267 6 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s
ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 4 0 CF R Part 6 0
[AO-FR L 1907-8 ] Standard s of

Performanc e fo r

Ne w Stationar y Sources ; Rubbe r Tir e Manufacturin g Industr y AGENCY : Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA)

. ACTION : Propose drul e an d notic e of publi c hearing

. SUMMARY : Th e propose dstandard s woul dlimi t

volatil e organi c compoun d (VOC ) emission s fro mnew , modified , an dreconstructe dfacilitie s withi n rubbe r tir e manufacturin g plants

. Th e propose dstandard s implemen t Sectio n 11 1 o f th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t an d ar e base d o n th e Administrator' s determinatio n tha t emission s fro mrubbe r tir e manufacturin g plant s cause , o r contribut e significantl y to , ai r pollutio n whic h ma y reasonabl y b e anticipate dt o endange r publi c healt h o r

welfare

. Th e inten t i s t o requir e new , modified , an d reconstructe dfacilitie s a t rubbe r tir e manufacturin g plant s t o contro l emission s t o th e level s achievabl e throug h us e o f

th e bes t demonstrate d system s o f

continuou s emissio n reduction , considerin g costs , nonai r qualit y health , an d environmenta l an d energ y impacts

. A publi c hearin g wil l b e hel dt o provid e intereste dperson s a n opportunit y fo r

ora l presentatio n o f data , views , o r

argument s concernin g th e propose dstandards

. DATES : Comments. Comment s mus t b e receive do n o r

befor e Apri l 1,1983

. Public Hearing. A publi c hearin g wil l b e hel do n Marc h 3,198 3 beginnin g a t 9 a.m
. Request to Speak

at Hearing. Person s wishin g t o presen t

ora l testimon y mus t contac t EP A b y Februar y 9.1983

. ADDRESSES : Comments. Comment s shoul db e submitte d(i n duplicat e i f possible ) to : Centra l Docke t Sectio n (A

130) , Attention : Docke t

Numbe r A-80-9 , U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , 40 1 M Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C

. 20460

. Public Hearing. Th e publi c hearin g wil l b e hel da t

th e Offic e o f Administratio n Auditorium , Researc h Triangl e Park , N.C

. Person s wishin g t o presen t ora l testimon y shoul dnotif y Mrs

. Naom i Durkee , Standard s Developmen t

Branch , Emissio n Standard s an d Engineerin g Divisio n (MD-13) , U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Researc h Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a27711 , telephon e numbe r (919 ) 541-5578

. Background

Information document. Th e Backgroun dInformatio n Documen t (BID ) fo r th e propose dstandard s ma y b e obtaine dfro mth e U.S

. EP A Librar y (MD-35) , Researc h Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a27711 , telephon e numbe r (919 ) 541-2777. Pleas e refe r

t o "Rubbe r

Tir e Manufacturin g Industry—Backgroun d Informatio n fo r

Propose dStandards, " EP A 45O/3-81-O08a

. Docket.- Docke t

No

. A-80-9 , containin g supportin g informatio n use d i n developin g th e propose dstandards , i s availabl e fo r

publi c inspectio n an d copyin g betwee n 8:00 a.m
. an d 4:0 0 p.m.
. Monda y throug h Friday , a t EPA' s Centra l Docke t

Section , Wes t

Towe r Lobby , Galler y 1 , Watersid e Mall

. 40 1 M Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C

. 20480

. A reasonabl e fe e ma y b e charge dfo r copying

. FO RFURTHE RINFORMATIO N CONTACT
. Ms

. Susa n R

. Wyatt , Standard s Developmen t

Branch , Emissio n Standard s an d Engineerin g Divisio n (MD-13) , U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Researc h Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a27711 , telephon e numbe r (919 ) 541-5578

. SUPPLEMENTAR Y INFORMATION : Propose dStandard s Standard s o f

performanc e fo r

ne w source s establishe dunde r Sectio n 11 1 o f th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t reflect :

" * * Applicatio n o

f th e bes t technological syste mo f continuou s emissio n reductio n whic h (takin g int o consideratio n th e cos t o f achievin g suc h emissio n reduction , an y nonai r qualit y healt h an denvironmental impac t an denerg y requirements ) th e Administrato r

determine s ha s bee n adequatel y demonstrate d(Sectio n 111(a)(1))

. Th e propose dstandard s woul dlimi t VO C emission s fromnew , modified , an d reconstructe dfacilities

. Th e affecte d facilitie s woul db e eac h undertrea d cementin g operation , eac h sidewal l cementin g operation , eac h trea den d cementin g operation , eac h bea d cementin g operation , eac h insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation , eac h outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation , eac h Michelin- A operation , eac h Michelin- B operation , an d eac h Michelin-C

automati c operation

. Facilitie s affecte db y th e propose d standard s woul db e thos e wher e component s fo r

agricultural , airplane , Industrial , mobil e home , light-dut y truc k o r passenge r

vehicl e tire s whic h hav e a bea ddiamete r

u p t o an d includin g 0. 5 mete r (m ) [19. 7 inche s (in) ] an d cros s sectio n dimensio n u p t o an d includin g 0.32 5 m(12. 8 In ) ar e mas s produce dI n assembly-lin e fashion

. VO C emission s fro mth e rubbe r tir e industr y ar e cause db y solven t applicatio n t o differen t

component s of

a tir e durin g th e manufacturin g process
. T o mee t th e propose dstandard s fo r eac h undertrea dcementin g an d sidewal l cementin g operation , a n owne r o r operato r woul dhav e th e optio n o f usin g les s solven t

an d maintainin g emission s a t o r belo w 2 5 gram s pe r

tir e ( aleve l currentl y achieve da t

som e plants ) withou t th e us e o f

a n emissio n reductio n system , o r

installin g a7 5 percen t efficien t emissio n reductio n syste mif solven t us e exceed s 2 5 g/tire

. Usin g les s solven t ha s th e advantage s of n o cos t (othe r tha n possibl y developmenta l cost) , n o energ y usage , an d solven t conservation

. Th e propose dstandard s for fou r affecte dfacilitie s ar e base do n th e us e o f

les s solven t

an d woul d requir e tha t

emission s b e limite dt o 1 0 gram s pe r

tir e (g/tire ) fo r

eac h trea den d cementin g an d eac h bea dcementin g operation , 1. 2 g/tir e fo r eac h insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation , an d 9. 3 g / tir e fo r eac h outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation

. Thus , th e propose dstandard s ar e structure ds o the y coul db e me t throug h solven t

us e reduction s withou t employmen t

o f acontro l device

. Th e propose dstandard s woul d requir e 7 5 percen t

emissio n reductio n fo r eac h Michelin- B operatio n an d 6 5 percen t emissio n reductio n fo r eac h Michelin- A an d Michelin-C-automati c operation

. Separat e testing , monitoring , an d recordkeepin g requirement s ar e propose dfo r

eac h combinatio n o f standar dforma t

(g/tir e o r

percen t emissio n reduction) , contro l techniqu e (lo w solven t

us e o r emissio n reductio n system) , an d complianc e metho d (performanc e test s o r

equipmen t specifications)

. Initia l performanc e test s woul db e require dfo r

eac h affecte d facility , unles s th e owne r o r operato r choose s t o demonstrat e complianc e wit h th e recommende dstandard s b y meetin g th e equipmen t

specifications

. A n exemptio n ha s bee n provide dfo r facilitie s tha t

mee t th e equipmen t specifications

. Th e propose dstandard s woul drequir e tin : owne r o r operato r t o repor t th e result s o f

al l initia l performanc e tests

. Monthl y performanc e test s woul db e require dt o determin e complianc e wit h eac h o f th e g/tir e limits

. Whethe r o r no t monthl y performanc e test s woul db e require dt o determin e complianc e wit h th e percen t

emissio n reductio n standard s depend s primaril y o n th e typ e of contro l devic e used , an d the n o n th e metho do f

demonstratin g compliance

. Th e propose dstandard s woul dno tFedera l Registe r/ Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday . Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 267 7 requir e a n owne ro roperato rto report result s o f monthl y performanc e tests . Th e propose d standard s woul d requir e continuou s monitorin g an d recordin g o f

therma l incinerato r combustio n temperatur e an d th e temperatur e befor e an d afte rth e catalys tfo rcatalyti c incinerators
. Th e requiremen tfo ra continuou s monito ro n a solven trecover y syste m i s no t applicabl e unti l performanc e specification s fo rth e monito rhav e bee n propose d an d promulgated . Th e propose d standard s woul d requir e that th e owne ro roperato rmaintai n a tth e sourc e fo r a perio d o f

a tleas ttw o year s record s o f

al l dat a an d calculation s use d t o determin e VO C emission s fo reac h affecte d facility
. Referenc e Metho d 2

4 woul d b e use d to determin e th e VO C conten to f cement s an d gree n tir e spra y materials
. Referenc e Metho d 2 5 woul d b e use d t o determin e th e concentratio n of VO C i n exhaus tga s streams . Summar y o f

Environmental , Energy , an d Economi c Impact s Th e incrementa l impacts ' of th e propose d standard s i n th e Backgroun d Informatio n Documen twer e determine d usin g th e level s of

emissio n reductio n recommende d i n th e contro l techniqu e guideline s (CTG ) document , "Contro l o f Volatil e Organi c Compoun d Emission s from Manufactur e of

Pneumati c Rubbe r Tires " (EPA-450/2-78-030) , a s th e regulator y baseline
. Thi s assume s tha t i n th e absenc e o f

standard s of performance , al l new , modified , an d reconstructe d facilitie s woul d b e require d to limi tvolatil e organi c compoun d emission s t o th e level s recommende d i n th e CTG
. Th e CTG recommend s a n averag e overal l emissio n reductio n o f

abou t7 0 percen t fro m undertrea d cementing , trea d en d cementing , bea d cementing , an d insid e an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operations
. Thi s reductio n woul d b e achieve d b y usin g emissio n reductio n system s a teac h o f

thes e affecte d facilities
. Water-base d spray s coul d als o b e use d a tinsid e an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operations
. Stat e Implementatio n Plan s (SIPs ) ar e currentl y bein g revised , an d th e leve l of contro l whic h woul d actuall y b e require d fo ra particula rrubbe rtire plan ti n th e absenc e o f

thes e propose d standard s of

performanc e i s uncertain
. Som e State s ma y adop tregulation s that requir e differen tlevel s o f emissio n reductio n tha n th e regulator y baselin e o r tha tallo w th e us e of

emissio n reductio n strategie s differen tfrom thos e assume d . fo r th e regulator y baseline
. Som e State s ma y no tInclud e regulation s limitin g VO C emission s from rubbe rtire manufacturin g plant s t n thei rSIPs.
- Therefore , basin g th e impact s o f th e propose d standard s o n th e assumptio n tha tal l plant s woul d b e controlle d t o th e leve l recommende d i n th e CT G tend s t o underestimat e th e emissio n reduction s an d cost s o f

th e propose d standards . Therefore , i n thi s summary , th e Impact s o f th e propose d standard s ar e presente d tw o ways : (1 ) A s th e differenc e betwee n uncontrolle d level s an d th e propose d standards , an d (2 1 a s th e differenc e betwee n th e regulator y baselin e an d th e propose d standards . Th e actua l impact s o f th e propose d standard s wil l depen d o n th e mi x o f

contro l level s require d b y State s an d th e locatio n o f newl y constructed , modified , an d reconstructe d facilities , an d wil l b e betwee n th e tw o set s o f number s presente d here . Compare d t o th e regulator y baseline , th e propose d standard s woul d reduc e nationwid e emission s from newl y constructed , modified , an d reconstructe d facilitie s b y 1,43 0 M g (1,57 0 tons ) i n th e fift

h yea rafte r proposal . Thi s represent s a 4 8 percen t reductio n i n emission s beyon d th e CT G baseline
. Fo ra singl e medium-size d plant , th e emissio n reductio n compare d to th e baseline , woul d b e 37 5 M g (41 5 tons)
. Compare d t o th e uncontrolle d levels , th e propose d standard s woul d reduc e nationwid e emission s b y 8,28 5 M g (9,13 0 tons)
. Thi s represent s a n 8 3 percen t reductio n fro m uncontrolle d levels . Fo ra singl e medium-size d plant , th e emissio n reductio n compare d to uncontrolle d level s woul d b e 1,77 5 M g (1,96 0 tons ) pe r year . Compare d t o th e regulator y baseline , th e propose d standard s woul d no tresul t i n a n increas e from baselin e level s o f wate rpollutio n an d soli d wast e o r energ y consumption
. Sinc e baselin e level s o f wate rpollution , soli d waste , an d energ y consumptio n shff w n o significan tincreas e Ove runcontrolle d levels , th e propose d standard s als o sho w n o significan tincreas e ove r uncontrolle d levels . Contro l cost s calculate d fo rth e regulator y baselin e assum e tha teac h affecte d facilit y woul d us e a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m t o contro l emission s excep tfo rinsid e an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operations , wher e water-base d spray s wer e assume d to b e used . Sinc e th e propose d standard s ar e partiall y base d o n proces s modifications , bot h th e capita l an d annualize d cost s t o compl y wit h th e propose d standard s ar e smalle rtha n th e cost s projecte d to compl y wit h th e baselin e levels . Th e tota l nationwid e capita l cos tfo rVO C emissio n reductio n from uncontrolle d level s t o th e leve l o f th e propose d standard s woul d b e abou t $10. 8 millio n durin g th e firs tfive"years
. Th e tota l nationwid e annualize d cos ti n th e fifth yea rwoul d b e abou t$1. 5 million , wit h solven trecover y credits
. (Withou tsolven trecover y credits , th e nationwid e annualize d cos twoul d b e abou t$3. 4 million : recover y credit s ar e anticipated. ) Fo ra singl e medium-size d plan tcontrollin g al l affecte d facilitie s t o th e leve l o f

th e propose d standards , th e annualize d cos twoul d b e approximatel y $110,00 0 if

credi ti s give n fo rsolven t recover y o r$403,00 0 withou tsolven t recover y credit
. Pric e increase s an d reduction s i n return o n investmen t(ROI ) ar e projecte d t o b e zer o compare d t o thos e projecte d fo rth e baselin e contro l level . Assumin g al l cost s ar e passe d throug h t o consumers , th e averag e increas e i n the . retai l pric e o f

a tir e from uncontrolle d level s woul d b e abou t0.2 0 percen ti n th e wors tcase . Upo n ful l cos tabsorption , usin g n o contro l a s a bas e o f comparison , th e retur n o n investmen t (ROI) o f ne w radia l tir e manufacturin g plant s ma y declin e fro m a n assume d rat e o f 5.1 7 percen tt o 5.0 4 percen ti n th e wors tcase . Wors tcas e condition s i n bot h situation s ar e represente d b y th e us e o f a separat e captur e syste m an d carbo n adsorbe rcontro l devic e a teac h affecte d facilit y wher e contro l equipmen ti s use d t o achiev e emissio n reductions
. Thes e impact s ar e no t expecte d t o inhibi tindustr y growth . Standard s o f

performanc e hav e othe r benefit s i n additio n t o achievin g reduction s i n emission s beyon d thos e require d b y a typica l SIP
. The y establis h a degre e o f

nationa l uniformity , whic h preclude s situation s i n whic h som e State s ma y attrac tne w industrie s a s a resul to f havin g les s stringen tai r pollutio n standard s relativ e t o othe r States
. Further , standard s o f performanc e provid e documentatio n whic h reduce s uncertaint y i n case-by
cas e determination s o f

bes tavailabl e technolog y (BACT ) fo rfacilitie s locate d i n attainmen tareas , an d lowes t achievabl e emissio n rate s (LAER ) fo r facilitie s locate d i n nonattainmen t areas . Thi s documentatio n include s identificatio n an d comprehensiv e analysi s o f

alternativ e emissio n contro l technologies
. Th e cost s ar e provide d fo r a n economi c analysi s tha treveal s th e affordabilit y o f

control s i n a n unbiase d stud y of th e economi c impac to f control s o n a n Industry . Th e rulemakin g proces s tha t implement s a performanc e standar d assure s adequat e technica l revie w an d promote s participatio n o f representative s o f

th e industr y bein g considere d fo rregulation , government .

### 267 8 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20

. 198 3 / Propose dRule s

an dth e publi c affecte db y tha t Industry' s emissions

. Th e resultan t regulatio n represent s abalanc e I n whic h government

resource s ar e applie din a wel l publicize dnationa l foru mt o reac h adecisio n on apollutio n emissio n leve l that allow s fo r adynami c econom

y an d ahealthfu l environment

. Rational e Selection Source 

### Th e EP A Priorit y Lis t (4 0 CF RPart 60 , S 60.16 , 4 4 F R49222 , Augus t

21,1979 ) reflect s th e Administrator' s determinatio n that

emission s fro

mth e liste dsourc e categorie s contribut e significantly to ai r

pollution , whic h ma

y reasonabl y b e anticipate dto endange r publi c health or

welfare

. Th e Priorit

y Lis t identifie s major

source s o f emission s o n anationwid e basi s i n orde r o f priorit y fo r regulatio n base don thre e factors : (1 ) quantitie s o f emission s fro msourc e categories , (2

) th e mobilit

y an dcompetitiv e natur e o

f eac h sourc e category , an d(3 ) th e exten t to whic h eac h pollutan t

endanger s health o r welfare

. Tire manufacturin g i s Include d o n th e Priorit

y Lis t a s asubcategor

y unde r Syntheti c Rubber , whic h i s ranke d number 2 0 ou t o f atota l o f 5 9 sourc e categories

. Rubber

tir e manufacturin g industr y VO C emission s fo

r 197 9 wer e estimate dto b e abou t

59,00 0 M g (65,00 0 tons)

. About 140,00 0 tire s per da y wil l b e produce db y new , modifie dan d reconstructe dfacilitie s i n operatio n by 1985

. I n th e absenc e o

f additiona l regulation , new , modified , an d reconstructe dfacilitie s woul demit abou t 3,12 0 M g o f VO C pe r year (3,43 0 tons/yr)

. Emissio n reductio n system s compose d o f acaptur e syste man dcontro l devic e ar e availabl e t o th e industry fo r reducin g VO C emissions

. Water-base d gree n tir e spray s wit

h lo w VO C conten t ar e in us e a t

many plants

. Technique s whic h minimiz e solven t

us e ca n reduc e emission s fromtrea den dcementin g an d bea dcementin g operatings

. Th e predicte dgrowt

h o f thi s industr

y wit h it s attendan t

Increas e in emission s an d th e availability o

f contro l technolog y furthe r suppor t th e developmen t

o f standard s o

f performanc e fo

r thi s Industry

. Selection of Pollutants

and Affected Facilities 

### A t arubbe r tire manufacturin g plant , ra w rubbe r

an dchemical s ar e firs t mixe dI n proportion s determine db y specification s fo

r th e tir e component

i n whic h th e rubbe r

wil l b e used

. Th e rubbe r I s the n transporte dt o different part * o f th e plan t fo r processin g int o variou s components , suc h a s treads ,

sidewalls , beads , plies , an dbelts

. I n som e o f thes e processe s rubbe r

i s combine dwit

h fabric , steel , o r fiberglass. Manufacture dcomponent s ar e brought

togethe r an dassemble da t

a tir e buildin g area
. Th e assemble dgree n tir e i s spraye dwit

h agree n tir e spray , whic h acts a s amol drelease agent an d lubricant , an dplace di n apres s where , wit h aspecifi c combinatio n o f time , temperature , an dpressure , th e tir e i s molde dt o it s fina l for man dth e rubbe r i s cured

. Tire s ar e the n inspecte dfo r qualit y an dappearance , o r

"finished. " VO C i s use da t

severa l point s in th e tire manufacturin g process
. Organi c solvent s or

organi c solvent-base d cement s ar e aplie dto component s durin g productio n or

durin g tir e buildin g to facilitat e adhesion

. Organi c solvent s ar e use din many gree n tir e spray s t o facilitat e applicatio n o

f mol drelease an dlubricatin g agent s an da t finishing , wher e minor

cosmeti c repair s ar e made

. Th e processe s use dto manufacture component s an dt

o assembl e tire s vary among companie s an damong plant s owne db y th e sam e company
. Whethe r an y VOC i s use din aproces s an din what amount s als o vary amon g companie s an dplant s owne db y th e same company
. Eac h compan y consider s some or

al l o f it s productio n precesse s to b e proprietary

. I n developin g th e propose dstandards , EP A was requeste dto maintai n th e confidentialit

y o f muc h o f th e proces s an dsolvent

us e dat asubmitte db y industry

. At

th e sam e time EP

A sought to develo p regulation s whic h reflec t us e o f bes t system s o

f continuou s emissio n reductio n an dwhic h appl y equitabl y to eac h manufacturer

. Futher , EP A sought to avoi dproposin g an y requiremen t whic h woul dadversel y affect tire safet y an dperforma/ice

. Volatil e organi c compound s (VOC) ar e th e principa l pollutant s emitte dt o th e atmospher e fromrubbe r tir e manufacturin g plants

. Th e VO C emitte d fromal l bu t

on e company' s plant s i s predominantl y whit e gasolin e an d petroleu mnaphtha

. Heptan e i s th e major solven t use da t on e company' s plants

. Toluene , xylene , ketones , an d ester s ar e als o use dthroughou t th e industry , bu t

i n smalle r

amounts

. Abou t 9 8 percen t

o f th e VOC emitte d fro man averag e uncontrolle dexistin g plan t result s fro

msolven t applicatio n i n seve n solvent-usin g processes
. Thes e processe s an dthei r

averag e contributio n to overal l plan t

VO C emissions , a s calculate dfro

msolvent us e an dtir e productio n data , provide db y industry , ar e show n below : Undertrea d cementtn g „ . Sidewal l cementin g —„. . Trea d en d cementin g Bea d cementin g , Tr e buildin g

_„ Insid e gree n tir

e iprayin Q (rogani c •orvem based )

. - _ Outsid e gree n tire sprayin g (organi c sorver v Finishin g Hon solvent-usin g (acuitie s .... . Tota l Emissio n contributio n (percent )

20. 5 1 3 3 4 9 2. 7 10. 7

28. 9 1 6 1. 6



### Industry-supplie ddat asho w wid e variation s i n solven t

usag e rate s amon g companie s an damon g plant s owne db y th e sam e company
. Thes e difference s occur fo r avariety o

f reasons , includin g difference s i n specification s fo r ho w tire s ar e to b e produced , an dth e type s o f tire s produced

. Emission s ar e significant

a t undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , trea den dcementing , bea d cementing , insid e gree n tir e spraying , an doutsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operations

. Further , emissio n reductio n technolog y i s availabl e an di s technicall y an deconomicall y feasibl e fo r us e a t eac h o f thes e type s o

f operations

. Therefore , thes e operation s wer e selecte dfo

r contro l b y th e propose dstandards

. Tire building , whil e contributin g abou t 1 1 percen t o f tota l plan t

emissions , i s characterize db y lo w VO C concentration s emanatin g fro m50 or mor e individual machine s withi n eac h plant

. Th e nee dfo

r libera l worke r acces s dictate s tha t

machine s b e open , and , a s aresult , high ventilatio n rate s woul db e neede dt o remov e organi c vapor s t o acontro l device

. Technically , contro l system s coul db e constructe dt o reduc e VO C emission s fro mtir e building

. Th e ai r

i n th e tir e buildin g roo mcoul db e ducte dt o acontro l devic e suc h a s an incinerato r

or carbo n adsorber

. However , exhaus t strea m VOC concentration s i n existin g tir e buildin g area s wher e genera l dilutio n ventilatio n i s employe dar e ver y low , rangin g fro

m0.0 1 t o 0.3 2 g/m * (0. 8 x 10" * to 20. 0 x 10" ' lb/ri-1

. Th e cos t o f suc h a syste mwoul drang e fro

m$68,00 0 pe r M g o f VO C remove d($62,000/ton) to

. $306,00 0 pe r M g o f VO C remove d ($280.000/ton)

. The Administrato r conclude dtha t

thes e cost s ar e exorbitan t fo r th e emissio n reductio n achieve dan dha s no t

include dtir e buildin g in th e propose dstandards

. Finishin g contribute s abou t 2 percen t o f tota l plan t

emissions

. Organi c solven t i s use din protectiv e coating s fo r whitewall s an di n coatin g use dfo r cosmeti c purposes. Bot

h uses , whil e

### Federa l Registe r/ Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar

y 20 , 198 3 /

Propose d Rule s 267 9 performe d i n separat e areas , ar

e par to f th e finishing process . Solvent application i s intermitten

tan d i s performe d a tworke r discretion
. Fo

r thes e reasons , finishin

g has no tbeen included i n th e propose d standards . Compounding

, milling, extrusion , calendering , an

d curing , wher e n o organi c solventi s used , togethe

r accoun t fo r les s tha n 2 percen to f tota l plan t VOC emissions , an

d have no tbeen included i n th e propose d standards . Micheli n Tir e Corporatio

n use s thre

e operations , referre

d t o i n this preambl

e an d i n th e regulatio

n a s "Michelin-A, " "Michelin-B, " an

d "Michelin-C, " fo

r whic h the y have claimed confidentiality
. EP A i s currentl

y treatin g th e specifi c informatio n provide d b y Micheli n o n thes e operations a s confidentia l an d has Initiate d a confidentialit

y determinatio

n i n accordanc

e wit h 4 0 CF RPar t2
. Since Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an d Michelin- C ar e operations believe d uniqu e t o th e Micheli n Tir e Corporation, emission s fro m thes e operations were notincluded i n th e above list
. VOC emission s fro m eac h o f thes e operations ar

e significant

, an d collectivel y accoun

tfo ra substantia l portio n o f tota l uncontrolle

d emission s fro

m eac h Micheli n plant . Emissio n reductio n technolog

y whic h i s technically an

d economically feasibl e i s availabl e fo

r us e a tMichelin-A an

d Michelin-B operations
. Therefore, Michelin- A an

d Michelin-B operations wer e selecte d fo

r contro l b y th e propose d standards . Th e Michelin- C operation i s performe d wit h either manua

l o r automatic cemen

tapplication dependin

g o n th e type o f tir e bein g made . Emissio

n reductio n technology , whic

h i s technically an

d economically feasible , i s availabl e fo

r us e a tautomatic Michelin
C operations
. Therefore, Mlchelin-C
automatic operations wer

e selecte d fo

r contro l b y th e propose d standards . VOC concentrations I

n th e exhauststream

s from manua

l Michelin- C operations ar e reportedl y ver y low , rangin

g fro m 0.1 0 t o 0.3 0 g/m s


### . Th

e cos to f operatin g a n emissio n reductio

n system a

ta manua l Michelin- C operation would b e simila r t o tha tpreviousl

y state d fo

r tir e building
. Th

e Administrator has concluded tha

tthes e cost s ar

e exorbitan tfo r th e emissio n reductio

n achieve d an

d has no tinclude d manua l Mlchelln- C operations i

n th e propose d standards . No

tal l tire s manufacture

d b y Micheli n Tir e Corporatio

n ca n b e mad e usin g th e Michelin-C-automatic operation
. Therefore, th

e propose d standards do no

tpreclude th

e us e o f manua l Mlchelln- C operations
. Affected Facilities Th e choic e o f th e affected facility(les ) fo r this standar

d i s base d o

n th e Agency' s interpretatio

n o f Sectio n 11 1 o

f th e Ac tan d judicia l construction o

f it s meaning
. Unde

r Section 111 , th

e NSP S mus tappl y t o "ne w sources; " "source " i s define d a s "an y building, structure, facility , o rinstallatio n whic

h emit s o r ma y emi tan y ai r pollutant " [Section 111(a)(3))
. Mos

tindustria l plants , however , consis to

f numerou s piece s o r group s o f equipmen twhic h emi tai r pollutants , an

d whic h migh tb e viewe d a s "sources. " EP

A therefor e use s th e ter m "affecte d facility " t

o designat e th e equipment

, within a particula

r kin d o f plant , whic h i s chose n a s th

e "source " covered b y a given standard . I n choosing th

e affected facility , EP

A mus tdecid e whic

h piece s o r groups o

f equipmen tar e the appropriat

e unit s fo r separat e emissio n standards . Th

e Agenc y mus tdo this in ligh

to f th e term s an d purpose o

f Sectio n 111
. On

e majo r consideration i s tha

tth e us e o f a narrowe r definition result

s in bringin

g replacemen

tequipmen

tunde r th e NSP S sooner . Fo r example , i

f a n entir e plan t wer e designated a s th

e affecte d facility , n o par to f a n existin g plan

twoul d b e subjec tt o th e standar d unles s th

e plan t a s a whol e wer

e "modified. " I

f o n th e othe rhand, eac

h piec e o f equipmen

t were designated a s a

n affected facility , the n a s eac h piec e wa s replaced , th

e replacemen

tpiec e woul d b e a ne w sourc e subjec tt o the standard . Since th

e purpos e o f Sectio n 11 1 i s t

o minimiz e emission s b

y th e application o

f th e bes t demonstrate

d contro l technolog

y (considerin

g cost , other healt

h an d environmenta

l effects , an

d energ y requirements) a

tall ne w an

d modifie d sources , ther

e i s a presumptio

n tha ta narrowe r designatio n o

f th e affected facilit y i s proper

. This ensure s tha

tne w emissio n source s woul d b e subjec tt o th e standards a s the

y ar e installed
. This presumptio

n ca n b e overcome , however , i f th e Agenc y conclude s tha

trelevant statutor y factor s (technica

l feasibiltiy , cost , energy, an

d the renvironmenta

l impacts) poin

tt o a broade

rdefinition
. I n a rubbe rtir e plant , th e narrowest designation o

f affected facilit

y fo rwhic h standards o

f performanc

e migh tb e appropriat

e i s eac h individua

l operation
. Th e rubbe r tir e industr y maintains tha

t muc h o f th e anticipated growt

h i n th e industr y b y 198 5 wil l resul

tfro m non routin e replacemen

to f existin g operations wit

h ne w operations
. New individua l operations would qualif

y a s ne w source s subjec

tt o standards o

f performanc

e unde rthis narrowest definition o

f affected facility
. A s a result , contro l cost s wer

e calculate d assumin g eac h operation woul

d b e controlled separately . I

n practice , however , a singl e contro

l devic e could b e used t o contro l emission s fro

m severa l operations
. Examinatio

n o f thes e costs showe d tha

tcontro l i s economically feasibl e (i.e. , th e costs would no tinhibi tgrowt h o r replacement

) i n all case s wher

e a separat e emissio n reductio

n system would b e used a

ta n individua

l operation
. Definin

g a n affecte d facilit y a s eac h separat e operation i s supporte

d b y technical , cost , and economi c considerations
. Th

e Agenc y request s comment s fro m interested parties about this definition o

f a n affected facility
. Wit h eac h operation defined a s a

n affected facility , an

y chang e whic h qualifie d a s a modification or reconstruction woul d caus e only tha t change d operation t

o become subjec

tt o standards o

f performance
. Further

, i f a ne w operation were constructed a ta n existin g plan

twher e other operations were no tsubjec tt o standards o

f performance, only the ne w operation would b e subjec

tt o standards o

f performance
. Undertrea d cementing an

d trea d end cementin g ar e usually performe

d a t differen tpoint s o n th e same trea

d line
. A ta n undertrea

d cementing operation , cemen ti s applied t

o a continuous stri

p o f trea d rubbe r o r t o a combined tread

/ sidewal l componen tTh

e trea d rubbe ri s usually transporte

d from the extruder t

o th e undertrea

d cementin

g operation b y a conveyor . Afte

rcemen ti s applied , the trea d rubbe r stri p passe s alon

g a conveyo r wher

e i tai r dries an d the n usuall y throug h a water bat

h fo rcooling
. A tundertrea

d cementing operations , VOC I s emitte d from cemen

tstorage an

d application equipmen

tan d from cemented rubbe

ra s VO C evaporate s afte r application
. Therefore, a n undertrea d cementing operation consist s o f a cemen tapplicatio n statio n an

d all othe r equipment

, suc h a s the cemen

t suppl y system , an

d feed an d takeawa

y conveyors , whic

h ar e necessary t

o appl y cemen tt o trea d o r combine d tread / sidewall • nmponent

s an d t o allo w evaporation o

f solventfrom trea

d o r combine d tread/sidewal l components . Eac h undertrea

d cementing operation i s a n affecte d facility
. Afte rthe wate rbat

h an d forced-air drying , the continuous stri

p i s cu tt o specifie d length s an

d the n i s usually conveye d t

o a trea d en d cementing operation
. A

ta trea d end cementing operation , cemen

ti s applied t

o one o r bot h trea d ends . Cemen

tI s usually applie d t o trea d end s either b

y sprayin g wit h a n electronically-triggered automatic spra

y ar m o rmanuall y b y a

# [VO L 268 0 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s
worke r equippe dwit h apo t

o f cemen t an da n applicator

. VO C i s als o emitte d fro mcemen t

storag e an dapplicatio n equipmen t

an dfro mcemente dtread s a s VO C evaporate s afte r

application

. Therefore , atrea den dcementin g operatio n consist s o f

acemen t applicatio n statio n an dal l othe r equipment , suc h a s th e cemen t suppl y system , an dfee dan dtakeawa y conveyors , whic h i s necessar y t o appl y cemen t t o trea den dcomponent s an dt o allo w evaporatio n o f

solven t fro mtrea d ends

. Eac h trea den dcementin g operatio n i s a n affecte dfacility

. Althoug h undertrea dcementin g an d trea den dcementin g operation s ar e usuall y performe do n th e sam e trea d line , the y ar e separat e emissio n point s an deac h ca n b e controlle dseparately

. Thi s support s designatin g eac h trea d en dcementin g operatio n a s a n affecte d facilit y separat e fro meac h undertrea d cementin g operation

. Fo r som e type s o f

tires , sidewall s ma y b e extrude da s par t

of th e tread

. Cemen t applicatio n fo r

thi s tread/sidewal l componen t

usuall y occur s a t

a n undertrea dcementin g operation , an d VO C emission s ar e counte da s par t o f thos e fromundertrea dcementing

. Whe n sidewal l cementin g i s performe da s a separat e operation , th e extrusion , conveying , cementing , an dcoolin g equipmen t

i s usuall y simila r

t o bu t smalle r tha n tha t

use dfo r undertrea d cementing

. Instea dof

bein g cu t

t o specifi c lengths , however , th e continuou s sidewal l stri p i s rolle di n a non-stic k fabri c an dstore dunti l needed

. VO C i s emitte dfro mcemen t storag e an d applicatio n equipmen t

an dfrom cemente drubbe r

a s VO C evaporate s afte r application

. Therefore , asidewal l cementin g operatio n consist s o f a cemen t applicatio n statio n an dal l othe r equipment : suc h a s th e cemen t suppl y system , an dfee dan dtakeawa y conveyors , whic h i s necessar y t o appl y cemen t t o sidewal l component s an dt o allo w evaporatio n of

solven t fro m sidewal l components

. Eac h sidewal l cementin g operatio n i s a n affecte d facility

. Bea dcementin g ma y occu r befor e o r afte r th e rubber-coate dwir e i s fashione dint o abead

. I f cemen t i s applie dbefor e bea dfashioning , th e cemen t applicatio n apparatu s i s usuall y aswa b o r

rolle r suspende di n atroug h o f cemen t attache dt o th e bea d fashionin g equipment

. Cemen t i s applie d a s th e rubber-coate dwir e passe s ove r th e trough

. I

f cemen t I s applie dafte r bead s ar e fashioned , i t

i s usuall y accomplishe db y sprayin g o r b y dippin g th e bead s int o ava t

o f cement

. Sprayin g o r dippin g equipmen t

i s separat e from bea dfashionin g equipment

. A bea d cementin g operatio n consist s o f a cemen t applicatio n station , suc h a s adi p tank , spra y boot h an dnozzles , cemen t trough , an drolle r

o r swa b applicator ; an dal l othe r

equipmen t

necessar y t o appl y cemen t

t o bead s o r

bea d component s an dt o allo w th e evaporatio n o f

solven t fro mcemente d beads

. Eac h bea dcementin g operatio n i s a n affecte dfacility

. Gree n tir e spray s ar e usuall y applie d insid e an doutsid e wit h automati c spra y nozzles

. Whethe r

water-base do r organi c solvent-base dinsid e an d outsid e gree n tir e spray s ar e used , outsid e spray s usuall y contai n mor e VO C tha n insid e sprays
. Insid e an d outsid e spray s ar e usuall y applie dusin g differen t nozzle s i n th e sam e booth

. However , differen t

booth s ma y b e employe da t

som e plants

. Th e spra y boot h i s designe dt o contai n overspra y an dven t i t t o adus t

collecto r

o r uncontrolle dt o th e atomosphere

. .Insid e gree n tir e sprayin g an doutsid e gree n tir e sprayin g ar e separat e operation s an dar e separat e affecte dfacilities

. A n insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n consist s o f

th e insid e spra y applicatio n statio n an drelate dequipment , suc h a s th e lubrican t

suppl y system , th e boot h wher e sprayin g i s performed , an d associate dfan s an dductwork

. Eac h insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n i s a n affecte dfacility

. A n outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n consist s o f th e outsid e spra y applicatio n statio n an d relate dequipment , suc h a s th e lubrican t suppl y system , th e boot h wher e sprayin g i s performed , an dassociate dfan s an d ductwork

. Eac h outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n i s a n affecte d facility

. Cemen t i s applie dt o tir e component s a t Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an dMichelin

C-automati c operations

. Eac h o f thes e operation s i s distinc t

an dha s VO C emission s whic h ca n b e accounte dfo r an dcontrolle dindependently

. Eac h operatio n consist s o f

cemen t storag e an dapplicatio n equipment , an dothe r equipmen t

necessar y fo r

th e applicatio n of cemen t t o an dth e evaporatio n o f VO C fro mtir e component s processe da t th e operation

. Eac h Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an dMichelln-C-automati c operatio n i s a n affecte dfacility

. Selection of Basis of Proposed

Standard Thre e genera l method s o f emissio n reductio n technolog y ar e availabl e t o th e rubbe r

tir e manufacturin g industry : (1 ) emissio n reductio n system s (captur e an dcontrol) ; (2 ) lo w solven t us e techniques ; an d(3 ) lo w VO C conten t materials

. Emission Reduction Systems Curren t us e o f emissio n reductio n system s i s limite di n th e rubbe r tir e industry

. Onl y tw o suc h system s ar e presen t i n thi s industry , bot h employin g carbo n adsorber s a s th e contro l device

. On e of thes e system s i s par t

of th e origina l desig n o f

th e undertrea d cementin g proces s a t

ane w plant

. Thi s plan t ha s no t ye t operate da t

ful l productio n capacity , an demissio n contro l dat ao n th e ne w syste mar e no t ye t available

. Th e othe r

syste mi s th e onl y emissio n reductio n syste mi n ful l us e i n th e industry

. I t

consist s o f

a captur e syste man dcarbo n adsorbe r installe do n a n undertrea dcementin g lin e i n 197 3 an dha s bee n show n b y material s balanc e calculation s t o hav e a n averag e solven t

recover y efficienc y of abou t 6 3 percen t

Th e carbo n adsorbe r ha s bee n teste dseparatel y an d show n t o b e abou t

9 0 percen t

efficient , thu s th e captur e syste maverage s abou t 7 0 percen t

efficiency

. Th e compan y operatin g thi s syste mha s submitte d informatio n concernin g factor s whic h limi t syste mperformance

. Factor s whic h accordin g t o th e compan y limi t syste m efficienc y include : (1 ) Abou t 8_percen t

o f VO C applie dt o arubbe r componen t

i s absorbe db y th e rubbe r an di s no t

immediatel y availabl e fo r captur e (emission s fromcemente d rubbe r accoun t fo r abou t 3 0 percen t

o f tota l VO C emission s fro mthi s line , thu s abou t 2. 4 percen t

o f VO C use di s absorbed) ; (2 ) Enclosur e syste macces s door s ar e ope n fo r afinit e perio dfo r

periodi c threadin g o f

ne w trea dsizes ; (3 ) Lengt h o f

th e dryin g are aconveyo r i s iimite db y th e configuratio n o f existin g extrusio n equipment ; (4 ) Th e switchin g dampe r installe dfo r enclosur e emergenc y situation s i s no t equippe dwit h vapo r

los s seals ; „ (5 ) Operatin g practice s d o no t provid e fo r containmen t

of VO C emission s durin g weeken dshutdown , eithe r b y drainin g cemen t

tank s o r b y equippin g tank s wit h tigh t

fittin g covers ; (6 ) Operatin g practice s d o no t provid e fo r ai r dryin g an dcoolin g o f

th e desorbe dc mbo n be dprio r t o th e nex t adsorptio n cycle ; an d (7 ) Th e compan y doe s no t accoun t fo r vapo r losae s fromcemen t

mixin g churns , recirculatin g cemen t

distributio n syste m storag e tanks , recovere dsolven t storag e tanks , pumping , an dventin g from decanter

. I n EPA' s judgment , thi s typ e o f emissio n reductio n syste mcoul db e improve dt o achiev e a n overal l efficienc y o f

7 5 percen t

o r better

. VO C los s durin g period s o f

worke r acces sFedera l Registe r/ Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thnrsday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 268 1

coul d b e minimize d b y restrictin g acces s openin g siz e an d b y maintainin g sufficien tventilatio n to contai n VOC
. Wher e cemente d rubbe rcomponent s ar e allowe d t o dr

y o n a conveyo rafte r cemen ti s applied , enclose d conveyor s coul d b e employe d t o contai n VO C emitte d fro

m cemente d rubber . Th e lengt h o f conveyo renclose d woul d depen d upo n conveyo rspee d an d th e tim e require d t o contai n VO C emitted
. Analysi s o f

evaporatio n rate s ha s show n thatabou t9 0 percen to f VO C applie d to rubbe r component s i s emitte d withi n 3 0 second s afte rapplication
. Othe r desig n feature s t o minimiz e VO C loss , suc h a s vapo rlos s seal s attache d t o a switchin g damper , coul d als o improve'overal l syste m efficiency
. Cemen ttank s coul d b e covere d durin g period s o f

non-use . Desorbe d carbo n bed s coul d b e ai r drie d an d coole d betwee n cycles . Thes e improvement s i n operatin g practice s woul d improv e overal l syste m efficiency
. VO C los s du e to absorptio n i s th e onl y are a i n whic h improvement s i n desig n an d operatin g practice s woul d hav e littl e o rn o effect
. Severa l source s of

informatio n wer e use d t o establis h th e leve l o f contro l tha t coul d b e achieve d b y emissio n reductio n system s i n th e rubbe rtir e industry
. Informatio n wa s obtaine d from: (1 ) Availabl e technica l literatur e concernin g emissio n reductio n system s applicabl e fo r th e contro l o f VO C emission s i n th e rubbe rindustry ; (2 ) hoo d an d enclosur e desig n parameter s from Industrial

Ventilation! A Manual of Recommended

Practice; (3 ) VO C us e an d proces s informatio n supplie d b y th e rubbe r tir e industry ; (4 ) visit s t o rubbe r tir e manufacturin g plants ; (5 ) result s o f emissio n measurement s an d material s balanc e test s conducte d b y EPA ; an d (6 ) result s o f

test s o f VO C absorptio n b y rubbe r conducte d b y industry
. Therma l an d catalyti c Incinerator s ar e effectiv e VO C emissio n contro l device s fo r th e type s o f

solvent s use d i n rubbe r tir e manufacturin g operations
. A therma l incinerato r operatin g a t870* C (1600"F) wit h 3/ 4 secon d residenc e tim e wil l typicall y achiev e 9 8 percen tVO C reductio n efficienc y o r2 0 part s pe r millio n o n a continuou s basis
. A catalyti c incinerato rca n b e designe d t o achiev e a 9 8 percen temissio n reductio n efficienc y o n a continuou s basis
. In bat h cases , primar y hea trecover y shoul d b e employe d t o reduc e operatin g costs . Carbo n absorber s hav e bee n demonstrate d i n th e rubbe rprocessin g industry , th e pressur e sensitiv e tap e an d labe l Industry , an d i n othe rindustrie s t o achiev e bette r tha n 9 6 percen tremova l o f VO C emission s o n a continuou s basi s whe n applie d t o exhaus tga s stream s simila rt o thos e generate d i n th e rubbe r tir e industry
. Stea m i s usuall y employe d fo rcarbo n be d regeneration , although an y hot , non-reactiv e ga s ma y b e used . Th e overal l degre e o f

continuou s emissio n reductio n achieve d i s no tonl y a functio n o f

contro l devic e efficiency , bu tals o o f

captur e efficiency
. A captur e syste m contain s VO C vapor s a tth e emissio n sourc e an d direct s the m t o th e contro l device
. VOCemission s from rubbe rtir e plan toperation s resul t primaril y from tw o activities : (1 ) applicatio n o f

cemen to rspra y t o rubbe r components ; an d (2 ) evaporatio n o f VO C from cemen to rspra y applie d t o a rubbe rcomponent . Effectiv e captur e o f VO C mus taccoun tfo rbot h o f thes e source s o f

VO C emissions
. Industry-supplie d dat a sho w tha ta t a n undertrea d cementin g operatio n abou t7 0 percen to f

tota l emissio n i s attributabl e t o evaporatio n o f VO C from applicatio n equipment , an d abou t3 0 percen ti s attributabl e t o evaporatio n o f VO C from rubbe rcomponen tsurfaces
. Simila rdat a fo rtrea d en d cementin g an d gree n tir e sprayin g sho w tha tabou t 8 0 percen to f

tota l emission s i s attributabl e t o evaporatio n o f VO C from applicatio n equipment , an d abou t2 0 percen ti s attributabl e t o evaporatio n o f VO C from rubbe rcomponen tsurfaces
. N o suc h dat a ar e availabl e t o sho w a rati o fo rsidewal l cementin g o rbea d cementing
. However , sinc e sidewal l cementin g i s a proces s ver y simila rt o undertrea d cementing , th e ratio s fo r thes e processe s shoul d b e similar
. Both trea d en d cementin g an d bea d cementin g involv e th e applicatio n o f cemen tt o relativel y smal l surface'areas
. Therefore , EP

A estimate s tha tth e rati o fo rbea d cementin g resemble s th e 80:2 0 rati o fo rtrea d en d cementing
. T o approac h tota l vapo rcollection , a completel y seale d enclosur e o f th e emissio n sourc e woul d b e necessary . However , completel y seale d enclosure s ar e no tpractica l i n th e rubbe rtir e industry
. Som e affecte d facilitie s requir e intermitten tworke raccess , usuall y fo r startup , maintenance , an d repai r purposes , whil e othe rfacilities , suc h a s manua l trea d en d cementing , requir e continua l worke racces s t o th e tir e componen t Captur e system s fo rcemen t applicatio n area s tha trequir e onl y Intermitten tacces s t o th e equipmen t suc h a s automati c trea d en d cementing , undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , an d rolle rbea d cementing , coul d consis to f

enclosure s containin g acces s port s equippe d wit h self-closin g doors . Th e captur e syste m currentl y toi us e a ton e undertrea d cementin g operatio n whic h wa s discoasex l earlie r coul d b e adapte d fo rus e a tothe r undertrea d cementin g operation s a s wel l a s a tautomati c trea d en d cementin g an d sidewal l cementing
. Captur e efficiencie s o f a tleas t8 0 percen tcoul d b e achieve d o n a continuou s basis
. Captur e system s fo rcemen t applicatio n area s tha trequir e constan t worke racces s coul d b e simila rt o thos e use d o n portabl e chippin g an d grindin g table s o rsolderin g table s i n othe r industries
. Thes e enclosure s provid e worke racces s an d conveyo rmovemen t throug h sid e opening s an d ar e designe d t o minimiz e pressur e losse s throug h th e openings
. Associate d wit h thes e cemen t applicatio n area s ar e conveyor s tha t, transpor tth e cemente d componen t Solven tevaporate s fro m th e componen t whil e i ti s o n th e conveyor . T o achiev e maximu m captur e efficiency , th e conveyor s mus tb e enclose d t o allo w fo r captur e o f

th e evaporate d solvent . Conveyo renclosure s suc h a s thos e use d fo rstraight-lin e automati c buffin g woul d b e appropriate
. Thes e enclosure s consis t o f hoods , wit h hinge d acces s doors , tha t surroun d Ih e top , sides , an d undersid e o f th e conveyor . Eac h en d o f th e hoo d i s partiall y covere d b y flap s to minimiz e th e openin g size
. Captur e efficiencie s o f suc h enclosure s ar e relate d t o th e percentag e o f

tota l solven ttha t evaporate s of

f th e componen twhil e i ti s insid e th e enclose d area ; however , efficiencie s o f

a tleas t8 0 percen tcoul d b e achieve d o n a continuou s basis
. Th e lengt h o f th e enclosur e woul d depen d o n th e conveyo rspee d an d th e rat e o f evaporatio n o f

th e solven t Di p bea d cementin g an d insid e an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation s usuall y consis tonl y o f

a cemen to r spra y applicatio n area . Fo rdi p bea d cementing , th e bead s ar e lowere d int o a tan k whic h ca n b e enclose d an d th e enclosur e equippe d wit h acces s ports . Bead s coul d b e place d i n th e enclosur e throug h acces s port s whic h woul d remai n ope n onl y unti l th e bead s wer e Inside
. Th e bead s coul d b e dippe d int o th e cemen tthen raised , an d woul d remai n i n th e enclosur e fo renoug h tim e t o allo w maximu m pvnporatio n o f solvent . Fo rinsid e an d outsid e gree n tir e spraying , spra y booth s ar e usuall y use d fo rapplication
. Tire s coul d remain insid e th e booth s fo ra sufficien ttim e afte rcemen tapplicatio n t o allo w fo r maximu m evaporation
. Captur e efficiencie s o f

a tleas t8 0 percen tcoul d b e achieve d o n a continuou s basis
. Th e mos teffectiv e captur e system s applicabl e a treasonabl e cos tt o Michelin- B operation s ar e simila rt o thos e describe d abov e fo r undertrea d an d sidewal l cementin g operation s an d ca n achiev e a tleas t8 0 percen tcaptur e268 2 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday

. Januar y 20

. 198 3 / Propose dRule s efficiency

. Captur e system s fo r Michelin- A an dMichelin-C-automati c operation s mus t

allo w fo r

continua l intrusio n o f

mechanica l devices , frequen t worke r access , an d introductio n of

additiona l tir e component s int o bot h th e cemen t applicatio n an ddryin g areas
. Thes e feature s limi t

captur e efficienc y a t

thes e operations

. EP A ha s determine dtha t th e mos t effectiv e captur e syste mapplicabl e a t reasonabl e cos t

t o Michelin- A an d Michelin-C-automati c operation s i s capabl e of

achievin g 7 0 percen t

captur e efficiency

. Technolog y exist s fo r

ne w an dretrofi t system s t o achiev e emissio n reduction s of/ 5 percen t

a t undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , trea den d cementing , bea dcementing , insid e an d outsid e gree n tire spraying , an d Michelin- B operations , an do f 8 5 percen t a t Michelin- A an dMichelin-C-automati c operations

. Contro l device s demonstrate di n othe r

industries , whic h achiev e a n averag e remova l o r destructio n efficienc y of a t leas t 9 5 percent , ar e availabl e an dca n b e use d i n conjunctio n wit h captur e system s simila r t o thos e describe dabov e t o achiev e thes e level s o f

overal l emissio n reduction

. Low Solvent

Use Techniques Emissio n reductio n i n th e rubbe r tir e industr y ca n als o b e achieve db y reducin g cemen t

usage
. Fo r

trea den d cementin g an dfo r

bea dcementin g operations , eac h compan y reportin g solven t us e dat aha s demonstrate dtha t i t ca n achiev e a n emissio n rat e o f 1 0 g / tir e withou t

th e us e o f

a n emissio n reductio n system

. Solven t us e rate s a s lo w a s 2 g/tir e hav e bee n reporte dfo r som e plants

. Mos t o f th e lo w solven t

us e rate s reporte dfo r

trea den dcementin g operation s wer e fo r

thos e wher e cemen t i s applie dmanually

. However , lo w solven t us e rate s wer e als o reporte dfo r operation s wher e cemen t i s applie db y automati c spra y arms
. Mos t lo w solven t us e rate s fo r

bea dcementin g operation s wer e fo r facilitie s tha t

us e roller s t o appl y th e cement

. However , lo w solven t us e rate s wer e als o reporte dfo r facilitie s tha t

us e abea ddippin g method

. EP A identifie dth e followin g goo dwor k

practice s a s helpin g t o achiev e lo w solven t

us e rates : minimizin g th e surfac e are afo r opening s o n cemen t

pot s a t manua l trea den d cementin g stations , coverin g cemen t •tank s use dfo r

bea ddipping , an d minimizin g overspra y a t automati c trea d en dcementin g stations

. I n EPA' s judgmen t

an y new , modified , o r reconstructe dtrea den do r bea d cementin g operatio n can'us e 1 0 g/tir e o r

les s o f VOC

. Substitution

of Low VOC Content Materials Gree n tir e sprayin g represent s anothe r affecte dfacilit y wher e significan t emissio n reductio n ca n b e achieve d withou t th e us e o f

emissio n reductio n systems

. Water-base dspray s hav e bee n substitute dfo r

organi c solvent-base d spray s a t insid e an doutsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation s I n anumbe r o f plants

. Uncontrolle demissio n rate s calculate dfo r

water-base dinsid e tir e spray s range dfromzer o t o 1. 2 g/tire : uncontrolle demissio n rate s calculate d fo r water-base doutsid e spray s range d fro mzer o t o 9. 3 g/tire

. Produc t qualit y consideration s hav e bee n cite db y industr y a s th e reaso n fo r retainin g a smal l amoun t

of VO C i n som e water

base dsprays
. Emission s fro mwater

base dgree n tire spray s ar e a t leas t 9 0 percen t les s tha n averag e uncontrolle d emission s fromsolvent-base dsprays
. Water-base dspray s hav e bee n widel y use dunde r

condition s representativ e of th e industr y an dar e availabl e t o al l companies

. Selection of

the Regulatory Alternatives Th e regulator y alternative s considere di n developin g th e standard s o f performanc e ar e base do n th e method s availabl e t o contro l th e VO C emission s fro mth e rubbe r tir e industry

. Th e thre e contro l method s considere d wer e emissio n reductio n system s (captur e an dcontro l technology) , lo w solven t us e techniques , an dlo w VO C conten t material s wer e considered

. Impact s calculate dfo r

th e regulator y alternative s wer e base do n th e us e o f carbo n adsorbe r

contro l device s wher e emissio n reductio n system s ar e used

. Th e propose dstandard s woul dallo w th e us e o f

othe r type s o f contro l devices

. Regulator y Alternativ e I represent s th e regulator y baseline

. Stat e Implementatio n Pla n (SIP ) regulation s fo r contro l o f

VO C emission s fro m rubbe r tir e manufacturin g plant s ar e expecte dt o b e base do n Informatio n presente dI n th e contro l technique s guidelin e (CTG ) documen t "Contro l of Volatil e Organi c Emission s fro m Manufactur e o f

Pneumati c Rubbe r Tires " (EPA-450 /

2-78-030)

. Therefore

. Regulator y Alternativ e I ha s bee n se t a t th e leve l o f

contro l recommende di n th e CTG

. Unde r

Regulator y Alternativ e 1 , VO C emission s fro mundertrea d cementing , trea den dcementing , bea d cementing , an dinsid e an doutsid e gree n tire sprayin g operation s woul db e reduce db y a n averag e o f abou t 7 0 percent

. Sidewal l cementin g operation s an dMichelin-A , Michelln-B , an d Michelin-C-automati c operation s wer e no t addresse di n th e CTG ; therefore','

. Regulator y Alternativ e I doe s no t limi t VO C emission s fromthes e affecte d facilities

. Emissio n reductio n system s coul db e use dfo r al l affecte dfacilitie s unde r Regulator y Alternativ e I t o achiev e a7 0 percen t emissio n reductio n efficiency

. Water-base dspray s coul db e use da t insid e an doutsid e gree n tir e sprayin g facilitie s t o mee t

o r excee da7 0 percen t emissio n reductio n fo r

Regulator y Alternativ e I

. Regulator y Alternativ e II i s base d upo n th e us e o f

7 5 percen t

efficien t emissio n reductio n system s fo r undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , trea den dcementing- , an d bea dcementin g facilities , an dupo n th e us e of water-base dspray s (9 0 percen t emissio n reduction ) fo r insid e an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g facilities

. Sinc e Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an d Michelin-C-automati c operation s ar e believe duniqu e t o Micheli n Tir e Corporation , the y wer e no t include di n Regulator y Alternativ e II

. Regulatio n o f thes e operation s wa s considere d separatel y an di s discusse dunde r th e sectio n o n "Bes t

Syste mo f

Continuou s Emissio n Reduction. " Emissio n reduction s achievabl e wit h water-base dgree n tir e spray s ar e significantl y greate r

tha n th e reduction s achievabl e wher e organi c solvent-base d spra y VO C emission s ar e reduce dwit h th e us e o f

a n emissio n reductio n system

. Water-base dinsid e an doutsid e gree n tir e spray s hav e bee n adequatel y demonstrate di n th e industr y an dar e availabl e t o al l companies

. En vironmental

Impacts Unde r Regulator y Alternativ e I (th e regulator y baseline) , emission s i n th e fift h yea r fro mnew , modified , an d reconstructe daffecte dfacilitie s woul d b e abou t 3,12 0 Mg/yea r

(3,43 0 tons/yr)

. Th e fift h yea r ai r qualit y impac t

o f Regulator y Alternativ e I I woul db e a reductio n o f

abou t 1,700 Mg/y r

(1,87 0 tons/yr ) fro mbaselin e emissions

. Thi s i s areductio n of

r> r

. »vrccn t fro mth e baseline

. Unde r eac h o f th e regulator y alternative s ther e coul db e effluen t fro m stea mregeneratio n o f

carbo n adsorptio n bed s an dfro moverspra y o f insid e an d outsid e water-base dgree n tir e sprays
. Th e VO C use di n tire manufacturin g I s virtuall y insolubl e I n water

. Therefore , mos t adsorbe dVO C whic h escape s decantin g an dmos t

VO C containe di n overspra y fro minsid e an doutsid e water-base dgree n tir e spray s wil l volatiliz e rathe r

tha n remai n i n th e water

. Wastewate r

flo w i n 198 5 unde rFedera l Registe r/ Vol . 48
. No . 1 4 /

Thursday . Januar y 20
. 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 268 3
Regulator y Alternativ e I woul d b e abou t 4. 8 millio n m'/y r (1. 3 billio n gal/yr)
. Regulator y Alternativ e I I woul d no t increas e th e wastewate rflo w beyon d th e baseline
. Unde r Regulator y Alternativ e I , soli d wast e generate d i n 198 5 woul d b e abou t 238,00 0 Mg/y r(263,00 0 tons/yr)
. Regulator y Alternativ e I I woul d no t increas e th e quantit y o f soli d wast e generated . Soli d wast e coul d resul tfro m disposa l of

spen tcarbo n from carbo n adsorbers . Spen tcarbo n ca n b e recycle d fo r othe r industria l uses , incinerate d o r dispose d o f

b y landfilling
. Energy Impacts Energ y us e fo rpollutio n contro l equipmen ti s base d o n th e us e o f carbo n adsorber s a s th e contro l techniqu e fo r bol h regulator y alternatives
. Unde r Regulator y Alternativ e I , facilitie s tha t ar e built , modified , o rreconstructe d b y 198 5 woul d us e a tota l o f abou t2. 5 x 10 " joules/y r o f

electricit y fo rprocess , non process , an d pollutio n contro l purposes . Emissio n reductio n t o th e leve l o f Regulator y Alternativ e I I woul d no t increas e th e fifth-yea renerg y usage . Economic Impacts A detaile d analysi s o f

th e economi c impac tof

th e regulator y alternative s o n th e rubbe r tir e manufacturin g industr y ha s bee o developed . Pric e increase s o r alternativ e decrease s i n return o n investmen t(ROI) wer e determine d t o b e reasonabl e fo rbot h regulator y alternatives , eve n unde rwors tcas e conditions
. In n o cas e d o capita l cost s o f contro l excee d 1 percen to f tota l investmen trequirements
. Regulator y Alternativ e I (baseline ) fifth-yea r cumulativ e capita l contro l cost s woul d b e abou t$16. 3 million
. Fifth-yea r annualize d contro l cost s withou tsolven trecover y credit s woul d b e abou t$4. 9 million ; wit h solven t recover y credits , annualize d contro l cost s woul d b e abou t$3. 3 million
. Regulator y Alternativ e I I fifth-year cumulativ e capita l contro l cost s woul d b e abou t$7. 9 millio n abov e th e baseline
. Fifth-yea r annualize d cost s withou t solven trecover y credit s woul d Increas e abov e th e baselin e figure b y abou t$2. 3 million
. Th e increas e abov e th e baselin e i n fiflh-yea r annualize d cost s wit h solven trecover y credit s woul d b e abou t $1. 5 million
. Unde rful l cos tpricing , th e produc tpric e woul d Increas e b y abou t 0.1 4 percen tunde rwors tcas e conditions
. Unde rfull cos tabsorption , th e RO I o f ne w radia l tir e manufacturin g plant s ma y declin e fro

m a n assume d rat e of 5 percen tto 4.9 3 percen ti n th e wors tcase . I

n eithe rsituatio n th e wors t cas e i s represente d b y th e us e o f a separate.caplur e syste m an d a carbo n adsorbe rcontro l devic e a teac h affecte d facilit y wher e contro l equipmen ti s use d t o reduc e emissions
. Neithe rimpac t woul d inhibi tindustr y growt h o r replacement . Bes tSystem s o f

Continuou s Emissio n Reductio n • Regulator y Alternativ e I I i s technicall y an d economicall y feasibl e fo rel l affecte d facilities , woul d achiev e greate remission , reductio n tha n Regulator y Alternativ e I , an d woul d • caus e n o advers e water , soli d waste , o r energ y impacts
. Captur e an d contro l technolog y i s availabl e t o mee t Regulator y Alternativ e I I emissio n reduction s fo rundertrea d cementing , sid e wal l cementing , trea d en d cementing , an d bea d cementing
. Water
base d insid e an d outsid e gree n tir e spray s ar e availabl e t o al l rubbe rtire manufacturer s an d ar e alread y i s us e b y mos tcompanie s a ton e o rmor e plants . Water-base d spray s ca n mee to rexcee d Regulator y Alternativ e I I emissio n reductions
. Alternativ e I I woul d decreas e overal l VO C emission s from th e affecte d facilitie s b y abou t5 5 percen tbelo w th e baseline
. Annualize d cost s withou trecover y credit s woul d increas e b y abou t4 7 percent ; wit h recover y credit s th e increas e woul d als o b e abou t4 7 percen tTh e increas e i s du e primaril y t o additio n o f sidewal l cementin g a s a n affecte d facility
. Base d o n consideratio n o f

thes e factors
. Regulator y Alternativ e I I wa s judge d superio rt o Regulator y Alternativ e I , an d Regulator y Alternativ e I I wa s use d a s th e basi s fo rselectin g th e bes tsyste m o f continuou s emissio n reduction
. Dat a o n existin g plant s Indicat e tha t ther e i s a wid e variatio n i n solven tus e rate s (an d a correspondin g wid e rang e i n uncontrolle d emissio n rates ) from eac h typ e o f

affecte d facility
. A tsom e lo w solven tus e rate , th e cos to f employin g a n emissio n rductio n syste m coul d b e unreasonabl y hig h fo rth e amoun to f

emissio n reductio n achieved
. Sinc e th e cos tpe runi to f emissio n reductio n achieve d I s a n importan t facto ri n determinin g th e reasonablenes s of contro l a tfacilitie s wit h lo w uncontrolle d emissions , th e Agenc y considere d requirin g les s efficien t emissio n reductio n a tfacilitie s wit h lo w solven tus e rate a and/o restablishin g solven tus e cutoffs , belo w whic h no leve l o f contro l woul d b e required
. Thes e choltic s woul d b e considere d if , indeed , ther e wa s a solven tus e rat e a t whic h th e contro l cost s wer e judge d t o b e unreasonabl y hig h whe n compare d to th e emmlssio n reduction
. A s a firs tste p i n th e Agency' s determination , annualize d cost s o f applyin g a 7 5 percen tefficien temissio n reductio n syste m wer e calculate d fo r th e rang e o f solven tus e rate s (number s equa l t o th e uncontrolle d emissio n rates ) a tundertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , trea d en d cementing , an d bea d cementin g facilities
. Annualize d cost s pe rmegagra m o f

VO C emissio n reductio n wer e the n plotte d acros s th e rang e o f solven tus e rates . (Se e Figure s 8- 1 an d 8- 2 i n th e BID. ) I twa s assume d tha ta separat e captur e syste m an d contro l devic e woul d b e use d fo reac h operatio n an d tha tflo w rate s an d capita l cost s fo reac h operatio n ar e constan tove rth e entir e rang e o f solven t us e rates . Thes e cost s d o no trepresent th e actua l amount s o f

mone y spen tfo r an y particula rplant . Rather , th e cost s ar e estimate s whic h represen t additiona l line s an d plant s likel y t o b e built
. Th e cost s o f

VO C emissio n reductio n system s wil l var y accordin g t o productio n rate , productio n equipmen t plan tlayou tgeographi c location , an d compan y preference s an d policies
. A s wa s expected , th e annualize d cos t pe rmegagra m o f

emissio n reduction increase s a s th e solven tus e rat e decreases . Fo rsolven tus e rate s abov e 5 0 gram s pe rtire (g/tire) , th e tota l annualize d cost s fo ra carbo n adsorber , assumin g recover y credits , woul d b e abou t$40 0 pe rmegagra m o f VO C emission s reduced. A s th e solven tus e rat e decreases , throug h change s i n proces s an d manufacturin g techniques , from 5 0 t o 2 5 g/tire , th e cost s graduall y increas e t o abou t$125 0 pe rmegagram . From 2 5 t o 1 5 g/tir e cost s begi n rising a t a mor e rapi d rate . However , ther e i s n o poin to n th e curv e a twhic h a shar p upwar d swin g i s distinguishable
. In th e 2 5 t o 1 5 g/tir e range , cost s begi n t o excee d $2,00 0 pe rmegagram . Base d o n VO C emissio n contro l cost s i n othe r industrie s regulate d b y standard s o f performance , cost s abov e $2,00 0 pe r megagra m ar e generall y considere d t o b e unreasonabl y hig h (although
. I n som e instances , ther e ma y b e overridin g consideration s tha taffec tth e determinatio n o f

reasonabl e cost)
. T o reduc e thr

* rns tpe rmegagra m o f pollutan tremove d fo rfacilitie s withi n th e 2 5 t o 1 5 g/tir e range , th e Agenc y considere d les s effectiv e an d les s costl y emissio n reductio n system s fo rthos e facilities
. However , system s whic h ar e les s tha n 7 5 percen tefficien tar e no t significantl y lowe ri n cos ttha n 7 5 percen tefficien tsystems . Consequently , requirin g a leve l of

contro l les s tha n 7 5 percen tefficien tfo rfacilitie s betwee n 2 5 an d 1 5 g/tir e woul d no tbrin g th e cos t pe rmegagra m significantl y belo w th e leve l generall y considere d unreasonabl y high
.

# VO L 288 4 

### Federa l Register /

Vol

. 48, No

. 14 /

Thursday

. Januar

y 20 , 198 3 /

Propose dRule s

T o Identif

y a cutof f poin tbetwe n 2 5 an d 1 5 g/tire , th e Agenc y considere d othe r cpst-relate d factor s i n selectin g th e exac tcutoff

. Specifically , th e Agenc y considere d th e additiona l cos tsaving s tha twoul d b e achieve d b y establishin g a cutof f a t2 5 g/tir e rathe rtha n 1 5 g/tire
. Thes e cos tsaving s ar e associate d with : conservatio n o f

energ y required t o operat e thes e systems , conservatio n o f resource s required fo rthei roperatf^ n an d maintenance , an d th e encouragemen to f

solven tconservatio n a tfacilitie s tha tcan , o rma y develo p method s to , reduc e solven tusag e t o mee tth e cutof

f limit s rathe rtha n instal l captur e an d contro l systems . I n ligh to f thes e benefit s an d th e genera l vie w tha t th e Agenc y shoul d se tstandard s tha t encourag e developmen to f inherentl y low-emittin g processes , an d i n th e absenc e o f

a clearl y Identifie d VO C us e rat e a twhic h th e contro l cost s pe r megagra m reductio n ar e clearl y unreasonable , th e Administrator i s proposin g 2

5 g/tir e a s th e cutof

f solven t us e rat e fo rundertrea d cementin g an d sidewal l cementin g facilities
. Whil e solven tus e rate s averag e abou t63 g/tir e fo r existin g undertrea d cementin g an d 4 1 g/tir e fo rexistin g sidewal l cementin g facilities , solven tus e rate s belo w 2 5 g / tir e hav e bee n reported fo reac h of thes e operations
. Th e cost s t o reduc e emission s b y 7 5 percen ta tsolven tus e rate s abov e 2 5 g/tir e ar e considere d reasonable , an d 2 5 g/tir e i s a n appropriat e cutof

f poin tconsiderin g bot h th e benefit s whic h accru e an d th e rapidl y Increasin g cos tpe rmegagra m associate d wit h contro l a tsolven tus e rate s belo w 2 5 g/tire
. Therefore , th e bes t syste m o f

continuou s emissio n reductio n fo r undertrea d an d sidewal l cementin g operation s i s a n emissio n reduction syste m tha tachieve s 7 5 percen toveral l contro l fo rfacilitie s tha tus e mor e tha n 2 5 g/tire , an d lo w solven ttechnique s fo r facilitie s tha tus e 2 5 g/ttr e o rless . Th e 7 5 percen tefficien temissio n reduction syste m wa s base d o n a n 8 0 percen t efficien tcaptur e syste m an d a 9 5 percen tefficien tcarbo n adsorbe r contro l device
. Th e propose d standard s woul d als o allo w us e o f othe rtype s o f contro l devices , an d an y combinatio n o f captur e an d contro l efficiencie s tha t resulti n a tleas ta 7 5 percen toveral l emissio n reduction
. A simila ranalysi s wa s don e fo rtrea d en d cementin g an d bea d cementing , an d cutoff s o f 2 5 an d 2 0 g/tir e respectively wer e selected . (Se e Figure s 8- 3 t o 8- 5 i n BID. ) Thes e cutoff

s wer e highe rtha n VO C us e rate s fo rmos texistin g trea d en d cementin g an d bea d cementin g facilities
. N o ne w trea d en d o rbea d cementin g operation s ar e expecte d t o us e mor e tha n th e 2 5 o r2 0 g/tir e cutoffs
. Therefore , requiring thos e trea d en d cementin g o rbea d cementin g operation s tha tus e mor e tha n th e cutof f amount s o f VO C t o reduc e emission s b y 7 5 percen t woul d achiev e n o emissio n reduction
. However , alternativ e mean s o f minimizin g emission s ha s bee n adequatel y demonstrate d t o achiev e effectiv e contro l a ttrea d en d cementin g an d bea d cementin g facilities
. Industry
supplie d solven tus e dat a sho w tha t eac h compan y ha s a tleas ton e plan t tha tuse s 1 0 g/tir e o rles s a teac h o f thes e operations
. Further , man y existin g plant s alread y us e substantiall y les s tha n 1 0 g/tire
. Emissio n rate s o f 1 0 g / tire , o rless , coul d b e achieve d withou t th e us e o f

emissio n reductio n systems . A 1 0 g/tir e emissio n limi tfo ral l trea d en d cementin g an d bea d cementin g operation s woul d resul ti n a greate r nationwid e emissio n reductio n tha n woul d b e achieve d b y requiring installatio n o f

a 7 5 percen tefficien t emissio n reductio n syste m fo rthos e facilitie s tha tus e mor e tha n th e cutof f amount s o f

VOC
. Sinc e n o emissio n reductio n system s woul d b e used , capita l an d operatin g costs , an d water , soli d wast e an d energ y impact s woul d b e reduced . Fo rth e abov e reasons , th e bes tsyste m o f

continuou s emissio n reductio n fo rtrea d en d an d bea d cementin g operation s i s low-solven t technique s tha tus e les s tha n 1 0 g/tire
. Th e bes tsyste m o f

continuou s emissio n reductio n fo rinsid e gree n tir e sprayin g an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation s i s water-base d gree n tir e sprays . Water-base d gree n tir e spray s resul ti n lowe remission s tha n whe n solvent-base d spray s ar e use d i n conjunctio n wit h emissio n reductio n systems . Choosin g lo w solven tus e technique s a s th e bes tsyste m o f

continuou s emissio n reductio n fo rtrea d cementin g an d bea d cementin g operations , an d settin g 2 5 g/tir e cutoff

s fo rundertrea d cementin g an d sidewal l cementin g operation s resul ti n th e impact s o f th e propose d standard s bein g differen tfro m th e impact s o f

Regulator y Alternativ e II . Unde rth e propose d standards , baselin e emission s fro m undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , trea d en d cementing , bea d cementing
. Insid e gree n tir e spraying , an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g woul d b e reduce d b y abou t 1,43 0 M g (1,57 0 tons ) i n th e fift h year , a 4 8 percen treduction
. Thi s emissio n reductio n woul d b e abou t9 percen tles s tha n th e emissio n reductio n estimate d fo rthes e affecte d facilitie s unde r Regulator y Alternativ e II . Th e amount s o f energ y used , an d wate rpollutio n an d soli d wast e generate d unde rth e propose d standard s woul d b e les s tha n unde rRegulator y Alternativ e II . Becaus e th e propose d standard s woul d no ti n mos tcase s requir e th e us e o f emissio n reductio n system s fo r affecte d facilitie s othe rtha n undertrea d cementin g an d sidewal l cementing , capita l an d annualize d cost s woul d b e les s tha n thos e fo rRegulator y Alternative s I an d II . Fifth-yea r cumulativ e capita l cost s woul d b e abou t $10. 8 millip n abov e uncontrolle d levels , abou t3 4 percen tles s tha n th e baselin e an d abou t5 5 percen tles s tha n Regulator y Alternativ e II . Annualize d cost s i n th e fift

h yea rwithou trecover y credit s woul d b e abou t$3. 4 millio n abov e uncontrolle d levels ; wit h recover y credit s th e fifth-yea rannualize d cos t woul d b e abou t$1. 5 millio n abov e uncontrolle d levels . Thes e annualize d cost s represen treduction s fro m th e baselin e o f

abou t3 1 percen tan d 54 percent , respectively ; the y represen t cos treduction s from Regulator y Alternativ e I

I o f abou t53 percen tan d 6 9 percent , respectively
. Th e averag e produc tpric e woul d ris e abou t0.2 6 percen tabov e uncontrolle d level s i n th e wors tcase . Th e produc tpric e i s no t expecte d t o increas e abov e baselin e levels . Unde rful l cos tabsorption , usin g uncontrolle d level s a s a bas e comparison , th e RO I woul d decreas e fro m a n assume d rat e o f

5.1 7 percen tt o abou t5.0 4 percen tunde rwors tcas e conditions
. Th e RO

I i s no texpecte d t o decreas e belo w baselin e levels . Base d o n EPA' s analysi s o f informatio n submitte d b y Micheli n Tir e Corporation , th e Agenc y ha s determine d th e bes ttechnologica l syste m o f continuou s emissio n reductio n fo r th e Michelin- B operatio n to b e a VO C captur e syste m an d carbo n adsorbe r contro l devic e tha twil l achiev e a 7 5 percen toveral l emissio n reduction
. Fo r - Michelin- A an d Micheli n C-automati c operations , EP

A ha s determine d th e bes t technologica l syste m o f emissio n reductio n t o b e a VO C captur e syste m an d carbo n adsorbe rcontro l devic e tha t wil l achiev e a 6 5 percen toveral l emissio n reduction
. EP A ha s determine d tha tthes e > .stem s ar e availabl e a t reasonabl e cos tan d d o no timpos e unreasonabl e advers e water , soli d waste , o renerg y Impacts . Th e propose d standard s woul d als o allo w th e us e o f contro l device s othe rtha n carbo n adsorbers . Selection of Format of Proposed Standard Concentration , mas s units , an d efficienc y wer e considere d a s format s fo rth e propose d standards . A concentratio n forma tfo rth e propose d

### Federa l Registe r / Vol. ' 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar

y 20 , 198 3 /

Propose d Rule s 268 5
standards would limi

ttri e amoun to f VO C pe r uni tvolum e o f exhaustgas discharge d int o th e atmospher

e bu tno t th e tota l mas s o f VO C discharged
. Th

e advantage o

f th e concentration forma

ti s tha tth e tes tmetho

d would no

trequir e measuremen

to f gas flo w o r composition o f th e solvent . Th

e primary
. disadvantage o

f usin g a concentration forma ti s tha tsolventapplication rates ' (henc e emissions ) ar

e variable , and, a s a result , vapo r concentrations als o var

y widely
. A furthe

r complication i s th

e assertio n b y some industr y representatives tha

tai r flow rates affec

t produc tquality , an

d companies ma

y therefor e diffe r i n thei rventilatio n specifications
. Fo

r thes e reasons , concentration unit

s were rejected a s a forma tfo r th e propose d standards . A second option i s t

o expres s th

e propose d standards i

n term s tha tlimi t VOC emission s t

o a maximu

m allowabl e mas s pe

r uni to f production
. A mas s standar

d fo rthis industr

y could b e expresse d i

n gram s o f VOC emitted pe r tir e processe d (g/tire)
. A g/tire standar d i s suitabl e wher

e lo w solvent us e techniques ar

e employed t

o minimiz e VOC emission s a

ttrea d end cementin g an d bead cementin

g facilities , an d wher e water-based sprays ar

e employed t

o minimiz e VO C emission s at insid e an d outside gree

n tire sprayin

g facilities
. A s a result

, th e propose d standards fo

r trea d end cementing, bead cementing, an

d gree n tir e sprayin g facilitie s or

e expresse d a s gram

s o f VOC emitted pe

r tir e processe d (g/tire)
. Gra m pe r tir e emissio n limit

s wer e no t considered t

o b e appropriat

e wher e th e bes tsystem o

f continuous emissio n reduction i s a

n emissio n reductio

n system . Establishing g/tire emissio n limit s base d o n reduction from the highestuncontrolled emissio n rates woul d ensur

e achievabilit

y o f th e standards bu

twoul d require Installation o f th e bes tsystem o

f continuous emissio n reduction onl

y o n th e fe w facilitie s wit

h th e highestemissio n rates . Facilitie s wit

h lower uncontrolle

d rates could achiev e th

e standards withou

t usin g bes tcontro

l technology . Gra

m pe r tir e emissio n limit

s base d o n reductio n fro m les s tha

n th e highest(e.g. , th

e average) uncontrolle

d emissio n rates could resultI

n limit s tha tma y notb e achievabl e by al

l facilities , especiall y thos e wit h th e highestuncontrolled emissions
. Further

, some industr

y representative s expresse d concer n a t th e Decembe

r 2,1980 , meetin

g o f th e Nationa l Ai r Pollution Contro

l Techniques Advisor

y Committe

e tha t gra m pe r tir e emissio n limit

s base d o n a reductio n from eve n th

e highestreporte

d emissio n rat

e ma y no tb e achievable
. This concer n wa s base d o

n the possibilit y tha ta ne w facilt

y could have a n uncontrolle

d emissio n rat

e highe r tha n thos e reporte

d fo r existin g facilities
. Thes e problem

s could b e overcom e b y choosing a

n efficienc

y format , whic h woul d reflec

tth e us e o f captur e an d contro l system s irrespective o f th e uncontrolle

d emissio n rat

e a tthe facility
. Therefore, a

n efficienc y forma t wa s chosen fo

r th e standards fo

r undertrea d an d sidewal l cementing operations tha

tus e mor e tha n 2 5 g/tir e an d fo r Michelin-A , Michelin-B , and Michelin-C-automati

c operations
. T o ensur e tha tall aspects o

f the issu e have bee n considered adequately , th e Agenc y request s comment

s from interested parties abou

tth e recommende

d percen t reduction format

. Selection of

Numerical

Emission Limits Based o n th e bes tsystem s o

f continuou s emissio n reduction, th

e propose d standards consis to

f the following numerica

l emissio n limits
. Eac h undertrea

d cementin

g operation an d eac h sidewal l cementin

g operation wher e mor e tha n 2 5 gram s o f VOC ar e used pe rtir e woul d b e require

d t o reduce emission s by a

tleas t7 5 percen t Undertrea d cementin

g an d sidewal l cementing operations tha

tus e les s tha

n 2 5 g/tire woul d notb e required t o Instal l emissio n reduction systems . Eac h trea d en d an d bead cementing facilit

y woul d b e require d t o limi temission s t

o n o mor e tha n 1 0 g/tire
. Eac

h insid e gree

n tir e spra y operation woul d b e required t o limi temission s t

o n o mor e tha n 1. 2 g/ tire, an d eac h outsid e gree

n tir e spra y operation woul d b e require d t o limi t emission s t

o n o mor e tha n 9. 3 g/tire
. Eac h Michelin-B operation woul d b e require d t o reduce emission s by a

tleas t 7 5 percent . Eac h Michelin-A operation an d eac h Michelin-C-automatic operation woul d b e require d t o reduc e emission s by a

tleas t6 5 percen tA s state d above , thes e emissio n limit s reflec tapplication o

f th e bes t demonstrated system o

f emissio n reductio n a teac h affected facilit

y i n a rubbe r tire manufacturin

g plan t Rubbe rtire industr

y representative s have requested EP

A t o conside raddin

g a provision t

o th e proposed standards whic h woul d allo w a

. plan towne r o r operato r th e option o f meetin g a n emissio n limi

tcalculate d fo

r a grou p o f individua l affected facilitie s rathe

rtha n individua l limit s fo r eac h affected facility
. Th

e emissio n limi

tfo r the grou p woul d b e calculate d b y combinin g prescribed emissio n limit

s fo rindividua

l affected facilitie s and , fo

r purposes o

f the following discussion , i s terme d a n NSP S compliance bubble , i.e. , a tradeof f o f emission s amon

g affected facilitie s fo rcompliance purposes . EP A believe s a compliance tradeof f fo rrubbe r tire manufacturing ' ma

y b e appropriat

e an d ma y b e consisten twit

h Section 11 1 o

f th e Clea n Air Ac tan d i s considering incorporatin

g suc h a tradeof f i n the standards befor

e promulgation
. Standards currentl y propose d o rpromulgate

d unde r Sectio n 11 1 o f th e Ac tdo no tcontain suc

h a provision
. EP

A i s in the early stage s o

f evaluating a genera

l policy fo rSectio n 11 1 standards which , i

f adopted , woul d provide fo rcomplianc

e tradeoff s where determine d appropriat

e fo rplant s containing multipl

e affected facilities
. Unti l EP A establishe s a policy fo

r Sectio n 11 1 standards in general , the Agenc y i s no tprepare

d to propos e such a polic y in th e rubbe rtir e standard . . However , EP

A wil l mak

e a decisio n o n thi s policy befor

e the rubbe

rtir e standar d i s promulgated . Therefore, EP A i s requesting comment

s o n the us e o

f a complianc e tradeof f a s a par to f thi s package . I ti s anticipated tha

tan y compliance tradeof

f incorporate

d int o th e rubbe r tir e standar d woul d allo w aggregatio n o f individua l emissio n limit

s onl y fo r thos e facilitie s within a plan t whic h ar e subjec tt o th e standards (newly constructed , modified , o r reconstructed) and whic h ar e presen ti n tha tspecifi c plan t Modification/Reconstruction Considerations Modification , a s defined i n § 60.1 4 o f Chapte rI , Titl e 4 0 o f the Cod e o f Federa l Regulation

s (CFR), ma

y occur when an

y physica l o r operationa

l chang e t o a n existin g facilit

y results i n a n increas e in emissio n rat

e t o th e atmospher

e o f an y pollutan tt o whic h a standar

d applies
. However , ther

e ar e several changes tha

t resulti n Increased emissio n rates whic h ar e exemp tfrom th

e modification provision
. Onc

e suc h provision i s fo

r a productio n rat e increas e tha

ti s accomplished withou

ta "capita

l expenditure " a s defined i

n 1 60.2. Th e productio

n rat e o f a rubbe rtire manufacturin

g plnn ti s usuall y directly related t o th e capacitie s o

f th e tire buildin g o r curin g pres s operations , whic h ar e notsubjec

tt o th e proposed standards . Othe

r operations , including operations selecte d a s affected facilities , normall y ru n a tles s tha n ful l capacity , an d thei rproductio

n rates can usually b e increase d u

p t o ful l capacit y withou t a capita l expenditure
. Mos

tchanges expecte d to occurwoul d b e o f thi s nature . A s a resultfew , i

f any , modifications ar

e expected . Reconstruction , a s defined in { 60.1 5 o f Chapte rI Title 4 0 o f th e CFR
. occur s

# VO L 268 8 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s
whe n th e fixe dcapita l cos t o f replacemen t

component s of

a n existin g facilit y exceed s 5 0 percen t o f th e fixe d capita l cos t

tha t woul db e require dt o construc t acomparabl e entirel y ne w facilit y an dcomplianc e i s technicall y an deconomicall y feasible

. Upo n replacemen t

o f components , th e Administrato r

wil l determine , o n acase
by-cas e basis , whethe r

areconstructio n ha s take n plac e an dwhethe r th e existin g facilit y become s a n affecte d facilit y unde r

th e NSPS

. Investigatio n o f

th e rubbe r

tir e manufacturin g industr y ha s indicate d tha t repai r o r rebuildin g o f

a n existin g facilit y wher e cost s woul dexcee d5 0 percen t o f th e cos t of replacin g th e facilit y i s unusual

. Selection of Performance

Test Methods Th e propose dstandard s woul d requir e tw o type s o f

performanc e tests , initia l performanc e test s an dmonthl y performanc e tests

. Initia l performanc e test s woul db e require dfor al l affecte d facilitie s excep t

thos e facilitie s tha t demonstrat e complianc e wit h th e percen t emissio n reductio n requirement s b y meetin g certai n equipmen t specifications

. Thes e facilitie s woul d conduc t a n initia l performanc e tes t o n th e contro l devic e bu t

no t o n th e captur e system

. However , th e owne r o r operato r woul db e require dt o stat e i n th e initia l complianc e repor t

whethe r o r no t eac h captur e syste mspecificatio n ha s bee n met

. Monthl y performanc e test s woul d b e require dfo r

most , bu t

no t all , affecte dfacilities

. Monthl y performanc e test s wer e chosen , wher e practical , t o ensur e continua l compliance

. Requirin g onl y a n initia l performanc e tes t woul d somewha t

reduc e th e monitorin g workloa do n th e owne r o r operator , bu t woul dno t

b e a s usefu l t o eithe r

th e owne r o r operato r o r t o th e Agenc y fo r ensurin g continua l compliance

. I n addition , mos t

o f th e dat arequire dfo r monthl y performanc e test s ar e routinel y collecte dan dmaintaine db y th e sourc e a s par t o f productio n an dInventor y records

. Performanc e test s tha t consis t

' o f costl y stac k

testin g ar e no t

require d o n amonthl y basi s I n orde r fo r EP A t o ensur e tha t

complianc e cost s ar e maintaine da t

areasonable level

. Monthl y performanc e test s woul db e require dt o determin e complianc e wit h eac h o f th e g/tlr e limits

. Whethe r o r no t monthl y performanc e test s woul db e requiredt o determin e complianc e wit h th e percen t

emissio n reduction standard s depend s primaril y o n th e typ e o f contro l devic e used , an dthe n o n th e metho do f

demonstratin g compliance

. I f th e contro l devic e recover s VO C an d complianc e i s demonstrate db y achievin g a7 5 percen t emissio n reduction , monthl y performanc e test s woul db e required. I f

th e contro l devic e recover s VO C bu t

complianc e i s demonstrate db y meetin g th e equipmen t specifications , monthl y performanc e test s woul dno t

b e required

. I

f th e contro l devic e destroy s VOC , monthl y performanc e test s woul dno t b e required , regardles s o f

th e metho duse d t o demonstrat e compliance

. Performanc e tes t

procedure s fo r

eac h typ e o f affecte dfacilit y vdr y dependin g o n th e forma t

o f th e standar d(g/tir e o r percen t emissio n reduction ) an dth e typ e o f emissio n contro l device , i f any , tha t

i s used

. Th e performanc e tes t procedure s ar e outline dbelow

. Fo r eac h affecte dfacilit y tha t complie s wit h ag/tir e limit , th e mas s o f VO C emitte dpe r

tir e processe dfo r

a calenda r mont h woul db e determine d durin g th e initia l performanc e test

. Thi s determinatio n woul dnecessitat e a material s balanc e calculatio n i f complianc e i s achieve db y reducin g solven t usag e o r

b y usin g acontro l devic e tha t

recover s VOC

. I

f acontro l devic e tha t

destroy s VO C i s used , th e determinatio n woul drequir e astac k test

. Monthl y performanc e test s fo r facilitie s tha t

compl y wit h g/tir e limit s woul db e th e sam e a s th e initia l performanc e tes t

excep t fo r thos e affecte dfacilitie s wher e acontro l devic e tha t destroy s VO C i s used

. Fo r thes e affecte dfacilities , th e overal l emissio n reductio n efficienc y determine di n th e initia l performanc e tes t coul db e use d fo r monthl y performanc e test s unti l th e Administrato r

request s tha t

th e efficienc y b e redetermined , o r th e operatin g condition s o f th e syste mar e changed

. Th e rational e fo r thi s provisio n i s tha t arequiremen t

fo r a n owne r

o r operato r t o conduc t

monthl y stac k

test s coul dresul t

I n unreasonabl e costs

. Fo r eac h affecte dfacilit y fo r whic h th e owne r

o r operato r choos e t o us e a n emissio n reductio n syste mwit h a contro l devic e tha t

recover s VO C t o mee t apercen t

reductio n requirement , th e overal l efficienc y of th e emissio n reductio n syste mfo r

acalenda r

mont h woul db e determine ddurin g th e initia l performanc e test

. Thi s woul db e don e b y comparin g th e mas s o f VO C recovere db y th e emissio n reductio n syste mt o th e mas s o f

VO C use da t

th e affecte dfacility

. N o stac k testin g woul d b e required

. Monthl y performanc e test s woul db e th e sam e a s th e initia l performanc e test

. Fo r eac h affecte dfacilit y fo r whio h th e owne r

o r operato r choose s t o us e a n emissio n reductio n syste mtha t destroy s VO C t o mee t

apercen t

reductio n requirement , th e overal l efficienc y of th e emissio n syste mwoul db e determine d b y astac k

tes t performe ddurin g th e initia l performanc e test

. N o monthl y performanc e tes t

woul db e required

. Th e emissio n reductio n syste mefficienc y woul db e redetermine db y astac k tes t whe n requeste db y th e Administrato r o r whe n th e operatin g condition s o f th e syste mar e changed

. Dat anecessar y t o calculat e th e VO C conten t o f cemen t o r spra y materia l woul db e obtaine dfro mformulatio n dat asupplie db y th e manufacture r o f th e spray , o r throug h th e analysi s of eac h cemen t o r spra y materia l b y Referenc e Metho d2

4 "Determinatio n o f

Volatil e Organi c Compoun dConten t of Paint , , Varnish , Lacquer , o r

Relate dProducts " o r a n alternativ e o r

equivalen t

metho d acceptabl e t o th e Administrator

. Referenc e Metho d2

4 woul dserv e a s th e referenc e metho dfo r

th e calculatio n o f th e VO C conten t

o f th e cemen t

o r spra y material s i n cas e of

dispute

. Alternative

Compliance

Method A s a n alternativ e metho dfo r demonstratin g complianc e wit h th e propose dstandard s fo r undertrea d cementing , sidwal l cementing , o r Michelin- B operations , th e owne r o r operato r ma y elec t

t o mee t equipmen t specification s fo r

captur e system s use d i n conjunctio n wit h a9 5 percen t efficien t contro l device

. Thes e specification s includ e enclosur e o f

cemen t applicatio n an ddryin g areas , maintenanc e o f 10 0 fee t pe r minut e fac e velocit y throug h eac h permanen t

openin g t o a n enclosure , an da n uppe r limi t o n th e are ao f permanen t

opening s t o a n enclosure

. Th e Administrato r ha s determine dtha t

meetin g thes e specification s i n conjunctio n wit h operatin g a9 5 percen t

efficien t contro l devic e i s a n acceptabl e mean s of demonstratin g compliance

. A n initia l performanc e tes t o f th e contro l devic e woul db e require dwithi n 18 0 day s afte r

initia l start-u p of

th e affecte dfacility

. Thi s tes t woul db e repeate dwhe n requeste db y th e Administrato r

o r whe n contro l devic e operatin g condition s ar e changed

. Th e owiii.- i o r operato r woul db e require dt o continuousl y monito r

th e contro l devic e a s describe di n th e sectio n o n Selectio n o f Monitorin g Requirements

. N o monthl y performanc e test s woul db e require d becaus e th e cos t

of monthl y stac k

test s coul db e unreasonable

. Neithe r a n initia l performanc e tes t no r monthl y performanc e test s woul db e require dfo r

th e captur e system

. However , th e owne r

o r operato r woul d b e require dt o Includ e i n th e initia l complianc e repor t

astatemen tFedera l Registe r /Vol
. 48 , No . 1 4 / Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 268 7

indicatin g whethe reac h o f th e equipmen tspecification s ha s bee n met . Selection of

Monitoring Requirements Monitorin g requirement s are include d i n standard s of

performanc e to provid e a mean s fo r ensurin g prope roperatio n an d maintenanc e of

emissio n reductio n system s an d t o provid e plan tan d enforcemen tpersonne l wit h sufficien t dat a t o determin e complianc e with th e propose d standards . Wher e therma l incineratio n i s use d t o achiev e compliance , th e owne ro r operato r woul d b e require d t o install , calibrate , operate , an d maintai n a monitorin g devic e to continuousl y recor d th e combustio n (firebox ) temperatur e of

th e contro l device
. I

f catalyti c incineratio n wer e used , th e owne r or operato r woul d b e require d t o instal l a monitorin g devic e t o continuousl y recor d th e ga s temperatur e bot h upstrea m an d downstrea m of th e catalys tbed . Th e owne ro roperato r woul d b e require d to continuall y recor d thes e values . Wher e a contro l devic e tha trecover s VO C i s use d t o achiev e complianc e wit h a percen treductio n requiremen tb y meetin g equipmen tspecifications , th e owne r o r operato r woul d b e require d t o instal l a continuou s monitorin g device
. Equipmen ti s availabl e t o monito rth e operationa l variable s associate d wit h solven trecover y syste m operation
. Monitorin g o f

operation s indicate s whethe r th e solven trecover y syste m i s bein g properl y operate d an d maintained , an d whethe r th e syste m i s continuousl y reducin g VO C emission s to a n acceptabl e level . Th e variabl e whic h woul d yiel d th e bes tindicatio n o f syste m operatio n i s VO C concentratio n a tth e solven trecover y syste m outlet . EP A ha s no tye tdevelope d performanc e specification s fo rsolven t recover y syste m monitors , bu ta program i s underwa y to develo p thes e specifications
. Consequently , unti l EP A propose s an d promulgate s monito r performanc e specifications , owner s an d operator s subjec tt o th e requiremen tt o instal l a continuou s monito ro n th e solven trecover y syste m wil l no tb e require d to do so . Recordkeeping and

Reporting Requirements Th e propose d standard s woul d requir e thatth e owne ro roperato r maintai n record s of

al l dat a an d calculation s use d to determin e VO C emission s from eac h affecte d facilit y fo r a tleas ttw o years . Fo reac h affecte d facilit y whic h use s therma l incineratio n t o achiev e compliance , continuou s record s o f

th e incinerato rcombustio n chambe r temperatur e mus tb e maintaine d a tth e sourc e fo ra perio d o f a tleas ttw o years . Wher e catalyti c incineratio n i s used , continuou s record s o f th e ga s temperature , bot h upstrea m an d downstrea m o f

th e incinerato r catalys tbed , mus tb e maintaine d a tth e sourc e fo ra perio d o f

a tleas ttw o years . Wher e a contro l devic e tha trecovers VO C i s use d to achiev e complianc e wit h a percen treductio n requiremen tb y meetin g th e equipmen tspecifications , th e owne ro roperato rmus tmaintai n a t th e sourc e fo ra perio d o f a tleas ttw o year s continuou s records o f VO C concentratio n a tth e solven trecover y syste m outlet. Th e propose d standard s woul d requir e th e owne roroperato rt o maintai n record s o f

al l 3-hou rperiod s durin g whic h th e averag e temperatur e o f a therma l incinerato ri s mor e tha n 28' C (50°F ) les s tha n th e averag e temperatur e durin g th e mos trecen tperformanc e tes t a twhic h th e destructio n efficienc y wa s determined
. Fo rcatalyti c incinerator s th e owne ro roperato rwoul d maintai n record s of

al l 3-hou rperiod s durin g whic h th e averag e temperatur e immediatel y befor e th e catalys tbe d i s mor e tha n 28° C (50*F) les s tha n th e averag e temperatur e durin g th e mos t recen tperformanc e tes ta twhic h th e destructio n efficienc y wa s determine d orth e temperatur e differenc e acros s th e catalys tbe d i s les s tha n 8 0 percen to f th e averag e temperatur e differenc e durin g th e mos trecen tperformanc e tes t a twhic h th e destructio n efficienc y wa s determined
. Wher e a contro l devic e tha t recover s VO C i s use d t o achiev e complianc e wit h a percen treductio n requiremen tb y meetin g th e equipmen t specifications , th e owne ro roperato r mus tmaintai n records o f al l 3-hou r period s durin g whic h th e averag e VO C concentratio n fro m th e outle to f th e solven trecover y syste m i s greate rtha n th e averag e valu e measure d durin g th e mos trecen ttes to f

th e contro l device
. Th e propose d standard s woul d requir e notificatio n reports an d reports o f al l Initia l performanc e tests , a s require d b y th e Genera l Provisions
. Impact s o f

Reportin g Requirement s A report s impac tanalysi s fo rth e rubbe rtir e manufacturin g industr y wa s prepared . Th e purpos e o f th e analysi s i s t o estimat e th e economi c impac to f th e reportin g an d recordkeeping requirement s tha twoul d b e impose d b y th e propose d standard s an d b y thos e appearin g i n th e Genera l Provision s o f 4 0 CF RPar t60
. Include d i n th e analysi s ar e th e rational e fo rth e selectio n o f th e propose d requirements, a n evaluatio n o f th e majo ralternative s considere d prio r to th e selectio n o f

th e propose d requirements , an d a descriptio n o f th e informatio n require d b y th e Genera l

Provision s an d b y th e propose d standards . A cop y o f

th e report s impac t analysi s i s include d i n th e rubbe rtir e manufacturin g docke t(EP A Docke tNo . A-fl0-e-II-B-14)
. Base d o n th e report s impac tanalysis , a maximu m o f

3 person-year s woul d b e require d industry-wid e t o compl y wit h th e recordkeepin g an d reportin g requirement s throug h th e firstfiv e year s o f applicability
. Th e Paperwor k Reductio n Ac to f 198 0 (Pub
. L. 96-511 ) requires clearanc e fro m th e Offic e o f

Managemen tan d Budge t (OMB ) o f certai n publi c reporting / recordkeepin g requirement s befor e thi s rulemakin g ca n b e promulgate d a s final
. Th e reporting/recordkeepin g requirement s associate d wit h thi s standar d hav e bee n submitte d t o OM B fo rapproval . Public Hearin g A publi c hearin g wil l b e hel d t o discus s th e propose d standard s i n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 307(d)(5 ) o f th e Clea n Ai rAc tPerson s wishin g t o mak e ora l presentation s shoul d contact.EP A a tth e addres s give n i n th e ADDRESSE S sectio n o f

thi s preamble . Ora l presentation s wil l b e limite d t o 1 5 minute s each . An y membe ro f th e publi c ma y fil e a writte n statemen tbefore , during , o rwithi n 3 0 day s afte rth e hearing
. Writte n statement s shoul d b e addresse d t o th e Centra l Docke tSectio n addres s give n i n th e ADDRESSE S sectio n o f thi s preamble . A verbati m transcrip to f th e hearin g an d writte n statement s wil l b e availabl e fo rpubli c inspectio n an d copyin g durin g norma l workin g hour s a tEPA' s Centra l Docke tSectio n i n Washington , D.C
. (se e ADDRESSE S sectio n o f

thi s preamble)
. Docke t Th e docke ti s a n organize d an d complet e fd e o f

al l th e informatio n submitte d t o o rotherwis e considere d i n th e developmen to f

thi s propose d rulemaking
. Th e principa l purpose s o f th e docke tar e (1 ) t o allo w intereste d partie s t o readil y identif y an d locat e document s s o tha tthe y ca n intelligentl y an d effectivel y participat e i n th e rulemakin g process , an d (2 ) t o serv e a s th e recor d i n cas e o f

judicia l review (excep tfo rthos e portion s o f th e docke t exclude d from th e record unde rSectio n 307(d)(7)(A))
. Miscellaneou s A s prescribe d b y Sectio n 111 , establishmen to f

standard s o f performanc e fo rrubbe rtir e manufacturin g plant s wa s precede d b y th e Administrator' s determinatio n (4 0268 8 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s
CF R60.16

. 44 F

R49222 , date dAugus t

21 , 1979 ) tha t thes e source s contribut e significantl y t o ai r

pollutio n whic h ma y reasonabl y b e anticipate dt o endange r publi c healt h o r

welfare

. I n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 11 7 o f

th e Act , publicatio n o f thi s proposa l wa s precede db y consultatio n wit h appropriat e advisor y committees , independen t experts , an d Federa l department s an dagencies

. Th e Administrato r

wil l welcom e comment s o n al l aspect s o f

th e propose d regulation , includin g economi c an d technologica l issues , an do n th e propose dtes t

methods

. It shoul db e note dtha t

standard s o f performanc e fo r

ne w stationar y source s establishe dunde r

Sectio n 11 1 o f

th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t reflect : * * ' applicatio n o

f th e bes t technologica

l syste mo f continuou s emissio n reductio n which (takin g Int

o consideratio n th e cos t

o f achievin g suc h emissio n reduction , an y nonai r qualit y health an denvironmental Impac t an denerg y requirements ) th e Administrato r

determine s ha s bee n adequatel y demonstrated

. (Sectio n 111(a)(1). ) Althoug h ther e ma

y b e emissio n contro l technolog y availabl e that

can reduc e emission s belo w thos e level s require dto compl y wit h standard s o

f performance , thi s technolog y migh

t no t b e selecte da s the basi s o f standard s o

f performanc e du e to cost s associate dwit

h it s use
. Accordingly , standard s o

f performanc e shoul dno t

b e viewe da s th e ultimate i

n achievabl e emissio n control

. I

n fac t th e Ac t require s (o

r ha s th e potentia l fo

r requiring ] th e impositio n o f amor e stringent emissio n standar di

n several situations

. Fo r example , applicabl e cost s d o no t pla y a s prominen t

arol e i n determinin g th e "lowes t

achievabl e emissio n rate " fo r ne w o r modifie dsource s locate di n nonattainmen t

areas , i.e. , thos e area s wher e statutorily-mandate dhealt h an d welfar e standard s ar e bein g violated

. I n thi s respect

. Sectio n 17 3 of th e Ac t require s tha t

ane w o r

modifie dsourc e constructe di n a n are awher e ambien t pollutan t concentration s excee dth e Nationa l Ambien t

Ai r Qualit y Standar d (NAAQS ) mus t

reduc e emission s t o th e leve l tha t reflect s th e "lowes t achievabl e emissio n rate " (LAER) , a s define di n Sectio n 171(3) , fo r suc h categor y o f

source
. Th e statut e define s LAE Ra s tha t

rat e o f emission s base do n th e following , whicheve r i s mor e stringent : (A ) Th e mos t

stringen t emissio n limitatio n whic h I s containe dI

n th e Implementatio n pla n o f an y Stat e fo

r suc h clas s o r

categor y o f source , unles s th e owner

o r operato r o f th e propose dsourc e demonstrate s that suc h limitation s ar e no t

achievable , or (B ) Th e mos t

stringen t emissio n limitatio n whic h I s achieve dI

n practic e b y suc h clas s o

r categor y o f source
. I n n o even t ca n th e emissio n rat e excee d an y applicabl e ne w sourc e performanc e standar d(Sectio n 171(3))

. A simila r situatio n ma y aris e unde r th e preventio n o f

significan t deterioratio n o f

ai r qualit y provision s o f th e Ac t (Par t C)

. Thes e provision s requir e tha t

certai n source s (referre dt o i n Sectio n 169(1) ) emplo y "bes t availabl e contro l technology " (BACT ) a s define di n Sectio n 189(3 ) fo r al l pollutant s regulate dunde r th e Act

. Bes t availabl e contro l technolog y mus t b e determine do n acase-by-cas e basis , takin g energy , environmenta l an d economi c impact s an dothe r cost s int o account

. I n n o even t

ma y th e applicatio n o f BAC T resul t

i n emission s o f

an y pollutant s whic h wil l excee dth e emission s allowe db y an y applicabl e standar destablishe dpursuan t t o Sectio n 11 1 (o r

112 ) o f th e Act

. I n al l events , Stat e Implementatio n Plan s (SIPs ) approve do r promulgate d unde r Sectio n 11 0 o f

th e Ac t mus t provid e fo r

th e attainmen t

an d maintenanc e o f

NAAQ S designe dt o protec t publi c healt h an dwelfare

. Fo r thi s purpose , SIP s mus t i n som e case s requir e greate r

emissio n reductio n tha n thos e require db y standard s o f performanc e fo r

ne w sources
. State s ar e free unde r

Sectio n 11 6 o f th e Ac t t o establis h eve n mor e stringen t emissio n limit s tha n thos e establishe d unde r Sectio n 11 1 o r

thos e necessar y t o attai n o r maintai n th e NAAQ S unde r Sectio n 110

. Accordingly , ne w source s ma y i n som e case s b e subjec t t o limitation s mor e stringen t tha n standard s o f

performanc e unde r

Sectio n 111 , an dprospectiv e owner s an d operator s o f

ne w source s shoul db e awar e o f thi s possibilit y i n plannin g fo r suc h facilities

. Thi s regulatio n wil l b e reviewe dfou r year s fromth e dat e o f

promulgatio n a s

- require db y th e Clea n Ai r Act

. Thi s revie w wil l includ e a n assessmen t of suc h factor s a s th e nee dfo r integratio n wit h othe r

programs , th e existenc e o f alternativ e methods , enforceability , improvement s i n emissio n contro l technology , an dreportin g requirements

. • Th e reportin g requirement s i n thi s regulatio n wil l b e reviewe da s require d unde r EPA' s sunse t

polic y fo r

reportin g requirement s I n regulations

. Sectio n 31 7 o f

th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t require s th e Administrato r t o prepar e a n economi c impac t

assessmen t

fo r an y ne w sourc e standar do f performanc e promulgate dunde r

Sectio n 111(b ) o f

th e Act

. A n economi c Impac t assessmen t wa s prepare dfo r

th e propose d regulation s an dfo r

othe r regulator y alternatives

. Al l aspect s of th e assessmen t

wer e considere dI

n th e formulatio n o f

th e propose dstandard s t o ensur e tha t th e propose dstandard s woul drepresen t

th e bes t syste mo f emissio n reductio n considerin g costs

. Th e economi c impac t

assessmen t

i s include di n th e Backgroun dInformatio n Documen t "Major Rule " Determination. Unde r Executiv e Orde r

12291 , EP A i s require d t o judg e whethe r

aregulatio n i s a "majo r rule " an dtherefor e subjec t t o certai n requirement s o f th e Order

. Th e Agenc y ha s determine dtha t thi s regulatio n woul dresul t i n non e o f

th e advers e economi c effect s se t fort h i n Sectio n 1 o f

th e Orde r

a s ground s fo r findin g aregulatio n t o b e a"majo r rule. " Fifth-yea r

annualize dcost s o f

th e standard , compare dt o a n uncontrolle d situation , woul db e abou t $3. 4 millio n i n th e wors t case
. Th e produc t

wholesal e pric e i s no t

expecte dt o increase

. Th e Agenc y ha s therefor e conclude dtha t th e propose dregulatio n i s no t a"majo r rule " unde r

Executiv e Orde r

12291

. Thi s regulatio n wa s submitte dt o th e Offic e o f Managemen t

an dBudge t

fo r revie w a s require db y Executiv e Orde r 12291

. An y comment s fromOM B t o EP A an dan y EP A respons e t o thos e comment s ar e availabl e fo r publi c inspectio n i n Docke t

No

. A-80-A , EPA' s Centra l Docke t

Section , Wes t

Towe r Lobby , Galler y 1 , Watersid e Mall , 40 1 M Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C

. 20460

. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Certification. Th e Regulator y Flexibilit y Ac t o f 198 0 require s tha t

advers e effect s o f al l Federa l regulation s upo n smal l businesse s b e identified

. Accordin g t o curren t Smal l Busines s Administratio n guidelines , asmal l busines s i n th e SI C categor y 3011 , "Tire s an dinnertubes, " i s on e tha t ha s 1,000 employee s o r less

. Thi s i s th e criterio n t o qualif y fo r SB A loan s o r fo r th e purpos e o f

governmen t procurement

. O f

th e 1 8 tir e manufacturin g companies , 3 existin g companie s hav e les s tha n 1,00 0 employees

. A n industr y representativ e ha s Btate dtha t

employmen t

i n atypica l ne w plan t

i s expecte dt o averag e 1,400 , wit h arang e o f

1,000 t o 2,000

. Thus , i t

i s unlikel y tha t

an y ne w plan t

woul db e considere da ? mil l entity

. Existin g smal l entitie s ar e no t

expecte dt o becom e subjec t t o th e NSP S throug h ne w construction , modification , o r reconstruction

. However , if asmal l busines s di dbecom e subjec t t o th e NSPS , th e cos t

o f complianc e woul d hav e minima l impacts

. Pursuan t t o th e provision s o f

5 U.S.C

. 605(b) , I hereb y certif

y tha t th e attache d rul e wil l no t

hav e asignifican t

economi c impac t o n asubstantia l numbe r o f smal l entities

.

### Federa l Registe r / Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday . January 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 268 9
Lis to f Subject s in 4 0 CF RPar t6 0 Ai r pollution control , Aluminum , Ammoniu m sulfat e plants . Asphal t Cemen tindustry, Coal , Copper

, Electri c power plants , Glas s an

d glas s products , Grains , Intergovernmenta

l relations , Iron , Lead , Metals , Metalli c minerals , Moto r vehicles , Nitri

c acid plants , Pape

r an d pape r product s industry, Petroleum, Phosphate , Sewag e disposal , Steel sulfuri c aci d plants . Wast

e treatmen

t an d disposal , Zinc, Tires
. Dated : January 5,1983
. Joh n W . Hernandez , Jr. , A cling A dministralor. PAR T 60—[AMENDED ] 

### I ti s propose

d tha t4 0 CF RPar t6 0 b e amende d b y addin g a ne w Subpar

tBB B t o rea d a s follows : Subpar t BBB—Standard

s o f Performanc

e fo r tri e Rubbe

r Tir e Manufacturin g Industr

y Sec
. 60.54 0 Applicabilit y an d designatio n o f affecte d facilities
. 60.54 1 Definitions
. 60.54 2 Standard s fo r volatil e organi c

. compounds . 60.54 3 Performanc e tes tan d complianc e provisions
. 60.54 4 Monitorin g o f

emission s an d operations
. 60.54 5 Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements
. 00.54 6 Referenc e method s an d procedures . Authority : Sees
. Il l an d 301(a) , Clea n Ai r Act , a s amended , (4 2 U.S.C
. 7411.7601(a)) , unles s otherwis e noted . Subpar t BBB—Standard s of Performanc e fo r th e Rubbe r Tir e Manufacturin g Industry § 60.54 0 Applicabilit

y an d designatio n o

f affected facilities

. 

### (a ) Th e provisions o

f this subpar

t appl y t o tiie following affected facilitie s i n rubbe r tir e manufacturin

g plants : eac

h undertrea d cementing operation , eac h sidewal l cementin

g operation , eac

h trea d en d cementing operation , eac h bead cementin

g operation , eac

h insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation , each outside gree

n tir e sprayin g operation , eac h Michelin- A operation , each Michelin-B operation , an

d eac h Michelin-C-automati

c operation
. (b ) Th e provisions o

f this subpar

t appl y t o eac h affected facilit

y whic h I s Identifie d I n paragrap

h (a ) o f this sectio n an d whic h commences construction o r modification afte

r Januar y 20,1983
. (c ) Th e provisions o

f $ 60.544(c) , 5 60.545(c)(3) , { 60.545(f)
. and I 60.545(h ) wil l no tappl y unti l EP A ha s establishe d and promulgate

d performanc

e specification s fo

r th e VO C concentration monitorin g device
. Afte

r the promulgatio

n o f performanc

e specifications , thes e provisions wil l appl y t o each affected facilit

y unde r paragrap h (b) o f this section
. § 60.54 1 Definitions
. (a ) All term s whic h ar e use d I n this subpar tan d ar e ho tdefme d belo w ar

e given th e same meanin

g a s i n th e Act an d in Subpar

tA o f thi s par t (1 ) "Bead " means rubbe

rcovered strands o f wire , wound int

o a circula r form , whic h ensur e a sea l betwee n a tir

e an d the ri m o f the whee l ont

o whic h the tir e i s mounted . Eac

h tir e usually contain s two beads . (2 ) "Bea d cementin

g operation " means th e system whic

h i s used to apply cemen tt o th e bead rubbe

r befor e o r afte r i ti s woun d int o It s fina l circula r form
. A bead cementin

g operation consists o f a cemen tapplicatio n station , suc h a s a di p tank , spra y boot h an d nozzles , cemen

tthroug h an d rolle r o r swab applicator ; an

d all other equipmen tnecessary t

o appl y cemen tt o woun d bead s o r bead rubbe

r an d t o allo w evaporation o

f solventfro

m cemente d beads . (3 ) "Component " means a piec e o f tread, combine

d tread/sidewall , o

r separat e sidewal l rubbe

r o f th e lengt h neede d t o manufactur

e a tir e o f the siz e an d typ e fo r whic h the componen

ti s produced . (4 ) "Dryin g area " mean

s th e are a wher e VO C fro

m applied cementor gree n tire sprays i s allowe d t

o evaporate . • (5 ) "Enclosure " means a structure, designe d t o contain evaporated VOC, whic h surround

s a cement

, solven to

r spra y application area, and/o r dryin g are a an d duct s contained VO C t

o a contro l device(s)
. Enclosures ma y have permanen tan d temporar

y openings
. (6 ) "Gree n tire " means a

n assembled , uncure d tire
. (7 ) "Insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation " means the system use d to appl y a mol d releas e agen

tan d lubrican tt o the insid e o

f gree n tires t o facilitat e th e curin g proces s an

d preven t rubbe rfro m sticking t

o the curin

g press . Spray s ma y b e organi

c solvent-base d o

r water-based . A n insid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation consists o

f th e insid e spra y application statio n an d relate d equipmentsuc

h a s the lubrican

tsuppl y system , the boot

h wher e sprayin g i s performed, and associate d fan s an d ductwork. (8 ) "Michelin-A operation " means tha t operation wher

e cemen ti s applied whic h I s Identifie d a s Michelin- A i n th e Emission Standards and Engineerin g Divisio n confidentia

l file a s referenced i n Docke tA-60-0-II-B-12
. (9 ) "Michelin- B operation " means tha t operation wher

e cementi s applied whic h i s Identifie

d a s Michelin- B I

n the Emission Standards an

d Engineerin

g Divisio n confidentia

l file a s reference

d in Docke tA-80-9-II-B-12
. (10 ) "Michelin-C-automati

c operation " means tha

toperation wher

e cemen ti s automatically applied whic h i s identified a s Michelin-C-automatic in the Emission Standards and Engineerin g Divisio n confidentia

l file a s referenced i n Docke tA-80-9-II-B-12
. (11 ) "Outsid

e gree n tir e sprayin g operation " means the system use d to appl y a mol d release agen

tt o the outside o f gree n tires t o facilitat e th e curin g proces s an

d preven trubbe r fro m sticking t o th e curin g press . Sprays ma

y b e organi c solvent-base d o

r water based . An outsid e gree

n tir e sprayin g operation consist s o

f the outsid e spra

y application statio n an

d related equipmentsuc

h a s the lubrican

tsuppl y system , th e boot h wher e sprayin g i s performed, an

d associate d fans an d ductwork. (12 ) "Permanen

topening " mean s a

n openin g designe d int

o a n enclosur

e t o allo w tir e component

s t o pas s throug

h th e enclosur e by conveyo ro

r other mechanica

l means , to provide acces s fo r permanen tmechanica

l o r electrica l equipmento

r t o direc tair flow throug

h th e enclosure . A permanen

topening i s no tequippe d wit h a doo r o r othermeans o f obstruction
. (13 ) "Sidewal

l cementing operation " means the syste m use d to appl y cement t o a continuous stri

p o f sidewal l componen tA sidewal l cementing operation consists cf

a cemen t applicatio n statio n and al l other equipmentsuc

h a s the cemen

tsuppl y system and fee d an d takeawa y conveyors , necessary t

o appl y cementt

o sidewal l strip s and t

o allo w evaporatio n o f solventfro

m cemented sidewall
. (14 ) 'Temporar

y opening " mean s a

n opening int

o a n enclosure tha

ti s equippe d wit h a mean s o

f obstruction , suc h a s a door, window , o r port , which i s normall y closed . (15 ) 'Tire " means an

y agricultural , airplane , industrial , mobile home , light
dut y truc k and/o r passenge rvehicl e tir e whic h has a bead diameter les s tha n or equa l to 0i 5 mete r (m ) [19. 7 inches ] an d cros s sectio n dimension les s tha n or equa l t o 0.32 5 m (12. 8 in. ) and i s mas s produce d i n a n assembly-lin e fashion
. (16 ) "Trea d end cementing operation " means th e syste m use d t

o apply cement t o one or bot

h end s o f trea d o r combined tread/sldewal l componen tA tread en d cementing operation consist s o f a cementapplicatio n statio n an d al l othe r equipmentsuc

h a s the cemen

tsuppl y

### 269 0 • Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s syste man dfeedan dtakeawa y conveyors , necessary to appl y cement to trea dend s an dto allo w evaporatio n o f solvent fromcemente dtrea dends

. (17) "Undertrea dcementin g operation " mean s th e syste muse dto appl y cement

t o acontinuou s stri p o

f trea dor combine dtread/sidewal l component

. A

n undertrea dcementin g operatio n consist s o

f acement applicatio n statio n an dal l othe r equipmen t

suc h a s th e cement

suppl y syste man dfeedan dtakeawa y conveyors , necessar y t o appl y cement t o trea dor combine dtread/sidewal l strip s an dto allo w evaporatio n o f solven t fromcemente dtrea dor

combine dtread / sidewall

. (18) "VO C emissio n contro l device " mean s equipment

tha t destroy s o r

. recover s VOC

. (19) "VO C emissio n reductio n system " mean s asyste mcompose do f an enclosure , hood , or

othe r devic e fo r containment

an dcaptur e o

f VO C emission s an daVOC emissio n contro l device

. (b ) Notation s use dunde r

thi s subpart ar e define dbelow : C,=Concentratio n o

f VOC in ga s streami n vent s after

contro l devic e (part s per millio n b y volume ) Ct,s = concentratio n o

f VOC in ga s strea min vent s befor

e contro l devic e (part s per millio n b y volume ) C(=concentratio n o

f VO C in ga s streami n vent s fromaffecte dfacilit y to atmosphere (part s pe r

millio n b y volume ) D e 

### =densit y o

f cement or spray material (gram s pe r

litre ) D r 

### =densit y o

f VOC recovere db y an emissio n contro l devic e (gram s per litre ) E=emi8sio n contro l devic e efficiency , inle t versu s outle t

(fraction ) F c 

### =captur e efficiency , VO C capture d an droute dt

o on e contro l devic e versu s tota l VOC use dfo

r an affecte dfacilit

y (fraction ) F 0 

### =fractio n o

f tota l mas s o

f VOC use di n acalendar

mont h b y al l facilitie s serve db y acommon cement or spray material distributio n syste mthat i s use d b y aparticula

r affecte dfacilit

y serve d b y the common distributio n syste m G=monthl y averag e mas s o f VO C use dper complete tire processe dfo r a particula r affecte dfacilit

y (gram s pe

r tire ) Lj=volum e o

f cement o r spray material use dfo

r acalendar

mont h (litres ) L,=volum e o

f VO C recovere db y an emissio n contro l devic e (litres ) M=tota l mas s o

f VO C use dfo

r a calendar mont h b y al l facilitie s serve d by acommon cement

or spray materia l distributio n syste m(grams ) M<,=tota l mas s o f VO C use da t

a n affecte dfacilit

y fo r acalendar

mont h (grams ) M p 

### =mas s o

f VO C recovere db y a n emissio n contro l devic e (grams ) N=mas s o

f VOC emitte dto th e atmospher e pe r

complete tir e processe d fo r an affecte dfacilit

y fo r acalendar mont h (gram s pe r

tire ) Q,=volumetri c flow rat e i n vent s afte r contro l devic e (dr

y standar dcubi c meter s pe r

hour) Q b 

### =volumetri c flo w rat e i n vent s befor e contro l devic e (dr

y standar d cubi c meter s pe r

hour ) Q,=volumetri c flow rat e i n vent s from affecte dfacilit

y to atmospher e (dr

y standar dcubi c meter s pe r hour) R=overal l efficienc y o

f a n emissio n reductio n syste m(fraction ) T„=tota l numbe r

o f tires processe da t aparticular

affecte dfacilit

y fo r a calendar mont h W„=weigh t

fractio n o

f VO C in a cement o r spray material

. § 60.54 2 Standard s fo r volatil e organi c compounds

. 

### (a ) On an dafter

th e dat e on whic h § 60.8(b) require s aperformanc e tes t t o b e completed , eac h owne r or operato r subjec t to th e provision s o

f thi s subpart shal l no t caus e to b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e mor

e than : (1 ) Fo r eac h undertrea dcementin g operation : (i ) 2 5 percen t o f th e VOC use d(7 5 percen t emissio n reduction ) fo

r eac h calendar mont h i f th e operatio n use s mor e than 2 5 gram s o f VO C per tir e processed ; or (ii ) 2 5 gram s o f VOC pe r tire processe dfo

r eac h calendar

mont h i f th e operatio n use s 2

5 gram s or

les s o f VO C pe r tir e processe dan ddoe s no t emplo y aVO C emissio n reductio n system

. (2 ) Fo r eac h sidewal l cementin g operation : (i ) 2 5 percen t o f th e VO C use d(7 5 percen t emissio n reduction ) fo

r eac h calendar mont h I f th e operatio n use s mor e tha n 2 5 gram s o f VO C per tir e processed ; or (ii) 2 5 gram s o f VO C pe r tir e processe dfo

r eac h calendar

mont h i f th e operatio n use s 2

5 gram s o r

les s o f VOC per tire processe dan ddoe s no t emplo y aVOC emissio n reductio n system

. (3 ) Fo r eac h trea den dcementin g operation : 1 0 gram s o

f VO C pe r tire proces s fo r eac h calendar

month

. (4 ) Fo r eac h bea dcementin g operation : 1 0 gram s o

f VO C pe r tire processe dfo

r eac h calendar

month

. (5) Fo r eac h insid e gree n tire sprayin g operation : 1.

2 grow s pe r

tir e processe d fo r eac h calendar

month

. (6 ) Fo r eac h outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operation : 9. 3 gram s pe r tir e processe dfo

r eac h calendar

month

. (7 ) Fo r eac h Michelin- A operation : 3 5 percen t o f th e VO C use dfo

r each * calendar mont h (6 5 percen t emissio n reduction)

. (8) Fo r eac h Michelin- B operation ; 25 ' percen t o f th e VOC use dfo

r eac h calendar mont h (7 5 percen t

emissio n
. reduction)

. (9 ) Fo r eac h Michelin-C-automati c operation : 3 5 percen t

o f th e VOC use d fo r eac h calendar

mont h (6 5 percen t emissio n reduction). ' $60,54 3 Performanc e tes t an d complianc e provisions

. 

### (a ) Sectio n 60.8(d

) doe s no t appl y to th e monthl y performanc e tes t procedure s require db y thi s subpart

. Sectio n 60.8(d

) doe s appl y to initia l performanc e tests

. Sectio n 60.8(f ) doe s no t appl y whe n Referenc e Metho d2 4 i s used

. (b ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit

y shal l conduc t

a n initia l performanc e tes t

a s require dunde r § 60.8(a ) excep t a s describe di n paragrap h (h

) o f thi s section

. Th e owne r or operato r o f an affecte dfacilit

y shal l thereafte r conduc t aperformanc e tes t eac h calendar

mont h excep t a s describe din paragraph s (e)(1 ) an d(h ) o f thi s section

. Initial an dmonthl y performanc e test s shal l b e conducte d

. accordin g to th e procedure s in thi s section

. (c) Fo r eac h undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , trea den d cementing , bea dcementing , insid e gree n tir e spraying , an doutsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n whic h doe s no t us e a VOC emissio n reductio n system , th e owne r o r operato r shal l us e th e following procedur e to determin e complianc e wit

h th e applicabl e g/tir e limit specifie dunde r

§ 60.542(a)

. (1 ) Calculat e th e tota l mas s o f VO C (M„ ) use da t th e affecte dfacilit

y fo r th e calendar mont h by th e following procedure

. (i ) Fo r eac h affecte dfacilit

y fo r whic h cement or sp-.-i y i 9 delivere di

n batch or vi aadistributio n syste mwhic h serve s only tha t affecte dfacility :

where : n equal s th

e numbe r o f differen t cement s o r spray s use ddurin g th e calenda r month

. (ii) Fo r eac h affecte dfacilit

y fo r whic h cement or spra y i s delivere dvi aa common distributio n syste mwhic h als oFedera l Registe r/ Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday . Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 269 1

serve s other , affecte d o rexistin g facilities
. (A ) Calculat e th e tota l mas s (M ) o f VO C use d fo r al l o f

th e facilitie s serve d b y th e commo n distributio n syste m fo r th e calenda r month :

= XU»D.W „
where : n equal s th

e numbe ro f differen t cement s o r spray s use d durin

g th e calendar month. (B ) Determin e th e fractio n (F<,l° f M ,use d b y th e affectetTfacilil y b y comparin g th e productio n record s an d proces s specification s fo rth e materia l cemente d o r spraye d a tth e affecte d facilit y fo r th e calenda rmont h t o th e productio n record s an d proces s specification s fo rth e materia l cemente d o r spraye d a tal l othe rfacilitie s serve d b y th e commo n distributio n syste m fo r th e calenda r mont h o rb y anothe r procedur e acceptabl e t o th e Administrator
. (C ) Calculat e th e tota l monthl y mas s o f VOC(M„ ) use d b y th e affecte d facility : M.=MF 0 (2 ) Determin e th e tota l numbe ro f tire s (T„ ) processe d a tth e affecte d facilit y fo r th e calenda r month b y th e followin g procedure . (i ) Fo r undertrea d cementing , T „ equal s th e numbe ro f

trea d o rcombine d tread/sidewal l component s whic h receiv e a n applicatio n o f undertrea d cement . (ii ) Fo r sidewal l cementing , T 0 equal s th e numbe r o f

sidewal l component s whic h receiv e ar

tapplicatio n of

sidewal l cement , divide d b y 2
. (iii ) Fo r tree d en d cementing , T „ equal s th e numbe ro f

trea d o rcombine d tread/sldewal l component s whic h receiv e a n applicatio n o f trea d en d cement . (iv ) Fo r bea d cementing , T 0 equal s th e number
- o f

bead s whic h receiv e a n applicatio n o f

bea d cement , divide d b y 2
. (v ) Fo r insid e gree n tir e spraying , T 0 equal s th e numbe ro f

gree n tire s whic h receiv e a n applicatio n of insid e gree n tir e spray . (vi ) Fo r outsid e gree n tir e spraying , T 0 equal s th e numbe rof

gree n tire s whic h receiv e a n applicatio n o f outsid e gree n tir e spray . (3 ) Calculat e th e mas s o f VO C use d pe r tir e processe d (G ) b y th e affecte d facilit y fo r th e calenda rmonth : H

.
(4 ) Calculat e th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtire processe d (N ) fo rth e affecte d facilit y fo rth e calenda rmonth : 

### N= C (5 ) Wher e th e valu e o f

th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N ) i s les s tha n o requa l t o th e applicabl e g / tir e limi tspecifie d unde r§ 60.542(a) , th e affecte d facilit y i s i n compliance
. (d ) Th e owne ro roperato rshal l us e th e followin g procedur e fo reac h trea d en d cementing , bea d cementing , insid e gree n tir e spraying , an d outsid e gree n tir e sprayin g operatio n whic h use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha tdestroy s VO C (e.g. , incinerator ) t o compl y wit h th e applicabl e g/tir e limi tspecifie d unde r 5 60.542(a)
. (1 ) Calculat e th e mas s o f VO C use d pe rtir e processe d (G ) fo rth e affecte d facilit y fo rth e calenda rmont h a s describe d unde r§ 60.543(c)(3)
. (2 ) Calculat e th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N ) fo rth e affecte d facilit y fo rth e calenda rmonth : N = G(i-R ) Fo rth e Initia l performanc e tes tth e overal l reductio n efficienc y (R ) shal l b e determine d a s prescribe d I n (d)(2 ) (i) , (ii) , an d (iii ) o f

thi s section
. In subsequen tmonths , th e owne ro r operato rma y us e th e mos trecently determine d overal l reductio n efficienc y (R ) fo rth e performanc e tes tprovidin g th e contro l devic e an d captur e syste m operatin g condition s hav e no tchanged . Th e procedur e i n (d)(2 ) (i) , (ii) , an d (til ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e repeated whe n directe d b y th e Administrato ro rwhe n th e owne ro roperato relect s t o operat e th e contro l devic e o rcaptur e syste m a t condition s differen tfro m th e mos t recen tdeterminatio n o f overal l reductio n efficiency
. (i ) Determin e th e fractio n (F e) o f tota l VO C use d fo rth e affecte d facilit y whic h enter s th e contro l device , th e owne ro r operato r o f

a n affecte d facilit y shal l construc ta temporar y tota l enclosur e aroun d th e applicatio n an d dryin g area s durin g th e performanc e tes tfo rth e purpos e o f

capturin g fugitiv e VO C emission s an d us e th e followin g equation : 

## £ty

_ 

# .?> Cb,Qb, + 

# Ji 0 

# " 5 

# * where : m i s th e numbe ro f vents fro m the affected facilit

y t o th e contro

l devic e and n I s th e numbe ro f vents fro m th e affecte d facilit y to. th e atmosphere . (ii ) Determin e th e destructio n efficienc y (E) o f

th e contro l devic e b y usin g value s o f

th e volumetri c flo w rat e o f eac h o f th e ga s stream s an d th e VO C conten t(a s carbon ) o f

eac h o f th e ga s stream s i n an d ou to f

th e contro l devic e b y th e followin g equation : '



### iQ-C«

- VOA i
E 

### =J i £ • tObA , i - i where : n I s th e numbe ro f vent s befor e th e contro l device , an

d m I s the numbe

ro f vent s afte rth e contro l device
.

- (iii ) Determin e th e overal l reductio n efficienc y (R

) usin g th e followin g equation : R=EF , (3 ) Wher e th e valu e o f

th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (NJ.i s les s tha n o requa l t o th e applicabl e g / tir e limi tspecifie d unde rI 60.524(a)
. th e affecte d facilit y i s i n compliance
. (e ) Th e owne ro roperato rshal l us e th e followin g procedur e fo reac h undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an d Michelin-C-automati c affecte d facilit y whic h use s a VO C emissio n reduction syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha t destroy s VO C (e.g. , incinerator) t o compl y wit h th e applicabl e percen t emissio n reduction requiremen t specifie d unde r{ 60.542(a)
. (1 ) Fo rth e initia l performanc e tes tth e overal l reduction efficienc y (R) shal l b e determine d a s prescribe d i n 5 60.543(d)92)(i}—(ill)
. Th e performanc e tes tshal l b e repeated usin g thi s sam e procedur e whe n directe d b y th e Administrato ro rwhe n th e owne ro r operato relect s t o operat e th e contro l devic e o rcaptur e syste m a tcondition s differen tfro m th e mos trecent determinatio n o f

overal l reduction efficiency
. N o monthl y performanc e test s ar e required. (2 ) Eac h undertr-on

d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o rMichelin- B facilit y wher e Ri s greate rtha n o requa l t o 0.7 5 i s i n compliance
. (3 ) Eac h Michelin- A o rMichelin-C
automati c facilit y wher e Ri s greate r tha n o requa l t o 0.6 5 i s i n compliance
. (f ) Th e owne ro roperato rshal l us e th e followin g procedur e fo reac h trea d en d cementing , bea d cementing , insid e gree n tir e spraying , an d outsid e gree n tire sprayin g affecte d facilit y whic h use s a

# VO L 289 2 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 48 , No

. 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose dRule s

VO C emissio n reduction syste mwit h a contro l devic e tha t

recover s VO C (e.g. , carbo n adsorber ) t o compl y wit h th e applicabl e g/tir e limit s specifie dunde r i 60.542(a)

. (1 ) Calculat e th e mas s o f VO C use d pe r tir e processe d(G ) a t

th e affecte d facilit y fo r

th e calenda r

mont h a s describe dunde r

§ 60.543(c)(3)

. (2 ) Calculat e th e tota l mas s o f VO C recovere d(M r ) fro mth e affecte dfacilit y fo r th e calenda r

mont h usin g th e followin g equation : M,=L,D , (3 ) Calculut e th e overal l reductio n efficienc y [V) fo r

th e VO C emissio n reductio n syste mfo r

th e calenda r

mont h usin g th e followin g equation :

M o (4 ) Calculat e th e mas s of VO C emitte d pe r tire processe d(N ) fo r

th e affecte d facilit y fo r

th e calenda r

mont h usin g th e followin g equation : N = C(1-R ) (5 ) Wher e th e valu e o f

th e mas s o f VO C emitte dpe r

tire processe d(N ) i s les s tha n o r

equa l t o th e applicabl e g / tire limi t specifie dunde r

5 60.542(a) , th e affecte dfacilit y i s i n compliance

. (g ) Th e owne r

o r operato r shal l us e th e followin g procedur e fo r eac h undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , Michelin-A , Michelin-B , an d Michelin-C-automati c affecte dfacilit y whic h use s aVO C emissio n reductio n syste mwit h acontro l devic e tha t recover s VO C (e.g. , carbo n adsorber ) t o compl y wit h th e applicabl e percen t reductio n requiremen t

specifie dunde r § 60.542(a)

. (1 ) Calculat e th e tota l mas s o f VO C use da t th e affecte dfacilit y (M J fo r th e calenda r mont h a s describe dunde r 5 60.543(c)(1)

. (2 ) Calculat e th e tota l mas s o f VO C recovere d(M , fro mth e affecte dfacilit y fo r th e calenda r

mont h usin g th e followin g equation : M r =L,D , (3 ) Calculat e th e overal l reductio n efficienc y (R ) fo r

th e VO C emissio n reductio n syste mfo r

th e calenda r

mont h usin g th e followin g equation :

M

. (4 ) Eac h undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , o r

Michelin- B facilit y wher e Ri s greate r tha n o r equa l t o 0.7 5 I s I n compliance

. (5 ) Eac h Michelin- A o r Michelin-C

automati c facilit y wher e Ri s greate r tha n o r equa l t o 0.6 4 i s i n compliance

. (h ) Rathe r

tha n demonstrat e complianc e wit h th e provision s o f § 60.542(a)(l),(2) , o r

(8 ) usin g th e performanc e tes t

procedure s describe d i n paragraph s (e ) an d(g ) o f thi s section , a n owne r o r operato r o f a n undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o r Michelin- B affecte dfacilit y tha t use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste mma y demonstrat e complianc e b y meetin g th e equipmen t

desig n an dperformanc e specification s liste di n (l)-(5 ) belo w an d b y conductin g aperformanc e tes t t o demonstrat e complianc e wit h (5 ) below

. Th e owne r

o r operato r shal l conduc t

thi s performanc e tes t

o f th e contro l devic e efficienc y (a s specifie di n { 60.8(a) ) no t late r tha n 18 0 day s afte r

initia l startu p o f th e affecte dfacility

. Th e Administrato r

ha s decide dtha t

meetin g th e captur e syste mdesig n an d performanc e specifications , i n conjunctio n wit h operatin g a9 5 percen t efficien t contro l device , i s a n acceptabl e mean s o f demonstratin g complianc e wit h th e standard

. Therefore , i n accordanc e wit h § 60.8(b) , th e Administrato r

ha s waive dth e requiremen t

fo r aperformanc e tes t

o n th e enclosur e (a s requiredb y § 0.8(a))

. N o monthl y performanc e test s ar e required

. (1 ) Th e cemen t

applicatio n an ddryin g are ao f th e affecte dfacilit y shal l b e containe di n a n enclosur e whic h meet s th e criteri ai n paragraph s (h ) (2) , (3) , an d (4 ) of thi s section ; (2 ) Th e dryin g are ashal l b e enclose d betwee n th e applicatio n are aan dth e wate r bat h o r t o th e exten t

necessar y t o contai n al l tir e component s fo r a t leas t J3 0 second s afte r

cemen t application , "whicheve r

distanc e i s less ; (3 ) A minimu mfac e velocit y o f 10 0 fee t pe r minut e shal l b e maintaine d throug h eac h permanen t openin g int o a n enclosure ; (4 ) Th e tota l are ao f

al l permanen t opening s int o th e enclosur e shal l no t excee dth e are atha t

woul db e necessar y t o maintai n th e VO C concentratio n o f

th e exhaus t

ga s strea m a t 2 5 percen t

o f th e lowe r

explosiv e limi t (LEL ) unde r th e followin g conditions : (i ) Th e affecte dfacilit y i s operatin g a t maximu msolven t

use-rate ; (ii ) Th e fac e velocit y throug h eac h permanen t

openin g i s 10 0 fee t

pe r minute ; (iii ) Al l temporar y opening s ar e closed

. (5 ) Al l capture dVO C ar e ducte dt o a VO C emissio n contro l devic e whic h achieve s a t

leas t 9 5 percen t

destructio n o r recover y efficiency

. T o determin e th e efficienc y (E ) o f

th e contro l device , fo r th e initia l performanc e tes t us e value s o f th e volumetri c flo w rat e o f eac h o f th e ga s stream s an dth e VO C conten t (a s carbon ) o f

eac h o f th e ga s stream s i n an dou t o f th e contro l devic e b y th e followin g equation :

I-I & J;Qb,c w

Th e contro l devic e efficienc y shal l b e redetermine dwhe n directe db y th e Administrato r

o r whe n th e owne r

o r operato r elect s t o operat e th e contro l devic e a t condition s differen t

fromth e mos t recent determinatio n o f

contro l devic e efficiency

. $ 60.54 4 Monitorin g o

f emission s an d operations

. (a ) Eac h owne r

o r operato r subjec t t o th e provision s o f

thi s subpar t

an dusin g aVO C emissio n reductio n syste mwit h atherma l incinerato r

shal l continuousl y monito r an drecor dth e temperatur e o f th e ga s i n th e combustio n zone
. Th e monitorin g instrumen t

shal l hav e a n accurac y equa l t o ±0.7 5 percen t o f th e temperatur e bein g measure di n * C o r ±2.5°C , whicheve r

i s greater

. (b ) Eac h owne r

o r operato r subjec t t o th e provision s o f

thi s subpar t

an dusin g aVO C emissio n reductio n syste mwit h acatalyti c incinerato r

shal l continuousl y monito r

an drecor dth e temperatur e i n th e ga s strea m immediatel y befor e an dafte r th e catalys t bed

. Th e monitorin g instrument s shal l hav e a n accurac y equa l t o ±0.7 5 percen t

o f th e temperatur e bein g measure di n ° C o r ±2.5°C , whicheve r

i s greater

. (c ) Eac h owne r

o r operato r o f a n undertrea dcementing , sidewal l cementing , o r

Michelin- B operatio n whic h use s aVO C emissio n contro l devic e tha t

recover s VO C t o mee t th e requirement s o f

§ 60.543(h)(5 ) shal l continuousl y monito r

an drecor dth e VO C concentratio n o f

th e exhaus t

ga s strea mfro mth e VO C recover y device

. Th e VOt.

. concentratio n monitorin g devic e shal l b e installe di n alocatio n tha t i s representativ e o f

th e VO C concentratio n i n th e exhaus t vent , a t leas t tw o equivalen t

stac k diameter s fro mth e exhaus t

point , an dprotecte d fro man y interference s du e t o wind , weather , o r

othe r processes
. (d ) Eac h monitorin g devic e shal l b e Installed , calibrated , operated , an d maintaine daccordin g t o accepte d practice s an dth e manufacturer' s specifications

.Federa l Registe r/ Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar y 20 , 198 3 / Propose d Rule s 

### 269 3

S 60.54 5 Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements

. (a ) Eac h owne r o roperato ro f a n affecte d facilit y shal l includ e th e followin g dat a i n th e initia l performanc e tes treportrequire d unde r5 60.8(a)
. (1 ) Fo r eac h affecte d facilit y whic h complie s wit h a g/tir e limi tspecifie d i n § 60.542(a ) withou tth e us e o f a VO C emissio n reductio n system . (i ) Th e mas s o f

VO C use d (K>) , th e numbe r o f

tire s processe d (T 0 ) , an d th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N)
. (ii ) A descriptio n o f

th e metho d use d t o determin e M

„ an d T 0 . (2 ) Fo r eac h affecte d facilit y whic h use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha tdestroy s VO C (e.g. , incinerator) to compl y wit h a g/tir e limi tspecifie d i n § 60.542(a) , (i ) Th e mas s o f

VO C use d (Mo) , th e numbe r of

tire s processe d (T„) , th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N) , th e mas s o f

VO C use d pe rtir e processe d (G) , th e emissio n contro l devic e efficienc y (E) , th e captur e syste m efficienc y (F,.) , th e overal l syste m emissio n reductio n (R) , an d th e mas s o f VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N)
. (ii ) A descriptio n o f

th e metho d use d t o determin e Mo

, T„ , E , an d F f (3 ) Fo r eac h affecte d facilit y whic h use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha tdestroy s VO C (e.g. , incinerator ) t o compl y wit h a percen temissio n reductio n requiremen t specifie d i n § 60.542(a)
. (i ) Th e emissio n contro l devic e efficienc y (E) , th e captur e syste m efficienc y (F c ) , an d th e overal l syste m emissio n reductio n (R)
. (ii ) A descriptio n o f

th e metho d use d t o determin e E an d F e . (4 ) Fo r eac h affecte d facilit y whic h use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha trecover s VO C (e.g. , carbo n adsorber ) t o compl y wit h a g/tir e limi tspecifie d i n 5 60.542(a)
. (i ) Th e mas s o f

VO C use d (M„)
. th e numbe r of

tire s processe d (T 0 ) , th e mas s of VO C use d pe r tir e processe d (G) , th e mas s of VO C recovere d (M,) , th e oyeral l syste m emissio n reductio n (R) , an d th e mas s of VO C emitte d pe rtir e processe d (N)
. (ii ) A descriptio n of

th e metho d use d t o determin e M

o an d T„ . (5 ) Fo r eac h affecte d facilit y whic h use s a VO C emissio n reductio n syste m wit h a contro l devic e tha trecover s VO C (e.g. , carbo n adsorber ) t o compl y wit h a percen temissio n reductip n requiremen t specifie d I

n § 60.542(a)
. (i ) Th e mas s o f

VO C use d (M,) , th e mas s o f VO C recovere d (M r ) , an d th e overal l syste m emissio n reductio n (R)
. (il ) A descriptio n o f

th e metho d use d t o determin e Mg

. (b ) Eac h owne ro roperator.o f a n undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o rMiche l in- B affecte d facilit y wher e th e metho d i n § 60.543(h ) ha s bee n chose n to demonstrat e complianc e shal l includ e i n th e initia l complianc e repor ta statemen t indicatin g whic h o f

th e equipmen t desig n an d performanc e specification s hav e bee n me tan d identifyin g eac h whic h ha s no tbee n met . Th e initia l complianc e repor tshal l als o includ e th e followin g data . (1 ) Th e emissio n contro l devic e efficienc y (E) , th e airflo w throug h al l permanen tenclosur e opening s wit h al l temporar y enclosur e opening s unobstructed , th e tota l are a o f al l permanen tenclosur e openings , th e tota l are a of al l temporar y enclosur e openings , th e maximu m solven tus e rat e (kg/hr) , th e type(s ) of

VO C used , th e lowe rexplosiv e limi t(LEL ) fo reac h VO C used , an d th e lengt h o f time eac h componen ti s enclose d afte rapplicatio n o f cemen to rspra y material
. (2 ) A descriptio n o f

th e metho d use d t o determin e E , th e syste m airflow , an d th e maximu m solven tus e rate . (c ) Eac h owne ro roperato ro f a n affecte d facilit y shal l includ e th e followin g data , a s measure d b y th e continuou s monitorin g device(s) , i n th e initia l performanc e tes treport . (1 ) Th e averag e combustio n temperatur e durin g th e tes to f incinerato rdestructio n efficienc y fo r eac h therma l incinerator
. (2 ) Th e averag e temperatur e befor e an d afte rth e catalys tdurin g th e tes to f incinerato refficienc y fo reac h catalyti c incinerator
. (3 ) Th e averag e VO C concentratio n o f th e exhaus tga s strea m from th e VO C recover y devic e durin g th e tes to f VO C recover y devic e efficienc y fo reac h undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o rMiche l in- B operatio n tha t use s a VO C emissio n contro l devic e tha t recover s VO C t o mee tth e requirement s o f §60.543(h)(5)
. (d ) Eac h owne ro roperato ro f a n affecte d facilit y whic h use s a therma l Incinerato r shal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f

a tleas ttw o years , record s o f

al l 3-hou rperiod s o f operatio n fo rwhic h th e averag e combustio n temperatur e wa s mor e tha n 28' C (50*F) belo w th e temperatur e a t whic h th e destructio n efficienc y o f th e therma l incinerato rwa s las tdetermined
. (e ) Eac h owne roroperato ro f a n affecte d facilit y whic h use s a catalyti c incinerato rshal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f

a tleas ttw o years , record s o f

al l 3-hou rperiod s o f operatio n fo rwhic h th e averag e temperatur e befor e th e catalys tbe d i s mor e tha n 28' C belo w th e temperatur e a twhic h th e destructio n efficienc y o f th e catalyti c incinerato rwa s las t determined , an d al l 3-hou rperiod s fo r whic h th e averag e temperatur e differenc e acros s th e catalys tbe d i s les s tha n 8 0 percen to f

th e temperatur e differenc e whe n th e destructio n efficienc y o f

th e catalyti c incinerato r wa s las tdetermined
. (f ) Eac h owne ro roperato ro f a n undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o rMichelin- B operatio n whic h use s a VO C emissio n contro l devic e tha trecover s VO C t o mee tth e requirement s o f

I 60.543(h)(5 ) shal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f a t leas ttw o years , record s o f al l 3-hou r period s o f

operatio n fo rwhic h th e averag e VO C concentratio n o f th e exhaus tga s strea m from th e VO C recover y devic e exceed s th e averag e valu e measure d durin g th e mos trecen t tes to f th e contro l device
. (g) Eac h owne ro roperato rsubjec tt o ' th e provision s o f

thi s subpar tshal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f a t leas ttw o years , record s o f al l dat a an d calculation s use d t o determin e VO C emission s from eac h affecte d facility
. A t affecte d facilitie s wher e complianc e i s achieve d throug h th e us e o f therma l incineration , eac h owne ro roperato r shal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f a tleas ttw o years , continuou s record s o f th e incinerato rcombustio n chambe r temperature . I

f catalyti c incineratio n i s used , th e owne ro roperato rshal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f a t leas ttw o years , continuou s record s o f th e ga s temperature , bot h upstrea m an d downstrea m o f

th e incinerato rcatalys t bed . (h ) Eac h owne ro roperato ro f a n undertrea d cementing , sidewal l cementing , o rMichelin- B operatio n tha t use s a VO C emissio n contro l devic e tha t recover s VO C t o mee tth e requirement s o f i 60.543(h)(5 ) shal l maintai n a tth e source , fo ra perio d o f

a tleas ttw o years , continuou s records o f th e VO C concentratio n o f

th e exhaus tga s strea m fro m th e VO C recovery device
. (i ) Eac h owne ro roperato ri s exempte d from th e quarterl y reports require d unde rS 60.7(c)
. S 60.54 6 Referenc e method s an d procedures

. (a ) Th e referenc e method s i n Appendi x A t o thi s par texcep ta s provide d i n { 60.8 , shal l b e use d t o conduc tperformanc e tests . (1 ) Referenc e Metho d 2 4 fo rth e determinatio n o f

th e VO C conten to f cement s o rgree n tir e spra y materials
. In th e even to f

dispute , Referenc e Metho d 2 4 shal l b e th e reference method .

### 269 4 Federa l Registe r / Vol . 48 , No . 1 4 /

Thursday , Januar

y 20 , 198 3 /

Propose d Rule s (2 ) Referenc e Metho d 2 5 fo r th e determinatio

n o f th e VOC concentration i n th e effluen tgas I n eac h stac k enterin g an d leaving a

n emissio n contro

l device
. Th e owner o r operato r shall notif

y th e Administrator 3

0 days i n advanc e o f an y stac k testb y Referenc

e Metho d 25
. Th e following referenc

e methods ar

e t o b e used i n conjunctio

n wit h Referenc

e Metho d 25 : (I ) Metho d 1 fo r sample an

d velocit y traverses , (ii) Metho d 2 fo rvelocit y an d volumetric flow rate , (Hi ) Metho d 3 fo r ga s analysis , an

d (iv) Metho d 4 fo r stack ga s moisture
. (b ) Fo r Referenc

e Metho d 24 , th e cemen to r gree n tir e spra y sample mus

t b e a 1-litr e sample collecte d i

n a 1-litr e container a

ta poin twher e th e sample wil l b e representative o

f th e materia l a s applied i n th e affecte d facility
. (c ) Fo r Referenc

e Metho d 25 , th e samplin g tim e fo r eac h o f thre e run s mus tb e a tleas tone hour

, Th e minimu m sample volum

e mus tb e 0.00 3 dsc m excep ttha

tshorte r samplin g times o r smaller volumes , when necessitate d b y proces s variables o

rothe r factors , ma

y b e approve

d b y th e Administrator
. (Sec
. 11 4 o f

th e Clea n Ai r Ac ta s amende d (4 2 U.S.C

. 7414)) [F RDo c 80-144 3 File d 1-19-03 ? 6.4 5 am ) BtUJN O COO C SMO-SO- M



# 98 3