p. 1



# OAR Box 1170
Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 183)IV-H- 1

Docket Number: 

# A-88-2 4

Printed 4/30/20081:48:38PM

Sheet 183 of 188P. 2

6560-5 0 ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y [4 0 CF RPar t 60 ] STANDARD S O F PERFORMANC E FORNE W STATIONAR YSOURCE S Amendment s t o Subpar t J (Petroleu m Refineries )

an dAdditio no f Performanc e Specification7 t o Appe r

[AD-FRL - ] AGENCY : Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA) . ACTION : Fina l Rule . SUMMARY : Th e purpos e o f thi s actio ni s five-fold : (1 ) td^fequir e (a s oppose dt o bein g a

noption ) th e monitorin g o f sulfu r dioxid e (S0 2 ) ingase s discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro m th e combustio no f fue l gase s or , a s a n alternative , th e monitorin g o f hydroge nsulfid e (H 2 S ) infue l gases ; (2 ) t o delet e th e mentio no f controllin g S0 2 afte r combustio no f fue l gases ; (3 ) t o delet e th e monitorin g requiremen t o f H 2 S ingase s discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro

m Clau s sulfu r recover y plants , bu t requir e th e monitorin g o f othe r reduce dsulfu r compound s usin g continuou s emissio nmonitorin g system s (CEMS's ) o r S0 2 CEMS' s afte r oxidizin g th e reduce dsulfu r compound s t o S0 2 ; (4 ) t o ad

dPerformanc e Specification(PS ) 7 fo r H 2 S CEMS' s t o Appendi xB o f thi s part ; an

d(5 ) t o clarif y

ambiguitie s inth e existin g regulations . Al l affecte dfue l ga s combustio ndevice s an dClau s plant s inpetroleu m refineries , subjec t t o Subpar t J o f 4 0 CF RPar t 60 , wil l b e require dt o instal l an d operat e CEMS' s withi n1 yea r o f th e promulgatio ndate . Thes e monitorin g requirement s ar e no t new , bu t previou s H 2 S an dreduce dsulfu r CEM S installation s wer e contingen t upo nth e Agency' s promulgatio no f PS's . Thes e amendment s wer e publishe d inth e FEDERAL REGISTE Ro nMarc h1 , 198 9 an

d Apri l 28 , 1989 .P. 3

DATES : Effectiv e Date : (dat e o f publicatio ninth e FEDERAL REGISTER) . Judicia l Review : Unde r Sectio n307(b)(1 ) o f th e Clea nAi r Act , judicia l revie w o f th e action s take nb y thi s notic e i s availabl e onl y b y th e filin g o f

a petitio nfo r revie w inth e U.S . Cour t o f Appeal s fo r th e Distric t o f Columbi a Circui t withi n6 0 day s o f today' s publicatio no f thi s rule . Unde r Sectio n307(b)(2 ) o f th e Clea nAi r Act , th e requirement s tha t ar e th e subjec t

o f today' s notic e ma y no t b e challenge dlate r incivi l o r crimina l proceeding s brough t b

y EPA t o enforc e thes e requirements . ADDRESSES : Docket . Docke t No . A-88-24 , containin g material s relevan t t o thi s rulemaking , i s availabl e fo r publi c inspectio nan dcopyin g betwee n 8:3 0 a.m . an

d3:3 0 p.m. , Monda y

throug hFriday , a t EPA' s Ai r Docke t Section , Roo m M-1500 , 1s t Floor , Watersid e Mall , 40 1 M Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C . 20460 . A

reasonabl e fe e ma y

be charge dfo r copying . FORFURTHE RINFORMATION CONTACT : Fosto nCurti s o r Roge r T . Shigehara , Emissio nMeasuremen t Branc h(MD-19) , Technica l Support Division , U.S . Environmenta l ProtectionAgency , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolin a 27711 , telephon e numbe r (919 ) 541-1063 . SUPPLEMENTAR YINFORMATION : I . TH E RULEMAKING Th e present monitorin g requirement s fo r fue l ga s combustio ndevice s unde r § 60.105(a)(3 ) an

d(4 ) allow

th e option s o f monitorin g S0 2 afte r fue l gase s

ar e combuste do r monitorin g H 2 S inth e fue l gases . Sinc e Octobe r 6 , 197 5 (4 0 FR46250) , affecte dfacilitie s choosin g t o monito r H 2 S inth e fue l gase s hav e bee nexempte dfro m th e monitorin g requirement s o f § 60.105(a)(4 ) becaus e PS' s fo r H 2 S CEMS' s hadno t bee nestablished . Thi s rulemakin g wil l amendth eP. 4

emissio nmonitorin g requirement s t o en dthi s exemption . Th e effec t o f thi s rulemakin g wil l b e t o requir e affecte dfacilitie s t o monito r S0 2 afte r fue l ga s combustio nor , a s a nalternative , H 2 S inth e fue l gas . Whe nfue l gase s ar e burne dina combustio ndevice , th e H 2 S i s converte d t o S0 2 . Th e resultin g S0 2 concentratio ni s substantiall y les s tha nth e correspondin g H 2 S inth e fue l ga s du e t o dilutio nfro m adde dcombustio nair . Th e amoun t o f dilutio nai r require dfo r complet e fue l ga s combustio nhinge s upo nth e makeu po f fue l ga s component s (primaril y hydroge nan

dhydrocarbons )

an dthei r stoichiometri c nee dfo r oxygen . Th e EPA investigate da numbe r o f typica l fue l ga s composition s an dthei r combustio nproduct s an d determine d that , a t zer o percent exces s air , th e concentratio no f S0 2 forme d fro m combustin g fue l ga s containin g H 2 S a t th e standar dleve l (16 2 ppm ) range dfro m 9 t o 2 5 pp

m wit hth e majorit y

o f value s betwee n1 5 an d2 0 ppm . Thi s agree s wit hth e 15 - t o 20-pp m S0 2 leve l note dinth e backgroun ddocumen t t o th e propose dpetroleu

m refinerie s standard . Realizin g th e complexit y o f establishin g th e S0 2 /H 2 S equivalenc y o na case-by-cas e basis , EPA ha s selecte d2 0 pp

m t o represen t th e complianc e leve l fo r S0 2 . Inaddition , rathe r tha nrequirin g monitorin g o f th e effluen t afte r

eac hcombustio ndevice , EPA i s allowin g th e monitorin g o f S0 2 afte r onl y on e

o f th e combustio ndevice s a s lon g a s tha t on e locatio naccuratel y represent s th e fue l ga s bein g burne db y al l o f th e combustio ndevices . Durin g 197 8 an

d1982 , EPA

conducte devaluation s o f H 2 S CEMS' s an d conclude dtha t acceptabl e H 2 S CEMS' s wer e no t availabl e (se e Sectio n4 o f P S 7) . However , a Stat e agenc y an da loca l agenc y

reporte dtha t H 2 S CEMS' s hav e bee ninstalle dunde r thei r jurisdictio ntha t ar e operatin g satisfactorily . Certificatio ntes t report s tha t hav e bee nsubmitte d fo rP. 5

Agenc y revie w indicat e that , a t leas t inthes e cases , acceptabl e CEM S accurac y

an dcalibratio ndrif t (CD ) ar e attainable . Othe r dat a fro m regulator y agencie s hav e show

nvaryin g degree s o f succes s incertifyin g an dauditin g H 2 S CEMS's . Mos t o f thes e dat a wer e take nfro m H 2 S CEMS' s o f th e same type , an d instrumen t performanc e appear s t o b e linke d t o operato r an dmaintenanc e proficiency . Thus , EPA ha s decide dt o allow th e us e o f H 2 S CEMS' s fo r fue l gase s a s a

nalternativ e t o S0 2 CEMS' s fo r combuste dfue l gases . Fo r thi s purpose , P S 7 wa s proposed . Inreviewin g th e regulations , EPA determine dtha t th e optio no f controllin g S0 2 afte r combustin g th e fue l gase s wa s no t bein g used . Also , thi s optio ndoe s no t appea r t o be a neconomicall y

feasibl e alternativ e fo r futur e consideration . Therefore , mentio no f thi s contro l optio ni s bein g delete dfro

m th e regulation . Thi s action , however , doe s no t prohibi t th e us e

o f suc hcontro l devices . Inth e future , source s tha t desir e t o bur nfue l gase s containin g H 2 S inexces s o f 23 0 mg/dsc m an dcontro l th e resultin g S0 2 emission s ma y

petitio nth e Administrato r fo r a nalternativ e complianc e demonstration . Hydroge nsulfid e an

dreduce dsulfu r emitte dfro m Clau s plant s ar e regulate db

y standard s se t a t 1 0 an d30 0 ppm , respectively . Reduce dsulfu r compounds , thoug hdetermine dseparatel y fro m H 2 S , ar e als o inclusiv e o f H 2 S b y definition . Th e Agenc y ha s determine dtha t i t i s difficul t t o monito r th e disproportionat e concentration s o f H 2 S an dothe r reduce dsulfu r compound s o na continua l basis , especiall y a t level s nea r th e standards . Therefore , a separat e determinatio no f H 2 S apar t fro m othe r reduce dsulfu r compound s wil lP. 6

no t be required , bu t onl y th e continuou s monitorin g o f reduce dsulfu r compounds . Performanc e Specificatio n5 an dMetho d1 5 o r 15 A

wil l b e use dt o evaluat e th e reduce dsulfu r CEM S performance . Fo r greate r flexibility , CEM S tha t oxidize s th e reduce dsulfu r t o S0 2 an d analyze s th e concentratio no f th e resultin g S0 2 wil l be allowed . Rathe r tha n tryin g t o determin e th e concentratio no f S0 2 equivalen t t o th e reduce dsulfu r concentration , EPA

wil l us e th e leve l o f 25 0 pp m S0 2 (dr y basis , zer o percen t

exces s air ) t o represen t th e S0 2 complianc e level . Thi s concentratio ni s consisten t wit hth e contro l optio no f combustin g th e effluen t gase s unde r § 60.102(a)(2)(i) . I nadditio nt o th e abov e changes , ambiguitie s inth e existin g regulation s

ar e bein g clarifie db y correctin g inconsistencie s an db y specifyin g pertinen t testin g procedure s tha t originall y wer e onl y

implied . Thi s rulemakin g doe s no t impos e emissio nmeasuremen t requirement s beyon d thos e specifie dinth e curren t regulations , neithe r doe s i t chang e an y emissio nstandar dno r mak e i t mor e stringent . Rather , th e rulemakin g wil l facilitat e th e us e o f acceptabl e CEMS' s an dallow affecte dfacilitie s t o compl y wit hmonitorin g requirement s t o whic hthe y ar e already

subject . II . PUBLI C PARTICIPATIO N Th e opportunit y

t o hol dpubli c hearing s a t 10:0 0 a.m . onMarc h22 , 198 9 fo r th e propose dSubpar t J revision s an dMa y 19 , 198 9 fo r propose dP S 7 wa s presente dbu t n o on e desire dt o mak e a nora l presentation . Th e publi c commen t period s wer e fro

m Marc h1 t o Jul y

12 , 198 9 fo r th e Subpar t J revision s an d fro m Apri l 2 8 t o July

12 , 198 9 fo r P S 7 .P. 7

III . SIGNIFICAN T COMMENT S AN D CHANGE S T O TH E PROPOSE D RULEMAKING Seve ncommen t letter s wer e receive d fro m th e proposa l o f th e rulemakings . Th e majo r comment s an dresponse s ar e summarize dinthi s preamble . Mos t o f th e

commen t letter s containe dmultipl e comments . Th e significan t comment s an d subsequen t methodchange s ar e liste d here . 1 . On e commente r requeste d tha t permeatio ntub e calibratio nsystem s an d scrubber s b e allowe da s alternative s t o Method s 3 , 6 , an d 1 1 fo r spa n calibratio nan

dzer o check s o f CEMS's . Th e commente r note dtha t commerciall y availabl e system s hav e bee nfoundt o be extremel y accurat e an

d reliabl e fo r fue l ga s an

dClau s plan t unit s an d ar e fa r superio r t o older , labor-intensive , wet-chemica l procedures . Approvin g alternative s fo r specifi c calibratio nsystem s beyondth e EP A referenc e method s i s no t withi nth e scop e o f th e rulemaking . Writte nrequest s fo r approva l shoul db e submitte dt o th e Directo r o f EPA' s Technica l Suppor t Division . Th e reques t mus t includ e a clearl y define dprocedur e tha t canb e uniforml y

followed , supportin g dat a showin g th e alternative' s comparabilit y t o th e referenc e method , an dprocedure s addressin g th e appropriat e qualit y
assuranc e (QA ) measures . 2 . Anothe r commente r strongl y urge dEP

A t o tak e a "mor e reasonable " approac ht o th e exemptio nfro m th e C O CEM S requiremen t provide din 60.105(a)(2)(ii) . Th e followin g reason s wer e offere dt o suppor t thi s stand :

a . A demonstratio ntha t C O emission s ar e les s tha n5 0 pp m wa s though t t o b e excessivel y restrictive . Instead , a limi t o f 3 0 percen t o f th e standar dshoul db e ampl e t o sho w tha t a uni t i s designe d fo r high-efficienc y regeneratio nan

dtha t a CEM S i s no t warranted .P. 8

b . Requirin g 3 0 day s o f continuou s monitorin g dat a t o demonstrat e a CEM S woul dno t b e necessary . Althoug hthi s ma y b e desirabl e insome instances , i t wa s recommende dtha t performanc e tes t dat a b e allowe dinlie u o f continuou s monitorin g data .

c . Th e languag e in§ 60.105(a)(2)(ii ) need s clarifyin g t o requir e tha t EPA issu e a

nexemptio nwhe nth e require dinformatio ni s submitte d wit h th e writte nrequest . A s proposed , a lac k o f respons e fro m EPA woul d leav e th e

owne r o r operato r ina nunclea r complianc e status . d . I t wa s no t clea r t o th e commente r i f an y additiona l requirement s wit hth e revision s [i.e. , CEM S relativ e accurac y (RA ) demonstrations ] affec t

owner s o r operator s wh o submitte drequest s fo r exemptio nunde r th e existin g requirements . Th e Metho d6 flow

rat e o f 2 liters/minin§ 60.105(a)(3)(iii ) wa s questioned . Wit hth e Metho d6 detectio nlimi t a t 3. 4 m g S0 2 whe nsamplin g a t 1 liter/mi nfo r 2 0 minutes , i t wa s no t understoo dwhy a large r sampl e wa s needed , sinc e thi s i s approximatel y 6 percen t o f th e 2 0 pp m standard . Thi s chang e wa s considere da nadde dcomplication , an di t wa s recommende dtha t i t be reconsidered . I f thi s chang e coul dbe trul y justified , some flexibilit y in th e samplin g flow

rat e wa s requested , suc ha s "approximatel y 2 liters/min. " Finally , th e commente r objecte dt o wha t wa s thought t o be a chang e t o rollin g 3-hou r averagin g period s fo r determinin g complianc e wit h § 60.105(a)(3 ) an

d(4) . I t wa s note dtha t no rational e fo r thi s chang e wa s discusse dinth e supplementar y information , an

dtha t thi s wa s clearl y a nadde d recordkeepin g requirement , no t a clarification . Current rule s wer e thought t o requir e tha t monitorin g record s b e kep t fo r 3-hou r bloc k periods , o f whic h ther e ar e eigh t pe r day . A 198 6 EPA

memorandu

m t o director s o f EPA Regiona lP. 9

ai r division s wa s cite da s evidenc e o f th e EPA polic y o f usin g bloc k averages . B y increasin g th e requiremen t t o rollin g 3-hou r periods , th e Agenc y woul d

caus e a threefol dincreas e t o th e recordkeepin g burde nan d a tripl e countin g

o f an y extende dperiod s o f exces s emissions . Th e propose drul e doe s no t chang e th e CEM S exemptio nrequirement s no r th e averagin g perio do f th e existin g regulation . Therefore , comment s t o thes e point s an

dan y subsequen t change s base d onth e comment s ar e beyon d th e scop e

o f thi s rulemaking . Concernin g th e issuanc e o f a nexemption , th e inten t o f th e wordin g in 60.105(a)(2)(ii ) i s t o not e tha t th e exemptio ni s contingen t upo nth e Agency' s decisio nafte r reviewin g th e submitte ddemonstratio ndat a an dexemptio n request , no t upo nit s submission . Mentionin g tha t a nexempte dsourc e i s no t require dt o perfor m

additiona l CEM S testin g requirement s i s no t necessar y sinc e anexemptio nfro m monitorin g implie s tha t n o CEM S wil l b e installe dt o furthe r test . Unde r norma l situations , a sourc e tha t ha s submitte da n exemptio nreques t i s no t require dt o perform additiona l testin g unti l th e Agenc y make s a decision . Insome case s though , th e Agenc y ma y nee dt o reques t interi m tests . However , i f th e decisio ni s suc htha t a CEM S mus t b e installed, thi s CEM S ma y b e subjecte dt o a

nR A test . Th e requiremen t in60.105(a)(3)(iii ) t o operat e Metho d6 a t 2 liters/mi n fo r a t leas t 3 0 minute s wa s mad e t o minimiz e th e analytica l erro r tha t result s fro m measurin g smal l titratio nvolumes . Fo r routin e Metho d6 analyses , sampl e titratio nvolume s o f a t leas t 2 m l ar e desire dt o minimiz e th e erro r contribute db

y bure t inaccurac y

an d th e averagin g o f duplicat e measurements . T o ad dflexibilit y

an dconform

wit hth e guideline s give ninMetho d6 , a n approximat e samplin g flow rat e o f 2 liters/mi nwil l be required .

8P.1 0

Finally , th e requiremen t fo r 3-hou r rollin g S0 2 average s i s no t a chang e fro m curren t practice . Th e bloc k averagin g perio dmentione dinth e Marc h198 6 memorandum

i s applicabl e specificall y t o determination s o f complianc e wit h applicabl e nationa l ai r qualit y standards . Curren t polic y permit s emissio n limit s establishe dt o compl y wit hsuc hstandard s t o b e expresse deithe r a s bloc k o r rollin g averages . Th e same hold s tru e fo r complianc e wit hemissio n contro l requirement s unde r applicabl e Par t 6 0 standards . I nth e cas e in question , th e rollin g averag e wa s th e origina l intent . Thu s today' s actio ni s

no t a chang e fro

m th e presen t requirements . 3 . On e commente r though t tha t P S 7 lef t muc ht o b e desired . Basi c

measure s o f analyze r performance , suc ha s calibratio nerror , respons e time , an doperationa l tes t perio dwer e though t t o be needed . Havin g t o mee t th e C D specificatio nononl y 6 ou t o f 7 tes t day s woul dno t encourag e adjustmen t o f th e analyze r whe ndrif t exceed s th e specification . Complianc e wit hth e C D specificatio nwithou t exception s wa s preferred , wit hshort-term an d zer o drif t specification s als o included . A t th e ver y least , languag e indicatin g tha t State s ma y

impos e additiona l o r mor e stringen t specification s wa s desired . Th e commente r though t tha t th e requiremen t t o repor t onl y exces s emission s woul dno t allow a nagenc y t o tak e int o accoun t performanc e durin g complianc e period s whe ndeterminin g enforcemen t action . Requirin g source s t o repor t dat a fo r al l time period s wa s favore d sinc e a differen t enforcemen t actio nma y

b e appropriat e fo r a sourc e tha t operate s mos t o f th e time nea r th e standar dtha nfo r a sourc e tha t usuall y operate s wel l below th e standard . Continua l CEM S complianc e an dAppendi xF procedure s wer e no t mandate dfo r Subpar t J sources . Th e P S tes t procedure s ar e no t designe dfo r long-ter m evaluatio nno r fo r continua l complianc e bu t t o provid e th e initia l chec k o fP.1 1

th e instrument' s capabilitie s a t th e time o f installation . Th e Agenc y feel s tha t CEM S dat a accurac y an drepresentativenes s ca nb e demonstrate d sufficientl y

b y R A an dC D tests . A

mor e in-dept hevaluatio no f th e CEM S a t th e discretio no f th e operato r i s encouraged , bu t thi s additiona l testin g nee d

no t be require dsinc e th e overal l qualit y o f monito r dat a ca nb e determine db y th e R A an dCD tests . Th e R A an dC D specification s ar e determine dfro m studie s o f CEM S performanc e ove r extende dperiod s o f time . I na nAgenc y study o f H 2 S CEMS's , th e mos t reliabl e instrument s wer e onl y capabl e o f meetin g CD' s o f 5 percen t

o r les s on6 o f 7 tes t days . Th e changin g o f reportin g requirement s i s beyond th e scop e o f thi s rulemaking . Th e purpos e o f th e rulemakin g i s t o revis e th e Subpart J monitorin g an

dtestin g requirement s t o ad d clarit y

an dadditiona l informatio n tha t wer e originall y

lef t out . Thi s doe s no t includ e revisin g th e reportin g criteri a tha t hav e becom e a standar dprocedur e fo r many sourc e categories . Regulation s governin g State' s authorit y ar e neithe r addresse dno r regulate din Subpar t J bu t inothe r section s o f th e regulations . 4 . A commente r note dtha t th e wordin g chang e t o § 60.10 4 migh t be construe dt o limi t th e exemptio no f flar e ga s associate dwit hemergenc y malfunctio nsituations . Thi s shoul dbe clarifie db y revisin g th e wordin g t o recogniz e th e fac t tha t proces s upse t gases , eve nwhe nno t th e direc t resul t

o f a n"emergenc y

malfunction " (e.g. , proces s uni t upset s du e t o changin g feedstock , etc.) , mus t b e handle db y a flar e system

fo r safet y

considerations . Th e propose dwordin g ha s bee nclarifie dt o reflec t this .



### 1 0P.1 2

5 . Anothe r commente r sa w no technica l reaso nwhy th e S0 2 CEMS' s shoul d

no t be use dfo r direc t complianc e wit hS0 2 emissio nlimitation s a t Subpart J

sources . Th e propose drevision s wer e though t t o b e inconsisten t wit hth e Subpart D brulin g whic huse s th e same CEMS' s a s Subpart J fo r direc t compliance . Th e propose drul e als o appeare dt o conflic t wit hcurren t EPA polic y (a s suggeste dina

nEPA interna l memorandum ) o f usin g CEM S dat a inth e enforcemen t process . Becaus e o f th e quantit y o f S0 2 emission s fro m refineries , an

ddu e t o pas t experienc e wit hsevera l refinerie s unde r th e commenter' s jurisdiction , th e enforcemen t o f continuou s complianc e wit hS0 2 emissio nlimitation s wa s thought t o be imperative . Th e commente r als o fel t tha t incinerator s followin g Clau s plant s be monitore dfo r temperatur e an doxyge nt o ensur e tota l sulfu r oxidatio nt o S0 2 . I t wa s note dtha t in§ 60.153(b)(3) , th e operator s o f incinerator s locate da t sewag e treatmen t plant s ar e require dt o install , calibrate , maintain , an d operat e temperatur e devices . Simila r languag e wa s desire d fo r Subpart J incinerators . Th e same commente r questione d th e flexibilit y o f span s allowe din § 60.105(a)(1 ) fo r opacit y CEMS's . Th e commente r argue dtha t th e benefit s o f additiona l accurac y

refinement s d o no t justif y th e cost s a s lon g a s Metho d9 remain s th e sol e complianc e method . Th e commente r fel t tha t th e argument s fo r allowin g th e us e o f CEM S dat a inlie u o f Metho d9 observation s fo r complianc e determination s wer e stil l vali dwhe nth e CEM S i s properl y installed , certified , an dmaintaine dinaccordanc e wit hP S 1 o f Appendi xB . I t wa s argue dtha t th e Agenc y eithe r allow

th e CEM S dat a fo r direc t complianc e

o r eliminat e th e allowanc e fo r spa nflexibility .



### 1 1P.1 3

I t wa s initiall y

determine d whe nth e Subpar t J regulation s wer e develope d tha t th e monitorin g dat a woul db e use dt o documen t exces s emissions . Thi s requiremen t canno t be change dinthi s rulemakin g sinc e suc ha chang e woul dconstitut e a majo r actio ninstea do f a clarificatio nan dwoul drequir e

a separat e assessmen t an dproposa l wit haccompanyin g CEM S Q A specifications . Th e oxidatio nefficienc y o f th e contro l devic e wil l b e documente d throug h Metho d1 5 testin g fo r reduce dsulfu r compounds , an d th e adde d requirement s fo r oxyge nan

dtemperatur e CEMS' s wil l no t be necessary . Th e us e o f noncomplianc e CEMS' s inth e propose drevision s i s no t inconsisten t wit hEPA polic y mentione dinth e memorandum . A s note d inth e memorandum , dat a fro m CEMS' s tha t ar e no t th e complianc e metho d "shoul db e use dt o monito r th e continuou s complianc e o f source s an dt o initiat e follow-u pactio nincludin g on-sit e inspections , requestin g furthe r information , an

dissuin g a notic e o f violation. " 6 . A commente r fro

m industr y

inquire dabou t a situatio ninwhic hsome o f thei r refinery' s facilitie s wer e require db y th e EPA Regiona l Offic e and th e Stat e agenc y

t o instal l CEMS' s unde r applicabl e Preventio no f Significan t Deterioratio n(PSD ) an dconstructio npermi t requirement s eve nthoug hfue l ga s combustiondevice s hav e bee nexempte dfro m H 2 S monitorin g requirement s sinc e 1975 . Thirtee nanalyzer s wer e installe da t a significan t cost . Twelv e o f thes e analyzer s wer e installe dbetwee n197 7 an d198 3 durin g EPA' s performanc e evaluatio no f H 2 S CEMS's . Althoug hEPA conclude dtha t acceptabl e H 2 S CEMS' s

wer e no t available , th e refinery wa s stil l require dt o instal l whateve r analyzer s wer e availabl e a t tha t time . Inview o f this , th e commente r mad e th e followin g recommendations .



### 1 2P. M

a . Th e CEMS' s tha t wer e require dt o be installe db y Stat e o r Federa l permit s prio r t o th e proposa l dat e o f th e subjec t rul e shoul dbe exemp t fro

m performanc e specificatio ntes t (PST ) requirements . b . Th e regulation s shoul dallow benc htestin g an

dcertificatio no f th e CEMS' s b

y th e manufacturer . c . I f a facilit y

ha s installe dmor e tha non e CEM S o f th e same mak e

an dmanufacturer , onl y on e PS T nee db e conducte dt o certif y th e remainin g CEMS's . Th e cos t o f certifyin g severa l identica l analyzer s i s significan t an d

a nunnecessar y

expense . Fo r CEMS' s tha t hav e already bee ninstalle d unde r Regiona l Offic e PS D requirements , exemption s o r "grandfathering " o f new monitorin g requirement s must b e requeste dona case-by-cas e basi s throug hth e Regiona l Offic e tha t require dth e initia l CEM S installation . Th e Agenc y

doe s no t fee l tha t CEM S benc htestin g an dcertificatio nb

y th e manufacture r represent s a fail-saf e mean s o f verifyin g instrumen t performance . Manufacturer s hav e a veste dinteres t inth e outcom e o f suc h evaluations . Benc htestin g ma y be routinel y

don e t o initiall y

demonstrat e th e reliabilit y

o f th e instrumen t t o th e purchaser . However , thi s shoul d

no t b e substitute dfo r a complet e an d observe dPS T afte r th e CEM S ha s bee n installe dan

di s functionin g unde r actua l conditions . Al l CEMS' s tha t ar e no t monitorin g th e same proces s stream wil l nee d t o b e evaluate db

y PST , regardles s o f mak e o r manufacturer . Experienc e ha s show nthat , eve nwit hidentica l CEMS's , performanc e ca nvar y fro m uni t t o unit . Factor s tha t affec t th e performanc e o f CEMS' s includ e interna l malfunction s tha t ma y b e specifi c t o individua l unit s a s wel l a s operationa l variable s tha t reflec t operato r technique . Th e initia l performanc e o f eac h

1 3P.1 5

CEM S ca nonl y

b e verifie db

y testin g eac huni t unde r actua l installe d conditions . 7 . A commente r recommende dtha t a nexemptio nshoul db e allowe d whe ni t i s demonstrate dtha t th e reduce dsulfu r an dH 2 S emission s fro

m subjec t Clau s unit s ar e wel l belo w

th e respectiv e 30 0 an d1 0 pp m standar d level s durin g routin e an

dnorma l operation . Wit hSulfte ntai l ga s treatin g units , continuou s H 2 S CEMS' s ar e already utilize dan

dth e reduce dsulfu r wa s reporte d t o b e barel y

detectable . Uni t upset s an dupstream

operationa l problem s wil l reflec t los s o f optimu m operatin g condition s lon g befor e an y resultan t increase demission s excee dth e reduce dsulfu r regulator y limit . Therefore , a n exemptio nfro

m th e continuou s monitorin g o f reduce dsulfu r an doxyge nfro

m thes e source s shoul db e allowed . Inaddition , th e commente r recommende d tha t th e tim e perio d fo r CEM S installatio na t affecte drefinerie s b e extende d t o a t leas t 1 8 month s t o allow sufficien t tim e fo r procurement , installation , an dcalibratio no f th e instrument . Wher e H 2 S analyzer s ar e employe da s standar dequipmen t fo r Clau s

recover y plants , th e analyze r ma y serv e a s th e CEMS , provide di t passe s th e PS T an dreflect s representativ e measuremen t o f emissions . Monitorin g exemption s ma y

b e considere dinthos e case s wher e emission s ar e routinel y muc h lowe r tha nth e standar dan dwher e ther e i s a

neconomi c incentiv e t o operat e th e devic e t o minimiz e operationa l problem s an dupse t conditions . Exemption s fo r device s tha t mee t thes e condition s ar e bes t considere d oncase-by-cas e request s sinc e suc hdevice s represen t a minorit y o f th e tota l i noperation . Th e Agenc y

doe s no t thin k a

nextensio no f th e CEM S installatio nperio d i s warranted . Affecte dsource s ar e notifie db y th e propose drulemakin g o f th e intende dmonitorin g needs . A napproximat e perio do f 1 yea r betwee n

1 4P.1 6

regulatio nproposa l an dpromulgationafford s time t o surve y th e CEM S market . Inconjunctio nwit hth e 1-yea r installatio nperiod , thi s ha s prove nt o be adequate . IV . ADMINISTRATIV E Th e docke t i s a

norganize dan

d complet e fil e o f al l th e informatio n considere db

y EPA inth e developmen t o f thi s rulemaking . Th e docke t i s a dynami c file , sinc e materia l i s adde d throughou t th e rulemakin g development . Th e docketin g system

i s intende dt o allow member s o f th e publi c an dindustrie s involve dt o identif y

readil y

an dlocat e document s s o tha t the y ca neffectivel y participat e i nth e rulemakin g process . Alon g wit hth e statemen t o f basi s an d purpos e o f th e propose dan dpromulgate drevision s an dEPA response s t o significan t comments , th e content s o f th e docket , excep t fo r interagenc y revie w materials , wil l serv e a s th e recor dincas e o f judicia l revie w [Sectio n307(d)(7)(A)] . Unde r Executiv e Orde r 12291 , EPA mus t judg e whethe r a regulatio ni s "major " and , therefore , subjec t t o th e requiremen t o f a regulator y impac t analysis . Th e Agenc y ha s determine dtha t thi s rulemakin g woul dno t resul t i n

an y o f th e advers e economi c effect s se t fort hinSectio n1 o f th e Orde r a s ground s fo r findin g a "majo r rule. " Th e Agenc y has , therefore , conclude dtha t thi s regulatio ni s no t a "majo r rule " unde r Executiv e Orde r 12291 . Th e Regulator y

Flexibilit y

Ac t (RFA ) o f 198 0 require s th e identificatio n

o f potentiall y

advers e impact s o f Federa l regulation s upo nsmal l busines s entities . Th e Ac t specificall y require s th e completio no f a nRFA analysi s in thos e instance s wher e smal l busines s impact s ar e possible . Becaus e thi s rulemakin g impose s n o advers e economi c impacts , a nanalysi s ha s no t bee n conducted .

1 5P.1 7

Pursuan t t o th e provision s o f 5 U.S.C . 605(b) , I hereby certif y

tha t th e promulgate drul e wil l no t hav e a nimpac t o nsmal l entitie s becaus e n o additiona l cost s wil l b e incurred . Thi s rul e doe s no t chang e an y informatio ncollectio nrequirement s currentl y

approve db

y OM B unde r th e Paperwor k Reductio nAc t o f 1980 , 4 4 U.S.C . 350 1 e t seq . Informatio nrequirement s containe din4 0 CF RPar t 60 , Appendi xA

ar e cleare dunde r OM B Contro l Numbe r 2060-0022 . Lis t o f Subject s in4 0 CF RPar t 6 0 Ai r pollutio ncontrol , Intergovernmenta l relations , Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements , Incorporatio nb y reference , an

d Petroleu

m refineries .

Dat e William K . Reill y Administrato r



### 1 6P.1 8

4 0 CF RPar t 6 0 i s amende d a s follows : 1 . Th e authorit y

fo r Par t 6 0 continue s t o read : Authority : 4 2 U.S.C . 7401 , 7411 , 7414 , 7416 , 7601 . 2 . I n§ 60.103(a) , th e phras e "gase s whic hcontai ncarbo nmonoxid e i n
exces s o f 0.05 0 percen t b y volume. " i s revise d t o rea d "gase s tha t contai n carbo nmonoxid e (CO ) i nexces s o f 50 0 pp m b y volume (dr

y basis). " 3 . I n§ 60.104 , paragraph s (a)(1) , (2)(i) , an d (2)(ii ) ar e revise d t o

rea d a s follows : § 60.10 4 Standar d fo r sulfu r dioxide , (a ) * * * (1 ) Bur ninan

y fue l ga s combustio ndevic e an y fue l ga s tha t contain s hydroge nsulfid e (H 2 S ) inexces s o f 23 0 mg/dsc m (0.1 0 gr/dscf) . Th e combustio nina flar e o f proces s upse t gase s o r fue l ga s tha t i s release d t o th e flar e a s a resul t o f relie f valv e leakag e o r othe r emergenc y malfunction s i s exemp t fro

m thi s paragraph . (2 ) * * * (i ) Fo r a

noxidatio ncontro l syste m o r a reductio ncontro l system followe d b

y incineration , 25 0 pp m b y volume (dr

y basis ) o f sulfu r dioxid e (S0 2 ) a t zer o percen t exces s air . (ii ) Fo r a reductio ncontro l syste m no t followe d b

y incineration , 30 0 pp m b y volume o f reduce d sulfu r compound s an d 1 0 pp m b y volume o f hydroge n sulfid e (H 2 S) , eac hcalculate d a s pp m S0 2 b y volume (dr

y basis ) a t zer o percen t exces s air .



### 1 7P.1 9

4 . In§ 60.105 , paragraph s (a) , (d) , an d (e ) ar e revise d t o rea da s foi1ows : § 60.10 5 Emissio nmonitoring . (a ) Th e owne r o r operato r o f th e affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e provision s o f thi s subpar t shal l install , calibrate , maintain , an doperat e continuou s emissio nmonitorin g system s (CEMS's ) an dcontinuou s opacit y monitorin g system s (COMS's ) a s follows : (1 ) Fo r flui dcatalyti c crackin g uni t catalys t regenerator s subjec t t o § 60.102(a)(2) , a COM S fo r continuousl y measurin g an

drecordin g th e opacit y o f emission s int o th e atmosphere . Th e COM S shal l be spanne da t 60 , 70 , o r 8 0 percen t opacity . (2 ) Fo r flui dcatalyti c crackin g uni t catalys t regenerator s subjec t t o § 60.103(a) , a CEM S fo r continuousl y measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio n b y volum e (dry

basis ) o f C O emission s int o th e atmosphere , excep t a s provide d inparagrap h(ii ) below . (i ) Th e spa nvalu e fo r thi s CEM S i s 1,00 0 pp m CO . (ii ) A C O CEM S nee dno t b e installe di f th e owne r o r operato r demonstrate s tha t th e averag e C O emission s ar e les s tha n5 0 pp m (dr y basis )

an dals o file s a writte nreques t fo r exemptio nt o th e Administrato r an d receive s suc ha

nexemption . Th e demonstratio nshal l consis t o f continuousl y monitorin g C O emission s fo r 3 0 day s usin g a ninstrumen t tha t shal l mee t th e requirement s o f Performanc e Specificatio n4 o f Appendi xB o f thi s part . Th e spa nvalu e shal l b e 10 0 pp m C O instea do f 1,00 0 ppm , an dth e relativ e accurac y limi t shal l be 1 0 percen t o f th e averag e C O emission s o r 5 pp m CO , whicheve r i s greater . Fo r CEMS' s tha t ar e identica l t o Metho d 1 0 an d emplo y th e sampl e

1 8conditionin g system o f Metho dIOA , th e alternativ e relativ e accurac y tes t procedur e inSectio n10. 1 o f Performanc e Specificatio n2 ma y b e use dinplac e

o f th e relativ e accurac y test . (3 ) Fo r fue l ga s combustio ndevice s subjec t t o § 60.104(a)(1) , a CEM S fo r continuousl y

measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio nb y volum e (dry basis , zer o percen t exces s air ) o f S0 2 emission s int o th e atmospher e (excep t wher e a nH 2 S CEM S i s installe dunde r paragrap h(a)(4 ) o f thi s section) . Th e CEM S shal l includ e a noxyge nmonito r fo r correctin g th e dat a fo r exces s air . (i ) Th e spa nvalue s fo r thi s CEM S ar e 5 0 pp m S0 2 an d1 0 percen t oxyge n(0 2 ) . (ii ) Th e S0 2 monitorin g leve l equivalen t t o th e H 2 S standar d unde r § 60.104(a)(1 ) shal l b e 2 0 pp m (dr y basis , zer o percen t exces s air) . (iii ) Th e performanc e evaluation s fo r thi s S0 2 CEM S unde r § 60.13(c ) shal l us e Performanc e Specificatio n2 . Method s 6 an d3 shal l b e use dfo r conductin g th e relativ e accurac y evaluations . Method6 sample s shal l b e take n

a t a flow

rat e o f approximatel y 2 liters/mi nfo r a t leas t 3 0 minutes . Th e relativ e accurac y

limi t shal l b e 2 0 percen t o r 4 ppm , whicheve r i s greater , an dth e calibratio ndrif t limi t shal l b e 5 percen t o f th e establishe dspa n value . (iv ) Fue l ga s combustio ndevice s havin g a commo nsourc e o f fue l ga s ma y be monitore da t onl y

on e locatio n(i.e. , afte r on e o f th e combustio ndevices) , i f monitorin g a t thi s locatio naccuratel y represent s th e S0 2 emission s int o th e atmospher e fro

m eac ho f th e combustio ndevices . (4 ) Inplac e o f th e S0 2 CEM S inparagrap h(a)(3 ) o f thi s section , a CEM S fo r continuousl y

measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio n(dry basis ) o f H 2 S infue l gase s befor e bein g burne dinan y fue l ga s combustio ndevice .
1 9P.2 1

(i ) Th e spa nvalu e fo r thi s CEM S i s 42 5 mg/dsc m H 2 S . (ii ) Fue l ga s combustio ndevice s havin g a commo nsourc e o f fue l ga s ma y b e monitore da t onl y

on e location , i f monitorin g a t thi s locatio naccuratel y represent s th e concentratio no f H 2 S i nth e fue l ga s bein g burned . (iii ) Th e performanc e evaluation s fo r thi s H 2 S CEM S unde r § 60.13(c ) shal l us e Performanc e Specificatio n7 . Metho d 1 1 shal l b e use d fo r conductin g th e relativ e accurac y evaluations . (5 ) Fo r Clau s sulfu r recover y plant s wit hoxidatio ncontro l system s o r reductio ncontro l system s followe db y incineratio nsubjec t t o § 60.104(a)(2)(i) , a CEM S fo r continuousl y measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio n(dr

y basis , zer o percen t exces s air ) o f S0 2 emission s int o th e atmosphere . Th e CEM S shal l includ e a noxyge nmonito r fo r correctin g th e dat a fo r exces s air . (i ) Th e spa nvalue s fo r thi s CEM S ar e 50 0 pp m S0 2 an d 1 0 percen t 0 2 . (ii ) Th e performanc e evaluation s fo r thi s S0 2 CEM S under § 60.13(c ) shal l us e Performanc e Specificatio n2 . Method s 6 an d3 shal l b e use dfo r conductin g th e relativ e accurac y evaluations . (6 ) Fo r Clau s sulfu r recover y plant s wit hreductio ncontro l system s no t followe db

y incineratio nsubjec t t o § 60.104(a)(2)(ii) , a CEM S fo r continuousl y

measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio no f reduce dsulfu r an d 0 2 emission s int o th e atmosphere . Th e reduce d sulfu r emission s shal l be calculate da s S0 2 (dr y basis , zer o percen t exces s air) . (i ) Th e spa nvalue s fo r thi s CEM S ar e 45 0 pp m reduce d sulfu r an

d 1 0 percen t 0 2 .



### 2 0(ii ) Th e performanc e evaluation s fo r thi s reduce d sulfu r (an d 0 2 ) CEM S unde r § 60.13(c ) shal l us e Performanc e Specificatio n5 , excep t th e calibratio n drif t specificatio ni s 2. 5 percen t o f th e spa nvalu e rathe r tha n5 percent . Method s 1 5 o r 15 A

an dMetho d3 shal l b e use dfo r conductin g th e relativ e

accurac y evaluations . I f Metho d3 yield s 0 2 concentration s below 0.2 5 percen t durin g th e performanc e specificatio ntest , th e 0 2 concentratio nma y be assume d t o b e zer o an

dth e reduce dsulfu r CEM S nee dno t includ e a n0 2 monitor . (7 ) Inplac e o f th e reduce dsulfu r CEM S unde r paragrap h(a)(6 ) o f thi s section , a CEM S usin g a nai r o r 0 2 dilutio nan doxidatio nsystem

t o conver t th e reduce dsulfu r t o S0 2 fo r continuousl y measurin g an

drecordin g th e concentratio n(dr

y basis , zer o percen t exces s air ) o f th e resultan t S0 2 . Th e CEM S shal l includ e a noxyge nmonito r fo r correctin g th e dat a fo r exces s oxygen . (i ) Th e spa nvalue s fo r thi s CEM S ar e 37 5 pp m S0 2 an d1 0 percent 0 2 . (ii ) Fo r reportin g purposes , th e S0 2 exceedanc e leve l fo r thi s CEM S i s 25 0 pp

m (dry basis , zer o percen t exces s air) . (iii ) Th e performanc e evaluation s fo r thi s S0 2 (an d0 2 ) CEM S unde r § 60.13(c ) shal l us e Performanc e Specificatio n5 . Method s 1 5 o r 15 A an d Metho d3 shal l b e use dfo r conductin g th e relativ e accurac y evaluations .

**** * (d ) Fo r an

y flui dcatalyti c crackin g uni t catalys t regenerato r unde r § 60.10 2 tha t use s a nincinerator-wast e hea t boile r t o combus t th e exhaus t gase s fro

m th e catalys t regenerator , th e owne r o r operato r shal l recor ddail y th e rat e o f combustio no f liqui do r soli dfossil-fuel s (liters/h r o r kg/hr )

an dth e hour s o f operatio ndurin g whic hliqui do r soli dfossil-fuel s ar e combuste dinth e incinerator-wast e hea t boiler .
2 1(e ) Fo r th e purpos e o f report s unde r § 60.7(c) , period s o f exces s

emission s tha t shal l b e determine d an d reporte d ar e define d a s follow s (NOTE : Al l averages , excep t fo r opacity , shal l be determine d a s th e arithmeti c averag e o f th e applicabl e 1-hour averages , e.g. , th e rollin g 3-hou r averag e shal l b e determine d a s th e arithmeti c averag e o f thre e contiguou s 1-hou r averages) : (1 ) Opacity . Al l 1-hour period s tha t contai ntw o o r mor e 6-minut e period s durin g whic hth e averag e opacit y a s measure d b

y th e COM S unde r § 60.105(a)(1 ) exceed s 3 0 percent . (2 ) Carbo nmonoxide . Al l 1-hour period s durin g whic hth e averag e C O concentratio na s measure d b y th e C O CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(2 ) exceed s 50 0 ppm . (3 ) Sulfu r dioxid e fro m fue l qa s combustion . (i ) Al l rollin g 3-hou r period s durin g whic hth e averag e concentratio no f S0 2 a s measure d b

y th e S0 2 CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(3 ) exceed s 2 0 pp m (dr y basis , zer o percen t exces s air) ; o r (ii ) Al l rollin g 3-hou r period s durin g whic hth e averag e concentratio n

o f H 2 S a s measure d b

y th e H 2 S CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(4 ) exceed s 23 0 mg/dsc m (0.1 0 gr/dscf) . (4 ) Sulfu r dioxid e fro m Clau s sulfu r recover y plants . (i ) Al l 12-hou r period s durin g whic hth e averag e concentratio no f S0 2 a s

measure d b

y th e S0 2 CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(5 ) exceed s 25 0 pp m (dr y basis , zer o percen t exces s air) ; o r (ii ) Al l 12-hou r period s durin g whic hth e averag e concentratio no f reduce d sulfu r (a s S0 2 ) a s measure d b y th e reduce d sulfu r CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(6 ) exceed s 30 0 ppm ; o r



### 2 2(iii ) Al l 12-hou r period s durin g whic hth e averag e concentratio no f S0 2

a s measure d b

y th e S0 2 CEM S unde r § 60.105(a)(7 ) exceed s 25 0 pp m (dr y basis , zer o percen t exces s air) .

* * * * * 5 . Sectio n60.10 6 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : § 60.10 6 Tes t method s an d procedures . (a ) I nconducting th e performanc e test s require d i n§ 60.8 , th e owne r o r operato r shal l us e a s referenc e method s an d procedure s th e tes t method s in Appendi xA

o f thi s par t o r othe r method s an d procedure s a s specifie d i nthi s section , excep t a s provide d in§ 60.8(b) . (b ) Th e owne r o r operato r shal l determin e complianc e wit hth e particulat e matte r (PM ) standard s i n§ 60.102(a ) a s follows : (1 ) Th e emissio nrat e (E ) o f P M shal l be compute d fo r eac hru nusin g th e followin g equation : Kc s Q s d

E =

where : 

### R c

E = Emissio nrat e o f PM , kg/100 0 k g (lb/100 0 lb ) o f cok e burn-off . c s = Concentratio no f PM , g/dsc m (lb/dscf) . Q s d= Volumetri c flo

w rat e o f effluen t gas , dscm/h r (dscf/hr) . Rc = Cok e burn-of f rate , k g coke/h r (l bcoke/hr) . K= Conversio nfactor , 1. 0 (kg 2 /g)/(100 0 kg ) [IO 3 lb/(100 0 lb)] . (2 ) Metho d 5 shal l b e use d t o determin e th e concentratio n(c s ) o f P M an d volumetri c flow

rat e (Q sd ) o f th e effluen t gas . Th e samplin g time an d sampl e volum e fo r eac hru nshal l be a t leas t 6 0 minute s an d 0.9 0 dsc m (31. 8 dscf) .

2 3P.2 5

(3 ) Th e coke burn-of f rat e (R c ) shal l b e compute d fo reac h ru n usin g th e followin g equation :

R c= K x Qr(%C0

2 + %C0 ) + K 2 Q a - K 3 Q r[(%C0/2 ) + %C0 2 + %0

2 ]

where : Rc = Cok e burn-of f rate , kg/h r (lb/hr) .

Q r = Volumetri c flo

w rat e o f exhaus t ga s fro m catalys t regenerato r befor e enterin g th e emissio ncontro l system , dscm/mi n(dscf/min) . Q a = Volumetri c flow

rat e o f ai r t o FCCUregenerator , a s determine d fro m th e flui d catalyti c crackin g uni t contro l roo m instrumentation , dscm/mi n(dscf/min) . %C0 2 = Carbo ndioxid e concentration , percen t b y volume (dr

y basis) . %C 0 = Carbo nmonoxid e concentration , percen t b y volume (dr

y basis) . % 0 2 = Oxyge nconcentration , percen t b y volume (dr

y basis) . K j = Materia l balanc e an d conversio nfactor , 0.298 2 (kg-min)/(hr-dscm-% ) [0.018 6 (lb-min)/(hr-dscf-%)] . K 2 = Materia l balanc e an d conversio nfactor , 2.08 8 (kg-min)/(hr-dscm-%)[0.130 3 (lb-min)/(hr-dscf-%)] . K 3 = Materia l balanc e an d conversio nfactor , 0.099 4 (kg-min)/(hr-dscm-% ) [0.006 2 (lb-min)/(hr-dscf-%)] . (i ) Metho d 2 shal l be use d t o determin e th e volumetri c flo w rat e (Q r ) . (ii ) Th e emissio ncorrectio nfactor , integrate d samplin g an d analysi s procedur e o f Metho d 3 shal l b e use d t o determin e C0 2 , CO , an d 0 2 concentrations .



### 2 4(4 ) Metho d9 an dth e procedure s o f § 60.1 1 shal l b e use dt o determin e opacity . (c ) I f auxiliar y

liqui do r soli dfossil-fuel s ar e burne dina n incinerator-wast e hea t boiler , th e owne r o r operato r shal l determin e th e emissio nrat e o f P

M permitte din§ 60.102(b ) a s follows : (1 ) Th e allowabl e emissio nrat e (E s ) o f P M shal l b e compute dfo r eac h

ru nusin g th e followin g equation :

E s = 1. 0 + A

(H/R c ) K ' where : E s = Emissio nrat e o f P M allowed , kg/100 0 k

g (lb/100 0 lb ) o f cok e burn-of f incatalys t regenerator . 1. 0 = Emissio nstandard , k g coke/100 0 k

g (l bcoke/100 0 lb) . A = Allowabl e incrementa l rat e o f P M emissions , 0.1 8 g/millio nca l (0.1 0 lb/millio nBtu) . H = Hea t inpu t rat e fro m soli do r liqui d fossi l fuel , millio ncal/h r (millio nBtu/hr) . R c = Cok e burn-of f rate , k g coke/h r (l bcoke/hr) . K ' = Conversio nfacto r t o unit s o f standard , 1. 0 (kg 2 /g)/(100 0 kg ) [IO 3 lb/(100 0 lb)] . (2 ) Procedure s subjec t t o th e approva l o f th e Administrato r shal l be
use dt o determin e th e hea t inpu t rate . (3 ) Th e procedur e inparagrap h(b)(3 ) o f thi s sectio nshal l b e use dt o determin e th e cok e burn-of f rat e (R c ) . (d ) Th e owne r o r operato r shal l determin e complianc e wit hth e C O standar din§ 60.103(a ) b y usin g th e integrate d samplin g techniqu e o f



### 2 5Metho d1 0 t o determin e th e C O concentratio n(dr y basis) . Th e samplin g time fo r eac hrunshal l b e 6 0 minutes . (e ) Th e owne r o r operato r shal l determin e complianc e wit hth e H 2 S standar din§ 60.104(a)(1 ) a s follows : Metho d 1 1 shal l be use dt o determin e th e H 2 S concentration . Th e gase s enterin g th e samplin g trai nshoul db e a t abou t atmospheri c pressure . I f th e pressur e inth e refiner y fue l ga s line s i s relativel y

high , a flow

contro l valv e ma y

b e use dt o reduc e th e pressure . I f th e lin e pressur e i s highenoug ht o operat e th e samplin g trai nwithou t a

vacuu m pump , th e pum

pma y be eliminate dfro

m th e samplin g train . Th e sampl e shal l b e draw

nfro m a poin t nea r th e centroi do f th e fue l ga s line . Th e samplin g time an

dsampl e volume shal l b e a t leas t 1 0 minute s an d0.01 0 dsc m (0.3 5 dscf) . Two sample s o f equa l samplin g time s shal l b e take na t abou t 1-hou r intervals . Th e arithmeti c averag e o f thes e tw o sample s shal l constitut e a run . Fo r mos t fue l gases , samplin g time s exceedin g 2 0 minute s

ma y resul t indepletio no f th e collectio nsolution , althoug hfue l gase s containin g low

concentration s o f H 2 S ma y necessitat e samplin g fo r longe r period s o f time . (f ) Th e owne r o r operato r shal l determin e complianc e wit hth e S0 2 an d th e H 2 S an

dreduce dsulfu r standard s in§ 60.104(a)(2 ) a s follows : (1 ) Metho d6 shal l b e use dt o determin e th e S0 2 concentration . Th e concentratio ninmg/dsc m (lb/dscf ) obtaine db y Metho d6 i s multiplie db y 0.375 4 t o obtai nth e concentratio ninppm . Th e samplin g poin t inth e duc t shal l b e th e centroi do f th e cros s sectio ni f th e cross-sectiona l are a i s les s tha n5.0 0 m 2 (5 4 ft 2 ) o r a t a poin t no close r t o th e wall s tha n1.0 0 m (3 9 in. ) i f th e cross-sectiona l are a i s 5.0 0 m 2 o r mor e an dth e centroi di s

mor e tha n1 m

fro m th e wall . Th e samplin g time an dsampl e volum e shal l be a t

2 6leas t 1 0 minute s an d0.01 0 dsc m

(0.3 5 dscf ) fo r eac hsample . Eigh t sample s o f equa l samplin g time s shal l be take na t abou t 30-minut e intervals . Th e arithmeti c averag e o f thes e eigh t sample s shal l constitut e a run . Metho d4 shal l b e use dt o determin e th e moistur e conten t o f th e gases . Th e samplin g poin t fo r Method4 shal l be adjacen t t o th e samplin g poin t fo r Metho d6 . Th e samplin g time fo r eac hsampl e shal l b e equa l t o th e time i t take s fo r two Metho d6 samples . Th e moistur e conten t fro m thi s sampl e shal l b e use dt o

correc t th e correspondin g Metho d6 sample s fo r moisture . Fo r documentin g th e oxidatio nefficienc y

o f th e contro l devic e fo r reduce dsulfu r compounds , Metho d1 5 shal l be use dfollowin g th e procedure s o f paragrap h(f)(2 ) o f thi s section . (2 ) Method1 5 shal l b e use dt o determin e th e reduce dsulfu r an dH 2 S concentrations . Eac hru nshal l consis t o f 1 6 sample s take nove r a minimu m o f 3 hours . Th e samplin g poin t shal l be th e sam e a s tha t describe dfo r Metho d6 inparagrap h(f)(1 ) o f thi s section . T o ensur e minimu m residenc e time fo r th e sampl e insid e th e sampl e lines , th e samplin g rat e shal l b e a t leas t 3. 0 lp m (0.1 0 cfm) . Th e S0 2 equivalen t fo r eac hru nshal l be calculate dafte r bein g correcte dfo r moistur e an doxyge na s th e arithmeti c averag e o f th e S0 2 equivalen t fo r eac hsampl e durin g th e run . Metho d4 shal l b e use dt o determin e th e moistur e conten t o f th e gase s a s inparagrap h(f)(1 ) o f thi s section . Th e samplin g time fo r eac hsampl e shal l b e equa l t o th e time i t take s fo r fou r Metho d1 5 samples . (3 ) Th e oxyge nconcentratio nuse dt o correc t th e emissio nrat e fo r
exces s ai r shal l b e obtaine db y th e integrate dsamplin g an danalysi s procedur e

o f Metho d3 . Th e sample s shal l b e take nsimultaneousl y wit hth e S0 2 , reduce d



### 2 7P.2 9

sulfu r an

dH 2 S , o r moistur e samples . Th e S0 2 , reduce dsulfur , an d H 2 S sample s shal l b e correcte dt o zer o percen t exces s ai r usin g th e followin g equation :

20. 9 C C = C 20. 9 - %0 2
where : C c = Correcte dconcentratio no f pollutant , pp m b y volum e (dry

basis ) C = Measure dconcentratio no f pollutant , pp m b y volum e (dr

y basis) . % 0 2 = Oxyge nconcentration , percen t b y volume (dr

y basis) .

**** *



### 2 8P.3 0

9 . InAppendi xB , b

y addin g Performanc e Specificatio n7 a s follows : APPENDI XB - PERFORMANC E SPECIFICATION S

**** * PERFORMANC E SPECIFICATIO N 7 - SPECIFICATION S AN D TES T PROCEDURE S FORHYDROGE N SULFID E CONTINUOU S EMISSIO N MONITORIN GSYSTEM S I N STATIONAR YSOURCE S 1 . Applicabilit y

an dPrincipl e 1. 1 Applicability . 1.1. 1 Thi s specificatio ni s t o be use dfo r evaluatin g th e acceptabilit y

o f hydroge nsulfid e (H 2 S ) continuou s emissio nmonitorin g system s (CEMS's ) a t th e tim e o f o r soo nafte r installatio nan dwheneve r specifie di na napplicabl e subpar t o f th e regulations . 1.1. 2 Thi s specificatio ni s no t designe dt o evaluat e th e installe dCEM S performanc e ove r a

nextende dperio do f time no r doe s i t identif y specifi c calibratio ntechnique s an dothe r auxiliar y

procedure s t o asses s CEM S performance . Th e sourc e owne r o r operator , however , i s responsibl e t o calibrate , maintain , an doperat e th e CEMS . T o evaluat e CEM S performance , th e Administrato r ma y require , unde r Sectio n11 4 o f th e Act , th e sourc e owne r o r operato r t o conduc t CEM S performanc e evaluation s a t othe r time s beside s th e initia l test . Se e Sectio n60.13(c) . 1.1. 3 Th e definitions , installatio nspecifications , tes t procedures , dat a reductio nprocedure s fo r determinin g calibratio ndrift s (CD ) an drelativ e

accurac y (RA) , an

dreportin g o f Performanc e Specificatio n2 (P S 2) , Section s 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 8 , an

d9 appl y

t o thi s specification .



### 2 9P.3 1

1. 2 Principle . Referenc e metho d(RM) , CD , an dR A test s ar e conducte dt o determin e tha t th e CEM S conform s t o th e specification . 2 . Performanc e an

dEquipmen t Specification s 2. 1 Instrumen t Zer o an dSpan . Thi s specificatio ni s th e same a s Sectio n 4. 1 o f P S 2 . 2. 2 Calibratio nDrift . Th e CEM S calibratio nmus t no t drif t o r deviat e fro m th e referenc e valu e o f th e calibratio nga s o r referenc e sourc e b y mor e tha n5 percen t o f th e establishe dspa nvalu e fo r 6 ou t o f 7 tes t day s (e.g. , th e establishe dspa nvalu e i s 30 0 pp m fo r Subpar t J fue l ga s combustio ndevices) . 2. 3 Relativ e Accuracy . Th e R A o f th e CEM S shal l b e n o greate r tha n2 0 percen t o f th e mea nvalu e o f th e R M tes t dat a interm s o f th e unit s o f th e emissio nstandar do r 1 0 percen t o f th e applicabl e standard , whicheve r i s greater . 3 . Relativ e Accurac y Tes t Procedur e 3. 1 Samplin g Strateg y fo r R M Tests , Correlatio no f R M an dCEM S Data , Numbe r

o f R M Tests , an

dCalculations . Thes e ar e th e sam e a s tha t inP S 2 , Section s 7.1 , 7.2 , 7.3 , an

d7.5 , respectively . 3. 2 Referenc e Methods . Unles s otherwis e specifie dina napplicabl e subpar t

o f th e regulation , Metho d1 1 i s th e R M fo r thi s PS . 4 . Bibliography 1 . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency . Standard s o f Performanc e fo r New Stationar y

Sources ; Appendi xB ; Performanc e Specification s 2 an d3 fo r S0 2 , N0 X , C0 2 , an d0 2 Continuou s Emissio nMonitorin g Systems ; Fina l Rule . 4 8 CF R23608 . Washington , D.C . U.S . Governmen t Printin g Office . Ma y 25 , 1983 . 2 . U.S . Governmen t Printin g Office . Gaseou s Continuou s Emissio nMonitorin g System s - Performanc e Specificatio nGuideline s fo r S0 2 , N0 X , C0 2 , 0 2 , an dTRS .



### 30U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency . Washington , D.C . EPA-450/3-82-026 .

Octobe r 1982 . 2 6 p . 3 . Maines , G.D. , W.C . Kell y (Scot t Environmenta l Technology , Inc.) , an d J.B . Homolya . Evaluatio no f Monitor s fo r Measurin g H 2 S inRefiner y Gas . Prepare dfo r th e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency . Researc hTriangl e Park , N.C . Contrac t No . 68-02-2707 . 1978 . 6 0 p . 4 . Ferguson , B.B. , R.E . Leste r (Harmo nEngineerin g an dTesting) , an

dW.J . Mitchell . Fiel dEvaluatio no f Carbo nMonoxid e an dHydroge nSulfid e Continuou s Emissio nMonitor s a t a nOi l Refinery . Prepare dfo r th e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency . Researc hTriangl e Park , N.C . Publicatio nNo . EPA-600/4-82 - 054 . Augus t 1982 . 10 0 p .



### 3 1