82414 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

1For the purposes of this preamble, EPA uses 

‘‘ozone-depleting substance’’ and ‘‘controlled 

substance’’ interchangeably. Both terms are 

intended to have the same meaning as ‘‘controlled 

substance’’ as defined in 40 CFR 82.3. 

2 In certain instances EPA may use the terms 

‘‘entity,’’ ‘‘person,’’ and ‘‘company’’ 

interchangeably. Because EPA anticipates that the 

parties that use process agents are companies or 

other entities, the Agency uses these terms to refer 

to regulated parties in the rule. Using this 

shorthand, however, does not alter the applicability 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA)’s or regulation’s 

requirements and prohibitions. Similarly, in certain 

instances EPA may use these terms interchangeably 

in this rule preamble, but such differences in 

terminology should not be viewed to carry a 

material distinction in how EPA interprets or is 

planning to apply the requirements discussed 

herein. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0707; FRL–9603–02– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AV65 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Updates Related to the Use of OzoneDepleting Substances as Process 

Agents 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action establishes 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for uses of ozonedepleting substances as process agents 

and updates related definitions. 

Codified recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements will provide clear notice 

of information the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency collects, aggregates, 

and reports each year on behalf of the 

United States as a party to the Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the 

Ozone Layer; effectively monitor these 

narrow uses in a more routine and 

consistent manner under the Clean Air 

Act; and enhance understanding of 

emissions of substances harmful to the 

stratospheric ozone layer. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

November 12, 2024. The incorporation 

by reference (IBR) of certain 

publications listed in the rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of November 12, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) has established 

a docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0707. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information may not be publicly 

available, e.g., confidential information 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard-copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available electronically 

through https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Feather, Stratospheric Protection 

Division, Office of Atmospheric 

Protection (Mail Code 6205A), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460; telephone number: 202–564– 

1230; or email address: feather.john@

epa.gov. You may also visit EPA’s 

website at https://www.epa.gov/ozonelayer-protection for further information. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ ‘‘the Agency,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is 

used, we mean the EPA. Acronyms that 

are used in this rulemaking that may be 

helpful include: 

ASME—American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers 

CAA—Clean Air Act 

CEMS—continuous emissions monitoring 

system 

CFC—chlorofluorocarbon 

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations 

CRA—Congressional Review Act 

EPA—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FOIA—Freedom of Information Act 

FTIR—Fourier-transform infrared 

spectroscopy 

GHGRP—Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program 

HCFC—hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

HFC—hydrofluorocarbon 

IBR—incorporation by reference 

ICR—Information Collection Request 

NAICS—North American Industry 

Classification System 

NARA—National Archives and Records 

Administration 

ODP—ozone depletion potential 

ODS—ozone-depleting substances 

PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act 

RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act 

SISNOSE—Significant Economic Impact on a 

Substantial Number of Small Entities 

TEAP—Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel 

TRI—Toxics Release Inventory 

UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What action is the Agency taking? 

C. What is EPA’s authority for this action? 

II. Background 

A. EPA’s Phaseout of ODS 

B. ODS Used as Process Agents 

C. EPA’s Treatment of ODS Process Agents 

III. Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements 

A. One-Time Report 

B. Annual Report 

C. Advance Notice of Changes Report 

D. Emissions Reporting Methodology 

E. Recordkeeping 

IV. How will EPA treat ODS process agent 

data collected under this action? 

A. Background on Determinations of 

Whether Information Is Entitled to 

Treatment as Confidential Information 

B. Data Elements To Be Reported to EPA 

Under This Action 

V. Definitions 

VI. Costs and Benefits 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 

Incorporation by Reference 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations and Executive Order 14096: 

Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment 

to Environmental Justice for All 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you use ozone-depleting 

substances 1 (ODS) as process agents. 

Potentially affected categories, North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) codes, and examples of 

potentially affected entities include 

Industrial Gas Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 325120), Other Basic Inorganic 

Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS code 

325180), and All Other Basic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS code 

325199). 

This list is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this section could 

also be affected. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity,2

consult the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What action is the Agency taking? 

This action is narrow in scope and 

primarily codifies reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements for a 

limited number of chemical 

manufacturing facilities. EPA annually 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82415 

3EPA considers terms related to ‘‘transformation’’ 

and ‘‘feedstock uses’’ to be interchangeable for the 

purposes of this preamble. 4Approved destruction technologies are listed at 

40 CFR 82.3 ‘‘Destruction.’’ 

5United Nations Environment Programme, 

Medical and Chemicals Technical Options 

Committee, 2022 Assessment Report. https://

ozone.unep.org/system/files/documents/MCTOCAssessment-Report-2022.pdf. 

6https://ozone.unep.org/treaties/montrealprotocol/meetings/tenth-meeting-parties/decisions/ 

decision-x14-process-agents. 

collects process agent consumption and 

emissions information. In this action, 

the Agency is codifying reporting 

requirements to collect this information, 

including a methodology to calculate 

emissions. EPA is also defining the term 

‘‘process agent,’’ revising definitions of 

‘‘plant’’ and ‘‘facility’’ to better reflect 

current practice, and establishing 

definitions associated with the emission 

reporting requirements. 

C. What is EPA’s authority for this 

action? 

Several sections of the CAA provide 

authority for this action. In particular, 

section 603 provides authority to 

establish monitoring and reporting 

requirements for controlled substances. 

EPA also relies on its authority under 

section 114 of the CAA, which 

authorizes the EPA Administrator to 

establish recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in carrying out any 

provision of the CAA (with certain 

exceptions that do not apply here). 

Sections 604 and 605 of the CAA 

provide the authority to phase out the 

production and consumption of class I 

and class II controlled substances, to 

restrict the use of class I and class II 

controlled substances, and to 

promulgate regulations associated with 

the production of class I and class II 

controlled substances. EPA’s regulations 

implementing the production and 

consumption controls for class I and 

class II controlled substances, including 

provisions implementing exceptions to 

those controls, can be found at 40 CFR 

part 82, subpart A. Additional authority 

for electronic reporting, as required 

under provisions in 40 CFR 82.13(c) and 

82.24(a)(1) comes from the Government 

Paperwork Elimination Act (44 U.S.C. 

3504), which provides ‘‘(1) for the 

option of the electronic maintenance, 

submission, or disclosure of 

information, when practicable as a 

substitute for paper; and (2) for the use 

and acceptance of electronic signatures, 

when practicable.’’ 

II. Background 

A. EPA’s Phaseout of ODS 

In 1987, the United States joined 23 

other countries and the European Union 

to sign the Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone 

Layer (Montreal Protocol) and the 

United States ratified the Montreal 

Protocol on April 21, 1988. This 

international treaty protects and restores 

the stratospheric ozone layer by phasing 

out the production and consumption of 

certain ODS including 

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, 

methyl bromide, and 

hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). The 

Montreal Protocol and its parent treaty, 

the Vienna Convention for the 

Protection of the Ozone Layer, are the 

first international treaties to achieve the 

distinction of having been joined by all 

countries of the United Nations. The 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

added title VI on Stratospheric Ozone 

Protection. Under the CAA and EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR part 82, controls 

are in place that restrict the production 

and consumption of ODS to implement 

the phaseout of these substances. Title 

VI establishes two classes of controlled 

ODS: class I and class II controlled 

substances. Class I controlled 

substances, i.e., CFCs, halons, carbon 

tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, 

methyl bromide, and 

hydrobromofluorocarbons, have higher 

ozone depletion potentials (ODPs) and 

were phased out ahead of class II 

controlled substances. Class II 

controlled substances consist only of 

HCFCs—which have lower ODPs than 

class I controlled substances—and in 

many cases acted as transitional 

substitutes for many class I controlled 

substances. While existing regulations 

allow for limited production and 

consumption of two HCFCs (HCFC–123 

and HCFC–124) until 2030, all others 

have been phased out in the United 

States. For both class I and class II 

controlled substances, there are limited 

exceptions, such as the exclusion from 

the definition of ‘‘production’’ in 40 

CFR 84.3 for controlled substances that 

are either manufactured and 

subsequently transformed, i.e., for 

feedstock uses,3 or destroyed by 

approved destruction technologies.4

B. ODS Used as Process Agents 

Process agents are generally 

understood to be used to create an 

environment for another process to 

occur, without themselves being 

transformed or destroyed during that 

process. The process agent is not 

consumed in the reaction, though trace 

quantities of the process agent may 

remain in the final product. Certain 

quantities may also be emitted. For the 

purposes of this rulemaking, EPA uses 

the terms ‘‘controlled substance used as 

a process agent’’, ‘‘ODS process agent’’, 

and ‘‘process agent’’ interchangeably. 

The Agency also uses the term 

‘‘consumed’’ in this context to mean 

‘‘used up’’ or transformed. 

After initial use, process agents may 

be reused (with or without recycling), 

used in transformation reactions, or 

destroyed. While process agents are 

generally reused, additional process 

agents may need to be introduced to 

replenish losses due to transformation, 

destruction, emission, or being present 

in trace quantities in the chemical 

substance being manufactured. 

Emissions can be reduced through 

limiting process agent losses (e.g., 

mitigate fugitive emissions or capture 

process agents for further use or 

destruction) and by directly abating 

process agent emissions. Technology 

resulting in zero-emission uses of 

process agents have increasingly been 

adopted over time.5

C. EPA’s Treatment of ODS Process 

Agents 

Some legacy uses of ODS as process 

agents continue, in particular where 

substitutes or alternative processes may 

not be currently viable, and the Agency 

annually requests, collects, and reviews 

information on these uses. This is in 

line with decisions under the Montreal 

Protocol to allow the continued use of 

ODS as process agents under specified 

situations. The parties to the Montreal 

Protocol agreed in decision X/14 to 

except quantities of ODS produced or 

imported for use as process agents from 

the general requirements to phase out 

production and consumption of 

controlled ODS.6 EPA annually prepares 

information derived from submissions 

to the Agency on process agent uses in 

the United States and submits this 

information to the Montreal Protocol’s 

Ozone Secretariat on behalf of the 

United States, consistent with decisions 

taken by the parties to the Montreal 

Protocol. On October 19, 2023, EPA 

proposed to establish recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements for uses of ODS 

as process agents and to update 

definitions to reflect current practice (88 

FR 72027). These codified requirements 

were proposed to monitor process agent 

uses in a more routine and consistent 

manner under the Clean Air Act; and 

enhance understanding of emissions of 

substances harmful to the stratospheric 

ozone layer. 

III. Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements 

EPA is establishing one-time, annual, 

and situational reporting for entities that 

use ODS as process agents, a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82416 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

7EPA encourages entities to contact the Agency 

for an applicability determination if it is unclear 

whether a given use of a controlled substance meets 

EPA’s criteria of a process agent use. 

methodology to estimate emissions, and 

associated recordkeeping requirements. 

These requirements will improve the 

Agency’s understanding of process 

agent uses, efforts to monitor changes 

that occur over time, and anticipate 

future changes. Codified recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements will provide 

clear and consistent notice of the 

information EPA will collect each year 

in order to report consistent with 

decisions taken by the parties to the 

Montreal Protocol. These requirements 

will also further clarify how companies 

treat and report ODS process agent uses. 

The Agency is establishing these 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements for both class I and class 

II controlled substances that may be 

used as process agents. These 

requirements apply to all controlled 

substances used as process agents, 

regardless of whether the process agent 

uses are listed in decisions under the 

Montreal Protocol.7 These reports must 

be submitted electronically through the 

Central Data Exchange or another format 

specified by EPA. 

EPA understands that uses in the 

United States of ODS as process agents 

are primarily in legacy processes at 

existing facilities. Based on the 

information reported and reviewed by 

the Ozone Secretariat, as well as the 

discussions held at Montreal Protocol 

meetings, the United States is one of a 

few countries that continue to use 

controlled substances as process agents. 

The additional recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements established in 

this action will support EPA’s efforts to 

assess use of controlled substances as 

process agents, prepare and report 

associated information supporting 

continued need for excepted uses where 

appropriate, and ensure there is clarity 

and consistency in reporting on 

emissions of ODS used as process 

agents. 

This reporting will allow EPA to 

effectively monitor these narrow process 

agent uses in a more routine and 

consistent manner under CAA section 

603, and ensure the Agency is 

accurately documenting production and 

consumption of class I and class II 

controlled substances consistent with 

the limits established under CAA 

sections 604 and 605. 

A. One-Time Report 

To establish a baseline set of 

information from which EPA can 

monitor potential changes over time, 

EPA is generally finalizing as proposed 

the one-time reporting requirements, 

with the additional reported data 

element of the percentage of process 

agent consumed in the process agent 

application. The Agency proposed that 

any facility that uses a controlled 

substance as a process agent must 

submit a one-time report. This report 

must be submitted within 120 days of 

October 10, 2024, or within 120 days of 

the date that a facility first uses a 

controlled substance as a process agent, 

whichever is later, and is required 

regardless of whether an entity has 

provided this information to EPA 

previously. 

EPA proposed that this one-time 

report include information concerning 

the controlled substance being used as 

a process agent; a mass balance 

describing where, how, and how much 

of the controlled substance is used and 

emitted; if relevant, where, how, and 

how much of the controlled substance is 

transformed, destroyed, or otherwise 

captured; data on how much controlled 

substance was used in the last year and 

what it was used to produce (e.g., 

another chemical or product); air 

emissions from stack point sources, 

fugitive sources, and total air emissions; 

actions taken or under evaluation to 

phase out use of ODS as a process agent 

(e.g., by transitioning to a non-ozone 

depleting alternative); actions taken or 

under evaluation to minimize process 

agent use or emissions; and the location 

of the facility using the process agent. 

One commenter requested that EPA 

remove from the reporting requirements 

the data elements relating to the 

percentages of class I controlled 

substances used as a process agent and 

retained within the process agent 

application, recovered after the process 

agent application, and emitted or 

entrained in the final product. The 

commenter stated that this baseline 

information on process agent use is 

unnecessary because the information 

would already be provided in the use, 

volume, and emission data in the 

annual reports. The commenter further 

stated that it produces controlled 

substances for other uses in addition to 

use as a process agent, and that 

reporting this baseline information 

would require a facility to include 

information associated with all 

controlled substance production. The 

commenter stated that process agent use 

could be a small percentage of overall 

production, market conditions that 

drive overall production do not provide 

a reliable baseline, and reporting on 

overall production could compromise 

confidential information associated with 

manufacturing processes. Alternatively, 

the commenter requested that EPA 

consider this reporting to be 

confidential and that process knowledge 

be allowed to serve as the basis for the 

information requested. 

In response, EPA does not agree that 

reporting elements concerning the 

percentages of process agent used are 

unnecessary and would disclose 

confidential information. Details of the 

percentages of process agents used will 

provide EPA information on how other 

reported information relate to typical 

chemical manufacturing pathways and 

may be relevant to future Agency 

considerations. It is not evident how 

EPA may identify these values from the 

aggregated quantities of use, volume, 

and emission data that entities will 

report. Considering the variety of 

internal processes, process cycles, and 

potential pathways, it is not feasible for 

EPA to reliably derive the information 

the Agency is seeking from the data 

otherwise provided in annual reports. 

EPA is also not requiring that facilities 

include in their annual reporting the 

amounts retained within the process or 

entrained in the product. The Agency is 

requiring that this information be 

included in the one-time reporting to 

ensure that this process information 

may be understood within the context of 

other reported data. Furthermore, these 

data elements provide useful 

information that will help address a 

recommendation from another 

commenter, discussed in section V of 

this preamble, concerning what 

quantities typically remain in a final 

product. As also discussed in section V 

of this preamble, EPA is further adding 

a requirement that the percentage of 

process agent consumed in the process 

agent application be included in this 

one-time report. Information on these 

data elements from the one-time reports 

will be relevant to Agency 

considerations of what may be 

appropriate thresholds for determining 

if a use meets the definition of ‘‘process 

agent’’ codified in this action at 40 CFR 

82.3. EPA further understands that the 

commenter misunderstood this 

information as being intended to apply 

across overall production of the given 

controlled substances instead of the 

proportion used as process agents. The 

relevant data elements were, of the 

amount of controlled substance used as 

a process agent, what percentages were 

respectively retained, recovered, 

emitted, or entrained. These 

representative percentages of process 

agent use through a cycle of the process 

agent application are not relevant to the 

commenter’s concerns that reporting on 

the overall production may not provide 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82417 

a reliable baseline for this one-time 

report. EPA clarifies that the reported 

information is intended to represent a 

typical cycle through a process agent 

application and entities may, to the best 

of their ability, apply process 

knowledge to obtain this information. 

EPA addresses comments concerning 

the confidentiality determinations in 

section IV.B of this preamble. 

B. Annual Report 

As part of a continuing effort to 

monitor potential changes over time, 

EPA is generally finalizing as proposed 

the requirement that any facility that 

uses a controlled substance as a process 

agent must submit an annual report 

each year by February 14, with the 

addition of a process for entities to 

request extensions of reporting due 

dates. If there are facilities that employ 

more than one process agent use, any 

such facilities will need to report data 

individually for each process that uses 

an ODS process agent. This information 

will help enable the Agency to develop 

annual reports regarding uses of process 

agents in the United States and to 

effectively monitor production and 

consumption of ODS used for process 

agents consistent with domestic 

requirements. 

EPA proposed to require that each 

entity with a facility that uses a 

controlled substance as a process agent 

must submit for each applicable facility 

an annual report by February 14 of each 

year concerning process agent uses for 

the previous calendar year (i.e., January 

1 through December 31). This date 

coincides with the fourth quarter and 

certain annual deadlines for related 

existing ODS reporting requirements, 

including all quarterly importer and 

producer reports and the annual reports 

under 40 CFR 82.13(m) for second party 

transformation and destruction of class 

I controlled substances. EPA proposed 

that these annual reports include 

information concerning process agent 

sourcing; amounts recycled, reused, 

transformed, and destroyed over the 

previous calendar year; air emissions 

from stack point sources, fugitive 

sources, and total air emissions; and a 

description of emission reduction 

actions currently in use, planned, or 

currently under evaluation since the last 

one-time or annual report. 

One commenter supported the 

proposed reporting on process agent 

sourcing and on actions taken or under 

evaluation to phase out use of ODS as 

a process agent, stating that this 

information will allow EPA to assess the 

progress of developing alternatives and 

possibly end the need for the U.S. 

exemption for ODS process agents. EPA 

acknowledges the commenter’s support 

for the proposed reporting requirements. 

The Agency notes that this action is 

limited to establishing reporting 

requirements, so the commenter’s 

asserted support for actions to phase out 

use of ODS as process agents are beyond 

the scope of this action. 

Another commenter requested that 

EPA revise the annual reporting 

timeline to provide consistency with 

prior practice, allow time for necessary 

information to become available, and 

avoid conflicting with other EPA 

deadlines. Specifically, the commenter 

requested that EPA revise the date by 

which annual reports must be submitted 

each year, from February 14 to July 31, 

or April 30 at the earliest. The 

commenter stated that previous requests 

for information from EPA on these 

process agent uses have been received 

in July and responses were due within 

20 working days and that the proposal 

did not indicate a need or reason to vary 

this timeline. The commenter stated that 

information EPA proposed to require in 

the annual reports would not be 

available by February 14 and that this 

accelerated timeline would place an 

undue burden on the commenter. The 

commenter stated that manufacturing 

facilities that will be subject to the 

requirements being established in this 

rule will not have finalized emission 

calculations for the prior calendar year 

by February 14, and provided as 

examples that reporting under the 

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program 

is not due until July 1 and emission 

inventory reporting obligations for the 

commenter’s facilities under State 

programs ranged from April 1 to April 

30. The commenter stated that aligning 

the timing with other existing and 

established requirements would reduce 

burden associated with the proposed 

reporting obligations. The commenter 

cited identical rationales for asserting 

that data elements are confidential as it 

had for the proposed one-time reporting 

requirements. 

EPA disagrees with the commenter’s 

assertions that a February 14 deadline 

for annual reporting would be 

infeasible, unduly burdensome, or 

unjustified. The commenter did not 

explain why the information required to 

be included in the annual report would 

not be available by February 14. The 

commenter provided examples of later 

deadlines under different programs, but 

did not provide a reason that it would 

be infeasible for facilities to submit the 

required information for this program by 

February 14 of each year. Emissions of 

controlled substances from process 

agent uses are one component of overall 

emission inventories for subject 

facilities and EPA is unaware of any 

impact the requirements being finalized 

in this action may have on these 

facilities under other programs. As EPA 

stated at proposal, February 14 aligns 

with the fourth quarter and annual 

deadlines for existing ODS reporting 

requirements under 40 CFR part 82. 

February 14 also aligns with existing 

deadlines for regulated substances, 

including reporting requirements under 

40 CFR part 84 for hydrofluorocarbon 

(HFC) production (which includes 

emissions), HFC–23 emissions, and HFC 

process agent emissions. The 

commenter noted that it was subject to 

existing reporting deadlines that ranged 

from April 1 to July 1, and it is unclear 

why the commenter requested the 

requirements being finalized in this 

action should be no later than July 31, 

or, at the earliest, April 30. Furthermore, 

in line with U.S. commitments through 

the Montreal Protocol, the earlier 

reporting deadline being finalized 

supports EPA efforts to thoroughly 

review submitted information for 

completeness, accuracy, and 

consistency prior to a timely submission 

of this information to the Montreal 

Protocol’s Ozone Secretariat on behalf of 

the United States. However, EPA is 

finalizing that the Agency may grant a 

short extension in the unlikely event 

that an entity cannot comply with this 

reporting timeline. Entities may submit 

a request for an extension with 

supporting documentation and 

explanation of the reasons needed for an 

extension. The Agency will consider the 

circumstances of any such requests and 

act accordingly. EPA addresses 

comments concerning the 

confidentiality determinations in 

section IV.B of this preamble. 

C. Advance Notice of Changes Report 

EPA is largely finalizing as proposed 

a requirement that entities provide 

advance notice of changes, with 

revisions to the conditions under which 

reporting would be necessary. This 

advance notice of changes is required at 

least 180 days before an entity expects 

to increase, as compared to the previous 

year and the average of the three 

previous years, the amount of process 

agent introduced into the application by 

more than 20 percent or emissions by at 

least one metric ton and 20 percent. 

EPA understands that facility operations 

change over time, and the Agency can 

monitor such changes through the 

annual reporting mechanism. However, 

large changes in facility operations over 

a short period of time can impact the 

environment, conformance with 

domestic regulatory requirements, and 

our commitment to international 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82418 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

agreements. Annual reports represent a 

delayed view into past actions and may 

not provide sufficient lead time for an 

appropriate response. This notification 

requirement will provide EPA the 

opportunity to assess potential 

implications in advance of a change at 

the facility. 

EPA proposed to require that each 

facility with a significant process 

change, including an increase in the 

quantity of the final output 

manufactured using an ODS process 

agent, submit a report specifying 

changes at least 180 days prior to 

implementing the change. EPA 

proposed that this prior notification 

requirement apply to any process 

changes anticipated to result in 

increases by the next annual report of 

greater than 20 percent of the amount of 

controlled substance initially 

introduced for or emitted during use as 

a process agent by a facility, as 

compared to the corresponding data in 

the previous calendar year. 

One commenter supported EPA’s 

proposal to require reporting to specify 

changes at least 180 days before 

implementing a significant process 

change, including any increase in the 

quantity of manufacturing output using 

an ODS process agent. EPA 

acknowledges the commenter’s support. 

Another commenter requested that 

EPA not require the significant change 

report or, alternatively, that the 

reporting requirement exclude changes 

due to production variability and 

unexpected circumstances. The 

commenter offered examples of 

potential changes that may be difficult 

to predict with at least 180-day notice 

or where further revisions may occur 

after a notification is submitted, 

including plant outage(s), natural 

disasters, and market conditions. The 

commenter further stated that uses of 

process agents can be quite small and 

that a 20 percent change could be 

difficult to predict. The commenter 

suggested that, particularly for facilities 

that emit greater than one ton, EPA 

could require reporting of these changes 

in the annual report through which 

process agent use and emissions would 

already be reported. 

EPA acknowledges the commenter’s 

concerns about situations where the 

proposed requirements may be difficult 

to implement, but disagrees with the 

commenter’s suggestion that the Agency 

not finalize the requirement to report 

significant changes in advance. It is 

unclear how the examples the 

commenter provided, namely plant 

outage(s), downtime due to natural 

disasters, other pauses in production, 

and drops in demand and production 

due to the covid epidemic, would result 

in unanticipated large increases in 

process agent use or emissions. These 

are cases where process agent use and 

emissions may decrease by large 

quantities, but these decreases would 

not necessitate an advance notice of 

changes. Subsequent increases in use or 

emissions in a year following such 

unexpected cases might necessitate 

reporting, but after such incidents it 

would be reasonable to anticipate a 

return to previous production levels. 

EPA could also imagine that 

unexpected changes at one of a 

company’s facilities might result in 

increased utilization of one or more of 

its other facilities. Shifting production 

between facilities to account for such 

cases might result in an individual 

facility increasing its process use or 

emissions by large amounts, but not 

result in an overall increase across the 

company or the United States. This 

scenario would be unlikely to result in 

large impacts on total use and 

emissions, conformance with domestic 

regulatory requirements, or U.S. 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol. Therefore, EPA is revising the 

advance notice of changes reporting 

requirement so that it applies to each 

entity rather than to an individual 

facility. Additionally, the Agency is 

revising the basis of the percentage 

change to apply only if the increase is 

greater than a 20 percent increase 

relative to values from both the 

immediately previous year and the 

average of the past three years. This 

accounts for situations where 

production may drop in a single year 

and then return to typical levels in the 

following year, which would result in 

an apparent year-on-year increase. In 

this case it would be reasonable to 

expect that production may return to 

previous levels after a disruption. This 

also addresses cases where production 

may moderately increase annually, 

which would result in a relatively large 

increase over several years. EPA would 

receive relevant information each year 

and there would not be a large increase 

in any given year. In both cases advance 

notice would not be necessary for EPA 

to understand the potential for large 

increases and impacts by the 

submission of the next annual report. 

Furthermore, the Agency would have 

had opportunities to assess the 

circumstances and request additional 

information as relevant. Advance notice 

reporting will only be required for 

anticipated changes that represent a 

large overall increase for the entity, as 

calculated across all the entity’s 

applicable facilities. EPA expects that 

this mitigates the commenter’s concern 

about production variability at the 

facility level or other unanticipated 

changes raised by the commenter. At the 

same time, the reports will provide EPA 

the information it needs to monitor uses 

and emissions of process agents. The 

Agency also recognizes that there may 

be instances where it is not feasible to 

provide EPA with the requisite 180 days 

of notice, but the possibility of those 

instances is not, in the Agency’s view, 

a reason not to require the notice period. 

If that situation were to occur, EPA 

encourages the entity to contact the 

Agency as soon as practicable so that 

EPA can work with the entity. 

EPA acknowledges the commenter’s 

statement that a 20 percent change from 

a facility with relatively small emissions 

may be difficult to assess, but the 

Agency disagrees with the commenter’s 

alternative recommendation that these 

changes instead be included in the 

annual report. Smaller changes at that 

level would pose lesser contributions to 

overall emissions in the United States, 

and advance notice would be less 

necessary. The annual report is 

submitted by February 14 of the year 

following actions taken, and is 

inherently retrospective. Only including 

this information in the annual report 

would defeat the purpose of providing 

advance notice. However, EPA 

recognizes that changes in emissions 

from process agents from facilities that 

have, on the whole, relatively small 

emissions, pose lesser contributions to 

overall emissions in the United States, 

and advance notice of these changes is 

therefore less critical. 

Accordingly, EPA is revising the 

qualifying criteria to require that this 

advance notice be provided only where 

changes that would result in annual 

increases greater than 20 percent of the 

amount initially introduced or, for 

emissions, increases of at least 20 

percent and one metric ton. This will 

ensure the Agency has advance notice of 

changes that may have a large impact on 

overall use or emissions of process 

agents in the United States, while 

exempting from the advance notice 

requirements changes from smaller 

contributors. EPA addresses comments 

concerning the confidentiality 

determinations in section IV.B of this 

preamble. 

D. Emissions Reporting Methodology 

and Incorporation by Reference 

In alignment with the one-time and 

annual reporting requirements being 

finalized in this action, EPA is 

establishing requirements that entities 

using controlled substances as process 

agents report emissions as specified in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82419 

8The citation for the version of ASTM D6348–03 

incorporated by reference in this action is different 

from the citation listed in 40 CFR 98.7 but the 

standard is the same standard listed in 40 CFR part 

98, subpart L. 

9The version of ASME MFC–4M–1986 

(Reaffirmed 2016) incorporated by reference in this 

action is different from the version listed in 40 CFR 

98.7 but the standard is the same standard listed in 

40 CFR part 98, subpart L. 

10As discussed in footnotes 8 and 9, in this action 

EPA is incorporating by reference different versions 

of standards than were listed in the memorandum. 

The Agency is also not incorporating by reference 

the ASTM D–2879 standard that was listed in the 

memorandum because it is unnecessary for the 

note’s guidance to incorporate that standard by 

reference. 

40 CFR 84.25. These requirements are 

being finalized largely as proposed, with 

the addition of a mass balance 

compliance option and a revision of the 

retesting frequency to be at least every 

five years rather than every 10 years. 

The units of measure for determining 

emissions and the method to calculate 

emissions will be in kilograms of 

controlled substance emitted. Emission 

reporting requirements align as 

appropriate with timelines for one-time 

and annual reporting requirements 

being established in this action. 

These requirements prescribe 

emission estimation methodologies 

through vent-specific and mass balance 

compliance options. Associated 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements will support EPA’s efforts 

to validate the reported information. For 

example, for facilities using an emission 

factor-based method, each process vent 

in the top quartile of its respective 

facility’s emissions generally must use 

the process-vent-specific emission factor 

method, which requires emission tests 

with process activity parameters 

measured for either each operating 

scenario or the operating scenario with 

the largest overall emissions. All 

emissions test data and procedures used 

in developing emission factors must be 

documented. Process vents with less 

emissions may use the process-ventspecific emission calculation factor 

method, which prescribes certain 

procedures to calculate emissions for 

each operating scenario, but does not 

require testing. All data, assumptions, 

and procedures used in the calculations 

or engineering assessment must be 

documented. Each process using the 

mass balance method must demonstrate 

adherence to accuracy and precision 

requirements. In these cases, the 

reported information follow specified 

methodologies and EPA may request 

and assess detailed records to better 

understand the reported data. EPA is 

also listing and incorporating by 

reference certain American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers (ASME), ASTM 

International (ASTM), and EPA 

standards as acceptable options to 

calculate, measure, analyze, or measure 

parameters associated with emissions. 

Due to similarities in requirements, 

emitted chemicals, and regulated 

industries, these standards are the same 

standards listed in 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart L, and the same versions 

incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 

98.7, except for ASTM D6348–03,8

incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 

60.17, and ASME MFC–4M–1986 

(Reaffirmed 2016).9

EPA proposed to require that entities 

using controlled substances as process 

agents report emissions using a 

methodology similar to the emissions 

reporting requirements for the 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program 

(GHGRP) codified at 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart L (40 CFR 98.120 through 

98.128). EPA also sought comment on a 

description of procedures to implement 

the proposed emission reporting 

requirements (available in a 

memorandum to the docket for this 

action at Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2022–0707–0002). 

Specifically, EPA proposed that 

acceptable testing methods for 

measuring process vent emissions of 

controlled substances would include 

EPA Method 18 in appendix A–1 to 40 

CFR part 60, EPA Method 320 in 

appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, EPA 

430–R–10–003, ASTM D6348–03, or 

other analytical methods validated 

using EPA Method 301 in appendix A 

to 40 CFR part 63. EPA Method 301 

provides a process to validate and 

approve other analytical methods as 

appropriate. In the memorandum to the 

docket, EPA included as compliance 

options these and other methods listed 

for existing requirements in 40 CFR part 

98, subpart L, and incorporated by 

reference in 40 CFR 98.7.10

In the proposal, EPA discussed 

advantages and disadvantages of 

potential approaches, requested 

comment on these assessments, and 

highlighted particular areas of 

consideration. The Agency noted the 

approach used by the TRI program at 40 

CFR part 372, and explained its 

concerns with applying the general TRI 

reporting requirements to this limited 

set of ODS process agent pollutants, 

industry sectors, and types of operations 

for the purposes of this action. 

Two commenters expressed their 

support for an emissions reporting 

approach similar to the GHGRP instead 

of TRI reporting requirements. There 

were no responses to EPA’s request for 

comment on whether adjustments from 

the proposed methodology were 

necessary to account for distinctions 

between controlled substance 

emissions, process agent applications, 

or industry sectors. The Agency 

understands that the emission reporting 

methodology established in this rule is 

applicable to these process agent 

applications and their associated 

industry sectors. 

The Agency requested comment on 

whether there are potential gaps in the 

proposed approaches to determining 

emissions from process agent 

applications and whether alternative 

approaches, such as a mass balance 

method as described in appendix A to 

40 CFR part 98, subpart L, may be 

suitable in those particular cases. EPA 

also requested comment on the 

advantages and disadvantages of 

specifying one testing method instead of 

several options (e.g., EPA Method 18 as 

the analytical method and EPA Method 

21 monitoring procedures for leak 

detection). EPA sought comment on 

whether finalizing the use of one 

method, instead of multiple methods, 

would improve the consistency of 

emission data reported across the 

facilities using ODS as process agents. 

Two commenters supported EPA’s 

proposal to use a methodology similar 

to the emissions reporting requirements 

at 40 CFR part 98, subpart L. These 

commenters stated that it would be 

reasonable to allow only one testing 

method for this small set of affected 

entities instead of several options and 

that this would ensure more consistency 

when evaluating emissions. One of 

these commenters recommended that 

EPA finalize the rule as proposed. The 

commenter stated that the GHGRP 

approach is more reasonable than the 

TRI approach because it would require 

entities to use a specific methodology 

and report more detailed information, 

which would result in data that are 

more consistent and manageable for 

EPA to validate. The commenter further 

stated that the approach EPA proposed 

is more likely to produce more reliable 

emission data than the mass balance 

approach the Agency took comment on. 

The other commenter stated that more 

frequent and involved testing was 

necessary to ensure accurate accounting 

of emissions. Further, the commenter 

referenced a report that it had 

previously issued and stated that the 

report had demonstrated that the 

GHGRP reporting requirements, which 

rely on emission factor estimates and/or 

limited and infrequent testing to 

support calculation methods, may be 

insufficient to accurately estimate and 

account for the controlled substances 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82420 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

11 74 FR 16579. 

being emitted. Specifically, the 

commenter pointed to the report’s 

assertion that its investigators detected 

controlled substances that the facilities 

did not report under existing GHGRP 

requirements. The commenter 

recommended incorporating some form 

of mandatory continuous emissions 

monitoring systems (CEMS) technology 

for the top emission sources of ODS 

process agents to gauge the accuracy of 

emission factor-based calculations and 

to identify emissions that may not have 

otherwise been detected. The 

commenter cited examples of 

technologies to continuously monitor 

emissions from process vents and leaks, 

including a portable Fourier-transform 

infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) gas 

analyzer and continuous infrared 

monitoring. The commenter stated that 

the frequency of retesting should be 

increased from every 10 years as 

proposed to every year to more quickly 

identify potential discrepancies between 

reported and actual emissions. The 

commenter stated that it is reasonable to 

expect monitoring and testing on all 

processes, given the restrictions on 

these ODS due to their outsized damage 

to the atmosphere. The commenter 

asked for clarification if TRI emission 

data would continue to be submitted in 

addition to these newly established 

requirements for ODS process agents. 

The commenter stated its belief in the 

value of a central data-sharing 

repository to view all fluorinated gas 

emission data and account for potential 

overlaps between reporting 

requirements. The commenter further 

stated that previous years’ data on 

process agent raw volumes of emissions 

specific to each use and substance by 

facility reported to the Montreal 

Protocol should be available. The 

commenter suggested that the decline in 

the number of ODS process agent uses 

and emissions over the years indicates 

that these uses are not essential and will 

cease in the future with the rise of 

alternatives. The commenter urged EPA 

to use information gathered to advance 

the understanding of alternatives to 

ongoing ODS process agent uses, and 

available options to further limit 

emissions from those sources still 

requiring their use. 

EPA acknowledges the commenters’ 

support for the proposed methodology 

and one commenter’s support for the 

proposal as a whole. The Agency 

acknowledges the commenters’ general 

support for specifying one testing 

method instead of allowing any of the 

several methods that were proposed. No 

commenters indicated potential 

disadvantages with specifying EPA 

Method 18 as the analytical method and 

EPA Method 21 monitoring procedures 

for leak detection. However, EPA 

remains unaware of whether these 

methods may be applicable in all 

situations for these operations and 

process agent emissions. At this time, 

EPA will allow entities to use any of the 

several methods being finalized in this 

action, as applicable. EPA will further 

assess available information and may 

consider in a future rulemaking whether 

it would be practicable and advisable to 

specify a more limited set of testing 

methods and monitoring procedures. To 

align with existing EPA emission 

reporting requirements for similar 

chemicals and processes, the Agency is 

incorporating by reference in 40 CFR 

part 82, subpart A, the same versions of 

the relevant methods listed at 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart L. 

With respect to the commenter’s 

request to require CEMS or some other 

form of continuous monitoring in order 

to verify the emission factor-based 

calculations underlying the proposed 

reporting requirements, EPA does not 

agree that these additional monitoring 

requirements and associated compliance 

burden are warranted for these 

circumstances. The Agency disagrees 

with the commenter’s characterization 

of the report’s findings as undermining 

the emission factor-based method or 

structure of the GHGRP reporting 

requirements in general as applied in 

this context for estimating emissions of 

controlled substances used as process 

agents. EPA’s understanding is that the 

facility where the commenter detected 

CFCs does not use controlled substances 

as process agents and would not be 

subject to the requirements being 

established in this action. The 

commenter did not justify why the 

emissions it detected from that facility 

would indicate that the proposed 

methodology would be insufficient for 

the process agent uses addressed in this 

action. The fact that controlled 

substances were detected from the 

specific facility but not reported through 

the GHGRP does not indicate any 

inadequacies of the emission 

calculation, monitoring, or reporting 

requirements being established for 

process agent uses in this action. EPA 

explicitly excepted ODS controlled 

substances from the definition of 

‘‘fluorinated greenhouse gas’’ under 40 

CFR 98.6, and accordingly from the 

GHGRP emission reporting 

requirements under 40 CFR 98.122, 

because EPA already regulated 

controlled substances under 40 CFR part 

82.11 This exclusion of controlled 

substances from the GHGRP reporting 

requirements was not due to any 

technical limitations of the 

requirements under 40 CFR part 98. 

EPA also understands that these 

facilities may produce or transform 

controlled substances, and other 

facilities within the vicinity may 

contribute to emissions of controlled 

substances as well, so it is unclear how 

effectively the detected emissions and 

recommended monitoring techniques 

may be attributable to any particular 

process. The emissions reporting 

requirements in this rule are specifically 

focused on obtaining accurate and 

consistent information on process agent 

uses. Because these process agent uses 

typically involve legacy operations, EPA 

does not anticipate that operations will 

change frequently enough in kind or 

scale to necessitate intensive monitoring 

or annual testing of process vents to 

revise emission factors. EPA is 

finalizing as proposed a requirement 

that entities conduct an emissions test 

of process vents to update emission 

factors if changes to operating scenarios 

result in increases of 15 percent or 

more. It is the Agency’s view that this 

is adequate to ensure that emissions 

factors are accurate and reasonably 

reflect current conditions. Furthermore, 

while the Agency does not agree that 

annual retesting should be required, 

because, as noted, most of the process 

agent uses involve legacy operations 

where EPA does not anticipate much 

variability in operations, the Agency 

recognizes that retesting at a greater 

frequency than every 10 years would 

provide more assurance of the validity 

of these factors. Accordingly, in this 

final rule, EPA is requiring process vent 

testing, as applicable, no less often than 

every five years. 

Another commenter stated that there 

are instances where a mass balance 

approach may be more accurate to 

estimate fugitive emissions than the 

proposed approach. The commenter 

provided information about its 

operations at one facility as an example, 

and requested EPA include a mass 

balance approach as an acceptable 

method for calculating fugitive ODS 

emissions. The commenter stated that, 

while the proposed emission factorbased methods have historically been 

used to quantify equipment leak 

emissions from various industrial 

processes, these approaches include 

factors that are based on general 

industry-wide data and do not 

necessarily reflect individual facility, 

site-specific process and equipment 

characteristics. The commenter 

explained that ODS enter into the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82421 

process at its facility from a single 

source, the facility does not produce or 

transform the ODS, stack emissions are 

monitored with an EPA-certified CEMS, 

and the ODS content of all generated 

waste stream quantities are monitored 

and documented. For these 

circumstances, the commenter stated 

that the fugitive emissions would be 

underestimated using an emissions 

factor method and are more accurately 

calculated using a mass balance 

approach than Method 21 and screening 

level emission factors. 

EPA understands that the proposed 

emission methodology requirements 

would be applicable to the commenter’s 

operations and does not agree that these 

requirements lack adaptability to sitespecific circumstances. The 

requirements being established in this 

action include a process to create sitespecific process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factors and site-specific leak 

monitoring approaches. However, EPA 

acknowledges that a mass balance 

approach may also be an appropriate 

option for the situation described, 

which EPA understands to involve 

batch operations with no on-site 

production or transformation. 

Accordingly, EPA is adding a mass 

balance approach as a compliance 

option for batch operations with no onsite production or transformation of 

controlled substances, based on the 

GHGRP provisions listed in appendix A 

to subpart L of 40 CFR part 98. The 

GHGRP requirements were designed for 

situations where fluorine enters a 

process as part of a reactant and leaves 

as part of a product or byproduct. 

Controlled substances are not produced 

or transformed in these process agent 

applications. Accordingly, the mass 

balance approach established in this 

action for controlled substances used as 

process agents addresses the quantities 

of controlled substances entering and 

leaving the process agent application. 

Any entity that uses this compliance 

option must demonstrate that it can 

meet the error limits or measurement 

and operating criteria specified in the 

requirements. Each facility should use 

the methodology that most accurately 

estimates emissions from its processes. 

More information on the standards 

being incorporated by reference in 40 

CFR 82.27 is available in section VII.I of 

this preamble. Available ASME methods 

are ASME MFC–3M–2004, 

Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 

Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi; 

ASME MFC–4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 

2016), Measurement of Gas Flow by 

Turbine Meters; ASME MFC–5M–1985 

(Reaffirmed 1994), Measurement of 

Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using 

Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters; 

ASME MFC–6M–1998, Measurement of 

Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Vortex 

Flowmeters; ASME MFC–7M–1987 

(Reaffirmed 1992), Measurement of Gas 

Flow by Means of Critical Flow Venturi 

Nozzles; ASME MFC–9M–1988 

(Reaffirmed 2001), Measurement of 

Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits by 

Weighing Method; ASME MFC–11M– 

2006), Measurement of Fluid Flow by 

Means of Coriolis Mass Flowmeters; and 

ASME MFC–14M–2003, Measurement 

of Fluid Flow Using Small Bore 

Precision Orifice Meters. 

The ASTM method is ASTM D6348– 

03, Standard Test Method for 

Determination of Gaseous Compounds 

by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier 

Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy. 

ASTM D2879–97 (Reapproved 2007), 

Standard Test Method for Vapor 

Pressure-Temperature Relationship and 

Initial Decomposition Temperature of 

Liquids by Isoteniscope may also be 

used to determine vapor pressures for 

purposes of the definition ‘‘in light 

liquid service.’’ ASTM D2879–97 is 

available for inspection at U.S. EPA’s 

Air and Radiation Docket; EPA West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave. NW, Washington, DC 202–566– 

1742 and may be obtained at ASTM 

International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, 

P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 

19428; phone: 610.832.9500; email: 

service@astm.org; website: 

www.astm.org/. 

EPA methods are Approved 

Alternative Method 012: An Alternate 

Procedure for Stack Gas Volumetric 

Flow Rate Determination; Methods for 

Estimating Air Emissions from Chemical 

Manufacturing Facilities, Emissions 

Inventory Improvement Program, 

Volume II: Chapter 16, August 2007; 

EPA–453/R–95–017, November 1995; 

EPA–430–R–10–003, March 2010, 

Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission 

Estimates; and Other Test Method 24, 

September 2006, Tracer Gas Protocol for 

the Determination of Volumetric Flow 

Rate Through the Ring Pipe of the Xact 

Multi-Metals Monitoring System. 

E. Recordkeeping 

Entities are obligated under existing 

requirements to record information in 

accordance with 40 CFR 82.13 and 

82.24, including information concerning 

ODS used as process agents. In this 

action EPA is finalizing as proposed 

recordkeeping requirements specifically 

for uses of ODS as process agents. Under 

40 CFR 82.13(d), entities must retain the 

records and copies of reports required 

for at least three years. Under previously 

established requirements in 40 CFR 

82.13 and 82.24, entities, including 

producers and importers, must record 

information that applies to controlled 

substances in general, including those 

used as process agents. In this action 

EPA is establishing specific 

requirements that differentiate 

controlled substances intended for 

process agent use from the wider uses. 

This additional information will 

provide further distinctions of 

information already required to be 

recorded. 

EPA proposed to also require that 

entities using process agents record 

information that documents what would 

be reported to the Agency, which 

includes information concerning 

sourcing, production, recycling, reuse, 

transformation, and destruction for ODS 

intended to be used for process agent 

applications. 

Specifically, the Agency proposed to 

add requirements that companies that 

use process agents maintain: dated 

records of the quantity of each process 

agent produced at each facility; records 

identifying the producer or importer of 

process agents received; copies of 

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 

process agents; dated records 

identifying the quantity of each product 

manufactured within each facility by 

using process agents; dated records of 

the quantity of process agent spills or 

releases greater than or equal to 100 

pounds; dated records of information 

used to calculate emissions; dated 

records of the quantity of process agents 

which are subsequently transformed or 

destroyed; and a copy of the 

transformation or destruction 

verification in the case that a process 

agent is subsequently sold or distributed 

to another entity for transformation or 

destruction. 

One commenter requested that EPA 

revise the proposed reference to 

recordkeeping responsibility in 40 CFR 

82.13(ee)(3) from applying to a ‘‘person’’ 

to instead apply to an ‘‘entity,’’ in 

alignment with EPA’s terminology for 

proposed reporting requirements under 

40 CFR 82.13(ee)(1) and (2). The same 

commenter requested that EPA revise 

the recordkeeping requirements 

proposed in 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(3)(i) to 

reflect the amount of controlled 

substance used as process agent at each 

facility instead of the amount of 

controlled substance produced at each 

facility, as the commenter also produces 

the same controlled substance for other 

uses. The commenter stated that it 

would be difficult to predict or keep 

accurate numbers prospectively 

recording the amount of controlled 

substance that was produced and may 

be used as a process agent, and that 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82422 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

12 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). 

13 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). 

14 40 CFR 2.205. 

15This approach of making categorical 

determinations for a class of information is a wellestablished Agency practice. Prior examples of rules 

where EPA has made such categorical 

determinations include Confidentiality 

Determinations for Data Required Under the 

Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and 

Amendments to Special Rules Governing Certain 

Information Obtained Under the Clean Air Act (76 

FR 30817, May 26, 2011); Control of Air Pollution 

From New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and 

Vehicle Standards (88 FR 4296, January 24, 2023); 

and Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: RFS 

Annual Rules (87 FR 39600, July 1, 2002). 

16Argus Leader, 139 S. Ct. at 2366. 

17 Id. at 2363. 

18 Id. (internal citations omitted). 

dated records of the amount used at 

each facility as a process agent would be 

most relevant for the purposes of these 

requirements. 

As EPA states in footnote 2 of this 

preamble, ‘‘person’’ and ‘‘entity’’ may be 

used interchangeably in certain 

circumstances. The instances referenced 

were not intended to carry a material 

distinction in interpretation or 

application. For clarity, EPA is 

finalizing terminology in 40 CFR 

82.13(ee)(3) that refers to the 

recordkeeping obligations as applying to 

an ‘‘entity.’’ To be clear, each entity, 

including all commonly owned 

companies, is responsible for the 

regulatory obligations as applicable of 

all commonly owned facilities and 

plants subject to the requirements being 

finalized in this action. EPA 

acknowledges the commenter’s 

explanation of its process agent 

production operations and understands 

that the same chemical may be used for 

multiple purposes and, after use as a 

process agent, may subsequently be 

transformed or destroyed. The Agency 

agrees that the amount of process agent 

used is a relevant recordkeeping 

element to track the use of controlled 

substances and is finalizing that 

additional data element for the 

recordkeeping requirements. However, 

under existing requirements in 40 CFR 

82.13(f)(2)(ii) and 82.24(b)(1)(i) and (ii), 

entities must differentiate production 

records by whether the quantities of 

controlled substances were intended for 

use in processes resulting in their 

transformation or destruction. EPA 

understands that some quantities of 

controlled substances are produced 

solely for use by the same entity as a 

process agent and ultimately are not 

transformed or destroyed. The Agency 

understands that complete information 

on future use and disposition may not 

be known at the time of production, but 

sees value in documentation of the 

expected use. Therefore, in addition to 

requiring that entities maintain records 

of the quantities of each controlled 

substance initially introduced into the 

process agent application for use as a 

process agent, EPA is clarifying records 

of the quantity that was produced for 

use as a process agent refers to the 

expectation at the time of production. 

This requirement for entities that use 

process agents is separate from existing 

requirements for producers in 40 CFR 

82.13(f)(2)(ii) and 82.24(b)(1)(i) and (ii) 

and may not necessarily correspond 

directly with the quantities actually 

used as a process agent. 

IV. How will EPA treat ODS process 

agent data collected under this action? 

Consistent with EPA’s commitment to 

transparency in program 

implementation, as well as to 

proactively encourage compliance with 

EPA’s general ODS phaseout and to 

meet the United States’ reporting 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol, EPA is finalizing 

determinations for the treatment and 

release of data that will be collected. 

EPA is finalizing certain categorical 

emission data and confidentiality 

determinations for individual reported 

data elements that EPA will be 

collecting through this rulemaking. This 

action identifies certain information 

categories that must be submitted to the 

Agency that will be subject to disclosure 

to the public without further notice 

because the information has been 

determined to be either ‘‘emission data’’ 

under 40 CFR 2.301(a), or EPA has 

found that the information does not 

meet the standard for confidential 

treatment under Exemption 4 of the 

FOIA. The Agency has also identified 

certain other categories of information 

that may be entitled to confidential 

treatment. The emission data and 

confidentiality determinations in this 

action are intended to encourage 

consistency among reported data, 

compliance with EPA’s ODS phaseout, 

and to meet the United States’ reporting 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol. Establishing these 

determinations through this rulemaking 

will provide predictability for both 

information requesters and submitters. 

Separately, for information reported on 

process agents that is not addressed in 

this rulemaking, i.e., data elements 

being finalized in this rule for which 

EPA is not in this action issuing a 

determination, the Agency will apply 

the 40 CFR part 2 process for 

establishing case-by-case confidentiality 

determinations. 

A. Background on Determinations of 

Whether Information Is Entitled to 

Treatment as Confidential Information 

1. Confidential Treatment of Reported 

Information 

Regulated entities that must submit 

information to EPA frequently claim 

that some or all of that information is 

entitled to confidential treatment and 

therefore exempt from disclosure under 

Exemption 4 of the FOIA.12 Exemption 

4 exempts from disclosure ‘‘trade secrets 

and commercial or financial information 

obtained from a person [that is] 

privileged or confidential.’’ 13 In order 

for information to meet the 

requirements of Exemption 4, EPA must 

find that the information is either: (1) A 

trade secret, or (2) commercial or 

financial information that is: (a) 

obtained from a person, and (b) 

privileged or confidential. 

Generally, when EPA has information 

that the Agency intends to disclose 

publicly that is covered by a claim of 

confidentiality under FOIA Exemption 

4, EPA has a process to make case-bycase or class determinations under 40 

CFR part 2 to evaluate whether such 

information qualifies for confidential 

treatment under the exemption.14 15 In 

this action, EPA is making categorical 

emission data and confidentiality 

determinations in advance through this 

notice and comment rulemaking for 

some information that will be submitted 

to EPA under the requirements 

established in this action. This 

information will be subject to disclosure 

to the public without further notice. 

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in 

Food Marketing Institute v. Argus 

Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) 

(Argus Leader) addresses the meaning of 

‘‘confidential’’ within the context of 

FOIA Exemption 4. The Court held that 

‘‘[a]t least where commercial or 

financial information is both 

customarily and actually treated as 

private by its owner and provided to the 

government under an assurance of 

privacy, the information is ‘confidential’ 

within the meaning of Exemption 4.’’ 16

The Court identified two conditions 

‘‘that might be required for information 

communicated to another to be 

considered confidential.’’ 17 Under the 

first condition, ‘‘information 

communicated to another remains 

confidential whenever it is customarily 

kept private, or at least closely held, by 

the person imparting it.’’ 18 The second 

condition provides that ‘‘information 

might be considered confidential only if 

the party receiving it provides some 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82423 

19 Id. (internal citations omitted). 

20 ‘‘Exemption 4 After the Supreme Court’s Ruling 

in Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media 

and Accompanying Step-by-Step Guide,’’ Office of 

Information Policy, U.S. Department of Justice, 

(October 4, 2019). Available at: https://

www.justice.gov/oip/exemption-4-after-supremecourts-ruling-food-marketing-institute-v-argusleader-media. 

21See id; see also ‘‘Step-by-Step Guide for 

Determining if Commercial or Financial 

Information Obtained from a Person is Confidential 

under Exemption 4 of the FOIA,’’ Office of 

Information Policy, U.S. Department of Justice, 

(updated October 7, 2019). Available at: https://

www.justice.gov/oip/step-step-guide-determining-ifcommercial-or-financial-information-obtainedperson-confidential. 

22CAA section 114(c); 42 U.S.C. 7414(c). 

23 5 U.S.C. 552. 

24 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). 

assurance that it will remain secret.’’ 19

The Court found the first condition 

necessary for information to be 

considered confidential within the 

meaning of Exemption 4, but did not 

address whether the second condition 

must also be met. 

Following the issuance of the Court’s 

opinion in Argus Leader, the U.S. 

Department of Justice issued guidance 

concerning the confidentiality prong of 

Exemption 4, articulating ‘‘the newly 

defined contours of Exemption 4’’ postArgus Leader.20 Where the Government 

provides an express or implied 

indication to the submitter prior to or at 

the time the information is submitted to 

the Government that the Government 

would publicly disclose the 

information, then the submitter 

generally cannot reasonably expect 

confidentiality of the information upon 

submission, and the information is not 

entitled to confidential treatment under 

Exemption 4.21 In this rule, EPA is 

clearly asserting the Agency’s 

determination that certain information 

is not confidential, not entitled to 

confidential treatment, and may be 

disclosed publicly. This is aligned with 

the Supreme Court’s decision and the 

subsequent Department of Justice 

guidance that the government’s 

assurances that a submission will be 

treated as not confidential should 

dictate the expectations of submitters. 

Based on the finalized determinations, 

submitters are on notice before they 

submit any information that EPA has 

determined that the identified data 

elements discussed below, as well as in 

the addendum provided in the docket 

for this action titled Confidentiality 

Determinations and Emission Data 

Designations for Data Elements in the 

ODS Process Agents Reporting Final 

Rule, will not be entitled to confidential 

treatment upon submission and may be 

released by the Agency without further 

notice. As a result, submitters will not 

have a reasonable expectation that the 

information will be treated as 

confidential; rather, they have the 

reasonable expectation that the 

information will be disclosed. 

As described further below, EPA is 

making categorical determinations that 

some of the data elements that will be 

submitted to EPA are not entitled to 

confidential treatment because either: it 

is not the type of information that 

submitters customarily keep private or 

closely held; it is already publicly 

available; or it is discernible 

information that is self-evident or 

readily observable through reverse 

engineering by a third party. 

2. Emission Data Under Section 114 of 

the CAA 

The CAA states that ‘‘[a]ny records, 

reports or information obtained under 

[section 114] shall be available to the 

public.’’ 22 Thus, the CAA begins with a 

presumption that the information 

submitted to EPA will be available to be 

disclosed to the public. It then provides 

a narrow exception to that presumption 

for information that ‘‘would divulge 

methods or processes entitled to 

protection as trade secrets.’’ The CAA 

then narrows this exception further by 

excluding ‘‘emission data’’ from the 

category of information eligible for 

confidential treatment. While the CAA 

does not define ‘‘emission data,’’ EPA 

has done so by regulation at 40 CFR 

2.301(a)(2)(i). On occasion EPA releases 

some of the information submitted 

under CAA section 114, such as 

emission data, to parties outside of the 

Agency of its own volition, through 

responses to requests submitted under 

the FOIA,23 or through civil litigation. 

As noted in the prior section, generally, 

when EPA has information that the 

Agency intends to disclose publicly that 

is covered by a claim of confidentiality 

under FOIA Exemption 4, EPA has a 

process to make case-by-case or class 

determinations under 40 CFR part 2. 

This process includes an evaluation of 

whether such information is or is not 

emission data, and whether it otherwise 

qualifies for confidential treatment 

under FOIA Exemption 4.24

The regulations at 40 CFR 2.301 

define emission data to include the 

following: 

• Information necessary to determine 

the identity, amount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics 

(to the extent related to air quality) of 

any emission which has been emitted by 

the source (or of any pollutant resulting 

from any emission by the source), or any 

combination of the foregoing; 

• Information necessary to determine 

the identity, amount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics 

(to the extent related to air quality) of 

the emissions which, under an 

applicable standard or limitation, the 

source was authorized to emit 

(including, to the extent necessary for 

such purposes, a description of the 

manner or rate of operation of the 

source); and 

• A general description of the 

location and/or nature of the source to 

the extent necessary to identify the 

source and to distinguish it from other 

sources (including, to the extent 

necessary for such purposes, a 

description of the device, installation, or 

operation constituting the source). 

In this action, EPA is applying the 

regulatory definition of ‘‘emission data’’ 

in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i) to determine 

that certain categories of source 

certification and compliance 

information are not entitled to 

confidential treatment because they 

qualify as emission data. That 

information is subject to disclosure to 

the public without further notice. As 

relevant to this action, a ‘‘source’’ for 

purposes of the definition in 40 CFR 

2.301 is generally the equipment 

covered by a regulatory requirement, 

such as process equipment in a plant or 

facility and any related emission units. 

EPA’s definition of emission data also 

excludes certain information related to 

products still in the research and 

development phase or products not yet 

on the market except for limited 

purposes. Thus, for example, 40 CFR 

2.301(a)(2)(ii) excludes information 

related to ‘‘any product, method, device, 

or installation (or any component 

thereof) designed and intended to be 

marketed or used commercially but not 

yet so marketed or used.’’ This specific 

exclusion from the definition of 

emission data is limited in time. EPA 

has concluded that no data related to 

this exclusion are implicated in this 

rulemaking because data required to be 

reported under this rule generally relate 

to equipment that EPA understands are 

primarily for purposes of maintaining 

legacy production processes at existing 

facilities. 

B. Data Elements To Be Reported to EPA 

Under This Action 

Consistent with EPA’s commitment to 

transparency in program 

implementation, EPA has reviewed the 

data reporting elements being finalized 

in this action to see if information under 

the umbrella of those data elements 

could be considered entitled to 

confidential treatment. EPA is finalizing 

as proposed its determinations to treat 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82424 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

certain data elements as not entitled to 

confidential treatment. Later in this 

section, EPA outlines individual data 

elements and the Agency’s 

determinations of whether they will be 

handled as confidential, not 

confidential or undetermined. The 

Agency also lists its determinations of 

whether the data elements are emission 

data, which are not confidential, and are 

therefore releasable. There may be 

additional reasons not to release 

individual data elements determined to 

not be entitled to confidential treatment, 

for example if it is personally 

identifiable information. EPA is making 

confidentiality determinations and 

treating data concerning process agent 

uses similarly to the process under the 

HFC Phasedown Program as codified in 

40 CFR 84.31(k). Some data may be 

released in different contexts, including 

to the general public to encourage 

transparency, to ensure compliance 

with EPA’s general ODS phaseout, and 

to meet the United States’ reporting 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol. Emission data, including data 

used as inputs to emissions equations, 

is generally releasable under CAA 

section 114(c), which provides that 

emission data shall be available to the 

public. ‘‘Inputs to emission equations’’ 

refers to data necessary to determine the 

identity, amount, frequency, or 

concentration of the emission emitted 

by the reporting facilities. Inputs to 

emission equations include equipment 

parameters, measured data, supporting 

calculations, and other rationale used to 

calculate reported emission quantities. 

Some aggregated data would also be 

released to the Ozone Secretariat in line 

with past practices and existing 

commitments, which could include a 

list of the process agent applications 

and the specific ODS used as process 

agents in those applications, the levels 

of emissions from those process agent 

applications in metric tons and ODPweighted metric tons, and the specific 

containment technologies used to 

minimize emissions of controlled 

substances. EPA also stated the 

Agency’s intention to release the 

aggregate consumption of ODS used as 

process agents in metric tons and ODPweighted tons. Finally, EPA stated that 

the Agency would include production, 

import, export, and destruction of ODS 

used as process agents by chemical in 

data reported to the Montreal Protocol’s 

Ozone Secretariat as part of the United 

States’ annual report submitted under 

Article 7 of the treaty. At this time, this 

aggregated data would generally 

comprise data from three or more 

entities. Release of this information 

documents U.S. conformance with 

commitments under an international 

agreement, so even if the number of 

entities with process agent uses 

decreases in the future, EPA is 

determining that process agent data 

reported by the United States in 

accordance with commitments under 

the Montreal Protocol are not 

confidential. 

Some of the data elements EPA is 

collecting may be similar to or the same 

as those required to be reported under 

the existing requirements associated 

with the GHGRP, particularly for 

entities subject to 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart L. Those reporting requirements 

are separate and the Agency is not 

making any changes to 40 CFR part 98 

in this rulemaking. To the extent 

relevant, data elements submitted in 

accordance with requirements 

established through this rulemaking and 

determined to not be confidential under 

40 CFR part 82, subpart A, will not be 

provided confidential treatment 

regardless of whether they have 

previously been determined to be 

confidential under the GHGRP. 

Specifically, EPA proposed that the 

identity of byproducts manufactured in 

the process agent application; contact 

information for facilities that use 

controlled substances as process agents; 

emission data, including reported 

emission factors and the proposed ODS 

process agent monitoring plan; and 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken to minimize use or 

emissions of controlled substances used 

as process agents would not be 

considered confidential. The Agency 

proposed in general, as described in 

more detail in a memorandum to the 

docket for this rulemaking, to determine 

the following information concerning 

ODS process agents as confidential: 

process agent sourcing; internal facility 

processes such as the quantity of 

process agent use, process agent 

recycling, process agent reuse, end 

products from the process agent 

application (e.g., chlorine from a chloralkali process), and byproducts (e.g., 

hydrogen from a chlor-alkali process); 

and emission reduction technologies 

and actions planned or currently under 

evaluation. As noted previously, the 

Agency expects to release aggregated 

data to the Ozone Secretariat, including 

ODS process agent information 

concerning process agent applications 

currently used in the United States, 

consumption, emissions, and emission 

reduction technologies and actions 

undertaken. Further, EPA would begin 

reporting emission data in metric tons 

instead of ODP-weighted metric tons. 

One commenter supported EPA’s 

proposal that data reported by the 

United States in accordance with 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol would not be confidential and 

stated that publishing this data is a 

requirement to assess the success of 

current emissions abatement 

technologies. The same commenter 

urged EPA to transparently share data 

on process agent emissions by specific 

use. 

EPA acknowledges the commenter’s 

support for the Agency’s determination 

of the confidentiality of information 

submitted under the Montreal Protocol 

on behalf of the United States. The 

Agency reiterates that EPA may release 

and publish both data that has been 

determined to not be confidential and 

aggregated data derived from 

information that has been determined to 

be confidential. The Agency will further 

consider how such data may be shared. 

Another commenter stated that 

certain data reporting elements 

established in this action, as addressed 

in sections III.A, III.B, and III.C of this 

preamble, meet the criteria to be 

considered confidential and requested 

that other elements that also meet those 

criteria may also be treated as 

confidential. The commenter requested 

that EPA confirm that the Agency will 

extend confidential treatment to all 

information submitted in the one-time 

and annual reports that meet FOIA 

exemptions. The commenter further 

stated that EPA should not preclude 

entities from claiming information as 

confidential in the reports if the item or 

process is not on EPA’s list of items that 

should be identified as confidential 

information, but that does meet a FOIA 

statutory exemption. The commenter 

statements generally aligned with EPA’s 

proposed confidentiality 

determinations. 

In accordance with the process 

established in this action at 40 CFR 

82.26, EPA is making determinations by 

rulemaking on data elements discussed 

in this section, as well as in the 

addendum provided in the docket for 

this action titled Confidentiality 

Determinations and Emission Data 

Designations for Data Elements in the 

ODS Process Agents Reporting Final 

Rule, about whether certain information 

is entitled to be treated confidentially. 

For information that must be reported as 

a result of this final rule for which EPA 

has not made a confidentiality 

determination, entities may claim the 

information as confidential and EPA 

will apply the 40 CFR part 2 process for 

case-by-case confidentiality 

determinations. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82425 

The commenter more specifically 

stated that percentages of class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent and retained, recovered, or 

entrained in the final product should be 

identified as confidential. The 

commenter noted that EPA had 

proposed to determine that information 

relating to internal process agent use, 

recycling, reuse, products, and 

byproducts would be confidential and 

requested that EPA clearly delineate 

that this information would be 

considered confidential. In support of 

its assertions, the commenter claimed 

that percentages and volumes, despite 

the few domestic manufacturers for 

some of the controlled substances, could 

reveal insights into a variety of sensitive 

considerations, including business 

decisions, production approaches, 

operational changes, and confidential 

manufacturing processes. The 

commenter specifically stated that 

percentages used as a process agent and 

then retained, recovered, or recycled, 

and the amounts of each product and 

byproduct manufactured during the 

prior control period, including the 

amounts destroyed or used as feedstock, 

are confidential. The commenter stated 

that there may be technologies or 

processes in place that reduce 

information (EPA understands the 

commenter as intending to refer to 

emissions) but are trade secrets or 

otherwise related to commercial 

information that qualify for exemptions 

as confidential under the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA). 

As discussed in section III.A of the 

preamble, EPA disagrees that reported 

information on percentages of process 

agent used would disclose confidential 

information concerning overall 

production of the given controlled 

substances. The relevant data elements 

are, of the amount of controlled 

substance used as a process agent, what 

percentages in the process agent 

application were respectively retained, 

consumed, recovered, emitted, or 

entrained. These representative 

percentages of process agent use 

through a cycle of the process agent 

application would not compromise its 

manufacturing processes. With regard to 

the particular data elements, EPA 

acknowledges the commenter’s support 

for its confidentiality determinations 

and determines, as proposed, that 

specific information related to internal 

processes, i.e., the percentages retained 

within and recovered after the process 

agent application, and the amounts of 

each product and byproduct 

manufactured during the prior control 

period are confidential. The Agency also 

determines, as proposed, that specific 

information related to emissions, i.e., 

the percentages emitted from the facility 

or entrained in the final product, are not 

confidential. Additionally, EPA 

determines that the percentage 

consumed in the process agent 

application is not confidential. These 

determinations are listed in a 

memorandum to the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

The commenter referenced EPA’s 

proposed determinations of data 

elements for annual reports, including 

examples for internal facility processes. 

The commenter stated that this 

confidential information includes, but 

may not be limited to, information 

proposed to be submitted under 40 CFR 

82.13(ee)(2)(iv) for the amount used as 

a process agent that was ultimately 

transformed, recycled, or destroyed, and 

under 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(2)(vi) for the 

amount of product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application. The commenter further 

stated that production variability due to 

market variability is confidential, 

supported the Agency’s proposed 

confidentiality determination 

concerning the proposed advance notice 

of change, and, if the requirements were 

to be finalized, encouraged EPA to 

confirm that the determination applies 

to information submitted in advance of 

a change. 

EPA discusses comments concerning 

the annual report and advance notice of 

changes in sections III.B and C. of this 

preamble. As specified above in this 

section of the preamble, the Agency will 

treat the confidentiality of submitted 

information in accordance with its 

determinations by rulemaking. Entities 

may claim other information as 

confidential, and EPA will follow the 

process described in this section of the 

preamble. EPA acknowledges the 

commenter’s support in general on the 

proposed confidentiality determinations 

and notes that the Agency is finalizing 

in this action a determination that the 

fact that an advance notice of changes 

was submitted is not confidential, but 

the changes themselves are confidential. 

V. Definitions 

EPA is finalizing a definition of 

‘‘process agent’’ largely the same as the 

definition proposed, with the addition 

of a list explicitly including currently 

approved process agent uses, and is 

finalizing as proposed two definitions to 

better reflect current Agency and 

international practices. EPA is also 

adding definitions as part of the 

emission reporting requirements this 

action is establishing in 40 CFR 82.25. 

EPA proposed to define the term 

‘‘process agent’’ for the purposes of 40 

CFR part 82 as ‘‘the use of a controlled 

substance to form the environment for a 

chemical reaction or inhibiting an 

unintended chemical reaction (e.g., use 

as a solvent, catalyst, or stabilizer) 

where the controlled substance is not 

consumed in the reaction, but is 

removed or recycled back into the 

process and where no more than trace 

quantities remain in the final product. A 

feedstock, in contrast, is entirely 

consumed during the reaction.’’ The 

Agency also proposed to switch the 

definitions of ‘‘facility’’ and ‘‘plant’’ in 

40 CFR 82.3 to better align with how 

they would typically be understood and 

applied. 

One commenter supported EPA’s 

proposed definition of ‘‘process agent.’’ 

EPA acknowledges the first 

commenter’s support for the proposed 

definition of ‘‘process agent.’’ 

Another commenter suggested that 

specific measurable numerical 

thresholds for quantities retained in the 

final product or consumed during the 

reaction would provide regulatory 

clarity. The commenter recommended 

EPA define a residual concentration of 

process agent in a product as 0.01 

percent by weight and to set a 

consumption rate of below one percent 

to distinguish a controlled substance 

used as a process agent from one use as 

a feedstock. 

The Agency acknowledges the 

commenter’s statement that including 

thresholds may provide additional 

clarity, but disagrees with the 

commenter’s suggested changes. EPA 

did not propose numerical thresholds, 

the commenter did not provide 

supporting evidence to justify the 

particular suggested values, and it is not 

readily apparent what the appropriate 

thresholds for these process agent uses 

would be. In this action EPA is 

establishing reporting requirements for 

these process agent uses, including for 

information that would be relevant for 

further consideration of this issue. 

Specifically, as discussed in section 

III.A of this preamble, EPA is 

establishing requirements in the onetime report for companies to provide 

details of the amount of process agent 

used and of what percentages are 

subsequently retained within the 

process agent application, consumed 

during the process agent application, 

recovered after the process agent 

application, emitted, or entrained in the 

final product. EPA is not establishing 

numerical thresholds at this time, but 

will consider this information, as well 

as potential interactions with related 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82426 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

program areas, as relevant in any future 

determination the Agency may make. 

A commenter who uses a controlled 

substance in a manufacturing process 

expressed concern that the definition 

EPA proposed could unintentionally 

exclude certain existing uses, including 

the commenter’s use. The commenter 

noted that EPA had previously 

acknowledged that its use of a 

controlled substance constituted a 

process agent use, the same process 

agent use is listed in table A to decision 

XXXI/6, and the commenter has 

annually submitted information to EPA 

on this process agent use. For clarity 

and to include existing approved uses, 

this commenter recommended that the 

Agency revise the definition to 

reference, in addition to chemical 

changes, uses that result in forming the 

environment for or inhibiting an 

unintended physical change, and to 

specify a physical spinning/extruding 

process as an example. Alternatively, 

the commenter recommended to expand 

the definition to include any uses 

identified in the Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP)’s 

list of process agent usages, and 

included in Table A from a TEAP 

report. 

EPA acknowledges the commenter’s 

concerns that the text of the proposed 

definition of ‘‘process agent’’ could be 

interpreted to exclude existing process 

agent uses. The Agency understands, 

based on another TEAP report included 

in the comments, that the controlled 

substance in question is used as an 

extraction solvent associated with a 

chemical reaction process. EPA sought 

clarification from the commenter and 

confirmed that it does not use the 

process agent for other purposes. EPA 

did not intend in this definition to 

exclude existing process agent uses that 

EPA has previously recognized, as listed 

in footnote 6 to the proposed rule (88 FR 

72030). However, EPA disagrees that it 

is appropriate or necessary to include 

physical changes in the definition. As 

EPA discussed in a similar context for 

HFC process agents (86 FR 55135), EPA 

does not have sufficient information to 

support a change. It is unclear what 

other processes might be included 

within that wider scope or what the 

potential implications may be of 

including physical changes in the 

definition. Furthermore, EPA does not 

agree that any uses listed by the TEAP 

should be incorporated into the 

definition. Table A, first established in 

decision X/14 and most recently 

updated in decision XXXI/6, includes 

all uses that have been permitted among 

the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, 

including those that have not been 

approved for the United States. Table A 

may be subject to further updates by the 

Parties in the future, and EPA is aware 

that five of these uses continue in the 

United States. In this action EPA 

clarifies that the definition of ‘‘process 

agent’’ includes, but is not limited to, 

the use of the following controlled 

substances in the following process 

agent applications and therefore the 

existing use referenced by the 

commenter: the use of carbon 

tetrachloride in the elimination of 

nitrogen trichloride in chlor-alkali 

production, the use of carbon 

tetrachloride in the recovery of chlorine 

by tail gas absorption from chlor-alkali 

production, the use of CFC–11 in the 

production of synthetic fiber sheet, the 

use of bromochloromethane in 

bromination of a styrenic polymer, and 

the use of CFC–113 in the production of 

high modulus polyethylene fiber. This 

definition also includes any other uses 

of controlled substances that meet the 

functional criteria. 

One commenter supported EPA’s 

proposed definitions of ‘‘plant’’ and 

‘‘facility.’’ Another commenter stated 

that the Agency should change the term 

‘‘plant’’ to ‘‘unit’’ or ‘‘process unit’’ 

because ‘‘plant’’ may be used 

synonymously as EPA’s proposed 

definition of ‘‘facility.’’ The commenter 

also stated that, in addition to process 

equipment, this definition should 

include a collection of process 

equipment. 

EPA acknowledges the first 

commenter’s support for the proposed 

definitions. In response to the second 

commenter, EPA recognizes that 

terminologies may vary between 

particular situations, the term ‘‘plant’’ 

may be used in similar contexts as 

‘‘facility,’’ the reference to process 

equipment could be applied more 

narrowly to a process unit, and that a 

plant would typically contain a 

collection or group of process 

equipment. However, multiple plants 

may be collocated within what is 

commonly considered a facility. These 

terms have particular relevance within 

EPA’s domestic requirements and the 

Montreal Protocol. For example, in 

decision X/14 the Parties agreed, with 

certain conditions, that no new plants 

using the listed process agents would be 

installed or commissioned. This context 

more closely aligns with equipment 

associated with a process agent 

application than an overall industrial 

site. Similarly, a plant contains any 

process equipment associated with the 

relevant industrial operations. The 

definition of ‘‘plant’’ is intended to 

broadly encompass any individual piece 

or collection of equipment. EPA further 

clarifies that this term includes any 

equipment that use controlled 

substances, such as process agents, 

related to industrial operations that 

convert raw materials, convert feedstock 

chemicals, or produce other chemicals. 

EPA is therefore not adopting the 

commenter’s suggested changes to the 

definitions. Moreover, EPA expects the 

terminology, that is being finalized as 

proposed, will be clear for the limited 

set of entities subject to the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 82. 

EPA is finalizing the definitions listed 

in the description of procedures to 

implement the proposed emission 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 

82, subpart A. These definitions align 

with existing practice in 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart L, and the Agency did not 

receive comment on these definitions. 

The defined terms are: ‘‘batch emission 

episode,’’ ‘‘batch process or batch 

operation,’’ ‘‘byproduct,’’ ‘‘continuous 

process or operation,’’ ‘‘difficult-tomonitor,’’ ‘‘dual mechanical seal pump 

and dual mechanical seal agitator,’’ 

‘‘equipment,’’ ‘‘in controlled substance 

service,’’ ‘‘in gas and vapor service,’’ ‘‘in 

heavy liquid service,’’ ‘‘in light liquid 

service,’’ ‘‘in vacuum service,’’ ‘‘isolated 

intermediate,’’ ‘‘no external shaft pump 

and no external shaft agitator,’’ 

‘‘operating scenario,’’ ‘‘process,’’ 

‘‘process condenser,’’ ‘‘process vent,’’ 

‘‘typical batch,’’ ‘‘uncontrolled 

emissions of controlled substances,’’ 

and ‘‘unsafe-to-monitor.’’ 

VI. Costs and Benefits 

The recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements EPA is establishing in this 

rule for uses of ODS as process agents 

in general codify existing practices and 

do not represent substantive additional 

effort on the part of affected entities. 

EPA is aware of six potentially affected 

entities, and expects that these entities 

are already able to meet most of the 

requirements based on current practice. 

These requirements will support U.S. 

efforts to report information consistent 

with Montreal Protocol decisions and to 

better understand potential implications 

of uses of ODS as process agents under 

the CAA. 

EPA expects that entities that will be 

affected by this action are already 

subject to recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements under 40 CFR part 82 and 

that the requirements established in this 

action will not result in significant 

increased burden. In 40 CFR 82.13 and 

82.24 the Agency had already required 

producers of controlled substance to 

record and report related information, 

including requirements in 40 CFR 

82.13(f)(2)(vii) and 82.24(b)(2)(vi) to 

maintain records of any controlled 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82427 

substance used as a feedstock, destroyed 

in the manufacture of another 

substance, used in the manufacture of 

any other substance, or introduced into 

the production process of the same 

controlled substance. EPA also requires 

documentation and reporting for uses of 

ODS in processes that result in their 

transformation or destruction. Subject 

entities have already reported similar 

information to EPA concerning uses of 

ODS as a process agent in the past on 

a voluntary basis, report similar 

information concerning production of 

ODS and feedstock uses, and already 

have available process knowledge and 

experience necessary to meet the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements established in this action. 

The codified requirements will also 

reduce potential uncertainty about 

EPA’s recordkeeping and reporting 

expectations. 

This action will result in costs for 

each subject entity to prepare an initial 

one-time report, submit annual reports 

and notifications of significant changes 

as warranted, and recordkeeping. 

However, with regards to the annual 

reports, the Agency has historically 

solicited information from the affected 

entities via annual requests. Therefore, 

EPA expects any associated change in 

burden will be limited relative to past 

practice. The Agency conservatively 

estimates these requirements to result in 

costs of approximately $13,000 per 

facility for the first year, with the higher 

costs due to initial preparation of the 

one-time report, and $1,000 per facility 

in following years for continued 

compliance with the other 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements. As noted in section II.B. 

of this preamble, EPA does not 

anticipate the establishment of new 

processes or facilities using ODS as 

process agents. The Agency did not 

receive additional information on this 

assumption in response to a request for 

comment at proposal. 

The Agency estimates that the annual 

emissions reporting requirements being 

finalized in this action, without 

accounting for past practice, will result 

in additional costs of approximately 

$190,000 per facility in the first year 

due to initial planning and additional 

sampling, analysis, monitoring, and 

calculations. EPA estimates compliance 

costs of approximately $17,000 in 

subsequent years for continued 

sampling, analysis, monitoring, and 

calculations. The total estimated costs 

for all requirements are approximately 

$1.8 million in the first year and 

$210,000 annually in subsequent years. 

The costs are discussed in the 

supporting statement for the 

information collection request (ICR). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, as amended by 

Executive Order 14094, and was 

therefore not subject to a requirement 

for Executive Order 12866 review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The information collection activities 

in this rule will be submitted for 

approval to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

document that EPA prepared has been 

assigned EPA ICR number 1432.40. You 

can find a copy of the ICR in the docket 

for this rule, and it is briefly 

summarized here. 

This ICR covers provisions under the 

Montreal Protocol and title VI of the 

CAA that establish limits on total U.S. 

production, import, and export of class 

I and class II ozone-depleting substances 

(or controlled substances). Production 

and import of class I controlled 

substances was phased out in the 

United States. The phaseout includes 

exceptions for essential uses, critical 

uses of methyl bromide, quarantine and 

pre-shipment uses of methyl bromide, 

previously used material, and material 

that will be transformed or destroyed. 

There are also regulations that restrict 

the use of class II controlled substances 

and require a gradual reduction in the 

production and consumption of these 

chemicals leading to their eventual 

phaseout. The class II controlled 

substance phaseout regulations include 

exceptions for previously used material 

and material that will be transformed or 

destroyed. 

In this action, EPA is establishing 

requirements for one-time, annual, and 

situational reporting and for 

recordkeeping to provide relevant 

information to EPA concerning 

implications of process agent uses and 

emissions and support international 

agreements concerning the use of 

controlled substances as process agents. 

One-time reporting, annual reporting, 

and recordkeeping requirements are 

consistent with the existing 

requirements for importers and 

producers in 40 CFR 82.13 for class I 

controlled substances and 40 CFR 82.24 

for class II controlled substances. These 

requirements are also consistent with 

existing practice of facilities subject to 

this rule who have provided similar 

information to EPA concerning these 

uses of controlled substances as process 

agents. The ICR includes these 

incremental changes in addition to the 

existing reporting and recordkeeping 

programs that are approved under OMB 

control number 2060–0170. 

Respondents/affected entities: 

Producers, importers, exporters, and 

certain users of ozone-depleting 

substances, including as process agents; 

methyl bromide applicators, 

distributors, and end users including 

commodity storage and quarantine 

users. 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: 

Mandatory—sections 603(b), 604(d)(6), 

and 114 of the CAA. 

Estimated number of respondents: 

1,175. 

Frequency of response: One-time, 

quarterly, annually, and as needed. 

Total estimated burden: 8,905 hours 

(per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

Total estimated cost: $1,122,911 (per 

year), including $36,495 annualized 

capital or operation and maintenance 

costs. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities because none of the identified 

affected entities are small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain an 

unfunded mandate of $100 million (in 

1995 dollars, adjusted annually for 

inflation) or more or more as described 

in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. While this action creates 

an enforceable duty on the private 

sector, the cost is less than $100 million. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the National 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82428 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have Tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. EPA is not aware of Tribal 

businesses engaged in activities that 

would be directly affected by this 

action. Based on the Agency’s 

assessments, as discussed in section VI 

of this preamble, EPA also does not 

believe that potential effects, even if 

direct, would be substantial. 

Accordingly, this action will not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian Tribes, the relationship between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

Tribes, or the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. The Agency has 

updated Tribal officials on this air 

regulation through a monthly meeting of 

the National Tribal Air Association. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not establish an 

environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. Since this 

action does not concern human health, 

EPA’s Policy on Children’s Health also 

does not apply. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act and Incorporation by 

Reference 

This action involves technical 

standards. EPA has decided to allow the 

use of the following ASME, ASTM, and 

EPA standards as compliance options 

under the emission reporting 

requirements established in this action. 

These existing voluntary consensus 

standards were previously incorporated 

under the GHGRP in 40 CFR 98.7 to 

help facilities monitor, report, and keep 

records of GHG emissions. This version 

of ASTM D6348–03 was previously 

incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 

60.17 and the remaining standard 

versions, except for ASME MFC–4M– 

1986 (Reaffirmed 2016), were previously 

incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 

98.7. ASME MFC–3M–2004 specifies 

the geometry and method of use for 

pressure difference devices which give 

necessary information for calculating 

flow rates and associated uncertainties. 

ASME MFC–4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 

2016) specifies procedures to evaluate 

flow rates using turbine meters. ASME 

MFC–5M–1985 (Reaffirmed 1994) 

specifies procedures to evaluate flow 

rates using ultrasonic flowmeters that 

base their operation on the 

measurement of transit times of acoustic 

signals. ASME MFC–6M–1998 describes 

the use of vortex flowmeters to measure 

volumetric flow rate and total flow. 

ASME MFC–7M–1987 (Reaffirmed 

1992) specifies the geometry and 

method of use for critical flow venturi 

nozzles. ASME MFC–9M–1988 

(Reaffirmed 2001) specifies a method to 

calculate liquid flow rate and 

uncertainties by measuring the mass of 

liquid delivered into a weighing tank in 

a known time interval. ASME MFC– 

11M–2006 gives guidelines for the 

selection, installation, calibration, and 

operation of Coriolis flow meters for the 

determination of mass flow, density, 

volume flow, and other related 

parameters of flowing fluids. ASME 

MFC–14M–2003 specifies the geometry 

and method of use for orifice meters. 

The ASME standards are available for 

purchase from Two Park Avenue, New 

York, NY 10016, phone: 800.843.2763, 

email: CustomerCare@asme.org; 

website: www.asme.org. In this action 

EPA is incorporating by reference 

versions of these standards that are not 

available through the ASME website. 

These versions are available for 

purchase from private resellers, 

including Nimonik Document Center, 

401 Roland Way, Suite 224, Oakland, 

CA 94624; phone (650)591–7600; email: 

info@document-center.com; website: 

www.document-center.com. The cost of 

an electronic copy is $100 for ASME 

MFC–3M–2004, $33 for ASME MFC– 

4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 2016), $29 for 

ASME MFC–5M–1985 (Reaffirmed 

1994), $35 for ASME MFC–6M–1998, 

$65 for ASME MFC–7M–1987 

(Reaffirmed 1992), $32 for ASME MFC– 

9M–1988 (Reaffirmed 2001), $46 for 

ASME MFC–11M–2006, and $40 for 

ASME MFC–14M–2003. 

ASTM D6348–03 specifies a test 

method to quantify gas phase 

concentrations of target analytes by 

using extractive direct interface FTIR 

spectroscopy. The ASTM International 

standard is available for purchase from 

ASTM International at 100 Barr Harbor 

Drive, P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428; tel.: 

610.832.9500; service@astm.org; 

website: https://www.astm.org/. The 

cost of an electronic copy is $83 for 

ASTM D6348–03. The cost of obtaining 

the applicable ASME and ASTM 

standards is not a significant financial 

burden. 

EPA’s Approved Alternative Method 

012 specifies procedures to use a tracer 

gas to determine the stack gas 

volumetric flow rate when low 

velocities and temporal variations 

complicate measurement. The 

Emissions Inventory Improvement 

Program, Volume II: Chapter 16 

provides methods for estimating air 

emissions from chemical manufacturing 

facilities. EPA–453/R–95–017 provides 

a protocol to generic process unitspecific estimates for equipment leak 

emissions. EPA–430–R–10–003 

provides a protocol for two specific 

methods for measuring abatement 

system inlet and outlet flows, and hence 

destruction or removal efficiencies, for 

process equipment. EPA’s Other Test 

Method 24 specifies a tracer gas 

procedure with a gas chromatograph 

and flame ionizer detector to measure 

the volumetric flow rate. The EPA 

standards are freely available from U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency at 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20460, 202.272.0167, 

https://www.epa.gov. Electronic copies 

are available at https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/default/files/2020-08/documents/ 

alt-012.pdf for Approved Alternative 

Method 012; https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

default/files/2015-08/documents/ii16_

aug2007final.pdf for Emissions 

Inventory Improvement Program, 

Volume II: Chapter 16, Methods for 

Estimating Air Emissions from Chemical 

Manufacturing Facilities, August 2007; 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/ 

2020-09/documents/protocol_for_

equipment_leak_emission_

estimates.pdf, November 1995 for EPA– 

453/R–95–017; https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/default/files/2016-02/documents/ 

dre_protocol.pdf, March 2010 for EPA 

430–R–10–003; and https://

www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 

08/documents/otm24.pdf for Other Test 

Method 24. Therefore, EPA concludes 

that the ASME, ASTM, and EPA 

standards being incorporated by 

reference are reasonably available. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82429 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations and Executive 

Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All 

EPA believes that this type of action 

does not concern human health or 

environmental conditions and therefore 

cannot be evaluated with respect to 

potentially disproportionate and 

adverse effects on communities with 

environmental justice concerns because 

it does not impact emissions from 

subject facilities. This regulatory action 

establishes reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements that do not impact human 

health or the environment, but provide 

additional insight into the uses and 

emissions of ODS used as process 

agents. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

This action is subject to the CRA, and 

EPA will submit a rule report to each 

House of the Congress and to the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Emissions, Incorporation by reference, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 82—PROTECTION OF 

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 82 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– 

7671q. 

■ 2. Amend § 82.3 by: 

■ a. Adding the definitions of ‘‘Batch 

emission episode’’, ‘‘Batch process or 

batch operation’’, ‘‘Byproduct’’, 

‘‘Continuous process or operation’’, 

‘‘Difficult-to-monitor’’, ‘‘Dual 

mechanical seal pump and dual 

mechanical seal agitator’’, and 

‘‘Equipment’’ in alphabetical order; 

■ b. Revising the definition of 

‘‘Facility’’; 

■ c. Adding the definitions of ‘‘In 

controlled substance service’’, ‘‘In gas 

and vapor service’’, ‘‘In heavy liquid 

service’’, ‘‘In light liquid service’’, ‘‘In 

vacuum service’’, ‘‘Isolated 

intermediate’’, ‘‘No external shaft pump 

and no external shaft agitator’’, and 

‘‘Operating scenario’’ in alphabetical 

order; 

■ d. Revising the definition of ‘‘Plant’’; 

and 

■ e. Adding the definitions of 

‘‘Process’’, ‘‘Process agent’’, ‘‘Process 

condenser’’, ‘‘Process vent’’, ‘‘Typical 

batch’’, ‘‘Uncontrolled emissions of 

controlled substances’’, and ‘‘Unsafe-tomonitor’’ in alphabetical order. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 82.3 Definitions for class I and class II 

controlled substances. 

* * * * * 

Batch emission episode means a 

discrete venting episode associated with 

a vessel in a process; a vessel may have 

more than one batch emission episode. 

For example, a displacement of vapor 

resulting from the charging of a vessel 

with a feed material will result in a 

discrete emission episode that will last 

through the duration of the charge and 

will have an average flow rate equal to 

the rate of the charge. If the vessel is 

then heated, there will also be another 

discrete emission episode resulting from 

the expulsion of expanded vapor. Other 

emission episodes also may occur from 

the same vessel and other vessels in the 

process, depending on process 

operations. 

Batch process or batch operation 

means a noncontinuous operation 

involving intermittent or discontinuous 

feed into equipment, and, in general, 

involves the emptying of the equipment 

after the batch operation ceases and 

prior to beginning a new operation. 

Addition of raw material and 

withdrawal of product do not occur 

simultaneously in a batch operation. 

* * * * * 

Byproduct (for the purpose of this 

subpart only) means a chemical that is 

produced coincidentally during the 

production of another chemical. 

* * * * * 

Continuous process or operation 

means a process where the inputs and 

outputs flow continuously throughout 

the duration of the process. Continuous 

processes are typically steady state. 

* * * * * 

Difficult-to-monitor means the 

equipment piece may not be monitored 

without elevating the monitoring 

personnel more than 2 meters (7 feet) 

above a support surface or it is not 

accessible in a safe manner when it is 

in controlled substance service. 

* * * * * 

Dual mechanical seal pump and dual 

mechanical seal agitator means a pump 

or agitator equipped with a dual 

mechanical seal system that includes a 

barrier fluid system where the barrier 

fluid is not in light liquid service; each 

barrier fluid system is equipped with a 

sensor that will detect failure of the seal 

system, the barrier fluid system, or both; 

and meets the following requirements: 

(1) Each dual mechanical seal system is 

operated with the barrier fluid at a pressure 

that is at all times (except periods of startup, 

shutdown, or malfunction) greater than the 

pump or agitator stuffing box pressure; or 

(2) Equipped with a barrier fluid degassing 

reservoir that is routed to a process or fuel 

gas system or connected by a closed-vent 

system to a control device; or 

(3) Equipped with a closed-loop system 

that purges the barrier fluid into a process 

stream. 

* * * * * 

Equipment (for the purposes of 

§ 82.25 only) means each pump, 

compressor, agitator, pressure relief 

device, sampling connection system, 

open-ended valve or line, valve, 

connector, and instrumentation system 

in controlled substance service for a 

process listed in § 82.25(b)(2); and any 

destruction units or closed-vent systems 

to which corresponding processes are 

vented. 

* * * * * 

Facility means one or more plants at 

the same location owned by or under 

common control of the same person. 

* * * * * 

In controlled substance service means 

that a piece of equipment that engages 

in an activity listed in § 82.25(b)(2), 

either contains or contacts a controlled 

substance that is a liquid or gas, and 

contains at least 5 percent by weight of 

a controlled substance. 

In gas and vapor service means that 

a piece of equipment in regulated 

material service contains a gas or vapor 

at operating conditions. 

In heavy liquid service means that a 

piece of equipment in regulated material 

service is not in gas and vapor service 

or in light liquid service. 

In light liquid service means that a 

piece of equipment in regulated material 

service contains a liquid that meets the 

following conditions: 

(1) The vapor pressure of one or more 

of the compounds is greater than 0.3 

kilopascals at 20 °C; 

(2) The total concentration of the pure 

compounds constituents having a vapor 

pressure greater than 0.3 kilopascals at 

20 °C is equal to or greater than 20 

percent by weight of the total process 

stream; and 

(3) The fluid is a liquid at operating 

conditions. 

Note 1 to definition of ‘‘in light liquid 

service’’: Vapor pressures may be 

determined by standard reference texts 

or ASTM D–2879. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82430 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

In vacuum service means that 

equipment is operating at an internal 

pressure which is at least 5 kilopascals 

below ambient pressure. 

* * * * * 

Isolated intermediate means a product 

of a process that is stored before 

subsequent processing. An isolated 

intermediate is usually a product of 

chemical synthesis. Storage of an 

isolated intermediate marks the end of 

a process. Storage occurs at any time the 

intermediate is placed in equipment 

used solely for storage. 

* * * * * 

No external shaft pump and no 

external shaft agitator means any pump 

or agitator that is designed with no 

externally actuated shaft penetrating the 

pump or agitator housing. 

* * * * * 

Operating scenario means any 

specific operation of a process and 

includes the information specified in 

paragraphs (1) through (5) of this 

definition for each process. A change or 

series of changes to any of these 

elements, except for paragraph (4) of 

this definition, constitutes a different 

operating scenario. 

(1) A description of the process, the 

specific process equipment used, and 

the range of operating conditions for the 

process. 

(2) An identification of related 

process vents, their associated 

emissions episodes and durations, and 

calculations and engineering analyses to 

show the annual uncontrolled emissions 

of controlled substances from the 

process vent. 

(3) The control or destruction units 

used, as applicable, including a 

description of operating and/or testing 

conditions for any associated 

destruction unit. 

(4) The process vents (including those 

from other processes) that are 

simultaneously routed to the control or 

destruction unit(s). 

(5) The applicable monitoring 

requirements and any parametric level 

that assures destruction or removal for 

all emissions routed to the control or 

destruction unit. 

* * * * * 

Plant means any process equipment 

(e.g., reactor, distillation column) used 

to convert raw materials or feedstock 

chemicals into controlled substances or 

use controlled substances in the 

production of other chemicals. 

* * * * * 

Process (for the purposes of § 82.25 

only) means all equipment that 

collectively functions to engage in an 

activity listed in § 82.25(b)(2). A process 

may consist of one or more unit 

operations. For the purposes of § 82.25, 

process includes any, all, or a 

combination of reaction, recovery, 

separation, purification, or other 

activity, operation, manufacture, or 

treatment which are used to engage in 

an activity listed in § 82.25(b)(2). For a 

continuous process, cleaning operations 

may be considered part of the process at 

the discretion of the facility. For a batch 

process, cleaning operations are part of 

the process. Ancillary activities are not 

considered a process or part of any 

process under § 82.25. Ancillary 

activities include boilers and 

incinerators, chillers and refrigeration 

systems, and other equipment and 

activities that are not directly involved 

(i.e., they operate within a closed 

system and materials are not combined 

with process fluids) in an activity listed 

in § 82.25(b)(2). 

Process agent means a controlled 

substance used to form the environment 

for a chemical reaction or inhibit an 

unintended chemical reaction (e.g., use 

as a solvent, catalyst, or stabilizer) 

where the controlled substance is not 

consumed in the reaction, but is 

removed or recycled back into the 

process and where no more than trace 

quantities remain in the final product. A 

feedstock, in contrast, is consumed 

during the reaction. The term process 

agent includes, but is not limited to: 

carbon tetrachloride used in the 

elimination of nitrogen trichloride in 

chlor-alkali production, carbon 

tetrachloride used in the recovery of 

chlorine by tail gas absorption from 

chlor-alkali production, CFC–11 used in 

the production of synthetic fiber sheet, 

bromochloromethane used in the 

bromination of a styrenic polymer, and 

CFC–113 used in the production of high 

modulus polyethylene fiber. 

Process condenser means a condenser 

whose primary purpose is to recover 

material as an integral part of a process. 

All condensers recovering condensate 

from a process vent at or above the 

boiling point or all condensers in line 

prior to a vacuum source are considered 

process condensers. Typically, a 

primary condenser or condensers in 

series are considered to be integral to 

the process if they are capable of and 

normally used for the purpose of 

recovering chemicals for fuel value (i.e., 

net positive heating value), use, reuse or 

for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. 

Process vent means a vent from a 

process vessel or vents from multiple 

process vessels within a process that are 

manifolded together into a common 

header, through which a controlled 

substance-containing gas stream is, or 

has the potential to be, released to the 

atmosphere (or the point of entry into a 

control device, if any). Examples of 

process vents include, but are not 

limited to, vents on condensers used for 

product recovery, bottoms receivers, 

surge control vessels, reactors, filters, 

centrifuges, and process tanks. Process 

vents do not include vents on storage 

tanks, wastewater emission sources, or 

pieces of equipment. 

* * * * * 

Typical batch means a batch process 

operated within a range of operating 

conditions that are documented in an 

operating scenario. Emissions from a 

typical batch are based on the operating 

conditions that result in representative 

emissions. The typical batch defines the 

uncontrolled emissions for each 

emission episode defined under the 

operating scenario. 

Uncontrolled emissions of controlled 

substance means a gas stream 

containing a controlled substance which 

has exited the process (or process 

condenser or control condenser, where 

applicable), but which has not yet been 

introduced into a destruction unit to 

reduce the mass of controlled substance 

in the stream. If the emissions from the 

process are not routed to a destruction 

unit, uncontrolled emissions are those 

controlled substance emissions released 

to the atmosphere. 

* * * * * 

Unsafe-to-monitor means that 

monitoring personnel would be exposed 

to an immediate danger as a 

consequence of monitoring the piece of 

equipment. Examples of unsafe-tomonitor equipment include, but are not 

limited to, equipment under extreme 

pressure or heat. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 82.13 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (c), adding the words 

‘‘or another format specified by EPA’’ 

after the words ‘‘Central Data 

Exchange’’; and 

■ b. Adding paragraph (ee). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 82.13 Recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for class I controlled 

substances. 

* * * * * 

(ee) Process agents. Any entity that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent must comply, in addition 

to the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in § 82.25, with the 

following recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for each facility that uses 

a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(1) Reporting—one-time report. By 

February 7, 2025, or within 120 days of 

the date that an entity first uses a class 

I controlled substance as a process 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82431 

agent, whichever is later, any entity that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent must submit to the 

Administrator a report containing the 

following information for each use of a 

class I controlled substance as a process 

agent: 

(i) The name and address of each 

facility and plant, and each responsible 

person’s name, email address, and 

phone number; 

(ii) The name, purpose, and final 

product manufactured of each process 

agent application that uses a class I 

controlled substance; 

(iii) The start-up date of each facility 

and the start-up date of each plant that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent; 

(iv) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of class I controlled 

substances used as a process agent 

during the previous control period; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken or currently under 

evaluation to minimize use or emissions 

of class I controlled substances used as 

process agents (including estimated 

emissions reductions associated with 

each); and 

(vii) For each facility, a description 

that includes details of the percentages 

of class I controlled substances used as 

a process agent and: 

(A) Retained within the process agent 

application; 

(B) Consumed in the process agent 

application; 

(C) Recovered after the process agent 

application; 

(D) Emitted; and 

(E) Entrained in the final product. 

(2) Annual reports. Any entity that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent must provide by February 

14 of each year an annual report for the 

previous control period containing the 

following information for each use of 

the class I controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(i) For each facility, contact 

information including email address 

and phone number for a primary and 

alternate contact person; 

(ii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance initially introduced into the 

process agent application for use as a 

process agent, specified independently 

for paragraphs (ee)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) 

of this section by whether the class I 

controlled substance was: 

(A) Obtained as virgin; 

(B) Obtained as used; 

(C) Produced by the entity; 

(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer; 

(E) Imported; 

(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a 

different use; and 

(G) Reclaimed by another entity; 

(iii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent and 

reused or recycled for use by the entity 

for continued use in the same process 

agent application at the same facility; 

(iv) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

was ultimately: 

(A) Transformed; 

(B) Reused or recycled for use in a 

different process agent application; or 

(C) Destroyed by approved 

destruction technologies; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

emission reduction actions for class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent taken since the last one-time or 

annual report, planned, or currently 

under evaluation; and 

(viii) For each entity, any process 

agent application changes anticipated to 

result in increases for the next annual 

report, as compared to the previous 

control period and the average of the 

three previous control periods, of the 

following magnitude must be specified 

in a report submitted to EPA at least 180 

days prior to implementing the change: 

(A) Greater than 20 percent of the 

amount of class I controlled substance 

initially introduced for use as a process 

agent; or 

(B) At least one metric ton and 20 

percent of the amount emitted during 

use as a process agent. 

(3) Recordkeeping. Every entity who 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent during a control period 

must maintain the following records, as 

applicable: 

(i) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class I controlled substance 

initially introduced at each facility into 

the process application for use as a 

process agent; 

(ii) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class I controlled substance 

produced at each facility for use as a 

process agent; 

(iii) Records identifying the producer 

or importer of the class I controlled 

substance received at each facility for 

use as a process agent by the entity; 

(iv) For each facility, copies of the 

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 

each class I controlled substance for use 

as a process agent to the entity; 

(v) Dated records identifying the 

quantity of each product manufactured 

within each facility by using a class I 

controlled substance as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, records of the 

date and the estimated quantity of any 

spill or release of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

equals or exceeds 100 pounds; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

the methodology used to measure and 

calculate emissions, and dated records 

of equipment parameters, measured 

data, supporting calculations, and other 

rationale used to validate reported 

emission quantities; 

(viii) For each facility, dated records 

of the quantity of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent which 

is subsequently transformed or 

destroyed; 

(ix) In the case where class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately transformed by an 

entity other than the entity which last 

used the class I controlled substances as 

a process agent, a copy of the Internal 

Revenue Service Certificate showing 

that the purchaser or recipient of the 

controlled substance, in the United 

States or in another country that is a 

Party, certifies the intent to transform 

the controlled substance, or sell the 

controlled substance for transformation; 

and 

(x) In the case where class I controlled 

substances used as a process agent were 

ultimately destroyed by an entity other 

than the entity which last used the class 

I controlled substances as a process 

agent, a copy of the destruction 

verification (as in paragraph (k) of this 

section), showing that the purchaser or 

recipient of a controlled substance, in 

the United States or in another country 

that is a Party, certifies the intent to 

destroy the controlled substance, or sell 

the controlled substance for destruction. 

(4) Request for extension. Any entity 

that uses a class I controlled substance 

as a process agent may request an 

extension to comply with paragraph 

(ee)(1) of this section. 

(i) This request must include the 

following information: 

(A) Name of the facility submitting 

the request, contact information for a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82432 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

person at the facility, and the address of 

the facility; 

(B) An explanation of the reasons that 

an extension is necessary and the 

timeline that would be practicable; and 

(C) Supporting documentation of the 

circumstances. 

(ii) The Administrator will review the 

request and, within five working days of 

receiving a complete request, provide 

notification of whether the request is 

granted and when the report is due. 

(5) Notification that use has ceased. 

Reports are no longer required for 

process agent use starting in the year 

after an entity notifies the Administrator 

that they have permanently ceased use 

of all class I controlled substances as a 

process agent, but the entity must 

continue to comply with all applicable 

recordkeeping requirements. 

§ 82.14 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 82.14, in paragraph (a), by 

adding the words ‘‘or another format 

specified by EPA’’ after the words 

‘‘Central Data Exchange.’’ 

■ 5. Amend § 82.24 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(1), adding the 

words ‘‘or another format specified by 

EPA’’ after the words ‘‘Central Data 

Exchange’’; and 

■ b. Adding paragraph (g). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 82.24 Recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for class II controlled 

substances. 

* * * * * 

(g) Process agents. Any entity that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent must comply, in addition 

to the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in § 82.25, with the 

following recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for each facility that uses 

a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(1) Reporting—one-time report. By 

February 7, 2025, or within 120 days of 

the date that an entity first uses a class 

II controlled substance as a process 

agent, whichever is later, any entity that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent must submit to the 

Administrator a report containing the 

following information for each use of a 

class II controlled substance as a process 

agent: 

(i) The name and address of each 

facility and plant, and each responsible 

person’s name, email address, and 

phone number; 

(ii) The name, purpose, and final 

product manufactured of each process 

agent application that uses a class II 

controlled substance; 

(iii) The start-up date of each facility 

and the start-up date of each plant that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent; 

(iv) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of class II controlled 

substances used as a process agent 

during the previous control period; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken or currently under 

evaluation to minimize use or emissions 

of class II controlled substances used as 

process agents (including estimated 

emissions reductions associated with 

each); and 

(vii) For each facility, a description 

that includes details of the percentages 

of class II controlled substances used as 

a process agent and: 

(A) Retained within the process agent 

application; 

(B) Consumed in the process agent 

application; 

(C) Recovered after the process agent 

application; 

(D) Emitted; and 

(E) Entrained in the final product. 

(2) Annual reports. Any entity that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent must provide by February 

14 of each year an annual report for the 

previous control period containing the 

following information for each use of 

the class II controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(i) For each facility, contact 

information including email address 

and phone number for a primary and 

alternate contact person; 

(ii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance initially introduced into the 

process agent application for use as a 

process agent, specified independently 

for paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) 

of this section by whether the class II 

controlled substance was: 

(A) Obtained as virgin; 

(B) Obtained as used; 

(C) Produced by the entity; 

(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer; 

(E) Imported; 

(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a 

different use; and 

(G) Reclaimed by another entity; 

(iii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent and 

reused or recycled for use by the entity 

for continued use in the same process 

agent application at the same facility; 

(iv) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

was ultimately: 

(A) Transformed; 

(B) Reused or recycled for use in a 

different process agent application; or 

(C) Destroyed by approved 

destruction technologies; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

emission reduction actions for class II 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent taken since the last one-time or 

annual report, planned, or currently 

under evaluation; and 

(viii) For each entity, any process 

agent application changes anticipated to 

result in increases for the next annual 

report, as compared to the previous 

control period and the average of the 

three previous control periods, of the 

following magnitude must be specified 

in a report submitted to EPA at least 180 

days prior to implementing the change: 

(A) Greater than 20 percent of the 

amount of class II controlled substance 

initially introduced for use as a process 

agent; or 

(B) At least one metric ton and 20 

percent of the amount emitted during 

use as a process agent. 

(3) Recordkeeping. Every entity who 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent during a control period 

must maintain the following records, as 

applicable: 

(i) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class II controlled substance 

initially introduced at each facility into 

the process application for use as a 

process agent; 

(ii) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class II controlled substance 

produced at each facility for use as a 

process agent; 

(iii) Records identifying the producer 

or importer of the class II controlled 

substance received at each facility for 

use as a process agent by the entity; 

(iv) For each facility, copies of the 

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 

each class II controlled substance for 

use as a process agent to the entity; 

(v) Dated records identifying the 

quantity of each product manufactured 

within each facility by using a class II 

controlled substance as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, records of the 

date and the estimated quantity of any 

spill or release of each class II 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82433 

controlled substance used as a process 

agent that equals or exceeds 100 

pounds; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

the methodology used to measure and 

calculate emissions, and dated records 

of equipment parameters, measured 

data, supporting calculations, and other 

rationale used to validate reported 

emission quantities; 

(viii) For each facility, dated records 

of the quantity of each class II 

controlled substance used as a process 

agent which is subsequently 

transformed or destroyed; 

(ix) In the case where class II 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately transformed by an 

entity other than the entity which last 

used the class II controlled substances 

as a process agent, a copy of the entity’s 

transformation verification as provided 

under paragraph (e)(3) of this section; 

and 

(x) In the case where class II 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately destroyed by an 

entity other than the entity which last 

used the class II controlled substances 

as a process agent, a copy of the entity’s 

destruction verification, as provided 

under paragraph (e)(5) of this section. 

(4) Request for extension. Any entity 

that uses a class II controlled substance 

as a process agent may request an 

extension to comply with paragraph 

(g)(1) of this section. 

(i) This request must include the 

following information: 

(A) Name of the facility submitting 

the request, contact information for a 

person at the facility, and the address of 

the facility; 

(B) An explanation of the reasons that 

an extension is necessary and the 

timeline that would be practicable; and 

(C) Supporting documentation of the 

circumstances. 

(ii) The Administrator will review the 

request and, within five working days of 

receiving a complete request, provide 

notification of whether the request is 

granted and when the report is due. 

(5) Notification that use has ceased. 

Reports are no longer required for 

process agent use starting in the year 

after an entity notifies the Administrator 

that they have permanently ceased use 

of all class II controlled substances as a 

process agent, but the entity must 

continue to comply with all applicable 

recordkeeping requirements. 

■ 6. Add § 82.25 to read as follows: 

§ 82.25 Emissions of controlled 

substances from industrial sources. 

(a) Source applicability. The 

requirements specified in this section 

apply to every entity which engages in 

any of the following activities: 

(1) Use of a controlled substance as a 

process agent. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(b) Emissions of controlled substances 

to report. Every entity that engages in 

any activity listed in paragraph (a) of 

this section must report, for each 

applicable facility, emissions of the 

controlled substances in paragraph 

(b)(1) of this section from the processes 

listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

(1) Emissions of controlled 

substances. For purposes of reporting 

emissions under this section, the term 

‘‘controlled substance’’ applies to the 

following controlled substances: 

(i) Each controlled substance used as 

a process agent. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Processes. For purposes of this 

section, the term ‘‘process’’ applies to 

the following activities: 

(i) Each activity listed in paragraph (a) 

of this section; 

(ii) Each separation process for the 

reuse or recycling of the controlled 

substance; 

(iii) Each transformation process of 

the controlled substance, where the 

controlled substance is produced at the 

facility and used in processes resulting 

in its transformation at the same facility; 

(iv) Each transformation process of 

the controlled substance at the facility, 

where one or more of the controlled 

substances transformed at the facility is 

produced at another facility; and 

(v) Each destruction process of the 

controlled substance. 

(c) Calculating emissions for 

controlled substances. For every activity 

listed in paragraph (a) of this section, 

each entity must calculate emissions of 

the controlled substances from each 

process using the emission factor, 

emission calculation factor, or mass 

balance method specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (4) of this section, as 

appropriate. The mass balance method 

may only be used for batch operations 

without on-site production or 

transformation of controlled substances. 

For destruction processes that destroy 

controlled substances, the entity must 

calculate emissions using the 

procedures in paragraph (c)(4) of this 

section. 

(1) Emission factor and emission 

calculation factor methods. To use the 

method in this paragraph (c)(1) for batch 

processes, each entity must use the 

methods in either paragraph (c)(1)(iii) 

(Emission Factor approach) or (iv) 

(Emission Calculation Factor approach) 

of this section. To use the method in 

this paragraph (c)(1) for continuous 

processes, the entity must first make a 

preliminary estimate of the emissions 

from each individual continuous 

process vent under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of 

this section. If the entity’s continuous 

process operates under different 

conditions as part of normal operations, 

that entity must also define the different 

operating scenarios and make a 

preliminary estimate of the emissions 

from the vent for each operating 

scenario. Then, compare the 

preliminary estimate for each 

continuous process vent (summed 

across operating scenarios) to the 

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

section to determine whether the 

process vent meets the criteria for using 

the emission factor method described in 

paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section or 

whether the process vent meets the 

criteria for using the emission 

calculation factor method described in 

paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. For 

continuous process vents that meet the 

criteria for using the emission factor 

method described in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) 

of this section and that have more than 

one operating scenario, compare the 

preliminary estimate for each operating 

scenario to the criteria in paragraph 

(c)(1)(iii)(B) of this section to determine 

whether an emission factor must be 

developed for that operating scenario. 

(i) Preliminary estimate of emissions 

by process vent. Each entity must 

estimate the annual emissions of the 

controlled substance for each process 

vent within each operating scenario of 

a continuous process using the 

approaches specified in paragraph 

(c)(1)(i)(A) or (B) of this section, 

accounting for any destruction as 

specified in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(C) of this 

section. The entity must determine 

emissions of controlled substances by 

process vent by using measurements, by 

using calculations based on chemical 

engineering principles and chemical 

property data, or by conducting an 

engineering assessment. The entity may 

use previously conducted 

measurements, calculations, or 

assessments if they represent current 

process operating conditions or process 

operating conditions that would result 

in higher controlled substance 

emissions than the current operating 

conditions and if they were performed 

in accordance with paragraph 

(c)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section, as 

applicable. The entity must document 

all data, assumptions, and procedures 

used in the calculations or engineering 

assessment and keep a record of the 

emissions determination as required by 

paragraph (f)(1) of this section. 

(A) Engineering calculations. For 

process vent emission calculations, each 

entity may use any of paragraph 

(c)(1)(i)(A)(1), (2), or (3) of this section. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82434 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(1) U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Emission Inventory 

Improvement Program, Volume II: 

Chapter 16, Methods for Estimating Air 

Emissions from Chemical 

Manufacturing Facilities, August 2007, 

Final (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 82.27). 

(2) Each entity may determine the 

controlled substance emissions from 

any process vent within the process 

using the procedures specified in 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3)(i)(B) of this 

chapter, except as specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A)(2)(i) through (iv) 

of this section. For the purposes of this 

section, use of the term ‘‘HAP’’ in 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3)(i)(B) of this 

chapter means ‘‘controlled substance.’’ 

(i) To calculate emissions caused by 

the heating of a vessel without a process 

condenser to a temperature lower than 

the boiling point, each entity must use 

the procedures in 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(3) of this chapter. 

(ii) To calculate emissions from 

depressurization of a vessel without a 

process condenser, each entity must use 

the procedures in 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(D)(10) of this chapter. 

(iii) To calculate emissions from 

vacuum systems, the terms used in 

equation 33 to § 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(E) of 

this chapter are defined as follows. 

Psystem means the absolute pressure of 

the receiving vessel. Pi means the partial 

pressure of the controlled substance 

determined at the exit temperature and 

exit pressure conditions of the 

condenser or at the conditions of the 

dedicated receiver. Pj means the partial 

pressure of condensables (including 

controlled substances) determined at the 

exit temperature and exit pressure 

conditions of the condenser or at the 

conditions of the dedicated receiver. 

MWcontrolled substance means the molecular 

weight of the controlled substance 

determined at the exit temperature and 

exit pressure conditions of the 

condenser or at the conditions of the 

dedicated receiver. 

(iv) To calculate emissions when a 

vessel is equipped with a process 

condenser or a control condenser, each 

entity must use the procedures in 

§ 63.1257(d)(3)(i)(B) of this chapter, 

except as follows. Each entity must 

determine the flow rate of gas (or 

volume of gas), partial pressures of 

condensables, temperature (T), and 

controlled substance molecular weight 

(MWcontrolled substance) at the exit 

temperature and exit pressure 

conditions of the condenser or at the 

conditions of the dedicated receiver. 

Each entity must assume that all of the 

components contained in the condenser 

exit vent stream are in equilibrium with 

the same components in the exit 

condensate stream (except for 

noncondensables). Each entity must 

perform a material balance for each 

component, if the condensate receiver 

composition is not known. For the 

emissions from purging, the term for 

time, t, must be used in equation 12 to 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) of this chapter. 

Emissions from empty vessel purging 

must be calculated using equation 36 to 

§ 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(H) of this chapter and 

the exit temperature and exit pressure 

conditions of the condenser or the 

conditions of the dedicated receiver. 

(3) Commercial software products that 

follow chemical engineering principles 

(e.g., including the calculation 

methodologies in paragraphs 

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

(B) Engineering assessments. For 

process vent emissions determinations, 

each entity may conduct an engineering 

assessment to calculate uncontrolled 

emissions. An engineering assessment 

includes, but is not limited to, the 

following: 

(1) Previous test results, provided the 

tests are representative of current 

operating practices of the process. 

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

representative of the process operating 

conditions. 

(3) Maximum flow rate, controlled 

substance emission rate, concentration, 

or other relevant parameters specified or 

implied within a permit limit applicable 

to the process vent. 

(4) Design analysis based on chemical 

engineering principles, measurable 

process parameters, or physical or 

chemical laws or properties. 

(C) Impact of destruction for the 

preliminary estimate. If the process vent 

is vented to a destruction unit, each 

entity may reflect the impact of the 

destruction unit on emissions. In the 

emissions estimate, account for the 

following: 

(1) The demonstrated destruction 

efficiencies of the device for the 

controlled substance in the vent stream 

for periods when the destruction device 

is in use. 

(2) Any periods when the process 

vent is not vented to the destruction 

unit. 

(D) Use of typical recent values. In the 

calculations in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) 

through (C) of this section, the values 

used for the expected process activity 

and for the expected fraction of that 

activity, whose emissions will be vented 

to the properly functioning destruction 

unit, must be based on either typical 

recent values for the process or values 

that overestimate emissions from the 

process, unless there is a compelling 

reason to adopt a different value (e.g., 

installation of a destruction unit for a 

previously uncontrolled process). If 

there is such a reason, it must be 

documented in the monitoring plan. 

(ii) Method selection for continuous 

process vents. (A) Based on the 

calculations under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of 

this section, as well as any subsequent 

measurements and calculations under 

this section, rank the process vents 

based on controlled substance 

emissions, upstream of any destruction 

unit, summed across all operating 

scenarios, from largest to smallest 

estimated annual emissions of 

controlled substances. The continuous 

process vents that comprise the top 

quartile of estimated annual emissions 

of controlled substances must use the 

method in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this 

section (Emission Factor approach). The 

process vent emissions will be based on 

the past 3 years for the ranking analysis. 

(B) The remaining continuous process 

vents that comprise the bottom three 

quartiles of estimated annual emissions 

of controlled substances may use either 

the emission factor method specified in 

paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section 

(Emission Factor approach) or a method 

specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this 

section (Emission Calculation Factor 

approach). 

(1) Each entity must conduct emission 

testing for process-vent-specific 

emission factor development upstream 

of the destruction unit. 

(2) The emission testing for processvent-specific emission factor 

development may be conducted on the 

outlet side of a wet scrubber in place for 

acid gas reduction, if there is no 

appreciable reduction in the controlled 

substance by the wet scrubber. 

(iii) Process-vent-specific emission 

factor method. For each process vent, 

each entity must conduct an emission 

test according to the procedures in 

paragraph (d) of this section and 

measure the process activity, such as the 

feed rate, production rate, or other 

process activity rate, during the test as 

described in this paragraph (c)(1)(iii). 

All emissions test data and procedures 

used in developing emission factors 

must be documented according to 

paragraph (f) of this section. If more 

than one operating scenario applies to 

the process that contains the subject 

process vent, each entity must use the 

method in either paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(A) 

or (B) of this section. 

(A) Conduct a separate emissions test 

for operation under each operating 

scenario. 

(B) Conduct an emissions test for the 

operating scenario that is expected to 

have the largest emissions of controlled 

substances (considering both activity 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82435 

levels and emission calculation factors) 

on an annual basis. Also conduct an 

emissions test for each additional 

operating scenario for which the 

emission calculation factor differs by 15 

percent or more from the emission 

calculation factor of the operating 

scenario that is expected to have the 

largest emissions(or of another operating 

scenario for which emission testing is 

performed), unless the difference 

between the operating scenarios is 

solely due to the application of a 

destruction unit to emissions under one 

of the operating scenarios. For any other 

operating scenarios, adjust the processvent specific emission factor developed 

for the operating scenario that is 

expected to have the largest emissions 

(or for another operating scenario for 

which emission testing is performed) 

using the approach in paragraph 

(c)(1)(iii)(G) of this section. 

(C) Each entity must measure the 

process activity, such as the process 

feed rate, process production rate, or 

other process activity rate, as applicable, 

during the emissions test and calculate 

the rate for the test period, in kg (or 

another appropriate metric) per hour. 

(D) For continuous processes, each 

entity must calculate the hourly 

emission rate of each controlled 

substance using equation 1 to this 

paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(D) and determine 

the hourly emission rate of each 

controlled substance per process vent 

(and per operating scenario, as 

applicable) for the test run. 

Equation 1 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(D) 

Where: 

EContPV = Mass of controlled substance p 

emitted from process vent v from process 

i, operating scenario j, during the 

emission test during test run r (kg/hr). 

CPV = Concentration of controlled substance 

p during test run r of the emission test 

(ppmv). 

MW = Molecular weight of controlled 

substance p (g/g-mole). 

QPV = Flow rate of the process vent stream 

during test run r of the emission test 

(m3/min). 

SV = Standard molar volume of gas (0.0240 

m3/g-mole at 68 °F and 1 atm). 

1/103 = Conversion factor (1 kilogram/1,000 

grams). 

60/1 = Conversion factor (60 minutes/1 

hour). 

(E) Each entity must calculate a sitespecific, process-vent-specific emission 

factor for each controlled substance for 

each process vent and each operating 

scenario, in kg of controlled substance 

per process activity rate (e.g., kg of feed 

or production), as applicable, using 

equation 2 to this paragraph 

(c)(1)(iii)(E). For continuous processes, 

divide the hourly controlled substance 

emission rate during the test by the 

hourly process activity rate during the 

test runs. 

Equation 2 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(E) 

Where: 

EFPV = Emission factor for controlled 

substance p emitted from process vent v 

during process i, operating scenario j 

(e.g., kg emitted/kg activity). 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 

operating scenario j, during the emission 

test during test run r, for either 

continuous or batch (kg emitted/hr for 

continuous, kg emitted/batch for batch). 

ActivityEmissionTest = Process feed, process 

production, or other process activity rate 

for process i, operating scenario j, during 

the emission test during test run r (e.g., 

kg product/hr). 

r = Number of test runs performed during the 

emission test. 

(F) If emissions testing is conducted 

upstream of the destruction unit, apply 

the destruction efficiencies of the device 

that have been demonstrated for the 

controlled substance in the vent stream 

to the controlled substance emissions 

for the process vent (and operating 

scenario, as applicable), using equation 

3 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(F). Each 

entity may apply the destruction 

efficiency only to the portion of the 

process activity during which emissions 

are vented to the properly functioning 

destruction unit (i.e., controlled). 

Equation 3 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(F) 

EPV = EFPV-U * (Activityu + Activityc * 

(1¥DE)) 

Where: 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 

operating scenario j, for the year, 

considering destruction efficiency (kg). 

EFPV–U = Emission factor (uncontrolled) for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j (kg emitted/kg 

product). 

ActivityU = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j, during the 

year for which the process vent is not 

vented to the properly functioning 

destruction unit (e.g., kg product). 

ActivityC = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j, during the 

year for which the process vent is vented 

to the properly functioning destruction 

unit (e.g., kg product). 

DE = Demonstrated destruction efficiency of 

the destruction unit (weight fraction). 

(G) For process vents from processes 

with multiple operating scenarios, use 

equation 4 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(G) 

to develop an adjusted process-ventspecific emission factor for each 

operating scenario whose emission 

calculation factor differs by less than 15 

percent from the emission calculation 

factor of the operating scenario that is 

expected to have the largest emissions 

(or of another operating scenario for 

which emission testing is performed). 

Equation 4 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(G) 

Where: 

EFPVadj = Adjusted process-vent-specific 

emission factor for an untested operating 

scenario. 

ECFUT = Emission calculation factor for the 

untested operating scenario developed 

under paragraph (c)(4) of this section. 

ECFT = Emission calculation for the tested 

operating scenario developed under 

paragraph (c)(4) of this section. 

EFPV = Process vent specific emission factor 

for the tested operating scenario. 

(H) Sum the emissions of each 

controlled substance from all process 

vents in each operating scenario and all 

operating scenarios in the process for 

the year to estimate the total process 

vent emissions of each controlled 

substance from the process, using 

equation 5 to this paragraph 

(c)(1)(iii)(H). 

Equation 5 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(H) 

Where: 

EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vents for process i for the 

year (kg). 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.000</GPH> ER10OC24.001</GPH> ER10OC24.002</GPH> ER10OC24.003</GPH>

1 1 60 

EcontPV = 10CPV 6 * MW * QPV * sv * 103 * 1 

ECFur = * EFpv EFPVadj = ECFr 

Li (ActivitYEmissionTeSt 

EFpv = r 
82436 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

operating scenario j, for the year, 

considering destruction efficiency (kg). 

v = Number of process vents in process i, 

operating scenario j. 

o = Number of operating scenarios for 

process i. 

(iv) Process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor method. For each 

process vent within an operating 

scenario, determine controlled 

substances emissions by calculations 

and determine the process activity rate, 

such as the feed rate, production rate, or 

other process activity rate, associated 

with the emission rate. 

(A) Each entity must calculate 

uncontrolled emissions of controlled 

substances by individual process vent, 

EPV, by using measurements, by using 

calculations based on chemical 

engineering principles and chemical 

property data, or by conducting an 

engineering assessment. Use the 

procedures in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) or 

(B) of this section, except paragraph 

(c)(1)(i)(B)(3) of this section. The 

procedures in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) 

and (B) of this section may be applied 

either to batch process vents or to 

continuous process vents. The 

uncontrolled emissions must be based 

on a typical batch or production rate 

under a defined operating scenario. The 

process activity rate associated with the 

uncontrolled emissions must be 

determined. The methods, data, and 

assumptions used to estimate emissions 

for each operating scenario must be 

selected to yield a best estimate 

(expected value) of emissions rather 

than an over- or underestimate of 

emissions for that operating scenario. 

All data, assumptions, and procedures 

used in the calculations or engineering 

assessment must be documented 

according to paragraph (f) of this 

section. 

(B) Each entity must calculate a sitespecific, process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor for each process vent 

each operating scenario, and each 

controlled substance, in kg of controlled 

substance per activity rate (e.g., kg of 

feed or production) as applicable, using 

equation 6 to this paragraph 

(c)(1)(iv)(B). 

Equation 6 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(B) 

Where: 

ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j (e.g., kg emitted/kg 

product). 

EPV = Average mass of controlled substance 

p emitted, based on calculations, from 

process vent v from process i, operating 

scenario j, during the period or batch for 

which emissions were calculated, for 

either continuous or batch (kg emitted/ 

hr for continuous, kg emitted/batch for 

batch). 

Activity Representative = Process feed, 

process production, or other process 

activity rate corresponding to average 

mass of emissions based on calculations 

(e.g., kg product/hr for continuous, kg 

product/batch for batch). 

(C) Each entity must calculate 

emissions of each controlled substance 

for the process vent (and for each 

operating scenario, as applicable) for the 

year by multiplying the process-ventspecific emission calculation factor by 

the total process activity, as applicable, 

for the year, using equation 7 to this 

paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(C). 

Equation 7 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(C) 

EPV = ECFPV * Activity 

Where: 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 

operating scenario j, for the year (kg). 

ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j (kg emitted/activity) 

(e.g., kg emitted/kg product). 

Activity = Process feed, process production, 

or other process activity for process i, 

operating scenario j, during the year. 

(D) If the process vent is vented to a 

destruction unit, apply the 

demonstrated destruction efficiency of 

the device to the controlled substance 

emissions for the process vent (and 

operating scenario, as applicable), using 

equation 8 to this paragraph 

(c)(1)(iv)(D). Apply the destruction 

efficiency only to the portion of the 

process activity that is vented to the 

properly functioning destruction unit 

(i.e., controlled). 

Equation 8 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(D) 

EPV = ECFPV * (Activityu + Activityc * 

(1¥DE)) 

Where: 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 

operating scenario j, for the year 

considering destruction efficiency (kg). 

ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j (e.g., kg emitted/kg 

product). 

ActivityU = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j, during the 

year for which the process vent is not 

vented to the properly functioning 

destruction unit (e.g., kg product). 

ActivityC = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j, during the 

year for which the process vent is vented 

to the properly functioning destruction 

unit (e.g., kg product). 

DE = Demonstrated destruction efficiency of 

the destruction unit (weight fraction). 

(E) Sum the emissions of each 

controlled substance from all process 

vents in each operating scenario and all 

operating scenarios in the process for 

the year to estimate the total process 

vent emissions of each controlled 

substance from the process, using 

equation 9 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(E). 

Equation 9 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(E) 

Where: 

EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vents for process i for the 

year (kg). 

EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from process vent v from process i, 

operating scenario j, for the year, 

considering destruction efficiency (kg). 

v = Number of process vents in process i, 

operating scenario j. 

o = Number of operating scenarios in process 

i. 

(2) Calculate emissions for equipment 

leaks (EL). If activity is covered under 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, each 

entity must calculate the emissions from 

pieces of equipment associated with 

processes covered under this section. If 

conducting monitoring of equipment in 

controlled substance service, monitoring 

must be conducted for those in light 

liquid and in gas and vapor service. If 

conducting monitoring of equipment in 

controlled substance service, the entity 

may exclude from monitoring each 

piece of equipment that is difficult-tomonitor, that is unsafe-to-monitor, that 

is insulated, or that is in heavy liquid 

service; the entity may exclude from 

monitoring each pump with dual 

mechanical seals, agitator with dual 

mechanical seals, pump with no 

external shaft, agitator with no external 

shaft; the entity may exclude from 

monitoring each pressure relief device 

in gas and vapor service with upstream 

rupture disk, each sampling connection 

system with closed-loop or closed-purge 

systems, and any pieces of equipment 

where leaks are routed through a closed 

vent system to a destruction unit. The 

entity must estimate emissions using 

another approach for those pieces of 

equipment excluded from monitoring. 

Equipment that is in controlled 

substance service for less than 300 hr/ 

yr, equipment that is in vacuum service, 

pressure relief devices that are in light 

liquid service, and instrumentation 

systems are exempted from the 

requirements in this paragraph (c)(2). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.004</GPH> ER10OC24.005</GPH>

ECFpv = ActivitYRepresentative 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82437 

(i) The emissions from equipment 

leaks must be calculated using any of 

the procedures in paragraphs 

(c)(2)(i)(A), (B), (C), or (D) of this 

section. 

(A) Use of Average Emission Factor 

Approach in EPA protocol for 

equipment leak emission estimates. The 

emissions from equipment leaks may be 

calculated using the default Average 

Emission Factor Approach in EPA–453/ 

R–95–017 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 82.27). 

(B) Use of Other Approaches in EPA 

protocol for equipment leak emission 

estimates in conjunction with EPA 

Method 21. The emissions from 

equipment leaks may be calculated 

using one of the following methods in 

EPA–453/R–95–017 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27): The Screening 

Ranges Approach; the EPA Correlation 

Approach; or the Unit-Specific 

Correlation Approach. If it is 

determined that EPA Method 21 in 

appendix A–7 to 40 CFR part 60 is 

appropriate for monitoring a controlled 

substance, and if the instrument is 

calibrated with a compound different 

from one or more of the controlled 

substances or surrogates to be measured, 

each entity must develop response 

factors for each controlled substance or 

for each surrogate to be measured using 

EPA Method 21. For each controlled 

substance or surrogate measured, the 

response factor must be less than 10. 

The response factor is the ratio of the 

known concentration of a controlled 

substance or surrogate to the observed 

meter reading when measured using an 

instrument calibrated with the reference 

compound. 

(C) Use of Other Approaches in EPA 

protocol for equipment leak emission 

estimates in conjunction with sitespecific leak monitoring methods. The 

emissions from equipment leaks may be 

calculated using one of the following 

methods in EPA–453/R–95–017 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27): 

The Screening Ranges Approach; the 

EPA Correlation Approach; or the UnitSpecific Correlation Approach. Each 

entity may develop a site-specific leak 

monitoring method appropriate for 

monitoring controlled substances or 

surrogates to use along with these three 

approaches. The site-specific leak 

monitoring method must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of 

this section. 

(D) Use of site-specific leak 

monitoring methods. The emissions 

from equipment leaks may be calculated 

using a site-specific leak monitoring 

method. The site-specific leak 

monitoring method must meet the 

requirements in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of 

this section. 

(ii) Each entity must collect 

information on the number of each type 

of equipment, the service of each piece 

of equipment (gas, light liquid, heavy 

liquid), the concentration of each 

controlled substance in the stream, and 

the time period each piece of equipment 

was in service (e.g., hours per year). 

Depending on which approach 

followed, the entity may be required to 

collect information for equipment on 

the associated screening data 

concentrations for greater than or equal 

to 10,000 ppmv and associated 

screening data concentrations for less 

than 10,000 ppmv; associated actual 

screening data concentrations; or 

associated screening data and leak rate 

data (i.e., bagging) used to develop a 

unit-specific correlation. 

(iii) Calculate and sum the emissions 

of each controlled substance in 

kilograms per year for equipment pieces 

for each process, EELp, annually. Each 

entity must include and estimate 

emissions for types of equipment that 

are excluded from monitoring, 

including difficult-to-monitor, unsafeto-monitor and insulated pieces of 

equipment, pieces of equipment in 

heavy liquid service, pumps with dual 

mechanical seals, agitators with dual 

mechanical seals, pumps with no 

external shaft, agitators with no external 

shaft, pressure relief devices in gas and 

vapor service with upstream rupture 

disk, sampling connection systems with 

closed-loop or closed purge systems, 

and pieces of equipment where leaks are 

routed through a closed vent system to 

a destruction unit. 

(3) Calculate total controlled 

substance emissions for each process 

and for production or transformation 

processes at the facility. (i) Estimate 

annually the total mass of each 

controlled substance emitted from each 

process, including emissions from 

process vents in paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) 

and (iv) of this section, as appropriate, 

and from equipment leaks in paragraph 

(c)(2) of this section, using equation 10 

to this paragraph (c)(3)(i). 

Equation 10 to Paragraph (c)(3)(i) 

Ei = EPpi + EELpi

Where: 

Ei = Total mass of each controlled substance 

p emitted from process i, annual basis 

(kg/year). 

EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted 

from all process vents and all operating 

scenarios in process i, annually (kg/year, 

calculated in equation 5 or 9 to this 

section, as appropriate). 

EELpi = Mass of controlled substance p 

emitted from equipment leaks for pieces 

of equipment for process i, annually (kg/ 

year, calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of 

this section). 

(ii) Estimate annually the total mass of 

each controlled substance emitted at the 

facility from each applicable process 

listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 

using equation 11 to this paragraph 

(c)(3)(ii). Develop separate totals for 

each applicable process listed in 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

Equation 11 to Paragraph (c)(3)(ii) 

Where: 

E = Total mass of each controlled substance 

p emitted from all processes listed in 

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

section, as appropriate (kilograms). 

Ei = Total mass of each controlled substance 

p emitted from each process listed in 

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

section, annual basis (kg/year, calculated 

in equation 10 to paragraph (c)(3)(i) of 

this section). 

z = Total number of processes listed in 

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

section, as appropriate. 

(4) Mass balance method. Before 

using the mass balance approach to 

estimate your controlled substance 

emissions from a process, you must 

ensure that the process and the 

equipment and methods used to 

measure the process meet either the 

error limits described in this paragraph 

(c)(4) and calculated under paragraph 

(c)(4)(i) of this section or the 

requirements specified in paragraph 

(d)(4)(viii) of this section. If you choose 

to calculate the error limits, you must 

estimate the absolute and relative errors 

associated with using the mass balance 

approach on that process using 

equations 12 through 15 to this section 

in conjunction with equations 16 

through 21 to this section. You may use 

the mass-balance approach to estimate 

emissions from the process if this 

calculation results in an absolute error 

of less than or equal to one metric ton 

of controlled substance per year or a 

relative error of less than or equal to 10 

percent of the estimated controlled 

substance emissions. If you do not meet 

either of the error limits or the 

requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(viii) of 

this section, you must use the emission 

factor approach detailed in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (3) of this section to 

estimate emissions from the process. 

(i) To perform the calculation, you 

must first calculate the absolute and 

relative errors associated with the 

quantities calculated using either 

equations 18 through 21 to this section 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.006</GPH>

z 

E= LEi 

i=1 
82438 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

or equation 28 to paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of 

this section. Alternatively, you may 

estimate these errors based on the 

variability of previous process 

measurements (e.g., the variability of 

measurements of stream 

concentrations), provided these 

measurements are representative of the 

current process and current 

measurement devices and techniques. 

Once errors have been calculated for the 

quantities in these equations, those 

errors must be used to calculate the 

errors in equations 16 and 17 to this 

section. You may omit the errors 

associated with equations 22 through 24 

to this section. 

(A) Where the measured quantity is a 

mass, the error in the mass must be 

equated to the accuracy or precision 

(whichever is larger) of the flowmeter, 

scale, or combination of volumetric and 

density measurements at the flow rate or 

mass measured. 

(B) Where the measured quantity is a 

concentration of a stream component, 

the error of the concentration must be 

equated to the accuracy or precision 

(whichever is larger) with which you 

estimate the mean concentration of that 

stream component, accounting for the 

variability of the process, the frequency 

of the measurements, and the accuracy 

or precision (whichever is larger) of the 

analytical technique used to measure 

the concentration at the concentration 

measured. If the variability of process 

measurements is used to estimate the 

error, this variability shall be assumed 

to account both for the variability of the 

process and the precision of the 

analytical technique. Use standard 

statistical techniques such as the 

student’s t distribution to estimate the 

error of the mean of the concentration 

measurements as a function of process 

variability and frequency of 

measurement. 

(C) Equation 12 to this paragraph 

(c)(4)(i)(C) provides the general formula 

for calculating the absolute errors of 

sums and differences where the sum, S, 

is the summation of variables measured, 

a, b, c, etc. (e.g., S = a + b + c). 

Equation 12 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(C) 

eSA = [(a * ea)2 + (b * eb)2 + (c * ec)2]1⁄2

Where: 

eSA = Absolute error of the sum, expressed 

as one half of a 95 percent confidence 

interval. 

ea = Relative error of a, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

eb = Relative error of b, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

ec = Relative error of c, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

(D) Equation 13 to this paragraph 

(c)(4)(i)(D) provides the general formula 

for calculating the relative errors of 

sums and differences. 

Equation 13 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(D) 

Where: 

eSR = Relative error of the sum, expressed as 

one half of a 95 percent confidence 

interval. 

eSA = Absolute error of the sum, expressed 

as one half of a 95 percent confidence 

interval. 

a+b+c = Sum of the variables measured. 

(E) Equation 14 to this paragraph 

(c)(4)(i)(E) provides the general formula 

for calculating the absolute errors of 

products (e.g., flow rates of controlled 

substances calculated as the product of 

the flow rate of the stream and the 

concentration of the controlled 

substance in the stream), where the 

product, P, is the result of multiplying 

the variables measured, a, b, c, etc. (e.g., 

P = a*b*c). 

Equation 14 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(E) 

ePA = (a * b * c)(e2

a + e2b + e2c)1⁄2

Where: 

ePA = Absolute error of the product, 

expressed as one half of a 95 percent 

confidence interval. 

ea = Relative error of a, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

eb = Relative error of b, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

ec = Relative error of c, expressed as one half 

of a 95 percent confidence interval. 

(F) Equation 15 to this paragraph 

(c)(4)(i)(F) provides the general formula 

for calculating the relative errors of 

products. 

Equation 15 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F) 

Where: 

ePR = Relative error of the product, expressed 

as one half of a 95 percent confidence 

interval. 

ePA = Absolute error of the product, 

expressed as one half of a 95 percent 

confidence interval. 

a*b*c = Product of the variables measured. 

(G) Calculate the absolute error of the 

controlled substance emissions estimate 

by performing a preliminary estimate of 

the annual controlled substance 

emissions of the process using the 

method in paragraph (c)(4)(i)(H) of this 

section. Multiply this result by the 

relative error calculated for the mass of 

halogen emitted from the process in 

equation 15 to paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F) of 

this section. 

(H) To estimate the annual controlled 

substance emissions of the process for 

use in the error estimate, apply the 

methods set forth in paragraphs (c)(4)(ii) 

through (vii) and (ix) through (xvi) of 

this section to representative process 

measurements. If these process 

measurements represent less than one 

year of typical process activity, adjust 

the estimated emissions to account for 

one year of typical process activity. To 

estimate the terms FERd, FEP, and FEBk 

for use in the error estimate for 

equations 22, 23, and 24 to this section, 

you must either use emission testing, 

monitoring of emitted streams, and/or 

engineering calculations or assessments. 

(ii) The total mass of each controlled 

substance emitted annually from each 

controlled substance process must be 

estimated by using equation 16 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(ii). 

Equation 16 to Paragraph (c)(4)(ii) 

Where: 

EContp = Total mass of each controlled 

substance p emitted annually from 

process i (metric tons). 

ERp-FContp = Total mass of controlled 

substance reactant p emitted from 

production process i over the period t 

(metric tons, calculated in equation 22 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(ix) of this section). 

EPp-FContp= Total mass of the controlled 

substance product p emitted from 

production process i over the period t 

(metric tons, calculated in equation 23 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(x) of this section). 

EBp-FContp = Total mass of controlled 

substance byproduct p emitted from 

production process i over the period t 

(metric tons, calculated in equation 24 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xi) of this section). 

n = Number of concentration and flow 

measurement periods for the year. 

(iii) The total mass of halogen emitted 

from process i over the period t must be 

estimated at least monthly by 

calculating the difference between the 

total mass of halogen in the reactant(s) 

(or inputs, for processes that do not 

involve a chemical reaction) and the 

total mass of halogen in the product (or 

outputs, for processes that do not 

involve a chemical reaction), accounting 

for the total mass of halogen in any 

destroyed or recaptured streams that 

contain reactants, products, or 

byproducts (or inputs or outputs). This 

calculation must be performed using 

equation 17 to this paragraph (c)(4)(iii). 

An element other than a halogen may be 

used in the mass-balance equation, 

provided the element occurs in all of the 

controlled substances fed into or 

generated by the process. In this case, 

the mass fractions of the element in the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.007</GPH> ER10OC24.008</GPH> ER10OC24.009</GPH>

esA 

e -----

SR - (a+ b + c) 

n 

Epcsf = L(ERp +Epp +EBp) 

t=1 

epA e -----

PR - (a* b * c) 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82439 

reactants, products, and byproducts must be calculated as appropriate for 

that element. 

Equation 17 to Paragraph (c)(4)(iii) 

Where: 

EH = Total mass of halogen emitted from 

process i over the period t (metric tons). 

Rd = Total mass of the halogen-containing 

reactant d that is fed into process i over 

the period t (metric tons). 

P = Total mass of the halogen-containing 

product produced by process i over the 

period t (metric tons). 

MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant 

d, calculated in equation 25 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(xii) of this section. 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product, calculated in equation 26 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section. 

FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or 

recaptured streams from process i 

containing halogen-containing reactants, 

products, and byproducts over the 

period t, calculated in equation 18 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section. 

v = Number of halogen-containing reactants 

fed into process i. 

(iv) The mass of total halogen in 

destroyed or recaptured streams 

containing halogen-containing reactants, 

products, and byproducts must be 

estimated at least monthly using 

equation 18 to this paragraph (c)(4)(iv) 

unless you use the alternative approach 

provided in paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this 

section. 

Equation 18 to Paragraph (c)(4)(iv) 

Where: 

FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or 

recaptured streams from process i 

containing halogen-containing reactants, 

products, and byproducts over the 

period t. 

Pj = Mass of the halogen-containing product 

removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t (calculated in 

equation 19 or 20 to this section). 

Bkj = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct 

k removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t (calculated in 

equation 19 or 20 to this section). 

Bkl = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct 

k removed from process i in stream l and 

recaptured over the period t. 

Rdj = Mass of halogen-containing reactant d 

removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t (calculated in 

equation 19 or 20 to this section). 

MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant 

d, calculated in equation 25 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(xii) of this section. 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product, calculated in equation 26 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section. 

MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in 

byproduct k, calculated in equation 27 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section. 

q = Number of streams destroyed in process 

i. 

x = Number of streams recaptured in process 

i. 

u = Number of halogen-containing 

byproducts generated in process i. 

v = Number of halogen-containing reactants 

fed into process i. 

(v) The mass of each controlled 

substance removed from process i in 

stream j and destroyed over the period 

t (i.e., Pj, Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable) must 

be estimated by applying the 

destruction efficiency of the device that 

has been demonstrated for the 

controlled substance p to controlled 

substance f using equation 19 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(v). 

Equation 19 to Paragraph (c)(4)(v) 

MFcontpj = DEContp * Ccontrpj * Sj

Where: 

MFContpj = Mass of controlled substance p 

removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t. (This may be 

Pj, Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable.) 

DEContp = Destruction efficiency of the device 

that has been demonstrated for 

controlled substance p in stream j 

(fraction). 

CContpj = Concentration (mass fraction) of 

controlled substance p in stream j 

removed from process i and fed into the 

destruction device over the period t. If 

this concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cContrpj is equal to zero. 

Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process 

i and fed into the destruction device over 

the period t (metric tons). 

(vi) The mass of each halogencontaining compound that is not a 

controlled substance and that is 

removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t (i.e., P>j, B>

kj, or R>dj, as applicable) must be 

estimated using equation 20 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(vi). 

Equation 20 to Paragraph (c)(4)(vi) 

Mhcgj = CHCgj * Sj

Where: 

MHCgj = Mass of non-controlled substance 

halogen-containing compound g 

removed from process i in stream j and 

destroyed over the period t. (This may be 

Pj, Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable.) 

CHCgj = Concentration (mass fraction) of noncontrolled substance halogen-containing 

compound g in stream j removed from 

process i and fed into the destruction 

device over the period t. If this 

concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cHCgj is equal to zero. 

Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process 

i and fed into the destruction device over 

the period t (metric tons). 

(vii) The mass of halogen-containing 

byproduct k removed from process i in 

stream l and recaptured over the period 

t must be estimated using equation 21 

to this paragraph (c)(4)(vii). 

Equation 21 to Paragraph (c)(4)(vii) 

Bkl = CBkl * Sl

Where: 

Bkl = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct 

k removed from process i in stream l and 

recaptured over the period t (metric 

tons). 

cBkl = Concentration (mass fraction) of 

halogen-containing byproduct k in 

stream l removed from process i and 

recaptured over the period t. If this 

concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cBkl is equal to zero. 

Sl = Mass removed in stream l from process 

i and recaptured over the period t (metric 

tons). 

(viii) To estimate the terms FERd, 

FEP, and FEBk for equations 22, 23, and 

24 to this section, you must account for 

the total mass of halogen emitted, EF, 

estimated in equation 17 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(iii) of this section. These emission 

characterization measurements must 

meet the requirements in paragraph 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.010</GPH> ER10OC24.011</GPH>

V 

EH= L(Rv * MFHRv)-P * MFHp -Fv 

1 
82440 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(c)(4)(viii)(A), (B), or (C) of this section, 

as appropriate. The sum of the terms 

must equal 1. You must document the 

data and calculations that are used to 

speciate individual compounds and to 

estimate FERd, FEP, and FEBk. Exclude 

from your calculations the halogen 

included in FD. For example, exclude 

halogen-containing compounds that are 

not controlled substances and that result 

from the destruction of controlled 

substances by any destruction devices 

(e.g., the mass of HF created by 

combustion of a chlorofluorocarbon). 

However, include emissions of 

controlled substance that survive the 

destruction process. 

(A) If the calculations under 

paragraph (b)(1)(viii) of this section, or 

any subsequent measurements and 

calculations under this subpart, indicate 

that the process emits 0.1 metric tons 

controlled substance or more, estimate 

the emissions from each process vent, 

considering controls, using the methods 

in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section. You 

must characterize the emissions of any 

process vent that emits 0.1 metric tons 

controlled substance or more as 

specified in paragraph (d)(4)(iv) of this 

section. 

(B) For other vents, including vents 

from processes that emit less than 0.1 

metric tons of controlled substance, you 

must characterize emissions as specified 

in paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section. 

(C) For halogen emissions that are not 

accounted for by vent estimates, you 

must characterize emissions as specified 

in paragraph (d)(4)(vi) of this section. 

(ix) The total mass of halogencontaining reactant d emitted must be 

estimated at least monthly based on the 

total halogen emitted and the fraction 

that consists of halogen-containing 

reactants using equation 22 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(ix). If the halogencontaining reactant d is not a controlled 

substance, you may assume that FERd is 

zero. 

Equation 22 to Paragraph (c)(4)(ix) 

Where: 

ER-it = Total mass of halogen-containing 

reactant d that is emitted from process i 

over the period t (metric tons). 

FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of the halogen-containing 

reactant d. 

EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from 

process i over the period t (metric tons), 

calculated in equation 17 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(iii) of this section. 

FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of the halogen-containing 

product. 

FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of halogen-containing byproduct 

k. 

MFFRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant 

d, calculated in equation 25 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(xii) of this section. 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product, calculated in equation 26 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section. 

MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in 

byproduct k, calculation in equation 27 

to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section. 

u = Number of halogen-containing 

byproducts generated in process i. 

v = Number of halogen-containing reactants 

fed into process i. 

(x) The total mass of halogencontaining product emitted must be 

estimated at least monthly based on the 

total halogen emitted and the fraction 

that consists of halogen-containing 

products using equation 23 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(x). If the halogencontaining product is not a controlled 

substance, you may assume that FEP is 

zero. 

Equation 23 to Paragraph (c)(4)(x) 

Where: 

EP-it = Total mass of halogen-containing 

product emitted from process i over the 

period t (metric tons). 

FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of the halogen-containing 

product. 

EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from 

process i over the period t (metric tons), 

calculated in equation 17 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(iii) of this section. 

FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of halogen-containing reactant 

d. 

FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of halogen-containing byproduct 

k. 

MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant 

d, calculated in equation 25 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(xii) of this section. 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product, calculated in equation 26 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section. 

MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in 

byproduct k, calculation in equation 27 

to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section. 

u = Number of halogen-containing 

byproducts generated in process i. 

v = Number of halogen-containing reactants 

fed into process i. 

(xi) The total mass of halogencontaining byproduct k emitted must be 

estimated at least monthly based on the 

total halogen emitted and the fraction 

that consists of halogen-containing 

byproducts using equation 24 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(xi). If halogencontaining byproduct k is not a 

controlled substance, you may assume 

that FEBk is zero. 

Equation 24 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xi) 

Where: 

EBk-it = Total mass of halogen-containing 

byproduct k emitted from process i over 

the period t (metric tons). 

FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of halogen-containing byproduct 

k. 

FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of halogen-containing reactant 

d. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.012</GPH> ER10OC24.013</GPH> ER10OC24.014</GPH>

FEP * EH 

EP-it = ('\'V '\'U ) L,1 FE Rd* MFHRd + FEP * MF Hp+ L..k=1 FE Bk* MFHBk 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82441 

FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that 

consists of the halogen-containing 

product. 

EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from 

process i over the period t (metric tons), 

calculated in equation 17 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(iii) of this section. 

MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant 

d, calculated in equation 25 to paragraph 

(c)(4)(xii) of this section. 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product, calculated in equation 26 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section. 

MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in 

byproduct k, calculation in equation 27 

to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section. 

u = Number of halogen-containing 

byproducts generated in process i. 

v = Number of halogen-containing reactants 

fed into process i. 

(xii) The mass fraction of halogen in 

reactant d must be estimated using 

equation 25 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xii). 

Equation 25 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xii) 

Where: 

MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in 

reactant d (fraction). 

MHRd = Moles halogen per mole of reactant 

d. 

AWH = Atomic weight of halogen. 

MWRd = Molecular weight of reactant d. 

(xiii) The mass fraction of halogen in 

the product must be estimated using 

equation 26 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xiii). 

Equation 26 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) 

Where: 

MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product (fraction). 

MHP = Moles halogen per mole of product. 

AWH = Atomic weight of halogen. 

MWP = Molecular weight of the product 

produced. 

(xiv) The mass fraction of each 

applicable halogen in byproduct k must 

be estimated using equation 27 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(xiv). 

Equation 27 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) 

Where: 

MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in the 

product (fraction). 

MHBk = Moles halogen per mole of 

byproduct k. 

AWH = Atomic weight of halogen. 

MWBk = Molecular weight of byproduct k. 

(xv) As an alternative to using 

equation 18 to paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of 

this section as provided in paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section, you may estimate 

at least monthly the total mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams containing halogen-containing 

compounds (including all halogencontaining reactants, products, and 

byproducts) using equation 28 to this 

paragraph (c)(4)(xv). 

Equation 28 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xv) 

Where: 

FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or 

recaptured streams from process i 

containing halogen-containing reactants, 

products, and byproducts over the 

period t. 

DEavgj = Weighted average destruction 

efficiency of the destruction device for 

the halogen-containing compounds 

identified in destroyed stream j under 

paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(B) and (d)(4)(v)(B) 

of this section (calculated in equation 28 

to this paragraph (c)(4)(xv)) (fraction). 

cTHj = Concentration (mass fraction) of total 

halogen in stream j removed from 

process i and fed into the destruction 

device over the period t. If this 

concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cTHj is equal to zero. 

Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process 

i and fed into the destruction device over 

the period t (metric tons). 

cTHl = Concentration (mass fraction) of total 

halogen in stream l removed from 

process i and recaptured over the period 

t. If this concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cBkl is equal to zero. 

Sl = Mass removed in stream l from process 

i and recaptured over the period t. 

q = Number of streams destroyed in process 

i. 

x = Number of streams recaptured in process 

i. 

(xvi) For purposes of equation 28 to 

paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section, 

calculate the weighted average 

destruction efficiency applicable to a 

destroyed stream using equation 29 to 

this paragraph (c)(4)(xvi). 

Equation 29 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xvi) 

Where: 

DEavgj = Weighted average destruction 

efficiency of the destruction device for 

the halogen-containing compounds 

identified in destroyed stream j under 

paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(B) or (d)(4)(v)(B) of 

this section, as appropriate. 

DEContp = Destruction efficiency of the device 

that has been demonstrated for 

controlled substance p in stream j 

(fraction). 

cContpj = Concentration (mass fraction) of 

controlled substance p in stream j 

removed from process i and fed into the 

destruction device over the period t. If 

this concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cContpj is equal to zero. 

cHCgj = Concentration (mass fraction) of noncontrolled substance halogen-containing 

compound g in stream j removed from 

process i and fed into the destruction 

device over the period t. If this 

concentration is only a trace 

concentration, cHCgj is equal to zero. 

Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process 

i and fed into the destruction device over 

the period t (metric tons). 

MFHContp = Mass fraction of halogen in 

controlled substance p, calculated in 

equation 25, 26, or 27 to this section, as 

appropriate. 

MFHHCg = Mass fraction of halogen in noncontrolled substance halogen-containing 

compound g, calculated in equation 25, 

26, or 27 to this section, as appropriate. 

w = Number of controlled substances in 

destroyed stream j. 

y = Number of non-controlled substance 

halogen-containing compounds in 

destroyed stream j. 

(5) Calculate controlled substance 

emissions from destruction of controlled 

substances. Estimate annually the total 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.015</GPH> ER10OC24.016</GPH> ER10OC24.017</GPH> ER10OC24.018</GPH> ER10OC24.019</GPH>

AWF 

MFHp = MHp *--

MWp 

q X 

Fv = L DEavgj * CrHj * sj + I CrHl * Si 

j=1 l=1 

L~=1 DEcontp * Ccontpj * sj * MFHcontp + r;=1 CHcg * sj * MFHg 

DEavgj = ~w ~y 

L.p=1 Ccontpj * sj * MFHcontp + L..g=1 CHcg * sj * MFHg 
82442 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

mass of controlled substances emitted 

annually from destruction of controlled 

substances using equation 30 to this 

paragraph (c)(5): 

Equation 30 to Paragraph (c)(5) 

ED = RED * (1¥DE) 

Where: 

ED = The mass of controlled substances 

emitted annually from destruction of 

controlled substances (kilograms). 

RED = The mass of controlled substances that 

are fed annually into the destruction unit 

(kilograms). 

DE = Destruction efficiency of the destruction 

unit (fraction). 

(6) Effective destruction efficiency for 

each process. If using the emission 

factor or emission calculation factor 

method to calculate emissions from the 

process, use equation 31 to this 

paragraph (c)(6) to calculate the 

effective destruction efficiency for the 

process, including each process vent: 

Equation 31 to Paragraph (c)(6) 

Where: 

DEEffective = Effective destruction efficiency 

for process i (fraction). 

EPVp = Mass of controlled substance p 

emitted from process vent v from process 

i, operating scenario j, for the year, 

calculated in equation 3, 7, or 8 to this 

section (kg). 

ECFPV-Up = Emission calculation factor for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j, as used in equation 

7 or 8 to this section (kg emitted/activity) 

(e.g., kg emitted/kg product), denoted as 

‘‘ECFPV’’ in those equations. 

EFPV-Up = Emission factor (uncontrolled) for 

controlled substance p emitted from 

process vent v during process i, 

operating scenario j, as used in equation 

3 to paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(F) of this section 

(kg emitted/activity) (e.g., kg emitted/kg 

product), denoted as ‘‘EFPV–U’’ in that 

equation. 

ActivityU = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j during the 

year, for which the process vent is not 

vented to the properly functioning 

destruction unit (i.e., uncontrolled). 

ActivityC = Total process feed, process 

production, or other process activity for 

process i, operating scenario j during the 

year, for which emissions are vented to 

the properly functioning destruction unit 

(i.e., controlled). 

o = Number of operating scenarios for 

process i. 

v = Number of process vents in process i, 

operating scenario j. 

w = Number of controlled substances emitted 

from the process. 

(d) Monitoring and QA/QC 

requirements—(1) Initial scoping 

speciation to identify controlled 

substances from transformation 

processes. Each entity that transforms 

controlled substances must conduct an 

initial scoping speciation to identify all 

controlled substances that may be 

generated or emitted from 

transformation processes that are subject 

to this section. The entity is not 

required to quantify emissions under 

this initial scoping speciation. Only 

controlled substance products and 

byproducts that occur in greater than 

trace concentrations in at least one 

stream must be identified under this 

paragraph (d)(1). 

(i) Procedure. To conduct the scoping 

speciation, select the stream(s) 

(including process streams or destroyed 

streams) or process vent(s) that would 

be expected to individually or 

collectively contain all of the controlled 

substance byproducts of the process at 

their maximum concentrations and 

sample and analyze the contents of 

these selected streams or process vents. 

For example, if controlled substance 

byproducts are separated into one lowboiling-point and one high-boiling-point 

stream, sample and analyze both of 

these streams. Alternatively, each entity 

may sample and analyze streams where 

controlled substance byproducts occur 

at less than their maximum 

concentrations, but the entity must 

ensure that the sensitivity of the 

analysis is sufficient to compensate for 

the expected difference in 

concentration. For example, if the entity 

samples and analyzes streams where 

controlled substance byproducts are 

expected to occur at one half their 

maximum concentrations elsewhere in 

the process, that entity must ensure that 

the sensitivity of the analysis is 

sufficient to detect controlled substance 

byproducts that occur at concentrations 

of 0.05 percent or higher. The entity 

does not have to sample and analyze 

every stream or process vent, i.e., the 

entity does not have to sample and 

analyze a stream or process vent that 

contains only controlled substances that 

are contained in other streams or 

process vents that are being sampled 

and analyzed. Sampling and analysis 

must be conducted according to the 

procedures in paragraph (d)(5) of this 

section. 

(ii) Previous measurements. If testing 

of streams (including process streams or 

destroyed streams) or process vents 

were conducted less than 5 years before 

November 12, 2024, and the testing 

meets the requirements in paragraph 

(d)(1)(i) of this section, each entity may 

use the previous testing to satisfy this 

requirement. 

(2) Emission factor testing. If 

controlled substance emissions are 

determined using the site-specific 

process-vent-specific emission factor, 

each entity must meet the requirements 

in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (vii) of 

this section. 

(i) Process vent testing. Conduct an 

emissions test that is based on 

representative performance of the 

process or operating scenario(s) of the 

process, as applicable. For process vents 

for which each entity performed an 

initial scoping speciation, include in the 

emission test any controlled substance 

that was identified in the initial scoping 

speciation. For process vents for which 

the entity did not perform an initial 

scoping speciation, include in the 

emission test any controlled substance 

that occurs in more than trace 

concentrations in the vent stream or, 

where a destruction unit is used, in the 

inlet to the destruction unit. The entity 

may include startup and shutdown 

events if the testing is sufficiently long 

or comprehensive to ensure that such 

events are not overrepresented in the 

emission factor. Malfunction events 

must not be included in the testing. If 

the entity does not detect a controlled 

substance that was identified in the 

scoping speciation or that occurs in 

more than trace concentrations in the 

vent stream or in the inlet to the 

destruction unit, assume that controlled 

substance was emitted from the process 

vent, or from the destruction unit, at a 

concentration of one third of the 

detection limit. 

(ii) Number of runs. For continuous 

processes, sample the process vent for a 

minimum of three runs of 1 hour each. 

If the relative standard deviation (RSD) 

of the emission factor calculated based 

on the first three runs is greater than or 

equal to 0.15 for the emission factor, 

continue to sample the process vent for 

an additional three runs of 1 hour each. 

(iii) Process activity measurements. 

Determine the mass rate of process feed, 

process production, or other process 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2ER10OC24.020</GPH>

DEEffective = 1- '\'Wf'\'O'\'V C (A • • A • • )) '\'Wf'\'O'\'VEF (A • • A • • )) L..l ~ 1 L..l E Fpv-up * ctwityu + ctwityc + L..l ~ 1 L..l PV-Uf * ctwityu + ctwityc 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82443 

activity as applicable during the test 

using flow meters, weigh scales, or other 

measurement devices or instruments 

with an accuracy and precision of ±1 

percent of full scale or better. These 

devices may be the same plant 

instruments or procedures that are used 

for accounting purposes (such as weigh 

hoppers, belt weigh feeders, 

combination of volume measurements 

and bulk density, etc.) if these devices 

or procedures meet the requirement. For 

monitoring ongoing process activity, use 

flow meters, weigh scales, or other 

measurement devices or instruments 

with an accuracy and precision of ±1 

percent of full scale or better. 

(iv) Sample each process. If process 

vents from separate processes are 

manifolded together to a common vent 

or to a common destruction unit, each 

entity must follow paragraph 

(d)(2)(iv)(A), (B), or (C) of this section. 

(A) Each entity may sample emissions 

from each process in the ducts upstream 

from the point where the emissions are 

combined. 

(B) Each entity may sample in the 

common duct or at the outlet of the 

destruction unit when only one process 

is operating. 

(C) Each entity may sample the 

combined emissions and use 

engineering calculations and 

assessments as specified in paragraph 

(c)(1)(iv) of this section to allocate the 

emissions to each manifolded process 

vent, provided the sum of the calculated 

controlled substance emissions across 

the individual process vents is within 

20 percent of the total controlled 

substance emissions measured during 

the manifolded testing. 

(v) Emission test results. The results 

of an emission test must include the 

analysis of samples, number of test runs, 

the results of the RSD analysis, the 

analytical method used, determination 

of emissions, the process activity, and 

raw data and must identify the process, 

the operating scenario, the process vents 

tested, and the controlled substances 

that were included in the test. The 

emissions test report must contain all 

information and data used to derive the 

process-vent-specific emission factor, as 

well as key process conditions during 

the test. Key process conditions include 

those that are normally monitored for 

process control purposes and may 

include but are not limited to yields, 

pressures, temperatures, etc. (e.g., of 

reactor vessels, distillation columns). 

(vi) Emissions testing frequency. Each 

entity must conduct emissions testing to 

develop the process-vent-specific 

emission factor under paragraph 

(d)(2)(vi)(A) or (B) of this section, 

whichever occurs first: 

(A) 5-year revision. Conduct an 

emissions test every 5 years. In the 

calculations under paragraph (c) of this 

section, apply the revised process-ventspecific emission factor to the process 

activity that occurs after the revision. 

(B) Operating scenario change that 

affects the emission factor. For planned 

operating scenario changes, each entity 

must estimate and compare the 

emission calculation factors for the 

changed operating scenario and for the 

original operating scenario whose 

process vent specific emission factor 

was measured. Use the calculation 

methods in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this 

section. If the emission calculation 

factor for the changed operating 

scenario is 15 percent or more different 

from the emission calculation factor for 

the previous operating scenario (this 

includes the cumulative change in the 

emission calculation factor since the 

most recent emissions test), the entity 

must conduct an emissions test to 

update the process-vent-specific 

emission factor, unless the difference 

between the operating scenarios is 

solely due to the application of a 

destruction unit to emissions under the 

changed operating scenario. Conduct 

the test before February 14 of the 

calendar year that immediately follows 

the change. In the calculations under 

paragraph (c) of this section, apply the 

revised process-vent-specific emission 

factor to the process activity that occurs 

after the operating scenario change. 

(vii) Previous measurements. If an 

emissions test was conducted less than 

5 years before November 12, 2024, and 

the emissions testing meets the 

requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) 

through (vii) of this section, the entity 

may use the previous emissions testing 

to develop process-vent-specific 

emission factors. For purposes of 

paragraph (d)(2)(vi)(A) of this section, 

the date of the previous emissions test 

rather than November 12, 2024, shall 

constitute the beginning of the 5-year remeasurement cycle. 

(3) Emission calculation factor 

monitoring. If controlled substance 

emissions were determined using the 

site-specific process-vent-specific 

emission calculation factor, each entity 

must meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this 

section. 

(i) Operating scenario. Perform the 

emissions calculation for the process 

vent based on representative 

performance of the operating scenario of 

the process. If more than one operating 

scenario applies to the process that 

contains the subject process vent, you 

must conduct a separate emissions 

calculation for operation under each 

operating scenario. For each continuous 

process vent that contains more than 

trace concentrations of any controlled 

substance and for each batch process 

vent that contains more than trace 

concentrations of any controlled 

substance, develop the process-ventspecific emission calculation factor for 

each operating scenario. For continuous 

process vents, determine the emissions 

based on the process activity for the 

representative performance of the 

operating scenario. For batch process 

vents, determine emissions based on the 

process activity for each typical batch 

operating scenario. 

(ii) Process activity measurements. 

Use flow meters, weigh scales, or other 

measurement devices or instruments 

with an accuracy and precision of ±1 

percent of full scale or better for 

monitoring ongoing process activity. 

(iii) Emission calculation results. The 

emission calculation must be 

documented by identifying the process, 

the operating scenario, and the process 

vent(s). The documentation must 

contain the information and data used 

to calculate the process-vent-specific 

emission calculation factor. 

(iv) Operating scenario change that 

affects the emission calculation factor. 

For planned operating scenario changes 

that are expected to change the processvent-specific emission calculation 

factor, each entity must conduct an 

emissions calculation to update the 

process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor. In the calculations 

under paragraph (c) of this section, 

apply the revised emission calculation 

factor to the process activity that occurs 

after the operating scenario change. 

(v) Previous calculations. If an 

emissions calculation was performed for 

the process vent and operating scenario 

less than 5 years before November 12, 

2024, and the emissions calculation 

meets the requirements in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(iv)(A) and (B) of this section and 

in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of 

this section, each entity may use the 

previous calculation to develop the sitespecific process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor. 

(4) Mass balance monitoring. If you 

determine controlled substance 

emissions from any process using the 

mass balance method under paragraph 

(c)(4) of this section, you must estimate 

the total mass of each controlled 

substance emitted from that process at 

least monthly. Only streams that contain 

greater than trace concentrations of 

halogen-containing reactants, products, 

or byproducts must be monitored under 

this paragraph (d)(4). 

(i) Mass measurements. Measure the 

following masses on a monthly or more 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82444 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

frequent basis using flowmeters, weigh 

scales, or a combination of volumetric 

and density measurements with 

accuracies and precisions that allow the 

facility to meet the error criteria in 

paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section: 

(A) Total mass of each halogencontaining product produced. Account 

for any used halogen-containing product 

added into the production process 

upstream of the output measurement as 

directed at §§ 98.413(b) and 98.414(b) of 

this chapter. 

(B) Total mass of each halogencontaining reactant fed into the process. 

(C) The mass removed from the 

process in each stream fed into the 

destruction device. 

(D) The mass removed from the 

process in each recaptured stream. 

(ii) Concentration measurements for 

use with paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this 

section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of 

this section to estimate the mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, measure the following 

concentrations at least once each 

calendar month during which the 

process is operating, on a schedule to 

ensure that the measurements are 

representative of the full range of 

process conditions (e.g., catalyst age). 

Measure more frequently if this is 

necessary to meet the error criteria in 

paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Use 

equipment and methods (e.g., gas 

chromatography) that comply with 

paragraph (d)(5) of this section and that 

have an accuracy and precision that 

allow the facility to meet the error 

criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this 

section. Only halogen-containing 

reactants, products, and byproducts that 

occur in a stream in greater than trace 

concentrations must be monitored 

under this paragraph (d)(4)(ii). 

(A) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of the halogen-containing product in 

each stream that is fed into the 

destruction device. 

(B) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of each halogen-containing byproduct in 

each stream that is fed into the 

destruction device. 

(C) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of each halogen-containing reactant in 

each stream that is fed into the 

destruction device. 

(D) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of each halogen-containing byproduct in 

each stream that is recaptured (cBkl). 

(iii) Concentration measurements for 

use with paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this 

section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) 

of this section to estimate the mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, measure the concentrations 

listed in paragraphs (d)(4)(iii)(A) and (B) 

of this section at least once each 

calendar month during which the 

process is operating, on a schedule to 

ensure that the measurements are 

representative of the full range of 

process conditions (e.g., catalyst age). 

Measure more frequently if this is 

necessary to meet the error criteria in 

paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Use 

equipment and methods (e.g., gas 

chromatography) that comply with 

paragraph (d)(5) of this section and that 

have an accuracy and precision that 

allow the facility to meet the error 

criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this 

section. Only halogen-containing 

reactants, products, and byproducts that 

occur in a stream in greater than trace 

concentrations must be monitored 

under this paragraph (d)(4)(iii). 

(A) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of total halogen in each stream that is 

fed into the destruction device. 

(B) The concentration (mass fraction) 

of total halogen in each stream that is 

recaptured. 

(iv) Emissions characterization: 

process vents emitting 0.1 metric tons or 

more. To characterize emissions from 

any process vent emitting 0.1 metric 

tons of controlled substances or more, 

comply with paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(A) 

through (E) of this section, as 

appropriate. Only halogen-containing 

reactants, products, and byproducts that 

occur in a stream in greater than trace 

concentrations must be monitored 

under this paragraph (d)(4)(iv). 

(A) Uncontrolled emissions. If 

emissions from the process vent are not 

routed through a destruction device, 

sample and analyze emissions at the 

process vent or stack or sample and 

analyze emitted streams before the 

process vent. If the process has more 

than one operating scenario, you must 

either perform the emission 

characterization for each operating 

scenario or perform the emission 

characterization for the operating 

scenario that is expected to have the 

largest emissions and adjust the 

emission characterization for other 

scenarios using engineering calculations 

and assessments as specified in 

paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. To 

perform the characterization, take three 

samples under conditions that are 

representative for the operating 

scenario. Measure the concentration of 

each halogen-containing compound in 

each sample. Use equipment and 

methods that comply with paragraph 

(d)(5) of this section. Calculate the 

average concentration of each halogencontaining compound across all three 

samples. 

(B) Controlled emissions using 

paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section. If 

you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this 

section to estimate the total mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, and if the emissions from the 

process vent are routed through a 

destruction device, characterize 

emissions as specified in paragraph 

(d)(4)(iv)(A) of this section before the 

destruction device. Apply the 

destruction efficiency demonstrated for 

each controlled substance in the 

destroyed stream to that controlled 

substance. Exclude from the 

characterization halogen-containing 

compounds that are not controlled 

substances. 

(C) Controlled emissions using 

paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section. If 

you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this 

section to estimate the mass of halogen 

in destroyed or recaptured streams, and 

if the emissions from the process vent 

are routed through a destruction device, 

characterize the process vent’s 

emissions monthly (or more frequently) 

using the monthly (or more frequent) 

measurements under paragraphs 

(d)(4)(i)(C) and (d)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) 

of this section. Apply the destruction 

efficiency demonstrated for each 

controlled substance in the destroyed 

stream to that controlled substance. 

Exclude from the characterization 

halogen-containing compounds that are 

not controlled substances. 

(D) Emissions characterization 

frequency. You must repeat emission 

characterizations performed under 

paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(A) and (B) of this 

section under paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(D)(1) 

or (2) of this section, whichever occurs 

first: 

(1) 5-year revision. Repeat the 

emission characterization every 5 years. 

In the calculations under paragraph (c) 

of this section, apply the revised 

emission characterization to the process 

activity that occurs after the revision. 

(2) Operating scenario change that 

affects the emission characterization. 

For planned operating scenario changes, 

you must estimate and compare the 

emission calculation factors for the 

changed operating scenario and for the 

original operating scenario whose 

process vent specific emission factor 

was measured. Use the engineering 

calculations and assessments specified 

in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. If 

the share of total halogen-containing 

compound emissions represented by 

any controlled substance changes under 

the changed operating scenario by 15 

percent or more of the total, relative to 

the previous operating scenario (this 

includes the cumulative change in the 

emission calculation factor since the last 

emissions test), you must repeat the 

emission characterization. Perform the 

emission characterization before 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82445 

February 14 of the year that 

immediately follows the change. In the 

calculations under paragraph (c) of this 

section, apply the revised emission 

characterization to the process activity 

that occurs after the operating scenario 

change. 

(E) Subsequent measurements. If a 

process vent with controlled substance 

emissions less than 0.1 metric tons, per 

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

later found to have controlled substance 

emissions of 0.1 metric tons or greater, 

you must perform an emission 

characterization under this paragraph 

(d)(4)(iv)(E) during the following year. 

(v) Emissions characterization: 

process vents emitting less than 0.1 

metric tons. To characterize emissions 

from any process vent emitting less than 

0.1 metric tons, comply with paragraphs 

(d)(4)(v)(A) and (B) of this section, as 

appropriate. Only halogen-containing 

reactants, products, and byproducts that 

occur in a stream in greater than trace 

concentrations must be monitored 

under this paragraph (d)(4)(v). 

(A) Uncontrolled emissions. If 

emissions from the process vent are not 

routed through a destruction device, 

emission measurements must consist of 

sampling and analysis of emissions at 

the process vent or stack, sampling and 

analysis of emitted streams before the 

process vent, previous test results, 

provided the tests are representative of 

current operating conditions of the 

process, or bench-scale or pilot-scale 

test data representative of the process 

operating conditions. 

(B) Controlled emissions using 

paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section. If 

you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this 

section to estimate the total mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, and if the emissions from the 

process vent are routed through a 

destruction device, characterize 

emissions as specified in paragraph 

(d)(4)(v)(A) of this section before the 

destruction device. Apply the 

destruction efficiency demonstrated for 

each controlled substance in the 

destroyed stream to that controlled 

substance. Exclude from the 

characterization halogen-containing 

compounds that are not controlled 

substances. 

(C) Controlled emissions using 

paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section. If 

you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this 

section to estimate the mass of halogen 

in destroyed or recaptured streams, and 

if the emissions from the process vent 

are routed through a destruction device, 

characterize the process vent’s 

emissions monthly (or more frequently) 

using the monthly (or more frequent) 

measurements under paragraphs 

(d)(4)(i)(C) and (d)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) 

of this section. Apply the destruction 

efficiency demonstrated for each 

controlled substance in the destroyed 

stream to that controlled substance. 

Exclude from the characterization 

halogen-containing compounds that are 

not controlled substances. 

(vi) Emissions characterization: 

emissions not accounted for by process 

vent estimates. Calculate the weighted 

average emission characterization across 

the process vents before any destruction 

devices. Apply the weighted average 

emission characterization for all the 

process vents to any halogen emissions 

that are not accounted for by process 

vent estimates. 

(vii) Impurities in reactants. If any 

halogen-containing impurity is fed into 

a process along with a reactant (or other 

input) in greater than trace 

concentrations, this impurity shall be 

monitored under this section and 

included in the calculations under 

paragraph (c) of this section in the same 

manner as reactants fed into the process, 

fed into the destruction device, 

recaptured, or emitted, except the 

concentration of the impurity in the 

mass fed into the process shall be 

measured, and the mass of the impurity 

fed into the process shall be calculated 

as the product of the concentration of 

the impurity and the mass fed into the 

process. The mass of the reactant fed 

into the process may be reduced to 

account for the mass of the impurity. 

(viii) Alternative to error calculation. 

As an alternative to calculating the 

relative and absolute errors associated 

with the estimate of emissions under 

this paragraph (d)(4), you may comply 

with the precision, accuracy, and 

measurement and calculation frequency 

requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(viii)(A) 

through (C) of this section. 

(A) Mass measurements. Measure the 

masses specified in paragraph (d)(4)(i) 

of this section using flowmeters, weigh 

scales, or a combination of volumetric 

and density measurements with 

accuracies and precisions of ±0.2 

percent of full scale or better. 

(B) Concentration measurements. 

Measure the concentrations specified in 

paragraph (d)(4)(ii) or (iii) of this 

section, as applicable, using analytical 

methods with accuracies and precisions 

of ±10 percent or better. 

(C) Measurement and calculation 

frequency. Perform the mass 

measurements specified in paragraph 

(d)(4)(i) of this section and the 

concentration measurements specified 

in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) or (iii) of this 

section, as applicable, at least weekly, 

and calculate emissions at least weekly. 

(5) Emission and stream testing, 

including analytical methods. Select 

and document testing and analytical 

methods as follows: 

(i) Sampling and mass measurement 

for emission testing. For emission 

testing in process vents or at the stack, 

use methods for sampling, measuring 

volumetric flow rates, non-controlled 

substance gas analysis, and measuring 

stack gas moisture that have been 

validated using a scientifically sound 

validation protocol. 

(A) Sample and velocity traverses. 

Acceptable methods include but are not 

limited to EPA Method 1 or 1A in 

appendix A–1 to 40 CFR part 60. 

(B) Velocity and volumetric flow rates. 

Acceptable methods include but are not 

limited to EPA Method 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 

2D, 2F, or 2G in appendix A–1 to 40 

CFR part 60. Alternatives that may be 

used for determining flow rates include 

Other Test Method 24 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27) and ALT–012 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27). 

(C) Non-controlled substance gas 

analysis. Acceptable methods include 

but are not limited to EPA Method 3, 

3A, or 3B in appendix A–1 to 40 CFR 

part 60. 

(D) Stack gas moisture. Acceptable 

methods include but are not limited to 

EPA Method 4 in appendix A–1 to 40 

CFR part 60. 

(ii) Analytical methods. Use a qualityassured analytical measurement 

technology capable of detecting the 

analyte of interest at the concentration 

of interest and use a sampling and 

analytical procedure validated with the 

analyte of interest at the concentration 

of interest. Where calibration standards 

for the analyte are not available, a 

chemically similar surrogate may be 

used. Acceptable analytical 

measurement technologies include but 

are not limited to gas chromatography 

(GC) with an appropriate detector, 

infrared (IR), Fourier transform infrared 

(FTIR), and nuclear magnetic resonance 

(NMR). Acceptable methods for 

determining controlled substances 

include EPA Method 18 in appendix A– 

1 to 40 CFR part 60, EPA Method 320 

in appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, EPA 

430–R–10–003 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27), ASTM D6348–03 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27), 

or other analytical methods validated 

using EPA Method 301 at appendix A to 

40 CFR part 63. The validation protocol 

may include analytical technology 

manufacturer specifications or 

recommendations. 

(iii) Documentation in the monitoring 

plan. Describe the sampling, 

measurement, and analytical method(s) 

used under paragraphs (d)(5)(i) and (ii) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82446 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

of this section in the monitoring plan. 

Identify the methods used to obtain the 

samples and measurements listed under 

paragraphs (d)(5)(i)(A) through (D) of 

this section. At a minimum, include in 

the description of the analytical method 

a description of the analytical 

measurement equipment and 

procedures, quantitative estimates of the 

method’s accuracy and precision for the 

analytes of interest at the concentrations 

of interest, as well as a description of 

how these accuracies and precisions 

were estimated, including the validation 

protocol used. 

(6) Emission monitoring for pieces of 

equipment. If conducting a site-specific 

leak detection method or monitoring 

approach for pieces of equipment, each 

entity must follow paragraph (d)(6)(i) or 

(ii) of this section and follow paragraph 

(d)(6)(iii) of this section. 

(i) Site-specific leak monitoring 

approach. Each entity may develop a 

site-specific leak monitoring approach. 

The entity must validate the leak 

monitoring method and describe the 

method and the validation in the 

monitoring plan. To validate the sitespecific method, the entity may, for 

example, release a known rate of the 

controlled substances or surrogates of 

interest, or may compare the results of 

the site-specific method to those of a 

method that has been validated for the 

controlled substances or surrogates of 

interest. In the description of the leak 

detection method and its validation, 

include a detailed description of the 

method, including the procedures and 

equipment used and any sampling 

strategies. Also include the rationale 

behind the method, including why the 

method is expected to result in an 

unbiased estimate of emissions from 

equipment leaks. If the method is based 

on methods that are used to detect or 

quantify leaks or other emissions in 

other regulations, standards, or 

guidelines, identify and describe the 

regulations, standards, or guidelines and 

why their methods are applicable to 

emissions of controlled substances or 

surrogates from leaks. Account for 

possible sources of error in the method, 

e.g., instrument detection limits, 

measurement biases, and sampling 

biases. Describe validation efforts, 

including but not limited to any 

comparisons against standard leaks or 

concentrations, any comparisons against 

other methods, and their results. If using 

the Screening Ranges Approach, the 

EPA Correlation Approach, or the UnitSpecific Correlation Approach with a 

monitoring instrument that does not 

meet all of the specifications in EPA 

Method 21 in appendix A–7 to 40 CFR 

part 60, then explain how and why the 

monitoring instrument, as used at the 

facility, would nevertheless be expected 

to accurately detect and quantify 

emissions of controlled substances or 

surrogates from process equipment, and 

describe how accuracy was verified. For 

all methods, provide a quantitative 

estimate of the accuracy and precision 

of the method. 

(ii) EPA Method 21 monitoring. If it is 

determined that EPA Method 21 in 

appendix A–7 to 40 CFR part 60 is 

appropriate for monitoring a controlled 

substance, conduct the screening value 

concentration measurements using EPA 

Method 21 to determine the screening 

range data or the actual screening value 

data for the Screening Ranges Approach, 

EPA Correlation Approach, or the UnitSpecific Correlation Approach. For the 

one-time testing to develop the UnitSpecific Correlation equations in EPA– 

453/R–95–017 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27), conduct the 

screening value concentration 

measurements using EPA Method 21 

and the bagging procedures to measure 

mass emissions. Concentration 

measurements of bagged samples must 

be conducted using gas chromatography 

following analytical procedures in EPA 

Method 18 in appendix A–1 to 40 CFR 

part 60 or other method according to 

this paragraph (d)(6). Use methane or 

other appropriate compound as the 

calibration gas. 

(iii) Frequency of measurement and 

sampling. If estimating emissions based 

on monitoring of equipment, each entity 

must conduct monitoring at least 

annually. Sample at least one-third of 

equipment annually (except for 

equipment that is unsafe-to-monitor, 

difficult-to-monitor, insulated, or in 

heavy liquid service, pumps with dual 

mechanical seals, agitators with dual 

mechanical seals, pumps with no 

external shaft, agitators with no external 

shaft, pressure relief devices in gas and 

vapor service with an upstream rupture 

disk, sampling connection systems with 

closed-loop or closed purge systems, 

and pieces of equipment whose leaks 

are routed through a closed vent system 

to a destruction unit), changing the 

sample each year such that at the end 

of three years, all equipment in the 

process (that is not subject to the abovelisted exceptions) has been monitored. If 

estimating emissions based on a sample 

of the equipment in the process, ensure 

that the sample is representative of the 

equipment in the process. If there are 

multiple processes that have similar 

types of equipment in similar service, 

and that perform activities on similar 

controlled substances (in terms of 

chemical composition, molecular 

weight, and vapor pressure) at similar 

pressures and concentrations, then the 

entity may annually sample all of the 

equipment in one third of these 

processes rather than one third of the 

equipment in each process. 

(7) Destruction unit performance 

testing. If venting or otherwise feeding 

controlled substances into a destruction 

unit and apply the destruction 

efficiency of the device to one or more 

controlled substances in paragraph (c) of 

this section, each entity must conduct 

emissions testing to determine the 

destruction efficiency for each 

controlled substance to which the 

destruction efficiency was applied. The 

entity must either determine the 

destruction efficiency for the mostdifficult-to-destroy controlled substance 

fed into the device (or a surrogate that 

is still more difficult to destroy) and 

apply that destruction efficiency to all 

the controlled substances fed into the 

device or alternatively determine 

different destruction efficiencies for 

different groups of controlled 

substances using the most-difficult-todestroy controlled substance of each 

group (or a surrogate that is still more 

difficult to destroy). 

(i) Destruction efficiency testing. Each 

entity must sample the inlet and outlet 

of the destruction unit for a minimum 

of three runs of 1 hour each to 

determine the destruction efficiency. 

The entity must conduct the emissions 

testing using the methods in paragraph 

(d)(5) of this section. To determine the 

destruction efficiency, emission testing 

must be conducted when operating at 

high loads reasonably expected to occur 

(i.e., representative of high total 

controlled substance load that will be 

sent to the device) and when destroying 

the most-difficult-to-destroy controlled 

substance (or a surrogate that is still 

more difficult to destroy) that is fed into 

the device from the processes subject to 

this section or that belongs to the group 

of controlled substances for which 

destruction efficiency is to be 

established. If the outlet concentration 

of a controlled substance that is fed into 

the device is below the detection limit 

of the method, the entity may use an 

outlet concentration of one-third the 

detection limit to estimate the 

destruction efficiency. 

(A) For all other controlled substances 

that are vented to the destruction unit 

in any stream in more than trace 

concentrations, each entity must test 

and determine the destruction efficiency 

achieved for the most-difficult-todestroy controlled substance or 

surrogate vented to the destruction unit. 

Examples of acceptable surrogates 

include the Class 1 compounds (ranked 

1 through 34) in Appendix D, Table D– 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82447 

1 of ‘‘Guidance on Setting Permit 

Conditions and Reporting Trial Burn 

Results; Volume II of the Hazardous 

Waste Incineration Guidance Series,’’ 

January 1989, EPA Publication EPA 

625/6–89/019. A copy of this 

publication can be obtained by 

contacting the Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 272– 

0167, https://www.epa.gov. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(ii) Destruction efficiency testing 

frequency. Each entity must conduct 

emissions testing to determine the 

destruction efficiency as provided in 

paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) or (B) of this 

section, whichever occurs first: 

(A) Conduct an emissions test every 5 

years. In the calculations under 

paragraph (c) of this section, apply the 

updated destruction efficiency to the 

destruction that occurs after the test. 

(B) Destruction unit changes that 

affect the destruction efficiency. If 

making a change to the destruction unit 

that would be expected to affect the 

destruction efficiency, each entity must 

conduct an emissions test to update the 

destruction efficiency. Conduct the test 

before February 14 of the year that 

immediately follows the change. In the 

calculations under paragraph (c) of this 

section, apply the updated destruction 

efficiency to the destruction that occurs 

after the change to the device. 

(iii) Previous testing. If an emissions 

test was conducted within the 5 years 

prior to November 12, 2024, and the 

emissions testing meets the 

requirements in paragraph (d)(7)(i) of 

this section, each entity may use the 

destruction efficiency determined 

during this previous emissions testing. 

For purposes of paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) 

of this section, the date of the previous 

emissions test rather than November 12, 

2024, shall constitute the beginning of 

the 5-year re-measurement cycle. 

(iv) Hazardous waste combustor 

testing. If a destruction unit used to 

destroy a controlled substance is subject 

to testing under subpart EEE of part 63 

of this chapter or any portion of parts 

260 through 270 of this chapter, each 

entity may apply the destruction 

efficiency specifically determined for 

controlled substances under that test if 

the testing meets the criteria in 

paragraph (d)(7)(i)(A) of this section. If 

the testing of the destruction efficiency 

under subpart EEE of part 63 was 

conducted more than 5 years ago, the 

entity may use the most recent 

destruction efficiency test provided that 

the design, operation, and maintenance 

of the destruction unit has not changed 

since the last destruction efficiency test 

in a manner that could affect the ability 

to achieve the destruction efficiency, 

and the hazardous waste is fed into the 

normal flame zone. 

(8) Mass of previously produced 

controlled substances fed into a 

destruction unit. Each entity must 

measure the mass of each controlled 

substance that is fed into the destruction 

unit in more than trace concentrations. 

Such controlled substances include but 

are not limited to quantities that are 

shipped to the facility by another 

facility for destruction and quantities 

that are returned to the facility for 

reclamation but are found to be 

irretrievably contaminated and are 

therefore destroyed. The entity must use 

flowmeters, weigh scales, or a 

combination of volumetric and density 

measurements with an accuracy and 

precision of ±1 percent of full scale or 

better. If the measured mass includes 

more than trace concentrations of 

materials other than the controlled 

substance being destroyed, the entity 

must measure the concentration of the 

controlled substance being destroyed. 

The entity must multiply this 

concentration (mass fraction) by the 

mass measurement to obtain the mass of 

the controlled substance fed into the 

destruction unit. 

(9) Emissions due to malfunctions of 

destruction unit. In their estimates of 

the mass of controlled substances 

destroyed, facilities that destroy 

controlled substances must account for 

any temporary reductions in the 

destruction efficiency that result from 

any malfunctions of the destruction 

unit, including periods of operation 

outside of the operating conditions 

defined in operating permit 

requirements and/or outside of the 

destruction unit’s manufacturer’s 

specifications. 

(10) Emissions due to process startup, 

shutdown, or malfunctions. For each 

process listed in paragraph (b) of this 

section, each entity must account for 

emissions of controlled substance that 

occur at each facility as a result of 

startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions, 

either recording controlled substance 

emissions during these events, or 

documenting that these events do not 

result in significant controlled 

substance emissions. Facilities may use 

the calculation methods in paragraph 

(c)(1)(i) of this section to estimate 

emissions during startups, shutdowns, 

and malfunctions. 

(11) Development of initial 

parameters. Initial scoping speciations, 

emissions testing, emission factor 

development, emission calculation 

factor development, emission 

characterization development, and 

destruction efficiency determinations 

must be completed by February 7, 2025, 

for processes and operating scenarios 

that operate between October 10, 2024, 

and November 12, 2024. For other 

processes and operating scenarios, 

initial scoping specifications, emissions 

testing, emission factor development, 

emission calculation factor 

development, emission characterization 

development, and destruction efficiency 

determinations must be complete by 

February 14 of the year following the 

year in which the process or operating 

scenario commences or recommences. 

(12) Calibration for volumetric and 

density measurements. Calibrate all 

flow meters, weigh scales, and 

combinations of volumetric and density 

measures using monitoring instruments 

traceable to the International System of 

Units (SI) through the National Institute 

of Standards and Technology (NIST) or 

other recognized national measurement 

institute. Recalibrate all flow meters, 

weigh scales, and combinations of 

volumetric and density measures at the 

minimum frequency specified by the 

manufacturer. Use any of the following 

applicable flow meter test methods or 

the calibration procedures specified by 

the flow meter, weigh-scale, or other 

volumetric or density measure 

manufacturer. 

(i) ASME MFC–3M–2004 

Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 

Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27). 

(ii) ASME MFC–4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 

2016) Measurement of Gas Flow by 

Turbine Meters (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27). 

(iii) ASME–MFC–5M–1985, 

(Reaffirmed1994) Measurement of 

Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using 

Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27). 

(iv) ASME MFC–6M–1998 

Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 

Using Vortex Flowmeters (incorporated 

by reference, see § 82.27). 

(v) ASME MFC–7M–1987 (Reaffirmed 

1992) Measurement of Gas Flow by 

Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27). 

(vi) ASME MFC–9M–1988 

(Reaffirmed 2001) Measurement of 

Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits by 

Weighing Method (incorporated by 

reference, see § 82.27). 

(vii) ASME MFC–11M–2006 

Measurement of Fluid Flow by Means of 

Coriolis Mass Flowmeters (incorporated 

by reference, see § 82.27). 

(viii) ASME MFC–14M–2003 

Measurement of Fluid Flow Using Small 

Bore Precision Orifice Meters 

(incorporated by reference, see § 82.27). 

(13) Calibration for concentration 

determinations. All analytical 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82448 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

equipment used to determine the 

concentration of controlled substances, 

including but not limited to gas 

chromatographs and associated 

detectors, IR, FTIR, and NMR devices, 

must be calibrated at a frequency 

needed to support the type of analysis 

specified in the monitoring plan as 

required under paragraph (d)(5)(iii) of 

this section. Quality assurance samples 

at the concentrations of concern must be 

used for the calibration. Such quality 

assurance samples must consist of or be 

prepared from certified standards of the 

analytes of concern where available; if 

not available, calibration must be 

performed by a method specified in the 

monitoring plan. 

(e) Data reporting requirements—(1) 

All facilities. In addition to the 

information required by § 82.13, for 

class I controlled substances, and 

§ 82.24, for class II controlled 

substances, each entity must report the 

information in paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) 

through (iv) of this section according to 

the schedule in paragraph (e)(1)(i) of 

this section. 

(i) Frequency of reporting under this 

paragraph (e)(1). The information in 

paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) through (v) of this 

section must be reported annually, as 

applicable. 

(ii) Process identification. For each 

process listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section, each entity must provide: 

(A) A description and identification of 

the process listed in paragraph (b)(2) of 

this section. 

(B) A description and number, letter, 

or other identifier for each process vent 

associated with the process. This 

identifier must be a consistent name 

reported from year to year. 

(C) The type of method(s) (i.e., 

process-vent-specific emission factor, 

process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor, or mass balance) and 

each applicable analytical approach 

(e.g., compliance options under 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (d)(4) of this 

section) used to determine the mass 

emissions from each process vent 

associated with the process. 

(D) The type of method(s) (e.g., sitespecific leak monitoring approach or 

EPA Method 21 monitoring) and each 

applicable analytical approach (e.g., 

compliance options under paragraphs 

(c)(2)(i) and (d)(4) of this section) used 

to determine the mass emissions from 

equipment leaks associated with the 

process. 

(iii) Process emissions. For each 

controlled substance, each entity must 

report the total mass in kilograms of the 

controlled substance emitted from the 

processes listed in paragraph (b)(2) of 

this section. 

(iv) Effective destruction efficiency. 

For each process and controlled 

substance, report the effective 

destruction efficiency, DEeffective,

calculated for that process using 

equation 31 to paragraph (c)(6) of this 

section. 

(v) Monitoring plan. The monitoring 

plan, as specified in paragraph (f)(6) of 

this section, including any revisions 

since the prior year’s submission as 

applicable. 

(2) Reporting for emission factor and 

emission calculation factor approach. 

For processes whose emissions are 

determined using the emission factor 

approach under paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of 

this section or the emission calculation 

factor under paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this 

section, each entity must report the 

following for each process. 

(i) The identity and quantity of the 

process activity used to estimate 

emissions (e.g., tons of product 

produced or tons of reactant consumed) 

for each process vent associated with 

the process. 

(ii) The site-specific, process-ventspecific emission factor(s) or emission 

calculation factor for each process vent 

associated with the process. 

(iii) For each controlled substance, the 

mass emitted from each process vent 

associated with the process, in 

kilograms. 

(iv) For each controlled substance, the 

total mass emitted from equipment 

leaks, in kilograms. 

(3) Reporting for mass balance 

approach. For processes whose 

emissions are determined using the 

mass-balance approach under paragraph 

(c)(4) of this section, you must report 

the information listed in paragraphs 

(e)(3)(i) through (xiii) of this section for 

each process on an annual basis. 

Identify and separately report controlled 

substance emissions from 

transformation processes where the 

controlled substance reactants are 

produced at another facility. If you use 

an element other than a halogen in the 

mass-balance equation pursuant to 

paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, 

substitute that element for the halogen 

in the reporting requirements of this 

paragraph (e)(3). 

(i) If you calculate the relative and 

absolute errors under paragraph (c)(4)(i) 

of this section, the absolute and relative 

errors calculated under paragraph 

(c)(4)(i) of this section, as well as the 

data (including quantities and their 

accuracies and precisions) used in these 

calculations. 

(ii) The balanced chemical equation 

that describes the reaction used to 

manufacture the controlled substance 

product and each controlled substance 

transformation product. 

(iii) The mass and chemical formula 

of each controlled substance reactant 

emitted from the process in metric tons. 

(iv) The mass and chemical formula of 

the controlled substance product 

emitted from the process in metric tons. 

(v) The mass and chemical formula of 

each controlled substance byproduct 

emitted from the process in metric tons. 

(vi) The mass and chemical formula of 

each controlled substance reactant that 

is fed into the process (metric tons). 

(vii) The mass and chemical formula 

of each halogen-containing product 

produced by the process (metric tons). 

(viii) If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of 

this section to estimate the total mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, report the following. 

(A) The mass and chemical formula of 

each halogen-containing product that is 

removed from the process and fed into 

the destruction device (metric tons). 

(B) The mass and chemical formula of 

each halogen-containing byproduct that 

is removed from the process and fed 

into the destruction device (metric 

tons). 

(C) The mass and chemical formula of 

each halogen-containing reactant that is 

removed from the process and fed into 

the destruction device (metric tons). 

(D) The mass and chemical formula of 

each halogen-containing byproduct that 

is removed from the process and 

recaptured (metric tons). 

(E) The demonstrated destruction 

efficiency of the destruction device for 

each controlled substance fed into the 

device from the process in greater than 

trace concentrations (fraction). 

(ix) If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of 

this section to estimate the total mass of 

halogen in destroyed or recaptured 

streams, report the following. 

(A) The mass of halogen in each 

stream that is fed into the destruction 

device (metric tons). 

(B) The mass of halogen that is 

recaptured (metric tons). 

(C) The weighted average destruction 

efficiency of the destruction device 

calculated for each stream under 

paragraph (c)(4)(xvi) of this section. 

(x) The fraction of the mass emitted 

that consists of each halogen-containing 

reactant. 

(xi) The fraction of the mass emitted 

that consists of the halogen-containing 

product. 

(xii) The fraction of the mass emitted 

that consists of each halogen-containing 

byproduct. 

(xiii) The method used to estimate the 

total mass of halogen in destroyed or 

recaptured streams (specify 

paragraph (c)(4)(iv) or (xv) of this 

section). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82449 

(4) Reporting of destruction unit 

excess emission data. Each facility that 

destroys a controlled substance must 

report the excess emissions that result 

from malfunctions of the destruction 

unit, and these excess emissions must 

be reflected in the controlled substance 

estimates in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section. Such excess emissions would 

occur if the destruction efficiency was 

reduced due to the malfunction. 

(5) Reporting of destruction unit 

testing. By February 7, 2025, or by 

February 14 of the year immediately 

following the year in which it begins 

controlled substance destruction, each 

facility that destroys controlled 

substances must submit a report 

containing the information in 

paragraphs (e)(5)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. This report is one-time unless a 

change is made to the destruction unit 

that would be expected to affect its 

destruction efficiencies. 

(i) Chemical identity of the controlled 

substance(s) used in the performance 

test conducted to determine destruction 

efficiency, including surrogates, and 

information on why the surrogate is 

sufficient to demonstrate the destruction 

efficiency for each controlled substance, 

consistent with requirements in 

paragraph (d)(7)(i) of this section, 

vented to the destruction unit. 

(ii) Date of the most recent destruction 

unit test. 

(iii) Name of all applicable Federal or 

State regulations that may apply to the 

destruction process. 

(6) Reporting for destruction. Each 

facility that destroys controlled 

substances must report, separately from 

the controlled substance emissions 

reported under paragraph (e)(2) of this 

section, the following for each 

previously produced controlled 

substance destroyed: 

(i) The mass of the controlled 

substance emitted from the destruction 

unit (kilograms). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(7) Reporting of controlled substance 

products of incomplete combustion 

(PICs) of controlled substances. Each 

facility that destroys controlled 

substances must submit a one-time 

report by February 7, 2025, or by 

February 14 of the year immediately 

following the year in which it begins 

controlled substance destruction, that 

describes any measurements, research, 

or analysis that it has performed or 

obtained that relate to the formation of 

products of incomplete combustion that 

are controlled substances during the 

destruction of controlled substances. 

The report must include the methods 

and results of any measurement or 

modeling studies, including the 

products of incomplete combustion for 

which the exhaust stream was analyzed, 

as well as copies of relevant scientific 

papers, if available, or citations of the 

papers, if they are not. No new testing 

is required to fulfill the requirement of 

this paragraph (e)(7). 

(f) Records that must be retained. 

Each entity must retain the dated 

records specified in paragraphs (f)(1) 

through (6) of this section, as applicable, 

and be able to provide such information 

to EPA within 5 business days of the 

date the records are requested. 

(1) Process information records. (i) 

Identify all processes subject to this 

section. Include the unit identification 

as appropriate, the process 

identification reported for the process 

under paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(A) through 

(B) of this section, and the product with 

which the process is associated. 

(ii) Monthly and annual records, as 

applicable, of all analyses and 

calculations conducted as required 

under paragraph (c) of this section, 

including the data monitored under 

paragraph (d) of this section, and all 

information reported as required under 

paragraph (e) of this section. 

(2) Scoping speciation. Retain records 

documenting the information collected 

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

(3) Emission factor and emission 

calculation factor method. Retain the 

following records for each process for 

which the emission factor or emission 

calculation factor method was used to 

estimate emissions. 

(i) Identify all continuous process 

vents with emissions of controlled 

substances that are included in the top 

25 percent of continuous process vents, 

and all continuous process vents in the 

remaining group (i.e., 75 percent of 

continuous process vents with lower 

emissions of controlled substances). 

Include the data and calculation used to 

develop the preliminary estimate of 

emissions for each process vent. 

(ii) Identify all batch process vents. 

(iii) For each vent, identify the 

method used to develop the factor (i.e., 

emission factor by emissions test or 

emission calculation factor). 

(iv) The emissions test data and 

reports (see paragraph (d)(2)(v) of this 

section) and the calculations used to 

determine the process-vent-specific 

emission factor, including the actual 

process-vent-specific emission factor, 

the average hourly emission rate of each 

controlled substance from the process 

vent during the test and the process feed 

rate, process production rate, or other 

process activity rate during the test. 

(v) The process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor and the calculations 

used to determine the process-ventspecific emission calculation factor. 

(vi) The annual process production 

quantity or other process activity 

information in the appropriate units, 

along with the dates and time period 

during which the process was operating 

and dates and time periods the process 

vents are vented to the destruction unit. 

As an alternative to date and time 

periods when process vents are vented 

to the destruction unit, a facility may 

track dates and time periods that 

process vents by-pass the destruction 

unit. 

(vii) Calculations used to determine 

annual emissions of each controlled 

substance for each process and the total 

controlled substance emissions for all 

processes, i.e., total for facility. 

(4) Mass-balance method. Retain the 

following records for each process for 

which the mass-balance method was 

used to estimate emissions. If you use 

an element other than a halogen in the 

mass-balance equation pursuant to 

paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, 

substitute that element for the halogen 

in the recordkeeping requirements of 

this paragraph (f)(4). 

(i) The data and calculations used to 

estimate the absolute and relative errors 

associated with use of the mass-balance 

approach. 

(ii) The data and calculations used to 

estimate the mass of halogen emitted 

from the process. 

(iii) The data and calculations used to 

determine the fractions of the mass 

emitted consisting of each reactant 

(FERd), product (FEP), and byproduct 

(FEBk), including the preliminary 

calculations in paragraph (c)(4)(viii)(A) 

of this section. 

(5) Destruction efficiency testing. A 

facility that destroys controlled 

substances and reflects this destruction 

in paragraph (c) of this section must 

retain the emissions performance testing 

reports (including revised reports) for 

each destruction unit. The emissions 

performance testing report must contain 

all information and data used to derive 

the destruction efficiency for each 

controlled substance whose destruction 

the facility reflects in paragraph (c) of 

this section, as well as the key process 

and device conditions during the test. 

This information includes the following: 

(i) Destruction efficiency (DE) 

determined for each controlled 

substance whose destruction the facility 

reflects in paragraph (c) of this section, 

in accordance with paragraph 

(d)(7)(i)(A) of this section. 

(ii) Chemical identity of the 

controlled substance(s) used in the 

performance test conducted to 

determine destruction efficiency, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
82450 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

including surrogates, and information 

on why the surrogate is sufficient to 

demonstrate destruction efficiency for 

each controlled substance, consistent 

with requirements in paragraph 

(d)(7)(i)(A) of this section, vented to the 

destruction unit. 

(iii) Mass flow rate of the stream 

containing the controlled substance or 

surrogate into the device during the test. 

(iv) Concentration (mass fraction) of 

each controlled substance or surrogate 

in the stream flowing into the device 

during the test. 

(v) Concentration (mass fraction) of 

each controlled substance or surrogate 

at the outlet of the destruction unit 

during the test. 

(vi) Mass flow rate at the outlet of the 

destruction unit during the test. 

(vii) Test methods and analytical 

methods used to determine the mass 

flow rates and controlled substance (or 

surrogate) concentrations of the streams 

flowing into and out of the destruction 

unit during the test. 

(viii) Destruction unit conditions that 

are normally monitored for device 

control, such as temperature, total mass 

flow rates into the device, and CO or O2

levels. 

(ix) Name of all applicable Federal or 

State regulations that may apply to the 

destruction process. 

(6) Equipment leak records. If the 

equipment is subject to paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section, each entity must 

maintain information on the number of 

each type of equipment, the service of 

each piece of equipment (gas, light 

liquid, heavy liquid); the concentration 

of each controlled substance in the 

stream; each piece of equipment 

excluded from monitoring requirement; 

the time period each piece of equipment 

was in service, and the emission 

calculations for each controlled 

substance for all processes. Depending 

on the equipment leak monitoring 

approach followed, each entity must 

maintain information for equipment on 

the associated screening data 

concentrations for greater than or equal 

to 10,000 ppmv and associated 

screening data concentrations for less 

than 10,000 ppmv; associated actual 

screening data concentrations; and 

associated screening data and leak rate 

data (i.e., bagging) used to develop a 

unit-specific correlation. If a sitespecific leak detection approach was 

developed and followed, provide the 

records for monitoring events and the 

emissions estimation calculations, as 

appropriate, consistent with the 

approach for equipment leak emission 

estimation in the monitoring plan. 

(7) All facilities. Dated records 

documenting the initial and periodic 

calibration of all analytical equipment 

used to determine the concentration of 

controlled substances, including but not 

limited to gas chromatographs, gas 

chromatography-mass spectrometry, gas 

chromatograph-electron capture 

detector, FTIR, and NMR devices, and 

all mass measurement equipment such 

as weigh scales, flowmeters, and 

volumetric and density measures used 

to measure the quantities reported 

under this section, including the 

industry standards or manufacturer 

directions used for calibration pursuant 

to paragraphs (d)(5), (6), (12), and (13) 

of this section. 

(8) Controlled substance monitoring 

plan. A Controlled Substance 

Monitoring Plan must be completed by 

February 7, 2025, or within 120 days of 

the date that an entity first meets the 

criteria in paragraph (a) of this section. 

(i) At a minimum, the monitoring 

plan shall include the elements listed in 

this paragraph (f)(8)(i) of this section. 

(A) Identification of positions of 

responsibility (i.e., job titles) for 

collection of the emission data. 

(B) Explanation of the processes and 

methods used to collect the necessary 

data for calculations under this section. 

(C) Description of the procedures and 

methods that are used for quality 

assurance, maintenance, and repair of 

all continuous monitoring systems, flow 

meters, and other instrumentation used 

to provide data for the controlled 

substances reported under this part. 

(ii) The monitoring plan may rely on 

references to existing corporate 

documents (e.g., standard operating 

procedures, quality assurance programs 

under appendix F to 40 CFR part 60 or 

appendix B to 40 CFR part 75, and other 

documents) provided that the elements 

required by paragraph (f)(8)(i) of this 

section are easily recognizable. 

(iii) The owner or operator shall 

revise the monitoring as needed to 

reflect changes in production processes, 

monitoring instrumentation, and quality 

assurance procedures; or to improve 

procedures for the maintenance and 

repair of monitoring systems to reduce 

the frequency of monitoring equipment 

downtime. 

■ 7. Add § 82.26 to read as follows: 

§ 82.26 Treatment of data submitted under 

this subpart. 

(a) Sections 2.201 through 2.215 and 

2.301 of this chapter do not apply to 

data submitted under this subpart that 

EPA has determined through 

rulemaking to be either of the following: 

(1) Emission data, as defined in 

§ 2.301(a)(2) of this chapter, determined 

in accordance with section 114(c) and 

307(d) of the Clean Air Act; or 

(2) Data not otherwise entitled to 

confidential treatment. 

(b) Except as otherwise provided in 

paragraph (d) of this section and 

§§ 2.201 through 2.208 and 2.301(c) and 

(d) of this chapter do not apply to data 

submitted under this part that EPA has 

determined through rulemaking to be 

entitled to confidential treatment. EPA 

shall treat that information as 

confidential in accordance with the 

provisions of § 2.211 of this chapter, 

subject to paragraph (d) of this section 

and § 2.209 of this chapter. 

(c) Upon receiving a request under 5 

U.S.C. 552 for data submitted under this 

part that EPA has determined through 

rulemaking to be entitled to confidential 

treatment, the relevant Agency official 

shall furnish the requestor a notice that 

the information has been determined to 

be entitled to confidential treatment and 

that the request is therefore denied. The 

notice shall include or cite to the 

appropriate EPA determination. 

(d) A determination made through 

rulemaking that information submitted 

under this part is entitled to 

confidential treatment shall continue in 

effect unless, subsequent to the 

confidentiality determination through 

rulemaking, EPA takes one of the 

following actions: 

(1) EPA determines through a 

subsequent rulemaking that the 

information is emission data or data not 

otherwise entitled to confidential 

treatment; or 

(2) The Office of General Counsel 

issues a final determination, based on 

the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), 

stating that the information is no longer 

entitled to confidential treatment 

because of change in the applicable law 

or newly discovered or changed facts. 

Prior to making such final 

determination, EPA shall afford the 

business an opportunity to submit 

comments on pertinent issues in the 

manner described by §§ 2.204(e) and 

2.205(b) of this chapter. If, after 

consideration of any timely comments 

submitted by the business, the Office of 

General Counsel makes a revised final 

determination that the information is 

not entitled to confidential treatment, 

the relevant agency official will notify 

the business in accordance with the 

procedures described in § 2.205(f)(2) of 

this chapter. 

■ 8. Add § 82.27 to read as follows: 

§ 82.27 Incorporation by reference. 

(a)(1) Certain material is incorporated 

by reference into this subpart with the 

approval of the Director of the Federal 

Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 

CFR part 51. All approved incorporation 

by reference (IBR) material is available 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 82451 

for inspection at EPA and at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). Contact EPA 

at: U.S. EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket; 

EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460, 202–566–1742. For information 

on the availability of this material at 

NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federalregister/cfr/ibr-locations or email 

fr.inspection@nara.gov. 

(2) The IBR material may be obtained 

from the sources in the following 

paragraphs of this section or from one 

or more private resellers listed in this 

paragraph (a)(2). For material that is no 

longer commercially available, contact: 

U.S. EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket; 

EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460; a-and-rdocket@epa.gov. 

(i) Accuris Standards Store, 321 

Inverness Drive, South Englewood, CO 

80112; phone: (800) 332–6077; website: 

https://accuristech.com. 

(ii) American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, 

Fourth Floor, New York, NY 10036– 

7417; phone: (212) 642–4980; email: 

info@ansi.org; website: www.ansi.org. 

(iii) GlobalSpec, 257 Fuller Road, 

Suite NFE 1100, Albany, NY 12203– 

3621; phone: (800) 261–2052; website: 

https://standards.globalspec.com. 

(iv) Nimonik Document Center, 401 

Roland Way, Suite 224, Oakland, CA 

94624; phone (650) 591–7600; email: 

info@document-center.com; website: 

www.document-center.com. 

(b) American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME), Two Park Avenue, 

New York, NY 10016, phone: 

800.843.2763, email: CustomerCare@

asme.org; website: www.asme.org. 

(1) ASME MFC–3M–2004, 

Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 

Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi, 

issued August 15, 2005; IBR approved 

for § 82.25(d). 

(2) ASME MFC–4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 

2016), Measurement of Gas Flow by 

Turbine Meters, reaffirmed 2016, IBR 

approved for § 82.25(d). 

(3) ASME MFC–5M–1985 (Reaffirmed 

1994), Measurement of Liquid Flow in 

Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time 

Ultrasonic Flow Meters, copyright 1985; 

IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

(4) ASME MFC–6M–1998, 

Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 

Using Vortex Flowmeters, July 4, 1998; 

IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

(5) ASME MFC–7M–1987 (Reaffirmed 

1992), Measurement of Gas Flow by 

Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles, 

copyright 1987; IBR approved for 

§ 82.25(d). 

(6) ASME MFC–9M–1988 (Reaffirmed 

2001), Measurement of Liquid Flow in 

Closed Conduits by Weighing Method, 

reaffirmed 2001; IBR approved for 

§ 82.25(d). 

(7) ASME MFC–11M–2006, 

Measurement of Fluid Flow by Means of 

Coriolis Mass Flowmeters, issued March 

30, 2007; IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

(8) ASME MFC–14M–2003, 

Measurement of Fluid Flow Using Small 

Bore Precision Orifice Meters, issued 

April 17, 2003; IBR approved for 

§ 82.25(d). 

(c) ASTM International, 100 Barr 

Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428; phone: 

610.832.9500; email: service@astm.org; 

website: www.astm.org/. 

(1) ASTM D6348–03 Standard Test 

Method for Determination of Gaseous 

Compounds by Extractive Direct 

Interface Fourier Transform Infrared 

(FTIR) Spectroscopy, approved October 

1, 2003, IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

(2) [Reserved] 

(d) U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460; phone: 

202.272.0167; website: www.epa.gov. 

(1) Approved Alternative Method 012: 

An Alternate Procedure for Stack Gas 

Volumetric Flow Rate Determination 

(Tracer Gas) (ALT–012), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Emission Measurement Center, May 23, 

1994, IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

(2) Emissions Inventory Improvement 

Program, Volume II: Chapter 16, 

Methods for Estimating Air Emissions 

from Chemical Manufacturing Facilities, 

August 2007, Final, IBR approved for 

§ 82.25(c). 

(3) Protocol for Equipment Leak 

Emission Estimates, EPA–453/R–95– 

017, November 1995 (EPA–453/R–95– 

017), IBR approved for § 82.25(c) and 

(d). 

(4) Protocol for Measuring Destruction 

or Removal Efficiency (DRE) of 

Fluorinated Greenhouse Gas Abatement 

Equipment in Electronics 

Manufacturing, Version 1, EPA–430–R– 

10–003, March 2010 (EPA 430–R–10– 

003), IBR approved for § 82.25 (d). 

(5) Tracer Gas Protocol for the 

Determination of Volumetric Flow Rate 

Through the Ring Pipe of the Xact 

Multi-Metals Monitoring System, also 

known as Other Test Method 24 (Tracer 

Gas Protocol), Eli Lilly and Company 

Tippecanoe Laboratories, September 

2006, IBR approved for § 82.25(d). 

[FR Doc. 2024–22380 Filed 10–9–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2