p.1 

OAR Box 1813 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

164) F. R. January 25, 19958 

Docket Number: 

A-88-02 

Printed 11/5/20081:25:06 PM Sheet 164 of 166 
Part II 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

P.2 

i t 

I! 

Wednesday . '•.w-'-.-.r.-i.'-rj:"--.•...-. JJ§. 

January 25, 1995 •..$ 

j ; 

to; 

i-t:; 

- 'i 

K 

,V; 

| 

it*. 

•;: I' 

I'I, 

"0. 

*.*i. i 

40 ICJ.I CFR Parts 9 and 63 ,, 

National Emission Standards for ';•:•! 

Chromium Emissions From Hard and . ||| 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating and 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Final Rule 

I 

iii 

'.--If 

1 
494 8 Federa l Register / Vo l 60, No. 1 6 / Wednesday, January; 25, .1995 / Rules an d .Regulations 

P.3 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63 

[AD-FRL--5115-7] 

RIN2060-nAC14 

National Emission Standards for 

Chromium Emissions From Hard and 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating 

and Chromium Anodizing Tanks 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112 ofthe 

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the 

Act), this action promulgates final 

standards that limit the discharge of ' 

chromium compound air emissions 

from existing and new hard chromium : 

electroplating, decorative chromium * 

electroplating, and chromium anodizing 

tanks at major and area sources. 

Chromium compounds are among the 

189 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) ' 

listed for regulation under section 112 

of the Act. Hard and decorative 

chromium electroplating and chromium 

anodizing tanks have been identified by 

the EPA as significant emitters of 

chromium compounds to the 

atmosphere. The purpose of the final 

rule is to reduce chromium compound 

air emissions from the source categories 

identified above. All affected sources 

must limit emissions to the level of the 

maximum achievable control.... . 

technology (MACT). The EPA is also -. 

finalizing Methods 306, 306A, and 306B 

with these standards. 

DATES: Effective Date: January 25,1995. 

Incorporation by Reference. The- . 

incorporation by reference of certain , 

publications in this standard is 

approved by the Director of the Office'-•'• 

of the Federal Register as of January 25, . 

1995. '•'• .' "• -. ' :.'".'

 ; Jf:,''3. '"*"• "".' 

Judicial Review. Under'.section .•./: 

307(b)(1) ofthe Act, judicial review of 

national emission standards for 

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) is 

available only by filing a petition for 

review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit within 

60 days of today's publication of this 

final rule, tinder section 307(b)(2) ofthe 

Act, the requirements that are the 

subject of today's notice may not be , . 

challenged later in civil or criminal >. 

proceedings brought by the EPA to ; 

enforce these requirements, v

 : 

ADDRESSESf DocJtet. Docket No: A-r_8-

02, containing information considered ' 

by the EPA in developing the * . j 

promulgated NESHAP for hard arid 

decorative chromium electroplating and 

chromium anodizing tanks is available,;.-: 

;

 for public^inspection and copying 

between8 a.m..and 5:30 p.my, Monday! 

through Friday, except for Federal v:- ; 

holidays, at the EPA's Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, Room -

M1500, U. S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 401M Street, SW:, Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A 

reasonable fee may be charged for ~ 

copying. . •-". -"•• ".- • 

Background Information Document A 

background information document (BID) 

for the promulgated NESHAP may be 

obtained from the docket; the U. S- EPA 

Library (MD-35), Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone 

(919) 541-2777; or from National 

Technical Information Services, 5285 

Port Royal Road, Springfield. Virginia 

22161, telephone (703) 487-4650. Please 

refer to "Chromium Emissions from 

Chromium Electroplating and Chromic 

Acid Anodizing Operationsr- : 

Backgroilnd Information for ..'.. • 

Promulgated Standards" (EPA-^453-*R94-082b). The BID contains a summary t;, 

of the public comments, made on the :; 

proposed standards and EPA responses 

to the comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Lalit Banker ofthe Emission Standards 

Division (MD-13), U. S. Environmental. 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone 

(919)541-5420, 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information presented in this.preamble 

is organized as follows: 

•I. Background •'**.;* 

II. Summary • ' . • > . 

A. Summary of Promulgated Standards. 

'. B. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal - ".,.. -..• 

HI. Summary of Environmental, Energy, Cost. 

: • and Economic Impacts 

. A. Environmental and Energy Impacts 

B. Cost Impacts. ; 

.".' C Economic Impacts 

IV. Public Participation 

V. Significant Comments and Responses 

A. Selection of Source Categories -end 

Pollutants to be Regulated 

B. Selection of MACT/GACT Approach 

C. Selection of MACT for Hard Chromium 

Electroplating Tanks 

D. Selection of MACT for Decorative 

Chromium Electroplating and Chromium 

Anodizing Tanks. \. 

JE. Selection of the Format of the Standard 

. F. Selection of the Emission Limits 

G. Selection of Compliance Dates 

H. Selection of Monitoring Requirements 

I. Selection of Test Methods • 

). Selection of Reporting and ' S 

' Recordkeeping Requirements

 J'"' , 

.. IC Operating Permit Program •• \ ,_ 

VI. Administrative Requirements -.

 v ^ '~ ' 

. * A.-Docket.:./' .'•>. . 

B, Executive Order 12866 •• ' 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

D. RegulatoryTlexibility Act • . . 

- E. Miscellaneous*.; ' ". •: • -: 

I. Background 

Section 112(b) of the Act lists 189 

HAP and requires the EPA to establish 

national emission standards for all * 

major sources and some area sources of. 

those HAP. Among the listed pollutants 

are chromium compounds. On July 16, 

1992 (57 FR 31576), the EPA published 

a list of major and area sources for 

which NESHAP are to be promulgated 

and on December 3,1993 (58 FR 83941), 

the EPA published a schedule for 

promulgation of those standards. The 

hard and decorative chromium 

electroplating and chromium anodizing 

source categories are included in the list 

of major and area sources for which the 

EPA is to establish national emission 

standards byNovember 1994. 

This NESHAP was proposed in the 

Federal Register on December 16,1993 

(58 FR 65768). A public hearing on this. 

rule was conducted on January 20,1994. 

In addition, 62 letters commenting on 

the proposed rule were received during 

the pubUc comment period, and 3 late 

comments were received. 

II. Summary 

A. Summary of Promulgated Standards 

The final rule applies to major and 

area sources performing hard chromium 

electroplating, decorative chromium 

electroplating, and chromium • 

anodizing. The affected source is each 

chromium electroplating or chromium 

anodizing tank. The emission 

limitations for each of these source 

categories are summarized in Table 1. 

These emission limitations apply only 

during tank operation, including 

periods of startup and shutdown. The 

emission limitation for all new hard 

chromium electroplating tanks, and for 

existing hard chromium electroplating •• 

tanks that are located at large, hard 

chromium electroplating facilities is 

based on the use of a composite mesh- .-. 

pad system. The emission limitation for 

existing hard chromium electroplating 

tanks located at small, hard chromium 

electroplating facilities is based on the • 

use of a packed-bed scrubber. For all 

existing and new sources performing . . 

decorative, chromium electroplating and 

all existing and new sources performing 

chromium anodizing, the standard is . • 

based on the use of fume suppressants. 

Even though these technologies formed 

theiase s for. the standards, any 

technology can be used as long as it is j 

demonstrated to meet the prescribed 

emission limitation..All area and major .. 

- sources must limit emissions to the -. -

level of the inaximum achievable -

control technology. (MACT). .•.-."•'• ' 
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 7 .Wednesday, January 25, 1995 /Rule s rind\ Fiegulatiohs; ..,4949 

TABLE 1.—STANDARDS FOR CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING AND CHROMIUM ANODIZING TANKS BASED ON.MACT; ' ' 

Type of tank 

• •*".;" Emission limitations•.•.../ ;;;V'' _ . '"'-'."^V". •• 

Small • . . ..•'"-• .*• " Large- - ', :'••.'• •'• -- * '• -' 

. / - _ ^:._ j -. • _ 

All new tanks • ...-

Hard Chromium Plating Tanks 

0.03 mg/dcsm (1.3x10-3 gr/dscf) ...:...„..*...'..:.;:'.....-. 

0.015 mg/dcsm (6.6x10-6 gr/dscf) .......... 

'-. . •'. . .•• ' . : .' • . .-••••-. • - .•••.-.*.•.'•.- . 

0:015 mg/dscrri (6.6x10-«.gr/dscf) '••" 

0.015 mg/dscm (6.6x10~6 gr/dscf) 

Decorative Chromium Plating Tanks Using a Chromic Acid Bath 

All new and existing tanks 0.01 mg/dscm "(4.4x10-? gr/dscf) 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks 

All new and existing tanks 0.01 nrig/dscm"(4.4x10-6

 gr/dscf). 

•In accordance with § 63.342(d)(2), pwners or operators using a fume suppressant containing a wetting agent as a-control technique can meet 

an alternate emission limitation of. 45 dynes/cm (3.1.x10-3 lbf/ft). '.'•' . 

Owners and operators of all affected sources are also subject to work practice standards, which require them to 

complete an operation and maintenance. (O&M) plan that contains the minimum elements of §63.342(f)(3) and Table 

2 . • '•••..'• •

 ; ' - ' -•:.- . 

P.4 

;>• 

TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS 

Control technique 

Composite mesh-pad (CMP) system. 

Packed-bed scrubber (PBS) 

PBS/CMP system 

Fiber-bed mist eliminatorc, 

Air pollution control device (APCD) 

not listed in mie.

 ;

 -.• 

Work practice standards 

1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, nb chromic acid buildup on the pads, and no evidence of chemical attack 

on the structural integrity of the device. 

2. Visually inspect back portion of the mesh pad closet to the fan to 

ensure there is no breakthrough of chromic acid mist. ' 

3. Visually inspect ductwork from tank or tanks to the control deviceto ensure there are no leaks. 

4. Perform washdown of the composite mesh-pads in accordance 

with manufacturers recommendations. 

1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chromic acid buildup on the packed beds, and no evidence of chemical 

attack on the structural integrity of the device. 

2. Visually inspect back portion of the chevron blade mist eMminator 

to ensure that it is dry and there is no breakthrough of chromic acid 

mis t .- .' ' "'',' • 

3. Same as number 3 above ',•••• .........;..! .........!.:...,...-,. 

4. Add fresh makeup water to the top of the packed bed** 

1. Same as for CMP system ..; 

2. Same as for CMP system ...;.: : 

3. Same as for CMP system .*.-.; .'..'-..! -......: :..*.....'..... 

4. Same as for CMP system • • '..::... 

1. Visually inspect fiber-bed unit and prefiltering device to ensure 

•there-is proper drainage, no chromic acid buildup in the units, and 

no evidence of chemical attack on the structural integrity of .the devices. •'.-: • --. .*/''-* XrV .

;

*. ' '.-='•• .' 

2. Visually inspect ductwork from tank or tanks to the control device 

to ensure there are no leaks. - .-•'•-• y- *'i. •'•'.'* .-:'^-: :«';,--•-

3. Perform washdown of fiber elements in accordance with manufac-

• -turersrecommendations. .

;

 .,:.;•-: . • ..•.'. ^. 

To be proposed by the source for approval.by the Administrator :.*.:>.:. 

Frequency 

1.1/quarter. 

2.1/quarter. 

3. 1/quarter.. 

4. Per manufacturer. 

1. 1/quarter.' 

2.1/quarter. . 

3. 1/quarter. 

4. Whenever makeup is added. 

1,1/quarter. 

2. i/quarter. 

3. 1/quarter. . ' ' 

4. Per manufacturer. 

1.-.1/quarter. : 

2.1/quarter. '»"••-''.Si,'/'•.'.' 

3. Per manufacturer. .' • •' ..,,, 

To.be proposed by the. source for 

;••• approval by the .Administrator. ..:;.. 

Monitoring Equipment 

Pitot tube 

Stala<j mq meter '3 

Backflush wrth water, or remove from the duct and rinse with fresh 

water. Replace in the duct and rotate 180 degrees to ensure that 

the same zero reading is obtained. Check pitot tube ends for darn-r 

age. Replace pitot tubelif cracked or fatigued:: ^ iv ^-vf-* " 

Follow manufacturers recommendations. J-.JyJjJj"JJ J'J.:':.'yJ 

1/quarter, 

•If greater than 50 percent of the scrubber water is drained (e.g., for maintenance purjx>ses),; makeup yy^ter'may be added, to the scrubber 

'basin.- - ..• - ' ; i-

: ;

. . .* ••<••' -^.••-,••:•.- • • • ......... .

 : ' • . • '•.*•'.•'•; : -:

 .--.••3.,.:...<-.'•:.••':..- . ,=•..":•- , .. .\.- . .: < -.,- _ .-.- . !•.;. . 

"For horizontal-flow scrubbers, top is defined as the section of the unit directly above the packing media such that the makeup water would 

flow perpendicular to the air flow through the packing. For vertical-flow units, the top is defined as the area downstream of the packing material 

such that the makeup water would flow countercurrent to the air flow, through the unit. •:•;'•': ; *-^ . , * : *^- .-••••--.'•....••:. '.•'•-" "'• - ."• 

«Work practice standards for the control device installed upstream of the fiber-bed.mist eliminator to prevent plugging do not apply as long as 

the work practice standards for the fiber-bed unit are followed. - •*••.••"- ..- •-.••• - ; ,. r. 

• : 1 ' 

n 

'4',V 

I 

••si 

'A 

;

1 
P.5 

f?95ip:^Feder^-R-ffi^ Rules and Regulations 

All existing sources performing hard 1- • 

" chromium electroplating and chromium 

anodizing must comply with the JJJJ_ 

emission limitations within 2 years of •".. 

January 25,1995. All existing sources 

performing decorative chromium 

electroplating must comply with the 

emission limitations within 1 year of 

January 25,19951 All new and ,: 

reconstructed sources must comply 

immediately upon startup. 

Sources must demonstrate initial 

compliance with the prescribed 

emission limitation in accordance with 

§§ 63.343(b) and 63.344. Continuous 

compliance is demonstrated through the 

monitoring required by § 64.343(c), as 

summarized in Table 3. As indicated in 

this table, the type of compliance ... 

monitoring performed is based on the 

type of control technique used to 

comply with the emission limitation, 

not the type of source being controlled. 

TABLE 3.-*-SUMMARY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 

; Control 

technique Initial compliance test Parameter(s) for compliance monitoring Frequency of compliance monitoring 

Composite mesh-pad (CMP)' 

system. 

Packed-bed scrubber (PSB) 

PBS/CMP system—. _ . 

Fiber-bed mist eliminator ..... 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes. 

Yes 

Pressure drop across the unit. 

Wetting agent-type fume 

suppressant. 

Foam blankets 

Air pollution control device 

(APCD) not listed in rule.. 

Yes (Unless the criteria of 

§63.343(b)(2) are met). 

Yes * : :.: 

Velocity pressure at the inlet of the control system and 

pressure drop across the unit 

Pressure drop across the unit _ 

Pressure drop across the fiber-bed mist eliminator and 

the pressure drop across the upstream control device 

used to prevent plugging. 

Surface tension 

Foam thickness ._ .'. 

To be proposed by the source for approval by Administrator. .-. 

1/day. 

1/day. 

1/day . 

1/day. 

Once every 4 hours.* 

Once per hour." 

N/A.. 

•Frequency can be-decreased according to §63.343 (c)(5)(fi) and (c)(6)(H) of subpart N. 

Owners Qr operators of affected 

sources are required to keep the records 

required by § 63.346 to document 

compliance with these standards. 

Records include those associated with 

the work practice standards, . 

performance test results, compliance 

monitoring data, duration of 

exceedances, and records to support a 

Federally-enforceable limit on facility 

size. Reports must also be periodically 

submitted! Table 4 summarizes the 

reports to be submitted and the 

reporting timeframes. 

Section in • • 

Subpart N 

§ 63.345(b) 

§ 63.347(c)(1) .V... 

§ 63.347(c)(2) _ _ 

§ 63.347(d) 

§ 63.347(e) . 

§ 63.347(f) ,;;',V 

§63.347(g) ..;....... 

§63.347(li) :....C„, 

§63.347(i) JS1S 

'.J-.y TABLE 4.—SUMMARY OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

Description" *.;' " ' 

Notification of construction or reconstruction ' „ . 

-Initial notification'.....;....... '..:...: 1 

-^Notification of when construction commenced 

—Notification of actual startup :;.. 

Notification of compliance status .._._ _. . ..:. 

Notification of performance test^esults .„_•..„..._ _.'. __. 

Compliance status reports for area sources '_:......•.'.'..•...'.:.'.—i., 

-^—Initial notification for users of TVC baths ......J~. .._..;..: 

—Notification of compliance status for users of TVC baths ... 

'" Timeframe for submittal 

Depends on when source was constructed—see 

:

 § 63.345(b)(5). ' 

180 days after the effective date. 

—Within 30 days of commencement for sources built after 

effective date, or with notification required by §63.345(b)'if 

built prior to effective date. • 

—Within 30 days of startup. 

At least 60 days prior to test. 

Within 90 days of performance test (if a test is conducted) or 

within 30 days of compliance date. 

Within 90 days of performance test 

2 times/yr, or 4 times/yr if exceedances occur or if requested 

by Administrator. v_ ,' • . 

.Complete once/yr and maintain on site,. or. 2 times/yr if 

. exceedances occur or if requested by Administrator. 

—Within1180 days of effective date. .. ••. y 

-•-Within 30 days of compliance date. -

—Within 30 days of process change 

B. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

In response to public comments 

received and-additional analyses 

performed by the EPA, the following 

changes have been made to the final 

rule since proposal: 

1. The emission limits associated with 

the control technologies that form the 

bases for the standards have been 

revised. The emission limit based on the 

use of a composite mesh-pad system is 

0 015 milligrams of total chromium per 

dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) of 

exhaust air. The emission limit based on. 

the use of a fume suppressant is 0.01 

mg/dscm. The emission limit based on J 

the use of a packed-bed scrubber is 

unchanged (0 03 mg/dscm) ' ~ -
P.6 

Federal Register / Vol 60, No. 16 / Wediriesday, fenoary 25, 1_<JS /.Ruies ^^Regulation s •'.•: 4951 

j . . * TABLE3.—SUMMUM^OFiMONITOI-^ 

Control technique Initial comffliance test Paiaroetefljs) Joroompfliance monitorinfl Frequency of oorapfk. 

*. anoe-monitoring. 

Composite mesh-pad JCMP) 

• system. 

Packed-bed "scrubber tPBS) 

PBSA3MP -system _.. 

Fiber-bed misttdimir-iator. 

Wetting agent-type iume 

suppressant 

Foam blankets _.._ 

Air pollution control device 

(APCD) not listed in fdl& 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Ves ^Unless the criteria Of 

§63_W3(bM?) are met). 

Yes -____. .-. 

Pressure drop across ttie urtft _ ' .J.yJJ. ,',• ' ,', ..,;'*',; 

Velocity pressure at -the Met of the control -system and 

•pressure drop across the unit v 

Pressure drop across -the _nit ...... 

Pressure drop across the fiber-bed mist eliminator and 

fiie pressure drop across tbe upstream control device 

used to prevent plugging. 

Surface tension ...:..._......... ..... :—... *. 

Foam thidkness :'. :...._ ..... : : ___.__. 

To be -proposed toy the source for approval by Adrniriis-

•rator. •••'*."•-* 

Uday.... 

1/day.'" 

I/day.' 

lAtey. 

Once -eveiy -4 -hours.* 

Once per Jjour.-1 

• Frequency .can be decreased according to -§63.343 (cK5)(ii) and (c)(6)(B) of siibpart N. , 

TABLE 4.—SUMMA-RY OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

Section in 

subpart N 1 

§ 63.345(b) _ 

§63.347<c)(1) _ 1 

§63.347{cM_) ... 

§63-347{d) 

§63^47fe) 

Description TJrnefcame for sdbmWal 

•,,i 

Mli 

•Notification of construction or reconstruction. 

•Irfltiai -notification _*. : 

—Notificsftion -of -When construction cammenced. 

—Wotificafionaf actual -Startup ....... 

iNofflicaiion of -performance test ..... 

Notification of compliance status ... 

§63.347(0 

§63._47i(gT 

§63.347*1*0 

§63347© _.„_.'.,.. 

Notification of performance testsesdtts _ 

Compliance status reports for rwyor sources — 

•Compliance -status Teports tor area sources 

—4nitia1 nofificartion -for users of TVC baths ...:_.. 

—-Nofificattion of compliance -status tor users 

TVC baths. 

—Notification <of process change :u ....;.: . 

of. 

•Depends on -when source -was constructed—see §63.345*{b){5). 

J6G days after the effective date! -' ••••*• 

—Within 30 days df odmmencemerft for sources bifltt after effective date, or with notification required by «§63_»4_(b) *H 

built prior to effective date, r .. . 

—Within 30 days of startup.. ' • - ..'*. 

At least ®0 days prior to test 

WrtNin 90 days of performance test ^f a test.Ss condudted) or 

•within 30 days of compliance date!. •'.. 

lA%hin SO days of performance test. -

2 timesfyr. or A timesiyr it •exoeedances wear or Sf requested 

by Administrator. 

Coo-plete once/yr and -maintain'on sta, or 2 times/yr.-If 

exceedances occur or if requested toy Administrator. . 

-r-Wiffiin 180 days of effective data. '.;*.' 

—"Within 30 days of compliance date. ••;:• •/•-, 

-r-Wlthfin SO dagrs Of process-change. ; 

. •, 2. Owners or operators of decorative 

chromium electroplating tanks "using a 

.trivalent chromium process that 

incorporates a wetting agent are 

required only to submit the notifications 

required by (§ 63.347(a) with-subsequent 

notiBcafSonsiegmrediftire process is * 

changed or replaced., . 

. 3. Existing Sources performing liard -

chromium -electroplating and chromium 

anodizing inust comply with the :.-* 

atandard within 2 years after January 25. 

1995- Existing sources performing .••'•. 

decorative__rbmiu_i electroplating 

must comply with lhe standard within . 

1 year__erJanuary 25,1995.'" ;:>.' -\ .-.;'. 

; «fc Use momtoring, -reporSsng, _»d '•'•;*'-

recordkeeping -requirements for affected 

sources have been reduced to the extant -; 

possible while still allowing the EPA to 

:

 detennirielhe'cwnipliance status'on a 

continuous basis. Special consideration 

has been given to area sotirces. 

5. Table 1 of subpart N clarifies which 

sections of the -Gen-»ai Prowisioiis,apply 

to sources subject to subpart N and 

which sections do not. " 

The rationale for the above changes is 

discussed in detail in section V of this 

preamble, which ___unarizesthe -major 

comments received on the proposed 

rule and tiie EPA's response to tiiese 

comment-. This section also discusses 

major cc-n__ei_ts4__t were xeceiyedbut... 

that did not result in changes to the 

finalrule.*. - •••..'.-'.•. ',.'•. -.:J-J'yy. 

III. Summary -oF-Envtronnreirta!,: • .-

Energy, Cost, «nd Economic Impacts •."'• 

A. Environmentaland Energy,•Impacts 3 

The environmental aiid inergy:\--"*•• .-.•*.;:~~ 

impacts for the sources covered by this 

"rulemaking are _nchanged from. .•,.*•.-. 

proposal because tiie bases oT the MACT. 

standards have not changed. J3J-JJ'JJJJ 'Ji 

B.Cost Imparts .vc :;.:> '

 !v * " v c 

The annualized cost -of control fcerQSB:: 

sources covered by this julemakiag ••.. 

remain unchanged from pivoposal ;')••• 3, 

because the bases of the MACT • '•- ' 

standards ha ve not changed. 

The monitoring,-repprli-g. and 

recordkeeping burdem in the -__al mile . 

has decreased from the proposed ••••:•J.;' 

requirements. i__emse. tSie costs -af -. •;. 

''mo_itoi-ag.__3^__i^:ai-l/'''''.>.;'''-r°'''.'.. 

recordkeeping have also decreased. Thie '• * 

on-going, annual oosa of.tire Juaal- .•.••-

monitering. M^orting, and';,;::.':. *. -•./•.; •••••• 

reoordkropingasa^ipaTOdinaliely 1WJQOQ . 

liours forliard chroimivus etectnoplateTs.;. 

. 29,000 hours fordctaarative cfcromiuin.;. 

electroplaters using a trivalent v..,.: 

chromium plating prbcess;:260;t30t) '. ' 

hosiis _OT otiher deraaatire chroinimn: if'.' 

. electropiatfiis, end 70^300 im-qis far ' :.:' 

chromium enodiaeis. Natjcmwiiie. .'-;':* 

ani__al costs -fc tb ^ a:ras3e Categories

 <J 

y are-$3j5miilionforhardchrcaiuama*: >'•- > 

elet_ropktei^v$&4B^300ifprd^oratiTO -...

: 

:; chibim-umeieptrbplateis^^^ ••>'.-•••.. 

trivalent *r-}*iromi-*i*nfi platin g process, $5JB :. 

miUion for other decora tave chromnam;...-. 

•electfopiaters,iandi$|J6million for «..-•;•. • •• 

chromium anodizeEfe These -rnimbers •:'• * • • V 

I 

1 I 

1 

1 

i 
P.7 

4952 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 /Wednesday , January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulatipns 

are reduced from the nationwide annual 

costs associated with monitoring, 

reporting, and recordkeeping in the 

proposed rule of $8;6 million for hard 

chromium electroplaters, $1.6 million 

for decorative chromium electroplaters 

using a trivalent chromium plating 

process, $14 million for other decorative 

chromium electroplaters, arid $3.8 

million for chromium anodizers. 

C, Economic Impacts 

The economic impacts for the sources 

covered by this rulemaking are 

unchanged from proposal because the 

basis ofthe MACT standards have not 

changed. 

IV. Public Participation -

Prior ie proposal of the chromium 

electroplating and anodizing rule, 

meetings ofthe National Air Pollution 

Control Techniques Advisory 

Committee (NAPCTAC) were held on 

January 30 and November 19,1991. 

These meetings were open to the public, 

and each attendee was given an 

opportunity to comment on the draft 

rule. "•'':'• 

The proposed rule was published in 

t i e Federal Register on December 16, 

1993 (58 FR 65768). The preamble to the 

proposal discussed the availability of . 

the proposal BID (Chromium 

Electroplating NESHAP—Background 

Information for Proposed Standards 

(Volume I: EPA-453/R-93-030a and 

Volume II: EPA-453/R-93-030b)), 

which describes in detail the regulatory 

alternatives considered and the impacts 

associated with those alternatives. 

Public comments were solicited at the 

time of proposal, and copies of the 

proposal BID were made available to 

interested parties. 

The public comment, period officially 

ended on March 14,1994. A public 

hearing was held on January 20,1994. 

In addition, 62 comment letters were 

received during the public comment , 

period; 3late comments werealso."..*>.;• 

received. The comments were carefully ;• 

considered, and where determined to be 

appropriate by the Administrator;-^* • 

changes were made in the final rule. *••••> 

V. Significant Comments and Responses 

1

 . Comments on the proposed rule were 

received from industry, environmental 

groups, and State arid local regulatory 

agencies. A detailed disCussiori of these 

comriients and responses can be. found ; 

in the promulgation BID (see ADDRESSES 

section). The surnriiaxy of cotirihents and 

responses in the promulgation BID ;••' 

serves as the basis for the revisions that 

have been made to the rule between 

proposal and promulgatibri... . 

A. Selection of Source Categories and 

Pollutants To Be Regulated 

Six commenters said that maximum 

cumulative potential rectifier capacity 

was an inappropriate parameter for 

determining facility size. Sources may 

have excess rectifier capacity to handle 

atypical applications, for safety 

purposes, dr for other reasons, but may 

routinely operate at a significantly lower 

rectifier output. Several commenters 

urged the EPA to consider alternatives 

to the maximum potential rectifier 

capacity specified, such as actual 

annual ampere-hour usage, raising the ' 

maximum potential ampererhour limit 

for small sources to 100 million amp-hr/ 

yr, allowing sources to multiply the 

maximum potential rectifier capacity by 

0.75 to account for oversizing, or 

allowing sources to-accept Federallyenforceable limits on their rectifier 

capacity that would allow them to be 

categorized as "small" facilities. 

Although the cutoff between small 

and large hard chromium electroplating 

facilities has not been changed, the EPA 

has included two provisions in the final 

rule to allow sources to use actual ' *' 

rectifier capacity or to limit their 

potential rectifier capacity. The first 

provision is available to facilities whose 

production records show that the 

previous annual, actual rectifier 

capacity was less than 60 million amp-, 

hr/yr. tinder this provision; hard 

chromium electroplating facilities may 

determine their Size by using actual 

cumulative rectifier capacity in lieu of 

the maximum potential capacity if -.* " * 

nonresettable, amp-hr meters are iised 

on affected tanks. The. final rule 

(§ 63.346(b)(12) and § 63.347(c)(l)(vi)) 

requires that records of arnp-hr usage be 

kept. ••.'.-

The final rule also allows all sources 

performing hard chromium 

electroplating to establish Federally^ 

enforceable limits on their rectifier 

capacity to allow'facilities to comply - •-

with the staridards*forsmall,.har'd•'•'..-

chromium electroplating tanks, even if 

those facilities have potential rectifier;

 v 

capacities that exceed the 60 million;;; *• 

amp-hr/yr cutoff. A Federally-•- •'*••: 

enforceable limit is obtained through 

the title V permit that is required by *. 

§ 63.340(e) of the final rule; Records are 

required iri adcordariCewith';('•'< -'r'•'"'"'."'_ 

§.63.346(b){12) and § 6_,347(c)(ijfyiii)to. 

document that.;the Federally-enforceable 

'-. limitis being mamMned^'.;^.\v; £ •'.'! ,C'..' 

The filial rule has-alsobeen clarified ' 

•to state that only the rectifiers .V./*-*.-**^'-.;.1 

associated with hard chromium •; 

electroplating should be used to '-;--' 

determine maxiirium.cumulative ."'•-*••''••:•; 

-potential rectifiercapacity*3-.. >.V

 ;;•-'-j- • • 

Comments were received regarding 

other processes conducted by this 

source category that were not identified 

in the process description. One. 

commenter pointed out a .distinction N 

among decorative chromiuni. 

electroplating processes: Black 

chromium and white chromium. The 

commenter stated that black "chromium 

electroplating is more like hard -

chromium electroplating in terms of 

process parameters, and the commenter 

recommended that black chromium 

electroplating be subject to the same 

requirements as hard chromium , 

electroplating processes. Other 

commenters noted that the proposed • 

rule did not cover a hard chromium 

electroplating method that uses lower 

amperage and a longer electroplating 

time (less amperage per square foot than 

decc-rative electroplating process) such 

that emissions are lower.' . . 

In the final rule, the definitions of t . 

hard chromium electroplating, 

decoratiye chromium electroplating, 

and chromium anodizing have been ' 

expanded, and are now expressed in 

terms of process, parameters as well as 

by function: Regardless of what name a 

facility has assigned to its process, for • 

the purposes of the regulation, the , 

process will be regulated according to 

its function, bath operating parameters, 

and desired plating characteristics.. 

Therefore, black decorative chromium 

electroplaters would likely be subject to 

the standards for hard chromium, 

electroplaters based on plating 

characteristics. The EPA will provide 

States with'additional guidance on these 

types of applicability issues in the 

enabling document.: . ' t 

The commenters that use a lowamperage electroplating process were 

concerned that such a process would ' . 

not be allowed by the rule, even though . 

emissions from this process are low. 

Although the process does differ from • 

othef hard chromium electroplating ''.,. 

processes in that a lower amperage is ... 

used, the rule.does not preclude the use, * 

of this process or any other technique to .. 

meet the applicable emission limitation;^.-' 

The rule does require that the technique;; 

be demonstrated through performance'•'.;•;.;_, 

testing conducted in accordance with"' 

the test methods arid, procedures',;. : ; • '. 

identified in the final nile, and that",".*s.'' 

compliance monitoring be conducted to • 

determine continuous cbihpliance.. •:.*••,.-., 

B, Selection of MAff/GAC^JApprdac^STen commenters questioned the,", ,,J',J. 

Agency's'decisioii'to regulate ai*ea 'SSh 

sources with MACT. A number of. these,,. 

: commenters disagreed that the •'•'.';' ' ;.':'. 

chrorriium compound toxicity data , 

alone was justification for regulating •"; ">'- ' 
Federal Register ../Vel.,60,,JNo. _6 J. Wednesday.-Jaraiairy 25, 1S95 / Rules a_xl:Regt_la_i_ns. _953 

area sources as stringently as major V 

sources. Other commehters state.d that 

the costs to area sources .regulated ydfh ' 

MACT was tinduly burdensome, 

particularly if those sources would be . 

subject to tide V. Two commeriteis 

suggested tiiat the EPA apply GACT 

standards to small facilities to allow the 

Agency to focus its resources on 

facilities posing the greatest impact, or 

establish a threshold below which 

sources would be -subject to GACT. 

Anotiier commenter questioned the 

EPA's decision to apply MACT to area 

sources on the grounds tiiat the Act does 

not intend a -residual sfslk analysis fcr 

area sources. This Dommentermoted that 

it was important to haye separate 

standards ior area sources even if GACT 

was as stringent as MACT to preserve 

the intent of section 112(d). 

In -determining whether -to apply 

MACT-or-GACT to thearea sources m 

this souroe category, (the EPA . 

considered tthe toxicity of chromimn 

compounds .emitted -from such sources 

and the availability Of controls. "The'EPA 

has -coiidhided that MACT should be 

applied lo all-areaisoui-ces m all source 

categories. The basis for «Ms "decision is 

the toxicity of-ohi-oniiuni oornp ounds. 

The potency of hexavalent 'Chromium, 

whicii is (categorized as-a'Group A 

carcinogen, is •well -documented, and at 

least Ihree-epidemiological studies have -

shown a strong -association between 

lung cancer -and occupational exposures 

to mixtures of trivalent and hexavalent 

chromium. Therefore, the Agency has 

concluded (thdt _H <chromi*om 

compounds emitted to the air -should be 

consitdefed^oxk- until adequate data are 

available to determine otherwise. 

In selecting MAlCT ovor GACT for all 

area sources, (he EPA also -evaluated the 

availability of control technologies amd 

the costofconrpliance for-area sources. 

The control technologies that form the 

bases for MACT .are-widely available; 

Although <§ 312(dttSi) <of the Act does 

allow an alternative standard for area 

sources, the _FA interprets tins 

paragraph asautborizmgtthe 

A-h-inististtor-to-estafefehiGACT •',. 

standard for .areasoin-pes when the 

imposition of MACT is determined to be 

unreasonable. For the souroe categories 

subjectto -subpartN.the Agency . 

considers it seasonable to apply MACT 

to area sources. 

C.Selec^ofJMA^for^dS JS-r-y 

ChronmimWectro^atingXaiiks : 

1. Selection of the^^-CTFleo-r''.:) 

Four commenters suggested that _he. .'.-

MACT floor for new hard chromiuni ':. 

electroplating tanksshoulri be based on 

the usenf afiber-r^d mist e_xnl*natar ....* 

(FBME) because this is the best 

technology In iise. 

The EPA has gathered additional 

information since proposal in response 

to public comments received. Based on 

this infonnation,. total of five facilities 

are known to be using FBME to control 

chromium emissions from affected hard 

chromium electroplating and .chromium 

anodizing tanks. These five facilities 

represent different sizes _f hard 

chromium electroplating and chromium 

anodizing operations. 

Emission test data were obtained from 

four of the fiv^ facilities using FBME 

(see Item No. TV-B-01 of Docket A-T88-

02). The emission test data available ' 

from one facility were incomplete and 

could not be used to assess the 

performance of fiber-bed units. The test 

results from the other facilities were 

adequate to evaluate the performance of 

FBME. .Ho weyer, after athorough 

evaluation, it was determined that the 

limited data are not sufficient to 

establish an omission 1i*mit -which must 

be met ona continuous long-term basis. 

In one case, the data were inadequate 

because onlya single traverse was made 

when two should have been performed. 

In the other cases, the quantity of 

emissions captured during sampling 

was too small io .meet Agency 

guidelines on minimum quantification 

levels. These -data, therefore., must be 

treated as qualitative rather than 

quantitative results and may not.be used 

to establish achievable emission limits. 

Based on this qualitative assessment, it . 

appears -that FBME offer excellent ^ 

control potential. 

In e«ahiating control te-__aalbgies, the 

Agency also'must consider the 

sustainability of *_hyperformance level. 

The ERA is concerned with .the longterm performance of these systenas . 

because of ihe tendency ofthe .fiber beds 

to plug. In other contexts, most vendors 

of FBME systems do not j-ecominend 

their use as primary pollution control 

systems. Rather, they recommend that 

coarse prefiltering be provided upstream 

of the -fiber beds to prevent ©lugging. -

The prefiltering devices range from a 

series of mesh pads to a complete ..•..* 

packed-bed scrubber O-oit. At present,; 

there are JIO long-tenm .data available to 

assess any actual deterioration or 

opesnatAonal problems associated with 

•'.FBME. Fiber-bed -mist eliminators to 

control-hromkun electroplating and . 

anodi__^_uiks have only zrecentily been • 

installedfas a Jesuit -of local air district J 

requirements; therefore,- it is unlikely 

that any long-itemn/data aie available. • 

Because of the uncent-kilies infooth 

the measuredFBME perforinamoederta. . 

•:" and the potential long-item -va-nabi-lily ... 

. of the system perlotiMaance,_heJ*;>..-.*• •*. ... 

Administrator cannot at this tiine • 

determine that a more stringent 

emission limit could be achieved based 

on theapplication of FBME technology 

for new hard chromium plating or 

chromium anodizing operations. 

Therefore, the final MACT peiformanoe 

level of mew hard •chromium 

electroplating and chromium anodizing 

tanks is unchanged from the proposal. 

However, the limited data/do suggest 

that FEME-systems can achieve the 

emission limits established for 

composite mesh-padsystems and fume 

suppressants. Because thi6-standard is a 

performance standard, the use of a 

specific technology is not mandatory; 

therefore, any system that -meets or 

exceeds the leqirired performance level 

may be used. - . * • 

In order to facilitate the use of FBME 

to achieve compliance with the 

standard, anonitoning -provisions have 

beeu included in the final rule for use 

with FEME. i(See discussion in sectioh 

V__.) The test-methods in the proposed 

riile are suitable for demonstrating 

compliance with the -standard regardless 

of the control technology employed. 

2. Regulatory Alternatives Considered . 

Eight commenters -suggested that the 

EPA -was too limiting in the "regulatory 

alternatives for hard chromium 

electroplating operations. These 

commenters 'believed that the ERA 

should allow sources in this subcategory 

to -use fume suppressants to comply * 

with the standard, instead ©flocking 

souioes into a control technology, such 

as packedrbed scruhbers. Four ofthe 

commenters also proposed that the EPA 

allow aiew and existing hard chromium 

electroplating operations the option <mf 

meeting the same surface tension limit • 

allowed for -decorative *r___mi*i__ -'' 

electroplating operations that iaise a 

wetting agent-type fume suppressant." 

The EPA has selected an -emisskm • 

limit format to provide sources &vrth the -

flexibility to choose the -enaissiofl ..;. , 

control strategy ibeSt suited tq their . v ^. 

facility. The .regulation only /requires 

that any strategy selected meet the .-••• . 

emission limits set out in the rule. As 

such, hard -chromium electroplating * 

sources can use fume suppressants to . 

achieve compliance (with the statadardj. 

as iongas initialoompHancetesting • 

demoristfates that the-enaissioh limit' i •; 

stipulated-in the-standaid isHseing ?.';:J 

acMeMed* As*dis-__5$ed___rinitte:.'-;:'.W.-; 

preamble, however, -on-igaing '3JS'ij)yJ-

compliance-rtenitoringisaaonteol- '•.;.•"'.,•.-.'. 

techMque-specafici; As___h,*tSffi-OOTi»er'; • 

or operator of any sou-roe that uses'a"'*;.',;;. • 

fume suppressantto -nampily._ath wi: • '•-"• 

eriiission limitatifflnshalllmonitor':;./'.'• • •:. 

surface tensibn or foam blanket *: >t' 

'1;; I 

iii 

vfl 

'-H 

'J 
P.9 

4954 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 7 Wednesday,; January" 25;''1905' / ;Rules arid Regulationsj,,,.,, 

i 

r 

thickness, as appropriate, to 

demonstrate continuous compliance. 

3 Selection of MACT 

Several commenters remarked that the 

standard for existing hard chromium 

electroplaters is inappropriate. Nine 

commenters stated tiiat the standard 

was too stringent for large, hard 

chromium electroplaters; small, hard 

chromium electroplaters; or both. The 

arguments against regulating existing 

hard chromium electroplaters as 

stringently as that proposed were 

primarily that the costs associated with 

• the standard; were unduly burdensome 

and did not justify the resulting 

environmental benefit, and the emission 

concentration limits specified in the 

proposed rule were not consistently 

achievable using the control devices 

upon which the standards are based. 

Five commenters, on the other hand, 

indicated that the standard for small, 

hard chromium electroplaters was too 

lenient. The arguments presented by the 

commenters who supported a more 

stringent standard for small, hard 

chromium electroplaters were that the 

residual risk associated with emissions 

from these sources warranted more 

"stringent controls, the Agency's 

interpretation of the MACT floor was 

flawed (i.e.; should be based on a 

straight average; not a median); and the 

control efficiency for packed-bed 

scrubbers is overstated, as are the cost 

impacts for a standard based on the use 

of composite mesh-pad systems. 

In setting an emission standard, the 

Act directs the Administrator to take 

into account costs,* nonair quality health 

and environmental impacts, and energy 

requirements. To fulfill this requirement 

for existing hard chromium 

electroplating sources, the EPA 

evaluated the cost, impact, and benefit 

of a standard based on the use of a 

packed-bed scrubber as well as a 

standard based on the use of a 

composite mesh-pad system. The • 

Agency's estimate ofthe incremental 

cost effectiveness of requiring all . 

sources to meet a standard based on 

composite mesh-pad,systems compared 

to one based ori packed-bed scrubbers is 

approximately$3.7millionper /.*-.••<•' 

Megagram of chromium controlled ($/ 

Mg) for large sources and $10.7 million/ 

Mg for small sources.' , -• . ; ' 

:••• Based ori the EPA's economic: 

•analysis,a standard based on the use of 

composite riieshrpad systems by all -

. sources would not cause-adverse *.:";. 

economic effects bri large sources that * 

currently Use packed-bed scrubbers. Due 

] to economies of scaler the economic" 

impacts on larger facilities are u; ; t -yy 

consistentlyless than those on small ,:• 

facilities. As a result, larger facilities : 

will have a greater ability to pass on 

control costs. Although these costs may 

seem high, the EPA believes the toxicity 

of chromium justifies these costs. In 

consideration of the potential adverse 

impacts to small sources, the final, rule 

requires a less stringent standard for . 

small sources than large sources, which 

is based on the use of packed-bed 

scrubbers rather than composite meshpad systems. [See Chapter 5 ofthe New 

Technology Document ("Technical 

Assessment of New Emission Control 

Technologies Used in the Hard . . 

Chromium Electroplating Industry;" 

EPA-453/R-93-031) for a detailed 

discussion of EPA's economic analysis 

for these systems.] . •'•-.-'•' 

The EPA considers the emission 

limitation based on the use of composite 

mesh-pad systems to be representative 

of and consistently achievable with 

well-maintained units. No data were 

submitted to support an alternate 

emission limitation. (For further 

discussion of the emission limitations,,; 

see section V.F4) 

Regarding the comments that the 

proposed standard for small, hard 

electroplaters was too lenient, the ' 

Agency believes that the MACT floor is 

properly based ori the use of packed:bed 

scrubbers for this source category. The 

EPA promulgated a final rule on June 6,... 

1994 (57 FR 29196) that presents the . 

Agency's interpretation of section 

112(d)(A) ofthe Act regarding the basis 

for the MACT floor, Under this , ,.* 

interpretatiori, the Agency considers the . 

emission limitations achieved by the 

best performing 12 percent of existing 

sources and arrives at the MACT floor 

by selecting the median of the values, 

rather than a straight average. This 

interpretation was followed in 

establishing the MACT floor for small, 

hard chromium electroplaters. The 

Agency considers any discussion ofthe1 

risk remaining from small, hard .; 

chromium electroplaters to be > 3 ; 

premature at this time/ . • '"~

 : 

In accordance with section 112(f) of ; 

the Act, if a significant residual risk "--'J. 

from small, hard chromium,; '-'•.'-;.-*' JJJ'J[: 

electroplating operations regulated by-' : 

MACT is found, the Agency is required 

to promulgate standards to mitigate that 

risk/The EPA recognizes the potential P 

hazards of chromium emissions from -•'- * 

small sources arid has chosen to regulate .'; 

area sources withMACT'rather th_a;-jfj'-

GACT. The EPA^alsb considers its cost * 

and impact analysis for sriiall; hard .*-;• ">.-"•'-

chromium electroplaters to be sourid. ' 

The EPA estimated retrofit costs based *; 

bri infonnation from vendors who: 3 : V; 

supply the equipment to the Industry,;: *: 

and therefore estimates aire*.-••;•y: •'>?*. \'. •*(.*'•• 

represeritative of the control costs';. ".'" 

incurred by affected sources. The EPA • 

considers the efficiency assigned to 

packed-bed scrubbers for purposes of 

calculating impacts to be represeritative 

qf that achieved by well-maintained and 

well-operated units controlling

 J' '•''" 

emissions from hard chromium , * .,•.., • 

electroplating tanks. As with comments 

on the emission limit basedon

 ; 

composite mesh-pad systems, no data 

supporting alternate einission limits for 

a standard based on packed-bed 

scrubbers were submitted. •'. '•"'. 

D. Selection of MACT for Decorative 

Chromium Electroplating and : ' **• . 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks ••••.•. 

1. Regulation ofthe Trivalent Chromium 

Plating Process .... 

Eleven commenters disagreed that ; 

decorative chromium electroplating 

tanks that use a trivalent chromium 

process should be regulated by the. 

proposed rule. Many ofthe commenters 

felt that the EPA had insufficient data to 

conclude that the risk associated with 

this process warranted regulation of .-. 

those sources. Four commenters found 

fault with the EPA's Supporting data -, 

and noted that the level of hexavalent •' 

chromium in a trivalent chromium bath.. 

that corresponds to the EPA's estimate 

of hexavalent emissions from that bath 

would far exceed that level of 

hexavalent chromium that would '.-

desuroy the trivalent bath. Three other 

commenters stated that use of the.. 

trivalent.chromium process should be. 

encouraged by the EPA, because '• 

trivalent processes result in less total 

chromium in process wastewater and * 

less sludge generation. One of the 

commenters suggested regulating' 

trivalent chromium electroplating , 

processes under GACT to eliminatesome ofthe burden associated with the 

reporting, recordkeeping, and • -v. 

monitoring requirerhents specified in 

the proposed nile. •-. -.'''J; •••-.";''•''. 

Twelve comirienters resporided to the . 

EPA's request for comment on whether.-.-,;' 

the trivalent chromium electroplating -.' 

process should be required for new,",. '•; 

sources/The majority of these J "•.'. 

commenters did not think that this - •:• 

should be a requiremerit because the ;, 

process was not technically feasible for.':. 

the full range of decorative chromium > -.-

electroplatirig operations.Two, ,'; . ;•:.'.' 

commenters pointed out'inconsistencies'' 

in the EPA's reasoninjg; the EPA can

 ?

- ' • 

only require trivalentxhromiuiri.baths if, 

it recbgriizes the difference in toxicity 

between hexavalent tmd trivalent !v-', ,» 

chromiuni.' ;:;A']J. ?•• .• ^'".* .•''. '*,. ''..* 

The EJPA has; reconsidered ihe] \' v;'".' 

technical basis for '{regulating tanks •'•".•.'•';'' 
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules arid Regulations 4955 

P.10 

using the trivalent chromium 

electroplating process and the feasibility 

of requiring such a process for new 

sources. During development ofthe 

proposed standards, the EPA evaluated 

the trivalent chromium electroplating 

process as a pollution prevention 

alternative. Chromic acid is not present 

in the plating solution in the trivalent 

chromium processes, and hexavalent 

chromium is regarded as a bath 

contaminant in these processes. In 

addition, all of the trivalent chromium 

plating solutions with which EPA is 

familiar contain a wetting agent as an 

inherent bath component. That is, the 

wetting agent is part of the plating 

solution purchased from the vendor; it 

is not added separately by the end user. 

With a trivalent chromium plating' 

process, the potential emissions of 

chromium in any form are much lower 

, because the concentration of total 

chromium in trivalent chromium baths 

is approximately four times lower than 

the total chromium concentration in 

chromic acid baths. Trivalent chromium 

processes greatly reduce emissions of 

the most potent form of chromium 

(hexavalent), and significantly lower 

emissions of chromium in other forms. 

In addition to reduction of air 

emissions.the use of trivalent 

chromium processes results in lower 

chromium concentrations in process 

wastewaters and, consequently, reduces 

the amount of sludge generated. Based 

on a source test conducted by the EPA, 

total chromium emissions from a 

trivalent chromium bath are 

approximately 99 percent less than 

those from a traditional, uncontrolled 

decorative hexavalent chromium bath. 

Hexavalent chromium emissions from a 

trivalent chromium bath were found to 

be approximately equivalent to those 

emitted from a decorative hexavalent 

chromium bath controlled by adding a 

wetting agent. 

Although chroriiium emissions frorii 

the trivalerit chromium process were 

low, the EPA had not anticipated the 

presence of hexavalent chromium in . 

emissions from thejtrivalerit 

electroplating process nor thelevel of -

total chromiuni emissions. Given that 

the Act lists all forms of chromium on 

the HAP fist, the EPA considered the. . 

trivalerit chromium electroplating 

process as a source of chromium 

emissions as well as an emission control 

alternative for the chromic acid • 

electroplating process. Based on the •-•••-' 

emission test results, a decorative 

hexavalent chromium bath controlled 

by adding a wetting agent had 

equivalent hexavalent chromium •;-..-••• 

emissions and less total chroriiium -

emissions than a trivalerit chromium, y_' 

plating bath. (As previously stated, for 

trivalent chromiuni baths, the wetting 

agent is inherent to the solution; it does 

not need to be added by the user.) In 

addition, the trivalent chromium 

process may not be technically feasible 

for all decorative chromium 

electroplating applications. Therefore, 

the final rule does not require the use 

of a trivalent chromium electroplating 

process for either existing or new 

decorative chromium electroplating 

tanks. , • * 

The EPA has decided to regulate 

sources that use trivalent chromium 

baths m the final rule. It is not clear 

whether the EPA data accurately reflect 

emissions from the trivalent chromium 

electroplating process, or if the 

analytical integrity of the data is 

suspect. In light of the ambiguity of the 

air emissions data, and given the other 

environmental benefits from the 

trivalent chromium process, thie EPA 

has decided to regulate these baths 

differently from hexavalent chromium 

electroplating baths. 

The final rule requires users of 

trivalent chromium baths to silbmit an 

initial notification and a notification of 

compliance status certifying that a 

trivalent chromium bath is being used 

and identifying the bath components 

(specifically, the wetting agent). -. 

Subsequent notifications are required 

only if the process is changed, or if a 

new trivalent chromium process is 

introduced. Users of trivalent. chromium 

haths must also keep records of bath 

chemicals purchased so the EPA can be 

assured that the bath contains a wetting 

agent. These notification and 

recordkeeping requirements apply only 

to those trivalerit chromium baths that 

incorporate a wetting agent. The EPA'• * 

has evaluated baths with this 

characteristic and fourid them to have 

the environmental benefits discussed 

above. Although such baths are not 

known to exist, the EPA has chosento 

regulate trivalent chromium baths that 

do not incorporate a wetting agent iri thesame manner as decorative chromium 

baths using a chromic acid solution/The 

EPA believes that this will discourage 

the use of a trivalent chromium bath 

that does not have a wetting agent as an"••• 

inherent bath component; 

2. Selection of MACT .for Decorative v 

Chromiuin Electroplating Tanks 

.Three commenters .suggested that the:*: 

proposed ernission limit df 0.003 nig/ -n; 

dscm for decorative chromium ,*•*yy 3.J--

electroplateis using hexavalent •J J-*-.* '.'•.>.*,*-••' 

chromium baths was too stringent. Two * 

commenters did riot think that a source, 

using either a fume suppressant or a•••'••<•?-' 

fume suppressant in'Conjunction With a;; 

packedTbed scrubber could consistently, 

meet a limit of 0.003 mg/dscm; *. 

In response fo the comments received 

at proposal, the EPA has reconsidered 

the basis for the emission limit of 0.003 

mg/dscm for decorative chromium '. 

electroplating and chromium anodizing . 

tanks. As stated in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, this emission limit was. 

based on tests of a decorative chromium 

electroplating tank in which a 

combination wetting agent/foarh blanket 

was used to control emissions. Tests 

had also been conducted on a decorative 

chromium electroplating tank using 

only a foam blanket for control. The 

chromium emission data fpr all types bf 

fume suppressants ranged from 0.001 to 

0.007 mg/dscm, with the wettingagent/-

foam blanket data rariging from 0.001 to 

0.003 mg/dscm and the foam blanket 

data ranging from 0.003 fo 0.007 mg/ 

dscm. In evaluating whether the 

proposed emission limit of 0.003 mg/ 

dscm should be revised in the final rule, 

the EPA reassessed the effect the test !". 

methods may have had on the emission 

data obtained. The analytical method 

used for the fume suppressant test was • 

colorimetric spectroscopy. As Thore 

efficient control technologies (such as 

composite mesh-pad systems) were ' • 

developed, a more sensitive analytical 

method was needed to measure the 

lower concentrations of chromium being 

emitted. Therefore, the more sensitive • 

ion chromatography method was used 

in the later phases of emission testing • 

for these standards involving add-ori 

control devices. '*'....' 

By using the less sensitive 

colorimetric analytical method, it is , " 

unclear whether the variation found 

between the two types of fume 

suppressants was due.to a performance 

difference in the fume Suppressants or *' 

. was ari artifact of the analytical method 

used. The fact that there is overlap. ' 

between the foam blanket and wetting 

agent/foarn blanket data further .

 : •;' '-_•• •' 

indicate s tha t this coul d b e th e case;/;*''•*. •"] 

(Both wer e able to achiev e a limit:6f •.-/";•• •• 

; 0.003-riig/dscrii in on e instance.)' '',V:';. 

Therefore, the EPA has concluded that 

:

 the emission limit in the final'rule. •. <-

should be based on tiie perforrhance of ',.-•• 

both foam blankets and wetting agents'. • 

Accordirigly, the emission limit selected 

for decorative chromium electroplating • 

and chromium anodizing tanks irithe"'• 

final rule is 0.01 mg/dscm. This"*'- •;*;?!••.'.' 

.-,eiriissidn-limit was'selected by applying {"• 

a safety factor to the highest rne&suxed .,' • 

data point (&.007. mg/dscm) tp account 

•for variations iri sampling and analytical'. 

: procedures.*!-, selection of this^-'y(V V? 

"emission limit is consistent witii-thej'Vl "•* 

.methodolog y used :t o select emission,--? j-- '••'•' 

.'• limits base d on othe r control'-'• •• ••"*:•'-•*,'>.- ••" -.: 

J.!' 

fc 

•'•a 

1 

J ; . 

1-1 

:,:,• 
P.11 

495 6 ; Fedjeraj Register 7 Vol:' 60,JJQaiJ 16 *7<?Wednes^y^^^tiary 25, 1995 ;/; Ruies-and Rejgulatioris 

£'*•*; 

techniques, as is further discussed in 

section V.F. , .'•*.;.•.*.;-**-.-,r. '• • J:_~'';y.Jf- •--:-'••<• 

3. Selection of MACT Hoor/MACT for 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks '*.'-. 

Three commenters questioned the 

MACT floor established by the EPA for 

sources performing chromium •-.'_'•••' 

anodizing. The coftimenters stated that 

it did not appear that the EPA had 

sufficient data to perform a MACT floor 

analysis for these sources. Commenters 

stated that chromium anodizers and 

decorative chromium electroplaters that 

cannot use fume suppressants should be 

considered separately, and the MACT 

floor for such sources should be based 

on packed-bed scrubbers. Also,. • 

according to six commenters, the .. 

standaid for chromium anodizing tanks 

is not achievable in all situations, ••-. 

especially when an add-on control 

device is used in lieu of fume 

suppressants. One commenter stated 

that unless the standard for chromium'. 

anodizing tanks controlled with add-on 

control devices is set at 0.03 mg/dscm, 

sources will have to use an add-on 

control device followed by a fiber-bed 

mist eliminator to achieve the emission 

limits . 

. The MACT floor for chromium 

anodizing sources was based on . 

information available to the EPA ori the 

source category. Information on the 

industry was obtained through survey • 

questionnaires to both industry - :*• ;' ' 

representatives and control system .;:-:. 

vendors, site visit reports, and available 

emission data. Although information * 

was not available from all sources in the 

category.the EPA believes the *; 

information was sufficient to satisfy the 

requirerhentspf section 112(d)(3) ofthe 

Act. Th e survey responses, which . 

included some aerospace facilities,.'-

indicated that fume suppressants were 

the control technique used \ 

predominantly in the industry. Section 

112(d)(3) of the Act prohibits the EPA 

from establishing a standard that is any. -

less stringent than the MACT floor for., 

, a category or subcategory of sources. No 

technical reason was provided by .*•> 

industry; rior is one known to the EPA, 

for creating a separate subcategory of . 

sources for which fume suppressants are 

hot technically feasible. Thus, all new. / 

and existing sources performing:38ijyJ--

chrprriium anodizing must meet.either:••.•;• 

aii emission limitpfp.01 mg/dscm or CT 

maintain the surface tension specified -:-** 

iri the rule. The EPA believes tiiat the' -.-•, 

revised chromium emission timit of 0.01 

mg/dscm for chromium anodizing tanks

 : 

in the final rule is achievable by sources 

using add-ori control-techriplogy£**?H •?. •':•.?•' 

Altematiyely.theEPAvbelieves that the 

c6riipli.-a(%''time_^e'f6r.'^st-3g^..'-'''^r:':': 

sources performingchromiumf;;-':, 

anodizing in the-final rule (2 years) will 

. allow these sources .to further'..; %'i ...*-. 

investigate the feasibility, of using fume 

suppressants.---'*" . •>•.•,•'.•:•'••!•..•••••,.* **..,••• 

E.SelertionofitieFoTmqtpfthe 

Standard .•"'"'.'.. 

Seven commenters stated that the' • . . 

format ofthe standard should be 

expressed as a process emission rate in 

milligrams of chromium emitted per , 

amp-hour of operation (mg/amp-hr), 

which would be consistent with •.-•. 

CaUfomia rules, rather than as an 

emission concentration (mg/dscm). 

According tothe commenters, 

concentration-baSed standards are 

flawed because they can be 

circumvented by dilution, concentration 

can vary from system to system, and 

source test data indicate that outlet 

concentrations vary widely for differerit 

inlet conditions.. Several commenters 

also pointed out that emissions should 

be correlated to production rates 

because chromium emissions'increase 

proportionately with increased current. 

Two other commenters suggested that . 

the final; rule specify acceptable process 

emission rates to avoid an equivalency 

evaluation. • : ' -...... ' 

Based on the Agency's "evaluation, the 

available test data indicate that a 

process emission rate format will not 

ensure consistent compliance with the 

control level required by the standard. 

The concentration data collected by the 

EPA for the composite mesh-pad and 

packed-bed scrubber systems do not 

overlap; that is, composite mesh-pad 

systems consistently, outperform ' 

packed-bed scrubbers/Theprocess ..-• 

emission rate data, on the other hand do 

overlap; even though composite meshpad systems are a superior technology to 

packed-bed scrubbers, both sometimes 

achieve the same process emission rate. * 

This occurs because two sources can be 

using the same control technology and 

achieving the same outlet emissions : • ••' 

concentration, but the one with the 

higher current loading "will have a; lower, 

process emission rate. Commenters 

contend that this is reasonable because 

the production rate, as measured in I 

ampere-hours, is related to emissions.-

However; the amount of current, •_ &••>••••}':-. 

supplied to the tank is ari-indicator of 

the arriouht of uncoritrblled emissiqiis 

:

 from the tank, not the controlled ;¥,--• A : 

- emission level from the tank; Because of 

the differences in process emission ratebased and coriceritfatibri-based •-« -'Jri- 3 3 

standards, and-the soiut^sp^ecific ;\4-';-".-. 

t nature of^process ehiissidh:rateV«,'J;n;^:-

• standards, the EPArcannot/Cite an • * : f e ' 

•• equivalent process emission rate in the 

;• 'final rule: yyyy&My; -R fci%*^'-^-; *'•* :*-.^ •!-.•'-. 

Regarding the issue of circumvention 

of the standard through dilution ofthe 

emission stream, the EPA believes that 

dilution of the gas stream can be 

determined by reviewing test and 

permit data for a facility. The outlet air 

flow rate measured during testing 

should approximate the design air flow 

rate for the control system reported on 

the permit application. If the two values 

differ significantly, then an inspection 

of the control system can be made to . 

determine if dilution air is being 

introduced. It is also possible for a 

faciUty to dilute the inlet gas stream to 

the control device by designing a system 

-to ventilate the electroplating tanks at 

air flow rates substantially above those 

required for adequate ventilation. ' 

However, the increased installalion and 

• maintenance costs associated with such 

a system would outweigh the costs of 

complying with the standard without 

dilution: Further, § 63.4(b) ofthe 

General Provisions expressly prohibits 

dilution as a means to comply with an 

emission limit. Therefore, concerns of 

dilution of the air stream were not 

considered to outweigh the benefits of a 

.concentration-based format for the 

standard. 

Eight commenters disagreed with the _. 

EPA's decision to base the standard on 

emissions of total chromium rather than 

on emissions of hexavalent chromium. . 

. Two commenters suggested allowing 

sources to demonstrate compliance by 

testing for hexavalent chromium in lieu 

of total chromium. 

The EPA decided to base the standard 

on total chromium because tho HAP list 

- identifies all chromium compounds, not 

just hexavalent chromium compounds. 

In addition, based on testing conducted 

by the EPA for these source categories," 

the available test data indicate that 

hexavalent and total chromium levels in 

the emission stream were essentially the -

same for chromic acid baths (varying 

within ±10 percent in most instances). 

Because the EPA data base is mainly . V 

comprised of data measured as.. . 

hexavalent chromium, the final rule -*•' : . 

does allow all sources using chromic 

acid baths.to demonstrate compliance . 

by measuririg either hexavalent or total . 

chromium forallsources.-' .-'•• " ;'

:

 - . . 

, F. Selection of the Emission, Limits y. 

:•••• Many commenters stated that the

 v 

emission limit based on the Use of: -

 :>..-. 

..compositemesh-pad systems-should be > 

:. changeaVThree cominenters'suggested ••"1 

lowering the emission limit that is based 

• oh the use of composite riiesh-pad -"! * 

; systems, stating that the EPA did not •• 

'test the best systems available, arid

 v '- ; -'• 

suggested levels ranging-from 0.001 mg/ _ 

' dscni to0.009 mg/dscm. Other..-';' 
Federal Register / Vol. 60, .No. 16 7 Wednesday, January 25, iQQ^l:

 Rules|,:4ndv^ulaU6ns ;;,.,4957, 

P.12 

commenters stated that the proposed 

limit based on composite mesh-pad 

systems (0.013 mg/dscm) was too low. 

Five commenters stated th&t the 

. proposed emission limit for packed-bed 

scrubbers was also tpo high, noting that 

some units tested by the EPA did not 

achieve this limit. 

The proposed emission limit of 0.013 

mg/dscm for large hard chromium 

electroplaters was based on tests that 

the EPA conducted on actual control, 

devices operating under normal process 

conditions. Lower limits than the one 

selected for large sources were 

measured from these devices, but the 

EPA based the emission limit on the 

highest measured data point and , 

believes that this limitis consistently 

achievable. Regarding the emission limit 

based on packed-bed scrubbers, the EPA 

did test some packed-bed scrubber 

systems that were not achieving the 

level of 0.03 mg/dscm required by the -

proposed standard. However, these 

devices were not optimized to achieve 

the higher removal efficiencies. 

Specifically, when scrubbers were 

operated with periodic or continuous 

. washdown in which fresh water was 

supplied as makeup to the top of the 

bed, a limit of at least 0.03 mg/dscm was 

. achieved. The final rule includes work 

practice standards that require the use 

of fresh water added to the top of the 

packed bed whenever makeup additions 

occur. Thus, packed-bed scrubbers that 

are operated in accordance with the 

requirements ofthe rule should be able . 

to achieve a limit of 0.03 mg/dscm. The 

EPA does not think it is appropriate to 

substantially charige the emission limits 

•. based on the use of composite mesh-pad 

systems or packed-bed scrubbers; the 

commenters did riot provide data that 

supported their claim that differerit 

emission limits are more appropriate. 

As discussed previously, the emission 

limit for decorative chromium: 

electroplating tanks and chromium 

anodizing tanks has been changed to 

0.01 mg/dscm in the final.rule by 

applymg a safety factor to the highest 

data point (0.007 mg/dscrii)in the fume 

suppressant data base. Similarly, the *•-.. 

emission limit that is based oh packedbed scrubbers is based on rounding the 

highest value (0.028 mg/dscm) in the ; ? 

packed-bed Scrubber data base to 0.03 ... 

mg/dscm to incorporate a safety factor, : 

Therefore, in the final rule,--theRemission 

' limit thatisbased-on theudeofJJJ -.-•/ 

composite mesh-pad systems (0.013 tag/ 

dscm) has been adjusted fb 0:015 mg/ 

; dscm by applyirige safety factor to the 

highest value (0.013 mg/dscm) in the V 

data base to ehsurethat the limit is 

achievableon a consistent basis- .' 

G. Selection of Compliance Dates . yl •_. -_ , 

Several commenters stated that the" '.** 

proposed compliance dates for, affected 

existing sources did not allow sufficient 

time to achieve compliance with the 

proposed rule. The inajority of these -. 

commenters suggested compUance .;•• 

timeframes of 2 to 3 years. According to 

the commenters, the compliance period 

specified in the proposed ruje did not 

allow enough time to inform and 

educate affected owners and operators; 

acquire, capital; conduct research and 

test systems; identify, purchase, and 

install control equipment; develop '-.. „ 

startup, shutdown, and malfunctionr 

plans; train staff; build.iriventories; and,.~ 

establish reporting and recordkeeping 

systems. ..' *.;. 

The Agericy agrees with the 

commenters that the compUance 

timeframes for affected sources should 

be increased. The EPA recognizes that 

sbirie ofthe faciUties within all ofthe 

source categories will have to 

investigate the technical feasibiUty of 

installing cbhtrol devices or using other 

technologies at their faciUty to meet the 

standards.-'.Also',' many area sources aire 

not yet aware that a rule is to be 

promulgated for their industry, and time 

is needed for them to be made aware of. 

the requirements of this rule. Therefore, 

the EPA has extended the compliance 

date to 1 year after the promulgation 

date for existing decorative chromium 

electroplaters and 2 years after the ' 

promulgation date for existing hard . 

chromium electroplaters and chromium * 

anodizers. The EPA beUeves that the 1 

year timeframe for decorative chromium 

electroplaters is sufficient because,' 

based on the EPA's survey data, 80 

percent of existing sources already use \ 

fume suppressants and very few will 

need to install add-on air pollution ,'._.,.'. 

control devices.. The EPA thinks that the 

compUance timeframes in the, final rule, 

will address commenters -concernsand 

Still ensure impleriientatiori of controls , 

in a timely fashion. Due to the toxicity! 

of chrpiriium compounds arid the .'* 

importance of controlling chromium: " 

emissions to protect human health 'and ~J 

the environment, the Agency decided V; 

against a compliance time longer than 2 -

years for any of the source categories'/. .3 

••affected; JJ'y; '•.,.*.• V •• -'•>$> 3JJJ3 C:'.\^J:/--y. ,'3 

Tp-accornmodatesources that cannot;; 

comply with the standard by the JyJOJJ';^ 

compUance date, § 63l6(i) of tUe Gbneral 

Provisions and§63.:343(a)(6);of subpart 

N alloWs -Source to request ajijyear.3'-^ 

CbmpUariCeextension, whichmust be;.; 

submitted 6;nionths in advance of the I* ;; 

compliance datei identified mthe:' J'J-J^,.-

regulation. This extension combined %yJ. 

with the compUance timeframes in'the "'•" 

proposed rule could provide a total of. '., 

2 years for compUance for decorative! 

chromium electroplaters and 3 years for 

compUance for hard chromium, 

electroplaters and chromium ariodizers. 

H. Selection of Monitoring Requirements 

Section li4(a)(3) ofthe Act requires 

enhanced monitoring and compliance 

certification of all major stationary 

sources. The annual comp Uarice 

certifications certify whether. , 

compUance has been continuous or 

interinittent. Enhanced monitoring shall 

be capable of detecting deviations from 

each appUcable eriiissloft Umit or 

standard -with sufficient .'..' ' 

representativeness; accuracy, precision, 

reUabiUty, frequency, and timeliness to 

determine if compliance is continuous 

during a reporting period. The .. . 

monitoring in this regulation satisfies 

the requirements of enhanced 

monitoring..." '•',''' • 

1. Compliance Monitoring for Add-on 

Air Pollution Control Devices ,. .••.,-. 

Eleven comments addressed the.. 

suitability of measuring gas velocity to 

demonstrate pri-going compliance when 

add-on air pollution control devices arcUsed to comply with an eriiission limit. 

The commenters stated that measuring 

gas velocity is very complicated,- , • 

redundant with measuring pressure • 

drop, and not indicative of.contrdl 

device performance. Two commenters 

pointed out that no suitable testing 

poirit may be accessible, and a 

permanent measurement device may bo . 

: fouled by chromic acid. 

Several commenters .remarked on the 

requirement for measuring chroriiium 

concentration in the scrubber water. 

Four of these commenters stated that 

there, is no obvious relationship between 

scrubber water chrorhium concentration 

arid scrubber performance. Other 

commenters indicated that /.,' •.. _ J" *. ' 

mieasurerhent of chromium >_'*'•':, •'' 

concentration in scrubber water with a' y" 

hydrometer is not accurate.;. ' -J. r.;. 

hi jevising the proposed mie, the EPA, 

recognizes that thejmeasufemeritof gas V 

velocity could be burderisoriie arid .that':"-. 

. other control,system parameters could ••'".'• 

potentiaUy be used to deterrriihe on- *•;•?'•_: 

going compliance; Therefore,' iii the >J •_;: V 

. final.rule, sources using cdmposite J'y'-'•','•_*" :-

; -mesfrpadsystems/are required tb'T-":....',:• • 

.-monitor presure drop across the icleyice\ 

^; ,forcompliwTO^p"^qses],:Basedpri J;.;!i' 

2 in.fonriation;gathered by the EPA,; •-';-:'.'.:;;,: -

'^pressure drop is directly relatedjto £& .Jl V 

composite..mesh-pad system .«;vi-.^'V'i--ii'rt A 4.-,: 

perform^ce, measurement of pressure-•• ••'•••'. 

drop is^straightforward, arid some!^users -

ofcompositejriesh-padsystems are /;.,,>.. 0. 

• currently• Tnoriitoring pressure drop. The ,••'••/.-

.- m 

: Li 

i 

•i 
4958 *.Federal Register; /Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 

P.13 

He 

EPA'believes that this change makes the 

rule more flexible for regulated sources,, 

while''still ensuring that the EPA has a 

mechanism for determinirig compUance 

with the emission limits at any given 

time. 

: The final rule requires sources that 

use a packed-bed scrubber to meet the 

emission limit must measure the 

velocity pressure at the inlet to the 

control system as well as the pressure 

drop across the device. The relationship, 

between pressure drop and packed-bed 

scrubber performance is less reliable 

than the relationship between pressure 

drop and composite mesh-pad system '** 

performance because of the lower 

pressure drop in packed-bed scrubbers. 

Therefore, the EPA also requires sources 

using packed-bed scrubbers to monitor 

the velocity pressure at the inlet to the 

control device. This requirement will 

ensure that the gas velocity through the 

control system is maintained in 

accordance with vendor 

recommendations and, along with the 

preissiire drop monitoring, will ensure 

that the control system is properly 

operating. 

The.requirement that sources using 

packed-bed scrubbers monitor the •• • 

chromium concentration in the scrubber 

water has been eliminated, because the 

EPA concluded that monitoring ofthe 

velocity pressure at the control device 

inlet and the pressure drop across the 

device was sufficientto demonstrate 

compUance with the emission Umits -

when packedrbed scrubbers are used. 

CompUance monitoring requirements 

for fiber-bed mist eliminators have been 

added in the final rule because these 

devices could likely be used to meet the 

emission limitations, and soriie fiberbed mist eliminators are known to be in 

use. Sources that use a fiber-bed mist " ;* 

eliminator to meet the emission limit 

must measure the pressure drop across 

the fiber-bed unit, as weU as the 

pressure.drop across the control device 

upstream of the fiber bed unit that is in 

place to prevent plugging. ; 

As discussed above, several changes 

have been made to the monitoring : 

requirements specified in the proposed 

rule based on the EPA's review of 

comments received on the proposed 

rule and further investigation of which 

process parameters relate best to proper 

-performance ofthe control systems. The 

final compUance monitoring 

requirements are found in § 63.3.43(c) of 

the final rule.-

2. Work Practice Standards for Add-on* 

An* Pollution Control Devices 

In the proposed rule. Operation and 

Maintenance (O&M) requirements for 

add-on air pollution control devices 

consisted of adding makeup water to 

packed-bed scrubbers, requiring 

washdown of composite mesh pads, and 

various inspections for both types of 

control devices. The majority of 

comments focused on the requirements 

associated with makeup water for 

packed beds and washdown for 

composite mesh pads. Several 

commenters suggested alternatives for

 v 

the requirements for adding makeup 

water to packed-bed scrubbers. The 

commenters disagreed that makeup 

water can or should be added to the top 

ofthe scrubber. Others questioned the 

need to use fresh water in scrubbers and 

composite mesh pads because doing so 

increased wastewater flows. Other 

commenters requested that the final rule 

define the term "fresh :Arater." 

In the final rule, the O&M 

requirements have been replaced with 

work practice standards that address 

O&M practices (§ 63.342(f)]. The final 

rule continues to require sources using 

packed-bed scrubbers to meet an 

emission limit and ensure that all 

makeup water is fresh and supplied to 

the unit at the top of the packed bed. 

The EPA considers this requirement 

essential tomeeting the prescribed 

emission limit. During source testing 

conducted by the EPA to estabUsh the 

performance level of packed-bed 

scrubbers, it was noted that a system 

equipped with an overhead spray 

system that periodicaUy cleaned the 

packing with .fresh water performed 

much better than a system without such 

cleaning. Based on those results, the 

EPA believes that without the 

•requirement that makeup water be fresh 

and added to the top ofthe packed bed, 

scrubbers wiU not continuously meet 

the required emission limit even if the. • 

scrubber met the limit during the initial 

performance test and is operated within 

the appropriate ranges of pressure drop 

and velocity pressure. For clarification, 

the term fresh water is defined in the 

finalrule. 

There were 11 comments on the '^ " 

washdown requirements for composite 

mesh-pad systems. Several of these •••...'.'• 

commenters indicated that the specified 

washdown frequency was either ';,:'. 

impractical, infeasible, or unnecessary. 

Seven commenters suggested washdown 

requirements for composite mesh-pad . 

systems be site^specificias}&:jJ. JJ ;.-

recommended by vendors, or apply only 

if pressure drop determinations indicate * 

the potential present of chromic add :;v> 

buildup. Two commeriters indicated : 'J*". ." 

that the washdown water will likely ~ 

exceed the quantity of water that canbe; 

recycled, thus resultingiri'a wastewater,'. 

stream that needs tbbe'treated; J.J-:~ 

In the final rule, the EPA has revised 

the requirement that sources complying 

with an emission limit by using a 

composite mesh-pad system perform 

washdown of the pads. The EPA 

beUeves that washdown is an essential 

part of composite mesh-pad system 

operation; if proper system maintenance 

such as.washdown does not occur, there ' 

will be a decUne in system performance. . 

However, instead of specifying a 

washdown frequency, the reyised rule i 

specifies that washdown be conducted 

in accordance with manufacturers' . 

recommendations as part of a faciUty's 

O&M plan. The EPA recognizes that. . 

vendor designs for these system's vary 

significantly, and the requirements for 

washdown are based on the design of 

the unit and the operation ofthe plating 

tanks. The frequency of washdown is -

dependent upon the position of the pad 

in the control unit. Pads located in the 

front portions ofthe unit are exposed to 

higher chromium concentrations' and,' 

therefore, require washdowns more 

frequently than those located in the 

back of the unit. Washdown practices 

recommended by manufacturers vary 

from continuous in some cases to a 

maximum of once every 1 to 2 weeks.. 

The EPA has also added work practice 

standards for fiber-bed mist eliminators 

in the final rule because these control 

devices are hkely to meet the emission 

limitations, arid are known to be in use , 

by sources affected by these standards. -

The work practice standards identified 

for fiber-bed mist eliminators are 

analogous to those identified for the 

composite mesh-pad system. Washdown . 

requirements for fiber-bed units will ':• 

depend on the efficiency of the ' 

prefiltering device and the operation of 

the plating tanks. Fiber-bed units 

installed downstream of more efficient 

prefiltering systems, such as packed-bed 

scrubbers, will require less frequent 

washdown than those using a less 

effective prefiltering device because of 

the lower inlet loading to the unit. Most 

vendors of fiber-bed units recommended 

monitoring ofthe pressure drop as a . 

means of gauging when the unit needs 

to be washed down. If an increase in 

pressure drop is observed, then the unit 

wtil be washed down to remove any .. 

chromium built up on the fiber - . '->.-;'•••' 

'demerits.. *'• •-.., • '•''.",Ji;:':'-:J-: '.•*'•• •' 

3. Frequency of Monitoring for-Add-on '•'"' 

-Ak.PoUu'tipnCMtoi'-Deyicgs'y*^/^.;'^^ 

' •*• Fourteen commenters indicated that \ »*-. 

the daily monitoring bf add-on air; sv*. >;«:;; 

poUution control devices is- *. ;•'j,'-' r i '->.•; 

unnecessary, particularly for siriaU [: ...

% 

sources- arid suggested that atleast sprite | 

ofthe monitoring IM required pri only a-.j.f: 

weekly,monthly.orquart-^lyl»sisL .;: :n' 
Federal Register J Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1*995 / Rules and -Regulations 4959 

P.14 

Other commenters suggested that " 

monitoring be tied to productiori rate, 

that monitoring he conducted only on 

days when-electroplating is taking 

place, or that monitoring requirements 

be reduced after the source has been in 

compUance for 6 months. Commenters 

also requested that monitoring be 

required only during tank operation, 

arid that tank operation be defined. 

Several commenters disagreed with the 

proposed inspection frequency because 

of increased exposure hazards to 

persons conducting the inspections or of 

anticipated down-time due to the 

inaccessibiUty of control systems. 

In response to these Comments and to 

minimize tiie burden on regulated 

sources, the EPA Ms reduced the ' 

burden associated with the'cbmpliance 

monitoring and work practice standards 

in the final rule. The final rule 

continues to require daily monitoring of 

pressure drop and velocity pressure for 

compUance, but the monitoring 

procedures specified in the rule are the 

minimum required to determine 

continuous compUance. Once the 

monitoring devices are in place, the 

only laborxequired is that needed to 

read the gauges. The frequency of 

inspections for compUance with the 

work practice standards has also been 

reduced orTevised. In the final rule, the 

frequency of inspections has been 

reduced from monthly or daily to Once 

every 3 months. The EPA beUeves that 

the inspections are stiU necessary to -

ensure that system degradation is not 

occurring overtime, because gradual 

degradation may not be apparent from 

compUance monitoring alone. Some 

commenters noted that their systems 

were not accessible for inspection, or 

that the inspection would result in 

extended downtime. The compliance 

timeframes in the final rule should 

allow sources sufficient time to retrofit 

their systems to faciUtate inspections, 

and the negative effects of any" C 

do wntime are minimized by tiie 

reduced inspection frequency. 

The final nile also has been clarified 

so that monitoring requirements apply 

only during tank operation; tank 

operatfonis defined iri §63.341; ^ 

4. Compliance Monitoring Associated - •-•: 

With Fume Suppressants 

:

 Regardingtiie useof -wetting agenttype fome suppressants; seven: ••• 

commenters indicated thaltthei''".; ;>" ; 

requirement for knaintainirig suiface v 

tension below40-dynes/cm for. chromic. 

acid baths Is inappropriate. The -reasons • 

provided by thecon-menters were that :-

a surface tension -standard may -hot be3. 

' prudent to demonstrate coriipliance, a : 

direct correlation between exceedanCe '•' 

of parameters and emission limits has 

not been estabUshed, and the rule 

should allow sources to set their own 

compUance value for surface tension. 

Other commenters noted that the 

specified limit was either too low or was 

not consistent with manufacturers' 

recommendations^ 

Based on data collected by the EPA, 

the performance of an electroplating 

bath controlled with a wetting agenttype fume suppressant can be 

determined by tiie surface tension of the 

bath. Therefore, the EPA beUeves that 

there is a direct link between surface . 

tension and emissions. The EPA also 

beUeves that it is necessary and 

appropriate to set a default value for 

surface tension in the nde. Based on the 

EPA's experience, many decorative 

chromium electroplating tanks are not 

ventilated, making source testing 

impossible without considerable 

retrofitting. 

The EPA has increased the default 

surface tension limit from the proposed 

40 dynes/cm to 45 dynes/cm based on 

information received during the 

comment period. However, if a facility 

beUeves that a different surface tension 

value is appropriate, the rule allows a 

source to conduct a performance test 

concurrently with surface tension 

monitoring to establish the maximum 

surface tension that corresponds to 

compUance with the emission Umits. 

The source would subsequently monitor 

surface tension, with an exceedance 

occurring if the surface tension of the 

bath-exceeded the value measured 

during the performance test" 

Regarding foam blanket-type fume 

suppressants, several commenters were 

concerned about the technique for 

measuring foam blanket thickness and 

the potential hazards associated with 

this measurement. Another commenter 

stated that the stack testing -requirement 

is unreasonable due to its excessive 

cost *'.-. * ".'*-. '•':--;"'.-'" 

The EPA does not believe that it is 

necessary to specify a procedure 

because it is simply a depth 

measurement Specifying a technique 

may also hinder the development of 

site-specific techniques to reduce 

worker exposure. TheEPA believes that 

wetting agents are safer than foam 

blankets because foam blankets present 

a potential safety hazard. The foam traps 

the hydrogen gas and chromic acid jnist 

in the foam layer; if these gases build up 

and a spark Is generated, ahydrpgen ••.*.: 

explosion will result As a means of J.yJ 

encouraging wetting agent use over .'• 

foam blankets, sources using wetting .; 

agents do riothaveto conduct a V> -

jperformarice test unless theywant;to set 

a surface tensiori limit other than the , " 

default value of 45 dyries/cm. The EPA 

believes that the compliance timeframes 

in the final rule will allow sources that 

currently use foam blankets the 

opportunity to explore the use of 

wetting agents. Sources that wish to 

continue using foam blankets wiU be 

required to conduct a performance test. 

5. Frequency of Monitoring Associated 

With Fume Suppressants 

There were over 20 comments related 

to the frequency of monitoring surface 

tensi on. Several of these commenters 

made recommendations for alternate 

monitoring schedules, ranging from 

daily to monthly monitoring, in place of 

the 4-hour schedule. Among the reasons 

cited for decreasing the surface tension 

monitoring frequency were that surface 

tension does not change on a daily or 

weekly basis, measuring surface-tension 

is very time-consuming and could 

require someone full-time if there were 

multiple tanks, and frequent monitoring 

results in increased worker exposure. 

Thirteen commenters provided 

remarks regarding the burden of hourly 

testing for sources using foam blankets. 

The commenters noted that foam * 

blankets that are used according to 

manufacturer's Instructions are 

designed to last 24 hours provided the 

air is not agitated at the surface near the 

anodes and freeboard height is 

adequate. Therefore/visual observation 

is adequate for determining foam 

blanket effectiveness. Other commenters 

stated that the excessive monitoring , 

requirements for foam blankets 

discourage their use, yet several States . 

recommend or require foam blankets . 

with less testing and recordkeeping than 

that proposed by the EPA. 

In response to comments and some 

data received, the EPA recognizes that 

the 4-hour surface tension monitoring ' 

frequency specified in the proposed rule 

may be burdensome, and in some cases, ,-

unnecessary. The ERA has insufficient 

data, however, to establish the 

monitoring frequency that is appropriate 

for each mode of bath operation. 

Therefore, the frhal rule aUows a 

decrease in monitoring frequency if no '; 

exceedances occur. Section .-. 

63.343(c)(5)(ii)(B) specifies that the 

surface tensionbe measured once every , 

4-houis of tank operation for the first 40 . 

hours oftank operation after the 

comphance date. If no exceedances :. 

occur, monitoring can occur once eveiy 

8 hours of tank operation. Once there' 

are again no Exceedances during 40 -

hours of tarikoperation,surface tension •, 

measurement may be conducted once .... 

every 40 hoursoftank operation on an 

on-goinghasis, until an exceedance ; 

occurs. Once an exceedance of the 

;' * 

f • 

• ' | 

• • : 

>,i 

!..! 

'«.' 

• • ! 

fl 

r;l 
P.15 

4960 Federal Register 7 Vol. 60, No.;16';/' Wedj-tesday^ •^ftai'v-'-^'''' 

!;:' 

a.' 

standard occurs or the electroplating .' 

solution is changed out, the original, 

monitoring schedule must be resumed 

Likewise, the final rule contains 

allowances to decrease the frequencyof 

monitoring foam blanket thickness. The 

proposed hourly frequency is based on 

the EPA's experience that foam blankets 

can deplete quickly and must be closely 

monitored. The final rule is unchanged 

iri that sources using a foam blanket 

must conduct a performance test, and 

the initial monitoring frequency is once 

per hour. However, as with wetting 

agents; the final rule allows a decrease 

in monitoring frequency if no 

exceedances occur. Section 

63.343(c)(6)(ii)(B) specifies that the 

foam blanket thickness be measured 

once every hour of tank operation for 

the first 40 hours bf tank operation after 

the compUance date.if no exceedances 

occur, the time between monitoring may 

be increased to once every 4 hours of 

tank operation; Once there are no 

exceedances during 40 hours of tank 

operation, foam blanket thickness 

measurement may be conducted once 

every 8 hours of tank operation on an 

on-going basis. As with wetting agents, 

if there is an exceedance or if the 

electroplating bath is changed out, the 

original monitoring schedule must be 

resumed. 

I. Selection of Test Methods 

Three commenters requested that 

CARB Method 425 be evaluated for 

equivalency, arid if determined to be 

equivalent, be identified as such in the 

rule. These commenters also stated that 

sources that have performed this test 

should not have to retest. Four 

commenters asked whether retesting 

will be required if sources have 

conducted performance tests previously 

using 306, 306A, or an equivalent test ' 

method. 

Section 63.344(c)(2) identifies the 

conditions under which the CARB 

Method 425 is considered equivalent 

Basically, the acceptabiUty of this test 

method will depend upon the analysis 

rather than the sampUng train or 

sampling procedure. Regarding the issue 

of whether retesting is required, 

§63.344(b>of the final^rule outlmes the 

criteria that must be met for a previous 

source test to be acceptable 

Two commenters requested that the 

rulejirovide: guidance on how to verify 

compUance when both chromium 

anodizingand hard chromium 

electroplating tanks are vented to a 

common coritroi deviceiTUree 

oomftieriters pointed but that the 

regulation does hot account for the 

situation iri which chromium 

electroplating soilrCes share a 

ventilatiori system with nonchromium 

sources that could introduce dilution 

air. Three corhmenters noted that it is 

extremely difficult to reconfigure some 

existing systems in such a way that only 

the emissions from chromium , 

electroplating or anodizing are tested. 

There are basically two situations . 

involving multiple tanks manifolded to 

one control system: (1) The multiple 

tanks include a chromium electroplating 

or chromium anodizing tank among 

other tanks not affected by the rule; or 

(2) the multiple tanks include 

chromium tanks performing different 

operations (e.g., electroplating and 

anodizing) or hard chromium tanks 

subject to different emission limits (e.g., 

a new tank and an existing small tank), 

which.may or may not be controlled 

with nonaffected sources. Section 

63.344(e) of the final rule includes 

compliance provisions for both of these 

situations. 

J. Selection of Reporting arid 

Recordkeeping Requirements 

Several commenters stated that the 

frequency of recordkeeping and •••• 

reporting outlined in the proposed rule 

was overly burdensome and suggested 

several alternatives. Seven commenters ••• 

stated that the types of recordkeeping 

required by the rule are inappropriate. : 

In general, the commenters remarked 

that records, such as the amount of 

chemicals used and purchased arid the 

amount of fume suppressant material 

added do not indicate compUance. Two 

commenters stated that recordkeeping 

requirements be limited to only surface 

tension measurements because that 

measurement is the basis of compUance. 

One commenter indicated there is no 

environmental benefit to keeping 

records of gas velocities, pressure drops, 

washdown conditions, and scrubber * 

water chromium concentrations. Two 

commenters stated that maintaining. 

records at a faciUty for 5 years is ' 

excessive; a more appropriate length of 

time Would be 3years.brie commenter 

suggested.^minimum of 2 years; :^;\-^ ; 

Two commenters suggested that.-the--^ 

reporting schedule be replaced.with a ./;! 

requirement that the source submit an,;. 

annual certificationi&at.necessaiyJjJJjJ:^ 

control parameters hayb Been met;:^!.% 

cbrisisterit; with the anhri-dcertificitiorit 

requirementsof title V.; AhpthieV:^;^:;^ 

commenter'indicated that sources'$•• _'!%•_ 

' •' .•"•- ! •^i••^•y"•''>"•^••r^•• ':'••:'• -',!,!'•;'':"'" •""' •S'IJ'S'V "' 

exceedances of any State orFederali >.-,:3 

emission- standards, -.;',"' * •'.•'•• '•-',.''.' '."*/",._;"' 

Severicommenters slated.that the

 ;',"." 

costsassociated with the monitoring'."' ' 

and recordkeeping constituted an .,,..,; 

unnecessary burdento both large and\ "'..' 

small facilities. These commenters also " 

. noted that the EPA underestimated the""'• 

costs associated with monitoring, •; -J..I 

reporting, and recordkeeping. Two of 'J. '•?• 

the commenters stated that small .... .V;. 

/businesses do riot haye the resources to,' 

keep extensive records, Another ..':;.. 

commenter pointed out that the EPA has 

, recognized differences in large and, 

small facilities in selecting MACT '"••.'.-• ..-

. emission standards and should also 

recognize differences between large and 

small facilities in selecting reporting^ . 

recordkeeping, and permitting .*!.-.'.. 

requirements. '.'"'. ••".'• ,. 

To respond to comments received and 

to reduce the burden on the many area./, 

sources that will be subject to tiiese . 

standards, the monitoring; reporting, .... 

. and recordkeeping requirements have ;..... 

been reduced in the final, rule to the; '•" 

extent possible while still providing the* 

EPA with the ability to determine a.:.'_..'.,,'. . 

source's continuous compliance status..',, 

The recordkeeping requirements are -.'..," 

contained in § 63.346 of the final rule. ;.y 

The EPA concurs that the records .*.'.-.. 

required to be kept should correspond 

specifically to that which is required to ,"" 

demonstrate compliance. As such, "..',' 

recordkeeping associated with fume. ,, 

suppressants requires only that sources 

maintain records of the date;and time of 

surface tension or foam blanket * .,*-,.'.. 

thickness measurements, as appropriate, 

the value measured, and the'date.and '.'. \ 

time of additions of fume suppressant to. 

the bath. Likewise, the recorclkeeping •".'•"' 

.associated with the add-on air pollution 

control devices is reduced to the extent 

that the monitoring requirements have' 

been reduced. Sources will have to keep;'.' 

records of pressiue.drpp andyelocity'£.',.7^ 

pressure, as: appropriate,, as weU as.-.]£?!•!:;,'.... 

records to document adheiencie with the'.'1.. . 

'- O&M plan required by § 63;342(f)(3).V;V-; *•' 

J The final rule is unchanged Imin&Q'-JfJ'' i 

Jc-proposal iirthat it^^ireqriiies'tiiatowheris".'; . 

•J:- Or operators ofaffected sources niairitkih'^ 

records for a period: of 5 years following^.'.'. 

... eachoccurreri'ce,measurement•.i.^Viv- >?••_;"• 

,'• maintenance, corrective ac-tibn/repiortT*i-

i

* r 

. > or record. Tm^,req*_irementlsv;Consistent . 

";. with the General Provisions and withe"''" Kthe title Vpermit progr^^heEPA';;!^^ '« 

•beUeves retention of recpMW;fpr,5years',:i:i; 

Z allcws the EPA to establisb aspurce's v.•-;«; i, 

% histqiyaridpatternof compiiaiiqejor-j-Xyv. 

£ purposes of determining Ae appropriate; • 

levelof enforcement action; 

should not be Required tp:submit£3:\J:3 

cbmpU^cfe reports if 1 ^ 

permittogagency.Ihspecte 

records; animally\;R .._..„» _.v„_.,„ __,_„_* _„,„,_„,,„,_<,. ;,.,;;;...,.•, 

commentersuj^bsted^^ 

a reduiced Sporting ttquency^ 

years if sources dd ribtexperierice"'" ' 'statu ' s reports to document' whether a 
Federal Register / Vol, 60, No. 1*6 /. Wednesday, January 25, 1995 '/.Rules antj;.*R^yjatjpns, ..4961 

P.16 

source has been in continuous 

compliance with the standards. The 

final rule contains different reporting 

schedules for major and area sources. 

Major"sources are required to submit ongoing compUance status reports 

semiannually, unless an exceedance 

occurs, at which time quarterly reports 

would be required. This change is 

analogous to the requirements of the 

final General Provisions, which had 

only been proposed at the time of this 

proposed rulemaking. 

In an effort to reduce the burden on 

area sources, the final rule allows area 

sources to complete an annual 

compUance report, and allows the 

source to maintain the report on site, to 

be made available to the Administrator 

or permitting authority upon request. 

The EPA recognizes that many 

permitting authorities may not be 

equipped to handle reports from area 

sources, and that these sources may not 

be the sources of primary concern tothe 

authority. However, the requirements in 

the final rule do not alleviate affected 

area sources from complying with the 

reporting requirements of State or! 

Federal operating permit programs 

. under title V. The rule does require that 

area sources submit reports 

semiannually if exceedances occur, or if 

required by the Administrator or 

permitting authority. . 

Sources using a trivalent chromium 

bath are only required to Jceep records 

of the bath ingredients purchased. These 

sources must submit an initial

 r" 

notification and notification of 

compUance status, but are riot required 

to submit on-going compliance status 

reports. . 

As a result of the reduced monitoring, 

reporting, and recordkeeping in the final 

rule compared to the proposed rule, the 

costs of these activities have also been 

reduced. A comparison ofthe cost of the 

monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping associated with the final 

and proposed rules was presented in 

section III.B of this preamble for each of 

the-regulated source categories. 

Ope commenter requested that the 

rule clearly state which sections of the 

General Provisions apply to chromium 

electrbplating sources and which do not 

apply. To eliminate Confusion 

concerning the applicabihty of the 

General Provisions to this source 

category. Table lofsubparthlUstsi*. -

which ofthe General F^OTsibnstoipait 

63 apply arid whichdomotapplyto' 

affected sources.; Jj. 3-'\ ' :'•,.'•';'-

K. Operating Permit Program ., • 

Eleven commenters stated that area 

sources should not be required to obtain 

title V operating permits biecause the 

costs for area sources to obtain title V 

permits would be overly burdensome, 

and the emissions from these sources 

rnay be insignificant Three of these 

commenters suggested that the rule 

explicitly state that a permit is required 

only for applicable emissions units at 

nonmajor sources. Two commenters 

asked that a general permit be included 

in the final rule to reduce the burden for 

small facilities. Another commenter 

stated that a title V permit is not 

necessary because existing requirements 

are enforceable through State and local 

permits. This commenter and one other 

commenter pointed out that because 

area sources are not likely to be subject 

to multipleMACTstandards or to 

employ emissions averaging and 

complex alternate operating scena_ibs, 

title V permits do not benefit the area* 

-sources. 

Two commenters stated that in 

preparing their title V permit programs, 

States did not anticipate a need for 

emission-unit specific permits at 

nonmajor sources, and inclusion of 

nonmajor sources under title V will 

require that many local agencies revise 

their permit programs. Two other 

commenters stated that States will not 

have the "resources for completing title 

V permits for area sources; some states 

have exempted nonmajor sources from 

their permitting programs until the 

nonmajor source permitting rule is 

promulgated in the late 1990's. 

The EPA believes that requiring all -

Sources that are subject to tiie standards, 

including area sources, to obtain title V 

operating permits is important because 

of the toxicity of chromium compounds 

and the cfose proximity of many of 

these sources to residential areas. The 

EPA beUeves that permitting area . 

sources will not be overly burdensome 

to permitting authorities and affected 

sources for fee reasons given below. 

First, many States are already 

permitting these sources under their 

State permit programs. The preamble to 

the final part 70 rule states feat "some 

nonmajor sources would already be 

permitted at the State level, and 

therefore would have some.experience -;• 

with the permitting process and 

completing permit applications."'"-., 

Therefore, a State would have little *' 

reason to defer title V permitting of 1 

sourcesthatalreadyhave State 

operating permits Second, the burden:* 

may be reduced si^ficantlyby issuing 

' general permits to these sburcesl

 f\ ;; 7 

. According to the preamble to the final;:; 

part 70 rule, general piennits^** •*; * "J'J 

provide an alternative means Sop. ;: • •'.';.. 

permitting.sources'for which the , : . ;: 

procedures of ihe norh—dpernutting';'.{ £•; 

process'wbuld be overly burdensome. 

such as area sources under section -

112* * — Uriderthis option.States' 

would develop a single general permit • 

for this source Category and issue It to 

individual sources; or alternatively, a 

letter or certification may be used. The 

burden would also be reduced by using 

general permits because public 

participation and the EPA and affected 

State review is only necessary when the 

initial general permit is drafted and. . 

issued. When subsequent general 

permits are issued to individual sources, 

these activities are not required. FinaUy, 

States are developing small business 

assistance programs (SBAP's) to assist 

these types qf sources with the •-.-." 

permitting process that wiU be funded 

using the annual fees coUected from 

permitted sources. Small businesses 

may also be eligible for reduced 

permitting fees. Also, the EPA is , 

developing a guidance document, .. 

scheduled to be completed by January 

1995, which wiU include sample forms 

for monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements, and a simplified 

general operating permit •;..-.-• .... 

Under title V, sources must include . 

information on all emission points 

(except those considered insignificant 

under the State or local permit program) 

iri their permit appUcation. However, 

only these emission points that are 

subject to regulation will be addressed 

in the permit ,- '.* '• 

VI. Administrative Requirements . 

A.Dockel 

The docket for this rulemaking is A88-02. The docket is ah organized and. 

complete file of all the information 

submitted to or otherwise, considered by 

the EPA in the development of this 

rulemaking. The principal purposes of 

the docket are: (1) To allow inteiested 

parties a means to identify and locate 

documents so that they can effectively 

participate In the rulemaking process; 

and (2) to. serve as the record in case of 

judicial review (except for interagency 

review materials) [section 307(dJ(7j(A) -. 

of the Act]. The docket is available for •. 

public inspection at the EPA's Ali-and... 

Radiation Docket and Information ;!, 

Center, the location of which; is given'in. 

the ADDRESSES section of -bis notice.Jl;:. ? 

B.ExecutimCMei:i2^Ji^j:%^J-^ 

Under Executive G)r_er'l_866158 '1-JR'.. 

51735 (pctober-i1993)],^thte&geni^;':';,': 

must determine wh^er'iheTeg^atqry','.' 

action is "slfenificanP- and &'e*»fore!'^.Ti^ 

. subjecttptJMBTeview and^B',,^'^; ^ 

requirements *pf the Executire Order. ,..-';N 

The Order defiriesvsigm^ 

regulatory .'aciion'* )as bnetiiat is 'Hcel^;.'^ 

to -result ina rule tiiatmay:' '~'•"" ' '" '• 

T>' 

t. 

Jj 

it A 

i9 
P.17 

4962 Federal. Register 7 Vol, 607No. 16 /Wednesday, January 25, 1995 /Rule s and Regulations 

•*•:, 

, (1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 milUon or more, or '••..; \ 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competitidn, jobs, the 

environment, pubUc health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or •'*_'"•' .' 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impact of entitiemerits, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations'of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel fegal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President's priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

Pursuant to the terms of the Executive 

Order 12866, the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has notified the EPA 

that this action is a "significant '•• 

regulatory action" within the meaning 

of the Executive Order. For this reason, 

this action was sent to OMB for review. 

Changes made in response to OMB 

suggestions or recorrimendations will be 

documented in the public record. 

C. Paperwork Reduction fict 

Information collection requirements 

associated with this rule have been 

. approved by OMB under the provisions 

ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and have been 

assigned OMB control number 2060-

0327. An Information Collection 

Request (ICR) document has been 

prepared by the EPA (ICR No. 1611.02) 

to reflect the changed information .'...*• 

requirements bf the final rule and has • 

been submitted to OMB for review. A 

copy may be obtained from Saridy. 

Fanner, Information PoUcy Branch, 

EPA, 401 M Street-SW, (2136), 

Washington, DC 20460, or by calUng 

(202) 260-2740. . 

The pubUc reportingburderifor this 

coUection of information is estimated to 

. average 34 hours per respondent in the' 

first year, 117 hours per respondent in 

the second year, and 297hours per' 

respondent in the third year. This • 

estimate includes the time required for; • 

reviewing instructions/searching .£'.•'••'<-,c \, 

existing data sources, gathering and J'' ' 

maintaining the data needed, and-.',.;;> 

completing and reviewing the coUection 

: of infonnation. The burden is greatest in 

the second and third years because this 

• is when, performance tests wiUbe ., ]£.--

cbndhdedi* Ah pri-^biriig burden of 104:' 

houra per respondent is representative ^: 

of the burden foUowing the third year.';;;^ 

^ Seridconunehts regarding the burden' 

estimate: orlany otheraspect Of this;;•?£••_ 

coUection'p'f.i^p-aratioh.-mdudh^:''^?'. 

suggestions for reducing this burden, to; 

Chief, Information PoUcy Branch, EPA, 

401M Street, SW. (2136), Washington, 

DC 20460; and to fee Office of •'-. - •*'. 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, •; 

Washington, DC 20503, marked ••• 

'.'Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that a , 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be 

performed for aU rules that have 

"significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities." If a 

preUminary analysis indicates that a 

proposed regulation would have a 

significant economic impact on 20 

percent or more of small entities, then 

a regulatory flexibiUty analysis must be 

prepared. 

Present Regulatory Flexibility Act 

guideUnes define an economic impact 

as significant if it meets one of the 

following criteria: 

(1) CompUance increases annual 

production costs by more than 5 

percent, assuming costs are passed on to 

consumers; r ; 

(2) CompUance costs as a percentage 

of sales for small entities are at least 10 

percent more than compUance costs as 

a percentage of sales for large entities; . 

(3) Capital costs of compliance . 

represerit a "significant" portion of 

capital available to small entities, 

considering internal cash flow plus 

external financial capabilities; or 

(4) Regulatory requirements are likely 

to result in closures of small entities. 

Using the Small Business 

Administration's definitiori of a small 

business for SIC Code 3471 of less than 

500 employees; it has been determined 

that none of the above criteria are 

triggered. In the hard chromium 

electroplating source category, the . 

number, of small businesses is estimated 

to be 1,170. None of the regulatory 

alternatives considered wiU^-; 

- significantly impact 20 percent, of this ..., 

operation: For example, the estimated ; 

number of closures is approximated as ./• 

less than 5 percent; Likewise, the -

1 ; 

standards for decorative chromium '; JJ;> 

electroplaters and.chromium anodizers 

would not cause _ny of the above •'•';>•'.• 

criteria to be triggered; -*•;3j}!:'.. Jj^Jy^ -r..--

Pursuant to fee provisions of 5 U.S;C.••'••• 

605(b), I hereby certify feat this rule will • 

: not have'.a. significarit economic impact* -•-. 

on a substantial numberpf small.; ^;;'; 

business entities because the number of;, 

small business entities that would be;.;.J,.)[ 

dfected is nbtsigriific--^ty£.^£j<-;;; •**•;]'z ^ 

'•• E. '-Afisc^aneous^-.V'^/V 

. In accbrdarioawitii sectiorill? of the i 

'/:Ad,--pubUcatioripf'^iEf!..p'ipmidgat^ 

rule was preceded by consultation with 

appropriate advisory committees,... 

independent experts, and Federal " 

departments and agericies, . 

This regulation will be reviewed 8 

years from fee date of prdmulgatiori.: 

This review wiU include an assessment 

of such factors as evaluationof the 

residual health risks, any overlap with 

other programs, the existence of 

alternative methods, enforceability,' 

improvements in emission control 

technology and health data, and the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements: .'"''•_.-

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9 and 

63 

Environmental protection, Air 

poUution control,. Hazardous 

substances, Incorporation by reference, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: November 22,.1994. 

Carol M. Browner, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preariible, title 40, Chapter I ofthe Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as set 

forth below. . 

PART 9—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 9 

continues to read as follows: * 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 1235-13Cy; 

15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 

21 U.S.C331J, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C 9701; 33 

U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311,1313d, 1314,1321, 

1326,1330,1344,1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 

11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975; 

Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243. 246, 

300f, 300g, 300g-l, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g*-4, 

300g-5,300g-6, 300J-1, 300J-2, 300J-3,3°°j*-

4, 300J-9,1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-

7671q, 7542, 9601-9657,11023,11048. 

2. Section 9.1-is amended by adding 

a new entry to the table under fee 

indicated heading iri numerical' order to 

readasfollows: *" .*'*':''.'.

 :

 - l «••. • '.• 

§ 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork -

Reduction Act.

 :

 ; . :. r..:

.,. -. 

40 CFR citation OMB con-

* trol No. *. 

National EmissiohStandards -;;;;';* ••'./•';.<.''y .-• 

; for Hazardous A_,-polluto^.rv;'*';-:-.1'iu"','-"':--;:'/ 

;;.' (or ^ur<»jCateg6ries:':--:• < h)?: "'• 7*. ['\Xjk.33 

*'•'.. . . ^ . • .' * • • V ' ••* * * '•* ' • . •" . • - • * ' • " • 

,-" • ""• * . - .*'** * •• • ' '.•*.,'* • • • ' • , . • " 

: 63.345-63.347

 ;;.V..;*:.„.„_.:A.._.S '•'•'. 206Crt327 
P.18 

Federal Register /Vol. 60, No. 16 /Wednesday, January 25, 1995 7 Rules arid Regulations ... 4963. I 

PART 63—{AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows:. . 

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

2. Section 63.14 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (b) (4) and (5) to read 

as follows: 

§63.14 Incorporation by reference. 

* * . * * * • 

(bj* * * . 

(4) ASTM D1193-77, Standard 

Specification for Reagent Water, IBR 

approved for Method 306, section 4.1.1 

and section 4.4.2, of appendix A to part 

63. 

(5) ASTM D 133.1-89, Standard Test 

Methods for Surface and Interfacial 

Tension of Solutions of Surface Active 

Agents, IBR approved for Method 306B, 

section 2.2, section 3.1, and section 4.2, 

of appendix A to part 63. 

* * * * * • 

3. By adding a new subpart N to read 

as follows: 

Subpart N—National Emission Standards 

for Chromium Emissions From Hard and 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating and 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks 

Sec. 

63.340 Applicability and designation of 

sources. 

63.341 Definitions and nomenclature. 

63.342 Standards. 

63.343 Compliance provisions. 

63.344 Performance test requirements and 

• test methods. 

63.345 Provisions for new and 

reconstructed sources. 

. 63.346 Recordkeeping requirements. 

63.347 Reporting requirements. 

Table 1 to Subpart N of Part 63—. 

General Provisions Applicability to 

Subpart N . 

Subpart.N—National Emission 

Standards for Chromium Emissions 

From Hard and Decorative Chromium 

Electroplating and Chromium 

Anodizing Tanks 

§ 63.340 Applicability and designation of 

sources.' 

(a) The affected source to which fee 

provisions of this subpart apply is each 

chromium electroplating or chromium 

anodizing tank at faciUties performing 

-hard chromium electroplating, .•.''."•'.*' 

decorative chromium electroplating, or 

chromium anodizing;••: ••-

(b)Owners'or operators ofaffected.;.-; 

sources subject to the provisions of this 

subpart must also comply wife fee •; ~_ .-• 

requiremerits bf subpart A of this part,;: 

according to fee appUcabiUty of subpart -

A of "^s part to such sources, as.-;-^jj;. 

identified in Table 1 of this subpart,-? JJJ, 

. (c) Process tariks associated with a f,; 

chroriiium electroplating or chromiuni:;;:. 

anodizing process, but in which neither 

chromium electroplating nor chromium 

anodizing is taking place, are riot subject 

to fee provisions of this subpart. 

Examples of such tanks include, but are 

not limited to, rinse tanks, etching 

tanks, and cleaning tanks. Likewise, 

tanks that contain a chromium solution, 

but in which no electrolytic process 

occurs, are not subject to this subpart. 

An exainple of such a tank is a chrome . 

conversion coating tank where nb 

electrical current is applied. , -

(d) Affected sources in which research 

and laboratory operations are performed 

are exempt from fee provisions of this 

subpart when such operations are taking 

place. •.-•••' 

(e) The owner or operator of an 

affected source subject to fee 

requirements of this subpart is required 

to obtain a title V permit from the -

permitting authority in which the 

affected source is located. 

§ 63.341 Definitions and nomenclature. 

(a) Definitions. Terrris used in this 

subpart are defined in fee Act, in 

subpart A of this part, or in this section. 

For the purposes of subpart N of this • 

part, if the same term is defined in 

subpart A of this part and in this 

section, it shall have the meaning given 

in this section. 

Add-on air pollution control device 

means equipment installed in the 

ventilation system of chromium 

electroplating and anodizing tanks for. 

the purposes of collecting and 

containing chromium emissions from 

thetank(s). 

Air pollution control technique means 

any method, such as an add-on air 

poUution control device ora chemical 

fume suppressant, feat is used to reduce 

chromium emissions from chromiuni 

electroplating and chromium anodizing 

tanks. , 

Base metal means the metal or riietal 

alloy that comprises fee workpiece. 

Bath component means fee trade or.-.. 

brand name of each component(s) in .-•••' 

trivalent chromiuni plating baths. For .; •*, 

trivialent chromium baths, fee bath -.-..•, 

composition is proprietary in most. ,;. . 

cases. Therefore, fee trade or brand, 

name jfor each component(s) can be . 

used; however, the chemical name of 3. 

fee wetting agent contained in that 4 •;•.;,*? 

component must be identified- y

:

yJ3yyy 

Chemicalfume suppressant means ;J 

any chemical agent feat reduces or?-•'£;.;'..-;; 

suppresses fumes or mists at the surface; 

of an electroplating or anodizing bath;"::;; 

another term.for fume suppressant is:;",. 

..mist suppressant.:.-:^>-1;^%iiKs::4y*-:-'U.v-.-

.^Chromic acid means the.coirimon.:.v:^ 

name for chromiuni anhydride (Cr03)r.;<• 

Chromium anodizing means the *• 

electrolytic process by which an oxide 

layer is produced on fee surface bf a 

base metal for functional purposes (e.g., 

corrosion resistance or electrical "•' 

insulation) using a chromic acid 

solution. In chroriiium anodizing, the 

part to be anodized acts as fee anode in 

' fee electrical circuit, and fee chromic 

acid solution, with a concentration 

typically ranging from 50 to 100 grams 

per liter (g/L), serves as fee electrolyte. 

Chromium electroplating or. '• ... 

chromium anodizing tank means fee 

receptacle or container in which hard or 

decorative chromium electroplating or 

chromium anodizing occurs. - •-' 

Composite mesh-pad system means 

an add-on air pollution control device 

typically consisting of several mesh-pad 

stages. The purpose of the first stage is 

to remove large particles. Smaller 

particles are removed in fee second. 

stage, which consists of fee composite 

mesh pad. A final stage may remove any 

reentrained particles not collected by 

the composite meshpad. ,-. 

Decorative chromium electroplating 

means the process by which a thin layer 

of chroriiium (typicaUy 0.003 to 2.5. 

microns) is electrodeposited on a base 

metal, plastic, or undercoating to 

provide a bright surface with wear and 

tarnish resistance. In this process, the 

part(s) serves as the cathode in the . 

electrolytic cell and fee solution serves 

as the electrolyte. Typical current 

density appUed during this process . 

ranges from 540 to 2,400 Amperes'per . 

square meter (A/m2) for total plating 

times ranging between 0.5 to 5 minutes. 

Electroplating or anodizing bath 

means fee electrolytic solution used as 

the conducting -medium in which fee 

flow of current is accompanied.by 

movement of metal ions for the

 ; 

purposes of electroplating metal out of 

the solution onto a workpiece or for.. 

oxidizing fee base iriateri.al.

 : 

Emission limitation mearis,for fee 

purposes of this subpart; fee ' 

concentration of total chromium '..•-"" 

allowed to be emitted expressed iii 

milUgrams per dry standard cubic meter , 

(mg/dscm), or fee allowable surface -' •' "' 

tension expressed indynes per;;.- -*"'"; "\-

centiineter (dynes/ah).''•'••>'•'.'' -•*•->.-'.'--~r ' - •-. 

•Facility meansfeeihajorbr area"';:V .'.; 

' source at which chromium:

 x*,1;' ;,::

".1'•''" 

electroplating or chromium anodizing is = 

•'performed.':-'i;''--;.:^-' '•^vi^v^^'-i'*-

 :;i"* •'."'_..'. 

'Fiberrbed mist eliminator Jnearis an • •'•".': ; 

add-on air pollution^control^deyidethat';. ;. 

removes contaminimts from a gais stream v 

through feemechanisriis of;inertiail •Vsht-^i , 

impaction and Brownian; diiHusioriT!t<;;:'*''j-> <:>. 

These devices are typicaUy installed;,*.;•'•''. ,1 • 

downstrearri^of ariotj_er control device; -;.' .••'•:, 

which serves to prevent plugging, ai)d*f;;; 

1 

w 

I; 

•rt 

J 
P.19 

1 ;;4_64:. -Federal-Register; / Vol/ 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 

consist of one or more fiber beds. Each 

bed consists of a hollow cyUnder 

formed from two concentric screens; the 

fiber between the screens may be 

fabricated from glass, ceramic plastic, or 

. meta l - .-..* '•*•..:.-.'•' • ;•>..' 

. Foam blanket means the type of 

chemical fume suppressant that 

generates a layer of foam across the 

surface of a solution when current is -

applied to that solution. 

Fresh water means water, such as tap 

water, feat has not been previously used 

in a process operation or, if fee water 

has been recycled from a process • * 

operation, it has been treated and meets 

fee effluent giiideUnes for chromium 

wastewater. *.'-•*. 

Hard chromium electroplating or 

industrial chromium electroplating 

means a process by which a thick layer 

of chromium (typically 1.3 to 760 

microns) is electrodeposited on a base 

material to provide a surface with 

functional properties such as wear . 

resistance, a low coefficient of friction, 

hardness, and corrosiori resistance. In 

this process, the part serves as fee 

cathode in the electrolytic cell arid the 

solution serves as the electrolyte. Hard 

chromium electroplating process is 

performed at current densities typically 

ranging from 1,600 to 6,500 A/m^ for 

total plating times ranging from 20 

minutes to 36 hours depending upon 

the desired plate thickness. . 

Hexavalent chromium means the form 

of chromium in a valence state of+6. 

Large, hard chromium electroplating 

facility means a faciUty that performs 

hard chromium electroplating and has a 

maximum cumulative potential rectifier 

capacity greater than or equal to 60 

million ampere-hours per year (amp-hr/ 

yr) . •:- . .,'• ' ." 

Maximum cumulative potential 

rectifiercapacity means thesummation 

of fee total instaUed rectifier capacity 

associated with' thb hard chromium ;•.. • 

electroplating tanks at a facility,,; :-....••• 

expressed in amperes, multiplied by the 

maximum potential operating schedule 

of 8,400 hours per year and 0.7, which 

assumes that electrodes are energized 70 

percent ofthe total operating time. The 

maximum potential operating schedule 

is based on operating 24 hours per day, . 

7 days per weefc 50 weeks.per year, ..*.; 

Operating parameter value means a :; 

• minimum or maximum value yyt-tiJ^.:3': 

established for a control device or "> 

.process parameter which, if achieved by 

itself or in combination with one or * 

more other operating parameter values, > 

determines that an owner oroperator is 

in continual compUance with the - A-.y 

appUcable emission limitationor ^A 

'. staridard.sii)vri-V&v*:^*:4-:-'..::-'v>*»::l^-'v.'':.' 

, Packed-bed scrubber means an add-on' 

air poUution control device consisting 

of a single or double packed bed that 

contains packing media on which the 

chromic acid droplets impinge. The 

packed^bed section of the scrubber is 

followed by a mist eUminator to remove 

any water eritrained from the packedbed section. 

Research or laboratory operation 

means an operation whose primary 

purpose is for research arid 

development of new processes and 

products, that is conducted under the 

close supervision of technically trained 

personnel, and that is not involved in 

fee manufacture of products for 

commercial sale in commerce, except in 

a ae minimis manner. 

Small, hard chromium electroplating 

facility means a facility feat performs 

hard chromium electroplating and has a 

maximum cumulative potential rectifier 

capacity less than 60 milUon amp-hr/yr. 

Stalagmometer means a device used 

to measure the surface tension of a 

solution. 

Surface tension means the property, 

due to molecular forces, that exists in 

the surface film of aU liquids and tends 

to prevent liquid from spreading. 

Tank operation means the time in 

which current and/or voltage is being 

applied to a chromium electroplating 

tank or a chromium anodizing tank. 

Tensiometer means a device used to 

measure the surface tension of a 

solution.. 

Trivalent chromium means fee form • 

of chromium in a valence state of+3. 

Trivalent chromium process means 

fee process used for electrodeposition of 

a thin layer of chromium onto a base 

material using a trivalent chromium 

solution instead of a chromic acid 

solution. . 

Wetting agent means the type of 

chemical fume suppressant that reduces 

fee surface tension of a liquid. J .1 

(b) Nomenclature. The nomenclature 

used in this subpart has the following 

meaning: 

. (1) AMR=fee allowable mass emission 

rate from each type ofaffected source 

subject to the same emission limitation 

in milUgrams per hour (mg/hr).; 

(2) AMR5yS=the allowable mass • 

emission rate from affected sources .*": ' . 

controlled by an add-on air pollution 

control device controlling emissions:; 

from multiplejsources in mg/hr.^;•;; :-

.(3) EL=the appUcable emission??;; >f '\* 

'--tmitatipn.'^m^'eS.M^'in'jni-igianas^.. 

per dry standard cubic meter (nig/:*

 ! ; •-

,dscm).;.-;':.";'.;-i ;•*;'*" i: ;-"-<;*-; ,•:;&-•--.•.'•;.*'?.';'••; 

(4) IAibi_=the Sum of aU inlet duct

 :J -^->" 

areas from both affected arid nonaffected; 

sources in meters squared. '•:• • :':.: •- ---•; •'•-':; • 

(5) IDA-=the total inlet area for all 

ducts associated with affected sources 

in meters squared. 

(6) IDA,.a=the total inlet duct area for 

all ducts conveying chromic acid from 

each type of affected source performing 

fee same operation, or each type of 

affected source subject to the sariie 

emission limitation in meters squared. 

. (7) VR=the total of ventilation rates 

for each type of affected source subject 

to fee same emission limitation in dry 

standard cubic meters per minute 

(dscm/min). 

(8) VRtaic-sfee total ventilation rate 

from all inlet ducts associated wife 

affected sources in dscm/min. 

(9) VRinkur-the total ventilation rate 

from all inlet ducts conveying chromic 

acid from each type of affected source 

performing the same operation, or each 

type ofaffected source subject to the. 

same emission Umitation in dscm/min. 

(10) VR,ot=the average total ventilation 

rate for the three test runs as determined 

at the outlet by means of the Method 

306 in appendix A of this part testing in 

dscm/min. 

§63.342 Standards. 

(a) Each owner or operator of an 

affected source subject to the provisions 

of this subpart shall comply with these 

requirements on and after the 

compliance dates specified in . 

§ 63.343(a). All affected sources are 

regulated by applying maximum : 

achievable control technology. 

(b) Applicability of emission limits. 

(1) The emission limitations in this 

section apply only during tank 

operation, and also apply during 

periods of startup and shutdown as 

these are routine occurrences for 

affected sources subject to this subpart. 

The emission limitations do not apply 

during periods of malfunction, but the 

work practice standards that address 

operation arid maintenance and feat are 

required by paragraph (f) of feis section 

must be followed during malfunctions. 

(2) If an owner or operator is - • -

controlUng a group of tanks with a 

common add-on air poUution control 

device, fee emission limitations of 

paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this •;*.' . 

section apply whenever ariy.one ' 

affected source is operated. The"•'"• 

emission Umitation that applies to the * -

group of affected sources is::

;

 v ..- *"? _•'•" 

(i) The emission limitation identified -

in paragraphs '(c);-(d),'and (e) of this '•'" -

section if fee affected sources are " *> '-"-•' 

performing the same type of operation •' 

(e.g., hard chromium electroplating), are. 

subject to the same emiission'limitatibn,/ 

arid are not controlled by.anadd^'n air V 

pollution control dewcealso controlling 

honaffededsources; -\i;tVv .:..-';'.' 
Federal Register /Vol. %6^,;:,No/^6*./;.^edhesJay,i'.Janaary 25. .1995 ./.Ruies arid,Regulations .4965 . 

P.20 

(ii) The eriiissibri hmitatiori calculated 

according to §63 344(e)(3) if affected \!. •• 

sources are performing the same type of 

operation, are subject to the same : 

emission limitation,' and are controlled 

wife an add-on air pollution control . 

device that is also controlling 

nonaffected sources; and 

(iii) The emission limitation '*.<,"•'-

calculated according to § 63.344(e)(4) if 

affected sources are performing different 

types of operations, or affected sources 

are performing fee same operations but 'J 

subject to different emission limitations,: 

and are controlled wife an add-on air :. > 

pollution control device that may also,., 

be controlling emissions from .. . : 

nonaffected sources. 

(c)(1) Standards for hard chromium . 

electroplating tanks. During tank 

operation, each owner or operator of an 

existing,'new, or reconstructed affected -• 

source shall control chromium 

emissions discharged to the atmosphere 

from that affected source by not 

allowing the concentration of total 

chromium in the exhaust gas stream 

discharged to the atmosphere to exceed: 

(i) 0.015 milligrams of total chromium 

per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) 

of ventilation air (6.6xl0~6 grains per 

dry standard cubic foot [gr/dscf]); or 

(ii) 0.03 mg/dscm (1.3X10-5 gr/dscf) ifthe hard chromiuni electroplating tank 

is an existing affected source and is 

located at a small, hard chromium 

. electroplating facility.- . 

(2)(i) An owner or operator may 

demonstrate the size of a hard 

chromium electroplating facility 

through the definitions in § 63.341(a). 

Alternatively, an owner or operator of a 

facility With a'maximum cumulative , 

potential rectifier capacity of 60 million 

arnp-hr/yr or more inay be considered . 

small if the actual cumulative rectifier 

capacity is less than 60 million amp-hr/. 

yr as demonstrated using the following 

procedures: 

(A) If records show that the faciUty's 

previous annual actual rectifier capacity, 

was less than 60 million ariip-hr/yr, by 

using nonresettable ampere-hr meters 

and keeping monthly records of actual .. 

ampere-hr usage for each 12-mpnfe 

rollirig period following the cornpliance 

- date in accordance with § 63-346(b)(12). 

The actual cumulative rectifier capacity :• 

. for fee previous; 12-monfe rolling period 

'• shallbe tabulated monthly by addirig :• 

fee capacity for the current month to the 

capacities for the previousill'"month's;, 

... {Bjfiyacoepthig a federal -. ;::-

: priforceable limit on: fee riiaxiinuni* f 

curiiulatiye potential rettifier capacity, i 

of a\hard chroirilum electroplating 

facility through the title V permit -

required by § 63.340(e),and by"..':. v '•'."• 

biainfairiirijj monthly ^records in*. •"":' * 

accordance with-.§-63-.346(b)(.12) to " 

demonstrate that the limit has not been 

exceededJThe actual cumulative 

rectifier capacity for the previous 12-

month rolling period shall be tabulated 

monthly by adding the capacity for the 

current month to fee capacities for the 

previous 11 months. 

(ii) Once the monthly records . 

required to be kept by §63.346(b)(12) 

and by this paragraph show: that the 

actual cumulative rectifier capacity over 

the previous 12-month rolling period 

corresponds to the large designation, the 

owner or Operator is subject to the 

emission liinitation identified: in 

paragraph (c)(l)(i) bf this section, in 

accordance with the compliance 

schedule of § 63.343(a)(5). 

(d) Standards for decorative 

chromium electroplating tanks using a 

chromic acid bath and chromium 

anodizing tanks. During tank operation, 

each owner or operator of an existing, 

new, or reconstructed affected source 

shall control chromium emissions 

discharged to the atmospheire from that 

affected source by either:-

(1) Not allowing the concentration of 

total chromium in the exhaust gas ; 

sfream discharged to fee atmosphere to 

exceed 0.01 riig/dscm (4.4x10~

6

 gr/ 

dscf); or -

(2) If a chemical fume suppressant 

containing a wetting agent is used, by 

not allowing the surface tension of the 

electroplating or anodizing bath 

contained within the affected source to 

exceed 45 dynes per centimeter (dynes/ 

cm) (3.1x10~

3

 pound-force per foot (lbf/ 

ft]) at ariy time during operation of the 

tank.' . 

(e) Standards for decorative 

chromium electroplating tanks using a 

trivalent chromium bath.(l) Each owner 

or operator of an existing, new, or 

reconstructed decorative chromium -

electroplating tank feat iises a trivalent 

chromium bath feat incorporates a 

wetting agent as a bath ingredient is -

subject to the recprdkeepirig and 

reporting requirements of . 

§§ 63.346(b)(14) and 63.347(i), but are 

not subject to the work practice . ..'..-

reqiiireriierits of paragraph (f) ofthis 

section, or fee continuous compUance 

monitpririg requirements in § 63.343(c). 

The wetting agent mustbeari ingredient 

':in the tiiyateritchroiniuni bath';?•'•;*.* J ;'•••• 

components purchased from vendors.' 

;; (2 J Each owner or operator of an ; /'; 

exiiting, ribW, orreconstructed J-'JJyj''3 

.decorative chromium eleC-bpiating '* J: 'y 

tank feat uses a tiiv^enf <__;pmiiuri bath 

that does not incorporate a wetting V-VJ. 

; agent as a bath ingredient is subject to J~ > 

the standards of paragraph (d)of this. •;-.-

"section.-'••• '.:• ':. J-'..i:y3yJJ,yy'JJJ••'•''. 

.'. (3) liach owner or operator of existing, 

new, or reconstructed decorative : 

chromium electroplating tank that had. 

been using a trivalent chromium bath 

that incorporates a wetting agent and ' 

ceases using this type of bath niust 

fulfill the reporting requirements of . 

§ 63.347(i)(3) and comply wife the 

appUcable emission limitation within 

the timeframe specified in 

§ 63.343(a)(7). -: 

(f) Work practice standards. The work 

practice standards of feis section 

address operation and maintenance 

. practices. All owners or operators 

subject to the standards in paragraphs 

(c) and (d) ofthis section are subject to 

these work practice standards. . . 

(l)(i) At all times, including periods 

of startup.shutdowfi, and malfunction, 

owners or operators shall operate and 

maintain any affected source, including 

associated air pollution control devices 

and monitoring equipment, in a mariner 

consistent wife good air pollution 

control practices, consistent with the 

operation and maintenance plan 

required by paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section. • . . 

(ii) Malfunctions shall be corrected as 

soon as practicable after their 

occurrence in accordance with the 

operation and maintenance plan 

required by paragraph (f)(3) ofthis 

section. 

(iii) Operation and rnainten.ance -

requirements established pursuant to 

section 112 ofthe Act are enforceable. 

independent bf emissions limitations or 

other requirements'in relevant • 

standards. '. ; -"* 

(2)(i) Determination of whether ,"; 

acceptable operation and mairitenance 

procedures are being used will be based 

on infonnation available to fee 

Administrator, which inay include, but 

is not Umited to, monitoring results; 

review of fee operation.and 

maintenance plan, procedures, and . 

records; and inspection ofthe source. 

'.. (ii).Based on the results of a \. ' . 

determination made under, paragraph 

(f)(2)(i) ofthis section, fee . . ;; 

Administrator may require that an 

owner or operator of an affected source 

make changes fo fee. operation and . * v ' . 

maintenance plan required byparagraph 

(f)(3) of this sectiori for featsource.'* -. 

"Revisions may bejequire'dif the"•;• 

': Administrator finds that fee plan:; : 

(A) Does hot address a malfunction' 

; that has occurred;/••'•.*::•'', ' .*' ..' ,. " 3'' 

\; ;(B) Fails to provide for fee qperatiqn -J. 

of fee affected source; fee air'poUution' ' 

control techniques,' or the control -

1

 'V;.; 

: system and processriibnitoring;.

 :

 - ' *i.*" 

equipment during a malfunction in a '.'.' 

, manner consistent with good air ;• .^y iV-;

!

; 

pollution control practices; or '"'".^'..r.v''-' 
-4966 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 

P.21 

(C) Does not provide adequate . 

procedures for correcting 

malfunctioning process equipment, air 

pollution control techniques, or 

monitoring equipment as quickly as 

practicable. • 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan. 

(i) The Owner or operator of an affected 

source subject to the work practices of 

paragraph (f) ofthis section shall 

prepare an operation and maintenance 

plan to be implemented no later than 

the compliance date. The plan shall be 

incorporated by reference into the 

source's title V permit and shall include 

fee following elements: 

(A) The plan shall specify fee 

operation and maintenance criteria for 

fee affected source, fee add-on air 

pollution control device (if such a 

device is used to comply with fee 

emission limits), and fee process and 

control system monitoring equipment; 

and shall include a standardized 

checklist to document the operation and 

maintenance of this equipment; 

(B) For sources using an add-on air 

pollution control device or monitoring 

equipment to comply wife this subpart, 

the plan shall incorporate the work 

practice standards for that device or 

monitoring equipment, asidentified in 

Table 1 ofthis section,, if the specific 

equipment used is identified in Table 1 

ofthis section; 

(C) If the specific equipment used is 

not identified in Table 1 Of this section, 

fee plan shall incorporate proposed 

work practice standards. These 

proposed work practice standards shall 

be submitted to fee Administrator for 

approval as part of fee submittal 

required under § 63.343(d); 

(D) The plan shall specify procedures 

to be followed to ensure that equipment 

or process inalfunctions due to poor 

maintenance or other preventable, 

conditions do not occur; and 

(E) The plan shall include a ' 

systematic procedure for identifying 

malfunctions of process equipment,.. -.• 

add-on air pollution control devices, 

and process and control system 

monitoring equipment and for 

implementing corrective actions to. 

address such malfunctions. 

(ii) If fee operation and maintenance 

plan fails to address or inadequately 

addresses an event that meets fee " 

characteristics of a malfunction at fee 

time fee plan is initially developed, the 

owner or operator shall revise the 

operation and maintenance plan within 

45 days after such ari event occurs. The 

•revised plan shall include procedures 

for operating and maintaining fee 

process equipment, add-on air pollution 

control device, or monitoring equipment 

during similar malfunction events, and 

a program for corrective action for such 

events."--

(iii) Recordkeeping associated with 

the operation and maintenance plan is 

identified in § 63.346(b). Reporting -.' 

associated with fee operation and. 

maintenance plan is identified in 

§ 63.347 (g) and (h) and paragraph 

(f)(3)(iv) of feis section. 

(iv) If actions taken by fee owner or 

operator during periods of malfunction 

are inconsistent with fee procedures 

specified in fee operation arid • 

maintenance plan required by paragraph 

(f)(3)(i) Of this section, the owner or 

operator shall record fee actions taken .. 

for that event and shall report such 

actions within 2 working days after 

commencing actions inconsistent with 

the plan-. This report shairbe.followed 

by a letter within 7 working days after 

the end of fee event, unless fee owner : 

or operator makes alternative reporting 

arrangements, in advance, with the •-.''-

Administrator. 

(v) The owner or operator shall keep 

fee written operation and maintenance. 

plan on record after it is developed to., 

be made available for inspection, upon 

request, by the Administrator for fee life 

of the affected source or until fee source: 

is no longer subjectto fee provisions of • ' 

this subpart. In addition; if the *• • 

operation and maintenance plan is 

revised, the owner or operator shall • 

keep previous (i.e., superseded) versions 

ofthe operation and maintenance plan 

on record to be inade available for . 

inspection, upon request, by fee 

Administrator for a period of 5 years 

after each revision to the plan. 

(vi) To satisfy the requirements of . 

paragraph (f)(3) of feis section,' fee 

owner or operator may use applicable 

standard operating procedure (SOP) 

manuals, Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration (OSHA) plans, or 

other existing plans, provided the 

alternative plans meet fee requirements 

ofthis section. 

(g) The standards in this section that 

apply to chromic acid baths shall not be ' 

met by using a reducing agent to change 

fee form of chromium from hexavalent 

to trivalent. 

§63.343 Compliance provisions. 

(a) Compliance dates. (1) The owner 

or operator of an existing affected-source 

shall corriply with the emission 

limitations in § 63.342 as follows: '• •.' 

(i) No later thari 1 year after January 

25,1995, if the affected source is a ; 

decorative chromium electroplating •• 

tank; and 

(ii) No later than 2 years after January 

25,1995, if the affected source is a hard 

chromium electroplating tank or a 

chromium anodizing tank. 

(2) The owner or operator of a new or 

reconstructed affected source that has 

an initial startup after Jariuary 25,1995, 

shall comply immediately upori istartup 

of the source. The owner or operator of 

anew or reconstructed affected source. 

that has an initial startup after 

, December 16,1993 but before January 

25,1995, shaU follow the compUance 

schedule of § 63.6(b) (3) and (4)...... 

• - . ' ••-•- . ."-•'..•- . • ••-•• • • 

-.-.-. Contrbl technique: -'•' 

Composite mesh-pad (CMP) 

tern 

Packed-bed scrubber (PSB) 

- — 

-..._> 

s 

TABLE 1 TO §63:342.-*--_OMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS; ;r 

sys-

._ 

-

-

Work practice standards 

1 Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chronic acid 

huildup on the pads, and nb evidence of chemical attack on the structural integrity of the device 

2 Visually inspect back portion of the mesh pad closest to the fan to ensure there 

is no breakthrough of chromic aad mist. 

3 Visually inspect ductwork from tank to the control device to ensure there are no 

4. Perform washdown of the composite mesh-pads tn accordance with manufacturers recommendations 

1. Visually inspect device to ensure there is proper drainage, no chromic aad 

buildup on the packed beds, and no evidence of chemical attack on the structural integrity of the device - v. 

2 Visually inspect back portion of the chevron blade mist eliminator to ensure that 

it is dry and there is no breakthrough ot chromic aad mist • - * 

3 Same as number 3 above 

•J':^"';', '.':•' :.';-•'•. .. 

Frequency 

.1.1/quarter.*.....-. ' ' 

-

2 1/quarter ,r 

3 1/quarter 

4 Per manufacturer 

• » 

1 1/quarter 

*•

 v 

2 1/quarter 

i » 

3 1/quarter ^ 
Federal Register /Vol . 6(T, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 / Rules arid Regulations 4967 

. TABLE 1 TO §63.342.—SUMMARY OF WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS—Continued 

Control technique Work practice standards Frequency 

4. Add fresh makeup water to the top of the packed bed • 

PBS/CMP system 

Fiber-bed mist elirhinatorc 

Air pollution control device 

(APCD) not listed in rule. 

1. Same as for CMP system .....:. 

2. Same as for CMP system .'. :..... : '. 

3. Same as for CMP system ..... 

4. Same as for CMP system : .:.. 

1. Visually inspect fiber-bed unit and prefiltering device to ensure there is proper 

drainage, no chromic acid buildup in the units, and no evidence of chemical attack on the structural integrity of the devices. 

2. Visually inspect ductwprK from tank or tanks to the control device to ensure 

there are no leaks. 

3. Perform washdown of fiber elements in accordance with manufacturers recommendations. 

To be proposed by the source for approval by the Administrator 

4. Whenever makeup is 

. added.' 

1.1/quarter. 

2; 1/quarter. 

3.1/quarter. 

4,. Per manufacturer. 

1.1/quarter. 

2.1/quarter. 

3. Per manufacturer. 

To be proposed by the 

source for approval 

by the Administrator. 

Monitoring Equipment 

Pitot tube. 

Stalagmometer. 

Backflush with water, or remove from the duct and rinse with fresh water. Replace 

in the duct and rotate 180 degrees to ensure that the same zero reading is obtained. Check pitot tube ends for damage. Replace pitot tube if cracked or fatigued. 

Follow manufacturers recommendations ; .* ..... 

1/quarter. 

•If greater than 50 percent of the scrubber water is drained (e.g., for maintenance purposes), makeup water may be added to the scrubber 

basin. • . 

b

For horizontal-flow scrubbers, top is defined as the section of the unit directly above the packing media such thatthe makeup water would 

flow perpendicular to the air flow through the packing. For vertical-flow units, the top is defined as the area downstream of the packing material 

such thatthe makeup water would flow countercurrent to the air flow through the unit. ic'-•***.:' 

c

 Work practice standards for the. control device .installed upstream of the fiber-bed mist eliminator to prevent plugging do not apply as king as 

the work practice standards for the fiber-bed unit are followed. 

(3) The owner or operator of an 

existing area source feat increases actual 

or potential emissions of hazardous air 

pollutants such that the area source 

becomes a major source must comply 

wife fee provisions for existing major 

sources, including fee reporting 

provisions of § 63.347(g), immediately 

upon becoming a major source. 

(4) The owner or operator of a new 

area source (i.e.,-an area source for 

which construction or reconstruction 

was commenced after December 16, 

1993) that increases actual or potential 

emissions Of hazardous air pollutants 

such that the area source becomes a 

major source must comply with the 

provisions for new major sourcies,; 

immediately upon becoming a major 

source-'. ~ •' -",V ' 

(5) An.owner or operator of ari 

existing hard chromium electroplating 

tank or tanks located at a smaU, hard 

chromium electroplating faciUty that ... 

increases itsmaximumcumulative -

-potential rectifier capacity, orits actual .v 

. cumulative rectifier capacity; such that .'•;. 

the facility becomes a large, hard ;-',-.. ±,.:-_ 

chromiuni efectroplatirig fadlity must 

comply with fee requirements of : .. 

§ 63.342(c)(l)(i).for all hard chromium 

electroplating tanksat feefacility no 

later than 1 year after fee morife in •:'-.-.' .-

which monthly records required by • 

§§ 63.342(c)(2) and 63.346(b)(12) show 

that the large designation is met. 

(6) Request for an extension of 

compliance. An owner or operator of an 

affected source or sources that requests 

an extension of compUance shall do so 

in accordance wife this paragraph andthe applicable paragraphs of § 63.6(i). 

When fee owner or operator is 

requesting the extension for more than 

one affected source located at fee 

faciUty, then only one request may be 

submitted for all affected sources at the 

facility. 

(i) The owner or operator of an ., 

existing affected source who is unable to 

comply wife a relevant standard undef 

this subpart may request that fee 

Administrator (or a State-when fee 

State has an approved part 70 permit 

program and fee source is required to 

obtain a part 70 permit under that . 

prograrii, or a State, when fee State has 

been delegated fee authority to .: 

implement and enforce fee emission / Jstandard for that source) grant an '.-J.-3.-_ 

extension aUovwng the owner or, .y_y_s-.3 

operator up to 1 additional year to; :.- „;.-; 

comply wife the standard.for the/X--*^i--:• • 

affected source. The owner or operator r,; i 

of an affected source who has requested \ 

ariexiension of compliance underthis>. M 

paragraph and is ofeerwise required to S.i 

obtain a title V permit for fee source r .; 

shall apply for such permit br'apply to: , • 

have the title V permit revised to 

incorporate fee conditions of the 

extension of compliance. The • 

conditions of an extension of ' 

compUance granted under feis 

paragraph will be incorporated into the 

owner or operator's-title V permit for the 

affected spurce(s) according to the • 

provisions of 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR 

part -71, whichever is appUcable. 

(ii) Any request under this paragraph • 

for an extension of compliance with a 

relevant standard shall be submitted in 

writing to fee appropriate authority not " 

later than 6 months before fee affected 

source's compUance date as specified iri 

thissection. -'.';••*. ' •• 

(7) Ah owner or operator of B T ".:'. v^ ;. 

decorative chromium electroplating • ...* -

tank that uses a trivalent chromium bath 

that incorporates a wetting agent, arid•'.:/:"• 

that ceases using fee trivalent chromium r 

process, must comply with the emission ,...*-, 

limitation now applicable to fee tank*... •_.._• 

within 1 ycaMofswitching.bathv',.!'.,. j;'•'* •'•.' 

operation... ,- \.J'^._.-•-'•-J''S''.y'.-.-'.''.'•'.••'•''•, 

. (b)Methods todemgnstitttainitialJsf^ii *. 

compliance..Q) Except as provided in«i 

;paragraiphs'(b)(2) and (b)(3) ofthis >.-.);:«•'••}•'. 

^ection; an;owheroroperatorofajt •?.-;.;'y. 

Effected,source subject to fee<«^*i-^;Af,'ji.'.••'-• t 

requirepients ofthis subpartis required*:']:: 

to conduct an initial performance test as-, 

-:required:under |§ 63.7, using the*.'*. - J v-
P.23 

4968 Federal Register / Vol. 60, N0M 6 / ;Wedriesday;;^ 

-it • 

i!j" 

V 

ir 

1 

procedures and test methods Usted iri 

§63.7 and §63.344. 

(2) If fee owner or operator of an 

affected source meets all of fee 

following criteria, an initial 

performance test is not required to be 

conducted under thissubpart: 

(i) The affected source is a decorative 

chromiuni electroplating tank or a 

chromium anodizing tank; and 

(ii) A wetting agent is used in fee 

plating or anodizing bath to inhibit 

chromium emissions from fee affected _ . 

source; arid 

(iii) The owner or operator complies 

wife the appUcable surface tension limit 

of § 63.342(d)(2) as demonstrated 

through fee continuous compUance 

monitoring required by paragraph 

(c)(5)(ii) of feis section. 

(3) If fee affected source is a 

decorative chromium electroplating 

tank using a trivalent chrornium bath, 

and the owner or operator is subject to . 

the provisions of § 63.342(e), an initial 

performance test is not required to be 

conducted under this subpart. 

(c) Monitoring to demonstrate 

continuous compliance. The owner or 

operator of an affected source subject to * 

the emission limitations ofthis subpart 

. shall conduct monitoring according to 

the type of air pollution control 

technique feat is used.to comply with 

the emission limitation. The monitoring 

required fo demonstrate continuous7 •••-.. 

compliance with the>emission 

limitations is identifiedin this section 

for fee ah pollution control techniques . 

expected to be used by the owners or 

operators of affected sources. 

(1) Composite mesh-pad systems, (i) 

During fee initial performance test, the 

owner or operator of an affected source, 

or a group of affected sources under 

common control, complying with the 

emissiorulimitations in § 63.342 through 

the use of a composite mesh-pad system 

shall determine the Outlet chromium .'..' 

concentration using fee test methods 

and procedures in § 63.344(c), and shall' 

establish as a site-specific operating 

: .-..parameter the pressure .drop acrossthe 

systerii, setting the value that:.'JJ'...JJ3 ',".'•*. 

corresponds to compUance wife feeIjJJJ, 

applicable emission.limitation,using • ;. 

the procedures in§ 63.344(d)(5):Ari 'JJiM'1 

owner or operator may conduct multiple.; 

J performance tests tp estabUsh a range of 

compliant pressure drop values, or may 

set as fee compliant value the average;'; 

pressure drop jheasured oyer fee threeV; •*= 

test runs of one performance lest and" "-" 

. accept ±1 inch of water-'-column from 

feis vahie.as fee coriipliarif range. 

(ii) Oriand after fee date on which the 

initial performance test is required to be 

: completed under §63.7, fee owner or 

operator of an affected source, or group 

ofaffected sources under coirimon •• 

control, shall monitor arid record fee -

pressure drop across the composite 

mesh-pad system brice each day that 

any affected source is operating. To be 

iri compliance wife fee standards, fee 

composite mesh-pad system shall be 

operated Within ±1 inch of water- : 

column of fee pressure drop value 

established during the initial 

performance test, or shall be operated 

within fee range of compliant values for 

pressure drop established during' ; 

multiple performance tests.".'.' 

(2) Packed-bed scrubber systems, (i) 

During fee initial performance test, the 

owner or operator of an affected source; 

or group of affected sources under 

common control, complying wife fee -

emission limitations in § 63:3.42 through 

the use of a packed-bed scrubber system 

shall determine fee outlet chromiuni 

concentration using fee procedures in 

§ 63.344(c), and shall estabUsh as sitespecific operating parameters fee -

pressure drop across fee system and fee 

velocity pressure at fee common inlet of 

the control device, setting fee value that 

corresponds to compliance with fee 

applicable emission limitation using fee 

procedures in § 63;344(d) (4) and (5). An 

owner or operator may conduct multiple 

performance tests to establish a range of 

compUant operating parameter values. 

:• Alternatively, the owner oroperator 

may set as the compUant value fee '•••'• 

average pressure drop and irilet velocity 

pressure measured over the three test 

rurts of one performance test, arid accept 

±1 inch of water column from fee 

pressure drop value and ±10 percent 

• from fee velocity pressure value as fee 

compliant range. -*•"*' 

(ii) On and after fee date on which the 

initial performance testis required to be 

completed under § 63.7, fee owner or -*; 

operator of an affected source, or group 

of affected sources under common. ; 

control, shall monitor and record fee • 

velocity pressure at fee inlet to fee . i 

packed-bed Scrubber and the pressure 

: drop across fee scrubber system price ;-.. 

eachday feat any affected sourceis 

openfting. To be ih.cbmpliianc<e wife; fee 

• standards, fee scrubber system.shall be 

- operated; withiri ±10 percent of the • •*. -J;j 

• velocity pressure Value established >-.:: 

during fee initial performance test, arid••/. 

; withinitl inch of water:columri bf fee:;i;'-' 

pressure drop value estatUshed diuihg 

fee initial performance testi; ory-rithin;. ' 

-fee rarigeofeoriipUa^ 

parameter values estabUshed;duririg:<';-; 

multipleperforriiancetestsl ^33;.y'3^ 

{3) Packed-bed scrubber/compdsit&JJ 

mesh-padsystem. The bwrier 'otJ-JyyJ/ 

operator of an affected^sori^e^ori^pup;; 

of a ffected sources under; common -vV. j. 

control, feat uses a packed-bed scrubber 

ih conjunctioti with a composite meshpad systemto meet the emission'.'''.' 

limitations.of § 63.342 shall comply 

wife fee riiohitpring requirements for 

composite mesh-pad systems as 

identified in paragraph (c)(1) ofthis 

section. 

(4) Fiber-bed mist eliminator, (i) 

During the initial performance test, fee 

owner or operator of an affected source, 

or group of affected sources under 

common control, complying wife fee 

emission limitations in §63,342 through 

the use of a fiber-bed mist eliminator 

shall determine the outlet chromium 

concentration using the procedures in 

§ 63.344(c), and shall establish as a sitespecific operating parameter fee 

pressure drop across fee fiber-bed mist 

eliminator and the pressure drop across 

fee control device installed upstream of 

the fiberbed to prevent plugging, setting 

fee value that corresponds to 

compliance wife the applicable 

emission Umitation using fee 

procedures in § 63.344(d)(5). An owrier 

or operator may conduct multiple 

performance tests to establish a range of 

compliant pressure'drop values, or may 

set as fee compliant value fee average 

pressure drop measured Over fee three 

test runs of one performance test and 

accept ± 1 inch of water column from 

. feis value as fee compliant range. 

(ii) Oriand after fee date on which the 

initial performance test is required to be 

• completed urider'§63.7, fee owner, or 

operator of an affected .source, or group 

of affected sources under common•'__• 

control, shall monitor and record the 

pressure drop across fee fiber-bed mist 

eliminator, and the control device 

installed upstream of fee fiber bed to 

prevent plugging, once each day that 

any affected source is operating. To be 

in compliance with fee standards, fee 

fiber-bed mist eliminator and the " 

upstream control device; shall be ' 

operated within ± 1 inch bf water : 

column of fee pressure drop value .* 

established during fee initial . .'•"'. 

performance test, or shaljhe operated . 

within the range of corhpliant values for: 

pressure drop established during .\ 

• multiple performance tests... , 

(5) Wetting agent-type or combination 

wetting agent-type)foam blanket fume 

suppressants, (i) During fee initial 

performance te^t, fee bwrier or operator.. 

. of an affected sburce complying wife 

the emissioff liriiitatibris in § 63.342,-.''.';,. 

through the vise of a wettirig agerit'ih fee 

elefctroplatingbr anodizing bath shall; . 

determiriethe outlet chromium '"'_"•__'.'. '.'• :4 

concentratibn using the procedure? in' •; • 

."§ 63.344(c). The owner or.opbratbr,shall, 

establish as the site-specific operating", 

parariieter the surface terisiori ofthe ,'', 

bath using Method 306B, appendix, A of 
Federal Register / Vol. 6Q, ^.1 6 /-Wednesday;-Januairy:25^^ 

this part, setting the maximum value 

that corresponds to compUance wife fee 

appUcable emission limitation. InUeu 

of estabUshing fee maximum surface 

tension during fee performance test, fee 

owner or operator may accept 45 dynes/ 

cm as the maximum surface tension 

value that corresponds to compliance 

wife the appUcable emission limitation. 

However, fee owner or operator is: .:;: 

exempt from conducting a performance 

test only if fee criteria of paragraph 

(b)(2) of tins section are met 

(ii) On and after the date on which the 

initial performance test is required to be 

completed under § 63.7, fee owner or 

operator of an affected source shall 

monitor fee surface tension of fee 

electroplating or anodizing bath. 

Operation of the affected source at a 

surface tension greater than the value 

established during the performance test, 

or greater than 45 dynes/cm.if fee owner 

pr operator is using this value in 

accordance wife paragraph (c)(5)(i) of 

this section, shall constitute 

noncompliance wife fee standards. The 

surface tension shall be monitored 

according to the following schedule: 

. (A) The surface tension shall be 

measured price every 4 houra during 

operation of the tank with a : 

stalagmometer or a tensiometer as 

specified in Method 306B, appendix A 

of this part. 

... IJB) The time between monitoring can 

be increased if there have been no 

exceedances. The surface tension shaU 

be riieasured once every 4 hours of tank 

operation for fee first 40 hours of tank 

operation after fee compliance date. 

Once there are no exceedances during 

40 hours of tank operation, surface 

tension measurement may be conducted 

once every 8 hours of tank operation. 

Once there are no exceedances during 

40 hours of tank operation, surface 

tension measurement may be conducted.-

once every 40 hoursof tank operation 

on an ongoing basis, until an 

exceedance occure. The minimum 

frequency of monitoring allowed by this 

subpart is once every 40 hours of tank 

operation. 

(C) Once an exceedance occurs as . 

indicated through surface tension 

monitoring, the original monitoring 

schedule of once.evejy. 4 hours must be 

resumed. A subsequent decrease iri -•*'.-

frequency shall follow the schedule laidJ 

out inparagraph(c) (5) (ii)(B) of this ».- < 

'•- -section:; Forexampleiif an;bvmeror?i;y •-. 

•operator had beenmonitoring an .-j * ;ii • 

-.affected source once every .40 hours and 

-j Jan.exceedance occurs-, subsequent 3 •_.3 J 

.',.,' monitoring wouldtakei place onceevery-

.... ^hours of tank operation. Oncejin : ; 

, exceedance does notbcc«_pip_40 hours J 

oftank operation; riionitoring can occur 

once every 8 hours of tank operation. .*; 

Once an exceedance does not occur for: 

40 hours of tank operation bri this *;• -:,".v. 

schedule, monitoring can occur once 

every 40 hoursof tank operation. 

• (iii) Once a bath solution is drained 

from fee affected tank and a new 

solution added, fee original monitoring 

schedule of once every 4 hours must be 

resumed, with a decrease in monitoring 

frequency allowed foUowing feeprocedures of paragraphs (c)(5)(h) (B) • 

and (C) of this section. 

(6) Foam blanket-type fume -•'. 

suppressants, (i) During fee initial 

performance test, fee owner or operator 

of an affected source complying with 

fee emission limitations in § 63.342 

through fee use of a foam blanket in fee 

electroplating or anodizing bath shall 

determine fee outlet chrbmium 

concentration using the procedures in 

§ 63.344(c), and shall estabUsh as the . 

site-specific operating parameter fee 

thickness of the foam blanket, setting 

the riiinimum thickness feat 

corresponds to compUance wife fee 

applicable emission limitation. In tieu 

of establishing fee minimum foam 

blanket thickness during the 

performance test, the owner or operator 

may accept 2^54 centimeters (1 inch) as 

fee minimum foam blanket thickness . 

feat corresponds to compUance with fee 

applicable emission limitation, All foam 

blanket measurements must be taken in 

clo^e "proximity to fee workpiece or 

cathode area in fee plating tank(s). 

(ii) On and after the date on which fee 

initial perfonnance test is required to be 

completed under § 63.7, the owner or 

operator of an affected source shall JJy" 

monitor the foam blanket thickness of 

the electroplating or anodizing bath. 

Operation ofthe affected source at a 

foam blanket thickness less than the •_ 

value established during the . 

performance test, or less than 2:54 cm •'-.. 

(1 inch) if fee owner or operator is using -

this value in accordance wife paragraph 

(c)(6)(i) of this section, shall constitute • 

noncompUance with the standards. The 

foam blanket thickness shall be ;. 

measured according to the foUowing ! 

''schedule:---.-.'- -'•-. '•• 'k:."_.;3';'y'yyy•'.•• 

(A) The foam blankettiu'c__iess shall; i 

be riieasured once every 1 hour of tank f 

•operation,'".. •'-.-yJ.-H: ^^WVyi'^'^Jy^^JJ 

(B) The time between monitoring can 

be increased if there have been no'•;-->J$£< 

- exceedances. The ;foamblanket-*i;fp-y3;y^t} 

thickness shall be rriea5siB^bhc*:every^ 

hour of tank operation for the-first 40-*-

hours of tank operation after the-lioSr^ktC. 

oompUance -date. Once there are •rib? '£ - s; 

-exceedances for io^ureb f tank -33 J3 

'•-. Qperationv foam blankefcthic"*taess^%4£ 

measurementtnayiie:condubted-bnce % : 

every 4 hours of tank operatlbhVOnce 0;; 

there tire-no -exeeOTimCiBs-duitag'4f> C"'•• 

hoursof tank operation; fcten\blanket " 

thickness rtieasureinent may be * \~'.". 

conducted once every 8 hburS of tank • 

operation on an ongoing basis, until.an 

exceedance occurs. The riiinimum '• ;-: • 

frequency bf monitoring allowed by feis 

subpart is orice per 8 hours of tankf ;. , 

operation.": •; .:: _;•-''••'-'•;';'•':/': ;''':''"''-\ 

,-.: (CJOnceanexceedancebccbrs,as;-v 

indicated through foam blanket' '••.?•'. 

thickness monitoring, the priginal,••.:'• •• 

monitoring schedule of once every hour 

must be resumed. A subsequent': .>.'~,. 

decrease in frequency shall follow tho 

schedule laid out in paragraph . -

;

 .•':••*;. 

(c)(6)(ii)(B) of this section. For example, 

if an owneror operator had beep".-iss- V 

monitoring an affected source once 

every 8 hours and an,exceedarice.'. •••'* ••' 

occurs, subsequent mon itoring would 

'take/place bnce every hour of tank -,y 

operation. Once an exceedance does not 

occur for 40 hours of tank operation, •• . 

monitoring can occur once every 4:,' . 

hours of tank operation. Once ah.•:.- . 

exceedarice does not occur for,r40 hours . 

oftank operation on this schedule/V,: 

monitoring cari.occuronce every 8 .-*. 

hours of tank operation, A- - :;:••; *. 

(iii) Once a bath solution is drained... 

from the affected tank and a hew ,..'.__'•' 

solution added, fee original monitoring 

schedule of once every hour must be 

resumed, with a decrease in monitoring 

frequency allowed following fee ' "'• 

procedures of paragraphs (c)(6)(ii)1(B) ~ 

and (C) of feis section. -• ••'•''"•'•'•' 

(7) Fume suppressant/add-on.control 

device, (i) If theowner or operator of an 

affected source uses both a fume '• *,- ' 

suppressant and add-on control device 

arid both are heeded to comply with fee 

appUcable emission limit, monitoringrequirements as identified in paragraphs 

(c) (1) through (6) of this section, arid. . 

the work practice standards of Table 1 

of § 63.3427:apply for each of the control 

•techniques used. ',. • ;•'" ••'"'.- ;.•'"':'• •'-•;'•'.' •-. 

-. (ii)Iffee owner or operator of an •;• '••" 

affected source uses both a'fume-J.*?-.!''•. 

suppressant and add-on cpntrbl device, 

tut only one of these techniques is;-

 ;

-

f

<"' 

needed to comply wife fee applicable'<-

emission limit, monitoring requirements • 

as identified in paragraphs (c)(l):*-f;V3;' . 

through (6) of.this section, and worki^i;;-J'. 

piac^ra istandiaixlsbf Table.1-pXf^?- •-•• 1: 

§63i342,,apply.only for fee corit^l:^-"' J"; • 

-.t^__i^e'-^t6'AchleVe''<£iDa^li^c£C'^': 

^'method:/(i)Requests -ridiapp^'valsfqFf'f' *'. 

alterri-tive riteriitbring methods shall be'. 

corisldeiedinaccordance wife ;•-;'i;.

?

;'-.ri;. 

; §63«(f)(l);;(Q(3);i(0(4);:and'{f)(^e^«V 3, 

:i^^ ;i(ii)-After receipt^^and consideration of ..; 

reArappUcatibrifor.an filtefriatiyei.V-'f WAK.. -

-inicmitbririgmefeod;^^feeAdiriiriistratbr ' -

may approve alternatives to* any - •' --}1-

4

 '• 

% 
P.25 

J-***:}' ^i^:& : : tfed^ 60,^b:-a6i^-:W?dnesd_y; ;Japuary?25U 199&. /Rule s arid- Regulations ••'. 

ft-* 

fc 

m

: 

m... 

t i -.-

i; 

riibriitbring methods or prbcedures of • •:. 

tUis subpart iriicluding, but riot limited 

to, feefollbwing: -J 

.-.-•_ (A)^Alternative monitoring . 

requirements when installation or use of 

monitoring devices specified in this 

subpart would riot provide accurate 

'measurements due to interferences 

caused by substances within the effluerit 

gases; Pi*''' -:-

(B) Alternative locations for installing 

monitoring devices when fee owner or 

operator cari demonstrate that - '•'••• 

installation at alternate locations will 

eriable accurate arid representative • 

^measurements,'/'.'..' ;":;';::"

;;'-- jjj^r" * 

'•'•',. (d) An owner or operator who uses ari 

air pollution control device not listed in 

this section shall submit a description of 

fee device, test results collected in 

accordance wife § 63.344(c) verifying 

the performance qf fee device for . 

.reducing chromium emissions to fee 

atmosphere to fee level required by feis 

subpart, a copy of fee operation and 

maintenance plan referenced, iri. ' 

§ 63.342(f) including proposed work 

practice standards, and appropriate 

operating parameters that will be v •>'.'• 

monitored toestablish continuous 

compliance wife fee standards. The 

monitoring plan submitted identifying ', 

..fee continuous Cbriipliarice monitoring 

is subject to the Administrator's 

approval/. 

§63.344 Performance test requirements ; 

and test methods. . 

(a) Performance test requirements. 

Perfoririance tests shall be conducted 

using fee test mefeods and procedures 

in this section and § 63.7. Performance, 

test results shall be documented in 

complete test reports feat contain fee ' 

information required by paragraphs 

(a)(1) through (a)(9) of this section. The 

test plan to be followed shall be made 

available to fee Administrator prior to -

fee testing, if requested. ;i 

(1) A brief process description; 

: (2) Sampling locatiori description(s); 

(3) A description of sampUng end _:'--. *•• 

analytical procedures and any x-JJJ-U-;; -

modifications to standard procedures; 3 

•;_cA4)Te&i!^ts_;jx;r£:^ 

(5) QuaUty assurance procedures arid 

.'• reSUltS|'.,&;_-..:::'y:*: 'i':Ji^-';,;<

;

;s*"4-'.';V;3-- ^J-JTJI 

.. '(6);Recbrds of'.operating coriditionsr.;v 

during the test, preparation of yJ-J^Jl- :.l-

. standards, and caUbration procedures; . 

; (7) Raw data sheets for field sanipUng 

and field and labbratoryianalyses; ij-vi4-

*.*..;' (8) Documentation of.calculations;;•___, "-

;.' andy'Jyj:..fJi J:- • -*; '•^-^••y & :**!-r#t ^/v'*'-'-

(9) Any^pfeermfqimatiori.required. by, 

.tlie't&tirieiihpi^ 

(b)(1) If the owner or operator qf ah: vj 

affected source conducts performance: 

testing at startup to obtain an operating; 

pemit in tiie State iri which fee affected 

source is located, the results''-of such 

testing may be used to demonstrate 

compliance wife this subpart if: 

(i) The test methods ana procedures 

identified in paragraph (c) of this 

section were used during fee 

performance test; 

(ii) The performance test was 

conducted under representative 

operating conditions for fee source; 

(iii) The performance test report 

contains fee elements required by 

paragraph (a)'of this section; and 

(iv) Tne. Owner or operator of fee 

affected Source for which fee 

perfonnance test Was conducted has 

sufficient data to establish the operating 

parameter value(s) that correspond to 

compliance wife the standards, as 

required for continuous compliance 

monitoririg under § 63.343(c). 

,(2) The results of tests conducted 

prior to December 1991 in which 

Method 306A; appendix A ofthis part, 

was used to demonstrate the 

performance of a control technique are 

not acceptable. , '••-.'• r 

1 ; (c) Test methods. Each owner or.: 

operator subject to fee provisions ofthis 

subpart and required by § 63.343(b) to 

conduct an initial performance test shall 

use the test methods identified in this 

section, to demonstrate compliance with 

the standards in § 63.342. 

(1) Method 306 or Method 306A, 

. "Determination of Chromium Emissions 

From Decorative and Hard Chromium. 

Electroplating and Anodizing 

Operations," appendix A of this part 

shall be used to determine fee 

chromium concentration from hard or 

decorative chromium electroplating 

tanks or chromium anodizing tanks. The 

sampUng time and sample volume for 

each rim of Methods 306 and 306A, 

appendix A of this part shall be at least 

120 minutes and 1-70 dscm (60 dscf), 

respectively. Mefeods 306 and 3Q6A, 

appendix A of this part allow the ..":. 

measurement of either total chromium 

or hexavalent chromium emissions. For 

fee purposes of this standard, sources 

using chromic acid baths can; 

demonstrate compUance with fee - ;' 

emission Umits of § 63.342 by-; :. 

measuring either.totalchromiurri or J3 

hexavalent chro*hium^ Hence, fee ;U!r::. 

hexavalent chromium concentration ' :; 

measured by these mefeods is equal to 

fee total chromium concentration for'y:. 

the affected bpemtions^^v^A?"^--'- -

(2) The California Air Resources.- ,--•"•. 

Board (CARB) Method 425 (which is :-

available by contacting fee GaUfornia:;: 

Air Resources Board;^ 1102 Q Street,:. 

Sacrariientp, Califprriiia 95814) may be ;> 

used;tb;determine the chromium*:;:;.'.';;•• 

concentratiori from hard and decorative 

chromium electroplatirig tanks and 

chromium anodizing tanks if fee . 

following conditions are met: 

(i) If a cbloiimetric analysis method is 

used, the sampling time, and volume 

shall be sufficient to ifesult in 33 to 66 

micrograms of catch in fee sampling 

train. .' ''.".' 

(ii) If Atomic Absorption Graphite' 

Furnace (AAGF) or Ion Chromatography 

with a Post-column Reactor (ICPCR); 

analyses were used, fee sampling time' 

and volume should be sufficient to 

result in a sample catch feat is 5 to 10 

times fee minimum detection limit of 

the analytical method (i.e., 1.0 

microgram per liter of sample for AAGF 

and 0.5 microgram per liter of sample 

.for ICPCR). •• - • . 

(iii) In the case of either paragraph 

(c)(2) (i) or (ii) of this section, a 

minimum of 3 separate runs must be 

.conducted. The other requirements of '• 

§ 63.7 feat apply to affected sources, as 

indicated in Table 1 of this subpart, 

must also be met. 

(3) Method 306B, "Surface Tension 

Measurement and Recordkeeping for 

Tanks Used at Decorative Chromium 

Electroplating and Anodizing' 

Facilities," appendix A of feis part shall 

be used.to measure.the surface tension (-

of electroplating and anodizing baths. 

• (4) Alternate test mefeods may also be 

used if the method has been validated 

using Method 301, appendix A ofthis 

part and if approved by the 

Administrator. Procedures for ' : 

requesting and obtaining approval are 

contained in § 63:7(f). 

(d) Establishing site-specific operating 

parameter values. (1) Each owner or' 

operator required to establish sitespecific operating parameters shall •"'

 ! 

follow fee procedures in this section. 

(2) All monitoring equipment shall be 

installed such-feat representative 

measurements of emissioris or process -. 

parameters from fee affected source are ' 

obtained. For monitoring equipment 

purchased from a vendor, verification bf 

the operational status of fee inpnitoring 

equipment shall include execution of ' 

fee manufacturer's written'- •' ''.:'.•..;.•-.' 

specifications or recommendations for . 

installation, operation, and calibration *.,'•• 

.of fee system. '•'.;*;•' ••'*.*'• ..'•"•'• .:'"• •'•• •'"•.',"1,'•,': 

(i) Specifications for differential. ;. , 

pressure measurerrient devices used to":. 

measure velocity pressure shall be iri;"." '• 

accordance wife section 2:2 of Method 

2 (40 CFR part 60,'appendix A),' .";""•'.'"*: ' 

, .(ii) Specification tor differential. '''••'' 

pressure riieasuiement' devices used to •• 

measure pressure drop jacross a control 

systeinshaUbeihaccordaricewith ••;;'*.; 

manufacturer's accuracy specifications. 

(3) The surface tension of

 v':- ; v

'' ' ; 

electroplatirig and anodizing baths shall -
Federal Register /VoL; 60, No^iey-/; Wednesdays January >25;* 1995 .*'/.; Rules arid; Regulations ; 4971 

be measured using Method 306B, ' -••*: 

"Surface Tension Measurement and 

Recordkeeping for. Tanks used at ^ 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating *-.: 

and Anodizing FaciUties," appendix A 

ofthis part. This method should also be 

followed when wetting agent type or 

combination wetting agent/foam blanket 

type fiime suppressants are used to 

control chromium emissions from a 

hard chromium electroplating tank arid 

surface tension measurement is 

conducted to demonstrate continuous 

compUance. 

(4) The owner or operator of a source 

required to measure fee velocity ..'*•-.'.• 

pressure at fee inlet to an add-on air 

pollution control device in accordance 

with' § 63.343(c)(2), shall establish fee 

site-specific velocity pressure as 

follows: 

(i) Locate a velocity traverse port in a 

section o'f straight duct that cbnriects fee 

hooding on fee plating tank or tanks 

wife the control device. The port shall 

be located as close to fee control system 

as possible, and shall be placed a . 

minimum of 2 duct diameters 

downstream and 0.5 diameter upstream 

of any flow disturbance such as a bend, 

expansion, or contraction (see Method 

1, 40 CFR part 60,'apperidix A). If 2.5 

diameters of straight duct work does not 

exist, locate the port 0.8 of the duct 

diameter downstream and 0.2 ofthe 

duct diameter upstream from any flow 

disturbance. 

(ii) A 12-point velocity traverse of fee 

duct to the control device shall be 

conducted along a single axis according 

to Method 2 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A) using ari S-type pitot tube; 

measurement ofthe barometric pressure 

and duct temperature at each traverse 

point is not required, but is suggested. 

Mark fee S-type pitot tube as specified 

in Method 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A) wife 12 points. Measure fee velocity 

pressure (Ap) values for the velocity 

poirits and record. Determine fee square 

root ofthe individual velocity point Ap 

values and average. The ppinf wife fee 

square root value that comes closest to , 

fee average square root value is the 

point of average velocity. The Ap value 

measured for this point during fee 

performance test Will be used as the ' 

reference for future monitoring. 

(5) The owner or operator of a source . 

required to measure fee pressure drop 

across the add-on air pollution control 

device in accordance wife § 63.343(c) 

(1) through (4) may establish the 

pressure drop in accordance with fee 

following guidelines: •'.''* *...,: 

(i) Pressure taps shall be installed at 

any of the following locations: 

(A) At fee inlet and outlet of the '".: 

control system. The inlet tap should be 

installed in the ductwork just prior to 

the control device and the 

corresponding outlet pressure tap 

should be installed on fee outlet side of 

fee control device prior to fee blower or 

on the downstream side of fee blower; 

(B) On each side of fee packed bed 

within the control system or on each ; 

side of each mesh pad wifem the 

control system; or 

(C) On the front side ofthe first mesh 

pad and back side ofthe last mesh pad 

within the control system. 

(ii) Pressure taps shall be sited at 

locations feat are: 

(A) Free from pluggage as possible 

arid away from any flow disturbances 

such as cyclonic demisters. 

(B) Situated such that no air 

infiltration at measurement site will 

occur that could bias fee measurement. 

(iii) Pressure taps shall be constructed 

of either polyethylene, polybutylene, or 

other nonreactive materials. . 

(iv) Nonreactive plastic tubing shall '. 

be used to connect, fee pressure taps, to 

the device used to measure pressure 

drop...-', . . ; . ;. . 

' (v) Any of fee following pressure 

gauges can be used to monitor pressure 

drop: a magneheUc'gauge, an inclined .. 

manometer, or a "U" tube -nanometer. 

(vi) Prior to connecting any pressure 

lines to the pressure gauge(s), each 

gauge should be zeroed. Nb calibration 

of fee pressure gauges is required; 

(e) Special compliance provisions for 

multiple sources controlled by a *,. 

common add-on air pollution control 

device. 

(1) This section identifies procedures 

for measuring fee outiet chromium ;' 

concentration from ari add-on air/ 

poUution control device that is used to ;: 

control -multiple sources that inay or 

may not include sources not affected by 

this subpart.; ?J'J-J'i!-.J.-3:-<:..->J '•'• -3, 

(2) When multiple affected sources V 

performing the same type of operation 

(e.g., all are performing hard chromium 

electroplating), and subject to the same 

emission limitation," are controlled with 

an add-on air pollution control device 

that is not controlling emissions from 

any other type ofaffected operation or 

from any nonaffected sources, fee 

applicable emission limitation 

identified in § 63.342 must be met at the 

outlet ofthe add-on air pollution control 

device. 

(3) When-multiple affected sources 

performing fee same type of operation 

and subject to fee same emission 

limitation are controlled wife a common 

add-on air pollution control device that 

is also controlling emissions from 

sources not affected by these standards, 

the following procedures should be 

followed to determine compliance with 

the applicable emission limitation in 

§63.342: -

- (i) Calculate the cross-sectional area of 

each inlet duct (i.e., uptakes from each 

hood) including those not affected by 

the standard. • 

(ii) Determine fee total sample time 

per test run by dividing the total inlet 

area from aUtanks connected to fee 

control system by the total inlet area for 

all ducts associated wife affected. 

sources/and then multiply this number 

by"2 hours. The calculated tirne is the 

minimum sample time required per test 

run." 

(iii) Perform Method 306 testing and 

calculate an outlet mass emission rate. 

(iv) Determine fee total ventilation 

rate from the affected sources by using 

equation 1: 

VR,^X_ IDA i =VR 

_ > 

inlcl (D 

total 

where VRt a is fee average total '• -

ventilation rate in dscm/min for fee 

three test runs as determined at the 

outlet by means of fee Method 306 

testing; IDA* is the total inlet area for all 

ducts associated with affected sources; 

IAto_i is fee sum of all inlet duct areas 

froiri both affected and nonaffected '.-

, sources; and VR-nie, is fee total •'*./.'* 

ventilation rate frorn all inlet ducts -

associated wife affected sources. _y>.-- . 

.*• (v) Establish the allowable mass ' 

emission rate of fee-system (AMRsys) in 

milligrams of total chromium per hour 

(mg/hr) using equation 2: - ' ' 

1; 

Si 

_£ VRinta x EL x 60 minutes/hours = AMRsys (2) 

where I VR,niei is fee total ventilation 

rate in dscm/min from fee affected 

. sources, and EL is fee applicable 

emission UmitaUon from § 63.342 in 

mg/dscm. The allowable mass emission 

rate (AMRsys) calculated from equation 2 

should be equal to or less than the outlet 

three-run average mass emission rate-. 

determined from Method 306 testing in 

order for fee source to be in compliance 

with fee standard. ' 
P.27 

4972 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday; January 25, 1995 /Rule s and Regulations 

I 

} 

(4) When multiple affected sources 

performing different types of operations 

(e.g., hard chromium electroplating, 

decorative chromium electroplating, or 

chromium anodizing) are controlled by 

a common add-on air poUution control 

device feat may or may not also be 

controlling emissions from sources not 

affected by these standards, or if fee 

affected sources controlled by the 

common add-on air poUution control 

device perform fee same operation but 

are.subject to different emission 

limitations (e.g., because one is a new . 

hard chromium plating tank and one is 

an existing small, hard chromium 

plating tank), fee following procedures 

should be followed to determine 

compliance wife fee appUcable 

emission limitation in § 63.342: 

(i) Follow the steps outlined in 

paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iii) of 

this section. 

•(ii) Determine fee total ventilation 

rate for each type of affected source 

using equation 3: 

.IDAVRt(XX '•" ±VR inkui (3) :£lA10Ud 

where VRu* is the average totalventilation rate in dscm/min for the 

. three test runs as determined at fee 

outlet by means of the Method 306 

testing; IDAi,a is the total inlet duct area 

for all ducts conveying chromic acid . 

from each type of affected source 

performing the same operation, or each 

type of affected source subject to the 

same emission limitation; IAio_i is the 

Sum of all duct areas from both affected 

and nonaffected sources; and VRmieui is 

the total ventilation rate from all inlet 

ducts conveying chromic acid from each 

type of affected source performing fee 

same operation, or each type of affected v 

source subject to the same emission 

•limitation.;.-". ;.-• .-••••• • _-. -

-.-•_ (iii) Establish the allowable niass 

emission rate in mg/hr for each type of 

affected source feat is controlled by the 

add-on air poUution control device 

using equation 4,5,6, or 7 as : 

appropriate:., ; •.;.- .."J... H ''-•-.. '•.-•••••'-'..' 

VRi^i xELhci X 6 0 minutes/hou r = 

;';.AMR*__,...*-> • (4). ; ; ;; , 'v ::•;.' ,J-: / J ••.-'*. 

VR-X:2X'_LIK 2 x 6 0 minutes/hou r = 

-• -;;: ^AMR^-y J{$)yJ^yy-yy-x•••*%;:• 

VRad x ELdc x 60 miriutes/hour =. AMRdc. 

' J-WJJJJ. 3.\J:\'J:-•%'': J.:yJ/.' 

VRca x ELca x 60 miriutes/hdiir = AMR<_ 

J;.v (7);;; ;;.::. : y

,

:.':,v\;;.;\-\;; •;•;'••:• ; 

where A'hc'' applies to fee total of. 

veritilafipii rates for all hard chromium 

ele^ppMmg tanks subject to fee sariie 

emission limitation, ''dc-'appUes to fee,; 

''.total ofyentilation rates for fee- -.*':: Jj *'•-

;

 decorative chrqmiinhbiectrbplatirig . 

tanks, "ca'' appUes to fee total of . 

ventilation rates for the chromium 

anodizing tanks, and EL is fee 

applicable emission limitation from . 

§ 63.342 in mg/dscm. There are two 

equations for hard chromium' 

electroplating tanks beqause different 

emission limitations may apply (e.g., a 

new tank versus an existing, small tank). 

(iv) Establish the allowable mass 

emission rate (AMR) iri mg/hr for the 

system using equation 8, including each 

type ofaffected source as appropriate: 

AMRhci + AMRhc2 + AMRjc + AMRc = 

AMR,,, (8) . 

The allowable mass emission rate 

calculated from equation 8 should be 

equal to or less than fee outlet three-run 

average mass emission rate determined 

from Method 306 testing in order for fee 

source to be in compUance with fee 

standards. *. . 

(5) Each owner or operator that uses . 

the special compliance provisions of 

feis paragraph to demonstrate 

compliance with fee emission * 

limitations of § 63.342 shall submit fee 

measurements and calculations to -

support these compUance methods wife 

fee notification of compliance status -** 

required by § 63.347(e). 

(6) Each owner or operator that use's 

the special compliance provisions of 

feis section to demonstrate compliance 

with the emission limitations of 

§ 63.342 shall repeat these procedures if 

a tank is added or removed from fee 

control system regardless of whether 

feat tank is a nonaffected source. If the 

new nonaffected tank replaces ari 

existing nonaffected tank of the same 

size and is connected to the control 

system through the same size inlet duct 

then this procedure does not have to be 

repeated. 

§63.345 Provisions for new and 

reconstructed sources.;; -'•'"-,.' 

(a) This section identifies fee 

preconstruction review requirements for 

new and reconstructed affected sources 

that are subject to, or become.subject to, 

this subpart.' .'-.*.*•-.:';•oi;*--^;;.?".--'r-.;.";•• '•"-•"••-' 

Q3) New or reconstructed affected ;; 

sources. Theowner or operator of a new" 

or reconstructed affected sourceis 

subject to § 63.5(a), (b)(1), (b)(5), (b)(6), .; 

and (f)(1), as well as the provisions of 

feis'paragraph.^'V*-^:*^^:^*-:^;-;1;' ,*••'.;• 

.*'{(lj Alter January'25;i995; whether or 

not an approved permifprograrn is ;. 

effective iri''fee.'Statbm*.-^m<i'a_4'|-.; . 

. affectedipurcieis (or^-^*&&bej'lbcated; 

.rio personmaycoristrUctariewkffeqted

 ; 

source or reconstruct an 'Effected source 

-..'•subject-to this subpai-t, or reconstruct a. i 

source such feat It becomes an;affected . 

source subject-.to feis subpto, without,; 

submitting a notificaticm;:pf coristniction 

or reconstruction to fee Administrator.;;.. 

The notification shaU contain the. ".,-.. 

information identified in paragraphs (b) 

(2) arid (3) of this section, as; ,.-;,; 

appropriate;., .... ,, . . ....•'...,.-./....'.': 

(2) The notification of construction or 

reconstruction required under . ',- ,...;_ 

paragraph (b)(1) ofthis section shaU. 

.include: ...... . ..••.•.•::..;•.•• 

(i) The owner or operator's nairiei'. ' 

title, and address;.'... . "•..'.." ....'...•. 

(ii) The address (i.e.,: physical ' "/'.'_ 

location) or proposed address of;the ..' 

affected source if different from fee ""J 

owner's or operator's; '.'"'.' 

(iii) A notification of intention to '-. 

construct a new affected source or make 

any physical or operational changes to 

an affected source feat may meet or has 

been determined to meet the criteria for 

a reconstruction'as defined in §63.2; ' 

(iv) An identification bf subpart N of 

feis part as fee basis for fee notification; 

. (y) The expected commencement and -

:

 completion dates bf fee construction pireconstruction; 

(vi) The anticipated date of (initial) 

startup of fee affected source;' • "JJ- 'i 

(vii) The type of process bperatibri to 

be performed (hard or decorative" ':'•"" 

chromium electroplating, or chromium 

anodizing); ' 

(vifi) A description ofthe air . !•-• '* 

pollution control technique to be'u'sed • 

to control emissions from the affected • 

source, such as preliminary design — 

drawings arid design capacity if an add- ' 

on air pollutioncontrol device is used; .* 

a n d • *." • •••'••*• .-'• 

(ix) An estimate of emissions from, the 

source based on engineering '.- -.*••.,'." 

calculations and vendor information on. 

control device efficiency, expressed in- -

units consistent with fee emission 

Umits of this subpart. Calculations of . 

emission estimates should be in . •_••- ••> 

sufficient detail to permit assessment of , 

fee validity of the calculations. -. -:•* ..• • • -: : 

(3) If a reconstruction is. to occur, the 

notification required under paragraph; -

. (b)(1) ofthis section shaU include the,,... 

following in addition to fee infonnation 

required in paragraph (b)(2) of this-j-.,;. 

section: JJ.'-. .-,__•; .'-.- ... ' ^\jJ'..Jj.' y-.j-

(i) A brief description of fee affected'. 

source arid fee.Comppnenfs.tqb'e,',';^,'.,*'_ 

replaced;' ..!7 >v.:.,.-.'.'.5! .'..",".''^.^;,-'\\'.:.T.'.. 

'"• (ii) A.briefdesaiption'bfthepreserit"*. 

and proposed eiriissipri cpntrbl:;.',.-_ '•^j'j,) 

technique, including the infonriatipri >'/' 

required by paragraphs"(b)(2). (yiii) arid

 r ; 

(ix) of this section; 'J-.-..'.""-.*:.--"--'*; ^iv,-)^ • ', 

:".•. (iii) An estimate, of fee fixed capital", -

cost of the replacements arid of. • • '1 

:

 constructing a comparable,entirely new* 

• source;;.;,'.-*.•-.'•-.__ ;yy '.'.-i.:'•;.-.••• v;,. '.r-ijc •' 

. (iv) The> estiinated life of the affected •*• 

Source .altertiielreplacenierits; arid'•• j \V £}'._ 

(v) A discussion pfany ecpnoniic prji • 

technicaiiimitatiqnsjthe $ourcemay.;rt-7. 
Federal Register /Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, .1995 / Rules and Regulations ' 4973 

have in complying wife relevant 

standards or other requirements after 

the proposed replacements. The 

discussion shall be sufficiently detailed 

to demonstrate to fee Administrator's 

satisfaction feat fee technical or 

economic limitations affect fee source's 

abiUty to comply wife fee relevant 

standard and how they do so. 

(vi) If in fee notification of 

reconstruction, fee owner or operator 

designates fee affected source as a 

recoristructed source and declares that 

there are no economic or technical _ 

Umitations to prevent fee source from 

complying wife all relevant staridards or 

requirements, fee owner or operator 

need not submit fee information 

required in paragraphs (b)(3) (iii) 

through (v) of this section. 

(4) The owner or operator of a new or 

reconstructed affected source feat 

submits a notification in accordance 

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

feis section is not subject to approval by 

fee Administrator. Construction or • 

reconstruction is subject only to 

notification and can begin upon . 

submission of a complete notification. 

(5) Submittal timeframes. After 

January 25,1995, whether or riot an 

approved permit program is effective in 

fee State in which an affected source is 

(or would be) located, an owner or 

operator of a new or reconstructed 

affected source shall submit fee 

notification of construction or 

reconstruction required by paragraph 

(b)(1) of this section according to fee 

following schedule: •' 

(i) If construction or reconstruction 

commences after January 25,1995, fee 

notification shaU be submitted, as soon 

as practicable before fee construction or 

reconstruction is planned to commence. 

(ii) If fee construction or 

reconstruction had commenced and 

initial startup had not occurred before 

January 25,1995, the notificatiori shall ' 

be submitted as sobri as practicable 

before startup but no later than 60 days 

after January 25,1995. "... 

'•_.' § 63.346 Recordkeeping requirements. 

v (a)The owner or operator..of eachJ.J:'. 

.. affected .-source'subjectto these .* - . • 

standards shall fulfill all recordkeeping -

I requirerrients outlined in this section; '•'"*•• 

arid irithei Geriet^lPrb visions to4bCFR : 

-part 63, according to fee appUcabiUty of 

subpart A of this partes identifiedin .••' 

;Tablel of this subpart. • ';- 7*H; • !"" • 

';.; (b)Theowrieroroperatbiiof^; ' •".- L 

affected source subject to the provisions 

of feis subpart shall iriairitain the; 

-followingrecords for.such source:, 

(1) irispectiori records for the add-on 

;

 air pollution control devicb, if such"a•'•"•-

device is used, and mbnitoririg i 

equipment, to document that fee 

inspection and maintenance required by 

fee work practice standards of : 

§ 63.342(f) and Table 1 of § 63.342 have 

taken place; The record can take fee 

form of a checklist and should identify 

fee device inspected, the date of 

inspection, a brief description of fee 

working condition of fee device during 

fee inspection, and any actions taken to 

correct deficiencies found during fee. 

inspection. 

(2) Records of all maintenance 

performed on fee affected source, fee 

add-on air pollution control device, and 

monitoring equipment; 

(3) Records of fee occurrence, 

duration, arid cause (if known) of each 

malfunction of process, add-on air 

poUution control, and monitoring * ' ' • 

equipment; 

(4) Records of actions taken during 

periods of malfunction when such 

actions are inconsistent with fee 

operation and maintenance plan; 

(5)i Other records, which may take fee 

form of checklists, necessary to 

demonstrate consistency wife fee 

provisions of fee operation arid 

maintenance plan required by 

§ 63.342(f)(3); 

(6) Test reports documenting results 

of all performance tests; 

(7) All measurements as may be. 

necessary'to determine fee conditions of 

performance tests, including 

measurements necessary to determine : 

compliance with fee special compliance 

procedures of § 63.344(e); ' 

(8) Records of monitoring data 

required by §63.343(c) feat are used to 

dernonstrate compUance with fee 

standard including fee date arid time 

the data are collected; ' 

(9) The specific identification (i.e., the 

date and time of commericement and 

completion) of each periqdof excess 

"emissions, as indicated by monitoring 

data, that occurs during rrialfunction of 

the process, add-on air pollution 

control, "or monitoring equipment; 

(10) The specific identification (i.e., 

fee date and time of commericement 

and Completion) of each period of 

excess emissioris, as indicated by, 

monitoring data, feat occurs during 

periods other than malfurictibn of fee/-..'.-. 

\ procbss, add-on air pollution control; pr;. 

•mbnitbriftgiebuipriierit; j!'_\ * *.i" j'y[ y-j-yjJ \. 

(11) The totalprocess operatingtime ;; 

ofthe affected source during the:"; 

reportmjfperiod; ; '-^fy;J'..'":'_:\ -

:

''jyv;J:J: 

•-.._ (12) Records bf fee artu^lcuimulative;• 

rectifier capacity of hardidri-briiium ;: * 

electf opiating tanks at afadlity ' •"; jj 

expended du^ng each -month ofthe.,.'."' -•• 

reporting period, and the total capacity JJ 

expended fo.date'fpr a reporting period, 

. if fee owner or operator is using fee :•'•;"'.'•_ 

actual cumulative rectifier capacity to 

determine facility size in accordance 

wife § 63.342(c)(2); 

; (13) For sources using fume 

suppressants to comply wife the 

standards, records ofthe date and time 

that fume suppressants are added to the 

electroplating or anodizing bath; 

(14) For sources complying with 

§ 63.342(e), records ofthe bath 

components purchased, wife the 

wetting agent clearly identified as a bath 

constituent contained in orie.of fee 

components; 

." (15) Any information demonstrating 

whether a source is meeting fee 

requirements for a waiver of ••• 

recordkeepingbr reporting 

requirements, if fee source has been 

granted a waiver under § 63.10(f); and 

(16) All documentation supporting 

the notifications and reports required by 

§ 63.9, § 63.10, and § 63.347. 

(c) All records shall be maintained for 

a period of 5 years in accordance with 

§ 63.10(b)(1), 

§ 63.347 Reporting requirements. 

(a) The owner or operator of each 

affected source subject to these 

standards shall fulfill all reporting, 

requirements outlined in feis section 

and in the General Provisions to 40 CFR 

part 63, according to the applicability of 

subpart A as identified in Table 1 ofthis 

subpart. These reports shall be made to 

fee Administrator at fee appropriate 

address as identified in § 63.13 or to the 

delegated State authority. 

(1) Reports required.by subpart A of 

this part and feis section may be sent by 

U.S. mail, fax, or by another courier. 

(i) Submittals sent by U.S. mail shall 

be postmarked on or before the specified 

date. ••'••• • 

(ii) Submittals sent by other methods 

shall be received by fee Administrator • 

on or before the specified date. 

(2) If acceptable to both fee 

Administrator and the owner or . ,. 

operator of an affected source, reports ' 

may be submitted on electronic media. 

(b) The reporting requirements of this \ 

section apply to the owner or operator 

of an affected source when such source 

becomes subject to the provisions of this 

subpart. :3.•'"..',-,;:•'•.::--

:

::.-'h-ui.i-.:.-.-- • 

••• lie) Initial notifications. (l),The b\yncr 

or operator of an affetfed source that has . 

ari initial.startiip before jairiutay.'^Sl • -

:

 % j '.• 

1995, shallribtify fee Administrator in ' 

writing feat the.^source is. subject .to this.!' 

subpart. The hotificatibn shall be -, ; , 

submittedno later than 180 calendar 

days after January 25,1995, anil shall,..;, 

contain the following inforinatipn: ;i, . 

;

 (i) The name, title, and address of the 

owner; or operator; .. .'*' ..•::. C lJj\3^J^ "..\\. 

.'• (ii) The address (i.e., physical; ,

:

 ' . 

location) of each affected source; "•'•"' 
P.29 

4974 ; Feder-1: R^i^ijJ/ Vol-; 60,:;N^ 

ti. 

I 

(iii) A statement feat subpart N of this. 

part is fee basis for feis notification; 

(iv) Identification of the applicable 

emission limitation and compliance . -

date for each affected source; 

(v) A brief description of each affepted 

source, including the type of process 

operation performed; •_• 

(vij For sources performing hard 

chromium electroplating, fee maximum 

potential cumulative potential rectifier 

capacity; 

(vii) For sources performing hard 

chromium electroplating, a statement of 

whether fee affected source(s) is located ' 

at a small or a large, hard chromium 

electroplating facility and whether feis 

will be demonstrated ferough actual or , 

maximum potential cumulative rectifier 

capacity; 

(viii) For sources performing hard 

chromium electroplating tanks, a 

stateinentof whether fee owner or 

operator of an affected source(s) will 

limit the maxinium potential 

cumulative rectifier capacity in 

accordance with § 63.342(c)(2) such feat 

fee hard chromium electroplating 

facility is considered small; and 

(ix) A statement of whether the 

affected source is located at a major 

source or an area source as defined in 

§63.2 . -•"•'.'_• . 

(2) The owner or operator of a riew or ' 

reconstructed affected source feat has - N 

an initial startup after January 25,1995 

shall submit an initial notification (in 

addition to the notification.of. 

construction or reconstruction required • 

by § 63.345(b) as follows: 

(i) A notification ofth e date when 

construction or reconstruction was 

commenced, shall be submitted 

simultaneously wife the notification of 

construction or reconstruction, if 

construction or reconstruction was * 

commenced before January 25,1995; 

(ii) A notification of fee date when ; 

construction or reconstruction was '•-.'•:;-.•_'_ 

commenced, shall be submitted no later 

than .30 calendar days after such date, if 

construction or reconstruction was '--*.:'*.-r' -. 

commenced after January 25,1995; arid ; 

(iii) A>notification of th e actual date -.::: 

of startup of fee source shall be ; " ;,:* 

subriiitted within 30 calendar days after 

such date.- yj sJJ:J5jyy'f'

!

jj:J3:yJjJ'yJ:''lJ 

(d) Notificationjof performance iej&jjj 

(ljThe pwrieror operator of anafferted"; 

.source shall ribtif^ feeiAdriiini^tratbr in1', 

writirigof his qrherintention to;; :JJ'y jjj 

conduct aperfbrinaricetest at ieast60;;% 

calendar;days before the' test is j;; ' ?;'"•';' 

scheduled-to begin-to'jgQdYrfoe'JjtyyljyJjjjJ, 

Admiriistratbr to haviaari observer jjj'y-y. 

present during the testi'Oliservatiori.bf.';•"'• 

fee performance- test byfee ^ J -^ > .' '"•" 

. Adrninistrator is optional.. ''*"''•' " 

(2) In the event fee owner or operator•' 

is unable to conduct fee performance 

test as scheduled, fee provisions of : 

§63.7(b)(2)appi y .;: v :,;;;;:: 

(e) Notification(of compliance status. 

(1) A notification of compUance status 

is required each time feat an affected 

source becomes subject to fee .'..' 

requirements of this subpart. I 

(2) Before a title V permit has been 

issued to fee owner or operator of an 

affected source, each time a notification 

of compUance status is required under 

this part, fee owner or operator of an 

affected source shall submit to fee 

Administrator a notification of ' , ;. 

compliance status, sighed by the!.. 

responsible official (as defined in § 63.2) 

who shall certify its accuracy,, attesting 

to whether fee affected source has . 

complied with this subpart. After a title 

V permit has been issued to the owner 

or operator of an affected source, fee 

notification of compUance status shall 

be submitted to fee appropriate -

permitting authority. The notification 

shall list for each affected source: 

(i) The appUcable emission limitation 

and fee methods feat were used to 

determine compliance wife this 

limitation; 

(ii) If a performance test is required by 

feis subpart • fee test report ;-:: 

documenting the results"'of.the •;",'*'" 

performance test,,which.contains fee 

elements required by § 63.344(a), 

including measurements and .', 

calculations to support fee special 

compUance provisions of § 63.344(e) if 

these are being foUowed; ..••.''•..'... 

(iii) The type and quantity of ','-.''' 

hazardous.air pollutants eiriitted^by fee 

source ..reported in mg/dscm or mg/hr. if 

fee source is using the special. 

provisions of § 63.344(e) to comply wife 

fee standards. (If fee owner or operator 

is subject to .fee construction and 

.reconstruction provisions'of § 63.345 

and had previously submitted'emission . 

estimates, fee ownerbrpperator shaU 

state feat tins report corrects or verifies 

tha previous estimate.) For sources riot 

required fb conduct-a performance test 

in accordance wife §63,343(b), fee 

surface tension measurement may fulfill 

this requirerrierit;;. JjJJy-3i1yJJy3. .v*'-v:','.,.*' 

-. (iy) For eachmorutoredparariieter fpr; 

which a compliantValue.istohe"':'. JyJ.Jj 

established under § 63343(c), fee, J';V

 : 

specific operating. pararfletiM^yalue,';or'•<-.'• 

.range of-'values'; "that .qor^Jipii!_s;.tOy;:

v^ 

cx>mpl^ce ^titthe.appUoM : 

: eriiissiari'lii^;'^.:'5;'?:i;^ 

• (v) Thejriiefebds'feai wilthi?.'lisedlp: j' '._ 

determme:cbritiriupu^CQmpl^ce^, ^ , 

• indud^g'a*descriptionpf;moiu 

and reporting requirements, if mefebds 

differ/frorri those identified m'this; ;;:.^ 

subpart;'''"- :i.-:_---:- *••-• ,-.*••- -••.:'•• 

(vi) A description of fee air pollution 

control technique for each emission . , 

point ; • ':.;••*-. •;.- •;.'., .•:. ... ..• ; i 

(vii) A statement feat fee owner or 

operator has completed and has on file . 

the operation and maintenance plan as 

required by fee work practice standards • 

in '§ 63.342(f);".,;..'• 

(viii) If fee owner or operator is 

determining faciUty size based on actual 

cumulative rectifier capacity in 

accordance wife § 63.342(c)(2), records, • 

to support thatthe facility is smaU. For 

existing sources, records from any 12-" 

month period preceding fee compUance. 

date shall be used or a description of , 

h ow operations will change to meet a 

small designation shall be provided. For 

new sources, records of projected . 

rectifier capacity for the first 12-month . 

period of tank operation shall be used; 

(ix) A statement h y fee owner or 

operator ofthe affected source as to 

whether fee source has complied with 

fee provisions of feis_ubpart. 

(3) For sources required to conduct a 

performance test by § 63.343(b), the 

notification of compliance status shall. • 

be submitted to fee Administrator no . 

later than 90 calendar days following. 

completion of fee compliance • 

demonstration required by § 63.7 and 

§ 63.343(b). ... ' 

(4) For sources feat are not required 

to complete a performance test in 

accordance wife'§ 63.343(b), fee 

. notification of compliance status shall 

be submitted to the Administrator no . 

later than 30 days after, fee cornpliance 

date specified in § 63;343(a). . 

(f) Reports of performance test results. 

(1) Before a title V permit has been • 

issued to fee owner or operator of an 

affected source, fee owner or operator 

shall report to fee Administrator fee 

results of any performance test . 

conducted as required by § 63.7 or. 

§ 63.343(b). After a title Vpermithas'. ' '_. 

been issued to fee owner or operatorpf 

an affected source, fee owner or:,.;_',"' V'"' , 

operator should report performance test. 

results to the appropriate perrnitting.-.' . . 

authority:..:•.;;• 'r,:-; >>; -

:

.*:j ••? -... -..:- -;:;v.s; "**,,:, .-

(2) Reports ofperfbrriiance test results•'••-. 

shall he submitted rio later than 90 days-; 

following fee completion ofthe -, A- -v r >. 

performance test, arid shall be submitted .' 

as pari pf the notification of compUance^. 

status re^uh-ed by .paragraph (e) of this,'...-: ; 

secii6aJ.y:*J.J_ j._j. j-'^•^.yyj'lyi: jJ.^J 

. (g) Ongoing"complianceJstqtustneppris':.. 

fqrmajor. sources. uJ.The owner .or : --.v*' , 

operator of an^ affected.source that is,, -,-;; 

located at a majbr source site shall!. •.;. :i\., 

submit a summary/report tp fee'.",'.\.;.-"v^<;'- ">' 

Administratpr to document the ongoing '.' 

. compliance katuisbf.fee. affected.-.soi_^;j'..; 

The report shall gontairi fee irifprrriatipn. 

identified in paragraph (g)(3) ofthis ' 
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January .25, 1995.7-Rules and Regulations-.4975 

section, and shall be submitted 

, semiannually except when: 

(i) The Administrator determines on a 

case-by-case basis feat more frequent 

reporting is necessary to accurately 

assess fee compliance status ofthe 

source; or 

(ii) The monitoring data collected by 

fee owner or operator ofthe affected 

source in accordance wife § 63.343(c) 

show feat fee emission limit has been 

exceeded, in which case quarterly 

.*• reports shall be, submitted. Once an 

owner or operator of an affected source 

reports an exceedance, ongoing 

compliluice status reports shall be 

- submitted quarterly until a request to 

. reduce reporting frequency under

 ; 

paragraph (g)(2) ofthis section is 

approved. 

(2) Request to reduce frequency of 

ongoing compliance status reports, (i) . 

An owner or operator who is required 

to submit ongoing compliance status 

reports on a quarterly (or more frequent 

basis) may reduce fee frequency of 

reporting to semiannual if all ofthe 

following conditions are met: 

(A) For1 full year (e.g., 4 quarterly or 

12 monthly reporting periods), the 

ongoing compliance status reports 

demonstrate that the affected source is 

in compliance with the relevant 

emission limit; 

(B) The owner or operator continues 

to comply wife all appUcable 

recordkeeping and monitoring 

requirements of subpart A ofthis part 

and this subpart; and 

(C) The Adrninistrator does not object 

to a reduced reporting frequency for fee 

affected source, as provided iri 

paragraphs (g)(2) (ii) and (iii) ofthis 

section. 

(ii) The frequency of submitting 

ongoing compUance status reports may 

be reduced only after fee owner or 

operator notifies fee Administrator in 

writing of his or her intention to make 

such a change, and fee Administrator 

does not object to fee intended change. 

In deciding whether to approve a 

•- reduced reporting frequency, the 

Administrator may review infonnation 

concerning fee source's entire previous 

performance history during fee 5 r-year 

A recordkeeping period prior to fee 

intendedchange, or fee recordkeeping 

period since fee source's compUance 

, date,-whichever is shorter. Records .. 

subjerttoreviewnriay include V -

.; : perfonriarice test results, monitoring -

i data, end evaluations of'an owner or <Jy 

:

;

 operator's conformance with emission 

N.-Unutatiori's and work practice standards. 

Such information may be used by fee 

Admiriistrator to make a judgment about 

fee source's potential for 

noncompliance in fee future. If fee 

Administrator disapproves the owner or 

operator's request to reduce reporting.* 

frequency, fee Administrator wiU notify 

fee owner or operator in writing within .'• 

45 days after receiving notice ofthe 

owner or operator's intention. The 

notification from fee Administrator to 

the owner or operator will specify fee 

grounds on which fee disapproval is 

based- In fee absence of a notice of 

disapproval within 45 days, approval is 

automatically granted. 

(iii) As soon as fee monitoring data 

required by § 63.343(c) show that fee _ 

source is not in compUance with fee 

relevant emission Umit, the frequency of 

reporting shaU revert to quarterly, and 

the owner shall state this exceedance in 

fee ongoing compliance status report for 

the next reporting period. After 

demonstrating ongoing compliance wife 

fee relevant emission Umit for another 

full year, fee owrier or operator may 

again request approval from the 

Administrator to reduce fee reporting 

frequency as allowed by paragraph (g)(2) 

of this section. 

(3) Contents of ongoing compliance • 

status reports. The .owner or operator of 

an affected source for which compUance 

monitoring is required in accordance 

with § 63.343(c) shall prepare a 

summary report to document fee 

ongoing compliance status ofthe source. 

The report must contain fee following 

iriformation: 

(i) The company name and address of 

fee affected source; 

(ii) An identification ofthe operating 

parameter feat is monitored for 

compUance determination, as required 

by § 63.343(c); •". • ' 

(iii) The relevant emission limitation 

for fee affected source, and fee 

operating parameter valuei or range of

 r 

values, that correspond to compUance 

wife this emission limitation as 

specified in fee notification of 

compUance status required by 

paragraph (e) of this section; ;: 

(iv) Trie beginning and ending dates 

ofthe reporting period;, -:'; 

v{v) A description ofthe type of "; 

process performed in fee affected 

source; .-•.-.•- y-;_-

(vi) The total operating time of the 

affected source during the reporting r : 

period;' .,-"'1"-'- .:•?•.•..-..•. yJyyy J J-y_ J; j-

(vii) If fee affected source is a hard 

chromium electroplating tankOand the 

owner oroperator is limitingthe'TTy JJJ. 

niaximurii cumulative^^rebtifiOT capacity; 

iri accordance wife § 63.342(e](2);fee J3 

• actual cumulative rectifier-capacity \ ••''J 

expended dining fee repottingpOTod;^;.; 

bri a month-hy-month-basis;:'Jj^y.J. H-: •-;• 

(viii) A summary of operating'•_'/.Jv-. 3"; 

parameter values, including fee total 

duration of excess emissions during fee 

reporting period as indicated by those 

values, fee total duration ofexcess '< \. 

emissions expressed as a percent of fee 

total source operating time duriiig feat 

reporting period, and a.breakdown of 

fee total duration of excess emissions 

during fee reporting period into those 

that are due to process upsets, control 

equipment malfunctions, other known 

causes, and unknown causes; 

(ix) A certification by a responsible 3 

official, as defined in § 63.2, feat fee : 

work practice standards in § 63.342(f) 

were foUowed in accordance wife the 

operation and maintenance plan for fee 

source; 

(x) If fee operation and maintenance 

plan required by § 63.342(f)(3) was not • 

followed, an explanation ofthe reasons 

for not foUowing the provisions, an 

assessment of whether any excess 

emission arid/or parameter monitoring 

exceedances are beUeved to have 

occurred, and a copy of the report(s) 

required by § 63.342(f)(3)(iv) ., 

documenting that the operation and 

maintenance plan was not followed;-, 

(xi) A description of any changes in 

monitoring, processes, or conbrols since 

fee last reporting period; 

(xii) The name,.title, and signature of 

the responsible official who'is certifying 

the accuracy of fee report; and 

(xiii) The date ofthe report., -

(4) When more than one monitoring 

device is used.to comply wife fee . 

continuous compUance monitoring • -

required by § 63.343(c), the owner or 

operator shaU report fee results as ,;' -

required for each monitoring device. . ,.' . 

However, when one monitoring device 

is used as a backup for fee primary 

monitoring device, fee owner or . 

operator shall only report the results 

from fee monitoring device used to meet 

the monitoring requirements of this., 

subpart. If both devices are used to meet 

these requirements, then fee ownef or 

operator shaU report fee results from ' -

each monitoring device for fee felevanfcompUance period. 

(h.) Ongoing compliance status reports 

for area sources.JThe requirements of-;-.' -'• 

this paragraph do not alleviate affected, . ;*-*•. 

area sources fromcomplying with the ;.. 

requirements of State or Federal. -,/•••*. •'__' '-i .•'} 

operatingpennitprogranisunder40 "... 

.CFRfart7i.u3j-.-./y-...y\3 ."4..".-.V.'•-.;•' 

' (1) The owner or operator of an ..:*^ •'. • ": 

affected source that is located atari area' • •:

 ? 

source site shall prepareiaJs\mrn^•JJ~JlJ'•^j•-••;^^ -•• 

.report to document fee ongoingjy-^y ft?}; 

compliance status of the affected source; ;. •'. 

The report shallcontairi fee^irifonriatibn.; k;;li~~ 

identified in: paragraph^'(g)(3);'of this y >-J? j.-; -;| * "J-". 

.section; shailhe cbmpleted.arihualiy '• il •':..." 

and retained onsite, and made a vailablpV •:.'•'; 

- to fee Admiriistrator upon request: The^. /,''" : "• 

report shall be completed annually •. >: 
P.31 

k'V':*.---^ 

•£: -

{ 

* j. 

except as provided in paragraph (h)(2) • 

ofthis section, -y-- --J-* .--J -*y;y'" ''' "•'•'•''• 

(2) Reports of exceedances. (i) If both 

ofthe following conditions are.met',- ~ - '? 

. sehiiannual reports shall be prepared 

and submitted to fee Administrator: 

(A) The total duration of excess 

emissions (as indicated by fee : 

riionitoring data collected by fee owner 

or operator of fee affected source in *• 

accordance wife § 63.343(c)) is 1 

percent of greater of the total operating'

 : 

time for fee reporting period; and 

(B) The total duration of malfunctions 

of fee add-on air pollution control y 

device and monitoring equipment is 5 

percent or greater bf the total operating 

-time.'."!* - - .-.-....;•: ;.,::-.-;•::.-'.- •;.-.-;•=••-.•••.>*.....v .-.._. 

(ii) Once an bwrier or operator of an 

affected source reports an exceedance as 

defined in paragraph (h)(2)(i) ofthis 

section, ongoing coiripUance status";-

reports shall be. submitted semiannually 

until arequest to reduce reporting 

frequency uiiderparagraph (h)(3)offeis 

section is approved • '>' 

(iii) The Administrator may determine 

on a case-by-case basis that fee 

summary report shall be completed 

more frequently and subhiitted, or that 

" fee annual report shall.be submitted 

instead of being retained on site, if these • 

measures are necessary to accurately 

-assess fee compliance status of the , 

source. • • ••• ""• -:.'*•'.:'••*' '••-. 

(3) Request to reduce frequency of 

ongoing compliance status reports.-(i) 

An owneror operator who is required 

to submit ongoing compliance status * 

reports on a semiannual (or more 

frequent) basis, or is required fb subriiit 

its annual report instead bf retaining it 

On site, may reduce fee frequency of 

reporting to annual and/or be allowed to. 

maintain fee annual report onsite if all 

of fee following conditions are met: .' 

(A) For 1 full year (e^g,, 2 semiannual 

or 4.quarterly •reporting periods), fee \ 

ongoing compliarice status reports 

demonstrate that fee affected source is * 

in compliance wife fee relevant 

emissionJimit, 

(B) The owner or operator continues 

to comply wife all applicable 

recordkeeping and monitoring 

:

'requirements of subpart A of-this part ' 

and this subpart; and y*-^ 

:'• (C) The Administrator does not object 

to a reduced reporting frequency for fee 

affectedsource, as provided in 

paragraphs (h)(3) (ii) and (iii) of feis 

section. - •*• •;-

(ii) The frequency of submitting 

ongoing compUance status reports may 

be reduced only after the owner or 

operator notifies fee Administrator in 

writing of his or her intention to make 

such a change, and fee Administrator 

does riot object to fee intended change. 

In deciding whether to approve a 

reduced reporting frequency, the 

Administrator may review infonnation 

concerning the source's previous 

performance history during the 5-year 

recordkeeping period prior to the 

intended change, or fee recordkeeping 

period since the source's compUance 

date, whichever is shorter. Records 

subject to review may include 

performance test results, monitoring 

data, and evaluations of an owner or 

operator's conformance with emission 

limitations and work practice standards. 

Such information may be used by fee 

Administrator to make a judgement 

about fee source's potential for 

noncompUance in the future. If the 

Administrator disapproves the owner or 

operator's request to reduce reporting 

frequency, fee Administrator will notify 

the owner or operator in writing within 

45 days after receiving notice ofthe . 

owner or operator's intention. The 

notification from the Administrator to 

the owner or operator will specify the 

grounds on which fee disapproval is. 

based. In the absence of a notice of 

disapproval within 45 days, approval is 

automatically granted. . 

, (iii) As soon as fee monitoring data 

required by § 63.343(c) show that the . 

source is not in compliance wife fee . 

relevant emissionJimit, fee frequency of 

reporting shall revert to semiannual,.-, 

and feeowner shall state this '.-**• 

exceedance in fee ongoing compliance 

status report for fee next reporting 

period After demonstrating ongomg 

compliance with fee relevant emission 

limit for another full year, fee owner or 

operator may again request approval 

from fee Administrator to reduce the 

reporting frequency as allowed by 

paragraph (h)(3) of this section. 

: (i) Reports associated with trivalent 

chromium baths. The requirements of. 

feis paragraph do not alleviate affected 

sources from complying wife fee 

requirements of State or Federal 

operating permit programs under title V. 

Owners or operators complying wife fee 

provisions of § 63.342(e) are not subject 

to paragraphs (a) through (h) of feis 

section, but must instead submit fee 

following reports: ' • 

(1) Witinn 180 days after January 25, 

1995, submit an initial notification that 

includes: 

(i) The same information as is 

required by paragraphs (c)(1) (i) through, 

(v) of this section; and 

(ii) A statement feat a trivalent 

chromium process that incorporates a 

wetting agent will be used to comply 

wife § 63.342(e); and r 

(iii) The list of bath components that 

comprise fee trivalent chromium bath, 

wife the wetting agent clearly . • '." 

identified; and -, 

(2) Within 30 days of the compliance 

date specified in § 63.343(a), a 

notification of compliance status that 

contains an update of the information 

submitted in accordance wife paragraph 

(i)(l) of this section or a statement that 

the information is still accurate; and 

(3) Within 30 days of a change to tlie 

trivalerit chromiuni electroplating 

process, a report that includes: • . " 

(i) A description of the irianner in 

which fee process has been changed 

and the emission limitation, if anyi now 

applicable to the affected source; 

(ii) If a different emission limitation, 

applies, the applicable information '• 

required by paragraph (c)(1) ofthis 

section;and •. y 

(iii) The notification arid reporting 

requirements of paragraphs (d), (e), (f), 

(g), and (h) of this section, which shall 

be submitted lrfaccordance with the 

schedules identified in those 

paragraphs 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART N OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N 

General provisions 

. reference 

631(a)(1) _. . , „ 

631(a)(2) 

631(a)(3) 

631(a)(4) 

631(a)(6) 

631(a)(7) 

631(a)(8) 

Applies to 

subpart N 

Yes . 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Comment " , 

Additional terms defined in §63 341, when overlap between subparts A and N occurs, subpart N 

takes precedence 

Subpart N clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to sources subject to subpart 

N 
j

,'-Erf^.al'-ji^-rter--/-ypi^ 

TABLE t-TO SUBPARTN OF PART 63.-^GENERAL PROVISIONS -AppL4CABiuTYt660BPARTN-riContinued 

General provisions. 

reference 

63.T(a)(10).. 

63.1(a)(11) ;__..„ 

63.1(a)(12H14) 

63.1(b)(1) 

63.1(b)(2) '-_.— 

. 63.1(b)(3) _ 

63.1(c)(1) 

63.1(c)(2) 

63.1(c)(4) 

63.1(c)(5) 

63.1(e) ,;„; 

63^2 

63.3 .... 

63.4 .... 

63.5(a) 

63.5(b)(1). 

63.5(b)(3), 

63.5(b)(4), 

63.5(b)(5)....: ..... 

63.5(b)(6) •..„.,.:..'. 

63.5(d)(1)(i) _____ 

63.5(d)(1)(ii) „.... ...... 

63.5<d)(1)(iii) ............. 

63.5(d)(2)........ 

63.5(d)(3M4) ~» ». 

63.5(e)-....:...-...:..:.: 

63.5(0(1) ..-'..-

63.5(f)(2) ;_•;..„ 

63.6(a) -.:.:.-.. 

63.6(b)(1)-(2) .... 

63.6<b)(3M4) ..-.. 

63.6(b)(5)....; 

63.6(b)(7)..._..,.. 

63.6(c)(1H2) J63.6(c)(5) .. . . 

53.6(e) .. . _• 

€3.6(0(1) 

63.6(f)(2)0H") • 

63.6(f)(2)(ui) .._.. 

63.6(f)(2)dv) . . 

63.6«)(2)(v) 

63;6(0(3) 

•i 63.6(g) 

y 63.6(h) 

63.6(0(1) _ 

,::: 63.6(0(2) 

^;.63,6(0(3) 

3,63.6(0(4)0)^..... 

63.6(i)(4)(i.) : 

63.60X5) 

63.6(0(6)0).-

-63.6(i)(6)(n)-... 

63,6(0(7) 

Applies to 

• subpart N 

Yes 

Yes ._.„TM.„ 

Yes 

No ^_.„_TM„ 

Yes ;'-.'.• 

No „__.__,_.; 

Yes„ '_ 

yes ...._....-.. 

Yes" 

No :..,.......:_.. 

Yes 

yes ...,.:. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No.. 

Yes.:-

Yes 

No . 

Yes 

Yes „... 

- <^' 

Yes .:._ 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

N o -

Yes 

Yes.. 

Yes 

Yes 

No_ 

Yes 

No.. 

No.. 

No.. 

Yes 

N o -

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No.. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No„ 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

* Comment 

§ 63.347(a) of subpart N also allows report submissions via fax and on electronic media-

§63-340 of subpart N specifies applicaWiity. ••.••-'•-._•-.••' 

This provision in subpart A is being:deleted. Also;all affeded area and-major sources-are subject 

to subpart N; there are no exemptions.; 

Subpart N clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to sources subject to subpart 

N - .'..-/, . .-:• . ' .. '•••'•.••. ->.3 -••"•" •.•*. ' • ...- : 

Subpart N specifies permit requirements for area sources. *., . 

Subpart N clarifies that an area source that becomes a major source is subject to the requirements for major sources. . : 

Additional terms defined in §63.341; "when overlap between subparts A and N occurs, subpart N 

takes precedence. --'-' . _'-.*•..•-.'• . 

Other units used in subpart N are defined in that subpart. •'".:'•• 

Except replace the term "source" and "stationary source" in § 63.5(a)(1) and (2) of subpart A with 

. "affected resources." 

Applies only to major affected sources. ,.*.'"• . 

Subpart N (§63.345) specifies requirements for the notification of construction or reconstruction 

for affected sources that are not major. 

§ 63.345(c)(5) of subpart N specifies when the application or notification shall be submitted. 

Applies..to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed. 

Except information should be submitted with the Notification of Compliance Status required by 

§ 63.347(e) of subpart N. 

Applies to major affeded sources that are new or reconstructed except (1) replace "source" In 

§ 63.5(d)(2) of subpart A with "affected source"; and (2) actuat control efficiencies are submitted 

with the Notification of Compliance Status required by § 63.347(e). 

Applies to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed.' 

Applies to major affected sources that are new or reconstructed. '•-" 

Except replace "source" in §63.5(f)(t) of subpart A with "affected source." 

New or reconstructed affected sources shall submit the request for approvalof construction or reconstruction under §63.5(f) of subpart A by the deadline specified in § 63.345(c)(5) of-subpart 

N . •'•" - '*' .':'; .-.' '_ •' - ' / .. ,- ' ' • '•' .. 

Except replace "source" In §63.6(b)(1>-<2) of part A with "affected source." 

Except replace "source" in §63.6{b)(5).of subpart A with "affected source." - : 

Provisions for new area sources that become major sources, are contained.in §63.343(a)(4) of 

subpartN. . J ^ ••.-.•• •yJ--.... •;.--..'•. -..-J....•'.-.•'-.:• 

Except replace "source" in _ 63.6(c)(1H2) of subpart A with "affected source " 

Compliance provisions tor existing area sources that become*-major sources are contained m 

- § 63.343(a)(3) of subpart-N. 

§63.342(0 of subpart -N contains -wortc practice standards (operation1 and-maintenance require-* 

tnents) that override these provisions. 

§63 342(b) of subpart N specifies when the standards apply 

§ 63.344(b) of subpart N specifies instances in which previous performance test results for existing sources are acceptable. 

Subpart N does not contain any opacity or visible emission standards. - ' - *.-*-• 

Except replace "source" in § 63.6(0(2)0) and («) of subpart A with "affected source." •;'•-• ' 

J • < v ' • l .<• -- , - ^ - - -i • \ .*'•'' ' 

§ 63.343(a)(6) of subpart N-specrfiesthe procedures for obtaining an extension of compliance and' 

the date by which such requests must be submitted. •> - *, • v*- - '• 

This paragraph ontyjeferences "paragraph (0(4)-of this section"<forcompl*ance<extenston provl^ 

sions.-8ut, §63.343(a)(6) of .subpart N -also-contatns provisions for requesting a compliance extension ' -" * x • -** . . ' ' ' 

'. . , . - 3 i. . 
P.33 

,4978y:;^deral^ Register-/ /Rules, and. Regulation^ y-rV..'- V;, 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART N OF PART 63.-T-GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N—Continued 

General provisions 

reference 

Applies to 

subpart N Comment 

II* 

1 

ill; 

ri 

Ji,-: 

I 

I: 

ii 

•ft 

63.6(0(8) 

63.6(i)(9) 

63.6(i)d 0)(iH<v) 

63.6(i)(10)(v)(A) . 

63.6(i)(10)(v)(B), 

63.6(0(11),......... 

63.6(i)(12)(i) 

. 63.6(i)(12)(iiHiii). 

63.6(0(13) 

63.6(0(14) 

63.6(0(16) 

63.60) • 

63.7{a)(1)........:... 

63.7(a)(2)0Hvi). • 

63T7(a)(2)(ix)....... 

63.7(a)(3) ...... 

63.7(b)(1)......: 

63.7(b)(2) 

63.7(c) ....; 

63.7(d) 

63.7(e) .... 

63.7(0 • 

63.7(g)(1) 

63.7(g)(3) >..*,... 

63.7(h)(1H2) ... 

63.7(h)(3)(i) .,.:.. 

63:7(h)(3)(iiH«i)-• 

63.7(h)(4H5) ... 

63.8(a)(1) -*.-...*. 

63.8(a)(2) ......;....„.. 

63.8(a)(4) 33....... 

63.8(b)(1) :...-........... 

63.8(b)(2) ..;..,;........ 

63.8(b)(3) ;.:..-;.:.-..„.. 

63.8(c)(1)(i) ::.L.....: 

63.8(c)(1)(ii) .3....: 

63.8(0(1 )(iii) y....J63.8(c)(2)-(3) ........ 

63.8(c)(4H7) ....... 

63.8(d) -.....;...: 

63.8(6)^;;:.,.,:.^:..:,. 

63.8(0(1) £=1.:U„ 

63 8(0(2)::....: :„... 

63.8(0(3) 

63.8(0(4) 

63.8(0(5) 

63.8(0(6). 

63.8(g) .... 

63.0(a) 

63.9(b)(1)0H«0 

63.9(b)(1)(i|i) 

63.9(b)(2), 

63.9(b)(3). 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

.Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No... 

Yes 

N o •;.. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No.. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes: 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No ..: 

No 

Yes 

No ... 

No... 

No.. 

No y 

No,. 

No '..' 

NO 

No;. 

No.. 

Yes 

No.. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No".. 

No.. 

Yes 

No.. 

No.. 

No . 

N o -

This paragraph only references "paragraphs (i)(4) through (i)(6) of this section" for compliance extension provisions. But, § 63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a 

. compliance extension. 

This paragraph only references "paragraphs (i)(4) through (i)(6) of this section" and "paragraphs 

.(0(4) and (i)(5) of this section" for compliance extension provisions. But, § 63.343(a)(6) of Subpart N.also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension. 

This paragraph only references "paragraph (i)(4)" for compliance extension provisions: But, 

§ 63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension. 

This paragraph only references "paragraph (0(4)0) or (i)(5) of this section" for compliance exten-

. sion provisions. But, §63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a com-

. pliance extension. .. . 

§63.347(d) of subpart N requires notification prior to the performance test. §63.344(a) of subpart ' 

N requires-submission of a site-specific test plan upon request.' • *' ' • • 

§63^44(a) of subpart N specifies what the test plan should contain, but does not require test plan 

approval or, performance audit samples. . 

Except replace "source" in the first sentence of § 63.7(d) of subpart A with "affected source." . 

Subpart N also contains test methods specific to affected sources covered by that subpart.. 

§ 63.344(c)(2) of subpart N identifies CARB Method 425 as acceptable under certain conditions.. :'• 

Subpart N identifies the items to be reported in the compliance test (§ 63.344(a)] and the timeframe for submitting the results'{§63.347(01-

This paragraph only references "§63.6(0" for compliance extension provisions. But, § 63.343(a)(6)* 

of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance extension. ';• -•?••.. . 

Work practice; standards are contained in §63.342(0 of subpart N. 

§63.344(d) bf subpart N specifies the monitoring location when there are multiple sources. ''._•- .. 

§63.347(g)(4) of subpart N identifies reporting requirements when multiple monitors are used. 

Subpart N requires proper, maintenance of monitoring devices expected to be used by sources' 

. subjecttosubpartN. 

§63.342(0(3)(iv) of subpart N specifies reporting when the O&M plan is hot followed. 

§63.343(0(2) identifies the criteria for whether O&M procedures are acceptable. . ••* -.*, 

§63.344(c0(2) requires appropriate use of monitoring devices. . 

Maintenance of monitoring devices is required by §§63.342(0 and 63.344(d)(2) of subpart N:-:;.. • 

There are no performance evaluation procedures for the monitoring devices expected to be used' 

to comply with subpart N. ^;:.;:. .- ".'"•:. ..""••'•,' . ' ". ..'•'-. -• J'<.;'• ,

s

 JInstances 'n which the AdministratO"- may approve alternatives tO the monitoring methods and pro- ' 

cedures of subpart N are contained in § 63.343(c)(8) of subpart N 

Subpart N does not require the use of CEM's. . -

Monitonng data does not need to be reduced for reporting purposes because'Subpart N requires' 

measurement once/day. - - - . - • • • • >-,-•>.' 

§63 343(a)(3) of subpart N requires area sources to comply with major source provisions if an increase in HAP emissions causes them to become major sources . - - •>- -

§63 347(c)(2) of subpart N specifies initial notification requirements for new-or reconstructed affected sources. / ~ >•> - ' - . -• 

§ 63.347(c)(1) of subpart N specifies the information to be contained in the initial notification. 

§63 347(c)(2) of subpart N specifies notification requirements for-new or reconstructed sourcesthat are not major affected sources 
Federal Register / Vol. ,60, No. 16 /Wednesday, Jarmary25, 1995 / Rules, and Regulations ... 4979 

TA_LE 1 t o SUBPART N OF PART 63.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N—Continued -

General provisions 

reference 

63.9(b)(4).;.... 

63.9(b)(5) .......:.. 

63.9(c) .-...;............ 

63.9(d) :.... :....: 

63.9(e) „....„... 

63.9(0 » 

63.9(g) ...... ......;. 

63.9(h)(1H3) • 

63.9(h)(5) i 

63.9(h)(6) .v. : :. 

63.9(i) ..T. ••—•. 

63.9(j) :.. 

63.10(a) „„....*'. 

63.10(b)(1) 

63.10(b)(2) 

63.10(b)(3) 

63.10(c) „..:.... 

63.10(d)(1) 

63.10(d)(2) 

63.10(d)(3) 

63.10(d)(4) 

63.10(d)(5) 

63.10(e) ...... 

63.10(0 

63.11 

63.12-63.15 

Applies to : 

subpart N 

No -.-. 

No ..': 

Yes ....:......... 

Yes.;', .v..-

No ...... 

No 

No 

No -.: 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No ........ 

No : 

No 

Yes 

No ...... 

No 

Yes 

No :.. 

No 

Yes 

No ... 

Yes 

.Comment 

•i ' - . • 

. . . ' ' . ...-- • . . ; . ; , • .. -

This paragraph only references "§63.6(0(4) through §63.6(0(6)" for compliance extension provisions. But, § 63.343(a)(6) of subpart N also contains provisions for requesting a compliance ex-

- tension. Subpart N provides a different timeframe for submitting the request than §63.6(0(4). 

This paragraph only references lh e notification dates established in paragraph (g) of this section." But, § 63.347 of subpart N also contains notification dates. 

Notification of performance test isi required by § 63.347(d) of subpart N. 

Subpart N does not require a performance evaluation or relative accuracy test for monitoring de-

, vices. '• 

§63.347(e) of subpart N specifies.information to be contained in the notification of compliance 

status and the timeframe for submitting this Infonnation; 

Similar language has been incorporated into § 63.347(e)(2)(iii) of subpart N. 

§ 63.346(b). of subpart N specifies the records that must be maintained. 

Subpart N applies to major and area sources. 

Applicable requirements of §63.10(c) have been incorporated into § 63.346(b) of subpart N. 

§63.347(0 of subpart N specifies the timeframe for reporting performance test results. 

Subpart N does not contain opacify or visible emissions standards. • 

§63.342(0(3)(iv) and § 63.347(g)(3) of subpart N specify reporting associated with malfunctions. 

§63:347(g) and (h) of subpart N specify the frequency of periodic reports of monitoring data used 

to establish compliance. Applicable requirements of. §63.10(e) have been incorporated.into 

§ 63.347(g) and (h). 

Flares will not be used to comply with the emmission limits. 

3. Appendix A to part 63 is amended 

by adding Methods 306 and 306a in 

numerical order to read as follows: 

Appendix A to part 63—Test Methods 

Method 306—Determination of Chromium ; 

Emissions From Decorative and Hard 

Chromium Electroplating and Anodizing 

Operations 

• ,- v 

1. Applicability and Principle '• - _ • 

1.1 Applicability. This method applies to 

the determination of chromium- (Cr) in 

emissions from decorative and hard chrome 

electroplating facilities and anodizing 

operations.; ' .- J . •'•':..''- -'••'•-"_-

1.2 Principle, (a) A sample is extracted 

isokinetically from the source using an 

unheated Method 5 sampling train (40 CFR •'•• 

part 60, appendix A), with a glass nozzle arid 

probe liner, but with the filter omitted. The , -

Cr emissions are collected in an alkaline.. 

solution: 0:1 N sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or 

6.1 N sodium bicarbonate (NaHCOj). The :': 

collected samples remain in the alkaline 

solution until analysis. Samples with high Cr, 

concentrations may be analyzed using 

inductively coupled plasma-emission -

spectrometry (ICP) at 267.72 nm. •. 

. Alternatively, if improved detection limits 

are required, a portion of the alkaline 

impinger solution is digested with nitric acid 

and analyzed by graphite furnace atomic 

absorption spectroscopy (GFAAS) at 357.9 

nm. . . . ; * 

(b) If it is desirable to determine hexavalent. 

chromium (Cr*1*

6

) emissions, the samples may 

be analyzed using an ion chromatograph 

equipped with a post-column reactor (IC/ 

PCR) arid a visible wavelength detector. To 

increase sensitivity for trace levels of Cr***6, 

a preconcentration system can be used in 

. conjunction with the IC/PCR. 

2. Range, Sensitivityj Precision, and 

Interferences --

2.1 Range. The recommended analytical 

range for each of the three analytical 

techniques is given below. The upper limit 

of all three techniques can be extended 

indefinitely by appropriate dilution. 

2.1.1: GFAAS Range. As reported in*-*." 

Method 7191 of SW-846 (Citation 5 in 

Bibliography), the optimum concentration 

range for GFAAS is 5 to IOO ng Cr/1 of 

concentrated analyte. *.-•'•" 

2.1.2 ICP Range. A linear response curve.' 

for ICP.can be Obtained in the range of 10 to 

at least 500 pg Cr/1 of absorbing solution. 

2.1.3 IC/PCR Range. In 40 CFR part 266, 

appendix IX, the lower limit ofthe detection

 : 

range for IC/PCR when employing a :'-;:-_ 

preconcentration procedure is reported to be 

about 0.1 pg Cr+«/l of absorbing solution." -

: 

2.2 Sensitivity. 

2.2.1 Analytical Sensitivity;

 : '.' -. '•''•••"• 

2.2.1.1 ICP Analytical Sensitivity. The *. 

minimum, detection limit, for IC?; as reported 

in Method 6010A of SW-^-846, is 7 ng Cr/1.j.--' 

. 2.2.1.2 GFAAS Analytical Sensitivity. 

The minimum detection limit for GFAAS, as 

reported in Method 7191 of SW-846, is 1 |ig 

Cr/1. .*•• . . ' . 

2.2.1.3 IC/PCR Analytical Sensitivity. Tho 

minimum detection limit for IC/PCR with a . 

preconcentrator, as reported in 40 CFR part 

266, appendix IX is 0.05 (ig Cr*«/l. ' 

2.2.2 In-stack Sensitivity. The in-stack 

sensitivity depends upon the analytical -

detection limit, the volume of stack gas 

sampled, and the total volume of the 

impinger absorbing solution, plus the rinses. 

Using the analytical detection limits given in 

sections 2.2.1.1, 2.2.1.2, and 2.2.1.3; a stack -

gas sample volume of 1.7 dscm; arid a total • 

liquid sample volume of 500 ml; the 

corresponding in-stack detection limits are 

0.0021 mg Cr/dscm for ICP, 0.00015 mg Cr/. 

dscm for GFAAS, and 0.000015 liigCr**/ . 

dscm for IC/PCR with preconcentration.." . 

However, it is recommended that the ..." 

concentration of Cr in the analytical.' .•..",'•'• 

solutions be at least five times the analytical 

detection limit to optimize sensitivity in the ' 

analyses. Using this guideline and the same'.. 

assumptions fof impinger sample volume'|. 

and stack gas sainple volume (500 ral and i.7 

dscm, respectively), the recommended V. / • • 

minimum stack concentrations for optlniurh 

sensitivity are 0.0103 mg Cr/dscm for ICP, 

0.00074 mg Cr/dscm for GFAAS.-and ".' •. 

0.000074 rag Cr+«/dscm for laPCR with ,-'• 

preconcentration. If required,* fhe uvstack 

detection limits can be improved by .either 

increasing the stack gas sample volume, . s 
P.35 

,4980 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25,; ^ 

'Pi 

:'• i . 

reducing the volume of the digested sample 

for GFAAS, improving the analytical . 

detection limits, or any combination ofthe 

three. 

2.3 Precision/The following precision 

data have been reported for the three 

analytical methods.- In the case of the GFAAS 

there is also bias data. In all cases, when 

sampling precision is combined with 

analytical precision, the resulting overall 

precision may be lower. 

2.3.1 GFAAS Precision. As reported in 

Method 7191 of SW-846, in a single . 

laboratory (EMSL), using Cincinnati, Ohio 

tap water spiked at concentrations of 19,48; 

and 77 fig Cr/1, the standard deviations were 

±0.1, ±0.2, and ±0.8, respectively. Recoveries 

at these levels were 97 percent, 101 percent, 

and 102 percent, respectively. 

2.3.2 ICP Precision. As reported in 

Method 6010A of SW-846, in an EPA roundrobin Phase 1 study, seven laboratories 

applied the ICP technique to acid/distilled 

water matrices that had been spiked with 

various metal concentrates. For true values of 

10, 50, and 150 (ig Cr/1; the mean reported 

values were 10, 501 and 149 ug Cr/1; and the 

mean percent relative "standard deviations 

were 18, 3.3, and 3.8 percent, respectively. 

2.3.3 IC/PCR Precision. As reported in 40 

CFR part 266, appendix IX, the precision of 

the IC/PCR with sample preconcentration is 

5 to 10 percent; the overall precision for 

sewage sludge incinerators emitting 120 ng/ 

dscm of Cr*''6 and 3.5 ng/dscm of total Cr is 

25 percent and 9 percent for Cr"1*

6

 and total. 

Cr, respectively; and for hazardous waste 

incinerators emitting 300 ng/dscm of Cr+<s 

the precision is 20 percent. 

2.4 Interferences. 

2.4.1 GFAAS Interferences. Low, 

concentrations of calcium and/or phosphate -

may cause interferences; at concentrations 

above 200 ng/1, calcium's effect is constant 

and eliminates the effect of phosphate. 

Calcium nitrate is therefore added to the 

concentrated analyte to epsure a known 

constant effect. Other matrix modifiers 

reconunended by the instrument 

manufacturer may also be suitable. Nitrogen 

should not be used as the purge gas due to 

cyanide band interference. Background 

correction may be required because of 

possible significant levels of nonspecific 

absorption and scattering at the 357.9 nm 

analytical wavelength. Zeeman or SmithHieftje background correction is •"* 

recommended to correct for interferences due 

to high levels of dissolved solids in the .' 

alkaline impinger solutions. ''..-

- 2.4.2 ICP interferences.^; ' \ 

2.4.2.1 ICP Spectral Interferences, (a) 

Spectral interferences are caused by: 

(1) Overlap of a spectral line from another 

element, „ 

(2) Unresolved overlap of molecular band 

'spectra, 

(3) Background contribution from 

continuous or recombination phenomena; 

and _ , > 

(4) Stray light from the line emission of y'5 V 

high-concentration elements....',.^... .:.-..,•.,.-.. 

(b) Spectral overlap may be compensated ''.' 

for by computer correcting the raw data after , 

monitoring and measuring the interfering 

element. At the 267.72-nm Cr analytical 

wavelength, iron, manganese, and uranium -

are potential interfering elements. 

Background and stray light interferences can 

usually be compensated for by a background . 

correction adjacent to the analytical line. 

Unresolved overlap requires the selection of 

an alternative Cr wavelength. Consult the 

instrument manufacturer's operation manual 

for interference correction procedures. 

2.4.2.2 ICP Physical Interferences. High 

levels of dissolved solids in the samples may * 

cause significant inaccuracies due to salt 

buildup at the nebulizer and torch tips. This 

problem can be controlled by diluting the 

sample or providing for extended rinse times 

between sample analyses. Standards are 

prepared in the same matrix as the samples 

(i.e*, 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N NaHC03). 

2.4.2.3 ICP Chemical Interferences. These 

include molecular compound formation, 

ionization effects and solute vaporization 

effects, and are usually not significant in ICP, 

especially if the standards and samples are 

matrix matched.' 

• 2.4.3 IC/PCR Interferences. Components 

in the sample matrix may cause Cr+6 to 

convert to trivalent chromium (Cr***) or , 

cause Cr*3 to convert to.Cr*6. The' 

-chromatographic separation of Cr** using 

ion chromatography reduces the potential for 

other metals to interfere with the post- . 

column reaction. For the IC/PCR analysis, 

only compounds that coelute with Cr*6 and 

affect the diphenylcarbazide reaction will . 

cause interference. Periodic analyses of 

reagent water blanks are used to demonstrate 

that the analytical system is essentially free 

of contamination. Sample cross- y 

contamination that can occur when high- * 

level and low-level samples or standards are 

analyzed alternately is eliminated by 

thorough purging ofthe sample loop. Purging 

can easily be achieved by increasing the . -

injection volume ofthe samples to ten times 

the size of the sample loop. * • •.•• ,_'_ y 

3.Apparatus ...*.'. *.- . ••_.' y - •-••y--;.• ••' ; 

3.1 Sampling Train. A schematic of the 

sampling train used in this method is shown 

in Figure 306-1. The train is tbe same as -... 

Method 5, section 2^1 (40 CFR part ^0.. y :,. 

appendix A), except thatthe filter is-omitted,, 

and quartz or bcnosilkate glass must be used. -

for the probe flozzJeand liner jn place of

 :

v— 

stainless steel It is not necessary to heat the ; 

probe liner. Probe fittings of plastic such as ; * 

Teflon, polypropylene,etc are recommended 

over metal fittings to prevent contamination.. 

If desired, a single combined piiofaeoozzleand liner may be used, but sucha single .glass 

piece is not a requirement ofthis y **• 

methodology. Use 0.1 N NaOH arO.1 N -

NaHCOj in the impingers in place of water. 

3.2 Sample Recovery-Sanjeas Method 5.-

section_.2 (40 CFR part 60. -appendix A), 

with the folio wtag exceptions- •, , _ 

'•'*3:2.i'':ftbbe-Lin«andPrbbiBiKozzle '". 

Brushes. Brushes are not necessary for. • 

sample recovery. If a probe brush is used, it 

must be nonmetallic! ••••*.'••.•. 

3.2.2 Sample Recovery Solution. Use 0^1 

N NaOH or a i N.NaHCOj, whichever was 

used as the impinger absorbing solution, in 

place of acetone to recover the sample. 

3.2.3 Sample Storage Containers. 

Polyethylene, with leak-free screw cap, 500 .' 

mlor 1.000 ml. 

3.2.4 Filtration Apparatus for IC/PCR. 

Teflon, or equivalent, filter holder and 0.45. 

I_n acetate, tx equivalent." filter. 

3.3 Analysis. For analysis^ the following 

equipment is needed. -. . '•• .'•• 

3.3.1 General. 

3.3.1-1 Phillips Beakers. (Phillips beakers 

are preferred, but regular beakers can also be, 

used.) y_ . - ' 

3.3.1.2 Hot Plate. • 

3.3.1.3 Volumetric Flasks. Class A,, 

various sizes as appropriate. ' - -, ' . 

3.3.1.4 Assorted Pipettes. " • 

3.3.2 Analysis by GFAAS. 

"3.3.2.1 Chromium Hollow Cathode Lamp 

or Electrodeless Discharge lamp. 

3.3.2.2 Graphite Furnace Atomic. . , 

Absorption Spectrophotometer. . 

3.3 J Analysis by JCP. .. . 

3.3.3.1 ICP Spectrometer. Computercontrolled emission spectrometer with 

background correction and radio frequency 

generator. .. . '.'".- • 

3.3.3.2: Argon Gas Supply."Weldinggrade 

or better. ' . _ 

3.3.4 Analysis by IC/PCR. 

3.3.4.1 IC/PCR System. High performance 

liquid chromatograph pump, sample •' • 

injection valve, post-column reagent delivery 

and mixing system,-and a visible detector, 

capable of operating at 520 nm. all. with a 

nonmetallic (or inert) flow path. An' 

electronic peak area mode is recommended, 

but other recording devices and integration' 

techniques are acceptable proyidedthe -.*• 

repeatability criteria and the linearity criteria 

for thecalibration curve described in section 

6.4.1 can be satisfied. A sample loading ' 

system will be required if preconcentration is 

employed.*. ...... •• .-'

 :

, . •.-• 

3.3.4.2 .'.AnalyticalColumn..A_i£h .;, 

performance ion chromatograph (HPIC) 

•: nonmetallic column with anion separation - • 

*. characteristics and a high loading capacity • 

designed fw separation of metal chelating i. 

com pounds to prevent metal interference..:'-. •••'• 

Resolution described in section 5.5 must be'.'' 

obtained. A nonmetallic guard column with ' 

the same ion-exchange material is '"'

 :

-v

;

 '-'-;' 

recommended.- " '.'"'<!"- ' -*" 

3.3.43 Preconcentration Column. An -' 'j 

HPIC nonmetallic column with -acceptable

 N 

anion retention characteristics and sample ''"• 

loading rales as described in section 5.5. 

BILUNG CODE 6S60-60-P ,•-" ,.. - ,^_!-\ i 

'I .-' 

/ 
P.36 

Federal Register / Vol.' 60, No. 16,/Wednesday, Jariuaty 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations y...4981 

* 1 ' u 

*. . u - i* 

Figure 306-1. Sampling^rain Schematic. 

BILLING COOE 6S60-6O-C 
4082y,,Federal Register./ Vol160,No/;16^;WedJne^day^i|ami^ry 25, 1995Jl Rules and Regulations 

3.3:4,4 0.45-jun Filter Cartridge: For the 

removal of insoluble;material. To be used just 

prior to sample injection/analysis. 

4. Reagents 

Unless otherwise indicated, all reagents 

shall conform to the specifications 

established by the Committee on Analytical 

Reagents of the American Chemical Society 

(ACS reagent grade). Where such 

specifications are not available, use the best 

available grade. . 

4.1 Sampling. 

4.1.1 Water. Reagent water that conforms 

to ASTM Specification D1193-77, Type II 

(incorporated by reference—see § 63.14). It is 

recommended that water blanks be checked 

prior to preparing sampling -reagents to 

ensure that the Cr content is less than the 

analytical detection limit. 

4.1.2 Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) 

-Absorbing Solution, 0.1 Nor-Sodium 

Bicarbonate (NaHCOj,1 Absorbing Solution, 

0.1 N. Dissolve 4.0 g of sodium hydroxide in 

11 of water, or dissolve 8.5 g of sodium 

bicarboitate in 1 1 of water. 

4.2 Sample Recovery. 

j : 4-2.1 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N NaHCOj. See 

•j section 4.1.2. Use the same solution for -

recovery as was used in the impingers. -•• 

4.2.2 pH Indicator Strip, for IC/PCR. pH 

indicator capable of determining the pH of 

solutions between the pH range of 7 and 12, 

at 0.5 pH intervals. _-,-.- ' 

4.3 Sample Preparation and Analysis. 

4.3.1 Nitric Acid (HNO3), Concentrated, 

for GFAAS. Trace metals grade or better 

HNOj must be used for reagent preparation. 

The ACS reagent grade HNOj is acceptable 

- for cleaning glassware. * 

4.3.2 HNO3,1.0 percent (v/v), for GFAAS. 

Add, with stirring, 10 ml of concentrated 

HNOj to 800 ml of water. Dilute to 1,000 ml 

with water. This reagent shall contain less 

than.0.001 nig Cr/1. .** 

4.3.3 Calcium Nitrate Ca(NOj)2 Solution 

(10 ug Ca/ml) for GFAAS. Prepare the 

, solution by weighing 36 mgcf Ca(NOj)2 into 

a 11 volumetric flask. Dilute with water to 

11. 

43.4 Matrix Modifier, for GFAAS. See 

instrument manufacturer's manual for 

suggested matrix modifier. • -

4.3.5 .Chromatographic Eluent, for IC/ 

PCR. The eluent used in the analytical 

system is ammonium sulfate based. Prepare 

by adding 6.5 ml of 29 percent ammonium 

. hydroxide (NH4OH) and 33 g of ammonium 

sulfate ((NfUfeSOJ to 500 ml of reagent 

water. Dilute to 1.1 with reagent water and 

mix-well. Other combinations of eluents and/: 

or columns may be employed provided peak 

resolution, as described in section 5.5, 

repeatabilityand linearity, as described in .. * 

section 6.4.1, and analytical sensitivity are 

acceptable. ....:• .-...-" ••'•••;•' •*.-.',,.'•-. - vy , ..-•,..• 

4.3.6 : Post-Colurnh Reagent, ibrTC/PCR:; .>•' 

An effective post-column:reagent for-Use with 

; the chromatographic eluent described in 

section 4.3.5 is a diphehylcarbazide (DPC) 

?;ll based system. Dissolve 0.5 g of 1,5-

diphenylcarbazide in 100 ml of ACS grade 

methanol. Add 500 ml bf reagent water • • 

$ 

containing 50 ml of 96 percent 

spectrophotometric grade sulfuric acid. 

Dilute, to 11 widi reagent water. 

• 4.3.7 Chromium Standard Stock Solution 

(1,000mg/l). Procuraa certified aqueous 

standard or dissolve 2.829 gof potassium 

dichromate (KiCrtOi.) in water and dilute to 

U . • -' 

. 4.3.8. Calibration Standards for GFAAS. 

Chromium solutions for GFAAS calibration 

shall be prepared to contain l.Opercent (v/ * 

v) HNOj. The zero standard shall be 1.0 

percent (v/v) HNOj. Calibration standards 

should be prepared daily by diluting the Cr 

standard stock solution (section 4.3.7) with 

1.0 percent HNO3. Use at least four standards 

to make the calibration curve. Suggested 

levels are 0, 5,50, and 100 ug Cr/1. 

4.3.9 Calibration Standards for ICP or IC/ 

PCR. Prepare calibration standards for ICP or 

IC/PCR by diluting the Cr standard stock 

solution (section 4.3.7) with 0.1 N NaOH or 

0.1 N NaHCOj, whichever was used as the 

impinger absorbing solution, to achieve a 

matrix similar to the actual field samples. 

Suggested levels are 0, 25,50. and 100 fig Cr/ 

1 for ICP. and 0.0.5. 5, and 10 pg Cr*«/1 for 

IC/PCR. 

4.4 Glassware Cleaning Reagents. 

4.4.1 HNOj, Concentrated: The ACS 

reagent grade or equivalent 

- .4.4.2 Water. Reagent water that conforms 

to ASTM Specification D1193-77, Type II, 

(incorporated by reference—%ee § 63.14). . 

4.4.3 HNOj, 10 percent (v/v). Add with 

stirring 500 ml of concentrated HNOj to a 

flask containing approximately 4,000 ml of 

water. Dilute to 5,000 ml with water. Mix 

well. The reagent shall contain less than 2 ug 

Cr/1. .. . ' « ' * ' 

5. Procedure 

5.1 Sampling, (a) Same as Method 5, 

section 4.1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A). . 

except omit the filter and filter holder from 

the sampling train, use a glass nozzle and 

probe liner, do not heat the probe, place 100 

ml of 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N NaHCOj in each 

of the first two impingers, and record the 

data for each run on a data sheet such as the 

one shown in Figure 306-2. 

(b) Clean all glassware prior to sampling in 

hot soapy water designed for laboratory 

cleaning of glassware. Next, rinse the 

glassware three times with tap water, • 

followed by three additional rinses with 

reagent water. Then soak all glassware in 10 

percent (y/v) HNOj solution for a minimum 

of 4 hours, rinse three times with reagent 

water, and allowed to air dry. Cover all 

glassware openings where contamination can 

occur with Parafilm, or.equivalent, until the. -

sampling train is assembled for sampling. 

. (c) If the sample is going to be analyzed for 

Cr-**« using IC/PCR, determine the pH of the '. 

solution in the first impinger at the end ofthe 

sampling m n using a pH indicator, strip. The •-• 

pH of the solution should be greater than 8.5.! 

If not, the concentration of the NaOH or. 

NaHCOj impinger absorbing solution should • 

be increased to 0.5 N and the sample should... 

be rerun. . :. .. . 

5.2 Sample Recovery. Follow the basic . 

procedures of Method 5, section.4-2, with the 

exceptions noted below; a filter is not 

recovered from this train. 

5.2.1 Container No. 1. Measure the 

volume ofthe liquid in the first, second, and 

third impingers and quantitatively transfer 

into a labelled sample container. Use ' 

approximately 200 to 300 ml of 0.1. N NaOH 

or 0.1 N NaHCOj to rinse the probe nozzle, 

probe liner, three impingers, and connecting 

glassware; add this rinse to the same 

container. 

5.2.2 ContainerNo. 2 (Reagent Blank). 

Place approximately 500 ml of 0.1 N NaOH 

or 0.1 N NaHCOj absorbing solution in a 

labeled sample container. 

5.2J. Sample Filtration for IC/PCR. If the 

sample is to be analyzed for Cr*« by IC/PCR, 

it must be filtered immediately following 

recovery to remove any insoluble'matter. 

Nitrogeirgas may be used as a pressure assist 

to the filtration process. Filter the entire 

contents of Container No. 1 through a 0.45-

jim acetate filter (or equivalent), and collect 

the filtrate in a 1,000 ml graduated cylinder. 

Rinse the sample container with reagent 

water three separate times, pass these rinses 

through the filter, and add the rinses to the 

sample filtrate. Determine the final volume of 

the filtrate and rinses and return them to the 

rinsed polyethylene sample container. 

5.2.4. Sample Preservation. Refrigerate 

samples upon receipt. (Containers Nos. 1 and. 

2). 

5.3 Sample Preparation and Analysis for 

GFAAS. For analysis by GFAAS, an acid 

digestion of the alkaline impinger solution is 

required. Two types of blanks are required 

for the analysis. The calibration blank is used 

in establishing the analytical curve, and the 

reagent blank is usedv to assess possible 

contamination resulting from the Sample 

processing! The 1.0 percent HNOj is the 

calibration blank. The 0.1 N NaOH solution 

or the 0.1 N NaHCOj from section S.2.2 is the 

reagent blank. The'reagent blank must be 

carried through the complete analytical 

procedure, including the acid digestion, and 

must contain the same acid concentration in 

the final solution as the sample solutions. 

5.3.1 Acid Digestion for GFAAS. (a) In a 

beaker, add 10 ml of concentrated HNOj to 

a sample aliquot of 100 ml taken for analysis. 

Cover the beaker with a watch glass. Place -

the beaker on a hot plate and reflux the 

sample down to near dryness.. Add another 

' 5 ml of concentrated HNOj to complete the 

digestion. Carefully reflux the sample volume 

down to near dryness. Wash down the beaker 

walls and watch glass with reagent water. 

The final concentration of HNOj in the 

solution should be 1 percent (v/v). Transfer 

the digested sample to a 50 ml volumetric * 

flask. Add 0.5 ml of concentrated HNOj, and 

liril of the ,10*ig/ml bf Ca (Npj)j'. 

' (b) Dilute to 50 ml.with reagent-water. A 

different filial volume-may be used, based on 

the expected Cr concentration, but the HNOj ' 

concentration must be maintained at'1 .'•'• • •'• 

percent (v/v). 

' BILUNO COOE 6S60-50-P . 
Plant 

LocationOperatorDate 

Run No -

Sample box NoMeter box No._ 

Meter AH@ 

C factor SCHEMATIC OF STACK CROSS.SfXTION 

Pitot tube coefficient, Cr 

Ambient temperatureBarometric pressure •_ 

Assumed moisture, %. 

Probe length, (ft.)". 

Nozzle identification No. -__. 

Average calibrated nozzle diameter, (in.)-

Leak rate, (cfm) 

Static pressure, (in. Hg) 

3

1 

tare 

CJ 

4 

% 

$ 

© 

Z o 

o 

Traverse 

point 

number 

\ 

Total 

Sampling 

time 

(min.) 

i 

Average 

V Vacuum 

(in-Hg) 

••'-. . 

Stack 

temperature 

(T8 )( 8F) 

. . '• 

Velocity 

head 

(in. H2 0) 

Pressure 

differential ' 

* across orifice 

meter 

(in. H2 0 ) 

• ' ' • - . 

*" '•' . 

Gas meter 

•:• reading 

(ft3) 

- • ' 

Gas sample 

temperature at dry gas 

meter 

Inlet 

CF) 

8 

'Avg . • • •. 

Avg, 

Outlet 

CF) 

• • • ' ' 

Avg. 

- . t -

Temperature 

of. gas leaving 

condenser or 

'; • '.'a- 5 1 

impingerCF). -: 

- '• -."• 5-: r ' 'y 

, '.'": " • ".' 

» 

D -. 

- CB:".' 

Mi • 

e_ 

3. 

g; 

CD 

to,. 

cn 

co 

«o. 

cn 

| 

CO*. 

CO 

Ir* 

Figuire 306-2 . Chromium Fiel d Data-Sheet: 

•> i 

* • 

co. 

oo 

3JSPjww»wigwrit',:W'-rjgggg; oo 
P.39 

;4984 ys^-Fedefal; Register ^Vok 60; No; ,16 I Wednesd4y,i January 25, .1995 ./ Rules and Regulations 

n 

m 

'fc,**-

if*; 

•> £ :• 

is'-1' 

' ••! ' -- 1 

5.3.2 Sample Analysis by GFAA& (a) The 

357.9-nm wavelength line shall be used: •' 

Follow the manufacturer's operating 

instructions for all other spectrophotometer 

parameters. 

(b) Furnace parameters suggested by the 

manufacturer should be employed as 

guidelines. Since temperature-sensing 

mechanisms and temperature controllers can 

vary between instruments and/or with time, 

the validity ofthe furnace parameters must 

be periodically confirmed by systematically, 

altering the furnace parameters while 

analyzing a standard. In this manner, losses 

of analyte due to higher-than-necessary 

. temperature settings or losses in sensitivity 

due to less than optimum settings can be 

minimized.. Similar verification cf furnace 

parameter^may be required for complex * 

sample matrices. Calibrate the GFAAS 

system following the procedures specified in . 

section 6. A/ * 

(c) Inject a measured aliquot of digested 

sample into the furnace and atomize.-If the 

. concentration found exceeds the calibration 

/range, the sample should be diluted with the 

calibration blank solution (1.0 percent HNOj) 

and reanalyzed. Consult the operator's 

manual for suggested injection volumes. The 

use ofmultiple injectionscan improve 

accuracy and help detect furnace pipetting 

errors. 

(d) Analyze a minimum of one matrixmatched reagent blank per sample batch to 

determine if contamination or any memory 

effects are occurring. Analyze a calibration 

blank and a midpoint calibration check -

standard after approximately every .10 sample 

injections. -•'• y. . 

(e) Calculate the Cr concentrations: ' 

(1) By the method of standard additions 

(see operator's manual), 

(2) From the calibration curve, or 

(3) Directly from the instrument's 

concentration readout. All dilution or 

concentration factors.must be taken into 

account. All results should be reported in |ig 

Cr/ml with iip to three significant figures. 

5.4 Sample Analysis by ICP. (a) The ICP 

measurement is performed directly oh the 

alkaline impinger solution; acid digestion is '• 

not necessary provided the samples and -

standards are matrix matched. However, ICP 

should only be used when the solution . 

analyzed has a Cr'concentration greater than 

35|ig/l. * 

(b) Two types of blanks are required for the 

analysis. The calibration blankiis used in' ' * 

establishing the arialyticalcurve, and the 

reagent blank is used to assess possible 

contamination resulting from sample

 : 

'processing; Use either 0:1 N NaOH or O.TN 

- NaHCOjVwhicheyer.wasi'usedforthe.'*- J- •. 

•'.* impinger.absbrbirig solution, forthey .--:*-•---

." calibrationbiank'.:The;caiibratibnblankcan * 

-be prepared fresh.in;t|ie laboratory; it does-: 

: not have'to be.;fromthe same batch of -y 

- solution that was used in the.'field. Prepare 

.- • a sufficient quatititytoflusb the system- • !-

between standards and samples.The reagent 

iblankfsection 5.2.2) is a sample'.qf the • 

•'__' impinger solution used for'samplecollection 

.*•'.• that is Collected in the field during the testing 

.-program.'•-.„ v*/*'-'*.:....._ ••'•';'. '•-..',:•. V.*.,'*,*" 

(c) Set .up the instnimeht with proper " 

operating-parameters, including wavelength. 

background correction settings (if necessary), 

and interfering element correction settings (if 

necessary). The instrument must be allowed 

to become thermally stable before beginning 

performance of measurements (usually 

requiring at least 30 min of operation prior 

to calibration). During this warmup period, 

' the optical calibration and torch position 

optimization may be performed (consult the 

' operator's manual). - '• 

(d) Calibrate the instrument according to 

die instrument manufacturer's recommended . 

procedures, and die procedures specified in 

section 6.3. Before analyzing the samples, •• 

reanalyze the highest calibration standard as 

if it were a sample. Concentration values 

obtained should not deviate from the actual, 

values by more than 5 percent, or the 

established control limits, whichever is lower 

(see sections 6 and 7). If they do, follow die 

recommendations of the instrument 

manufacturer to correct for this condition. 

(e) Flush the system with the calibration 

blank solution for at least 1 min before the 

analysis of each sample or standard. Analyze 

the midpoint calibration standard and the 

calibration blank after each 10 samples. Use 

the average intensity ofmultiple exposures 

for both standardization and sample analysis 

. to reduce random error. 

(f) Dilute and reanalyze samples that are 

more concentrated than the linear calibration 

limit or use an alternate, less sensitive Cr 

wavelength for which quality control data are 

already established. 

(g) If dilutions are performed, the 

* appropriate factors must be applied to 

sample values. All results should be reportedin |ig Cr/ml with up to three significant 

figures. 

5.5 Sample Analyses by IC/PCR. (a) the 

Cr+6 content of the sample filtrate is 

determined by IC/PCR. To increase 

sensitivity for trace levels of chromium, a 

preconcentration system is also used in 

: conjunction widi the IC/PCR. 

'. (b) Prior to preconcentration and/or 

analysis, filter all field samples through a 

0.45-um filter. This filtration should be 

conducted just prior to sample injection/ 

analysis. 

(c) The preconcentration is accomplished 

by selectively retaining the analyte on a solid 

absorbent (as described in section 3.4.3.3), : 

followed by removal ofthe analyte from the 

absorbent: Inject the sample into a sample 

loop of the desired size (use repeated 

-loadings or a larger size loop for greater . 

. sensitivity). The Crt 6 is collected on the. * 

-resin bed ofthe column. Switch the injection 

valve so that the eluent displaces the 

-'• concentrated Cr+6 sample, moving it off the i 

-preconcentration column and onto the IC ; 

•janion separation column.-Afterseparation 

tfrom other sample components,- the Cr*.* '''• 

j forms a specific complex in" the jpbst-cdluinn ; 

: reactor with the DPC reaction solution/and'•'*'.. 

- the complex is detected by visible absorbance: 

; at a*wayelength of 520 nm. The amount of ,.. 

absorbance measured is proportional to the 

concentration ofthe Cr**-6 complex formed. 

Compare the IC retention time and die'___. :' -• 

absorbance of the Cr+6 complex with known 

•Cr"*6 standards analyzed under identical.:.'-. 

conditions to provide both qualitative and 

-. quantitative analyses. 

' (d) Two types of blanks are required for tho 

analysis. The calibration blank is used in ' 

establishing the analytical curve, and the 

reagent blank is used to assess possible 

contamination resulting from sample 

. processing. Use either 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N 

NaHCOj, whichever was used for the 

impinger solution,- for the calibration blank. 

The calibration blank can be prepared fresh 

in the laboratory; it does not have to be from 

the same batch of solution that was used In 

the field. The reagent blank (section 5.2.2) is 

a sample of the impinger solution used for 

sample collection that is collected in the field 

during the testing program. 

(e) Prior to sample analysis, establish a -

'stable baseline with the detector set at the ' 

required attenuation by setting the eluent 

flow rate at approximately 1 ml/min and tho 

post-column reagent flow rate at 

approximately 0.5 ml/min. Note: As long as 

the ratio of eluent flow rate to PCR flow rate 

remains constant, the standard curve should 

. remain linear. Inject a sample of reagent 

water to ensure that no Cr+* appears in the 

water blank. 

, (f) First, inject the calibration standards 

prepared, as described in section 4.3.9 to 

cover the appropriate concentration range, 

starting with the lowest standard first/Next, 

inject, in duplicate, the calibration reference . 

standard (as described in section 7.3.1), 

followed by the reagent blank (section 5.2.2), 

and the field samples. Finally, repeat the 

injection of the calibration standards to 

assess instrument drift. Measure areas or 

heights of the Cr+«/DPC complex • • 

chromatogram peaks. The response for 

replicate.'cbrisecutive'injections of samples 

must be'within 5 percent ofthe average 

response,

 :or the injection should be repeated 

until the 5 percent criterion can be met. Use 

the average response (peak areas or heights)' 

from the duplicate injections, of calibration 

standards to generate a linear calibration 

curve. From the calibration curvo, determine 

the concentrations qf the field samples 

employing die average response from the 

duplicate.injections. ' 

6. Calibration /_,..._' 

•••6.1i Sampling Train Calibration. Perform 

all ofthe calibrations described in Method 5, 

section 5 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A). The 

alternate calibration procedures described in 

section 7 of Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A),may also be used. , 

•:";*6.2/...GFAASCalibration.Eitherruna . 

series of chromium standards and a j . 

calibration blank and construct a calibration ' -

curve by plotting the concentrations of the ' : 

; standards against the absorbencies, or using '. 

.the method of standard additions, plot added 

:; concentration versus absorbahCe.,For . 

instniments that read directly in -....,• 

•^'concentration, set the curve' corrector to read 

.- out the proper concentration, if applicable.., 

•^This is customarily performed automatically ' 

:.: with mosUnstrument computer-based data • , 

systems. .A ';'•',,•. . •„-. -... . 

6.2.1 GFAAS Calibration Curve. If a . 

calibration curve is used, jt should be 

prepared daily with a minimum of a • 

calibration blank and three standards. 

. Calibration standards for total chromium . 

should start with' 1 percent v/v HNOJ with • 
P.40 

Federal,Regis^^ Vol*,^/*,-No;^16L-.*/-:Vy9dne^y|...J^ary 25. 1995./.. Rules and. Regulations 4985 

no chromium for the'calibration blank, with -

appropriate increases in total chj-an-uum. 

concentration for the'other calibration ,' 

standards (see section 4.3.9:1. Calibration 

standards should be prepared-fresh daily. 

6.3 ICP Calibration. Calibrate the : 

instrument according to the instrument 

manufacturer's recommended procedures, 

using a calibration blank and three, standards 

for the initial calibration. Calibration .. . 

standards should be prepared fresh daily, as 

described in section 4.3.9. Be sure that 

. samples and calibration standards are matrix 

matched. Flush the system with the • . . . 

calibration blank between each standard. Use 

the average intensity, of multiple exposures 

for both standardization and sample analysis 

to reduce random error. 

6.4 IC/PCR Calibration. Prepare a 

calibration curve using the calibration blank 

and three calibration standards prepared 

fresh daily as described in section 4.3.9. Run 

the standards with the field samples as 

described in section 5.5: 

7. Quality Controlj: 

7.1 GFAAS Quality Control 

7.1.1 GFAAS Calibration Reference 

Standards. If a calibration curve is used, it 

must he verified by iise'of at least one ' 

calibration reference standard (made from a 

reference material or other Independent 

standard material) at or near tbe mid-range of 

the calibration curve. The calibration 

reference standard must be measured within 

IQ percent of it's true value for the curve to 

be considered valid. The curve must be 

validated before sample analyses are 

performed. 

7.1.2. GFAAS Check Standards, (a) Run a 

check standaid and a calibration blank after 

approximately every 10 sample injections, 

and af the end ofthe analytical run. These 

standards are run, in part, to monitor the life 

and performance ofthe graphite tube. Lack 

of reproducibilityor a significant change in 

the signal for the check standard indicates

 :

. 

that the graphite tube should be replaced. 

Check standards can be the mid-range 

calibration standard or the reference 

standard. The results ofthe check standard 

shall agree within 10 percent of the expected . 

value. If not,.terminatethe analyses, correct 

theproblem, recalibrate the instruments and 

reanalyze all samples analyzed subsequent to 

the lasf acceptable check standard, analysis. 

(b) The results of the calibration blank are 

to agree within three standard deviations of 

the mean blank value.- If not, repeat the ' 

analysis two more times and average the. 

results. If the average is not within three 

standard deviations ofthe background mean, 

terminate the analyses, correct the problem; 

recalibrate, and reanalyze all samples.: 

analyzed subsequent to the last acceptable 

calibration blank analysis.' 

''; 7:1.3 ;'GFAAS Duplicate Samples. Run one 

duplit^tesampieforevery 20samples, (or ... 

bhS "^ersdurce test, whicheveris more 

frequent). Duplicate samples are brought' "Athrough the whole sample preparation and . 

analytical process separately: Duplicate 

samples shall agiee within lb percent. 

7.1.4 "GFAAS Matrix Spiking. Spiked 

samples shall be prepared and analyzed daily 

. to erisili-e that correct procedures are being 

followed and that all equipment is operating 

properly. Spiked sample recovery analyses 

should indicatea recovery for the Cr spike 

df between 75 and 125 percent. Spikes are 

added prior to any sainple preparation. Cr 

levels in the spiked sample should provide 

final solution concentrations that fell within 

the linear portion of the calibration curve, 

7.1.5 GFAAS Method of Standard 

Additions.'Whenever sample matrix 

problems are suspected and standard/sample 

matrix matching is not possible or'whenever 

a new sample matrix fs wing analyzed, the 

method of standard additions shall be Used 

for the analysis of all extracts. Section 5.4.2 

of Method 12 (40 CFR part 60. appendix A) 

specifies a performance test to determine if 

the method of standard additions is ' 

necessary. 

7.1.6 GFAAS Reagent Blank Samples. 

Analyze a minimum of one matrix-matched 

reagent blank (section 5.2J!) per sample batch 

to determine if contamination or memory 

effects are occurring. The results should 

agree within three standard deviations ofthe 

mean blank value. 

7.2 ICP Quality ControL 

7.2.1 ICP Interference Check. Prepare an 

interference check solution to contain known 

concentrations of interfering elements that 

will provide an adequate test ofthe 

correction factors in the event of potential 

spectral interferences. Two potential -•-

interferences, iron and manganese, may be 

prepared as 1,000 ug/ml and 200 fig/ml 

solutions, respectively. Tbe solutions should 

be prepared in dilute HNOj (1-5 percent). 

Particular, care must be taken to ensure that 

the solutions and/or salts used to prepare the 

solutions are of IGPgrade purity (i.e., that no 

measurable Cr contamination exists in the 

salts/solutions). Commercially prepared 

interfering element check standards are 

available. Verify the interelement correction 

factors every three months by analyzing the 

interference check solution. The correction 

factors are calculated according to the 

instrument manufacturer's directions. Ff 

interelement correction factors are used 

properly, no false Cr should be detected. 

7.2:2 ICP Calibration Reference 

Standards. Prepare a calibration reference 

standard in the samealkaline matrix as the 

calibration standards; itshould be at least 10 

times the instrumental detection limit. This 

reference standard should be prepared from 

a different Cr stock solution source than that 

used for preparation of the calibration curve 

standards and is used to verify the accuracy 

of the calibration curve. Prior to sample 

analysis, analyze at least one reference 

standard. The calibration reference standard 

rnust be measured within 10 percent of it's 

true value.for the curve to be considered 

valid. The curve must be validated before, 

sample analyses are performed. 

7.2.3 ICP Check Standards. Run a check 

standard and a calibration blank after every 

10 samples, and at the end of the analytical 

run. Check standards can be the mid-range.' 

calibration standard or the reference .. 

standard. The results Of die check standard 

shall agree within 10 percent ofthe expected 

valuer if not, terminate the analyses, correct; 

the problem', recalibrate the instrument, and 

rerunall samples analyzed subsequent to the 

last acceptable check standard analysis. The 

results of the calibration blank are to agree 

within three standard deviations ofthe mean 

blank value. If not. repeat the analysis two 

more times and average tbe results. If the 

average is not within three standard 

deviations ofthe background mean, 

terminate the analyses, correct the problem. 

recalibrate, and reanalyze all samples 

analyzed subsequent to the last acceptable 

. calibration blank analysis. ' 

. 7.2.4 " ICP Duplicate Samples. Analyze one 

duplicate sample for every 20 samples, (or 

one per source test whichever is more 

frequent). Duplicate samples aro brought' 

through the whole sample preparation and 

analytical process: Duplicate samples shall 

agree within 10 percent 

7.2.5 ICP Reagent Blank Samples. 

Analyze a minimum of one matrix-matched 

reagent blank (section 5.2.2) per sample batch 

to determine if contamination or memory 

effects are occurring. The results should 

agree within three standard deviatibns of tho 

mean blank value.' 

7.3 IC/PCR Quality Control 

7.3.1 IC/PCR Calibration Reference 

- Standards. Prepare a calibration reference 

standard in the same alkaline matrix as the 

calibration standards at a concentration that 

is at or near the mid-point ofthe calibration 

curve. This reference standard should be 

prepared from a different Cr stock solution 

source than that used for preparing the . 

calibration curve standards. The reference 

standard is used to verify the accuracy of the 

calibration curve. Prior to sample analysis, 

analyze at least one reference standard. The 

results of this analysis of the reference 

standard must.be within 10 percent of the 

true value of the reference standard for the 

"calibration curve to be considered valid. The 

curve must be validated before sample 

analyses are performed. 

7.3.2 IC/PCR Check Standards, (a) Run 

the calibration blanlTand calibration • 

standards with the field samples as described 

in section 5.5. For each standard, determine 

the peak areas (iecommended) pr the peek 

heights, calculate the average response from 

the duplicate injections, and plot the average 

response against the Cr+6 concentration in 

(ig/1. The individual responses for each 

calibration standard determined before and 

after field sample analysis must be within 5 

percent of the average response for die 

analysis to be valid. If the 5 percent criteria 

is exceeded, excessive drift and/or •• 

instrument degradation may have occurred,. 

and must be corrected before further analyses 

are performed. • 

(b) Employing linear regression, calculate a 

predicted value for each calibration standard 

using the average response for the duplicate 

injections. Each predicted value must be 

within 7 percent ofthe actual value for. the 

calibration curve to be considered acceptable. 

If not acceptable, remake and/or rerun the 

calibration standards. If the calibration curve 

is still unacceptable, reduce the range ofthe 

curve. . '.. ', . . .'• . 

7.3.3 IC/PCR Duplicate Samples. Analyze 

one duplicate sample for every 20 samples, 

,(or one per source test, whichever is more 

frequent). Duplicate samples are brought' '. 

through the whole sample preparation and • 

I 

i i 

i 

I i 

• 

I 
1 

4986 Federal;Register / Vol. 60; No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25- 199^ /Ruleis arid Regulations 

P.41 

ml'-

V.Jj 

r

iy' ' 

ft 

:;* **.' 

fiyanalytical process. Duplicate samples shall 

agree within 10 percent. 

7.3.4 ICP Reagent Blank Samples. 

Analyze a minimum of one matrix-matched 

reagent blank (section 5.2.2) per sample batch 

to determine if contamination or memory 

effects are occurring. The results should -

agree within three standard, deviations of the 

mean blank value. 

8. Emission Calculations 

Carry out the calculations, retaining one 

extra decimal figure beyond that of the 

acquired data. Round off figures after final 

calculations. 

8.1 Total Cr in Sample. Calculate Mer, the 

total (ig Cr in each sample, as follows: 

Mo = (Vnj) (Csj(F) (D) Eq.306-1 

where: 

Ymi = Volume of impinger contents plus' 

rinses, ml.. 

Cs = Concentration of Cr.in sample solution, 

_igCr/fal. 

F = Dilution factor. 

= Volume of aliquot after dilution, ml; 

Volume of aliquot before dilution, ml 

D = Digestion factor. . 

= Volume of sample aliquot after digestion, 

ml; Volume of sample aliquot submitted 

to digestion, ml 

8.2 Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature 

and Average Orifice Pressure Drop. Same as 

Method 5, section 6.2. 

8.3 Dry.Gas Volume. Volume of Water 

Vapor, Moisture Content.Same as Method 5, 

sections 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5, respectively. 

8.4 Cr Emission Concentration. Calculate 

Co, the Cr concentration in the stack gas, in 

mg/dscm on a dry basis, corrected to 

standard conditions, as follows: 

Cc^=(l0-3 mg/(ig) (Mo/V^u-,) Eq. 306-2 

where: 

Vn>(sid)=Gas sample volume measured by the * 

dry gas meter, corrected to dry standard 

conditions, dscm. 

8.5 Isokinetic Variation, Acceptable 

Results. Same as Method 5, sections 6.11 end 

6.12, respectively. • 

9. Bibliography 

1. "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid 

Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods," U. S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Publication SW-846, 2nd Edition, July 1982, 

2. Cox, X.B., R.W. Linton, and F.E. Butler. 

Determination of Chromium Speciation in 

Environmental Particlesr—A Multitechnique 

Study of Ferrochrome Smelter Dust. 

Accepted for publication in Environmental 

Science and Technology. 

3. Same as Bibliography of Method 5, 

Citations 2 to 5 and 7. 

4. California Air Resources Board,. 

"Determination of Total Chromium and 

Hexavalent Chromium Emissions from . -

Stationary Sources." Method 425, September 

12,1990. 

5. "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid 

Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods", U. S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Publication SW-846, 3rd Edition, November . 

1986 as amended by Update I, November 

1990. 

Method 306A—Determination of Chromium 

Emissions From Decorative and Hard 

Chromium Electroplating and Anodizing 

Operations 

1. Applicability and Principle 

1.1 * Applicability. This method applies to 

the determination of chromium (Cr) in 

emissions from decorative and hard 

chromium electroplating facilities and 

anodizing operations. The method is less 

expensive and less complex to conduct than 

Method 306 of this appendix. Correctly 

applied, the precision and bias of the sample 

results will be comparable to those obtained 

with the isokinetic Method 306 of this 

appendix. This method is applicable under 

ambient moisture, air, and temperature 

conditions. 

1.2 Principle. A sample is extracted from 

the source at a constant sampling rate -•• 

determined by a critical orifice and collected 

in a probe and impingers. The sampling time 

at the sampling traverse points is varied 

according to the stack gas velocity at each 

point to obtain a proportional sample: Tho 

concentration is determined by the same 

analytical procedures used In Method 306 of 

-this appendix: inductively-coupled plasma 

emission spectrometry (ICP), graphite furnace 

atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS), or 

ion chromatography with a post-column 

reactor (IC/PCR). 

2. Range, Sensitivity, Precision, and . 

Interferences 

Same as Method 306, section 2 of this ' 

appendix. • . 

3.Apparatus . 

Note: Mention of trade names'or specific 

products does hot constitute endorsement by 

the Environmental Protection Agency. 

3.1' 'Sampling Train. A schematic of the 

sampling train is shown in Figure 306A-1. 

The components of the train are available 

commercially, but some fabrication and 

assembly are required. If Method 306 

equipment is available, the sampling train 

may be assembled as specified in Method 306 

of this appendix and die sampling rate of the 

meter box set at the delta H@ specified for 

the calibrated orifice; this train is then . 

operated as specified in this method. 

3.1.1 Probe Nozzle/Tubing and Sheath. 

Use approximately 1/4 in. inner diameter (ID) 

glass or rigid plastic tubing about 8 in. long -

with a short 90° bend at one end to form the 

nozzle. Grind a slight taper on the nozzlo end 

before making the bend. Attach the nozzle to 

flexible tubing of sufficient length to collect 

a sample from the stack. Use a straight piece 

of larger diameter rigid tubing (such as metal 

conduit or plastic water pipe) fo form a. 

sheath that begins about 1 in. from the 90° 

bend on the nozzle and encases the flexible 

tubing. 

BILUNG CODE 6560-50-P 

&' 

' • V •• 

iS. 
8 

9~\. 

:

 •• . 1 / 

IQ 

•:n-': 

fD 

'J'iti 

O 

a. 

. > 

w 

,'.H-

£( 

U*** 

:•-H

 : 

•*. K 

JD 

P-

;.a: 

co 

o 

cr 

fDA 

3 

qj . 

rtH- ".-

o 

Plastic Tubing 

| Probe/Nozzle Sheath Assembly 

(VVlD. Tubing) A : 

0.1 N NaOH 

or 

6.1 NNaHCO 

• A ' ' 3 

Mason Jar Impingers 

Vacuum Gauge 

(optional) 

.'••'©•''• • 

n 

CL 

<: 

••©• . 

p.* 1 

rn.: 

a. 

a 

. CD. 

CO 

. » -

Temperature 

Sensor 

Vacuum 

Pump 

a-. 

' • c 

•»• • 

.Ol. 

>a;' 

co 

CO 

o» 

tl: 

CD 

;•» ; 

3 A •Oii ! 

» " 

te 

hCO* 

08.-

- ' X 
4988 AFedei^ IU^er/ i 

I 8-y . 3.1.2, S-Type Pitot. Same as Method2,: 

section 3 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A). 

3.1.3 Sample Line. Use thick wall flexible 

plastic tubing (e.g., polyethylene, •.... '•-

polypropylene, or polyvinylchloride) about 

'A in. to

 3/a in. ID to connect the train 

components. A combination of rigid plastic -

tubing and thin wall flexible tubing may be -.A 

used as long as neither tubing collapses when 

leak-checking the train. Metal tubing cannot •-

be used. . ;..,.-.. .yy. y.-r.-,:.y 

3.1.4 Impingers. One quart capacity J.J-J-. 

"Mason" glass canning jars with vacuum seal 

lids are used. Three impingers are required: 

the first is for collecting the absorbing, 

solution, the second is empty and is used to 

collect any absorbing solution carried over 

from the first impinger, and the third 

contains the drying agent. Install bleak-tight . 

.inlet and outlet tubes in the lids of each 

impinger for assembly with the train. The' 

tubes may be made of approximately V* in. 

ID glass or rigid plastic tubing. For the inlet 

tube of the fiiret impinger, heat the glass or 

plastic tubing and draw until the tubing 

separates. Cut the tip off until the tip orifice 

is %2 in. in diameter. When fabricating the 

first impinger, place the'tip orifice Vie in.." 

above the bottom of the jar when assembled. 

For the second impinger, the inlet tube need 

not be drawn and sized, hut the tip should 

be approximately 2 in. above the bottom of 

the jar. The inlet tube ofthe third impinger 

should extend to about M: in. above the 

bottom of the jar. Locate the outlet tube end ' 

of all impingers about Vi in. beneath the 

bottom of the lid. ' 

3.1.5 Manometer. Inclined/vertical type,

 :" 

or equivalent device, as described in section -•' 

2.2 of Method 2 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A). " 

3.1.6 Critical Orifice; The critical orifice 

is a small restriction in the sample line A . 

(approximately Vie in. in diameter) that is 

located upstream of the vacuum pump and 

sets the sample rate at about 0:75 cfm. An A y: 

..orifice can be made of %i in: brass tabtagy A • 

approximately*:%e'in.iong sealed inside ; <•'. -

larger diameter, approximately Via in., brass 

tubing td serve as a critical orifice giving a,• 

constant sample flow. Materials other than 

brass can be used to constnicf the critical . 

orifice as long as the flow through the 

sampling train is approximately 0.75 cfrn. 

' 3.1.7 vConnectingHardware. Standardypipe aid fittings, V* in. or'ii in., are used . 

to install the vacuum pump and dry gas . 

meter in the sampling train A 

:

 3.1.8 ...Pump Oiler. A glass oil reservoir- '_--•• 

with a wick moimted at the vacuum pump 

inlet lubricates the pump vanes. The oiler 

should be an inline type and not vented to -

the atmosphere. .'*•....•_ 3... J Jj j'•••:;•. _ 

3.1.9 Vaciiuna Pump) G-Jst Model 0522-

V103-G18DX, or equivalent, capable of 

delivering at least 1.5 cfin at 15 in. Hg A:.".:..: 

vacuum...'..'•, .•••'>.•'•''.' ';• -

. 3.1.10 OilTrap"; An empty glass oil;:. 

reservoir without wick is mounted at pump . 

outlet to prevent oil from reaching the dry 

gasmeter. >.; •-.; A.' * :* 

3.1.11 Dry Gas Meter: A Rockwell model 

175-s test meter, or equivalent,-vnth a *":.'>-' - . 

thermometer installed to monitor meter 

temperature. The dry. gas meter must be * 

capable of measuring volume to within 2. 

percent. • .]••.' 

3.2 .Saniple.Recoveiy. .- A 

3.2.1 .Wash Bottles. These are glass or y 

inert plastic, 500 or 1000 ml, with spray tube. 

3.2.2 Sample Containers. The first mason 

jar Impinger of the sampling train serves as 

the sample container. A new lid and plastic 

wrap are substituted for the impinger inlet/, 

outlet assembly. .:.,- • , • *,' 

-3.3 * Analysis; Same as Method 306, -

isection.3.3 of this appendix. 

:

4jReagents « • • •.> y/"*-. A'';•';_•'•-.••,. 

v':-4:ir"Sam'pIing. Same as Method 306, ' 

section 4.1 ofthis appendix. •'• 

:4.2..- Sample Recovery. Sameas Method 

306, section 4.2 of this appendix. . 

5. Procedure'y .* *.-. ••'-. • 

• 5.1 'Sampling.. 

511.1 ftetest Preparation. 

5.1.1.1 Port Location. Locate the sampling 

ports as specified in section 2.1 of Method 1 

(40 CFR part 60, appendix A). Use a total of 

24 sampling points for round ducts and 25 

points for rectangular ducts. Locate the 

sampling points as specified in section 2.3 of 

Method 1 (40 CFR part 60. Appendix A). 

Mark the pitot and sampling probe with thin 

* strips of tape to permit velocity and sample 

traversing..For.ducts less than 12 in. in . 

diameter, use a total of 16 points. ; 

' .5.1.1.2 Velocity Pressure Traverse, (a) 

Perform a velocity pressure traverse before 

the first sample run. Figure 306A-2 may be 

used to record velocity pressure data. If . 

testing occurs over several days, perform the' 

traverse at the beginning of each day. Perform 

velocity pressure traverses as specified in 

section 3 of Method 2 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A), but record only the Ap (velocity 

., head) values for each sampling point. 

. (b) Check for cyclonic flow during the first 

traverse to verify that it does not exist; if 

cyclonic flow does exist, make sure that the 

absolute average angle of misalignment does 

not exceed 20°. If the average angle of 

misalignment exceeds 20° at an outlet 

location, install straightening vanes to ' 

eliminate the cyclonic flow. If it is-necessary 

to test an inlet location where cyclonic flow -

exists, it may not be possible to install 

straightening vanes. In this case, a variation 

. ofthe alignment method must be used. This 

-must be approved.by the Administrator. 

BILUNG CODE &56O-50-P 

4 * " 

. . 

; -
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No; 16 /Wednesday^ January > 25, "1995 7 Rules and^Regulations: "•: 4 4989 

Plant. 

Date- TimeLocationOperators)- ' • . 

Beginning stack temperature, °F_ 

Ending stack temperature, °F-_-

Average stack temperature, °E 

P.44 

Circle one: 

Before Run 1 Before Run 2 

Schematic of Points 

Before Run 3 After Run No. 

Traverse 

Point 

Number 

Cyclonic 

Flow 

Angle 

(Degrees) 

Ap 

V3p .. y2"px5 min 

(•/Ap)avy 

.= Numerical 

Minutes 

• - ; • ' ' • 

, , 

• • -

Decimal 

Part of 

Minute 

x60 = .. 

Seconds 

Whole. 

Minutes -f 

Seconds = 

Sample 

Time 

Avg 

. 

Avg 

-. 

• ' -"•"*' ' -. . 

-. 

••-A . C; 

.Figure 306A-2 Velpcity Traverse and Point Sample'Time 

•," Calculation,Sheet/ 

BILUNO CODE 656O-50-C 
I3J-; 

te. 

3.: 

i-•••'••-. • 

!. r?- - f. 

J A 

4990 Federal Register i& Vpl. 60, No. 16 •/;.Wednesday. January 25, 1995/ Rules and Regulations -

P.45 

1 iJri" 

[fi 

5 11 3 Point Sampling Times. Since the 

sampling rate ofthe train is held constant by 

the critical orifice, it is necessary to calculate 

specific sampling times for each point in 

-order to obtain a proportional sample- If all 

sampling can be completed in a single day, 

it-is necessary to calculate the point sampling 

times only once. If sampling occurs over 

severaldays, recalculate the point sample 

times each day using velocity traverse data 

obtained earlier in the day. Determine the 

average of the Ap values obtained during the 

velocity traverse (Figure 306A-2). Calculate 

the sampling times for each point using 

Equation 306A-1. Convert the decimal parts 

of minutes to seconds. If the stack diameter 

is less than 12 in., use 7.5 minutes in place 

of 5 minutes in the equation and 16 sampling 

points. 

P'" I 

• -v/Point n Ap , . ' • .' 

Minutes at point n = - - x 5 minutes Eq: 306A-l 

• \ " /avg 

II, 

-Jr'-

Where: " 

-n=Sampling point number. 

Ap=Velocity head measured by Type-S pitot 

tube.in.HjO . ,~ . . 

5;i.i.4 Preparation.of Sampling Train. 

Assemble the sampling train as shown in 

Figura 306A-l. Secure the nozzle-liner 

assembly to the sheath to prevent slipping 

when sampling. Before charging, rinse the 

first mason jar impinger with either 0.1 N 

sodium hydroxide (NaOH] or 0.1 N sodium 

bicarbonate (NaHCOj); discard the solution. 

Put 250 ml of 0.1 N NaOH or 0.1 N NaHCOj 

absorbing solution into the first mason jar 

impinger. Similarly, rinse the second mason 

jar impinger and leave empty. Put silica gel 

into the third mason jar impinger until the 

impinger is half full. Place the impingers into 

an ice bath and check to ensure that the lids 

are tight. 

5.1.1.5 Train Leak Check Procedure. Wait 

until the ice has cooled the impingers before 

sampling. Next, seal the nozzle with a finger 

covered by a piece of clear plastic wrap and 

turn on the pump. The vacuum in the lino 

between the pump and the critical orifice 

must be at least 15'in. Hg. Observe any leak 

rate on the dry gas meter. The leak rate 

should not exceed 0.02 cfm. 

5.1.2 Sampling Train Operation. 

5.1.2.1 Record all pertinent process and . 

sampling data"on the data sheet (see Figure ' 

306A-3). Ensure that the process operation is 

suitable for sample collection. 

BILUNG COOE 6860-50-P 
Federal Register /Vol. -fHK''No!£l&^ ,:;

 4991 

— — ^ • • " • '—— - • ——— - ::± " -• • " ' • * • • -—-———-—-* • ...... . 

PlantSampling SiteTotal Cr catch, MQ , /igAvg dry gas mete temp, Tm,°FMeter correction factor, Vm 

Meter vorume, V f r ; . 

nr Barometric press, P-^p. in. HgStart clock Ume -

Stop clock time • 

Date*.; Run NtimberOperatozStack radius, r, in—• • , __ 

Avgsq/rt.Ap, (>fKp)tvg ,in. H20_ 

"Uck tempi Ts, °F ; ; ; 

Leak rate before run, cfm_ 

Leak rate after run, cfm_ 

'Stop meter volume, ft3. 

Start meter volume, ft3-

REMARKS: 

Point No. 

- -

• : • . 

• • 

-

: '" -

Sample 

(Min/Sec) 

' ' 

- -

Gas Meter 

Temp(°F) 

• '.'•-... - •' . 

/ • 

• - • . • -. . 

Ccr = 

(Ma) _Tm + 460 ) 

Point No. 

.. 

' .-' -'• 

Sample 

(Min/Sec) 

Gas Meter 

Temp (T) 

:

 -•-

- •' . 

(499.8) (YJ (VJ (P^J. barkg/hz =(C-J . (0.000-i597> (rz

) (v'Sp), 

(Ts + 460) 

""V- (-*W (28.73) 

mg/cubic meter,'(CQ.)-. (Optional) kg/hr -

Figure 306A-3. Chromium Constant Sampling Rate Field 

Data Sheet. . 

BILUNG CODE 6560-60-C 
4992 Federal Register /Vol. 60, No, 16'./ Wednesday, January.25,. 1995 / ..Rules vanid;i

 Regulations;A.-L' 

! I) i. 

i l l 

5.1.2.2 Place the probe/nozzle into the 

duct at the first sampling point and tum on 

the pump. A minimum vacuum of 15 in. Hg 

or 0.47 atmosphere between the critical 

orifice and pump is required to maintain 

critical flow. Sample for the.time intervalpreviously determined for that point. Move 

to the second point and sample for the time 

interval determined for that point; sample all 

points on the traverse in this manner. Keep 

ice around the impingers during the run. 

Complete the traverse and turn off the pump. 

Move to the next sampling port and repeat. 

Record the final dry gas meter reading. 

(NOTE: If an approximate mass emission rate 

is desired, record the stack temperature, 

before and after the run.) 

5;i.2.3 Post Test Leak Check. Remove the 

probe assembly and flexible tubing from the 

first impinger. Do not cover the nozzle. Seal 

the inlet tube of the first impinger with a 

.finger covered by clear plastic wrap and turn 

on the pump. The vacuum in the line 

between the pump and the critical orifice 

must.be at least 15 in. Hg. Observe any leak 

rate on the dry gas meter. If the leak rate 

exceeds 0.02 cfm, reject the run. If the leak 

rate is acceptable, take the probe assembly 

and impinger assembly to the sample • 

recovery area. N 

5.2 Sample Recovery. 

5.2.1 Container No. 1. (a) After the train 

has been moved to the sample recovery area, 

disconnect the tubing, that joins the first 

impinger with the second. 

(b) The first impinger jar is also used as the 

sample container jar. Unscrew the lid from 

the first impinger jar. Lift the inlet/outlet 

tube assembly almost out of the jar, and using 

the wash bottle, rinse the outside of the 

impinger tip that was immersed in the 

impinger jar with extra absorbing solution; 

rinse the inside of the tip as well. 

(c) Recover the second impinger by 

removing the lid and pouring any contents 

from the second impinger into the first 

impinger. Rinse the second impinger 

including the inside and outside of the 

impinger stem as well as any connecting 

plastic tubing with extra.absorbing solution 

and place the rinse into the first impinger. 

(d) Hold the nozzle and connecting plastic

 ; 

tubing in a vertical, position so that the tubing 

forms a "U." Using the wash bottle, partially 

fill the tubing with sampling reagent. Raise 

and lower the end of the plastic tubing 

several times to cause the reagent to Contact 

the major portion of the internal parts of the 

assembly thoroughly; Do not raise the -•'.* ' 

solution level top high or part of-the sample 

will be lost. Place the nozzle end.of the . 

assembly over the mouth of the first impinger.: 

jar (sample container) and elevate the plastic -

tubing so that the solution flows rapidly out 

of the nozzle. Perform this procedure three 

times. Next, repeat the recovery procedure . 

but allow the solution to flow rapidly out the 

open end of the plastic tubing iiito'the first 

impinger jar. 

(e) Place a piece of clear plastic wrap over • 

the mouth of the first impinger jar. Use a 

standard lid and band assembly to seal the 

jar. Label the jar with, the sample number and 

mark the liquid level to gauge any losses 

during handling. 

5.2.2 Container No. 2 (Reagent Blank). 

Place approximately 500 ml of the 0.1 N 

NaOH or 0.1 N NaHC03 absorbing solution 

in a labeled sample container. 

5.2:3 Sample Filtration for IC/PCR. If the 

sample is to be analyzed for Cr*1*

6

 by IC/PCR, .-

it must be filtered immediately following 

recovery as described in section 5,2.3 of. * A 

Method.306 of.this appendix.- 'A'-

5.3 Analysis. Sample preparation and 

analysis procedures are identical to Method 

306, section 5.3 of this appendix. 

6: Calibration • 

6il Dry Gas Meter, (a) Dry gas meter 

calibrations may be performed by either the 

manufacturer, a firm who provides 

calibration services, or the tester. The.dry gas 

meter calibration coefficient (Ym) must be . 

determined prior to initial use of the meter, 

and must be checked following each field 

.(b) If the dry gas meter is new, the 

manufacturer will have specified the Ym for 

the meter. The manufacturer may also have 

included a calibration orifice and a data sheet 

with the meter that may be used for A ' 

calibration purposes. The sheet will specify, 

a standard cubic foot volume and a sample 

time, and these values were determined 

when the orifice was used to set the initial. 

Ym for the meter. The Ym may be checked by 

disconnecting the critical orifice inthe . . 

sampling train and replacing it with the < ' 

calibration orifice. The inlet side of the. . 

calibration orifice is open to the atmosphere 

and is not reconnected to the sample train. 

Record the initial dry gas meter volume and 

meter temperature. Turn on the pump and ' 

operate it for the number of minutes 

specified by the manufacturer's data sheet. 

Stop the pump and record the final dry gas 

meter volume and temperature. Subtract tho 

start volume from the stop volume and 

average the temperatures. Check the Ym for • 

the dry gas meter after the test-by using the 

following equation: . • *•.-••• '*" 

Y = 

Ft.3n*(Tm+460) 

17.647(Ft3

p,)(Pbar) 

Where: 

Ft.3

m=Cubic feet given by meter manufacturer 

Tm=Temperature of meter in degrees 

Fahrenheit 

Ffpr-iCubic feet from dry gas meter, post test 

PbM=Barometric pressure in inches of 

. mercury 

Compare the Ym just calculated with the 

Ym given by the manufacturer: '...-.-. . 

Y^ (manufacturer) 

Y,,, (calculated after test) 

If this value is between 6,95 and 1,05,: the 

Ym of the meter is acceptable.'If the value lies 

outside the specified range; the test series 

shall either be voided, or calculations for the 

test series shall be performed using

 v 

whichever meter coefficient value (i.e., before 

and after) that gives the lower value of total 

sample volume. Return the dry gas meter to 

the manufacturer for recallbration. The 

calibration may also be conducted as 

specified in section 5.3.1 or section 7 of 

Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), 

except that it is only necessary to check the 

calibration at an approximate flowrate of 

0.75 cfm. the calibration of the dry gais meter 

must be checked after each field use in the 

. same manner...If the values of Ym obtained 

before and after a test series, differ by more. •, 

than 5%, the test series shall either be . 

voided, or calculations for the test series J- '-. 

shall be performed using whichever meter 

coefficient value (i.e., before or after) that • 

gives the lower value of total sample volume.1 

6.2 GFAA Spectrometer. Same'as Method 

306, section 6.2 of this appendix. ' ' 

:

 .6.3 ICP Spectrometer. Same as Method •• 

306, section 6.3 of this appendix. 

7. Quality Control 

. Same as Method 306, section 7 ofthis' J-. 

appendix. A A:-.. :, .... . •• •' J j -

8. Calculation's '. - " '' .'•••- • 

.8,1' Pollutant Concentration. Calculate A .. 

Cc, the Cr concentration in thestack gas, in' . 

mg/dscm on a dry basis as follows:; .",',',--, 

-Cr (499.8)(Ym)(Vm)(P^)y:; 

;;Eq.306A-2 A 

where: Mcr=Amount of Cr in sample from Method 

306 of this appendix, Eq. 306-1, ng. 

Tm=Dry.gas meter temperature/°F."_' 
Federal Register I Vol. 60, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 1995 /Rules and Regulations 4993 

. Ym=Pry gas meter correction factor, 

'dimensionless. 

Vm=Dry gas meter volume, ft3. 

Pb«r=Barometric pressure, in. Hg, 

8.2 Approximate Mass Emission Rate 

(Optional). Calculate an approximate mass 

emission rate of Cr in kg/hr using the 

following equation: 

kg/hr = (0.(XX)1597)(GCr)(r2)(VA?)avg. 

(Ts + 460) 

^(Pbar)(28.73) 

Eq.306A-3 

where: 

r=Radius of stack, in. 

(VAp)av?=Average of VAp values. 

Ts=Stack temperature, °F. , 

Pb«r=Barometric pressure, in. Hg. 

Ccr=Concentration of Cr, mg/dscm. 

Note: The emission rate calculated "Using 

Equation 306A-3 is based on an assumed 

moisture content of 2%-. 

9. Bibliography • . 

1, Clay, F.R. Memo, Impinger Collection 

Efficiency—Mason Jars vs. Greenburg-Smith 

Impingers, Dec. 1989. 

2. Segall, R.R., W.G. DeWees, F.R. Clay, 

and J.W. Brown. Development of Screening 

Methods for Use in Chromium Emissions 

Measurement and Regulations Enforcement. 

In: Proceedings ofthe 1989 EPA/A&WMA 

International Symposium—Measurement of 

Toxic and Related Air Pollutants, A&WMA 

Publication VIP-13, EPA Report No. 600/9-

89-060, p. 785. 

.3. Clay, F.R. Chromium Sampling Method. 

In: Proceedings ofthe 1990 EPA/A&WMA 

International Symposium—Measurement of 

Toxic and Related Air Pollutants, A&WMA 

Publication VIP-17, EPA Report No. 600/9-

9&-026. p. 576. ' 

'4. Clay, F.R. Proposed Sampling Method 

306A for the Determination of Hexavalent 

Chromium Emissions from Electroplating 

and Anodizing Facilities. In: Proceedings of 

the 1992 EPA/A&WMA International 

Symposium—Measurement of Toxic and 

Related Air-Pollutants, A&WMA Publication 

VIP-25, EPA Report No. 600/R-92/131, p. 

209. 

Method 306-B—Surface Tension 

Measurement and Recordkeeping for 

: Chromium Plating Tanks Used at 

Electroplating and Anodizing Facilities 

1. Applicability and Principle 

1.1 Applicability. This method is 

applicable to all decorative plating and 

anodizing operations where a wetting agent 

is used in the tank as the primary mechanism 

for reducing emissions from the surface of 

the solution. 

1.2 Principle. During an electroplating or 

anodizing operation, gas bubbles generated 

during the process rise to the surface of the 

tank liquid and burst. Upon bursting, tiny 

droplets of chromic acid become entrained in 

ambient air. The addition of a wetting agent, 

to the tank bathreduces the surface tension of 

the liquid and diminishes the formation of 

these droplets.

 : 

2. Apparatus 

2.1 Stalagmometer. Any commercially 

' available stalagmometer or equivalent surface 

tension measuring device may be used to 

measure the surface tension of the plating or 

anodizing tank liquid. 

2.2 Preciser tensiometer. A Preciser 

tensiometer may be used to measure the 

surface tension of the tank liquid provided 

the procedures specified in ASTM Method D 

1331-89, Standard Test Methods for Surface 

and Interfacial Tension of Solutions of 

Surface Active Agents (incorporated by 

reference—see § 63.14) are followed: 

3. Procedure 

3.1 The surface tension of the tank bath 

may be measured by using a Preciser 

tensiometer, a stalagmometer or any other 

device suitable for measuring surface tension 

in dynes per centimeter. If the Preciser 

tensiometer is used, the instructions given in 

ASTM Method D 1331-89, Standard Test 

Methods for Surface and Interfacial Tension 

of Solutions of Surface Active Agents 

(incorporated by reference—see § 63.14) must 

be followed. If a stalagmometer or other , 

device is-used to measure surface tension, the 

instructions that came with the measuring 

device must be followed. 

• 3.2 . (a) Measurements ofthe bath surface 

tension are done using a progressive system 

which minimizes the number of surface 

, tension measurements required when the 

proper surface tension is maintained. 

Initially, measurements must be madeev'ery 

4 hours of tank operation for the first 40 

hours of tank operation after the compliance 

date. Once there are no exceedances during 

40 hours of tank operation, measurements 

may be conducted once every 8 hours of tank 

operation. Once there are no exceedances 

during 40 hours of tank operation, 

measurements may be conducted once every 

40 hours of tank operation on an on-going 

basis, until an exceedance occurs. The 

maximum time interval for measurements is 

once every 40 hours of tank operation. 

(b) If a measurement of the surface tension 

of the solution is above the 40 dynes per 

centimeter limit; the time interval reverts 

back to the original monitoring schedule of 

once every 4 hours. A subsequent decrease in 

frequency would then be allowed according 

to the previous paragraph. 

4. Recordkeeping 

4.1 Log book of surface tension 

measurements and fume suppressant ' 

additions. The surface tension ofthe plating 

or anodizing tank bath must be measured as 

specified in section 3.2. The measurements 

must be recorded in the log book. In addition 

to the record of surface tension 

measurements, the frequency of fume 

suppressant maintenance additions and the 

amount of fume suppressant added during 

each maintenance addition will be recorded 

in die log book. The log book will be readily 

available for inspection by regulatory 

personnel. 

4.2 Instructions for apparatus used in 

measuring surface tension. Also included 

with the log book must be a copy of the 

instructions for the apparatus used for . 

measuring the surface tension ofthe plating 

or anodizing bath. If a Preciser tensiometer is 

used, a copy of ASTM Method D 1331^89, . 

Standard Methods for Surface and Interfacial 

Tension of Solution's of Surface Active 

Agents (incorporated by reference—see 

§ 63.14) must be included with the log book. 

[FR Doc. 95-65 Filed 1-24-95; 8:45 am] 

BILUNG COOE 6560-60-P