

measures and records the pressure drop 

across the scrubbing system at least 

once every 15 minutes. Each facility 

must demonstrate compliance by either 

conducting a performance test or 

submitting the results of a previous 

performance test conducted using the 

methods and procedures in the 

proposed NESHAP. Because both the 

continuous and noncontinuous 

monitoring methods required by the 

proposed NESHAP would provide 

periodic monitoring, title V would not 

add any monitoring to the proposed 

NESHAP. 

We also considered the extent to 

which title V could enhance compliance 

through recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements, including title V 

requirements for a 6-month monitoring 

report, deviation reports, and an annual 

compliance certification in 40 CFR 70.6 

and 71.6. Records are required to 

demonstrate compliance. Plants also 

would be required to comply with the 

testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the part 60 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, 

subpart A). The information required in 

the proposed NESHAP is similar to the 

information that must be provided in 

the deviation reports and semiannual 

monitoring reports required under 40 

CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3). 

The proposed NESHAP does not 

require an annual compliance 

certification report, which is a 

requirement of a title V permit. See 40 

CFR 70.5(c)(9)(iii) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(5)(i). EPA believes that the 

annual certification reporting 

requirement is not necessary because 

the quarterly reports are adequate to 

ensure compliance for new and existing 

sources. 

The monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements in the proposed 

NESHAP for the Lead Acid Battery 

Manufacturing area source category are 

substantially equivalent to such 

requirements under title V. Therefore, 

we conclude that title V would not 

result in significant improvements to 

the compliance requirements we are 

proposing for this area source category. 

To determine whether title V permits 

would add significant compliance 

requirements, we also compared the 

title V monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements to those 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP 

for Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Production and Fabrication area source 

category. The proposed NESHAP does 

not contain monitoring or periodic 

reporting requirements for facilities that 

have already reduced HAP emissions by 

complying with the proposed ban on 

methylene chloride. These provisions 

are not included in the proposed 

NESHAP for this area source category 

because the discontinued use of 

methylene chloride would reduce urban 

HAP emissions without the need for 

continuous or periodic monitoring of 

equipment or operations. For slabstock 

foam plants still using methylene 

chloride, the proposed NESHAP 

requires the same monitoring that must 

be performed by major sources. 

Therefore, title V would not add any 

monitoring to the proposed NESHAP. 

We also considered the extent to 

which title V could enhance compliance 

for area sources through recordkeeping 

or reporting requirements, including 

title V requirements for a 6-month 

monitoring report, deviation reports, 

and an annual compliance certification 

in 40 CFR 70.6 and 71.6. The proposed 

NESHAP requires foam plants that have 

discontinued the use of methylene 

chloride to certify compliance with the 

prohibition on methylene chloride. For 

slabstock foam plants still using 

methylene chloride, the proposed 

NESHAP requires the same 

recordkeeping or reporting that must be 

performed by major sources. The 

information required in the proposed 

reports and records is similar to the 

information that must be provided in 

the deviation reports and required 

under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3). 

The proposed NESHAP requires a 

report if a deviation occurs, but does not 

require periodic compliance reports. 

The addition of periodic reports for 

sources that are not subject to 

monitoring requirements would not 

result in significant improvements to 

the compliance requirements we are 

proposing for this area source category. 

The proposed NESHAP does not 

require an annual compliance 

certification report, which is a 

requirement of a title V permit. See 40 

CFR 70.5(c)(9)(iii) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(5)(i). EPA believes that the 

annual certification reporting 

requirement is not necessary because 

the deviation reports are adequate to 

ensure compliance for new and existing 

sources. 

To determine whether title V permits 

would add significant compliance 

requirements, we also compared the 

title V monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements to those 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP 

for the Wood Preserving area source 

category. EPA determined that the good 

management practices currently used at 

most facilities during the application of 

wood preservatives is GACT for this 

source category. The rule proposes to 

require recordkeeping and deviation 

reporting to ensure compliance with the 

NESHAP. Given the nature of the 

management practices proposed for this 

source category, we believe that the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in the rule are sufficient to 

ensure compliance and find that 

additional monitoring is not necessary 

in this instance. The proposed NESHAP 

does not contain monitoring or periodic 

reporting requirements because the 

facilities have reduced HAP emissions 

by using good management practices as 

part of their standard method of 

operation. 

The management practices would 

reduce urban HAP emissions without 

the need for continuous monitoring of 

equipment or operations. Therefore, title 

V would not add any monitoring to the 

proposed NESHAP. We also considered 

the extent to which title V could 

enhance compliance for area sources 

through recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements, including title V 

requirements for a 6-month monitoring 

report, deviation reports, and an annual 

compliance certification in 40 CFR 70.6 

and 71.6. 

The proposed NESHAP also requires 

wood preserving plants to certify 

compliance with the management 

practices identified as GACT. In 

addition, wood preserving plants must 

maintain records showing compliance 

with the required management practices 

in the proposed NESHAP and report 

deviations. The information required in 

the proposed reports and records is 

similar to the information that must be 

provided in the deviation reports and 

required under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 

CFR 71.6(a)(3). We have determined that 

title V would not enhance compliance 

for area sources through additional 

recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements. 

The second factor we considered is 

whether title V permitting would 

impose significant burdens on these 

area sources and whether that burden 

would be aggravated by any difficulty 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16656 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

these sources may have in obtaining 

assistance from permitting agencies. The 

information collection request (ICR) for 

parts 70 and 71 describes the title V 

burdens and costs in the aggregate, and 

although they do not focus on area 

sources, they do describe the various 

activities undertaken by title V sources, 

including area sources, so many of the 

same burdens and costs described in the 

ICR will also apply to area sources. 

Some examples of this burden include 

reading and understanding permit 

program guidance and regulations, 

completing the permit application, 

preparing and submitting applications 

for permit revisions every 5 years, and 

paying permit fees. We believe that this 

cost is a significant burden for these 

area sources. 

The third factor we considered is 

whether the costs of title V permitting 

for these area sources would be 

justified, taking into consideration any 

potential gains in compliance likely to 

occur for such sources. Based on our 

consideration of factor 1 (described 

above) and factor 4 (described below), 

we did not identify potential gain in 

compliance from title V permitting. 

Therefore, we conclude that the costs of 

title V permitting for these area source 

categories are not justified. 

The fourth factor we considered is 

whether there are implementation and 

enforcement programs in place that are 

sufficient to assure compliance with 

these NESHAP without relying on title 

V permits. A conclusion that these 

criteria can be met would support a 

conclusion that title V permitting is 

‘‘unnecessary’’ for these area sources. 

See 70 FR 15254. There are State 

programs in place to enforce these area 

source NESHAP. We believe that these 

programs are sufficient to assure 

compliance with these NESHAP. In 

addition, EPA retains authority to 

enforce these NESHAP anytime under 

CAA sections 112, 113 and 114. In light 

of the above, we conclude that title V 

permitting is ‘‘unnecessary’’ to assure 

compliance with these NESHAP 

because the statutory requirements for 

implementation and enforcement of 

these NESHAP by the delegated States 

and EPA are sufficient to assure 

compliance with these area source 

NESHAP, in all parts of the U.S., 

without title V permits. In addition, 

small business assistance programs 

required by CAA section 507 may be 

used to assist area sources that have 

been exempted from title V permitting. 

Also, States and EPA often conduct 

voluntary compliance assistance, 

outreach, and education programs 

(compliance assistance programs), 

which are not required by statute. These 

additional programs supplement and 

enhance the success of compliance with 

these area source NESHAP. In light of 

all of the above, we conclude that there 

are implementation and enforcement 

programs in place that are sufficient to 

assure compliance with these NESHAP 

without relying on title V permitting. 

In addition to evaluating whether 

compliance with title V requirements is 

‘‘unnecessarily burdensome’’, EPA also 

considered, consistent with guidance 

provided by the legislative history of 

section 502(a), whether exempting these 

area source categories from title V 

requirements would adversely affect 

public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Exemption of these area 

source categories from title V 

requirements would not adversely affect 

public health, welfare, or the 

environment because the level of 

control would remain the same if a 

permit were required. Therefore, we 

conclude that exempting these area 

sources from title V permitting 

requirements in these proposed rules 

would not adversely affect public 

health, welfare, or the environment. 

One of the primary purposes of the 

title V permitting program is to clarify, 

in a single document, the various and 

sometimes complex regulations that 

apply to sources in order to improve 

understanding of these requirements 

and to help sources to achieve 

compliance with the requirements. In 

this case, however, we do not believe 

that a title V permit is necessary for us 

to understand the requirements 

applicable to these area sources. This 

proposal would add new requirements 

to the NESHAP for new area sources. 

We have determined that the current 

requirements for existing area sources 

reflect GACT and thus adopted them in 

the proposed rules for existing sources. 

Furthermore, we do not find the 

requirements for existing sources to be 

very complicated to understand or 

implement. For these reasons, we do not 

find that title V permitting is necessary 

to improve understanding of and 

achieve compliance with these 

standards. 

Based on the above analysis, we 

conclude that title V permitting would 

be ‘‘unnecessarily burdensome’’ for the 

acrylic and modacrylic fibers 

production, flexible polyurethane foam 

production and fabrication, lead acid 

battery manufacturing, and wood 

preserving area source categories. We 

are, therefore, proposing that these area 

source categories be exempt from title V 

permitting requirements. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

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

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because 

it may raise novel legal or policy issues. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to OMB for review under Executive 

Order 12866, and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information requirements in the 

proposed NESHAP for Acrylic and 

Modacrylic Fibers Production Area 

Sources, Carbon Black Production Area 

Sources, Chemical Manufacturing: 

Chromium Compounds Area Sources, 

Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 

and Fabrication Area Sources, Lead 

Acid Battery Manufacturing Area 

Sources, and Wood Preserving Area 

Sources have been submitted for 

approval to OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

The ICR document prepared by EPA has 

been assigned EPA ICR number 2256.01. 

The recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in the proposed rules are 

based on the existing permit 

requirements as well as the information 

collection requirements in the part 63 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A). The recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements in the General 

Provisions are mandatory pursuant to 

section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). 

All information submitted to EPA 

pursuant to the information collection 

requirements for which a claim of 

confidentiality is made is safeguarded 

according to CAA section 114(c) and the 

Agency’s implementing regulations at 

40 CFR part 2, subpart B. 

The proposed information collection 

requirements for acrylic and modacrylic 

fibers production are the same as the 

requirements that are in the current 

State operating permit for the one 

existing source. The only new 

information collection requirements that 

would apply to this area source would 

consist of initial notifications and an 

SSM plan. Any new acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers production area 

source would be subject to all 

information collection requirements in 

the part 63 General Provisions. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 9 labor hours per year at a cost of 

$780 for the one existing acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers area source. No 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16657 

capital/startup costs or operation and 

maintenance costs are associated with 

the proposed requirements. No costs or 

burden hours are estimated for new 

acrylic and modacrylic fibers 

production area sources because no new 

area sources are estimated during the 

next 3 years. 

The proposed NESHAP for carbon 

black production area sources includes 

testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements equivalent to 

current requirements applicable to the 

existing area source carbon black 

production facility. The only new 

information collection requirements that 

would apply to this area source would 

consist of initial notifications and SSM 

plans. Any new carbon black 

production area source would be subject 

to all information collection 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 9 labor hours per year at a cost of 

$780 for the one existing carbon black 

production area source. No capital/ 

startup costs or operation and 

maintenance costs are associated with 

the proposed requirements. No costs or 

burden hours are estimated for new 

carbon black production area sources 

because no new sources are estimated 

during the next 3 years. 

The proposed PM testing, monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements for existing chromium 

compounds manufacturing area sources 

are the same as the requirements that 

are in the current title V operating 

permit for the two existing facilities. 

The only new information collection 

requirements that would apply to these 

area sources would consist of initial 

notifications, SSM plans, and control 

device inspections at one plant. Any 

new chromium compounds 

manufacturing area source would be 

subject to all information collection 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 194 labor hours per year at a cost 

of $16,409 for the two existing 

chromium compounds manufacturing 

area sources. No capital/startup costs or 

operation and maintenance costs are 

associated with the proposed 

requirements. No costs or burden hours 

are estimated for new chromium 

compounds manufacturing area sources 

because no new area sources are 

estimated during the next 3 years. 

The proposed NESHAP for flexible 

polyurethane foam production and 

fabrication operations area sources 

requires a one-time notification by slab 

stock foam facilities that they do not use 

methylene chloride and records 

documenting that they do not use 

methylene chloride. One plant that uses 

methylene chloride would be subject to 

additional reporting requirements. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 835 labor hours per year at a cost 

of $70,686 for the 500 or more existing 

flexible foam fabrication and production 

area sources. No capital/startup costs or 

operation and maintenance costs are 

associated with the proposed 

requirements. No costs or burden hours 

are estimated for new flexible foam 

production or fabrication area sources 

because no new sources are estimated 

during the next 3 years. 

The proposed PM testing, monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements for new and existing lead 

acid battery manufacturing area sources 

are the same as the requirements that 

are in the NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart 

KK). In addition, new information 

collection requirements that would 

apply to these area sources would 

consist of either an initial performance 

test or submission of the results of a 

previous performance test and the 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions for initial notifications. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 675 labor hours per year at a cost 

of $57,147 for the 58 existing lead acid 

battery manufacturing area sources. No 

capital/startup costs or operation and 

maintenance costs are associated with 

the proposed requirements. No costs or 

burden hours are estimated for new lead 

acid battery manufacturing area sources 

because no new sources are estimated 

during the next 3 years. 

The proposed NESHAP for wood 

preserving area sources does not include 

testing, monitoring, or recordkeeping 

requirements because they are subject to 

management practices. The only new 

information collection requirements that 

would apply to these existing area 

sources would consist of initial 

notifications and records demonstrating 

compliance with the management 

practice requirements. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 1,055 labor hours per year at a cost 

of $89,324 for approximately 400 

existing wood preserving area sources. 

No capital/startup costs or operation 

and maintenance costs are associated 

with the proposed requirements. No 

costs or burden hours are estimated for 

new wood preserving area sources 

because no new sources are estimated 

during the next 3 years. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or 

provide information to or for a Federal 

agency. This includes the time needed 

to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and utilize technology and 

systems for the purposes of collecting, 

validating, and verifying information, 

processing and maintaining 

information, and disclosing and 

providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; 

complete and review the collection of 

information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information. 

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 part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

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 would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

For the purposes of assessing the 

impacts of the proposed area source 

NESHAP on small entities, small entity 

is defined as: (1) A small business that 

meets the Small Business 

Administration size standards for small 

businesses found at 13 CFR 121.201 

(less than 1,000 employees for acrylic 

and modacrylic fiber production and 

chromium compounds manufacturing 

and less than 500 employees for carbon 

black production, flexible polyurethane 

foam production and fabrication, leadacid battery manufacturing, and wood 

preserving); (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-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16658 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

After considering the economic 

impacts of the proposed rules on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

There would not be adverse impacts on 

existing area sources in any of the seven 

source categories because the proposed 

rules do not create any new 

requirements or burdens for existing 

sources other than minimal notification 

requirements. 

Although the proposed NESHAP 

contain emissions control requirements 

for new area sources in all seven source 

categories, we are not specifically aware 

of any new sources being constructed 

now or planned in the next 3 years, and 

consequently, we did not estimate any 

impacts for new sources. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed action 

on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L. 

104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any 1 year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. 

Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to 

adopt an alternative other than the least 

costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation why that alternative 

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes 

any regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed rules do 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. 

Thus, the proposed rules are not subject 

to the requirements of sections 202 and 

205 of the UMRA. In addition, the 

proposed rules do not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. The 

proposed rules contain no requirements 

that apply to such governments, impose 

no obligations upon them, and would 

not result in expenditures by them of 

$100 million or more in any one year or 

any disproportionate impacts on them. 

Therefore, the proposed rules are not 

subject to section 203 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999) requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies 

that have federalism implications’’ are 

defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that 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.’’

The proposed rules do not have 

federalism implications. They would 

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 

rules impose requirements on owners 

and operators of specified area sources 

and not State and local governments. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to the proposed rules. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 6, 2000), requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ The proposed rules do 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. They would 

not have substantial direct effects on 

tribal governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal government and Indian tribes, 

as specified in Executive Order 13175. 

The proposed rules impose 

requirements on owners and operators 

of specified area sources and not tribal 

governments. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to the proposed 

rules. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: 

(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

EPA must evaluate the environmental 

health or safety effects of the planned 

rule on children, and explain why the 

planned regulation is preferable to other 

potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible alternatives considered by the 

Agency. EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 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. These proposed rules are not 

subject to the Executive Order 13045 

because they are based solely on 

technology performance. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The proposed rules are not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ as defined in 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 

May 22, 2001) because they are not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. Further, we have concluded that 

these proposed rules are not likely to 

have any adverse energy effects because 

energy requirements would remain at 

existing levels. No additional pollution 

controls or other equipment that would 

consume energy are required by the 

proposed rules. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16659 

Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–113, 

Section 12(d), 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. The VCS are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency does not 

use available and applicable VCS. 

The proposed rules involve technical 

standards. The EPA cites the following 

standards: EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 

2C, 2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 5D, 9, 

or 22 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. 

The method ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,’’

(incorporated by reference-see 40 CFR 

63.14) is cited in this proposed rule for 

its manual method for measuring the 

oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon 

monoxide content of the exhaust gas. 

This part of ASME PTC 19.10–1981 is 

an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 

3B. This ASTM method is a VCS. 

Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA 

conducted searches to identify VCS in 

addition to these EPA methods. No 

applicable VCS were identified for EPA 

Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 5D, 9, or 

22. The search and review results are in 

the docket for these proposed rules. 

The search for emissions 

measurement procedures identified 12 

other VCS. The EPA determined that 

these 12 standards identified for 

measuring emissions of the HAP or 

surrogates subject to emissions 

standards in these proposed rules were 

impractical alternatives to EPA test 

methods. Therefore, EPA does not 

intend to adopt these standards for this 

purpose. The reasons for the 

determinations for the 12 methods 

discussed in a memorandum included 

in the docket for these proposed rules. 

For the methods required or 

referenced by these proposed rules, a 

source may apply to EPA for permission 

to use alternative test methods or 

alternative monitoring requirements in 

place of any required testing methods, 

performance specifications, or 

procedures under § 63.7(f) and § 63.8(f) 

of subpart A of the General Provisions. 

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 these 

proposed rules 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. 

These proposed rules establish national 

standards for each area source category. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Incorporations by reference, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

Stephen L. Johnson, 

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 A—[Amended] 

2. Section 63.14 is amended by 

revising paragraph (i)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.14 Incorporations by reference. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 

10, Instruments and Apparatus],’’ IBR 

approved for §§ 63.309(k)(1)(iii), 

63.865(b), 63.3166(a)(3), 

63.3360(e)(1)(iii), 63.3545(a)(3), 

63.3555(a)(3), 63.4166(a)(3), 

63.4362(a)(3), 63.4766(a)(3), 

63.4965(a)(3), 63.5160(d)(1)(iii), 

63.9307(c)(2), 63.9323(a)(3), 

63.11148(e)(3)(iii), 63.11155(e)(3), 

63.11162(f)(3)(iii) and (f)(4), 

63.11163(g)(1)(iii) and (g)(2), 

63.11410(j)(1)(iii), and Table 5 of 

subpart DDDDD of this part. 

* * * * * 

3. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart LLLLLL to read as follows: 

Subpart LLLLLL—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 

Production Area Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11393 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11394 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11395 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

63.11396 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new 

sources? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11397 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11398 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11399 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Table 1 to Subpart LLLLLL of Part 63—

Applicability of General Provisions to 

Subpart LLLLLL 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11393 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate an acrylic or 

modacrylic fiber production plant that 

is an area source of hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) emissions. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

or existing affected source. The affected 

source is each acrylic or modacrylic 

fiber plant. 

(1) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

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

Air Act (CAA). 

(d) You are exempt from the 

obligation to obtain a permit under 40 

CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, provided 

you are not otherwise required by law 

to obtain a permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) 

or 40 CFR 71.3(a). Notwithstanding the 

previous sentence, you must continue to 

comply with the provisions of this 

subpart. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16660 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

§ 63.11394 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart no later than 

6 months after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register. 

(b) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart not later than 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. 

(c) If you startup a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with the 

provisions in this subpart upon startup 

of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11395 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

(a) You must operate and maintain 

capture or enclosure systems that collect 

the gases and fumes containing AN 

released from polymerization process 

equipment and monomer recovery 

process equipment and convey the 

collected gas stream through a closed 

vent system to a control device. 

(b) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere through any combination of 

stacks or other vents captured gases 

containing AN in excess of the 

emissions limits in paragraphs (b)(1) 

and (2) of this paragraph. 

(1) 0.2 pounds of AN per hour (lb/hr) 

from the control device for 

polymerization process equipment. 

(2) 0.05 lb/hr of AN from the control 

device for monomer recovery process 

equipment. 

(c) If you use a wet scrubber control 

device, you must comply with the 

control device parameter operating 

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

section. 

(1) You must maintain the daily 

average water flow rate to a wet 

scrubber used to control polymerization 

process equipment at a minimum of 50 

liters per minute (l/min). If the water 

flow to the wet scrubber ceases, the 

polymerization reactor(s) must be shut 

down. 

(2) You must maintain the daily 

average water flow rate to a wet 

scrubber used to control monomer 

recovery process equipment at a 

minimum of 30 l/min. 

(d) You must comply with the 

requirements of the New Source 

Performance Standard for Volatile 

Organic Liquids (40 CFR part 60, 

subpart Kb) for vessels that store 

acrylonitrile. The provisions in 40 CFR 

60.114b do not apply to this subpart. 

(e) You must operate continuous 

parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) 

to measure and record the water flow 

rate to a wet scrubber control device for 

the polymerization process equipment 

and the monomer recovery process 

equipment. The CPMS must record the 

water flow rate at least every 15 minutes 

and determine and record the daily 

average water flow rate. 

(f) You must determine compliance 

with the daily average control device 

parameter operating limits for water 

flow rate in paragraph (c) of this section 

on a monthly basis and submit a 

summary report to EPA or the delegated 

authority on a quarterly basis. Should 

the daily average water flow rate to a 

wet scrubber control device for the 

polymerization process equipment fall 

below 50 l/min or the daily water flow 

rate to a wet scrubber control device for 

the monomer recovery process 

equipment fall below 30 l/min, you 

must notify EPA or the delegated 

authority in writing within 10 days of 

the identification of the exceedance. 

(g) You must keep records of each 

monthly compliance determination for 

the water flow rate operating parameter 

limits in a permanent form suitable for 

inspection and retain the records for at 

least 2 years following the date of each 

compliance determination. 

(h) You must conduct a performance 

test for each control device for 

polymerization process equipment and 

monomer recovery process equipment 

subject to an emissions limit in 

paragraph (b) of this section within 180 

days of your compliance date and report 

the results in your notification of 

compliance status. You must conduct 

each test according to the requirements 

in 40 CFR 63.7 and § 63.1104 of subpart 

YY. You are not required to conduct a 

performance test if a prior performance 

test was conducted using the methods 

specified in § 63.1104 of subpart YY and 

either no process changes have been 

made since the test, or you can 

demonstrate that the results of the 

performance test, with or without 

adjustments, reliably demonstrate 

compliance despite process changes. 

(i) If you do not use a wet scrubber 

control device for the polymerization 

process equipment or the monomer 

recovery process equipment, you must 

submit a monitoring plan to EPA or the 

delegated authority for approval. Each 

plan must contain the information in 

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

section. 

(1) A description of the device; 

(2) Test results collected in 

accordance with § 63.1104 of subpart 

YY verifying the performance of the 

device for reducing AN to the levels 

required by this subpart; 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan 

for the control device (including a 

preventative maintenance schedule 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for routine and long-term 

maintenance) and continuous 

monitoring system. 

(4) A list of operating parameters that 

will be monitored to maintain 

continuous compliance with the 

applicable emissions limits; and 

(5) Operating parameter limits based 

on monitoring data collected during the 

performance test. 

(j) If you do not operate a monomer 

recovery process that removes AN prior 

to spinning, you must comply with the 

requirements in paragraph (j)(1), (2), or 

(3) of this section for each fiber spinning 

line that uses a spin dope produced 

from either a suspension polymerization 

process or solution polymerization 

process. 

(1) You must reduce the AN 

concentration of the spin dope to less 

than 100 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw); or 

(2) You must design and operate a 

fiber spinning line enclosure according 

to the requirements in § 63.1103(b)(4) of 

subpart YY and reduce AN emissions by 

85 weight-percent or more by venting 

emissions from the enclosure through a 

closed vent system to any combination 

of control devices meeting the 

requirements in § 63.982(a)(2) of subpart 

SS; or 

(3) You must reduce AN emissions 

from the spinning line to less than or 

equal to 0.5 pounds of AN per ton (lb/ 

ton) of acrylic and modacrylic fiber 

produced. 

§ 63.11396 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new sources? 

(a) You must comply with the 

requirements in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) 

of this section for each process vent 

where the AN concentration of the vent 

stream is equal to or greater than 50 

parts per million by volume (ppmv) and 

the average flow rate is equal to or 

greater than 0.005 cubic meters per 

minute, as determined by the 

applicability and assessment procedures 

in § 63.1104 of subpart YY. 

(1) You must reduce emissions of AN 

by 98 weight-percent or limit the 

concentration of AN in the emissions to 

no more than 20 ppmv, whichever is 

less stringent, by venting emissions 

through a closed vent system to any 

combination of control devices meeting 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16661 

the requirements for process vents in 

§ 63.982(a)(2) of subpart SS; or 

(2) You must reduce emissions of AN 

by using a flare that meets the 

requirements of § 63.987 of subpart SS. 

(b) You must comply with the 

requirements in paragraph (b)(1), (2), or 

(3) of this section for each fiber spinning 

line that uses a spin dope produced 

from either a suspension polymerization 

process or solution polymerization 

process. 

(1) You must reduce the AN 

concentration of the spin dope to less 

than 100 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw); or 

(2) You must design and operate a 

fiber spinning line enclosure according 

to the requirements in § 63.1103(b)(4) of 

subpart YY and reduce AN emissions by 

85 weight-percent or more by venting 

emissions from the enclosure through a 

closed vent system to any combination 

of control devices meeting the 

requirements in § 63.982(a)(2) of subpart 

SS; or 

(3) You must reduce AN emissions 

from the spinning line to less than or 

equal to 0.5 pounds of AN per ton (lb/ 

ton) of acrylic and modacrylic fiber 

produced. 

(c) You must comply with the 

requirements for storage vessels holding 

acrylonitrile as shown in Table 2 to 

§ 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of subpart YY. 

(d) You must comply with the 

requirements for equipment that 

contains or contacts 10 percent by 

weight or more of AN and operates 300 

hours per year as shown in Table 2 to 

§ 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of subpart YY. 

(e) You must comply with the 

requirements for process wastewater 

and maintenance wastewater from an 

acrylic and modacrylic fiber production 

process as shown in Table 2 to 

§ 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of subpart YY. 

(f) You must comply with all testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in subpart SS 

(for process vents); subpart SS or WW 

(for AN tanks); subpart TT or UU (for 

equipment leaks); and subpart G (for 

process wastewater and maintenance 

wastewater). Only the provisions in 

§§ 63.132 through 63.148 and §§ 63.151 

through 63.153 of subpart G apply to 

this subpart. 

(g) If you use a control device other 

than a wet scrubber, flare, incinerator, 

boiler, process heater, absorber, 

condenser, or carbon adsorber, you must 

prepare and submit a monitoring plan to 

the Administrator for approval. Each 

plan must contain the information in 

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

section. 

(1) A description of the device; 

(2) Test results collected in 

accordance with paragraph (f) of this 

section verifying the performance of the 

device for reducing AN to the levels 

required by this subpart; 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan 

for the control device (including a 

preventative maintenance schedule 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for routine and long-term 

maintenance) and continuous 

monitoring system. 

(4) A list of operating parameters that 

will be monitored to maintain 

continuous compliance with the 

applicable emissions limits; and 

(5) Operating parameter limits based 

on monitoring data collected during the 

performance test. 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11397 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) You must meet the requirements of 

the General Provisions in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart A, as shown in Table 1 to 

this subpart. 

(b) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include the following information: 

(1) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

standards in § 63.11395(a): ‘‘This facility 

complies with the management 

practices required in § 63.11395(a) for 

operation of capture systems for 

polymerization process equipment and 

monomer recovery process equipment.’’

(2) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

emissions limits in § 63.11395(b): ‘‘This 

facility complies with the emissions 

limits in § 63.11395(b) for control 

devices serving the polymerization 

process equipment and monomer 

recovery process equipment based on 

previous performance tests in 

accordance with § 63.11395(h).’’ If you 

conduct a performance test to 

demonstrate compliance, you must 

include the results of the performance 

test. 

(3) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

standards for storage tanks in 

§ 63.11396(d): ‘‘This facility complies 

with the requirements of 40 CFR part 

60, subpart Kb for each tank that stores 

acrylonitrile.’’

(4) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

requirement in Table 1 to subpart 

LLLLLL for preparation of a startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction plan: ‘‘This 

facility has prepared a startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction plan in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR 63.6(e)(3).’’

(c) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include: 

(1) The results of the initial 

performance test or compliance 

demonstration for each process vent 

(including closed vent system and 

control device, flare, or recovery 

device), fiber spinning line, AN storage 

tank, equipment, and wastewater stream 

subject to this subpart. 

(2) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

applicable emissions limit in 

§ 63.11396(a) for process vents: ‘‘This 

facility complies with the emissions 

limits in § 63.11396(a) for each process 

vent subject to control.’’

(3) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

applicable emissions limit in 

§ 63.11396(b) for each fiber spinning 

line: ‘‘This facility complies with the 

emissions limit and/or management 

practice requirements in 

§ 63.11396(b)(1), (2), or (3) for each fiber 

spinning line.’’

(4) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

storage tank requirements in 

§ 63.11396(c): ‘‘This facility complies 

with the requirements for storage 

vessels holding acrylonitrile as shown 

in Table 2 to § 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of 

subpart YY.’’

(5) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

equipment leak requirements in 

§ 63.11396(d): ‘‘This facility complies 

with the requirements for all equipment 

that contains or contacts 10 percent by 

weight or more of AN and operates 300 

hours per year or more as shown in 

Table 2 to § 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of subpart 

YY.’’

(6) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

process wastewater and maintenance 

wastewater requirements in 

§ 63.11396(e): ‘‘This facility complies 

with the requirements in Table 2 to 

§ 63.1103(b)(3)(i) of subpart YY for each 

process wastewater stream and each 

maintenance wastewater stream.’’

(d) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, you must report any 

deviation from the requirements of this 

subpart in the semiannual report 

required by 40 CFR 63.10(e)(3). 

§ 63.11398 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Acrylic fiber means a manufactured 

synthetic fiber in which the fiberforming substance is any long-chain 

synthetic polymer composed of at least 

85 percent by weight of acrylonitrile 

units. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16662 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Acrylic and modacrylic fibers 

production means the production of 

either of the following synthetic fibers 

composed of acrylonitrile units: acrylic 

fiber or modacrylic fiber. 

Acrylonitrile solution polymerization 

means a process where acrylonitrile and 

comonomers are dissolved in a solvent 

to form a polymer solution (typically 

polyacrylonitrile). The polyacrylonitrile 

is soluble in the solvent. In contrast to 

suspension polymerization, the 

resulting reactor polymer solution (spin 

dope) is filtered and pumped directly to 

the fiber spinning process. 

Acrylonitrile suspension 

polymerization means a polymerization 

process where small drops of 

acrylonitrile and comonomers are 

suspended in water in the presence of 

a catalyst where they polymerize under 

agitation. Solid beads of polymer are 

formed in this suspension reaction 

which are subsequently filtered, 

washed, refiltered, and dried. The beads 

must be subsequently redissolved in a 

solvent to create a spin dope prior to 

introduction to the fiber spinning 

process. 

Deviation means any instance in 

which an affected source subject to this 

subpart, or an owner or operator of such 

a source: 

(1) Fails to meet any requirement or 

obligation established by this subpart, 

including but not limited to any 

emissions limitation or management 

practice; 

(2) Fails to meet any term or condition 

that is adopted to implement an 

applicable requirement in this subpart 

and that is included in the operating 

permit for any affected source required 

to obtain such a permit; or 

(3) Fails to meet any emissions 

limitation or management practice in 

this subpart during startup, shutdown, 

or malfunction, regardless of whether or 

not such failure is permitted by this 

subpart. 

Equipment means each of the 

following that is subject to this subpart: 

Pump, compressor, agitator, pressure 

relief device, sampling collection 

system, open-ended valve or line, valve 

connector, instrumentation system in 

organic HAP service which contains or 

contacts greater than 10 percent by 

weight of acrylonitrile and operates 

more than 300 hours per year. 

Fiber spinning line means the group 

of equipment and process vents 

associated with acrylic or modacrylic 

fiber spinning operations. The fiber 

spinning line includes (as applicable to 

the type of spinning process used) the 

blending and dissolving tanks, spinning 

solution filters, wet spinning units, spin 

bath tanks, and the equipment used 

downstream of the spin bath to wash, 

dry, or draw the spun fiber. 

Maintenance wastewater means 

wastewater generated by the draining of 

process fluid from components in the 

process unit, whose primary product is 

a product produced by a source category 

subject to this subpart, into an 

individual drain system prior to or 

during maintenance activities. 

Maintenance wastewater can be 

generated during planned and 

unplanned shutdowns and during 

periods not associated with a shutdown. 

Examples of activities that can generate 

maintenance wastewaters include 

descaling of heat exchanger tubing 

bundles, cleaning of distillation column 

traps, draining of low legs and high 

point bleeds, draining of pumps into an 

individual drain system, and draining of 

portions of the process unit, whose 

primary product is a product produced 

by a source category subject to this 

subpart, for repair. 

Modacrylic fiber means a 

manufactured synthetic fiber in which 

the fiber-forming substance is any longchain synthetic polymer composed of at 

least 35 percent by weight of 

acrylonitrile units but less than 85 

percent by weight of acrylonitrile units. 

Monomer recovery process equipment 

means the collection of process units 

and associated process equipment used 

to reclaim the monomer for subsequent 

reuse, including but not limited to 

polymer holding tanks, polymer buffer 

tanks, monomer vacuum pump flush 

drum, and drum filter vacuum pump 

flush drum. 

Polymerization process equipment 

means the collection of process units 

and associated process equipment used 

in the acrylonitrile polymerization 

process prior to the fiber spinning line, 

including but not limited to 

acrylonitrile storage tanks, recovered 

monomer tanks, monomer measuring 

tanks, monomer preparation tanks, 

monomer feed tanks, slurry receiver 

tanks, polymerization reactors, and 

drum filters. 

Process vent means the point of 

discharge to the atmosphere (or point of 

entry into a control device, if any) of a 

gas stream from the acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers production process. 

Process wastewater means 

wastewater, which during 

manufacturing or processing, comes into 

direct contact with or results from the 

production of use of any raw material, 

intermediate product, finished product, 

by-product, or waste product. 

Responsible official means 

responsible official as defined at 40 CFR 

70.2. 

Spin dope means the liquid mixture 

of polymer and solvent that is fed to the 

spinneret to form the acrylic and 

modacrylic fibers. 

Wastewater means process 

wastewater that: 

(1) Contains either an annual 

concentration of organic hazardous air 

pollutants listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of at least 5 parts per million by weight 

at the point of determination and has an 

annual average flow rate of 0.02 liter per 

minute, or contains an annual average 

concentration of organic hazardous air 

pollutants listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of at least 10,000 parts per million by 

weight at the point of determination at 

any flow rate; and 

(2) Is discarded from a polymerization 

production process, monomer recovery 

process, or other production operation. 

§ 63.11399 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find 

out if this subpart is delegated to a State, 

local, or tribal agency within your State. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the approval 

authorities contained in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (4) of this section are 

retained by the Administrator of the 

U.S. EPA and are not transferred to the 

State, local, or tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to a 

test method under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). 

A ‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

As required in § 63.11397(a), you 

must comply with the requirements of 

the NESHAP General Provisions (40 

CFR part 63, subpart A) as shown in the 

following table. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16663 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART LLLLLL OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART LLLLLL 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart 

LLLLLL? Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), 

(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.

63.3 ...................................... Units and Abbreviations ...... Yes.

63.4 ...................................... Prohibited Activities and Circumvention.Yes.

63.5 ...................................... Preconstruction Review and 

Notification Requirements.

No.

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), 

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

(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)–

(e)(3)(ix), (f) (g), (i), (j).

Compliance with Standards 

and Maintenance Requirements.

Yes ............................. Subpart LLLLLL requires new and existing sources to 

comply with requirements for startups, shutdowns, and 

malfunctions in § 63.6(e)(3). 

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), 

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

(h)(5)(iv).

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

63.6(h)(1)–(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–

(h)(5)(iii), (h)(6)–(h)(9).

.............................................. No ............................... Subpart LLLLLL does not include opacity or visible emissions standards or require a continuous opacity monitoring system. 

63.7(a), (e), (f), (g), (h) ........ Performance Testing Requirements.Yes/No ........................ Subpart LLLLLL requires performance tests for new and 

existing sources; a test for an existing source is not required if a prior test meets the conditions in 

§ 63.11395(h). 

63.7(b), (c) ........................... .............................................. Yes/No ........................ Requirements for notification of performance test and for 

quality assurance program apply to new sources but 

not existing sources. 

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1)–

(c)(3), (f)(1)–(5).

Monitoring Requirements .... Yes.

63.8(a)(3) ............................. Reserved ............................. No.

63.8(a)(4) ............................. .............................................. Yes ............................. Requirements apply to new sources if flares are the selected control option. 

63.8(c)(4)–(c)(8), (d), (e), 

(f)(6), (g).

.............................................. Yes ............................. Requirements apply to new sources but not to existing 

sources. 

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(5), (c), 

(d), (i), (j).

Notification Requirements ... Yes.

63.9(e) .................................. .............................................. Yes/No ........................ Notification of performance test is required for new area 

sources. 

63.9(b)(2) ............................. .............................................. Yes ............................. Initial notification of applicability is required for new and 

existing area sources. 

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) .................. Reserved ............................. No.

63.9(b)(4), (h)(5) .................. .............................................. No.

63.9(f), (g) ............................ .............................................. No ............................... Subpart LLLLLL does not require a continuous opacity 

monitoring system or continuous emissions monitoring 

system. 

63.9(h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(6) ....... .............................................. Yes ............................. Notification of compliance status is required for new and 

existing area sources. 

63.10(a) ................................ Recordkeeping Requirements.Yes.

(b)(1) .................................... .............................................. Yes/No ........................ Record retention requirement applies to new area 

sources but not existing area sources. Subpart LLLLLL 

establishes 2-year retention period for existing area 

sources. 

63.10(b)(2) ........................... .............................................. Yes ............................. Recordkeeping requirements for startups, shutdowns, 

and malfunctions apply to new and existing area 

sources. 

63.10(b)(3) ........................... .............................................. Yes ............................. Recordkeeping requirements for applicability determinations apply to new area sources. 

63.10(c)(1), (c)(5)–(c)(14) .... .............................................. Yes/No ........................ Recordkeeping requirements for continuous parameter 

monitoring systems apply to new sources but not existing sources. 

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ...... Reserved ............................. No.

63.10(d)(1), (d)(4), (e)(1), 

(e)(2), (f).

Reporting Requirements ...... Yes.

63.10(d)(2) ........................... .............................................. Yes ............................. Report of performance test results applies to each area 

source required to conduct a performance test. 

63.10(d)(3) ........................... .............................................. No ............................... Subpart LLLLLL does not include opacity or visible emissions limits. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16664 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART LLLLLL OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART LLLLLL—Continued 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart 

LLLLLL? Explanation 

63.10(d)(5) ........................... .............................................. Yes ............................. Requirements for startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports apply to new and existing area sources. 

(e)(1)–(e)(2), (e)(4) .............. .............................................. No ............................... Subpart LLLLLL does not require a continuous emissions 

monitoring system or continuous opacity monitoring 

system. 

63.10(e)(3) ........................... .............................................. Yes/No ........................ Semiannual reporting requirements for excess emissions 

and parameter monitoring exceedances apply to new 

area sources but not existing area sources. 

63.11 .................................... Control Device Requirements.Yes ............................. Requirements apply to new sources if flares are the selected control option. 

63.12 .................................... State Authorities and Delegations.Yes.

63.13 .................................... Addresses ............................ Yes.

63.14 .................................... Incorporations by Reference Yes.

63.15 .................................... Availability of Information 

and Confidentiality.

Yes.

63.16 .................................... Performance Track Provisions.Yes.

4. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart MMMMMM to read as follows: 

Subpart MMMMMM—National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for Carbon Black 

Production Area Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11400 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11401 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11402 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

63.11403 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11404 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11405 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11406 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11400 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a carbon black 

production facility that is an area source 

of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 

emissions. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

or existing affected source. The affected 

source is each carbon black production 

process unit. The affected source 

includes all waste management units, 

maintenance wastewater, and 

equipment components that contain or 

contact HAP that are associated with the 

carbon black production unit. 

(1) An affected source is an existing 

source if you commenced construction 

or reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

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

Air Act (CAA). 

(d) If you own or operate an area 

source subject to this subpart, you must 

obtain a permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 

40 CFR part 71. 

§ 63.11401 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart by the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

(b) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart not later than 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. 

(c) If you startup a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with the 

applicable provisions of this subpart 

upon startup of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11402 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

You must meet all the requirements in 

§ 63.1103(f) of subpart YY. 

§ 63.11403 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11404 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

The provisions in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A, applicable to this subpart are 

§§ 63.1 through 63.5 and §§ 63.11 

through 63.16. 

§ 63.11405 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

The terms used in this subpart are 

defined in §§ 63.1101 and 63.1103(f)(2). 

§ 63.11406 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find 

out if this subpart is delegated to a State, 

local, or tribal agency within your State. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the approval 

authorities contained in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (4) of this section are 

retained by the Administrator of the 

U.S. EPA and are not transferred to the 

State, local, or tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.992(b)(1). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16665 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

5. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart NNNNNN to read as follows: 

Subpart NNNNNN—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Chemical Manufacturing Area 

Sources: Chromium Compounds 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11407 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11408 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11409 What are the standards? 

63.11410 What are the compliance 

requirements? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11411 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11412 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11413 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Table 1 to Subpart NNNNNN of Part 63—

HAP Emissions Units 

Table 2 to Subpart NNNNNN of Part 63—

Applicability of General Provisions to 

Subpart NNNNNN 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11407 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a chromium 

compounds manufacturing facility that 

is an area source of hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) emissions. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

or existing affected source. The affected 

source is each chromium compounds 

manufacturing facility. 

(1) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commence construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

defined in section 112(c)(7) of the CAA. 

(d) If you own or operate an area 

source subject to this subpart, you must 

obtain a permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 

40 CFR part 71. 

§ 63.11408 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart not later than 

6 months after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register. 

(b) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart not later than 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. 

(c) If you startup a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with the 

applicable provisions of this subpart 

upon startup of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11409 What are the standards? 

(a) You must operate a capture system 

that collects the gases and fumes 

released during the operation of each 

emissions unit listed in Table 1 of this 

subpart and conveys the collected gas 

stream to a particulate matter (PM) 

control device. 

(b) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere through any combination of 

stacks or other vents process gases from 

an emissions unit listed in Table 1 of 

this subpart that contain PM in excess 

of the allowable process rate determined 

according to Equation 1 of this section 

(for an emissions unit with a process 

rate of less than 30 tons per hour) or 

Equation 2 of this section (for an 

emissions unit with a process rate of 30 

tons per hour or greater). If more than 

one process vents to a common stack, 

the applicable emissions limit for the 

stack is the sum of allowable emissions 

calculated for each process using 

Equation 1 or 2 of this section, as 

applicable. 

E P Eq = × 41 1 ( ) 0 67 . . .

Where: 

E = Emissions limit in pounds per hour (lb/ 

hr); and 

P = Process rate of emissions unit in tons per 

hour (ton/hr). 

E P Eq =× − 55 40 ( ) 0 11 . . 2

§ 63.11410 What are the compliance 

requirements? 

(a) Existing sources. If you own or 

operate an existing area source, you 

must comply with the requirements in 

paragraphs (b) through (e) of this 

section. 

(b) Initial control device inspection. 

You must conduct an initial inspection 

of each PM control device according to 

the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (4) of this section. You must 

conduct each inspection no later than 

60 days after your applicable 

compliance date. 

(1) For each baghouse, you must 

visually inspect the system ductwork 

and baghouse unit for leaks. You must 

also inspect the inside of each baghouse 

for structural integrity and fabric filter 

condition. You must record the results 

of the inspection and any maintenance 

action in the logbook required in 

paragraph (d) of this section. 

(2) For each dry electrostatic 

precipitator, you must verify the proper 

functioning of the electronic controls for 

corona power and rapper operation, that 

the corona wires are energized, and that 

adequate air pressure is present on the 

rapper manifold. You must also visually 

inspect the system ductwork and 

electrostatic precipitator housing unit 

and hopper for leaks and inspect the 

interior of the electrostatic precipitator 

to determine the condition and integrity 

of corona wires, collection plates, 

hopper, and air diffuser plates. 

(3) For each wet electrostatic 

precipitator, you must verify the proper 

functioning of the electronic controls for 

corona power, that the corona wires are 

energized, and that water flow is 

present. You must also visually inspect 

the system ductwork and electrostatic 

precipitator housing unit and hopper for 

leaks and inspect the interior of the 

electrostatic precipitator to determine 

the condition and integrity of corona 

wires, collection plates, plate wash 

spray heads, hopper, and air diffuser 

plates. 

(4) For each wet scrubber, you must 

verify the presence of water flow to the 

scrubber. You must also visually inspect 

the system ductwork and scrubber unit 

for leaks and inspect the interior of the 

scrubber for structural integrity and the 

condition of the demister and spray 

nozzle. 

(c) Periodic inspections/maintenance. 

Following the initial inspections, you 

must perform periodic inspections and 

maintenance of each PM control device 

according to the requirements in 

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

section. 

(1) You must inspect and maintain 

each baghouse according to the 

requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and 

(ii) of this section. 

(i) You must conduct monthly visual 

inspections of the system ductwork for 

leaks. 

(ii) You must conduct annual 

inspections of the interior of the 

baghouse for structural integrity and to 

determine the condition of the fabric 

filter. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2EP04AP07.002</MATH> EP04AP07.003</MATH>
16666 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(2) You must inspect and maintain 

each dry electrostatic precipitator 

according to the requirements in 

paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) You must conduct a daily 

inspection to verify the proper 

functioning of the electronic controls for 

corona power and rapper operation, that 

the corona wires are energized, and that 

adequate air pressure is present on the 

rapper manifold. 

(ii) You must conduct monthly visual 

inspections of the system ductwork, 

housing unit, and hopper for leaks. 

(iii) You must conduct biennial 

inspections of the interior of the 

electrostatic precipitator to determine 

the condition and integrity of corona 

wires, collection plates, plate rappers, 

hopper, and air diffuser plates. 

(3) You must inspect and maintain 

each wet electrostatic precipitator 

according to the requirements in 

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

section. 

(i) You must conduct a daily 

inspection to verify the proper 

functioning of the electronic controls for 

corona power, that the corona wires are 

energized, and that water flow is 

present. 

(ii) You must conduct monthly visual 

inspections of the system ductwork, 

electrostatic precipitator housing unit, 

and hopper for leaks. 

(iii) You must conduct biennial 

inspections of the interior of the 

electrostatic precipitator to determine 

the condition and integrity of corona 

wires, collection plates, plate rappers, 

hopper, and air diffuser plates. 

(4) You must inspect and maintain 

each wet scrubber according to the 

requirements in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) 

through (iii) of this section. 

(i) You must conduct a daily 

inspection to verify the presence of 

water flow to the scrubber. 

(ii) You must conduct monthly visual 

inspections of the system ductwork and 

scrubber unit for leaks. 

(iii) You must conduct annual 

inspections of the interior of the 

scrubber to determine the structural 

integrity and condition of the demister 

and spray nozzle. 

(d) Recordkeeping requirements. You 

must record the results of each 

inspection and maintenance action in a 

logbook (written or electronic format). 

You must keep the logbook onsite and 

make the logbook available to the 

permitting authority upon request. You 

must keep records of the information 

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(4) of this section for 5 years following 

the date of each recorded action. 

(1) The date and time of each 

recorded action for a fabric filter, the 

results of each inspection, and the 

results of any maintenance performed 

on the bag filters. 

(2) The date and time of each 

recorded action for a wet or dry 

electrostatic precipitator (including 

ductwork), the results of each 

inspection, and the results of any 

maintenance performed on the 

electrostatic precipitator. 

(3) The date and time of each 

recorded action for a wet scrubber 

(including ductwork), the results of each 

inspection, and the results of any 

maintenance performed on the wet 

scrubber. 

(4) Records of all required monitoring 

data and supporting information 

including all calibration and 

maintenance records, original stripchart recordings for continuous 

monitoring information, and copies of 

all reports required by this subpart. You 

must maintain records of required 

monitoring data in a form suitable and 

readily available for expeditious review. 

All records must be kept onsite and 

made available to EPA or the delegated 

authority for inspection upon request. 

You must maintain records of all 

required monitoring data and 

supporting information for at least 5 

years from the date of the monitoring 

sample, measurement, report, or 

application. 

(e) Reports. (1) You must report each 

deviation (an action or condition not in 

accordance with the requirements of 

this subpart, including upset conditions 

but excluding excess emissions) to the 

permitting agency on the next business 

day after becoming aware of the 

deviation. You must submit a written 

report within 2 business days which 

identifies the probable cause of the 

deviation and any corrective actions or 

preventative actions taken. All reports 

of deviations must be certified by a 

responsible official. 

(2) You must submit semiannual 

reports of monitoring and recordkeeping 

activities to your permitting authority. 

(3) You must submit the results of any 

maintenance performed on each PM 

control device within 30 days of a 

written request by the permitting 

authority. 

(f) New sources. If you own or operate 

a new affected source, you must comply 

with the requirements in paragraphs (g) 

and (h) of this section. 

(g) Bag leak detection systems. You 

must install, operate, and maintain a bag 

leak detection system on all baghouses 

used to comply with the PM emissions 

limit in § 63.11409 according to 

paragraph (g)(1) of this section; prepare 

and operate by a site-specific 

monitoring plan according to paragraph 

(g)(2) of this section; take corrective 

action according to paragraph (g)(3) of 

this section; and record information 

according to paragraph (g)(4) of this 

section. 

(1) Each bag leak detection system 

must meet the specifications and 

requirements in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) 

through (viii) of this section. 

(i) The bag leak detection system must 

be certified by the manufacturer to be 

capable of detecting PM emissions at 

concentrations of 0.00044 grains per 

actual cubic foot or less. 

(ii) The bag leak detection system 

sensor must provide output of relative 

PM loadings. The owner or operator 

shall continuously record the output 

from the bag leak detection system using 

electronic or other means (e.g., using a 

strip chart recorder or a data logger). 

(iii) The bag leak detection system 

must be equipped with an alarm system 

that will sound when the system detects 

an increase in relative particulate 

loading over the alarm set point 

established according to paragraph 

(g)(1)(iv) of this section, and the alarm 

must be located such that it can be 

heard by the appropriate plant 

personnel. 

(iv) In the initial adjustment of the bag 

leak detection system, you must 

establish, at a minimum, the baseline 

output by adjusting the sensitivity 

(range) and the averaging period of the 

device, the alarm set points, and the 

alarm delay time. 

(v) Following initial adjustment, you 

shall not adjust the averaging period, 

alarm set point, or alarm delay time 

without approval from the 

Administrator or delegated authority 

except as provided in paragraph 

(g)(1)(vi) of this section. 

(vi) Once per quarter, you may adjust 

the sensitivity of the bag leak detection 

system to account for seasonal effects, 

including temperature and humidity, 

according to the procedures identified 

in the site-specific monitoring plan 

required by paragraph (g)(2) of this 

section. 

(vii) You must install the bag leak 

detection sensor downstream of the 

baghouse and upstream of any wet 

scrubber. 

(viii) Where multiple detectors are 

required, the system’s instrumentation 

and alarm may be shared among 

detectors. 

(2) You must develop and submit to 

the Administrator or delegated authority 

for approval a site-specific monitoring 

plan for each bag leak detection system. 

You must operate and maintain the bag 

leak detection system according to the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16667 

site-specific monitoring plan at all 

times. Each monitoring plan must 

describe the items in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) 

through (vi) 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; and 

(vi) Corrective action procedures as 

specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this 

section. In approving the site-specific 

monitoring plan, the Administrator or 

delegated authority may allow owners 

and operators more than 3 hours to 

alleviate a specific condition that causes 

an alarm if the owner or operator 

identifies in the monitoring plan this 

specific condition as one that could lead 

to an alarm, adequately explains why it 

is not feasible to alleviate this condition 

within 3 hours of the time the alarm 

occurs, and demonstrates that the 

requested time will ensure alleviation of 

this condition as expeditiously as 

practicable. 

(3) For each bag leak detection 

system, you must initiate procedures to 

determine the cause of every alarm 

within 1 hour of the alarm. Except as 

provided in paragraph (g)(2)(vi) of this 

section, you must alleviate the cause of 

the alarm within 3 hours of the alarm by 

taking whatever corrective action(s) are 

necessary. Corrective actions may 

include, but are not limited to the 

following: 

(i) Inspecting the baghouse for air 

leaks, torn or broken bags or filter 

media, or any other condition that may 

cause an increase in particulate 

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 baghouse 

compartment; 

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection 

system probe or otherwise repairing the 

bag leak detection system; or 

(vi) Shutting down the process 

producing the particulate emissions. 

(4) You must maintain records of the 

information specified in paragraphs 

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

each bag leak detection system. 

(i) Records of the bag leak detection 

system output; 

(ii) Records of bag leak detection 

system adjustments, including the date 

and time of the adjustment, the initial 

bag leak detection system settings, and 

the final bag leak detection system 

settings; and 

(iii) The date and time of all bag leak 

detection system alarms, the time that 

procedures to determine the cause of the 

alarm were initiated, the cause of the 

alarm, an explanation of the actions 

taken, the date and time the cause of the 

alarm was alleviated, and whether the 

alarm was alleviated within 3 hours of 

the alarm. 

(h) Other control devices. If you use 

a control device other than a baghouse, 

you must prepare and submit a 

monitoring plan to EPA or the delegated 

authority for approval. Each plan must 

contain the information in paragraphs 

(h)(1) through (5) of this section. 

(1) A description of the device; 

(2) Test results collected in 

accordance with paragraph (i) of this 

section verifying the performance of the 

device for reducing PM to the levels 

required by this subpart; 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan 

for the control device (including a 

preventative maintenance schedule 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for routine and long-term 

maintenance) and continuous 

monitoring system. 

(4) A list of operating parameters that 

will be monitored to maintain 

continuous compliance with the 

applicable emissions limits; and 

(5) Operating parameter limits based 

on monitoring data collected during the 

performance test. 

(i) Performance tests. If you own or 

operate a new affected source, you must 

conduct a performance test for each 

emissions unit subject to an emissions 

limit in § 63.11409(b) within 180 days of 

your compliance date and report the 

results in your notification of 

compliance status. If you own or operate 

an existing affected source, you are not 

required to conduct a performance test 

if a prior performance test was 

conducted within the past five years of 

the effective date using the same 

methods specified in paragraph (j) of 

this section and either no process 

changes have been made since the test, 

or if you can demonstrate that the 

results of the performance test, with or 

without adjustments, reliably 

demonstrate compliance despite process 

changes. 

(j) Test methods. You must conduct 

each performance test according to the 

requirements in § 63.7 and paragraphs 

(j)(1) through (3) of this section. 

(1) Determine the concentration of PM 

according to the following test methods 

in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter: 

(i) Method 1 or 1A to select sampling 

port locations and the number of 

traverse points in each stack or duct. 

Sampling sites must be located at the 

outlet of the control device and prior to 

any releases to the atmosphere. 

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G 

to determine the volumetric flow rate of 

the stack gas. 

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B to determine 

the dry molecular weight of the stack 

gas. You may use ANSI/ASME PTC 

19.10–1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas 

Analyses (incorporated by reference—

see § 63.14) as an alternative to EPA 

Method 3B. 

(iv) Method 4 to determine the 

moisture content of the stack gas. 

(v) Method 5 or 5D to determine the 

concentration of particulate matter 

(front half filterable catch only). Three 

valid test runs are needed to comprise 

a performance test. 

(2) During the test, you must operate 

each emissions unit within 10 percent 

of the normal process rate specified in 

your notification of compliance status. 

You must monitor and record the 

process rate during the test. 

(3) Compute the mass emissions (E) in 

pounds per hour (lb/hr) for each test run 

using Equation 1 of this section and the 

process rate measured during the test. 

The PM emissions in lb/hr must be less 

than the allowable PM emissions rate 

for the emissions unit. 

E C Q

K = Eq × ( ) . 3

Where: 

E = Mass emissions of PM, pounds per hour 

(lb/hr); 

C = Concentration of PM, grains per dry 

standard cubic foot (gr/dscf); 

Q = Volumetric flow rate of stack gas, dry 

standard cubic foot per hour (dscf/hr); 

and 

K = Conversion factor, 7,000 grains per 

pound (gr/lb). 

(k) Startups, shutdown, and 

malfunctions. The requirements in 

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

apply to the owner or operator of a new 

or existing affected source. 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(k)(2) of this section, you must report 

emissions in excess of a PM emissions 

limit established by this subpart lasting 

for more than 4 hours that result from 

a malfunction, a breakdown of process 

or control equipment, or any other 

abnormal condition by 9 a.m. of the next 

business day of becoming aware of the 

occurrence. You must provide the name 

and location of the facility, the nature 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2EP04AP07.004</MATH>
16668 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

and cause of the malfunction or 

breakdown, the time when the 

malfunction or breakdown is first 

observed, the expected duration, and 

the estimated rate of emissions. You 

must also notify EPA or the delegated 

authority immediately when corrected 

measures have been accomplished and, 

if requested, submit a written report 

within 15 days after the request. 

(2) As an alternative to the 

requirements in paragraph (k)(1) of this 

section, you must comply with the 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11411 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) You must comply with the 

requirements of the General Provisions 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A as 

specified in Table 2 to this subpart. 

(b) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include the following information for a 

new or existing affected source: 

(1) This certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

standards in § 63.11409(a): ‘‘This facility 

complies with the management practice 

requirements in § 63.11409(a) for 

installation and operation of capture 

systems for each emissions unit subject 

to an emissions limit in § 63.11409(b).’’

(2) This certification of compliance by 

the owner or operator of an existing 

source (if applicable), signed by a 

responsible official, for the emissions 

limits in § 63.11409(b): ‘‘This facility 

complies with the emissions limits in 

§ 63.11409(b) based on a previous 

performance test in accordance with 

§ 63.11410(i).’’

(3) The process rate for each 

emissions point subject to an emissions 

limit in § 63.11409(b) that represents 

normal and representative production 

operations. 

(4) The procedures used to measure 

and record the process rate for each 

emissions unit point to an emissions 

limit in § 63.11409(b). 

(5) This certification of compliance by 

the owner or operator of an existing 

affected source, signed by a responsible 

official, for the control device 

inspection and maintenance 

requirements in § 63.11410(b) through 

(d): ‘‘This facility has conducted an 

initial inspection of each control device 

according to the requirements in 

§ 63.11410(b), will conduct periodic 

inspections and maintenance of control 

devices in accordance with 

§ 63.11410(c), and will maintain records 

of each inspection and maintenance 

action in the logbook required by 

§ 63.11410(d).’’

(6) This certification of compliance by 

the owner or operator of a new affected 

source, signed by a responsible official, 

for the bag leak detection system 

monitoring plan requirement in 

§ 63.11410(g)(2): ‘‘This facility has an 

approved bag leak detection system 

monitoring plan in accordance with 

§ 63.11410(g)(2).’’

(7) Performance test results for each 

emissions unit at a new affected source 

(or each emissions point at an existing 

affected source if a test is required) in 

accordance with § 63.11410(j). The 

performance test results for a new 

affected source must identify the daily 

average parameter operating limit for 

each PM control device. 

(8) If applicable, this certification of 

compliance by the owner or operator of 

a new or existing source, signed by a 

responsible official, for the requirement 

in paragraph (k)(2) of this section to 

comply with the startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction provisions in 40 CFR 

63.6(e)(3): ‘‘This facility has prepared a 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

plan in accordance with 40 CFR 

63.6(e)(3)’’. 

§ 63.11412 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2, and 

in this section as follows: 

Bag leak detection system means a 

system that is capable of continuously 

monitoring relative particulate matter 

(dust loadings) in the exhaust of a 

baghouse to detect bag leaks and other 

upset conditions. A bag leak detection 

system includes, but is not limited to, 

an instrument that operates on 

triboelectric, light scattering, light 

transmittance, or other effect to 

continuously monitor relative 

particulate matter loadings. 

Chromic acid means chromium 

trioxide (CrO3). It is produced by the 

electrolytic reaction or acidification of 

sodium dichromate. 

Chromium compounds 

manufacturing means any process that 

uses chromite ore as the basic feedstock 

to manufacture chromium compounds, 

primarily sodium dichromate, chromic 

acid, and chromic oxide. 

Chromite ore means an oxide of 

chromium and iron (FeCr2O4) that is the 

primary feedstock for chromium 

compounds manufacturing. 

Chromic oxide means Cr2O3. In the 

production of chromic oxide, 

ammonium sulfate and sodium 

dichromate that have been concentrated 

by evaporation are mixed and fed to a 

rotary roasting kiln to produce chromic 

oxide, sodium sulfate and nitrogen gas. 

Roasting means a heating (oxidizing) 

process where ground chromite ore is 

mixed with alkaline material (such as 

soda ash, sodium bicarbonate, and 

sodium hydroxide) and fed to a rotary 

kiln where it is heated to about 2,000 °F, 

converting the majority of the chromium 

in the ore from trivalent to hexavalent 

chromium. 

Sodium chromate means Na 2CrO4. It 

is produced by roasting chromite ore in 

a rotary kiln. 

Sodium dichromate means sodium 

bichromate or sodium bichromate 

dihydrate and is known technically as 

sodium dichromate dihydrate 

(Na2Cr2O7.2H2O). It is produced by the 

electrolytic reaction or acidification of 

sodium chromate. 

§ 63.11413 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA, or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find 

out if this subpart is delegated to a State, 

local, or tribal agency. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities 

contained in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(4) of this section are retained by the 

Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are 

not transferred to the State, local, or 

tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

As required in § 63.11409, you must 

install and operate capture systems and 

comply with the applicable emissions 

limit for each emissions point shown in 

the following table. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16669 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART NNNNNN OF PART 63.—HAP EMISSIONS UNITS

Process Emissions points 

1. Sodium chromate production ...... a. Ball mill used to grind chromite ore. 

b. Dryer used to dry chromite ore. 

c. Rotary kiln used to roast chromite ore to produce sodium chromate. 

d. Secondary rotary kiln used to recycle and refine residues containing chromium compounds. 

e. Filter for sodium chromate slurry. 

f. Quench tanks. 

2. Sodium dichromate production ... a. Stack on the electrolytic cell system used to produce sodium dichromate. 

b. Sodium dichromate crystallization unit. 

c. Sodium dichromate evaporation unit. 

d. Sodium dichromate drying unit. 

3. Chromic acid production ............. a. Electrolytic cell system used to produce chromic acid. 

b. Reactor used to produce chromic acid. 

c. Chromic acid crystallization unit. 

d. Chromic acid dryer. 

4. Chromic oxide production ........... a. Primary rotary roasting kiln used to produce chromic oxide. 

b. Chromic oxide filter. 

c. Chromic oxide dryer. 

d. Chromic oxide grinding unit. 

e. Chromic oxide storage vessel. 

f. Secondary rotary roasting kiln. 

g. Quench tanks. 

5. Chromium hydrate production .... a. Furnace used to produce chromium hydrate. 

b. Chromium hydrate grinding unit. 

As required in § 63.11411(a), you 

must comply with the requirements of 

the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A) as shown in the following 

table. 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART NNNNNN OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART NNNNNN 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart 

NNNNNN? Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), 

(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.

63.3 ...................................... Units and Abbreviations .... Yes.

63.4 ...................................... Prohibited Activities and 

Circumvention.

Yes.

63.5 ...................................... Preconstruction Review 

and Notification Requirements.

No.

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), 

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

(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)–

(e)(3)(ix), (f), (g), (i), (j).

Compliance with Standards 

and Maintenance Requirements.

Yes .................................... The startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements 

in § 63.6(e)(3) apply at new and existing area 

sources that choose to comply with § 63.11410(k)(2) 

instead of the requirements in § 63.11410(k)(1). 

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), 

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

(h)(5)(iv).

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

63.6(h)(1)–(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–

(h)(5)(iii), (h)(6)–(h)(9).

No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does 

not include opacity or 

visible emissions standards or require a continuous opacity monitoring 

system.

63.7(a), (e), (f), (g), (h) ........ Performance Testing Requirements.Yes .................................... Subpart NNNNNN requires a performance test for a 

new source; a test for an existing source is not required under the conditions specified in 

§ 63.11410(i). 

63.7(b), (c) ........................... ............................................ Yes/No ............................... Requirements for notification of performance test and 

for quality assurance program apply to new area 

sources but not existing area sources. 

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1)–

(c)(3), (f)(1)–(5).

Monitoring Requirements .. Yes.

63.8(a)(3) ............................. Reserved ........................... No.

63.8(a)(4) ............................. ............................................ No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does not require flares. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16670 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART NNNNNN OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART NNNNNN—

Continued 

Citation Subject Applies to subpart 

NNNNNN? Explanation 

63.8(c)(4)–(c)(8), (d), (e), 

(f)(6), (g).

............................................ No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN establishes requirements for continuous parameter monitoring systems. 

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(5), (c), 

(d), (i), (j).

Notification Requirements Yes.

63.9(e) ................................. ............................................ Yes/No ............................... Notification of performance test is required only for 

new area sources. 

63.9(b)(2) ............................. ............................................ Yes.

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) .................. Reserved ........................... No.

63.9(b)(4), (h)(5) .................. ............................................ No.

63.9(f), (g) ............................ ............................................ No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does not include opacity or visible 

emissions standards or require a continuous opacity 

monitoring system or continuous emissions monitoring system. 

63.9(h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(6) ....... ............................................ Yes.

63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(xii), 

(b)(2)(xiv), (b)(3).

Recordkeeping Requirements.Yes.

63.10(b)(2)(i)–(b)(2)(v) ......... ............................................ Yes .................................... Recordkeeping requirements for startups, shutdowns, 

and malfunctions apply to new and existing area 

sources that choose to comply with 

§ 63.11410(k)(2). 

63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(b)(2)(ix), 

(c)(1), (c)(5)–(c)(14).

............................................ Yes/No ............................... Requirements apply to continuous parameter monitoring systems at new area sources but not existing 

area sources. 

63.10(b)(2)(vii)(A)–(B), 

(b)(2)(x), (b)(2)(xiii).

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

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ...... Reserved ........................... No.

63.10(d)(1), (d)(4), (e)(1), 

(e)(2), (f).

Reporting Requirements ... Yes.

63.10(d)(2) ........................... ............................................ Yes .................................... Report of performance test results applies to new area 

sources; requirement applies to existing area 

sources if the permitting authority requests a performance test. 

63.10(d)(3) ........................... ............................................ No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does not include opacity or visible 

emissions limits. 

63.10(d)(5) ........................... ............................................ Yes .................................... Requirements for startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

reports apply to new and existing area sources that 

choose to comply with § 63.11410(k)(2). 

63.10(e)(1)–(e)(2), (e)(4) ..... ............................................ No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does not require a continuous 

emissions monitoring system or continuous opacity 

monitoring system. 

63.10(e)(3) ........................... ............................................ Yes/No ............................... Semiannual reporting requirements apply to new area 

sources but not existing area sources. 

63.11 .................................... Control Device Requirements.No ...................................... Subpart NNNNNN does not require flares. 

63.12 .................................... State Authorities and Delegations.Yes.

63.13 .................................... Addresses .......................... Yes.

63.14 .................................... Incorporations by Reference.Yes.

63.15 .................................... Availability of Information 

and Confidentiality.

Yes.

63.16 .................................... Performance Track Provisions.Yes.

6. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart OOOOOO to read as follows: 

Subpart OOOOOO—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Flexible Polyurethane Foam 

Production and Fabrication Area 

Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11414 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11415 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11416 What are the standards for new 

and existing sources? 

63.11417 What are the compliance 

requirements for new and existing 

sources? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11418 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11419 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11420 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Tables to Subpart OOOOOO of Part 63 

Table 1 to Subpart OOOOOO of Part 63—

Applicability of General Provisions (40 

CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart 

OOOOOO 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11414 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate an area source of 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16671 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions 

that meets the criteria in paragraph 

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

(1) You own or operate a plant that 

produces flexible polyurethane foam or 

rebond foam as defined in § 63.1292 of 

subpart III. 

(2) You own or operate a flexible 

polyurethane foam fabrication facility, 

as defined in § 63.11419. 

(b) The provisions of this subpart 

apply to each new and existing affected 

source that meets the criteria listed in 

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

section. 

(1) A slabstock flexible polyurethane 

foam production affected source is the 

collection of all equipment and 

activities necessary to produce slabstock 

flexible polyurethane foam. 

(2) A molded flexible polyurethane 

foam production affected source is the 

collection of all equipment and 

activities necessary to produce molded 

foam. 

(3) A rebond foam production affected 

source is the collection of all equipment 

and activities necessary to produce 

rebond foam. 

(4) A flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication affected source is the 

collection of all equipment and 

activities at a flexible polyurethane 

foam fabrication facility where 

adhesives are used to bond foam to foam 

or other substrates. Equipment and 

activities at flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication facilities which do not use 

adhesives to bond foam to foam or other 

substrates are not flexible polyurethane 

foam fabrication affected sources. 

(c) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(d) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(e) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

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

Air Act (CAA). 

(f) You are exempt from the obligation 

to obtain a permit under 40 CFR part 70 

or 40 CFR part 71, provided you are not 

otherwise required by law to obtain a 

permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) or 40 CFR 

71.3(a). Notwithstanding the previous 

sentence, you must continue to comply 

with the provisions of this subpart. 

§ 63.11415 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart by the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

(b) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart not later than 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. 

(c) If you startup a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with the 

provisions in this subpart upon startup 

of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11416 What are the standards for new 

and existing sources? 

(a) If you own or operate a slabstock 

flexible polyurethane foam production 

affected source, you must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (b) of this 

section. If you own or operate a molded 

foam affected source, you must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (c) of this 

section. If you own or operate a rebond 

foam affected source, you must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (d) of this 

section. If you own or operate a flexible 

polyurethane foam fabrication affected 

source you must meet the requirements 

in paragraph (e) of this section. 

(b) If you own or operate a new or 

existing slabstock polyurethane foam 

production affected source, you must 

comply with the requirements in either 

paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section. 

(1) Comply with § 63.1293(a) or (b) of 

subpart III, except that you must use 

Equation 1 of this section to determine 

the HAP auxiliary blowing agent (ABA) 

formulation limit for each foam grade 

instead of Equation 3 of § 63.1297 of 

subpart III. You must use zero as the 

formulation limitation for any grade of 

foam where the result of the formulation 

equation (using Equation 1 of this 

section) is negative (i.e., less than zero): 

ABA IFD

IFD

DEN

DEN limit = − ( ) − 



 



 − ( ) − 



 



 0 2 19 1 +

1 15 3 6 8 1 .. . .36 5 1 . Equation ( )

Where: 

ABAlimit = HAP ABA formulation limitation, 

parts methylene chloride ABA allowed 

per hundred parts polyol (pph). 

IFD = Indentation force deflection, pounds. 

DEN = Density, pounds per cubic foot. 

(2) Use no material containing 

methylene chloride for any purpose in 

any slabstock flexible foam production 

process. 

(c) If you own or operate a new or 

existing molded foam affected source, 

you must comply with the requirements 

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

section. 

(1) You must not use a material 

containing methylene chloride as an 

equipment cleaner to flush the mixhead 

or use a material containing methylene 

chloride elsewhere as an equipment 

cleaner in a molded flexible 

polyurethane foam process. 

(2) You must not use a mold release 

agent containing methylene chloride in 

a molded flexible polyurethane foam 

process. 

(d) If you own or operate a new or 

existing rebond foam affected source, 

you must comply with the requirements 

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

section. 

(1) You must not use a material 

containing methylene chloride as an 

equipment cleaner in a rebond foam 

process. 

(2) You must not use a mold release 

agent containing methylene chloride in 

a rebond foam process. 

(e) If you own or operate a new or 

existing flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication affected source, you must 

not use any adhesive containing 

methylene chloride in a flexible 

polyurethane foam fabrication process. 

(f) You may demonstrate compliance 

with the requirements in paragraphs 

(b)(2) and (c) through (e) of this section 

using adhesive usage records, Material 

Safety Data Sheets, and engineering 

calculations. 

§ 63.11417 What are the compliance 

requirements for new and existing sources? 

(a) If you own or operate a slabstock 

flexible polyurethane foam production 

affected source, you must comply with 

the requirements in paragraph (b) of this 

section. If you own or operate a molded 

foam affected source, rebond foam 

affected source, or a loop slitter at a 

flexible polyurethane foam fabrication 

affected source you must comply with 

the requirements in paragraphs (c) and 

(d) of this section. 

(b) Each owner or operator of a new 

or existing slabstock flexible 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2EP04AP07.005</MATH>
16672 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

polyurethane foam production affected 

source who chooses to comply with 

§ 63.11416(b)(1) must comply with 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Each 

owner or operator of a new or existing 

slabstock flexible polyurethane foam 

production affected source who chooses 

to comply with § 63.11416(b)(2) must 

comply with paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of 

this section. 

(1) You must comply with paragraphs 

(b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section. 

(i) The monitoring requirements in 

§ 63.1303 of subpart III. 

(ii) The testing requirements in 

§ 63.1304 or § 63.1305 of subpart III. 

(iii) The reporting requirements in 

§ 63.1306 of subpart III, with the 

exception of the reporting requirements 

in § 63.1306(d)(1), (2), (4), and (5) of 

subpart III. 

(iv) The recordkeeping requirements 

in § 63.1307 of subpart III. 

(v) The compliance demonstration 

requirements in § 63.1308(a), (c), and (d) 

of subpart III. 

(2) You must submit a notification of 

compliance status report no later than 

180 days after your compliance date. 

The report must contain the information 

detailed in § 63.9(h)(2)(i) paragraphs (A) 

and (G), and must contain this 

certification of compliance, signed by a 

responsible official, for the standards in 

§ 63.11416(b)(2): ‘‘This facility uses no 

material containing methylene chloride 

for any purpose on any slabstock 

flexible foam process and will not use 

it in the future.’’

(3) You must maintain records of the 

information used to demonstrate 

compliance, as required in § 63.11416(f). 

You must maintain the records for 5 

years, with the last 2 years of data 

retained on site. The remaining 3 years 

of data may be maintained off site. 

(c) You must have a compliance 

certification on file by the compliance 

date. This certification must contain the 

statements in paragraph (c)(1), (2), or (3) 

of this section, as applicable, and must 

be signed by a responsible official. 

(1) For a molded foam affected source: 

(i) ‘‘This facility does not use, and 

will not use in the future, any 

equipment cleaner to flush the mixhead 

which contains methylene chloride, or 

any other equipment cleaner containing 

methylene chloride in a molded flexible 

polyurethane foam process in 

accordance with § 63.11416(c)(1).’’

(ii) ‘‘This facility does not use, and 

will not use in the future, any mold 

release agent containing methylene 

chloride in a molded flexible 

polyurethane foam process in 

accordance with § 63.11416(c)(2).’’

(2) For a rebond foam affected source: 

(i) ‘‘This facility does not use, and 

will not use in the future, any 

equipment cleaner which contains 

methylene chloride in a rebond flexible 

polyurethane foam process in 

accordance with § 63.11416(d)(1).’’

(ii) ‘‘This facility does not use, and 

will not use in the future, any mold 

release agent containing methylene 

chloride in a rebond flexible 

polyurethane foam process in 

accordance with § 63.11416(d)(2).’’

(3) For a flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication affected source containing a 

loop slitter: ‘‘This facility does not use, 

and will not use in the future, any 

adhesive containing methylene chloride 

on a loop slitter process in accordance 

with § 63.11416(e).’’

(d) For molded foam affected sources, 

rebond foam affected sources, and 

flexible polyurethane foam fabrication 

affected sources containing a loop 

slitter, you must maintain records of the 

information used to demonstrate 

compliance, as required in § 63.11416(f). 

You must maintain the records for 5 

years, with the last 2 years of data 

retained on site. The remaining 3 years 

of data may be maintained off site. 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11418 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

The provisions in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A, applicable to sources subject 

to § 63.11416(b)(1) are specified in Table 

1 of this subpart. 

§ 63.11419 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

The terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA; § 63.1292 of 

subpart III; § 63.8830 of subpart 

MMMMM; § 63.2 of subpart A; and in 

this section as follows: 

Flexible polyurethane foam 

fabrication facility means a facility 

where pieces of flexible polyurethane 

foam are cut, bonded, and/or laminated 

together or to other substrates. 

§ 63.11420 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find 

out if this subpart is delegated to a State, 

local, or tribal agency within your State. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the approval 

authorities contained in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (4) of this section are 

retained by the Administrator of the 

U.S. EPA and are No transferred to the 

State, local, or tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative Noopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

Tables to Subpart OOOOOO of Part 63 

As required in § 63.11418, you must 

comply with the requirements of the 

NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart A) as shown in the 

following table. 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART OOOOOO.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART A) TO

SUBPART OOOOOO 

Subpart A reference 

Applies to 

subpart 

OOOOOO? 

Comment 

§ 63.1 ........................................................... Yes.

§ 63.2 ........................................................... Yes ........... Definitions are modified and supplemented by § 63.11419. 

§ 63.3 ........................................................... Yes.

§ 63.4 ........................................................... Yes.

§ 63.5 ........................................................... Yes.

§ 63.6(a)–(d) ................................................ Yes.


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16673 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART OOOOOO.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART A) TO

SUBPART OOOOOO—Continued 

Subpart A reference 

Applies to 

subpart 

OOOOOO? 

Comment 

§ 63.6(e)(1)–(2) ............................................ Yes.

§ 63.6(e)(3) .................................................. No ............. Owners and operators of subpart OOOOOO affected sources are No required to develop and implement a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan. 

§ 63.6 (f)–(g) ................................................ Yes.

§ 63.6(h) ....................................................... No ............. Subpart OOOOOO does No require opacity and visible emissions standards. 

§ 63.6 (i)–(j) ................................................. Yes.

§ 63.7 ........................................................... No ............. Performance tests No required by subpart OOOOOO. 

§ 63.8 ........................................................... No ............. Continuous monitoring, as defined in subpart A, is No required by subpart 

OOOOOO. 

§ 63.9(a)–(d) ................................................ Yes.

§ 63.9(e)–(g) ................................................ No.

§ 63.9(h) ....................................................... No ............. Subpart OOOOOO specifies Noification of Compliance Status requirements. 

§ 63.9 (i)–(j) ................................................. Yes.

§ 63.10(a)–(b) .............................................. Yes ........... Except that the records specified in § 63.10(b)(2) are No required. 

§ 63.10(c) ..................................................... No.

§ 63.10(d)(1) ................................................ Yes.

§ 63.10(d)(2)–(3) .......................................... No.

§ 63.10(d)(4) ................................................ Yes.

§ 63.10(d)(5) ................................................ No.

§ 63.10(e) ..................................................... No.

§ 63.10(f) ...................................................... Yes.

§ 63.11 ......................................................... No.

§ 63.12 ......................................................... Yes.

§ 63.13 ......................................................... Yes.

§ 63.14 ......................................................... Yes.

§ 63.15 ......................................................... Yes.

§ 63.16 ......................................................... Yes.

7. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart PPPPPP to read as follows: 

Subpart PPPPPP—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing 

Area Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11421 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11422 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11423 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

63.11424 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11425 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11426 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11427 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11421 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a lead acid battery 

manufacturing plant that is an area 

source of hazardous air pollutants 

(HAP) emissions. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

or existing affected source. The affected 

source is each lead acid battery 

manufacturing plant. The affected 

source includes all grid casting 

facilities, paste mixing facilities, threeprocess operation facilities, lead oxide 

manufacturing facilities, lead 

reclamation facilities, and any other 

lead-emitting operation that are 

associated with the lead acid battery 

manufacturing plant. 

(1) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

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

Air Act (CAA). 

(d) You are exempt from the 

obligation to obtain a permit under 40 

CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, provided 

you are not otherwise required by law 

to obtain a permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) 

or 40 CFR 71.3(a). Notwithstanding the 

previous sentence, you must continue to 

comply with the provisions of this 

subpart. 

§ 63.11422 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart by no later 

than 1 year after the date of publication 

of the final rule in the Federal Register. 

(b) If you start up a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart not later than 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. 

(c) If you start up a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with the 

provisions in this subpart upon startup 

of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11423 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

(a) You must meet all the 

requirements in 40 CFR 60.372, 60.373, 

and 60.374, with the exception noted in 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

(b) Existing sources are not required 

to conduct a performance test if a prior 

performance test was conducted using 

the same methods specified in 40 CFR 

60.374 and either no process changes 

have been made since the test, or you 

can demonstrate that the results of the 

performance test, with or without 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16674 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

adjustments, reliably demonstrates 

compliance despite process changes. 

(c) Sources without a prior 

performance test, as described in 

paragraph (b) of this section, must 

conduct a performance test using the 

methods specified in 40 CFR 60.374 by 

180 days after the compliance date. 

§ 63.11424 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11425 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) The provisions in 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart A, applicable to this subpart are 

§§ 60.7 through 60.8, §§ 60.11 through 

60.13, and § 60.17. 

(b) The provisions in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A, applicable to this subpart are 

§§ 63.1 through 63.4, § 63.6(g), § 63.9(b) 

through (d), § 63.9(h), and §§ 63.12 

through 63.16. 

§ 63.11426 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

The terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA; 40 CFR 60.371; 40 

CFR 60.2 for terms used in the 

applicable provisions of part 60, subpart 

A, as specified in § 63.11425(a); and 

§ 63.2 for terms used in the applicable 

provisions of part 63, subpart A, as 

specified in § 63.11425(b). 

§ 63.11427 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find 

out if this subpart is delegated to a State, 

local, or tribal agency within your State. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the approval 

authorities contained in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (4) of this section are 

retained by the Administrator of the 

U.S. EPA and are not transferred to the 

State, local, or tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under 40 CFR 60.8(b). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under 40 CFR 60.13(i). A 

‘‘major change to monitoring’’ is defined 

in § 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 40 CFR 

60.7(b) through (f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

8. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart QQQQQQ to read as follows: 

Subpart QQQQQQ—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Wood Preserving Area Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11428 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11429 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards 

63.11430 What are the standards? 

63.11431 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11432 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11433 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11434 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11428 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a wood preserving 

operation that is an area source of 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 

emissions. 

(b) The affected source is each new or 

existing wood preserving operation. 

(1) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before April 4, 2007. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after April 4, 2007. 

(c) You are exempt from the 

obligation to obtain a permit under 40 

CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, provided 

you are not otherwise required by law 

to obtain a permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) 

or 40 CFR 71.3(a). Notwithstanding the 

previous sentence, you must continue to 

comply with the provisions of this 

subpart. 

§ 63.11429 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you have an existing affected 

source, you must achieve compliance 

with applicable provisions in this 

subpart by the date of publication of the 

final rule in the Federal Register. 

(b) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register, you must achieve 

compliance with applicable provisions 

in this subpart not later than the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

(c) If you startup a new affected 

source after the date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, 

you must achieve compliance with 

applicable provisions in this subpart 

upon initial startup. 

Standards 

§ 63.11430 What are the standards? 

(a) If you use a pressure treatment 

process with any wood preservatives 

containing chromium, arsenic, dioxins, 

or methylene chloride at a new or 

existing area source, the preservatives 

must be applied to the wood product 

inside a retort or similarly enclosed 

vessel. 

(b) If you use a thermal treatment 

process with any wood preservatives 

containing chromium, arsenic, dioxins, 

or methylene chloride at a new or 

existing area source, the preservatives 

must be applied using process treatment 

tanks equipped with an air scavenging 

system to control emissions. 

(c) You must prepare and operate 

according to a management practice 

plan to minimize air emissions from the 

preservative treatment of wood at a new 

or existing area source. You may use 

your standard operating procedures to 

meet the requirements for a 

management practice plan if it includes 

the minimum activities required for a 

management practice plan. The 

management practice plan must 

include, but is not limited to, the 

following activities: 

(1) Minimize preservative usage; 

(2) Maintain records on the type of 

treatment process and types and 

amounts of wood preservatives used at 

the facility; 

(3) For the pressure treatment process, 

maintain charge records identifying 

pressure reading(s) inside the retorts (or 

similarly enclosed vessel); 

(4) For the thermal treatment process, 

maintain records that the air scavenging 

system is in place and operated properly 

during the treatment process; 

(5) Store treated wood product on 

drip pads or in a primary containment 

area to convey preservative drippage to 

a collection system until drippage has 

ceased; 

(6) For the pressure treatment process, 

fully drain the retort prior to opening 

the retort door; 

(7) Promptly collect any spills; and 

(8) Perform relevant corrective actions 

or preventative measures in the event of 

a malfunction before resuming 

operations. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16675 

§ 63.11431 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11432 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) If you own or operate a new or 

existing affected source, you must 

comply with the requirements of the 

General Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A, according to Table 1 to this 

subpart. 

(b) You must submit an initial 

notification of applicability required by 

§ 63.9(a)(2) no later than 90 days after 

the applicable compliance date 

specified in § 63.11429. The initial 

notification may be combined with the 

notification of compliance status 

required in paragraph (c) of this section. 

The notification of applicability must 

include the following information: 

(1) The name and address of the 

owner or operator; 

(2) The address (i.e., physical 

location) of the affected source; and 

(3) An identification of the relevant 

standard, or other requirement, that is 

the basis of the notification and the 

source’s compliance date. 

(c) You must submit a notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

no later than 90 days after the 

applicable compliance date specified in 

§ 63.11429. Your notification of 

compliance status must include this 

certification of compliance, signed by a 

responsible official, for the standards in 

§ 63.11430: ‘‘This facility complies with 

the management practices to minimize 

air emissions from the preservative 

treatment of wood in accordance with 

§ 63.11430.’’

(d) You must report any deviation 

from the requirements of this subpart 

within 30 days of the deviation. 

§ 63.11433 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the Clean Air Act, § 63.2, and 

in this section as follows: 

Air scavenging system means an air 

collection and control system that 

collects and removes vapors from a 

thermal treatment process vessel and 

vents the emissions to a vapor recovery 

tank that collects condensate from the 

vapors. 

Chromated copper arsenate (CCA) 

means a chemical wood preservative 

consisting of mixtures of water-soluble 

chemicals containing metal oxides of 

chromium, copper, and arsenic. CCA is 

used in pressure treated wood to protect 

wood from rotting due to insects and 

microbial agents. 

Deviation means any instance in 

which an affected source subject to this 

subpart, or an owner or operator of such 

a source: 

(1) Fails to meet any requirement or 

obligation established by this subpart, 

including but not limited to any 

emissions limitation or management 

practice; 

(2) Fails to meet any term or condition 

that is adopted to implement an 

applicable requirement in this subpart 

and that is included in the operating 

permit for any affected source required 

to obtain such a permit; or 

(3) Fails to meet any emissions 

limitation or management practice in 

this subpart during startup, shutdown, 

or malfunction, regardless of whether or 

not such failure is permitted by this 

subpart. 

Pressure treatment process means a 

wood treatment process involving an 

enclosed vessel, usually a retort, and the 

application of pneumatic or hydrostatic 

pressure to expedite the movement of 

preservative liquid into the wood. 

Responsible official means 

responsible official as defined in 40 CFR 

70.2. 

Retort means an airtight pressure 

vessel, typically a long horizontal 

cylinder, used for the pressure 

impregnation of wood products with a 

liquid wood preservative. 

Thermal treatment process means a 

non-pressurized wood treatment process 

where the wood is exposed to a heated 

preservative. 

Wood preserving means the pressure 

or thermal impregnation of chemicals 

into wood to provide effective long-term 

resistance to attack by fungi, bacteria, 

insects, and marine borers. 

§ 63.11434 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency pursuant 

to 40 CFR subpart E, then that Agency 

has the authority to implement and 

enforce this subpart. You should contact 

your U.S. 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 under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities 

contained in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(4) of this section are retained by the 

Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are 

not transferred to the State, local, or 

tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

As required in § 63.11432, you must 

comply with the requirements of the 

NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart A) as shown in the 

following table. 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART QQQQQQ OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART QQQQQQ 

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

subpart 

QQQQQQ? 

Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (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.

63.3 ........................................... Units and Abbreviations ........... Yes.

63.4 ........................................... Prohibited Activities and Circumvention.Yes.

63.5 ........................................... Preconstruction Review and 

Notification Requirements.

No.


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
16676 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART QQQQQQ OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART QQQQQQ—

Continued 

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

subpart 

QQQQQQ? 

Explanation 

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), 

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

(j).

Compliance with Standards 

and Maintenance Requirements.

Yes.

63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)–

(e)(3)(ix), (f), (g), (h)(1), 

(h)(2), (h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–

(h)(5)(iii), (h)(v)(v), (h)(6)–

(h)(9).

................................................... No ............. Subpart QQQQQQ does not require startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction plan or contain emission or opacity limits. 

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), 

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

(h)(5)(iv).

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

63.7 ........................................... Performance Testing Requirements.No ............. Subpart QQQQQQ does not require performance tests. 

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(4), (b), 

(c), (d), (e), (f), (g).

Monitoring Requirements ......... No ............. Subpart QQQQQQ does not require monitoring of emissions. 

63.8(a)(3) .................................. Reserved .................................. No.

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(4), 

(b)(5), (c), (d), (h)(1), (h)(6), 

(i), (j).

Notification Requirements ........ Yes.

63.9(b)(2)(i)–(b)(2)(v), (h)(2)(i)–

(h)(2)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5).

................................................... Yes.

63.9(e), (f), (g) .......................... ................................................... No.

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) ....................... Reserved .................................. No.

63.10(a), (b), (c)(1), (c)(5)–

(c)(8), (c)(10)–(c)(14), (d), 

(e), (f).

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements.

No ............. Subpart QQQQQQ establishes requirements for a report of deviations within 30 days. 

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ........... Reserved .................................. No.

63.11 ......................................... Control Device Requirements .. No ............. Subpart QQQQQQ does not require flares. 

63.12 ......................................... State Authorities and Delegations.Yes.

63.13 ......................................... Addresses ................................ Yes.

63.14 ......................................... Incorporations by Reference .... Yes.

63.15 ......................................... Availability of Information and 

Confidentiality.

Yes.

63.16 ......................................... Performance Track Provisions Yes.

[FR Doc. E7–5790 Filed 4–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2