*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 1 of 406

6560-50-P

E.O. 12866 PVC 2060-AN33 Proposed Rule PVC Proposed Rule 

20110316 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037;

FRL- ]

RIN 2060-AN33

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production. The proposed rule would establish emission 

standards for hazardous air pollutants from polyvinyl chloride

and copolymers production located at major and area sources. 

The proposed rule includes requirements to demonstrate initial 

and continuous compliance with the proposed emission standards. 

EPA is proposing standards that would apply at all times, 

including during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunctions. 

The proposed standards also include continuous monitoring 

provisions and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 2 of 406

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before 

[INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER]. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the 

information collection provisions are best assured of having 

full effect if the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

receives a copy of your comments on or before [INSERT DATE 30 

DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

Public Hearing. We1 will hold two public hearings 

concerning the proposed polyvinyl chloride and copolymers (PVC) 

production rules on May 24, 2011, in the Houston, Texas area,

and May 26, 2011, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Persons interested 

in presenting oral testimony at either public hearing should 

contact Ms. Teresa Clemons at (919) 541-0252 by [INSERT DATE 10 

DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. If no 

one requests to speak at the public hearings by [INSERT DATE 10 

DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], then the 

public hearings will be cancelled without further notice. We 

will specify the date and time of the public hearings on 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pvc/pvcpg.html.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.

EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037 by one of the following methods:

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

 

1 Throughout this preamble, ―we‖ refers to EPA.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 3 of 406

instructions for submitting comments.

http://www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments.

E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. Attn: Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2002-0037.

Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2002-0037.

Mail: By U.S. Postal Service, send your comments to: EPA 

Docket Center, EPA West Building (Air Docket), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, Attn: Docket 

ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. Please include a total of two 

copies. In addition, please mail a copy of your comments 

on the information collection provisions to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management 

and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW, 

Washington, DC 20503. 

Hand Delivery: By courier, deliver your comments to: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, EPA 

West Building (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20004, Attn: Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2002-0037. Such deliveries are only accepted during 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 4 of 406

the normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays), and 

special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information.

Instructions: All submissions must include agency name and 

docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this 

rulemaking. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2002-0037. EPA‘s policy is that all comments received will be 

included in the public docket and may be made available online 

at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided, unless the comment includes information 

claimed to be confidential business information (CBI), or other 

information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not 

submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected through http://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov web site is an ―anonymous access‖ 

system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an E-mail comment directly to EPA without going 

through http://www.regulations.gov, your E-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that 

is placed in the public docket, and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 5 of 406

that you include your name and other contact information in the 

body of your comment, and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 

If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties,

and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA‘s 

public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at 

http://www.regulations.gov.

Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 

statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 

available docket materials are available either electronically 

at http://www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy at the EPA Docket 

Center, EPA West Building (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 6 of 406

EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jodi Howard, Sector

Policies and Programs Division (E143-01), Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; Telephone number: 

(919) 541-4607; Fax number: (919) 541-0246; E-mail address: 

howard.jodi@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Acronyms and Abbreviations. Several acronyms and terms are

used in this preamble. While this may not be an exhaustive 

list, to ease the reading of this preamble and for reference 

purposes, the following terms and acronyms are defined here:

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBI confidential business information

CDD/CDF chlorinated dibenzo-dioxins and furans 

CDX Central Data Exchange

CEMS continuous emission monitoring system

CPMS continuous parameter monitoring system

ERT Emissions Reporting Tool

Fe fraction emitted

GACT generally available control technologies or management 

practices

HAP hazardous air pollutants 

HCl hydrogen chloride 

HON Hazardous Organic NESHAP

ICR information collection request

K kurtosis

lbs/yr pounds per year 

l/min liters per minute

MACT maximum achievable control technology 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 7 of 406

NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants

ng/dscm nanograms per dry standard cubic meter

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

OP Office of Policy

ppbv parts per billion by volume

ppbw parts per billion by weight

ppmv parts per million by volume 

ppmw parts per million by weight

PRD pressure relief device

psia pounds per square inch absolute

PVC polyvinyl chloride and copolymers

PVCPU PVC production process unit

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act

RIN Regulatory Information Number 

S skewness

SEK standard error of kurtosis 

SES standard error of skewness 

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

TEF toxic equivalency factor 

TEQ toxic equivalent

THC total hydrocarbons 

TTN Technology Transfer Network 

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

UPL upper prediction limit 

VCM vinyl chloride monomer

WWW World Wide Web 

Organization of This Document. The following outline is

provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. General Information

A. Do these rules apply to me?

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?

C. Where can I get a copy of this document?

II. Background Information for these Proposed Rules

A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed PVC rule?

B. What is the history of the PVC Production source category?

C. Summary of Related Court Decisions

D. What are the emission sources at PVC production facilities?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 8 of 406

E. What HAP are emitted from PVC production facilities?

F. How did we gather information for the proposed PVC rule?

III. Summary of the Proposed Rule

A. What is the affected source for the proposed rule?

B. What is the relationship between this proposed rule and the 

existing 40 CFR part 61 standards for PVCPU?

C. How have we used subcategories in the proposed rule?

D. What proposed emission limitations and work practice 

standards must I meet?

E. When must I comply with the proposed standards?

F. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements?

G. What are the performance testing requirements for batch 

process operations?

H. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements?

I. What are the electronic data submittal requirements?

J. What revisions are proposed for the area source rule (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart DDDDDD)?

IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC Rule for Major and Area 

Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH)

A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC production?

B. How did EPA select the emission points, format, and 

pollutants for the proposed rule?

C. How did EPA determine the proposed emission standards for 

area sources?

D. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for existing major 

sources?

E. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for new major sources?

F. How did EPA analyze beyond-the-floor options and determine 

MACT?

G. How did EPA select the compliance and monitoring 

requirements for the proposed rule?

H. How did EPA determine compliance times for the proposed 

rule?

I. How did EPA determine the required records and reports for 

this proposed rule?

J. What are the startup, shutdown, and malfunction provisions?

V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule

A. What are the air impacts?

B. What are the cost impacts?

C. What are the non-air quality health, environmental, and 

energy impacts?

D. What are the economic impacts of the proposed standards?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 9 of 406

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 

Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations

A red-line version of the regulatory language that 

incorporates the changes in this proposed action to 40 CFR 63, 

subpart DDDDDD is available in the docket.

I. General Information

A. Do these rules apply to me?

The proposed rules establish national emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for PVC production. 

The regulated categories and entities potentially affected 

by the proposed PVC production standards include the following:

Category

NAICS1

Code

Examples of Potentially 

Regulated Entities

Polyvinyl chloride 

resins manufacturing

325211 Facilities that polymerize vinyl

chloride monomer to produce 

polyvinyl chloride and/or 

copolymers products.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 10 of 406

1 North American Industry Classification System.

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. To determine whether your facility, 

company, business, organization, etc., would be affected by this 

proposed action, you should examine the applicability criteria 

in the proposed 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH (National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production), and in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart DDDDDD (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area 

Sources). 

Your PVC production process unit (PVCPU) is not subject to 

this subpart if it is a research and development facility, as 

defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). If you 

have any questions regarding the applicability of the proposed 

action to a particular entity, contact the person listed in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?

Submitting CBI. Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. Send or deliver 

information identified as CBI to only the following address: 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 11 of 406

Ms. Jodi Howard, c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room C404-

02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711, Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2002-0037. 

Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you 

claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 

specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one

complete version of the comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the 

information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in 

the public docket. If you submit a disk or CD-ROM that does not 

contain CBI, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM clearly that 

it does not contain CBI. Information marked as CBI will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 

CFR part 2.

If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for 

claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR 

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

C. Where can I get a copy of this document?

In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic 

copy of this proposed action will also be available on the World
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 12 of 406

Wide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). 

Following signature, a copy of the proposed action will be 

posted on the TTN‘s policy and guidance page for newly proposed 

or promulgated rules at the following address: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN provides information and 

technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

II. Background Information for these Proposed Rules

A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed PVC rule?

Section 112(d) of the CAA requires us to establish NESHAP 

for source categories and subcategories of both major and area 

sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) that are listed for 

regulation under CAA section 112(c). A major source emits or 

has the potential to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of any 

single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP. An area 

source is a HAP-emitting stationary source that is not a major 

source.

Section 112(d) of the CAA requires EPA to set emissions 

standards for HAP emitted by major stationary sources based on 

performance of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). 

The MACT standards for existing sources must be at least as 

stringent as the average emissions limitation achieved by the 

best performing 12 percent of existing sources (for which the 

Administrator has emissions information) or the best performing 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 13 of 406

five sources for source categories or subcategories with fewer

than 30 sources (CAA section 112(d)(3)(A) and (B)). This 

minimum level of stringency is called the MACT floor. For new 

sources, MACT standards must be at least as stringent as the 

control level achieved in practice by the best controlled 

similar source (CAA section 112(d)(3)). EPA also must consider 

more stringent ―beyond-the-floor‖ control options. When 

considering beyond-the-floor options, EPA must consider not only 

the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP, but must 

take into account costs, energy, and non-air quality health and 

environmental impacts when doing so.

Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA requires EPA to identify at 

least 30 HAP which, as a result of emissions from area sources, 

pose the greatest threat to public health in the largest number 

of urban areas. EPA implemented this provision in 1999 in the 

Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy (Strategy), (64 FR 38715, 

July 19, 1999). Specifically, in the Strategy, EPA identified 

30 HAP that pose the greatest potential health threat in urban 

areas, and these HAP are referred to as the ―30 urban HAP.‖ CAA 

section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list sufficient categories or 

subcategories of area sources to ensure that area sources 

representing 90 percent of the emissions of the 30 urban HAP are 

subject to regulation. A primary goal of the Strategy is to 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 14 of 406

achieve a 75-percent reduction in cancer incidence attributable 

to HAP emitted from stationary sources.

EPA can set MACT standards for area sources. Section

112(d)(2). Alternatively, under CAA section 112(d)(5), EPA can 

promulgate standards or requirements for area sources "which 

provide for the use of generally available control technologies 

[―GACT‖] or management practices by such sources to reduce 

emissions of hazardous air pollutants." Additional information 

on GACT is found in the Senate report on the legislation (Senate 

Report Number 101-228, December 20, 1989), which describes GACT 

as:

. . . methods, practices and techniques which are commercially 

available and appropriate for application by the sources in the 

category considering economic impacts and the technical 

capabilities of the firms to operate and maintain the emissions 

control systems. Consistent with the legislative history, we 

can consider costs and economic impacts in determining GACT.

Determining what constitutes GACT involves considering the 

control technologies and management practices that are generally 

available to the area sources in the source category. We also 

consider the standards applicable to major sources in the 

analogous source category to determine if the control 

technologies and management practices are transferable and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 15 of 406

generally available to area sources. In appropriate 

circumstances, we may also consider technologies and practices 

at area and major sources in similar categories to determine 

whether such technologies and practices could be considered 

generally available for the area source categories at issue. 

Finally, as noted above, in determining GACT for a particular 

area source category, we consider the costs and economic impacts 

of available control technologies and management practices on 

that category.

Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are required to ―review,

and revise as necessary (taking into account developments in

practices, processes, and control technologies), emission 

standards promulgated under this section no less often than 

every 8 years.‖ 

We are proposing revised standards for vinyl chloride 

emissions from area sources under the authority of CAA section 

112(d)(6). We are also proposing standards for dioxin, hydrogen 

chloride (HCl), and total HAP under CAA section 112(d)(5). 

B. What is the history of the PVC Production source category?

On July 16, 1992, PVC Production was listed as a major 

source category for regulation pursuant to section 112(c) of the 

CAA (57 FR 31576). A major source of HAP is a stationary source

that has the potential to emit 10 tpy or more of any one HAP or 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 16 of 406

25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP. 

On June 26, 2002, PVC Production was listed as an area 

source category for regulation pursuant to sections 112(c)(3) 

and 112(k)(3)(B)(ii) of the CAA (67 FR 43112). An area source 

is a stationary source of HAP that is not a major source. 

On July 10, 2002, EPA promulgated NESHAP for new and 

existing PVC production facilities that are major sources in 40 

CFR part 63, subpart J (67 FR 45886, July 10, 2002) (referred to 

as the ―part 63 NESHAP‖). In that rulemaking, EPA determined

that compliance with the existing Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (40 CFR 

part 61, subpart F) (referred to as the ―part 61 NESHAP‖) 

reflected the application of MACT, thus, satisfying CAA section 

112(d), with the exception of adding requirements for equipment 

leaks at new sources. In the part 61 NESHAP and the associated 

part 63 NESHAP, EPA regulated vinyl chloride emissions as a 

surrogate for all HAP emitted from PVC production. For 

equipment leaks, the part 63 NESHAP required that new sources 

comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, National Emission 

Standards for Equipment Leaks – Control Level 2 Standards.

In Mossville Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232 

(D.C. Cir. 2004), the petitioners argued that EPA failed to set 

emission standards for all HAP emitted by PVC plants. EPA had 

set emission standards for vinyl chloride as a surrogate for the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 17 of 406

remaining HAP, because it was the predominant HAP used and 

emitted at PVC plants. The Court ruled that EPA did not 

adequately explain the basis for its decision to use vinyl 

chloride as a surrogate for other HAP. The Court ―vacated and 

remanded [the rule in its entirety] to the Agency for it to 

reconsider or properly explain its methodology for regulating 

[HAP] emitted in PVC production other than vinyl chloride by use 

of a surrogate.‖ 370 F.3d at 1243. This rule proposes NESHAP 

for PVC production major sources in response to the remand, and 

in accordance with section 112 of the CAA.

On January 23, 2007 (72 FR 2930), EPA promulgated NESHAP

for new and existing PVC production area sources in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart DDDDDD. Subpart DDDDDD is based on GACT, and

requires area sources to meet the requirements in the existing 

Vinyl Chloride NESHAP (part 61 NESHAP). The part 61 NESHAP 

requirements address only vinyl chloride emissions. In this 

rulemaking, we are fulfilling our obligation under section 

112(d)(6) of the CAA to review, and revise, as necessary, the 

PVC production area source standards. We are coordinating our 

review of the area source standards with the development of 

major source MACT standards in response to the Court remand. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 18 of 406

C. Summary of Related Court Decisions

In addition to Mossville Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 

summarized above, two other court decisions are relevant to this 

proposal. In March 2007, the District of Columbia Circuit Court

issued an opinion (Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875 (D.C. Cir.

2007) (Brick MACT)) vacating and remanding CAA section 112(d) 

MACT standards for the Brick and Structural Clay Ceramics source

categories. Some key holdings in that case were:

MACT floors for existing sources must reflect the average 

emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12

percent of existing sources, not levels EPA considers to be 

achievable by all sources (479 F.3d at 880–81);

EPA cannot set floors of ―no control.‖ The Court 

reiterated its prior holdings, including National Lime 

Association v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625 (D.C. Cir. 2000),

confirming that EPA must set floor standards for all HAP 

emitted by the major source, including those HAP that are 

not controlled by at-the-stack control devices (479 F.3d at 

883); and

EPA cannot ignore non-technology factors that reduce HAP 

emissions, including when determining which sources are

best performers for purposes of ascertaining the MACT 

floor. Specifically, the Court held that ―EPA‘s decision 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 19 of 406

to base floors exclusively on technology even though nontechnology factors affect emissions violates the Act.‖

(479 F.3d at 883).

In addition, the fact that a specific level of performance 

is not being intentionally achieved by the source is not a legal 

basis for excluding the source‘s performance from consideration. 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d at 631-34; National Lime 

Association, 233 F.3d at 640.

The Brick MACT decision also stated that EPA may account 

for variability in setting floors. However, the Court found

that EPA erred in assessing variability, because it relied on 

data from the worst performers to estimate best performers‘

variability, and held that ―EPA may not use emission levels of 

the worst performers to estimate variability of the best 

performers without a demonstrated relationship between the two‖

(479 F.3d at 882).

A second Court opinion of relevance to this proposal is 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008). In that 

case, the Court vacated portions of two provisions contained in 

the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). The 

regulations at issue were 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 

63.6(h)(1), which, when incorporated into CAA section 112(d) 

regulations for specific source categories, exempt sources from
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 20 of 406

the requirement to comply with the otherwise applicable CAA 

section 112(d) emission standard during periods of startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction.

D. What are the emission sources at PVC production facilities? 

PVC production includes the manufacture of PVC resins. The 

resins are then used to make a large number of commercial and 

industrial products. Producing these resins involves batch 

reactors where vinyl chloride monomer (VCM), along with 

initiators and inhibitors, is polymerized as a homopolymer, or 

copolymerized with varying amounts of a co-monomer, such as 

vinyl acetate. At most facilities, the resulting resins are in 

a slurry form and are then stripped to recover the unreacted 

VCM. The stripped resin is then dried into powders or granules. 

PVC resins are then either shipped offsite, or used to make 

final products in equipment and unit operations that are not 

covered under this source category. 

PVC is not a HAP, but the manufacture of PVC resin requires 

VCM, which is a HAP, as a primary feedstock. Unreacted VCM and 

other organic HAP present in feedstocks or formed during the 

polymerization process, may be present in process components. 

HAP may be released from an opening or leak in a process 

component; or the residual HAP (i.e., unreacted VCM, and other 

organic compounds) in the resin may be released to the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 21 of 406

atmosphere as a result of drying or handling dry resin.

Stripping the polymerized resin to recover unreacted VCM reduces 

the air emissions of vinyl chloride and other HAP from the resin 

slurry by reducing the amount of HAP present. Gaseous vent 

streams containing vinyl chloride and other HAP that originates

from process equipment prior to, and including, the resin 

stripper, are sent to a VCM recovery process before being routed 

to one or more control devices, such as an absorber, or thermal 

oxidizer, followed by a halogenated compound scrubber. 

Combustion controls greatly reduce vinyl chloride and other HAP 

emissions, but may create other HAP, in particular, chlorinated 

dibenzo-dioxins and furans (CDD/CDF), and HCl.

Emission sources in the PVC production process include 

process components prior to, and including, the resin 

stripper(s) (e.g., the reactor, resin stripper, reactor used as 

a stripper, storage and feed vessels for raw materials, 

additives, initiators, and inhibitors); VCM recovery systems 

(e.g., condenser or other vapor separation devices, holding 

tanks, gas holders); and process components downstream of the 

resin stripper(s) (e.g., centrifuges, concentrators, blend 

tanks, filters, dryers, conveyor air discharges, bagging 

operations, resin handling and conveyance equipment), and final 

resin storage tanks or storage silos. Additional emission 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 22 of 406

sources at PVC production facilities include leaking equipment 

(e.g., pumps, valves, compressors); wastewater collection and 

treatment systems; heat exchange system components (e.g., 

cooling towers, heat exchangers, pumps, and other equipment 

associated with the heat exchange system); and other emission

sources, such as opening a reactor and other components for

maintenance and cleaning.

E. What HAP are emitted from PVC production facilities? 

The HAP emitted from PVC production processes includes a 

wide variety of HAP. There are no metal HAP emitted from PVC 

production. In addition, combustion control devices emit HCl 

and CDD/CDF. Of the HAP emitted from PVC production processes, 

1,3-butadiene, benzene, CDD/CDF, and vinyl chloride have been 

classified as known human carcinogens.

2 Several other compounds 

that may be emitted from PVC production processes have been 

classified as probable carcinogens, such as acetaldehyde, bis

(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, chloroform, chloroprene, ethylene 

dichloride, ethylidene dichloride, formaldehyde, iso-octane, 

methylene chloride, vinyl bromide, and vinylidene chloride.

3

Hydrogen chloride, along with other non-carcinogenic HAP (e.g., 

methanol), are also emitted from PVC production processes. 

F. How did we gather information for the proposed PVC rule?

 

2 U.S. EPA, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/IRIS/index.html.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 23 of 406

We gathered information on PVC production through review of 

previously collected information, current literature, data from 

the National Emissions Inventory, meetings and voluntary 

information submissions by industry and the industry trade 

association, and formal information collection pursuant to CAA 

section 114. 

There were two components to the information collection. 

First, we solicited information from eight PVC companies in the 

United States that manufacture PVC resin. The collection 

obtained available information on PVC production units at major 

and area sources (e.g., information on production processes, 

equipment, emission points, control techniques, operating 

practices, and emissions based on previous tests or 

calculations). Companies were also asked to provide data for 

other emission sources, including process component openings and 

cleanouts, handling of unstripped resin, filters, and gas 

holders. Second, we required the same companies to measure the 

HAP content in their PVC resins (both following stripping, but 

before drying, and after drying) and measure the HAP emissions 

at the inlet and outlet to their process vent control devices. 

The information collection is documented in the memorandum,

Information Collection for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

(PVC) Production Source Category, and results of this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 24 of 406

information collection are available in the docket.

III. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

This section summarizes and provides our rationale for the 

requirements proposed in this action. In section III of this

preamble, the term "you" refers to owners and operators of 

sources affected by the proposed rule. 

A. What is the affected source for the proposed rule?

The proposed rule applies to owners or operators of PVC PU 

located at, or that are part of, a major source or an area 

source as defined in 40 CFR 63.2. The affected source for this 

subpart is each individual PVCPU. An existing affected source 

is a PVCPU that is not a new affected source, as defined in 40 

CFR 63.11870 of the proposed rule. A new affected source is a 

PVCPU for which construction is commenced on or after [INSERT 

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] at a major or area 

source. If components of an existing affected source are 

replaced such that the replacement meets the definition of 

reconstruction in 40 CFR 63.2 and the reconstruction commenced 

on or after [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER], then the existing source becomes a reconstructed 

source and is subject to the relevant standards for a new 

affected source. The reconstructed source must comply with the 

requirements for a new affected source upon initial startup of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 25 of 406

the reconstructed source, or by the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, whichever 

is later. 

A PVCPU is defined as a collection of process components

that is assembled and connected by hard-piping or duct work that

processes raw materials to manufacture PVC resin. A PVCPU 

includes, but is not limited to, polymerization reactors; resin 

strippers; blend tanks; centrifuges; dryers; product separators; 

recovery devices; feed, intermediate, and product storage 

vessels; finished product loading operations; heat exchange 

systems; wastewater strippers; wastewater treatment systems; 

connected ducts and piping; and equipment in HAP service,

including pumps, compressors, agitators, pressure relief devices

(PRD), sampling connection systems, open-ended valves or lines, 

valves, and connectors.

B. What is the relationship between this proposed rule and the 

existing 40 CFR part 61 standards for PVCPU?

PVCPU are currently subject to requirements in the part 61 

NESHAP. This proposed rule includes requirements that are at 

least as stringent as the requirements in this existing rule. 

We, therefore, propose that once facilities are in compliance 

with the final PVCPU MACT, the requirements of the part 61 

NESHAP would no longer apply.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 26 of 406

C. How have we used subcategories in the proposed rule?

Most of the emissions sources subject to the proposed 

regulation have the same characteristics, and are addressed 

consistently, independent of process operations or products 

produced. We are proposing, however, three subcategories for 

our limits on the amount of HAP remaining in resins following 

polymerization and stripping (i.e., the stripped resin). These 

subcategories are based on the type of resin produced, and 

include: (1) bulk resin, (2) dispersion resin, and (3) all 

other resin (e.g., suspension and solution resin). 

D. What proposed emission limitations and work practice 

standards must I meet?

The proposed rule would establish the same requirements for 

affected sources located at major and area sources. We explain 

in section IV.C below our rationale for the standards proposed 

for area sources.

1. Storage Vessels and Handling Operations

Under 40 CFR 63.11910 and Table 4 of the proposed rule, if 

you own or operate a storage vessel at a new or existing 

affected source, we are proposing that material with a maximum 

true vapor pressure of the stored liquid greater than 11.1

pounds per square inch absolute (psia) be stored in pressure 

vessels with no emissions to the atmosphere. During those times 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 27 of 406

when purging is required, or when the pressure vessel is being 

loaded, the purged stream or the emission stream during loading 

would be required to be routed to a closed vent system and 

control device. The closed vent system and control device must 

meet the requirements specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the 

proposed rule. You would also be required to equip all openings 

in the pressure vessel with closure devices that are designed to 

operate with no detectable emissions, as determined using 

procedures specified in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of the proposed 

rule.

For storage vessels with a capacity greater than or equal 

to 40,000 gallons, storing material with a maximum true vapor 

pressure greater than or equal to 0.75 psia, or storage vessels 

with a capacity greater than or equal to 20,000 gallons (but 

less than 40,000 gallons), storing materials with a maximum true 

vapor pressure greater than or equal to 4 psia, we are proposing 

two equivalent compliance options. We are proposing that 

material be stored in either: (1) a floating roof tank meeting 

the operating, inspection, and maintenance requirements of 40 

CFR part 63, subpart WW, or (2) a fixed roof storage vessel that 

routes vent streams to a closed vent system and control device 

(meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed 

rule) capable of reducing inlet volatile organic compound (VOC)
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 28 of 406

emissions by 95 or greater. 

We are proposing that all other storage vessels meet the 

operating, inspection, and maintenance requirements for fixed 

roof vessels of 40 CFR 63.11910(a) of the proposed rule, or 

comply with either the controlled fixed roof or floating roof 

requirements discussed previously. 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(1)(ii) 

and 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3)(i) of the proposed rule include 

requirements to equip each opening in the roof with a closure 

device, and to perform initial and annual inspections, and 

repair any defects found within the specified time period. 

Defects include, but are not limited to, visible cracks, holes, 

gaps, or other open spaces in the closure device or between the 

perimeter of the opening and the closure device; broken,

cracked, or otherwise damaged seals or gaskets on closure 

devices; and broken or missing hatches, access covers, caps, or 

other closure devices.

We are not proposing requirements for handling operations 

(unloading and transfer) for reasons explained in section IV.D

of this preamble. 

2. Equipment Leaks

In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

that existing and new affected sources comply with the leak 

detection and repair (LDAR) program requirements of the National 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 29 of 406

Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks-Control Level 2 

Standards, subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63, except for agitators, 

and rotating or reciprocating pumps and compressors. For gas 

and light liquid valves, subpart UU specifies a leak definition 

of 500 parts per million VOC, and a monitoring frequency that is 

dependent upon the number of leaking valves. Subpart UU also 

requires equipment specifications that prevent leaks for other 

pieces of equipment. 

We are proposing that rotating pumps be sealless, equipped 

with double seals, or equivalent. Reciprocating pumps, 

reciprocating and rotating compressors, and agitator must be 

equipped with double seals, or equivalent, as provided in 40 CFR 

63.11915 of the proposed rule. If double mechanical seals or 

double outboard seals are used, HAP emissions must be minimized 

by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that the 

leak occurs into the pump, compressor, or agitator; by ducting 

any HAP between the two seals through a closed vent system to a 

control device meeting the process vent emission limits 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule; or by an 

equivalent method, as provided in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the

proposed rule. 

We are proposing that a vinyl chloride monitoring system be

operated for detection of major leaks and identification of the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 30 of 406

general area of the plant where a leak is located. A vinyl 

chloride monitoring system is a device that obtains air samples 

from one or more points continuously, and analyzes the samples 

with gas chromatography, infrared spectrophotometry, flame ion 

detection, or an equivalent or alternate method.

In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule, we are also

proposing that, in addition to operating with no detectable 

emissions, there be no discharge to the atmosphere from any PRD

on any equipment in HAP service within the PVCPU. We are 

proposing that upon a discharge to the atmosphere from the PRD 

that the monitoring requirements specified in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU for pressure releases from PRD be followed. 

3. Heat Exchange Systems

In 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

that you implement a LDAR program to detect leaks of VOC into 

cooling water. For existing sources, we are proposing monthly 

monitoring for both closed loop and once-through heat exchange 

systems using either the Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality (TCEQ) Modified El Paso Method3 or EPA Method 8021B, 

Aromatic and Halogenated Volatiles by Gas Chromatography Using 

Photoionization and/or Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors, 

 

3 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for Determination of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number One, dated 

January 2003, Sampling Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 

Monitoring, prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference—see 

40 CFR 65.645).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 31 of 406

with a leak action level of 38 parts per billion by weight 

(ppbw) of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 2.9 parts 

per million by volume (ppmv) of total strippable VOC in the 

stripping gas. For new sources, we are proposing twice-daily

(12 hour intervals) monitoring for both closed loop and oncethrough heat exchange systems using either the TCEQ‘s Modified 

El Paso Method4 or EPA Method 8021B with a leak action level of 

30 ppbw of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 2.3 ppmv 

of total strippable VOC in the stripping gas. The delay of 

repair action level for both new and existing sources is 380 

ppbw of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 29 ppmv of 

total strippable VOC in the stripping gas. When a leak is 

identified, additional monitoring must be performed to isolate 

the source of the leak. If the total strippable VOC 

concentration remains below the leak action level throughout the 

period of additional monitoring, then repairs are not required; 

otherwise, repairs must be completed within 45 days of 

identifying the leak. Repairs may be delayed if the 

concentration of total strippable VOC in the cooling water or 

stripping gas remains below the delay of repair action level and 

either: (1) it is technically infeasible to repair the leak 

 

4 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for Determination of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number One, dated 

January 2003, Sampling Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 

Monitoring, prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference—see 

40 CFR 65.645).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 32 of 406

without a shutdown, or (2) the necessary equipment, parts, or 

personnel are not available.

4. Process Vents

In 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

all the vent streams from: polymerization reactors, resin 

strippers, other process components prior to the resin stripper, 

VCM recovery systems, wastewater collection and treatment 

system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples be 

routed through a closed vent system to a control device. We are 

proposing the emission limitations presented in Table 1 of this 

preamble for the outlet of the control device. These emission 

limitations apply at all times.

Table 1. Emission Limitations for Process Ventsa

Pollutant

Emission Limitationsb

Existing Sources New Sources

Vinyl chloride 0.32 ppmv 3.2 ppbv

Hydrogen chloride 150 ppmv 0.17 ppmv

Total organic HAP 12 ppmv 0.22 ppmv

Dioxin/Furans (TEQ) 0.023 ng/dscm 0.0087 ng/dscm

a Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which 

controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery 

systems, certain storage vessels, the wastewater collection and treatment 

system, slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples.

b ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent O2

.

 ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent O2.

 ng/dscm = nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent O2.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 33 of 406

5. Other Emission Sources

Other emission sources include reactor and other component

opening losses. When reactors or other components (including 

pre-polymerization reactors used in the manufacture of bulk 

resins) are opened for cleaning, we are proposing in 40 CFR 

63.11955 of the proposed rule that emissions be minimized prior 

to opening. We are proposing that emissions from opening a 

polymerization reactor must not exceed 0.04 pound vinyl 

chloride/ton of polyvinyl chloride product where the product 

means the gross product of pre-polymerization and postpolymerization. We are proposing emissions from opening of 

process components for any reason be minimized by reducing the 

volume of vinyl chloride to an amount that occupies a volume of 

no more than 2.0 percent of the component's containment volume 

or 25 gallons, whichever is larger, at standard temperature and 

pressure. Any vinyl chloride removed from opening equipment

must be ducted through a closed vent system to a control device 

meeting the requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925 through 40 CFR 

63.11950 of the proposed rule. The outlet of the control device 

must meet the emission limitations for process vents discussed 

in section III.D.4.

6. Stripped Resin

In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 34 of 406

emission limitations for residual vinyl chloride and total HAP 

in the stripped resin presented in Tables 2 and 3 of this 

preamble. The limits were developed for new and existing 

sources for three subcategories of PVC resins: (1) bulk resins, 

(2) dispersion resins, and (3) all other resins. These emission 

limits would apply at all times.

Table 2. Limits for Stripped Resin at Existing Sources

Pollutant

Emission Limits (ppmw)

Bulk Resins Dispersion 

Resins

All Other 

Resins

Vinyl chloride 7.1 55 0.48

Total HAP 170 110 76

Table 3. Limits for Stripped Resin at New Sources

Pollutant

Emission Limitations (ppmw)

Bulk Resins Dispersion 

Resins

All Other 

Resins

Vinyl chloride 7.1 41 0.20

Total HAP 170 58 42

7. Wastewater

In 40 CFR 63.11965 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

that you must determine the vinyl chloride concentration for 

each wastewater stream at the point of wastewater generation. 

Streams with 10 ppmw vinyl chloride, or more, must be treated to 

reduce the concentration of vinyl chloride to a concentration of 

0.11 ppmw for existing sources, and 0.0060 ppmw for new sources. 

The 10 ppmw determination applies before the wastewater stream 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 35 of 406

is exposed to the atmosphere, stored, mixed with any other 

wastewater stream, and enters a wastewater treatment process, or 

is discharged untreated as a wastewater. 

We are also proposing that wastewater streams with flow

rates greater than or equal to 10 liters per minute (l/min), and 

the concentrations of HAP, as determined by Method 305 (as 

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9) greater than or 

equal to 1,000 ppmw, meet the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON)

wastewater requirements, as described in the sections of 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart G, and specified in the proposed rule. 

Streams that contain less than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride (at 

the point of generation), and streams that either contain less 

than 1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a flow rate less than the 10 

l/min criteria (at the point of determination, as defined by 40 

CFR part 63, subpart G), are not required to further reduce 

emissions, but must remain below these levels. 

E. When must I comply with the proposed standards?

Existing affected sources would be required to comply with 

the proposed 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH no later than 3 

years after publication of the final rule in the Federal 

Register. New affected sources would be required to comply on 

the effective date of the final rule, or upon startup, whichever 

is later. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 36 of 406

F. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements?

In 40 CFR 63.11896 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

that, if you make a process change to an existing affected 

source that does not meet the criteria to become a new affected 

source in 40 CFR 63.11870(c) of the proposed rule, you must 

demonstrate that any added emission points are in compliance 

with the applicable requirements for an existing affected 

source. If the process change results in a change in the 

characteristics of any emission point such that a different 

emission limit, operating parameter limit, or work practice 

standard applies, we are proposing that you demonstrate that the 

changed emission point complies with the applicable requirements 

for an existing affected source. You must demonstrate 

compliance with any applicable work practice standards upon 

startup of the changed emission point, and must demonstrate 

compliance with any emission limits and establish applicable 

operating limits by 180 days after the date of initial startup 

of the changed process unit.

We are also proposing that, if you make a process change 

to a new affected source, you would demonstrate that any added 

emission point(s) is/are in compliance with the applicable work 

practice standards for a new affected source by start-up of the 

changed emission point. You must also demonstrate initial 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 37 of 406

compliance with any emission limits and establish applicable 

operating limits by 180 days after the date of initial startup 

of the changed process unit.

If you make a process change that adds or changes emission 

points, we are proposing that you demonstrate continuous 

compliance with your emission limits and standards, operating 

limits, and work practice standards according to the procedures 

and frequency in 40 CFR 63.11910 through 40 CFR 63.11980 of this 

proposed rule, and submit a notification report specified in 40 

CFR 63.11985 of the proposed rule.

1. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for storage vessels?

For each floating roof storage vessel, we are proposing 

that you meet the operating, inspection, repair, and maintenance 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW. For each fixed roof 

storage tank venting through a closed vent system to a control 

device achieving 95-percent reduction in total HAP emissions, we 

are proposing that you meet the requirements for closed vent 

systems and control devices in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed 

rule, and summarized in section III.D.3 of this preamble. 

In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed rule, we are also 

proposing that, for each fixed roof tank, you install and 

maintain the tank with no visible cracks, holes, or other open 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 38 of 406

spaces between roof section joints or between the interface of 

the roof edge and the tank wall. We are also proposing that you 

must install closure devices that you secure in the closed 

position except during periods when you need to have access to 

the interior of the fixed roof tank. The closure device may be 

opened when needed to provide access. The fixed roof tank and 

its closure device would be required to be inspected initially,

and at least once per year. The inspection requirements would 

not be applicable to parts of the fixed roof that are determined 

to be unsafe to inspect if you document and explain why it is 

unsafe to inspect and develop a plan to conduct inspections when 

the tank is not in service. A first attempt to repair defects 

must be made no later than 5 calendar days after detection, and 

repairs would be required to be completed no later than 45 days 

after detection, except as specified in 40 CFR

63.11910(a)(4)(ii) of the proposed rule. 

In 40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed rule, for pressure 

vessels, we are proposing that all potential leak interfaces in 

the pressure vessel be monitored for leaks annually and repaired

following the procedures of 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed 

rule.

2. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for equipment leaks?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 39 of 406

For each applicable piece of equipment (e.g., valves, 

connectors) associated with your affected source, we are 

proposing that you meet the LDAR requirements of 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU. In 40 CFR 63.11915 of the proposed rule, you would

also be required to install electronic indicators on each PRD

that would be able to identify and record the time and duration 

of each pressure release and notify operators that a pressure 

release has occurred. 

3. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for heat exchange systems?

We are proposing that for each affected source, you must

operate an equipment leak program, as specified in the proposed 

rule. Under the compliance requirements for heat exchange 

systems in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule, an affected 

source would be required to conduct sampling and analyses using 

either the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method, Revision Number One, 

dated January 2003,

5 or EPA Method 8021B, no less frequently than 

monthly for existing sources and twice-daily (12-hour intervals) 

for new sources, and fix any leaks detected. We are proposing 

different sampling locations for once-through and closed loop 

heat exchange systems as specified in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the 

 

5 Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for Determination of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from Water Sources, Revision Number One, dated 

January 2003, Sampling Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 

Monitoring, prepared by TCEQ, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference—see 

40 CFR 65.645).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 40 of 406

proposed rule. For once-through systems only, you may monitor 

at the cooling tower return line prior to exposure to the air. 

For once-through systems, you must monitor selected heat 

exchanger exit line(s) so that each heat exchanger or group of 

heat exchangers within a system is covered by the selected

monitoring location. Monitoring of selected heat exchanger exit 

lines is also a monitoring option for closed loop systems. 

Additionally, for once-through systems, you may also monitor the 

inlet water feed line prior to any heat exchanger. If multiple 

heat exchange systems use the same water feed (i.e., inlet water 

from the same primary water source), you may monitor at one 

representative location and use the monitoring results for that 

sampling location for all heat exchange systems that use that 

same water feed. We are proposing to exempt a heat exchange 

system from the monitoring requirements in 40 CFR 63.11920 if 

all heat exchangers within the heat exchange system operate with 

the minimum pressure on the cooling water side at least 35 

kilopascals greater than the maximum pressure on the process 

side, or the heat exchange system does not contain any heat 

exchangers.

Identified leaks must be repaired as soon as practicable,

but within 45 days after identifying the leak. We are proposing 

delay of repair action levels as either a total strippable VOC
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 41 of 406

concentration (as methane) in the stripping gas of 29 ppmv or a 

total strippable VOC concentration in the cooling water of 380 

ppbw. Leaking heat exchanger repairs may be delayed if the 

repair is technically infeasible without a shutdown, or the 

necessary equipment, parts, or personnel are not available. To 

delay repairs in either case, the total strippable VOC must 

initially be, and remain less than, the delay of repair action 

level for all monitoring periods during the delay of repair.

4. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for process vents?

To demonstrate compliance for process vents, you would be 

required to meet the requirements of proposed 40 CFR 63.11930

for each closed vent system that routes emissions from process 

vents subject to the HAP emission limits to a control device. 

You would be required to meet the initial and continuous 

compliance requirements for process vents specified in 40 CFR 

63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11935, the monitoring requirements for 

your process vent control device, as specified in proposed 40 

CFR 63.11940, and the performance testing requirements for 

process vents in 40 CFR 60.11945. You may not use a flare to 

comply with the emission limits of the proposed rule, as 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11925(b). 

Closed vent systems. In 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 42 of 406

rule, for closed vent systems, you would be required to meet 

specified design requirements and install flow indicators in the 

bypass lines, or meet other requirements to prevent and detect 

bypass of the control device. You must also follow the 

inspection, leak monitoring, and repair requirements in 40 CFR 

63.11930 of the proposed rule for closed vent systems. Closed 

vent systems in vacuum service would be required to install 

alarms rather than performing leak inspection and monitoring. 

If you operate a closed vent system in vacuum service, you are 

not required to comply with the other closed vent system 

requirements in the proposed rule.

Performance testing, continuous parameter monitoring system 

(CPMS), and continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) 

requirements for process vents and associated control devices.

Compliance would be demonstrated through a combination of 

performance testing (as specified in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR 

63.11945) and/or monitoring using CEMS or CPMS that measure 

process vent control device operating parameters (as specified 

in 40 CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR 63.11935, and 40 CFR 63.11940). 

These sections also refer to Tables 1, 2, 6, and 7 of the 

proposed rule for emission limits, testing methods, and 

requirements. Below, we summarize the process vent testing and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 43 of 406

compliance requirements by pollutant. Each test would consist 

of three test runs.

We are proposing that existing and new sources would be 

required to demonstrate initial and annual compliance with the 

total organic HAP emission limits in Table 1 or 2 of the 

proposed rule by measuring total hydrocarbon (THC) at the outlet 

of the control device using EPA Method 25A, as specified in 

Table 9 of the proposed rule. The minimum test run duration 

would be 1 hour.

During the initial compliance test, you would be required 

to establish values for the control device operating parameters 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and 40 CFR 63.11940 (e.g., 

incinerator temperature). You would then use a CPMS to 

continuously monitor that parameter to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total organic HAP limit. New and existing 

sources could elect to use THC CEMS instead of annual testing 

and CPMS for total organic HAP. All CEMS must meet the 

applicable performance specifications, procedures, and other 

calibration, accuracy, and operating and maintenance 

requirements, as specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed 

rule. For vinyl chloride, you would demonstrate compliance by 

conducting initial and annual performance tests using EPA Method 

18. You would be required to establish monitoring parameters 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 44 of 406

during the initial performance test, and continuously monitor 

control device operating parameters. 

For CDD/CDF, you would demonstrate compliance by conducting 

initial and annual performance tests using EPA Method 23. The 

minimum sampling volume collected would be 5 cubic meters for 

Method 23. For HCl, you would demonstrate compliance by 

conducting an initial performance test using EPA Method 26 or 

26A. The minimum sampling volumes collected would be 60 liters 

for EPA Method 26, or 1 cubic meter for EPA Method 26A. You 

would be required to establish monitoring parameters during the 

initial performance test, and continuously monitor control

device operating parameters (e.g., liquid flow rate and pH for 

scrubbers, and temperature and carbon injection rate for 

activated carbon injection). After EPA publishes final 

performance specifications for CEMS for HCl and CDD/CDF, new 

sources would be required to use CEMS instead of annual testing 

for these pollutants, as required in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the 

proposed rule. Existing sources could elect to use CEMS instead 

of annual testing and CPMS for these pollutants. All CEMS must 

meet the applicable performance specifications, procedures, and 

other calibration, accuracy, and operating and maintenance 

requirements, as specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 of the proposed 

rule.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 45 of 406

We have included specific performance testing requirements, 

including the process operating conditions under which 

performance tests should be conducted, for continuous process 

vents and batch operations, as provided in 40 CFR 63.11945 of 

the proposed rule, and discussed in section III.F and III.G of

this preamble.

All CPMS would be required to have data averaging periods 

of 3-hour block averages. All CPMS would be required to meet 

minimum accuracy and calibration frequency requirements, as 

specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and Table 8 of the proposed rule. 

For each monitored parameter, you would establish a minimum, 

maximum, or a range that indicates proper operation of the 

control device, as specified in 40 CFR 63.11935(d). The 

proposed rule specifies the parameters that would be monitored 

for each type of control device, including each incinerator, 

absorber, adsorber, condenser, sorbent injection system, fabric 

filter, or other control device. You must also install a flow 

indicator at the inlet of the control device to indicate periods 

of no flow to the control device.

Some control devices would be subject to additional 

emission point-specific performance testing requirements, as 

described in 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed rule. We have 

included specific performance testing requirements for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 46 of 406

continuous process vents and batch operations, as provided in 40 

CFR 63.11945 of the proposed rule, and discussed in section 

III.F of this preamble.

5. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for wastewater? 

As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965(a) of the proposed rule, we 

are proposing that you must conduct an initial test for 

wastewater streams from the affected source to determine the 

vinyl chloride concentration, the total HAP concentration 

(including all HAP listed in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

G), and the flow rate. The concentration tests would be 

conducted using EPA Method 107 in combination with Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Method SW-8260B and EPA 

Method 305. Prior to testing, you would be required to submit a 

test plan for EPA approval that includes your proposed method 

for analysis using these methods. We are proposing that you 

sample for vinyl chloride by collecting one grab sample at the 

point of generation. We are also proposing that you sample for 

total HAP by collecting one grab sample at the point of 

determination, as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G.

Wastewater streams that contain less than 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride (at the point of generation), and wastewater streams 

that either contain less than 1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 47 of 406

flow rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the point of 

determination, as defined by 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), must 

remain below these levels. You would conduct periodic tests at 

the same locations, and using the same test methods described 

above to verify that the stream concentration stays below the 

vinyl chloride and total HAP concentration levels. Wastewater 

streams would be tested monthly. There are also proposed 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.11975(e)(2) of the proposed rule, for 

demonstrating that you remain below the 10 l/min flow rate 

criterion, based on flow rate measurements.

If your wastewater stream contains vinyl chloride 

concentrations greater than or equal to 10 ppmw, you would be 

required to treat the wastewater stream to achieve a

concentration of 0.11 ppmw vinyl chloride at the wastewater 

stripper outlet for existing sources, and 0.0060 ppmw at new 

sources. You must conduct an initial compliance test and 

monthly testing to demonstrate compliance with these limits. We 

are proposing that you measure at the outlet of the wastewater 

stripper by collecting one grab sample. In addition, during 

your performance test, you would be required to establish 

operating ranges for your wastewater steam or vacuum stripper, 

including steam-to-feed ratios and stripper bottoms temperature, 

and also the vacuum level measured in the column for vacuum 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 48 of 406

strippers. You would use a CPMS to continuously monitor control 

device operating parameters to demonstrate that you continuously 

meet these limits.

If the wastewater stream exceeds the 1,000 ppmw HAP 

concentration (based on the list of HAP in Table 9 of 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart G), and the 10-l/min flow rate, then you must 

comply with the 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Group 1, wastewater 

suppression and treatment requirements, and conduct the 

compliance testing and monitoring required in subpart G.

For more information on the wastewater compliance 

requirements, see 40 CFR 63.11965, 40 CFR 63.11970, and 40 CFR 

63.11975 of the proposed rule.

6. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for stripped resins?

In 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed rule, we are proposing 

that you conduct initial performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed vinyl chloride and total HAP limits 

for stripped resin. We are also proposing that you conduct 

daily performance testing to demonstrate continuous compliance 

with the proposed vinyl chloride limit, and monthly performance 

testing to demonstrate continuous compliance with the proposed 

total HAP limit. The tests would be conducted at the outlet of 

the resin stripper for continuous processes and immediately 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 49 of 406

after stripping for batch processes. You would be required to 

use EPA Method 107 in combination with RCRA Method SW-8260B, and 

to include in your test plan a proposed method for analysis

using these methods. You would be required to submit the test 

plan for EPA approval. In addition, during your initial 

performance test, you would be required to establish operating 

ranges for your resin steam or vacuum stripper, including steamto-feed ratios, stripping temperature, and the vacuum level 

measured in the column for vacuum strippers. You would use a 

CPMS to continuously monitor resin stripper operating 

parameters. All CPMS would be required to calculate 3-hour 

block averages for the parameters measured. 

To demonstrate initial compliance with the total HAP 

limits, you would be required to collect one grab sample every 8 

hours for a single grade, or one grab sample per grade of PVC 

resin produced, whichever is more frequent for each resin 

stripper over a 24-hour period. To determine initial compliance 

with the vinyl chloride limit, you would be required to collect 

one grab sample every 8 hours for a single grade, or one grab

sample per grade of PVC resin produced, whichever is more 

frequent, for each resin stripper over a 24-hour period. You 

would be required to collect samples over a 24-hour period 

during which you are manufacturing the grade of resin, which you 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 50 of 406

produce the most of, based on total mass of resin produced in 

the preceding month.

To demonstrate continuous compliance with the vinyl 

chloride limit for a continuous process, you would be required 

to collect one grab sample from each resin stripper every 8 

hours for a single grade, or one grab sample per grade of PVC 

resin produced, whichever is more frequent. Grade is defined in 

40 CFR 63.12010 of the proposed rule and is unchanged from the 

definition in the Part 61 NESHAP other than the insertion of the 

term ―PVC.‖ To demonstrate compliance with the vinyl chloride 

limit for a batch process, you would be required to collect one 

grab sample from each batch of resin produced. You must 

demonstrate compliance on a daily basis using a 24-hour average 

concentration weighted on production.

To demonstrate continuous compliance with the total HAP 

limits for a continuous process, on a monthly basis you would be 

required to collect one grab sample every 8 hours for a single 

grade, or per grade of PVC resin produced, whichever is more 

frequent from each resin stripper over a 24-hour period.

Individual sampling events may be 3 to 5 weeks apart, but you 

must conduct a minimum of 12 sampling events per calendar year. 

The 24-hour arithmetic average total HAP concentration for each

stripper for each resin grade produced during the 24-hour 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 51 of 406

sampling period must be calculated using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab. Beginning 13 months 

following your initial demonstration of compliance, you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, based on a 12-month 

rolling average concentration, calculated as the average of the 

12 most recent 24-hour arithmetic average concentrations.

To demonstrate continuous compliance with the total HAP 

limits for a batch process, on a monthly basis, you would be 

required to collect one grab sample for each batch of resin 

produced over a 24-hour period. You would be required to 

collect samples over a 24-hour period during which you are 

producing the grade of resin, which you manufacture for a 

majority of the time during that month. You must demonstrate 

compliance on a monthly basis with the average concentration of 

the most recent 12 months of data.

7. What are the initial and continuous compliance requirements 

for other emission sources?

To demonstrate compliance with the requirements for other 

emission sources, we are proposing that for reactors and other 

components prior to opening, you must follow the initial and 

continuous compliance requirements in 40 CFR 63.11925. We are 

requesting comments on this compliance approach. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 52 of 406

G. What are the performance testing requirements for batch 

process operations?

For batch process operations, performance tests would be 

conducted under the most challenging conditions that you would 

run your batch process operations to make sure that the control 

devices is operating at the level needed to demonstration 

compliance with the appropriate emission limits. The Agency‘s 

intent is to require testing of the performance of the control 

device under its most challenging conditions. Subsequent to the 

initial compliance test, continuous monitoring of operating 

parameters established during the initial test is a reasonable 

measure of continuous compliance with the efficiency requirement 

under all conditions. Presumably, the control device should

function as well or better under conditions that are not as 

challenging. You would be required to develop an emission 

profile that describes the characteristics of the vent stream at 

the inlet to the control device under either absolute or 

hypothetical worst-case conditions. The emissions profile may 

be developed by process, by process component, or by capture and 

control device limitations, as specified in 40 CFR 

63.11945(c)(3) of the proposed rule. We have provided 

methodologies to develop the emissions profile for each batch 

processing operation in proposed 40 CFR 63.11950, including 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 53 of 406

methodologies for vapor displacement, gas sweep of a partially 

filled vessel, heating, depressurization, vacuum systems, gas 

evolution, air drying, and purging. All other HAP emissions for 

the emissions profile would be determined through an engineering 

assessment, or through testing approved by the Administrator. 

See 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed rule.

H. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements?

1. Notifications and Reports

All new and existing sources would be required to comply 

with certain requirements of the General Provisions (40 CFR part 

63, subpart A), which are identified in Table 5 of the proposed 

40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. The General Provisions include 

specific requirements for notifications, recordkeeping, and 

reporting. Reports include notifications of initial startup, 

initial notification, notification of compliance status, 

compliance reports, notification of performance test, 

notification of inspection, batch pre-compliance report, and 

other notifications and reports specified in proposed 40 CFR 

63.11985.

 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 54 of 406

The notification of compliance status report required by 40 

CFR 63.9(h), must include certifications of compliance with rule 

requirements. 

The excess emissions and continuous system performance 

report and summary report required by 40 CFR 63.10(e)(3) of the 

NESHAP General Provisions (referred to in the rule as a 

compliance report), would be required to be submitted semiannually for reporting periods during which there was: an 

exceedance of any emission limit or a monitored parameter; a 

deviation from any of the requirements in the rule occurred; or 

if any process changes occurred and compliance certifications 

were reevaluated. The proposed rule includes additional 

requirements for what you must include in these reports for each 

type of emission point. See 40 CFR 63.11985 of the proposed 

rule.

2. Recordkeeping

The proposed rule would require compiling and retaining 

records to demonstrate compliance with each emission limit and 

work practice standard. These recordkeeping requirements are 

specified either directly in the proposed rule, in the General 

Provisions to 40 CFR part 63, and in 40 CFR part 63, subparts UU

and WW. Records that we are proposing that you keep include 

performance tests, records of CPMS and CEMS, records of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 55 of 406

malfunction, records of deviations, records specific to each 

emission point, and other records specified in proposed 40 CFR

63.11990. The 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions requirements 

that apply are listed in Table 5 of the proposed rule. We are 

proposing that records be kept for 5 years in a form suitable 

and readily available for EPA review. We are proposing that 

records be kept on-site for 2 years; you may keep the records 

off-site for the remaining 3 years. See 40 CFR 63.11990 of the 

proposed rule.

I. What are the electronic data submittal requirements?

EPA must have performance test data to conduct effective 

reviews (e.g., risk assessment) of CAA section 112 standards, as 

well as for many other purposes, including compliance 

determinations, emission factor development, and annual emission 

rate determinations. In conducting these reviews, EPA has found 

it ineffective and time consuming, not only for us, but also for 

regulatory agencies and source owners and operators to locate, 

collect, and submit emissions test data in paper form because of 

varied locations for data storage and varied data storage 

methods. In recent years, though, stack testing firms have 

typically collected performance test data in electronic format, 

making it possible to move to an electronic data submittal 

system that would increase the ease and efficiency of data 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 56 of 406

submittal and improve data accessibility.

In this action, EPA is proposing a step to increase the 

ease and efficiency of data submittal and improve data 

accessibility. Specifically, we are proposing that owners and 

operators of PVC production facilities would be required to 

submit electronic copies of reports of certain required 

performance test reports to EPA‘s WebFire database. The WebFIRE 

database was constructed to store performance test data for use 

in developing emission factors. A description of the WebFIRE 

database is available at 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main. EPA 

solicits comment on the proposed electronic data submittal 

requirements. 

Data entry will be through an electronic emissions test 

report structure called the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT). 

The ERT would be able to transmit the electronic report through 

EPA‘s Central Data Exchange (CDX) network for storage in the 

WebFIRE database making submittal of data very straightforward 

and easy. A description of the ERT can be found at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html.

The requirement to submit source test data electronically 

to EPA would only apply to those performance tests conducted 

using test methods that are supported by the ERT. The ERT 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 57 of 406

contains a specific electronic data entry form for most of the 

commonly used EPA reference methods. A listing of the 

pollutants and test methods supported by the ERT is available at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html. We believe that 

industry would benefit from this proposed approach to electronic 

data submittal. Having these data, EPA would be able to develop 

improved emission factors, make fewer information requests, and 

promulgate better regulations.

One major advantage of submitting source test data through 

the ERT is that it will provide a standardized method to compile 

and store much of the documentation required to be reported by 

the proposed rule. Another advantage is that the ERT clearly 

states what testing information would be required. 

Another important benefit of submitting these data to EPA 

at the time the source test is conducted is that it should 

substantially reduce the effort involved in data collection 

activities in the future. When EPA has performance test data in 

hand, there will likely be fewer or less substantial data 

collection requests in conjunction with prospective required 

residual risk assessments or technology reviews. This would 

result in a reduced burden on both affected facilities (in terms 

of reduced manpower to respond to data collection requests) and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 58 of 406

EPA (in terms of preparing and distributing data collection 

requests and assessing the results).

State, local, and tribal agencies may also benefit from a

more streamlined and accurate review process rather than a 

manual data assessment, making review and evaluation of the 

source provided data and calculations easier and more efficient. 

Finally, another benefit of the proposed data submittal to 

WebFIRE electronically is that these data would greatly improve 

the overall quality of existing and new emissions factors by 

supplementing the pool of emissions test data for establishing 

emissions factors, and by ensuring that the factors are more 

representative of current industry operational procedures. A 

common complaint heard from industry and regulators is that 

emission factors are outdated or not representative of a 

particular source category. With timely receipt and 

incorporation of data from most performance tests, EPA would be 

able to ensure that emission factors, when updated, represent 

the most current range of operational practices. In summary,

consistent with Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, issued on January 18, 2011, in addition to 

supporting regulation development, control strategy development, 

and other air pollution control activities, having an electronic 

database populated with performance test data would save 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 59 of 406

industry, State, local, tribal agencies, and EPA significant

time, money, and effort while also improving the quality of 

emission inventories and, as a result, air quality regulations.

J. What revisions are proposed for the area source rule (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart DDDDDD)?

We are proposing to revise the existing NESHAP for PVC 

production area sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD) to 

require that PVC production area sources comply with the 

proposed rule. Area sources would be required to continue to 

comply with the current provisions of subpart DDDDDD until they 

are in compliance with the proposed rule. After that date, 

existing and new area sources would no longer be subject to the 

requirements of subpart DDDDDD. 

IV. Rationale for the Proposed PVC Rule for Major and Area 

Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH)

A. How did EPA subcategorize PVC production?

The CAA allows EPA to divide source categories into 

subcategories, based on differences in class, type, or size. 

For example, differences between given types of units can lead 

to corresponding differences in the nature of emissions and the 

technical feasibility of applying emission control techniques. 

For the stripped resin limits, we are proposing three 

subcategories. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 60 of 406

In the United States, four different types of 

polymerization processes have been used to manufacture PVC: 

dispersion, suspension, solution, and bulk. The type of resin 

production process used is dictated by the end use of the 

product and the products‘ required physical and chemical 

properties and function, such as the need for flexibility, 

rigidity, or the ability to be molded. For example, to make 

dispersion resins (as compared to other types of resins), 

different reactants, initiators, and surfactants are used in the 

manufacturing process. The differences in chemicals used for 

manufacturing, and the properties of the final product, result 

in products with different compositions. 

After the polymerization process is complete, the PVC resin

is sent to a resin stripper, or the resin can be stripped 

directly in the reactor to remove residual HAP such as vinyl 

chloride. The vent streams from the resin stripper, 

polymerization reactors, other process components upstream of 

the resin stripper, and vents from the wastewater stripper are 

sent to recovery processes to recover unreacted VCM. After 

recovery, the vent stream containing unrecovered VCM is sent to 

a control device before being emitted to atmosphere. 

Dispersion resins have less porosity, mechanical stability, 

and heat stability than suspension or solution resins, resulting 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 61 of 406

in more difficulty in stripping vinyl chloride. Consequently, 

the levels of vinyl chloride in the stripped dispersion resin 

products are not as low as those in the stripped suspension 

resin products. At bulk resin production, the product of the 

polymerization process results in a resin that is more of a 

solid than a slurry, which is unlike solution, dispersion, and 

suspension resins, and results in a different emissions profile

at the resin stripper for organic HAP and vinyl chloride. We 

are unaware of any resin that is being manufactured using the 

solution process, and we do not have emissions data on this type 

of process. 

For purposes of the stripped resin limits, which serve to 

limit emissions from points downstream of the resin stripper, we 

are proposing to subcategorize PVCPU into three subcategories: 

bulk resins, dispersion resins, and all other resin types. In 

the absence of data on solution resin production facilities, we 

are incorporating them into the ―other resins‖ subcategory, 

which also includes suspension resin. We are requesting comment 

on the proposed subcategorization, and the appropriateness of 

including suspension and solution resins in the same 

subcategory.

We are not proposing to establish separate subcategories 

for any of the other emission points regulated by the proposed 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 62 of 406

rule (process vents, equipment leaks, wastewater, storage 

vessels, other emission sources, and heat exchange systems by 

resin type). The same air pollution control devices, wastewater 

treatment processes, and work practices for these kinds of 

emission points are applicable and effective regardless of any 

potential differences in physical and chemical properties of the 

resin being produced. Therefore, EPA chose not to subcategorize 

in setting emission limitations and work practice standards for 

these emission points.

B. How did EPA select the emission points, format, and 

pollutants for the proposed rule?

1. How did EPA select the emission points covered?

The emission points covered by the proposed rule were 

selected to ensure control of all sources of HAP emissions 

within the PVC production process. The HAP emission points 

within PVCPU are process vents (e.g., process vents from 

polymerization reactors, resin strippers, other process 

components prior to the resin stripper, the VCM recovery system, 

slip gauges, loading and unloading lines, samples, the 

wastewater collection and treatment system that routes emissions 

through a closed vent system to a control device, and emission 

control devices), stripped resin, equipment leaks (e.g., valves, 

pumps, connectors, and PRD), wastewater collection and treatment 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 63 of 406

systems, storage vessels, reactor and other process component 

openings, and heat exchange systems.

EPA solicits comment on the emission points proposed for 

regulation.

2. How did EPA select the format of the proposed rule?

We are proposing to establish numerical emission limits in 

the form of concentration limits for process vents, stripped 

resin, and wastewater. We are establishing the process vent 

emission limits at the outlet of the control device. The 

process vent emissions are comprised of emissions from 

polymerization reactors, resin strippers, other process 

components prior to the resin stripper, the VCM recovery system, 

certain pressurized and fixed storage vessels, slip gauges, 

loading and unloading lines, samples, the wastewater collection 

and treatment system that routes emissions through a closed vent 

system to the control device, and emission control devices. 

The emission limits in the proposed rule provides 

flexibility for the regulated community by allowing a regulated 

source to choose any control technology or technique to meet the 

emission limits, rather than requiring each unit to use a 

prescribed control method that may not be appropriate in each 

case. We are proposing numerical emission rate limits as ppmv 

dry standardized to 3-percent oxygen for process vents. A 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 64 of 406

concentration limit in units of ppmv is consistent with previous 

EPA and State regulations for PVC production facilities, and 

other processes controlled by combustion devices.

We are proposing a concentration limit for HAP in the 

stripped resin in units of ppmw as a means to control HAP 

emissions from downstream sources (e.g. dryers, centrifuges, 

filters). We are proposing a concentration based limit because 

the HAP emissions from vents associated with processes 

downstream of the resin stripper are dependent on the 

concentration of HAP in the stripped resin. That is, the 

greater the HAP concentration in the stripped resin, the greater 

the HAP emissions from downstream process components. 

Similarly, the lower the HAP concentration in the stripped 

resin, the lower the HAP emissions from downstream process 

components. Consequently, limiting HAP in the stripped resin is 

the best means to control HAP emissions from downstream 

processes. This approach is consistent with current Federal and 

State regulations that are applicable to PVC production 

facilities. 

For wastewater streams that contain greater than or equal 

to 10 ppmw vinyl chloride, and, accordingly, require treatment 

to reduce the vinyl chloride concentration, we are proposing a 

stripper outlet concentration. Wastewater streams with less 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 65 of 406

than 10 ppmw vinyl chloride must stay below that level. To 

address HAP emissions other than vinyl chloride, the proposed 

rule would require compliance with the HON requirements in 40 

CFR part 63, subpart G. 

We are proposing work practice standards to reduce 

emissions from storage vessels, equipment leaks, and heat 

exchange systems. 

CAA section 112(h)(1) states that the Administrator may 

prescribe a work practice standard or other requirements, 

consistent with the provisions of CAA sections 112(d) or (f), in 

those cases where, in the judgment of the Administrator, it is 

not feasible to enforce an emission standard. CAA section 

112(h)(2) defines the phrase ―not feasible to prescribe or 

enforce an emission standard‖ as follows:

[A]ny situation in which the Administrator determines that 

(A) a hazardous air pollutant or pollutants cannot be 

emitted through a conveyance designed and constructed to 

emit or capture such pollutant, or that any requirement 

for, or use of, such a conveyance would be inconsistent 

with any Federal, State, or local law, or (B) the 

application of measurement methodology to a particular 

class of sources is not practicable due to technological 

and economic limitations.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 66 of 406

The work practice standards in this proposed rule are consistent 

with CAA section 112(h)(2)(B), because applying a measurement 

methodology to this class of sources is not technologically 

feasible due to the number of openings and possible emissions 

points. 

The proposed work standards for emissions from storage 

tanks are evaporative losses that result from barometric 

pressure and ambient temperature changes, as well as filling and 

emptying operations. The flow rate of vent emissions from a 

tank is very low, except during filling. The concentration of 

HAP in the vent stream varies with the degree of saturation of 

HAP in the tank vapor space. The degree of saturation depends 

on such factors as HAP vapor pressure, tank size, and liquid 

throughput. Low flow rate and varying concentration make 

emission measurement impractical. 

Emissions from equipment leaks are intermittent and 

fugitive in nature, so it is, therefore, not feasible to fully 

measure the mass emission rate from numerous potential leaks at 

an affected source. 

3. How did EPA determine the pollutants for which to set 

emission limits? 

The major HAP emitted from PVC production processes is the 

raw material, vinyl chloride. This is from the feed material 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 67 of 406

processing prior to the reaction, and from post reaction 

processing (some of the VCM raw material remains unreacted 

during the polymerization process). For these reasons, we are 

setting emission limits for vinyl chloride. 

PVC production processes also emit a variety of other HAP 

that may be contained in initiators or inhibitors of 

polymerization, additives, copolymer feedstocks, impurities, or 

formed during the polymerization process. As discussed earlier, 

these HAP include 1,3-butadiene, benzene, acetaldehyde, bis (2-

ethylhexyl) phthalate, chloroform, chloroprene, ethylene 

dichloride, ethylidene dichloride, formaldehyde, iso-octane, 

methylene chloride, vinyl bromide, and vinylidene chloride.

3

PVCPU use different processes to produce a variety of resin 

products. Rather than setting individual emission limits for 

the wide variety of other HAP that can be found in PVC 

production processes, we are proposing a total HAP emission 

limit. A total HAP limit is appropriate because emissions from 

PVC facilities are comprised of mixtures of these HAP, and the 

control technologies used to control total HAP such as 

condensers and thermal oxidizers, achieve control of the 

individual HAP. Thermal oxidizers combust all organic HAP and 

convert them to carbon dioxide and water, with only trace 

amounts of organic compounds remaining. An acid gas scrubber 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 68 of 406

removes any inorganic compounds that remain after combustion. 

Condensers, as a part of the vinyl chloride recovery system 

condense out organic compounds that are re-used in the process. 

Process vents are often controlled using thermal oxidizers 

because they are effective at reducing emissions of vinyl 

chloride and organic HAP. However, the combustion of 

halogenated organic compounds results in formation of hydrogen 

chloride, which is a HAP, and can also result in the formation 

of CDD/CDF. We are proposing to set emission limits for HCl 

from process vents.

We are authorized to regulate the CDD/CDF class of HAP. 

While dibenzofuran and 2,3,7,8-TCDD are identified by name as 

HAP in CAA section 112, all CDD/CDF are polycyclic organic 

matter, and, as such, we have the authority to regulate these 

compounds. Under CAA section 112(d), the MACT floor standards 

are to be based on the average emissions performance of the best 

performing units for which the Administrator has emissions 

information. We received a substantial amount of emissions test 

data for CDD/CDF emissions through the CAA section 114 

information collection, in which we sought CDD/CDF information 

from sampling runs that lasted about 4 hours each. While 

reported CDD/CDF emissions were below detectable levels in 

approximately 46 percent of the individual test runs for all
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 69 of 406

CDD/CDF isomers reported, only 37 percent of three-run test 

averages were comprised of individual test runs where all runs 

were below detection limits. Therefore, a majority (63 percent) 

of the three-run tests detected some level of CDD/CDF. 

Furthermore, some of the emission tests detected most or all 

isomers at some level, and CDD/CDF emissions can be precisely 

measured for most control devices in the PVC production source 

category. Therefore, the statutory test for establishment of 

work practice standards--i.e., that measurement of emissions is 

impracticable due to technological and economic limitations--is 

not met.

To make sure that the emission limits are set at a level 

that can be measured, we adjusted for variability using the 

upper prediction limit (UPL) approach, and we used the ―three 

times MDL‖ approach (discussed elsewhere in this preamble) as a 

minimum level at which a CDD/CDF emission limit, on a toxic 

equivalency (TEQ) basis, is set. Rather than establishing work 

practice standards, but recognizing that emissions tend to be 

very low compared to more significant sources of CDD/CDF, such 

as incinerators, our approach to CDD/CDF requires an initial 

compliance test to demonstrate that the PVCPU meet the CDD/CDF

standard, and additional compliance testing on an annual basis. 

Initial and continuous compliance requirements for process vents 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 70 of 406

are discussed in section III.F.4 of this preamble. Furthermore, 

the CDD/CDF test method, EPA Method 23, requires that, for 

compliance purposes, non-detect values from runs should be 

reported and calculated as zeroes. Therefore, for purposes of 

compliance, there should be no concern about being unable to 

meet the standards because of the contribution of non-detect 

values. Consequently, we are proposing to set emission limits 

for CDD/CDF (on a TEQ basis), from process vents. 

Cooling towers may emit a variety of VOC, depending on 

which process components may be leaking into the heat exchange 

system. The most prevalent HAP that may leak into a heat 

exchange system is vinyl chloride, which is also a VOC. The 

proposed compliance method for heat exchange systems measures 

total VOC and not speciated compounds. A detection of total VOC 

in the cooling water indicates leakage of organic HAP (including 

vinyl chloride) into the heat exchange system.

4. Solicitation of Comments. 

EPA solicits comment on the emission points proposed for 

regulation and the format of the proposed standards. We also 

solicit comments on the pollutants that we have proposed for 

regulation and how we grouped pollutants such as total HAP and 

dioxin.

C. How did EPA determine the proposed emission standards for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 71 of 406

area sources?

Under CAA section 112(d)(6), we are required to ―. . . 

review, and revise as necessary (taking into account 

developments in practices, processes, and control technologies), 

emission standards promulgated under this section no less often 

than every 8 years.‖ With this rulemaking, we are fulfilling 

our obligation to review, and revise, as necessary, the PVC 

Production area source standards. The 2007 NESHAP for PVC 

production area sources (40 CFR, part 63, subpart DDDDDD) are 

based on GACT. The area source NESHAP only set emission limits 

for vinyl chloride, which was the pollutant for which we needed 

the PVC Production area source category to meet our 90-percent 

obligation in CAA section 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B). We are 

proposing to tighten emission standards for vinyl chloride under 

CAA section 112(d)(6).

Under CAA section 112(d)(5), we may elect to promulgate 

standards or requirements for area sources "which provide for 

the use of generally available control technologies [―GACT‖] or 

management practices by such sources to reduce emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants." In this proposed rule, we have 

determined that area source emission limits should be set for 

total HAP, CDD/CDF, and HCl, in addition to vinyl chloride, that 

are emitted from PVC production processes. As explained in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 72 of 406

other area source rules, the Agency has discretion to set 

standards for all urban HAP, in this case, CDD/CDF and total 

HAP, and to not limit standards to only the urban HAP for which 

the area source category was listed (i.e., vinyl chloride). In 

addition to vinyl chloride, PVC production processes emit a 

variety of other HAP that may be contained in initiators or 

inhibitors of polymerization, additives, copolymer feedstocks, 

impurities, or formed during the polymerization process. The 

urban HAP reported to be emitted by the only existing PVC area 

source include 1,3-butadiene, ethylene dichloride, and methylene 

chloride. However, PVCPU can produce a variety of resin 

products over time which can influence the HAP emitted, so there 

is a potential that the area source could also emit other 

organic HAP reported at major source PVCPU (such as benzene, 

acetaldehyde, chloroform, and formaldehyde). Rather than 

setting individual emission limits for the wide variety of HAP 

that can be emitted by the area source PVC facility, we are 

proposing a total HAP emission limit (as we are for major 

sources). A total HAP limit is appropriate because emissions 

from the area source PVC facility are comprised of mixtures of 

these organic HAP, and the control technologies used to control 

total HAP achieve control of the individual organic HAP. 

Although we recognize that we have met the 90-percent 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 73 of 406

requirement of CAA section 112(c)(3), nothing precludes the 

Agency from regulating beyond the 90 percent with regard to the 

30 urban HAP. We also believe it is appropriate to establish 

area source emission standards for HCl because, although not an 

urban HAP, it is formed as a product of combustion in 

controlling vents containing vinyl chloride and HAP. We solicit 

comment on our proposal to regulate these other HAP, beyond 

vinyl chloride since the Agency has already met its 90-percent 

statutory obligation under CAA section 112(c)(3) and 

112(k)(3)(B).The 2007 GACT standards (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

DDDDDD) generally required area sources to continue to comply 

with the vinyl chloride emission limits, and other requirements 

in the part 61 NESHAP, which had been promulgated in 1976 (41 FR 

46560, October 21, 1976). Therefore, the 2007 GACT standards 

did not achieve any emissions reductions. 

In determining what constitutes GACT for this proposed 

rule, we considered the control technologies and management 

practices that are generally available to PVC area sources by 

examining relevant data and information, including information

collected from the only known PVC area source. We also 

considered the standards proposed for major sources to determine 

if the control technologies and management practices are 

transferable and generally available to area sources. (See 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 74 of 406

section III of this preamble for a summary of the MACT standards 

and sections IV.D through IV.F for further information on how 

the proposed MACT standards were determined.) As part of the 

GACT determination, we considered the costs and economic impacts 

of available control technologies and management practices on 

area sources.

As explained in greater detail below, we determined that 

GACT standards for area sources should be the same as the major 

source MACT standards, based on the similarity between 

production processes, emission points, emissions, and control 

technologies that are characteristic of both major and area 

source PVC production facilities. Due to the nature of the PVC 

production process and as reported in the information collected, 

the one existing area source has the same kinds of emission 

points (process vents, stripped resin, wastewater, equipment 

leaks, storage, heat exchangers, and other emission sources) and 

emits the same types of pollutants (identified in section IV.B

of this preamble) as major sources. From the information that 

we collected during this rule development, which includes stack 

testing and site visits at both major and area sources, we now 

know that area sources have the same types of emissions, 

emission sources, and controls (see control information below)

as major sources. Information that we have collected to support 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 75 of 406

development of these proposed standards indicates that the one 

area source would be major, based on its potential to emit,

except that the source has an enforceable requirement to operate 

its thermal oxidizer, which keeps it below major source levels. 

We are not aware of any planned new area sources.

In reviewing the data collected from major and area sources 

for development of the proposed rule, it is clear that the one 

PVC area source, like the major sources, is achieving vinyl 

chloride emission limits well below those required in the 2007 

area source NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD) and the part 

61 NESHAP. The data collected from major and area sources are

discussed in the memorandum, Baseline Emission Estimates for the 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source 

Category, which is available in the docket. The PVC area source 

uses the same control technologies as the major sources. For 

example, for process vents, the area source is using the same 

control technology (a thermal oxidizer in series with an acid 

gas scrubber) as most major sources. It is also using the same 

wastewater control (a wastewater stripper) used by major 

sources, and implementing the same type of equipment LDAR 

program as most major sources. The achievability of stripped 

resin HAP limits is a function of the resin-type subcategory 

(bulk, dispersion, or other) rather than the size of the PVCPU, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 76 of 406

or its location at a major or area source, and the PVC area 

source is already meting the proposed stripped resin MACT limits 

for the bulk PVC subcategory. In addition, the area source PVC 

plant is already meeting the proposed MACT limits for storage 

vessels and other emission sources (reactor and other component 

opening losses). Therefore, the control technologies and 

management practices used by major sources are generally 

available for area sources. In addition, the part 61 NESHAP for 

this industry requires all PVC production facilities to meet the 

same standards with no major or area source distinction, and 

because of the similarities between major and area sources, it 

is reasonable for them to meet the same emission standards under 

this proposed rule. 

As part of the GACT determination, we analyzed the cost and 

emissions reduction for the area source to meet the proposed 

GACT standards. The overall annual cost is $332,351, and the 

annual emission reduction is 17.23 tons of HAP per year. For 

information on the methodology and more detailed results of this 

analysis, see the memorandum, Costs and Emission Reductions of 

the MACT Floor Level of Control for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, in the docket. The 

economic impact analysis (see section V.D of this preamble) 

showed that there are no significant economic impacts. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 77 of 406

For the aforementioned reasons, we have determined, 

pursuant to CAA sections 112(d)(5) and (6), that the control 

technologies and management practices necessary to meet the 

proposed major source emission standards are generally available 

for area sources in this source category. Accordingly, we are 

proposing the GACT level of control for area sources is the 

same as the MACT level of control for major sources, and that 

these area sources must meet the same standards as proposed in 

this rule for major sources.

Because the compliance dates in the proposed rule are 3 

years after promulgation for existing area sources, and startup 

or the date of promulgation, whichever is later, for new area 

sources, area sources must continue to comply with the current 

provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDDD until they are 

required to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. 

However, on and after the proposed rule‘s compliance dates, 

existing and new PVC production area sources would no longer be 

required to comply with subpart DDDDDD. The proposed amendments 

to subpart DDDDDD make this clear. Amending subpart DDDDDD in 

this manner allows for continuous compliance with emission 

standards for PVC production area sources, while avoiding 

duplicative or burdensome requirements under more than one 

subpart.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 78 of 406

EPA solicits comment on the proposed approach. 

D. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for existing major 

sources?

There are less than 30 sources in this source category. 

Therefore, EPA has based the MACT floor on the average of the 

best performing five sources. The determination of the best 

performing sources is discussed below. 

In general, MACT floor analyses involve an assessment of 

the emissions from the best performing sources in a source 

category using the available emissions information. For each 

source category, the assessment involves a review of emissions 

data with an appropriate accounting for emissions variability. 

Various methods of estimating emissions can be used if the 

methods can be shown to provide reasonable estimates of the 

actual emissions performance of a source or sources.

Process vents and stripped resin. To develop the MACT 

floor emission limits for process vents (which includes all the 

vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripping operation, 

VCM recovery system, slip gauges, loading and unloading lines, 

samples, and the wastewater collection and treatment system that 

are sent to a control device) and stripped resin, we ranked all 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 79 of 406

the available emission concentration or resin concentration data 

for each pollutant: vinyl chloride, HCl, CDD/CDF, and total HAP 

for process vents; and vinyl chloride and total HAP for stripped 

resin. For this ranking, EPA included all major sources and the 

one synthetic area source. In previous rulemakings (e.g., Brick 

NESHAP, 68 FR 26697-26698, May 16, 2003), EPA determined that 

including synthetic area sources in calculating the MACT floor 

for major sources is consistent with CAA section 112(d). 

Concentration data for each pollutant were ranked from 

sources within the entire category (for process vents), or each 

subcategory (for resins) from lowest to highest. Based on 

information available to EPA, at all existing PVC production 

facilities, emissions from process vents are routed to a VCM

recovery system. The vent stream from the recovery system is 

controlled either by a thermal oxidizer followed by a scrubber, 

or by an absorber. Emissions data were collected from emissions 

tests (consisting of three test runs) conducted at the outlet of 

the absorber, or the thermal oxidizer/scrubber control system. 

For each pollutant, the average of the three test runs was 

calculated for each facility. The average values (for each 

pollutant) from each facility were then ranked from lowest to 

highest to identify the best performing sources. 

The CAA section 114 information collection required each 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 80 of 406

facility to take samples of the stripped resin being produced 

daily over a 30-day period at the outlets of the resin 

stripper(s) and the resin dryer(s). The facilities analyzed the 

samples for the concentration(s) of HAP present in the resin,

and then calculated the corresponding mass of each HAP present 

in the stripped resin, based on the analysis of the 

concentration in each of the samples. Facilities were asked to 

report both the mass of each HAP present in the sampled resin, 

and also the production rate for that resin. The test results 

revealed that the methods used to convert the HAP concentration 

to mass varied across the industry making the emissions 

information incomparable. For example, some companies used the 

production rate from the entire plant, while others used the 

production rate from the production lines being sampled. We did 

not initially request the HAP concentration values for the 

analyzed resins, but because of the many discrepancies in the 

mass of each HAP in the stripped resin, these HAP concentrations 

values were provided in a subsequent data submittal by the 

industry trade association. The industry trade association also 

provided additional detail related to the detection levels and

specific test methods used during the sampling and analysis 

required by our CAA section 114 information collection. The 

data used to calculate the MACT floors for stripped resin were 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 81 of 406

the HAP concentration data, and not the mass loading data. To 

determine the stripped resin limits, we calculated the average 

concentration levels for each pollutant at each facility. They

were then ranked from lowest to highest for each facility in the 

subcategory to identify the best performing sources. 

MACT floors were calculated for each pollutant regulated by 

the proposed rule. Because there are fewer than 30 sources in 

the source category (for process vents) and each subcategory 

(for stripped resins), the MACT floor for each pollutant was 

calculated from the average of the best performing (i.e., lowest 

emitting) five sources. We took the numerical average of the 

five best performing sources, and accounted for variability, as 

discussed later in this section of the preamble.

Wastewater. All PVC production facilities are currently 

subject to the part 61 NESHAP inprocess wastewater standards. 

In the part 61 NESHAP, inprocess wastewater is defined as 

―...water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into 

direct contact with vinyl chloride or results from the 

production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, 

finished product, by-product, or waste product containing vinyl 

chloride or polyvinyl chloride, but which has not been 

discharged to a wastewater treatment process or discharged

untreated as wastewater. Gasholder seal water is not wastewater
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 82 of 406

until it is removed from the gasholder.‖ The part 61 NESHAP

requires control of inprocess wastewater streams with a 

concentration of 10 ppmw or more vinyl chloride at the point of 

generation, and all facilities achieve this control by using a 

wastewater steam stripper. The average annual vinyl chloride 

concentrations at the outlet of the stripper were provided in 

survey responses for 13 out of 17 facilities. The average 

values from each facility were then ranked from lowest to 

highest to identify the best performing sources (that controlled 

streams with vinyl chloride concentrations greater than 10 ppmw 

at the point of generation). We took the numerical average of 

the five best performing sources, and accounted for variability, 

as discussed later in this section of the preamble. The 

predominant HAP in wastewater streams generated from this source 

category is vinyl chloride. All of the stripped wastewater

streams contain vinyl chloride, which the survey data show 

comprises, on average, 95 percent of the HAP concentration in 

these streams. A review of the streams exiting the wastewater 

stripper, and streams that do not require control to meet the 10

ppmw vinyl chloride requirements (from the part 61 NESHAP) at 

the point of generation, does not indicate that additional 

control is used to reduce those compounds that are not easily 

removed by the wastewater stripper. We have documented this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 83 of 406

analysis in the memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for the 

Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) and Copolymers Production Source 

Category, which is available in the docket. However, as 

explained in section IV.F of this preamble, we are proposing 

additional control of wastewater streams, based on other HAP (in 

additional to vinyl chloride as a beyond-the-floor option, and 

have included total HAP limits in the proposed rule. Equipment 

leaks. For equipment leaks, we ranked the LDAR programs used at 

each affected PVC source from most stringent to least stringent, 

based on the leak definitions, monitoring frequencies, control 

requirements, and repair requirements. We then identified the 

LDAR programs employed by the best performing five sources. The 

results of this analysis showed that three out of the best 

performing five sources comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU 

level 2 controls. The remaining sources comply with less 

stringent LDAR programs, such as 40 CFR part 61, subpart V. 

Additionally, existing sources are complying with the 

requirements of the part 61 NESHAP, that rotating pumps must be 

either sealless, equipped with double mechanical seals, or 

equivalent and all reciprocating pumps, rotating and 

reciprocating compressors, and agitators must be equipped with 

double mechanical seals or equivalent. If double mechanical 

seals or double outboard seals are used, HAP emissions must be 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 84 of 406

minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so 

that the leak occurs into the pump, compressor, or agitator by 

ducting any HAP between the two seals through a closed vent 

system to a control device. 

Therefore, we are proposing that existing and new affected 

sources comply with the LDAR program requirements of the 

National Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks-Control Level 2 

Standards, subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63, except for rotating or 

reciprocating pumps, compressors, and agitators. We are 

proposing that rotating pumps be sealless, equipped with double 

seals, or equivalent. Reciprocating pumps, reciprocating and 

rotating compressors, and agitator be equipped with double 

seals, or equivalent, as provided in 40 CFR 63.11915 of the 

proposed rule.

The part 61 NESHAP also requires installation of a vinyl 

chloride monitoring system for detection of major leaks and 

identification of the general area of the plant where a leak is 

located. A vinyl chloride monitoring system is a device that

obtains air samples from one or more points continuously, and 

analyzes the samples with gas chromatography, infrared 

spectrophotometry, flame ion detection, or an equivalent or 

alternate method. These requirements from the part 61 NESHAP

also constitute the MACT floor level of control.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 85 of 406

The MACT floor analysis is available in the docket in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category.

Storage vessels and handling operations. Two different 

types of storage vessels were identified from data collected 

from the PVC production industry: (1) storage vessels storing 

material that are gases at ambient conditions (vapor pressures 

greater than 14.7 psia), and (2) storage vessels storing all 

other materials. The information collected showed that 

materials with vapor pressures greater than 14.7 psia are stored 

under pressure. A closed vent system that is routed to a 

control device is used at all facilities when filling the tank 

or purging the tank. All other materials are stored at all 

facilities in fixed roof tanks ranging in size from less than 

5,000 gallons up to 30,000 gallons. These tanks primarily store 

methanol. The responses to the CAA section 114 information 

collection indicated that these tanks are not controlled.

The part 61 NESHAP, which covers ethylene dichloride, vinyl 

chloride, and PVC plants, has specific emission standards for 

handling operations (i.e., loading and unloading of liquid 

products). However, PVC processes do not produce liquid 

products and do not have transfer rack loading operations. 

Handling a solid final product is unlikely to emit HAP, and the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 86 of 406

stripped resins limit already minimizes the HAP content of the 

final product. Consequently, no emission standards are being 

proposed for transfer operations. Unloading operations at PVC 

production facilities are considered part of process vents or 

storage, because emissions from unloading operations occur when 

charging storage vessels or reactor vessels, and any emissions 

are released from reactor vents or from the storage vessels. 

The emissions from these activities are subject to the process 

vent emission limits or storage vessel work practices. We are 

requesting comment on our proposed standards.

Heat exchange systems. For heat exchange systems, we 

requested information on each heat exchange system at PVC 

production facilities, including closed loop and once-through 

systems, existing programs and procedures to identify leaks of

HAP into cooling water, leak action levels, and estimates of 

emissions from cooling towers. We also requested information on 

the regulations applicable to PVC production facilities. Leak 

action levels are the concentration of pollutants in the cooling 

water that indicates one or more heat exchangers is leaking 

process fluid, or other HAP-containing fluid into the 

circulating cooling water. The HAP contained in the cooling 

water can then be emitted from a cooling tower once the cooling 

water is exposed to the atmosphere. We received leak action 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 87 of 406

levels for vinyl chloride, ethylene dichloride, vinylidene 

chloride, VOC, and non-methane hydrocarbons from twelve

facilities. From the data submitted by the best performing 

facilities discussed above, we determined that leak action 

levels ranged from 30 ppbw to 5,000 ppbw for VOC and non-methane 

hydrocarbons. The best performers had an average leak action 

level of 38 ppbw for total VOC, which corresponds to a total 

strippable VOC concentration of 2.9 ppmv in stripping gas. 

Therefore, we are proposing a leak action level of 38 ppbw of 

total strippable VOC in cooling water, or 2.9 ppmv total 

strippable VOC in stripping gas with monthly monitoring is the 

MACT floor for existing sources. While the data provided 

indicate that facilities monitor on a variety of different 

frequencies, we are proposing monthly monitoring. The majority 

perform either weekly or monthly monitoring. 

Other emission sources. The requirements from the part 61 

NESHAP for reactor opening losses and component openings set 

numeric limits that must be met. The reactor opening loss from 

each reactor must not exceed 0.04 pound vinyl chloride/ton of 

PVC product. This requirement does not apply to prepolymerization reactors in the bulk process. This requirement 

does apply to post-polymerization reactors in the bulk process, 

where the product means the gross product of pre-polymerization 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 88 of 406

and post-polymerization. 

The part 61 NESHAP also require that emissions from opening 

of other components, including pre-polymerization reactors used 

in the manufacture of bulk resins are to be minimized by 

reducing the volume of vinyl chloride to an amount which 

occupies a volume of no more than 2.0 percent of the equipment's 

containment volume, or 25 gallons, whichever is larger, at 

standard temperature and pressure. In the case of reactors used 

as strippers, the standard is based on the sum of allowable 

reactor opening losses, and the emissions limit for all 

downstream equipment (e.g., the stripped resin limits). 

Furthermore, exhaust gasses from reactors and any vinyl chloride 

removed from process components must be ducted through a control 

system meeting specified outlet concentration limits. These 

requirements from the part 61 NESHAP constitute the MACT floor 

level of control from these emission sources. 

1. Variability Calculation for MACT Floor Emission Limits Based 

on Emissions Test Data

For process vents, facilities measured the concentration of 

HAP in the vent stream exiting the control device used to 

control process vent streams. For stripped resin, facilities 

measured the concentration of HAP in the resin slurry exiting 

the resin stripper. For wastewater, facilities measured the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 89 of 406

concentration of vinyl chloride in the wastewater exiting the 

wastewater stripper. We used the emission concentration, resin 

concentration, and wastewater concentration data from the best 

performing sources to determine the MACT floor emission limits, 

with an accounting for variability. Data were collected from 

the CAA section 114 information collection, process vent 

emission testing results, resin sampling and analysis results,

and additional data submissions by individual companies and the 

industry trade association that clarified, and/or corrected 

initial submissions, or that provided the same data in a 

different format (e.g., concentration instead of mass in the 

case of stripped resin analysis results). We account for 

variability of the best-controlled source in setting floors, not 

only because variability is an element of performance, but 

because it is reasonable to assess best performance over time. 

The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals has recognized 

that EPA may consider variability in estimating the degree of 

emission reduction achieved by best performing sources, and in 

setting MACT floors. See Mossville Environmental Action Now v. 

EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1241–42 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

In determining the MACT floor limits for process vents, 

stripped resins, and wastewater, we first determined the MACT 

floor, which is the level achieved in practice by the average of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 90 of 406

the best-performing five sources. We then assessed variability 

of the best performers by using a statistical formula designed 

to estimate a MACT floor level that is achieved by the average 

of the five best performing sources. Specifically, the MACT 

floor limit is an UPL calculated with the Student‘s t-test using 

the TINV function in Microsoft Excel©. The UPL has also been 

used in other EPA rulemakings (e.g., the final NESHAP for 

Portland cement manufacturing, and the final NESHAP for 

industrial/commercial/institutional boilers) in accounting for 

variability. A prediction interval for a future observation is 

an interval that will, with a specified degree of confidence, 

contain the next (or some other pre-specified) randomly selected 

observation from a population. In other words, the prediction 

interval estimates what future values will be based upon present 

or past background samples taken. Given this definition, the 

UPL represents the value that we can expect the mean of three 

future observations (three-run average) to fall below, based 

upon the results of an independent sample from the same 

population. In other words, if we were to randomly select a 

future test condition from any of these sources (i.e., average 

of three runs), we can be 99-percent confident that the reported 

level will fall at or below the UPL value. To calculate the 

UPL, we used the average (or sample mean) and sample standard 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 91 of 406

deviation, which are two statistical measures calculated from 

the sample data. The average is the central value of a data 

set, and the standard deviation is the common measure of the 

dispersion of the data set around the average for a normally 

distributed data set.

We first determined the distribution of the emissions data 

for the best performing five sources within the source category 

for process vents, and within each subcategory for resins prior 

to calculating UPL values. To evaluate the distribution of the 

best performing dataset, we first computed the skewness and 

kurtosis statistics, and then conducted the appropriate smallsample hypothesis tests.

The skewness statistic (S) characterizes the degree of 

asymmetry of a given data distribution. Normally, distributed 

data have a skewness of 0. A skewness statistic that is greater 

(or less) than 0 indicates that the data are asymmetrically 

distributed with a right (or left) tail extending towards 

positive (or negative) values. Further, the standard error of 

the skewness statistic (SES) is given by SES = SQRT(6/N), where 

N is the sample size. According to the small sample skewness 

hypothesis test, if the skewness statistic (S) is greater than 2 

times the SES, the data distribution can be considered nonnormal. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 92 of 406

The kurtosis statistic (K) characterizes the degree of 

peakedness or flatness of a given data distribution in 

comparison to a normal distribution. Normally, distributed data 

have a kurtosis of 0. A kurtosis statistic that is greater (or 

less) than 0 indicates a relatively peaked (or flat) 

distribution. Further, the standard error of the kurtosis 

statistic (SEK) is calculated by SEK = SQRT(24/N) where N is the 

sample size. According to the small sample kurtosis hypothesis 

test, if the kurtosis statistic (K) is greater than 2times the 

SEK, the data distribution is typically considered to be nonnormal.

We applied the skewness and kurtosis hypothesis tests to 

both the reported test values and the lognormal values of the 

reported test values. If the skewness (S) and kurtosis (K) 

statistics of the reported data set were both less than twice 

the SES and SEK, respectively, we classified the dataset as 

normally distributed. If neither of the skewness (S) and 

kurtosis (K) statistics, or only one of these statistics were 

less than twice the SES or SEK, respectively, then we conducted 

the skewness and kurtosis hypothesis tests for the natural logtransformed data. Then, we selected the distribution most 

similar to a log-normal distribution as the basis for 

calculating the UPL, based on EPA guidance documents. If both 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 93 of 406

the reported values and the natural log-transformed reported 

values had skewness (S) and kurtosis (K) statistics that were 

greater than twice the SES or SEK, respectively, we selected the 

normally distributed dataset as the basis of the MACT floor to 

be conservative. If the results of the skewness and kurtosis 

hypothesis tests were mixed for the reported values, and the 

natural log-transformed reported values, we also chose the lognormal distribution to comply with EPA guidance. We believe 

this approach is more accurate and obtained more representative 

results than a more simplistic normal distribution assumption.

Because compliance with the MACT floor emission limit is 

based on the average of a three-run test, the UPL is calculated 

by:

(Eq. 1)

Where:

n = Number of test runs.

m = Number of test runs in the compliance average.

s = Standard deviation.

x bar = Mean

t (0.99,n-1) = T-statistic for 99-percent significance, and a 

sample size of n.

This calculation was performed using the following two 

Microsoft Excel© functions:
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 94 of 406

Normal distribution: 99-percent UPL = AVERAGE(Test Runs in 

Top 5) + [STDEV(Test Runs in Top 5)x TINV(2 x probability, n-1 

degrees of freedom)*SQRT((1/n)+(1/3))], for a one-tailed t-value 

(with 2 x probability), probability of 0.01, and sample size of 

n. 

Lognormal distribution: 99-percent UPL = 

EXP{AVERAGE(Natural Log Values of Test Runs in Top 5) + 

[STDEV(Natural Log Values of Test Runs in Top 5) x TINV(2 x 

probability, n-1 degrees of freedom)* SQRT((1/n)+(1/3))]}, for a 

one-tailed t-value (with 2 x probability), probability of 0.01, 

and sample size of n.

We followed these procedures for determining the 

variability of process vent emission limits (for vent streams 

from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, other process 

components prior to the resin stripper, VCM recovery system, and 

wastewater collection and treatment system). For the stripped 

resin variability analysis, the same procedures were followed 

with one change. The variability calculation for stripped

resins uses the average of the sampling results for each day of 

the 30-day sampling period (e.g., essentially 30 runs instead of 

three runs for process vents). As a result, the 99-percent UPL 

equation uses a compliance average value of 30 instead of 3.

For wastewater, we followed the same procedures for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 95 of 406

determining variability. A variability analysis was performed 

on the top five facilities. The skewness and kurtosis 

statistics were calculated (following the same procedure as for 

process vents and resins) to determine the top 5 data set 

distribution. The 99-percent UPL value was calculated for both 

the normal and log-normal distribution using the same formula as 

process vents and resins, except that the number of samples in 

the data set was set to 5 (the top 5 fraction remaining values),

and the number of samples in the compliance average was set to 1

(because the data provided by facilities only included one value 

for any wastewater concentration). 

2. Incorporation of Non-detect Data

Non-detect values constitute more than 50 percent of the 

process vent emissions data for CDD/CDF and HCl, and 

approximately 42 percent of the stripped resin data for all 

reported HAP. For these pollutants, we developed a methodology 

to account for the imprecision introduced by incorporating nondetect data into the MACT floor calculation. 

At very low emission levels for which emissions tests 

result in non-detect values, the inherent imprecision in the 

pollutant measurement method has a large influence on the 

reliability of the data underlying the MACT floor emission 

limit. Because of resin sample and emission matrix effects, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 96 of 406

laboratory techniques, sample size, and other factors, method 

detection levels normally vary from test to test for any 

specific test method and pollutant measurement. The confidence 

level that a value measured at the detection level is greater 

than zero is about 99 percent. The expected measurement 

imprecision for an emissions value occurring at or near the 

method detection level is about 40 to 50 percent. Pollutant 

measurement imprecision decreases to a consistent level of 10 to 

15 percent for values measured at a level about 3 times the 

method detection level.6

We are using an approach to account for measurement 

variability when significant numbers of non-detect measurements 

are included in the dataset that starts with defining a method 

detection level that is representative of the data used in the 

data pool. 

The first step in this approach is to identify the highest 

test-specific method detection level reported in a data set that 

is also equal to or less than the average emission calculated 

for the data set. This approach has the advantage of relying on 

the data collected to develop the MACT floor emission limit, 

while, to some degree, minimizing the effect of a test(s) with 

an inordinately high method detection level (e.g., the sample 

 

6

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Reference Method Accuracy and 

Precision (ReMAPJ: Phase 1, Precision of Manual Stack)
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 97 of 406

volume was too small, the laboratory technique was 

insufficiently sensitive, or the procedure for determining the 

detection level was other than that specified). 

The second step is to determine the value equal to 3 times 

the representative method detection level, and compare it to the 

calculated MACT floor emission limit. If 3 times the 

representative method detection level is less than the 

calculated MACT floor emission limit, we would conclude that 

measurement variability is adequately addressed, and we would 

not adjust the calculated MACT floor emission limit. If, on the 

other hand, the value equal to 3 times the representative method 

detection level is greater than the calculated MACT floor 

emission limit, we would conclude that the calculated MACT floor 

emission limit does not account entirely for measurement 

variability. We, therefore, use the value equal to 3 times the 

method detection level, in place of the calculated MACT floor 

emission limit, to ensure that the MACT floor emission limit 

accounts for measurement variability and imprecision. The same 

procedures were followed for non-detect values for the resin 

information, but the analysis was done for 30 days worth of 

samples from each facility rather than three test runs. We 

request comment on this approach to incorporation of non-detect 

data in the MACT floor.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 98 of 406

We followed the following additional procedures for CDD/CDF 

TEQ basis limits. To calculate a limit on a TEQ basis, first, 

we identified non-detect values on an individual CDD/CDF 

congener basis. There are 17 CDD/CDF congeners used to 

calculate TEQ values. For facilities that reported some, but 

not all CDD/CDF congeners as non-detect, we calculated the mean 

of the non-detect values for each CDD/CDF congener. Then we 

multiplied the toxic equivalency factor (TEF) for each congener 

by the mean to determine the TEQ detection level for each 

CDD/CDF congener. For facilities that reported all CDD/CDF 

congeners as non-detect, we multiplied each non-detect value by 

the respective TEF factor. We used the sum of the detection 

level toxic equivalencies for each of the 17 CDD/CDF congeners 

of interest to calculate a TEQ detection level sum value. The 

TEQ sum was then used as the detection limit for the test run. 

We used the second step discussed above to set the limit. The 

methodology is described in detail in the memorandum MACT Floor,

Analysis for the PVC Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. We solicit comment on these 

procedures. For wastewater, non-detect values were not 

incorporated into the variability analysis because they were not 

included with the facility submitted survey information.

3. Existing Source MACT Floor Results for Process Vents,
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 99 of 406

Stripped Resins, and Wastewater

We identified the best performing five sources in the 

category (for process vents and wastewater), or each subcategory 

(for stripped resins), and each pollutant (e.g., vinyl chloride, 

total HAP, HCl, and CDD/CDF). We then compiled the individual 

test run and sampling concentration data for these sources, and 

conducted a statistical analysis to calculate the average and 

account for variability, and, thereby, determine the MACT floor 

emission limit.

Table 4 of this preamble summarizes results of the UPL 

analysis and the MACT floor emission limits for existing process 

vents for each pollutant. Table 5 of this preamble presents the 

results for stripped resins. A detailed discussion of the MACT 

floor methodology is presented in the memorandum, MACT Floor 

Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC)

Production Source Category, and is available in the docket.

Table 4. Summary of MACT Floor Emission Limits for PVC Process 

Vents at Existing Sourcesc,d

Pollutant (and units of measure) 99% UPL MACT Floor Emission Limita

Vinyl chloride (ppmv) 0.319 0.32

Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) 140.17 150

Total HAP (ppmv) 11.3 12b

CDD/CDF (TEQ) (ng/dscm) 0.0183 0.023b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis.

c ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen.

 ng/dscm = nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen.

d Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which 

controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), certain storage 

vessels, VCM recovery systems, wastewater collection and treatment system, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 100 of 406

slip gauges, unloading and loading lines, and samples.

Table 5. Summary of MACT Floor Emission Limits for PVC Stripped 

Resins at Existing Sources (ppmw)

Pollutant

Bulk Resins Dispersion Resins All Other Resins

99% UPL

MACT 

Floor 

Emission 

Limita 99% UPL

MACT 

Floor 

Emission 

Limita 99% UPL

MACT 

Floor 

Emission 

Limita

Vinyl chloride 7.1 7.1 54.8 55 0.471 0.48

Total HAP 167.3 170 100.1 110 33.3 76b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis

For wastewater that exceeds the 10 ppmw vinyl chloride 

limit at the point of generation, we determined that the 99-

percent UPL is 0.109 ppmw at the outlet of the wastewater 

stripper and the MACT floor level of control rounded up to two 

significant figures is 0.11 ppmw. The analysis is documented in 

the memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride 

and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket. Wastewater streams below the 10 ppmw 

vinyl chloride limit at the point of generation, must remain 

below the 10 ppmw limit.

Results of the MACT floor analysis for heat exchange 

systems, storage vessels, equipment leaks, and other emission 

sources are discussed in section IV.D of this preamble.

E. How did EPA determine the MACT floors for new major sources?

Similar to the MACT floor process used for existing 

sources, the approach for determining the MACT floor for new 

sources is based on available emissions information. Using such 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 101 of 406

an approach to develop the MACT floor emission limits for 

process vents and stripped resins for each pollutant, we ranked 

all the available emission concentration, stripped resin 

concentration, or wastewater concentration data for each 

pollutant from sources within the entire category (for process 

vents and wastewater), or each subcategory (for stripped resin) 

from lowest to highest. As discussed in section IV.C of this 

preamble, data from all major sources and the one synthetic area

source were included in this ranking. See section IV.C of this 

preamble for more information about the emission concentration 

and resin concentration data. Based on this ranking, we 

calculated the MACT floor limits for each pollutant, and for the 

summation of pollutants making up the total HAP value, based on 

the performance (of the lowest emitting (best controlled))

source for each pollutant in the category or subcategory.

We calculated the MACT floor limits accounting for 

variability for new sources using the same formula that we used 

for existing sources. As discussed in section IV.D of this 

preamble, we account for variability of the best-controlled 

source in setting floors, not only because variability is an 

element of performance, but also because it is reasonable to 

assess best performance over time. If we do not account for 

this variability, we would expect that even the best-controlled 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 102 of 406

similar source would potentially exceed the floor emission 

levels part of the time, which would mean that their variability 

was not properly accounted for when setting the MACT floor. We 

calculated the MACT floor based on the UPL (upper 99th 

percentile), as described in section IV.D from the average 

performance, based on emission testing and resin sampling of the 

best controlled similar source, Students t-factor, the total 

variability of the best controlled source, and incorporating the 

non-detect procedures.

This approach reasonably ensures that the emission limit 

selected as the MACT floor adequately represents the level of 

control actually achieved by the best controlled similar source, 

considering ordinary operational variability. Tables 6 and 7 of 

this preamble present the analysis summaries, and the new source 

MACT floor limits for PVC process vents and stripped resins, 

respectively. 

A detailed discussion of the MACT floor methodology is 

presented in the memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for the PVC

Production Source Category, and is available in the docket.

Table 6. Summary of MACT Floor Emission Limits for PVC Process 

Vents at New Sourcesc,d

Pollutant (and unit of measure) 99% UPL

MACT Floor Emission 

Limita

Vinyl chloride (ppbv)

1.53 3.2b

Hydrogen chloride (ppmv) 0.162 0.17 

Total HAP (ppmv) 0.217 0.22 

CDD/CDF (TEQ)(ng/dscm) 0.00428 0.0087b
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 103 of 406

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis.

c ppbv = parts per billion by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen.

 ppmv = parts per million by volume dry at 3-percent oxygen.

 ng/dscm = nanograms per dry standard cubic meter at 3-percent oxygen.

d Process vents limits apply at the outlet of the control device which 

controls closed vent streams from polymerization reactors, resin strippers, 

other process components prior to the resin stripper(s), VCM recovery 

systems, certain storage vessels, slip gauges, loading and unloading lines, 

samples, and the wastewater collection and treatment system.

Table 7. Summary of MACT Floor Emission Limits for PVC Stripped 

Resins at New Sources (ppmw)

Pollutant

Bulk Resins Dispersion Resins All Other Resins

99% UPL

MACT Floor 

Emission 

Limita 99% UPL

MACT Floor 

Emission 

Limita 99% UPL

MACT Floor 

Emission 

Limita

Vinyl 

chloride 7.1 7.1 40.3 41 0.191 0.20

Total HAP 167.3 170 57.8 58 25.1 42 b

a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.

b Limit result of detection limit variability analysis.

The best performing wastewater source is complying with the 

part 61 NESHAP wastewater standards. The part 61 NESHAP

requires that inprocess wastewater streams that exceed a vinyl 

chloride concentration limit of 10 ppmw, at the point of 

generation, be controlled. The best-performing source achieves 

this control by using a wastewater steam stripper and achieves a 

vinyl chloride concentration at the outlet of the wastewater 

stripper of 0.0060 ppmw. The analysis is documented in the 

memorandum, MACT Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, and is available in 

the docket. We are proposing that all new wastewater streams 

meet a vinyl chloride limit of 10 ppmw, at the point of 

generation. We are also proposing that new wastewater streams 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 104 of 406

that exceed the 10 ppmw vinyl chloride limit at the point of 

generation, reduce vinyl chloride to a wastewater stripper 

outlet concentration of 0.0060 ppmw.

For equipment leaks, the best performing source complies 

with the LDAR requirements for 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU and 

the existing part 61 NESHAP LDAR requirements for rotating and 

reciprocating pumps and compressors, and agitators. For storage 

vessels, the information collected showed that at all sources, 

including the best performing source, materials with vapor 

pressures greater than 14.7 psia are stored under pressure; a 

closed vent system that is routed to a control device is used at 

all facilities when filling the tank, or purging the tank. All 

other materials are stored at all facilities in fixed roof 

tanks. 

The current requirements from the part 61 NESHAP, for 

reactor opening losses and equipment openings, set standards

that must be met. In the case of reactors used as strippers, 

the standard is based on the sum of allowable reactor opening 

losses, and the standard for all downstream equipment (e.g., the 

stripped resin limits). All affected sources are required to 

meet the part 61 NESHAP requirements. 

For heat exchange systems, the best performing source has a 

leak action level of 30 ppbw of total strippable VOC in the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 105 of 406

cooling water or 2.3 ppmv of total strippable VOC in the 

stripping gas, with twice-daily monitoring, which is, therefore,

the MACT floor for heat exchange systems at new sources.

EPA solicits comment on the proposed MACT floors for new 

PVC production facilities.

F. How did EPA analyze beyond-the-floor options and determine 

MACT?

1. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Existing Sources

Once the MACT floor determinations were done for each 

category or subcategory, we considered various regulatory 

options more stringent than the MACT floor levels of control 

(e.g., control technologies or work practices that could result 

in lower emissions). A detailed description of the beyond-thefloor consideration is in the memorandum, Analysis of Beyond 

MACT Floor Controls for the PVC Production Source Category, and 

is available in the docket.

We first identified regulatory requirements for each 

emission point that would be more stringent than the MACT floor 

level of control, and determined whether they were technically 

feasible. If the more stringent requirements were technically 

feasible, a cost and emission impacts analysis was conducted for 

applying them.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 106 of 406

Process Vents. The control technologies that would be 

needed to achieve the proposed MACT floor levels for process 

vents (e.g., enhanced vinyl chloride recovery, activated carbon 

injection, and fabric filters, in combination with existing 

controls, such as incinerators and acid gas scrubbers) are 

generally the most effective controls available for reducing 

vinyl chloride, HCl, total organic HAP, and dioxins/furans. 

Therefore, no beyond-the-floor regulatory options were 

identified for HAP from process vents. 

Equipment Leaks. For equipment leaks, we are proposing to 

require that facilities implement the LDAR program from 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart UU, which is generally equivalent to the HON, 

and which we identified as the most effective control of 

emissions from equipment leaks. We are also proposing that 

facilities implement the equipment requirements for rotating and 

reciprocating pumps and compressors and agitators from part 61 

NESHAP, which are leakless equipment. Therefore, no beyond-thefloor HAP emission reduction approaches were identified for 

equipment leaks.

Heat Exchange Systems. For heat exchange systems, the 

proposed existing source MACT floor level of control is a LDAR

program with a leak action level of 38 ppbw of total strippable

VOC in the cooling water, or 2.9 ppmv of total strippable VOC in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 107 of 406

the stripping gas and monthly monitoring. We analyzed a beyondthe-floor option of requiring a lower leak action level for the 

cooling water of 25 ppbw. Average costs and emission reductions 

were calculated on a per leak basis. The results of the 

analysis showed that 5.78 tpy of total VOC would be reduced for 

an annual cost of $175,630, resulting in a cost of $30,386 per 

ton of VOC reduced. Consequently, we determined it was not 

appropriate to go beyond-the-floor considering the cost and 

emission reductions of this option.

Storage Vessels. For storage vessels, the CAA section 114 

information collection data indicate that methanol is the 

primary material stored in fixed roof tanks ranging from 5,000 

gallons to 30,000 gallons associated with PVCPU. We analyzed a 

beyond-the-floor option of requiring storage vessels meeting 

specific vapor pressure and storage capacity parameters

specified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb to comply with the 

control requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW. The subpart 

Kb standard in 40 CFR 60.112(b), requires material be stored in 

controlled tanks if: (1) the material stored has a maximum true 

vapor pressure greater or equal to 0.75 psia, and the storage 

vessel has a capacity equal to, or greater than 40,000 gallons, 

or (2) the material stored has a maximum true vapor pressure 

greater or equal to 4 psia, and the storage vessel has a 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 108 of 406

capacity equal to, or greater than 20,000 gallons, but less than 

40,000 gallons. Subpart Kb also requires materials above 11.1 

psia to be stored in pressure tanks. The beyond-the-floor 

controls include specific sealing mechanisms for internal or 

external floating roofs or routing streams from a fixed roof 

vessel through a closed vent system to a control device meeting 

a 95-percent or greater reduction in volatile organic emissions.

We calculated the emission reduction and cost of retrofitting 

subpart WW controls on model fixed roof tanks meeting subpart Kb 

vapor pressure and size parameters. The results of the analysis 

showed that cost-effectiveness ranged from $2,000 to $12,000 per 

ton of HAP reduced by this option, depending on the number of 

turnovers assumed. Considering the cost and emissions 

reduction, we have determined that it is appropriate to propose 

this beyond-the-floor requirement for storage vessels. Based on 

information submitted by PVC production facilities, we are not 

aware of any storage vessels from affected sources that meet the 

capacity levels (20,000 gallons or 40,000 gallons), and store 

material that meet the vapor pressure levels. Therefore, we 

estimate that there are no additional costs and emission 

reductions for this option for storage vessels currently at 

PVCPU. However, the proposed beyond-the-floor standards for 

storage vessels will ensure that, if there are any storage 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 109 of 406

vessels (now or in the future) that meet the capacity and vapor 

pressure criteria, they will be controlled. This analysis is 

documented in the memorandum, Analysis of Beyond MACT Floor 

Controls for the PVC Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket.

Five gas holders are currently in use by three facilities,

and are a part of the vinyl chloride recovery system. In these 

recovery systems, process vents originating from polymerization 

reactors, resin strippers, and wastewater strippers (among 

others) are routed in closed vent systems to a separate process 

to recover unreacted VCM from the vent gasses. Gas holders 

provide intermediate storage of vent gasses which contain VCM

before the VCM is recovered, compressed, and recycled back into 

the process. Gas holders are cylindrical tanks with a floating 

bell top. The tanks contain water that serves as a seal between 

the contained gas and the ambient air outside of the tank. The 

pressure inside the gas holder changes as gasses are fed to, or 

removed from, the tank. The water inside the gas holder is in 

constant contact with the vinyl chloride laden gas and can 

approach saturation. The primary source of emissions from gas 

holders is from the water seal on the gas holder that is 

continually exposed to the ambient atmosphere. In addition, as 

the gas holder bell rises, a thin film of water that contains 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 110 of 406

vinyl chloride remains on the outer surface of the bell. 

Methods to reduce emissions may include keeping the gas holder 

water level at the lowest possible level, using either floating 

objects on the surface of the water seal or using a thin layer 

of oil, or using a windshield around the gas holder water seal.

We do not have information from emission tests, control 

information, or cost information on gas holders. We are 

requesting comment and additional information on emissions, 

controls, and costs of controls for this emission source.

Wastewater. For wastewater, EPA has previously determined 

for the HON that a beyond-the-floor option of treating streams 

with HAP concentrations greater than 1,000 ppmw (of 40 CFR part 

63, subpart G, Table 9 HAP), and annual average flow rates 

greater than 10 l/min measured at the point of determination (as 

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), is cost-effective 

($670/ton in 2010 dollars). The analysis previously conducted 

for the HON is applicable to PVC, because the cost-effectiveness 

of wastewater treatment depends on the wastewater flow and HAP 

concentration, not on the type of process unit from which the 

wastewater stream is generated. The same treatment systems 

(steam stripping or biotreatment), and the same measures to 

prevent atmospheric emissions from the systems conveying the 

wastewater streams to the treatment systems, are applicable to 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 111 of 406

wastewater streams that meet these criteria. Furthermore, 35 

percent of PVC production facilities are co-located with 

chemical manufacturing process units that are subject to the 

HON, and could potentially route PVC wastewater streams (if any) 

that meet the total HAP criteria to existing HON wastewater 

treatment processes to meet these limits. Consequently, we are 

proposing that streams with HAP concentrations greater than 

1,000 ppmw (of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Table 9 HAP), and 

annual average flow rates greater than 10 l/min be treated as 

specified in the HON requirement as a beyond-the-floor HAP 

emissions reduction approach. Based on information submitted by 

PVC production facilities, we are not aware of any wastewater

streams from affected sources that are above these flow rate and 

concentration limits. Therefore, we estimate that there are no 

additional costs or emission reductions because all facilities 

are below the 1,000 ppmw total HAP concentration and 10 l/min 

flow rate limits. However, the limit will ensure that, if there 

are any wastewater streams meeting the total HAP and flow rate 

criteria, they will be controlled.

Additionally, wastewater generated during maintenance 

activities is not currently regulated by 40 CFR part 61, subpart 

F. We requested and received limited information on vinyl 

chloride and HAP concentrations in maintenance wastewater 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 112 of 406

streams. We are requesting comment on whether maintenance 

wastewater should have separate limits from inprocess 

wastewater. We are also soliciting additional data relevant to 

setting a maintenance wastewater MACT standard. 

Other Emission Sources. We did not identify more stringent 

control requirements than what we are proposing to require at 

the MACT floor to reduce emissions from reactor and equipment 

openings. The proposed MACT standard requires that, prior to 

being opened, emissions from reactor and process component 

openings must be reduced to a specified level and ducted through 

a closed vent system and control device that would meet the 

proposed emission limits for process vents. We did identify an 

additional work practice that could be used to minimize 

emissions from all PVC production facilities. One facility 

identified placing filter bags, strainers, and other removable 

separation media in closed and sealed containers that remain 

closed and sealed unless being actively filled or emptied to 

minimize emissions. However, we do not have information on the 

costs and emission reductions of this work practice, or the 

procedures followed. We request comments, and any further 

information, including cost and performance data, on this 

practice, and other work practices that are being followed by 

the industry to minimize emissions from other emission sources. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 113 of 406

Stripped Resin. For stripped resins, we determined that 

facilities would use additional steam in existing equipment to 

reduce the concentrations of residual vinyl chloride and total 

HAP to meet the limits for resins being proposed. We believe 

that additional stripping in existing equipment beyond what 

would be required to meet the proposed limits would not be 

technically feasible as the incremental additional concentration 

reductions would be either negligible or zero, and existing 

sources may not be able to further reduce concentrations to the 

beyond-the-floor levels without degrading product. However,

additional HAP emission reductions could be achieved by routing 

vents from process components downstream of the resin stripper 

(e.g., resin dryers and centrifuges) to an incinerator. We then 

determined the cost and emission reductions of applying a 98-

percent efficient incinerator to the process vents downstream of 

the resin stripper (e.g., dryer and centrifuge vents). The 

results of the analysis are shown in Table 8.

Summary of Beyond the Floor Analysis. Table 8 of this 

preamble summarizes the costs of the MACT floor emission level 

(referred to as option 1), and one beyond-the-floor option for 

stripped resins (option 2). Option 2 is the same as option 1 

plus the installation of a thermal oxidizer on vent streams from 

processes downstream of the resin stripper. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 114 of 406

Table 8. Summary of Costs for PVCPU to Comply with MACT Control 

Options for Existing Sources (2010$)

Option

Total Capital 

Costs ($million)

Total Annualized 

Costs ($million/Yr)a

1 - MACT Floor 16 20

2 - Option 1 + 

additional control of 

resin 

370 129

a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for costs for process vents, 

equipment leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor options 

for wastewater and storage vessels do not result in costs, because no 

sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability requirements for 

these emission points.

b Calculated using a 7-percent discount factor.

Table 9 of this preamble summarizes the emission reductions 

of each pollutant for the MACT control options analyzed.

Table 9. Summary of Emission Reductions for PVCPU to Comply 

with the MACT Control Options for Existing Sources

Pollutant

Option 1 (MACT 

Floor)

(tpy)

Option 2

(Option 1 + 

additional 

control of 

stripped resin)

(tpy)

CDD/CDF TEQ 2.45E-08 2.45E-08

HCl 33 33

Vinyl chloride 135 176

Total HAP 1,570 2,618

a No beyond-the-floor options were analyzed for process vents, equipment 

leaks, and other emission sources. The beyond-the-floor options for 

wastewater and storage vessels do not result in emission reductions,

because no sources currently meet the beyond-the-floor applicability 

requirements for these emission points.

The results provided in Tables 8 and 9 of this preamble 

were calculated using data gathered for the PVC industry. We 

estimate that applying additional control to reduce emissions 

from stripped resins would result in a total annualized cost of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 115 of 406

$129 million, and would achieve vinyl chloride and total HAP

reductions of 176 tpy and 2,618 tpy, respectively. The 

incremental cost-effectiveness of adding a thermal oxidizer to 

control emissions from process vents downstream of the resin 

stripper was estimated to be $2.7 million per ton of vinyl 

chloride reduced, and over $100,000 per ton of total HAP 

reduced. Consequently, we determined it was not appropriate to 

go beyond the floor, considering the cost and emission 

reductions of this option. The results of the beyond-the-floor 

analysis are documented in the memorandum, Analysis of Beyond 

MACT Floor Controls for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

(PVC) Production Source Category, and is available in the 

docket. Table 1 in this preamble summarizes the proposed 

emissions limits for existing PVCPU.

2. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for New Sources

Except for wastewater and storage vessels, we did not 

identify any technologies or methods to achieve HAP emission 

limits more stringent than the MACT floor limits, or work 

practices for new units, based on the best performing PVC 

facilities. The control technologies and work practices 

necessary to achieve the MACT floor levels are generally the 

most effective controls available. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 116 of 406

For wastewater, EPA has previously determined for the HON 

that a beyond-the-floor option of treating streams with HAP 

concentrations greater than 1,000 ppmw (of 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart G, Table 9 HAP), and annual average flow rates greater 

than 10 l/min is cost-effective for new sources ($1,300/ton in 

2010 dollars for new sources). For the same reasons discussed 

in section IV.F.1 of this preamble, the analysis previously 

conducted for HON is applicable to PVC because the costeffectiveness of wastewater treatment depends on the wastewater 

flow and HAP concentration, not on the type of process unit the 

wastewater stream is coming from. As discussed in section 

IV.F.1 of this preamble, we are requesting comment on whether 

maintenance wastewater should have separate limits from 

inprocess wastewater, and requesting data relevant to setting a 

maintenance wastewater MACT standard. 

We also concluded, in section IV.F.1 of this preamble, that 

it was cost-effective ($2,000 to $12,000 per ton of HAP) to 

require floating roof tanks or fixed roof tanks routed to a 

closed vent system, and control device for storage vessels that 

(1) have a storage capacity equal to or greater than 40,000 

gallons (151 cubic meters), and store material with maximum true 

vapor pressures greater or equal to 0.75 psia, or (2) have a 

storage capacity equal to or greater than 20,000 gallons, and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 117 of 406

less than 40,000 gallons, and store material with maximum true

vapor pressures greater or equal to 4 psia. Consequently, the 

beyond-the-floor options for wastewater and storage vessels are 

the only ones being proposed for new sources. Tables 1 and 3 of

this preamble summarizes the proposed emissions limits for new 

PVCPU.

EPA solicits comment on the proposed beyond-the-floor 

determinations.

G. How did EPA select the compliance and monitoring 

requirements for the proposed rule?

We are proposing testing, monitoring, notification, 

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are adequate to 

assure continuous compliance with the requirements of the 

proposed rule. These requirements are described in detail in 

various sections in the proposed rule. We solicit comment on 

the proposed compliance and monitoring requirements. We 

selected these requirements based upon our examination of the 

information necessary to ensure that the emission standards and 

work practices are being followed, and that emission control 

devices and process components are maintained and operated 

properly. These proposed requirements impose on facilities the 

minimum burden that is necessary to ensure compliance with the 

proposed rule.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 118 of 406

1. How did we select the compliance and monitoring requirements 

for storage vessels?

For storage vessels, we are proposing that you meet the 

operating, inspection, repair, and maintenance requirements in 

40 CFR 63.11910 of the proposed rule, as discussed in section 

III.F.1 of this preamble. We are proposing work practice 

standards to ensure that pressure vessels and fixed roof storage 

tanks are being operated correctly and maintained. Pressure 

vessels, during purging and filling, are required to meet the 

closed vent system and control device requirements specified in 

40 CFR 63.11910(c)(1) of the proposed rule. Annual monitoring 

of potential leak interfaces on pressure vessels using EPA 

Method 21 is proposed to be used to verify there are no leaks.

Any detectable emissions would be considered a violation of the 

rule. These requirements ensure that pressure vessels do not 

vent to the atmosphere. We are requesting comment on this 

requirement.

Floating roof storage vessels would be required to comply 

with the operation, maintenance, and inspection requirements of 

40 CFR part 63 subpart WW. The requirements of subpart WW are 

in many EPA standards, such as the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP 

(MON), and provide more current compliance requirements that 

better reflect the current state of operations for the industry. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 119 of 406

The subpart WW provisions for floating roof tanks would ensure 

that floating roof vessels operate correctly by requiring 

periodic inspection of the floating roofs. 

If you choose to route vent streams from fixed roof tanks 

to a closed vent system and control device, we are proposing 

that the control device must reduce the inlet VOC emissions by 

95 percent, or greater. This requirement is based on the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, which provides 

reduction requirements for fixed roof vessels routed to a closed 

vent system, and control device in 40 CFR 60.112b(a)(3)(ii). 

These are achievable reductions for storage tanks that have been 

previously implemented, as in subpart Kb. You would also be 

required to meet the requirements for closed vent systems and 

control devices in 40 CFR 63.11925 and 40 CFR 63.11930 of the 

proposed rule. These requirements would limit the VOC emissions 

released to the atmosphere from storage tanks. 

All types of storage vessels are required to be equipped 

with closure devices. You would also be required to visually 

inspect the fixed roof tanks and their closure devices for 

defects initially, and at least once per calendar year, with the 

exception of parts of the fixed roof that you determine are 

unsafe to inspect. 

For parts that you have determined are unsafe to inspect, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 120 of 406

you would be required to prepare and maintain written 

documentation that identifies each part and explains why the 

part is unsafe to inspect, and to conduct inspections during 

times when it is safe to do so (as frequently as practicable, 

but not required more than once per calendar year). We have 

included provisions intended to clarify the required intervals 

between inspections, because we have received comments during 

development of prior rules that some requirements could be 

subject to different interpretations. For example, a 

requirement to conduct inspections "annually" could be read to

mean in every calendar year, no later than the date 1 year after 

the previous inspection, or in the same month every year. To 

address concerns about when inspections must be conducted if the 

storage vessel is out of service on the date when the inspection 

must be completed, instead of proposing to require inspections 

―annually,‖ we are proposing a requirement to conduct 

inspections at least ―once per calendar year.‖ For fixed roof 

parts that are unsafe to inspect, an inspection may be delayed 

until an alternative storage vessel can be made available, and 

the vessel to be inspected can be emptied and temporarily 

removed from service. The inspection must be conducted before 

the fixed roof storage vessel is returned to service. These 

provisions are provided in 40 CFR 63.11910(a)(3) of the proposed 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 121 of 406

rule.

We have included fixed roof repair provisions in 40 CFR 

63.11910(a)(4) of the proposed rule for when a defect is 

identified. These requirements are based on the requirements in 

40 CFR 63.1063(e) of 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW. We have made 

one clarification to the conditions under which delay of repair 

extensions are allowed. You must make a first attempt to repair 

the defect no later than 5 calendar days after detection, and 

complete the repair as soon as possible, but no later than 45 

calendar days after detection. The delay of repair provisions 

would allow delay beyond 45 calendar days if you determine that 

the repair requires emptying or temporary removal from service 

of the storage vessel, and no alternative storage capacity is 

available at the site. You would be required to repair the 

defect the next time alternative storage capacity becomes 

available, and the storage vessel can be emptied, or temporarily 

removed from service.

Under 40 CFR 63.11910(c) of the proposed rule, pressure 

vessels, as defined in proposed 40 CFR 63.12010, may not vent to 

the atmosphere, but must instead be vented back into the 

process, or vented to a closed vent system and control device. 

These provisions have been included in 40 CFR 63.11910(c) of the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 122 of 406

proposed rule to ensure that the pressure vessel stream is not 

inadvertently directed to the atmosphere.

2. How did we select the compliance and monitoring requirements 

for equipment leaks?

For equipment leaks, we are proposing in 40 CFR 63.11915 of 

the proposed rule, as discussed in section III.F.2 of this 

preamble, that you meet the LDAR requirements of 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU, which defines leak thresholds and monitoring 

frequencies for each type of equipment. These requirements are 

already being used at several PVCPU and in other source 

categories, and have been shown to be effective in minimizing 

emissions from leaking equipment. 

Release events from PRD have the potential to emit large 

quantities of HAP. We are concerned that a large number of 

these releases that occur may not be identified and controlled 

in a timely manner and may be due to repeat problems that have 

not been corrected. The end result would be significant 

increases in annual HAP emissions. To address this issue, we 

are proposing that you be required to install electronic 

indicators on each PRD that would be able to identify and record 

the time and duration of each pressure release.

3. How did we select the compliance and monitoring requirements 

for heat exchangers?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 123 of 406

For heat exchange systems, we are proposing in 40 CFR

63.11920 of the proposed rule to include requirements equivalent 

to the primary monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements that were finalized for heat exchange systems for 

Refinery MACT 1 sources (74 FR 55669), including a LDAR program 

that requires you to conduct sampling and analyses using the 

TCEQ Modified El Paso Method or EPA Method 8021B, no less 

frequently than monthly for existing sources and twice-daily

(12-hour intervals) for new sources. We are proposing a leak 

action level of 38 ppbw of total strippable VOC in the cooling 

water, or 2.9 ppmv of total strippable VOC in the stripping gas

for existing sources, and a leak action level of 30 ppbw of 

total strippable VOC in the cooling water, or 2.3 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas for new sources. We are 

also proposing a delay of repair leak action level of 380 ppbw

of total strippable VOC in cooling water, or 29 ppmv of total 

strippable VOC in the stripping gas for new and existing 

sources. 

In contrast to a water sampling method such as EPA Method 

601 or 624, the TCEQ Modified El Paso Method provides similar 

detection limits, as speciated water analysis and simulates the 

actual losses that might occur from cooling water. Further, the 

Modified El Paso Method helps overcome potential losses of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 124 of 406

highly VOC during water sampling. The sensitivity of the 

Modified El Paso Method using flame ionization detector (FID)

analysis is typically 0.1 to 0.5 ppmv (as methane) in the 

stripped air, with 1.0 ppmv (as methane) being typical. We note 

that the Modified El Paso Method has been demonstrated at 

numerous sources as an effective means of identifying leaks in 

heat exchange systems, and the method has been used extensively 

for over 20 years.

We considered the variety of systems that may be 

monitored, and whether the Modified El Paso Method should be 

used exclusively. For the PVC Production source category, a 

limited number of compounds may be present in the process stream 

for which analytical methods are available that can detect these 

compounds at low concentrations. Additionally, for streams 

containing highly chlorinated organic compounds such as vinyl 

chloride, these alternative methods may provide lower detection 

limits and better sensitivity than using the Modified El Paso 

Method (which uses a flame ionization detector). We believe 

that the specific analytical method used is not critical to the 

emission limitations achieved, provided that the method can 

accurately quantify pollutant concentrations at levels far 

enough below the leak action level that the method could 

accurately indicate whether or not a leak exists. As such, we 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 125 of 406

are proposing to include a direct water analysis method in the 

proposed rule. We are proposing different sampling locations

and leak repair provisions for heat exchange systems, including 

a cooling tower (i.e., closed-loop recirculation systems) and 

once-through heat exchange systems (e.g., river or brackish 

water), as specified in 40 CFR 63.11920 of the proposed rule. 

For closed-loop recirculation systems, sampling could be 

conducted at the combined return line at the inlet to the 

cooling tower prior to exposure to air. Alternatively, sampling 

could be conducted in the "exit" lines (i.e., water lines 

returning the water from the heat exchangers to the cooling 

tower) from an individual heat exchanger or bank of heat 

exchangers. Therefore, if the cooling tower services multiple 

heat exchangers, you could elect to monitor only the heat 

exchangers in HAP service, monitor at branch points that combine 

several heat exchanger exit lines, or monitor at the combined 

stream for the entire closed-loop recirculation system. These 

provisions allow flexibility and potentially reduce the cost of 

monitoring, while still ensuring leak detection. For closedloop recirculation heat exchange systems, the impacts of the 

potential dilution of the leak from aggregation with other 

process cooling waters are minimized due to the physical 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 126 of 406

limitations of quantity of water that can be processed by a 

single cooling tower. 

A once-through heat exchange system consists of one or more 

heat exchangers servicing an individual process unit and all 

water lines to and from the heat exchanger. As such, sampling 

for once-through heat exchange systems must be conducted in exit 

lines from individual heat exchangers, or group of heat 

exchangers associated with a single process unit. If oncethrough heat exchange systems are not limited to a single 

process unit, a once-through heat exchange system could include 

all heat exchangers at the entire facility. The potential to 

aggregate all cooling water at a facility prior to sampling 

would reduce the effectiveness of the leak monitoring methods,

and would allow HAP leaks to remain undetected, based solely on 

the dilution effect from the large quantity of water processed 

at the facility. Commenters are encouraged to provide 

additional information and suggestions for sampling alternatives 

that would allow flexibility, but would include a small enough 

number of individual heat exchangers to provide meaningful 

measurements in once-through systems. 

We are also proposing to allow the owner or operator of a 

once-through heat exchange system to monitor both the inlet and 

outlet of an individual heat exchanger or group of heat 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 127 of 406

exchangers associated with a single process unit, and compare 

the difference between those two measurements to the leak action 

level to determine if a leak is detected. The use of a 

differential leak is provided for once-through systems because 

the water supply for these systems (often river water or ocean 

water) may contain higher background concentrations of 

hydrocarbons than the purchased water that is used in closedloop recirculation systems.

The proposed rule allows facilities to use more frequent or 

continuous monitoring as an alternative, but only requires 

monthly monitoring.

4. How did we select the compliance and monitoring requirements 

for process vents?

As described in section III.F.4 of this preamble, we are 

proposing in 40 CFR 63.11925 through 40 CFR 63.11950 of the 

proposed rule, performance testing, CEMS, and CPMS monitoring 

requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance 

with the limits in Tables 1 and 2 of the proposed rule for 

process vents. 

To demonstrate compliance with the total organic HAP 

emission limits, we are proposing in 40 CFR 63.11945, and in 

Table 9 of the proposed rule, to require initial and annual 

performance tests using EPA Method 25A to measure THC. Because 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 128 of 406

measuring THC is more practical than measuring total organic HAP 

using available test methods, we are proposing to allow 

compliance with the total organic HAP limit to be determined by 

measuring THC. We calculated the THC level that equates to the 

total HAP limit from the THC data reported for the same best 

performing five sources used to calculate the total organic HAP 

limit. During the initial performance test, you would be 

required to establish an operating limit for the control device 

operating parameters specified in 40 CFR 63.11935 and 40 CFR 

63.11940 (e.g., incinerator temperature). You would then 

demonstrate continuous compliance with the total HAP limit by 

staying within the operating limit established for each 

operating parameter. In 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule, 

we are providing the option of using a THC CEMS meeting the 

specifications in 40 CFR Part 60, appendix B, Performance 

Specification 8A as an alternative to CPMS. CEMS have been 

widely used to demonstrate that air pollution control devices 

are being operated correctly to ensure emission limitations are 

being met.

To demonstrate initial compliance with the CDD/CDF and HCl

emission limits, under 40 CFR 63.11925, 40 CFR 63.11935, 40 CFR 

63.11940, and 40 CFR 63.11945 of the proposed rule, compliance 

would be determined by performance tests using EPA Method 18 for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 129 of 406

vinyl chloride, EPA Method 23 for CDD/CDF, and either EPA Method 

26 or 26A for HCl. Continuous compliance with the vinyl 

chloride, CDD/CDF and HCl emission limits would be demonstrated 

using continuous monitoring of control device parameters (e.g., 

liquid flow rate and pH for scrubbers, and temperature and 

carbon injection rate for activated carbon injection, 

temperature for thermal oxidizers), and annual performance tests 

for CDD/CDF and vinyl chloride. While parameter monitoring has 

historically been a cost-effective monitoring option, CEMS are 

increasingly being used in many different situations, and 

provide more accurate data for demonstrating continuous 

compliance. As specified in proposed 40 CFR 63.11925, after EPA 

publishes final performance specifications for CEMS for HCl and 

CDD/CDF, new sources would be required to use CEMS instead of 

annual testing and CPMS for these pollutants, and existing 

sources would be given the option to use CEMS. 

To demonstrate compliance for process vents, we are also 

proposing in 40 CFR 63.11925 of the proposed rule that you must 

meet the requirements of proposed 40 CFR 63.11930 for each 

closed vent system, and proposed 40 CFR 63.11940 for each 

control device, including each incinerator, absorber, adsorber, 

condenser, sorbent injection system, fabric filter, or other 

control device. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 130 of 406

The requirements we are proposing for closed vent systems 

are based on the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, 

although we have revised and incorporated new requirements, as 

discussed below. 

The standards for closed vent systems in 40 CFR 63.11930 of 

the proposed rule include bypass monitoring requirements, and 

leak monitoring and inspection requirements. We are proposing 

that for all closed vent systems, except those systems in vacuum 

service, as defined in 40 CFR 63.12010, for bypasses that do not 

contain an automatic flow control valve and have manual lockand-key flow control valves, anytime the manual valve is opened,

it would result in a violation. If you install and maintain a 

bypass flow indicator equipped with an automatic alarm system, 

then any indication of flow through the bypass is a violation, 

but the action of opening the valve is not a violation. These 

provisions are to ensure that any flow directed to a bypass is 

detected and addressed by the operator. We have not included 

monitoring exemptions for difficult-to-inspect, or unsafe-toinspect equipment. Instead, we are proposing that you maintain 

and follow a written plan that requires inspecting the equipment 

designated as unsafe-to-inspect as frequently as practical 

during safe-to-inspect times, but not more frequently than the 

otherwise applicable annual inspection schedule. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 131 of 406

For the leak monitoring and inspection requirements in 40 

CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule, we have added provisions 

based on 40 CFR part 60, subpart VVa, which require a 

calibration drift assessment for the leak detection instrument 

at the end of each monitoring day. The post-test calibration 

drift assessments constitute good practice, and are a useful

quality assurance/quality control tool to validate the proper

operation of the leak detection instrument during the monitoring 

period, and, hence, the measurement data. 

We are proposing that closed vent systems that operate in 

vacuum service, as defined in 40 CFR 63.12010 of the proposed 

rule, are not required to perform the leak monitoring and 

inspection requirements required for other closed vent systems. 

However, if you choose to operate in vacuum service under 40 CFR 

63.11930 of the proposed rule, you would be required to install 

a pressure gauge and an automatic alarm system capable of 

alerting an operator immediately when the closed vent system is 

no longer in vacuum service. Unless you meet the monitoring and 

inspection requirements of 40 CFR 63.11930 of the proposed rule 

for closed vent systems, which are not in vacuum service, if a 

loss of vacuum alarm is triggered, you would be in violation of 

the rule, and would be required to bring the closed vent system 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 132 of 406

back into vacuum service. These requirements ensure that vacuum 

systems remain in compliance with the rule and do not leak. 

For process vents that must demonstrate compliance using a 

control device and continuous monitoring using a CPMS, the 

parameters that would be monitored for each type of control 

device are specified in proposed 40 CFR 63.11940. The 

monitoring requirements for each control device were primarily 

based on requirements from 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, and 40 

CFR part 63, subpart FFFF, with additional requirements added 

for new control devices, and significant revisions for 

adsorbers, which are discussed in this section. 

In 40 CFR 63.11940 of the proposed rule, we have revised 

the former 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS requirements for "carbon 

adsorbers" to apply to "adsorbers," and modified the 

applicability to pertain to adsorbers containing carbon, 

zeolite, adsorbing polymers, or any other adsorbents. This 

change reduces the need for owners and operators to request 

alternative controls, and for EPA to review these requests. The 

proposed rule has been written to address known performance 

issues for adsorbers, including the regeneration frequency of 

the adsorbent, the effectiveness of regeneration, the life of 

the adsorbent material before replacement is required,

mechanical issues with the system operation, including valve 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 133 of 406

sequencing, and for non-regenerative systems, the expected life 

of the bed before replacement. We are proposing several 

monitoring approaches for non-vacuum systems, regenerative 

adsorption systems, and non-regenerative adsorption systems, 

based on requirements from 40 CFR part 63, subparts G, SS, GGG, 

MMM, FFFF, GGGGG, and BBBBBB, as well as approaches which have 

been reviewed and approved by EPA through alternative monitoring 

requests, and which we believe have universal applicability. 

Under 40 CFR 63.11925(b) of the proposed rule, we are not 

allowing process vents to be routed to a flare due to the 

potential for acid-gas formation from combustion of halogenated 

streams at PVCPU. We have included in 40 CFR 63.11940 of the 

proposed rule compliance and monitoring requirements for control 

devices not covered by 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, including 

sorbent injection systems and fabric filters. The compliance

requirements for sorbent injection systems were based on the 

NESHAP for the Portland cement manufacturing industry, and the 

compliance requirements for fabric filters were modeled after 

the Pesticide Active Ingredient Production NESHAP (40 CFR part 

63, subpart MMM, as referenced by the MON), and the Portland 

Cement Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 134 of 406

We have also included requirements from the MON for batch 

processing operations, as discussed in section IV.G.8 of this 

preamble. 

5. How did we select the compliance requirements for 

wastewater?

As specified in 40 CFR 63.11965 of the proposed rule, we 

are proposing that you must conduct an initial test for 

wastewater streams from the affected source to determine the 

vinyl chloride concentration, the total HAP concentration 

(including all HAP listed in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

G), and the flow rate. The concentration tests would be 

conducted using EPA Method 107 for sampling, in combination with 

RCRA Method SW-8260B, Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas 

Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), and EPA Method 305, 

Measurement of Emission Potential of Individual Volatile Organic 

Compounds in Waste, for analysis. EPA Method 107 is commonly 

used in this source category as both a sampling and analytical 

method for vinyl chloride. We are proposing to require RCRA 

Method SW-8260B for analysis of HAP except for methanol because 

it provides concentrations for vinyl chloride, as well as other 

HAP. We are proposing to require EPA Method 305 for analysis of 

methanol. Prior to testing, you would be required to submit a 

test plan for EPA approval that includes your proposed method 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 135 of 406

for analysis using these methods. 

For wastewater, you would be required to test for vinyl 

chloride at the point where the wastewater is generated, and 

test for Table 9 HAP at the point of determination, as defined 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G. The HAP most prevalent in 

wastewater, and in the largest amounts for this source category,

is vinyl chloride, which is volatile, and is easily stripped. 

Testing at the point of generation is necessary to get an 

accurate assessment of the amount of vinyl chloride in the 

wastewater stream before it potentially volatizes in the 

downstream wastewater processes. 

Wastewater streams that contain less than 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride (at the point of generation), and wastewater streams 

that either contain less than 1,000 ppmw total HAP, or have a 

flow rate less than the 10 l/min criteria (at the point of 

determination, as defined by 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), are not 

required to further reduce emissions, but must remain below 

these levels. You would test periodically at the same 

locations, and using the same test methods described above, to 

verify that the stream concentration stays below these levels. 

Wastewater streams would be tested monthly. We believe these 

are the least burdensome intervals to test for wastewater, 

considering the variety of resin grades that may be produced, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 136 of 406

while still ensuring compliance with the proposed emission 

limits. There are also proposed requirements in 40 CFR 

63.11975(d) of the rule for demonstrating that you remain below

the 10 l/min flow rate criterion. These would be required for 

wastewater streams that are not required to apply additional 

control because they are below the 10 l/min flow rate criterion. 

The flow rate determination procedures are consistent with the 

HON, which is the basis of the flow rate criterion.

Under 40 CFR 63.11970 and 40 CFR 63.11975 of the proposed 

rule, you would conduct an initial compliance test and monthly 

testing to demonstrate compliance with the wastewater stripper 

outlet concentration limit. In addition, during your 

performance test, you would be required to establish operating 

ranges for your wastewater vacuum stripper, including steam-tofeed ratios and wastewater stripper temperature, and also the 

vacuum level measured in the column for wastewater vacuum 

strippers. These operating parameters are good indicators of 

wastewater stripper performance and proper operation. You would 

use a CPMS to continuously monitor control device operating 

parameters to demonstrate that you meet these operating 

parameter limits.

If the wastewater stream exceeds the 1,000 ppmw HAP 

concentration (measured at the point of determination, and based 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 137 of 406

on the list of HAP in Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G), and 

exceeds an annual average flow rate of 10 l/min (as measured at 

the same point of determination), then you would be required, 

under 40 CFR 63.11970(a)(2) of the proposed rule, to comply with 

the subpart G Group 1, wastewater suppression and treatment 

requirements, and conduct the compliance testing and monitoring 

required in subpart G. As discussed in section IV.F of this 

preamble, this proposed requirement is a beyond-the-floor option 

selected because it was determined to be cost-effective in the 

HON. Consequently, we are proposing that you comply with the 

HON testing and monitoring requirements for these streams.

6. How did we select the compliance requirements for stripped 

resin?

As discussed in section III.F.6 of this preamble, we are 

proposing in 40 CFR 63.11960 of the proposed rule that you 

conduct initial and continuous performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed vinyl chloride limits and monthly 

performance tests to demonstrate compliance with the proposed 

total HAP limits for stripped resin. The tests would be 

conducted at the outlet of the resin stripper as the stripped 

resin exits the stripper for continuous processes and 

immediately after stripping for batch processes. You would be 

required to use EPA Method 107 in combination with RCRA Method 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 138 of 406

SW-8260B, and to include in your test plan a proposed method for 

analysis using these methods. Affected sources are currently 

measuring vinyl chloride using EPA Method 107 to comply with 

limits in the part 61 NESHAP, and would continue to do so under 

this proposed rule. Initial and subsequent sampling for vinyl 

chloride would follow the same requirements as those in part 61 

NESHAP. You would be required to sample for total HAP 

initially, and then on a monthly basis to demonstrate continuous 

compliance. We are proposing that RCRA Method SW-8260B also be 

used to analyze for concentrations of organic HAP in the 

stripped resin other than vinyl chloride. You would be required 

to submit the test plan for EPA approval. 

The MACT floor limits for total HAP were based on averages 

of 30 days of resin sampling. We are proposing that samples be 

taken monthly, and compliance be demonstrated, based on a 12 

month rolling average of the 12 most recent months. In the 

first 12 months following your demonstration of initial 

compliance, you would be required to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the total HAP emission limit on a monthly basis, 

using the same procedures required for initial compliance. We 

request comment on adding an alternative to allow you, in these 

first 12 months, to use data collected in the year preceding 

your initial compliance to demonstrate continuous compliance. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 139 of 406

You would also be required to conduct your monthly monitoring 

for total HAP on a day that you are producing the resin grade of 

which you manufacture the most, based on total mass of resin 

produced in the month preceding the sampling event. To allow 

you flexibility in selecting this sampling day, sampling is 

required monthly, with a minimum of 12 sampling events per year, 

but individual sampling events may be 3 to 5 weeks apart.

In addition, during your initial performance test, you 

would be required to establish operating ranges for your resin 

steam or vacuum stripper, including steam-to-feed ratios and 

stripper temperature, and also the vacuum level measured in the 

component for vacuum strippers. You would use a CPMS to 

continuously monitor control device operating parameters. The 

proposed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements 

are necessary to ensure compliance with the proposed emission 

limits.

7. How did we select the compliance requirements for other 

emission sources?

Other emission sources include reactor and other component

opening losses. Reactor exhaust gas streams and any HAP removed 

from process component openings must be ducted through a closed 

vent system and control device. Therefore, we are proposing the 

same compliance requirements for these emission sources as those 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 140 of 406

requirements for process vents.

8. How did we select the compliance requirements for batch 

process operations?

We are proposing compliance language, based on the MON, to 

accommodate batch process vents. The MON primarily references 

the batch process vent provisions in the Pharmaceuticals 

Production NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG), but includes 

some changes and exceptions when specifying how to calculate 

uncontrolled emissions from batch process vents (including 

emission episode equations), as well as requiring performance 

testing under worst-case conditions. Although the MON uses a 

hierarchy to determine applicable requirements for combined 

emission streams (e.g., it allows you to comply with only the 

batch process vent requirements for combined batch and 

continuous process vents), 40 CFR 63.11945(b)(3) of the proposed 

rule requires that you meet all requirements for each emission 

stream type in a combined emission stream (i.e., both continuous 

and batch process vent requirements must be met). The proposed 

rule is written in this way to ensure compliance for each 

emission stream. 

Additionally, we revised the purging emission episode 

equation included in 40 CFR 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) (Equation 12). 

This equation specifies that the partial pressure of HAP shall 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 141 of 406

be assumed to be 25 percent of the saturated value if the purge 

flow rate is greater than 100 standard cubic feet per minute 

(scfm). We revised this requirement to incorporate iterative 

methodology equations from the Miscellaneous Coating 

Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR 63.8050(c)(1)(ii)), requiring you 

to determine a HAP-specific saturation factor, and are calling 

the episode "gas sweep of a partially filled vessel," in lieu of 

"purging". This revision is in accordance with Volume II, 

Chapter 16 of the Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), 

issued August 2007. This change includes site-specific values 

where possible, and ensures that the calculated emissions are 

more accurate.

H. How did EPA determine compliance times for the proposed 

rule?

Section 112 of the CAA provides limits for the dates by 

which affected sources must comply with the emission standards. 

New or reconstructed units must be in compliance with the final 

rule immediately upon startup, or the date the final rule is 

published in the Federal Register, whichever is later. The 

proposed rule allows existing sources 3 years to comply with the 

final rule, which is the maximum period allowed by the CAA. We 

believe that 3 years for compliance is necessary to allow 

adequate time to design, install, and test control systems, as 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 142 of 406

well as obtain permits for the use of add-on controls. We 

welcome comment on the proposed compliance dates.

I. How did EPA determine the required records and reports for 

this proposed rule?

Section 112 of the CAA requires the EPA to develop 

regulations that include requirements for reporting the results 

of testing and monitoring performed to determine compliance with

the standards. You would be required to comply with the 

applicable requirements in the NESHAP General Provisions, 

subpart A of 40 CFR part 63, as referenced in Table 5 of the 

proposed rule. We evaluated the General Provisions

requirements, and included those we determined to be the minimum 

notification, recordkeeping, and reporting necessary to ensure 

compliance with, and effective enforcement of, this rule, as 

proposed. The reports that we are proposing to be required are 

presented in 40 CFR 63.11985 of the proposed rule. 

We also reviewed the necessary records that need to be kept 

to demonstrate continuous compliance with the proposed emission 

limits and work practice standards. These recordkeeping 

requirements are specified either directly in the proposed rule, 

in the General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63, or in other rules 

to which the proposed rule refers. Recordkeeping requirements 

are found in the proposed 40 CFR 63.11990. We are proposing 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 143 of 406

that records be kept for 5 years, in a form suitable and readily 

available for EPA review. We are proposing that records be kept 

on site for 2 years, and you can keep the records off site for 

the remaining 3 years. 

The General Provisions include specific requirements for 

notifications, recordkeeping, and reporting. The reports are 

specified in proposed 40 CFR 63.11985. 

The notification of compliance status report required by 40 

CFR 63.9(h) must include certifications of compliance with rule 

requirements. The excess emissions and continuous system 

performance report and summary report required by 40 CFR 

63.10(e)(3) of the NESHAP General Provisions (referred to in the 

rule as a compliance report) would be required to be submitted 

semiannually for reporting periods during which there was an 

exceedance of any emission limit, or a monitored parameter, or a 

deviation from any of the requirements in the rule occurred, or 

if any process changes occurred, and compliance certifications 

were reevaluated.

The part 61 NESHAP requires that, within 10 days of any 

discharge from a PRD to the atmosphere, the owners or operators 

must submit to the Administrator, a report containing 

information on the source, nature, and cause of the discharge, 

the date and time of the discharge, duration of the discharge, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 144 of 406

the approximate emissions during the discharge, and the method 

used for determining the HAP emitted (i.e., the calculation 

method). The report must also include a description of the 

actions taken to prevent the discharge, and measures adopted to 

prevent future discharges. We are proposing to extend this 

recordkeeping and reporting requirement to violations associated 

with bypasses, pressure vessels, closed vent systems in vacuum 

service as discussed in section III.H of this preamble. We 

solicit comment on the proposed recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements.

J. What are the startup, shutdown, and malfunction provisions?

Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. 

Cir. 2008), EPA is proposing standards in this rule that apply 

at all times. In proposing the standards in this rule, EPA has 

taken into account startup and shutdown periods, and, for the 

reasons explained below, has not proposed different standards 

for those periods. We solicit comment on this approach.

We expect facilities can meet the proposed emission 

standards during startup and shutdown. For process vents, 

control is achieved by routing vents to thermal oxidizers, or 

vent gas absorbers. During startup, it is common practice to 

start the thermal oxidizers using natural gas, before process 

vent emissions are routed to them, so that the oxidizers are at 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 145 of 406

the required temperature prior to receiving the vent streams and 

will accomplish the same level of control that they would during 

normal operation. Vent gas absorbers operate such that vent 

streams can be routed to them at all times. For wastewater

streams and stripped resins, we expect that during startup, 

streams normally fed to the wastewater stripper and resin 

stripper are recycled back to the process until the correct 

stripper steam to feed ratio is established. At such time, the 

feed streams are no longer recycled back to the process, and are 

then sent through the stripper to remove HAP to the required 

levels. For batch processes, startups and shutdowns are a part 

of their normal daily operations. For the other emission 

points, the proposed rule requires work practices that can be 

followed during startup and shutdown. Additionally, we are 

proposing that process components, such as reactors, cannot be 

opened except when the process or process component is shut

down. The proposed rule includes several requirements to reduce 

emissions during openings.

Periods of startup, normal operations, and shutdown are all 

predictable and routine aspects of a source‘s operations. 

However, by contrast, malfunction is defined as a ―sudden, 

infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air 

pollution control and monitoring equipment, process equipment or 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 146 of 406

a process to operate in a normal or usual manner * * * ‘‘(40 CFR 

63.2). EPA has determined that malfunctions should not be 

viewed as a distinct operating mode, and, therefore, any 

emissions that occur at such times do not need to be factored 

into development of CAA section 112(d) standards, which, once 

promulgated, apply at all times. In Mossville Environmental 

Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1242 (D.C. Cir. 2004), the 

Court upheld as reasonable standards that had factored in 

variability of emissions under all operating conditions. 

However, nothing in CAA section 112(d) or in case law requires 

that EPA anticipate and account for the innumerable types of 

potential malfunction events in setting emission standards. 

See, Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (D.C. Cir.

1978) (―In the nature of things, no general limit, individual 

permit, or even any upset provision can anticipate all upset 

situations. After a certain point, the transgression of 

regulatory limits caused by  ̳uncontrollable acts of third 

parties,‘ such as strikes, sabotage, operator intoxication or 

insanity, and a variety of other eventualities, must be a matter 

for the administrative exercise of case-by-case enforcement 

discretion, not for specification in advance by regulation.‖).

Further, it is reasonable to interpret CAA section 112(d) 

as not requiring EPA to account for malfunctions in setting 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 147 of 406

emissions standards. For example, we note that CAA section 112 

uses the concept of ―best performing‖ sources in defining MACT, 

the level of stringency that major source standards must meet. 

Applying the concept of ―best performing‖ to a source that is 

malfunctioning presents significant difficulties. The goal of 

best performing sources is to operate in such a way as to avoid 

malfunctions of their units. 

Moreover, even if malfunctions were considered a distinct 

operating mode, we believe it would be impracticable to take 

malfunctions into account in setting CAA section 112(d) 

standards for PVC and copolymer production. As noted above, by 

definition, malfunctions are sudden and unexpected events, and 

it would be difficult to set a standard that takes into account 

the myriad different types of malfunctions that can occur across 

all sources in the category. Moreover, malfunctions can vary in 

frequency, degree, and duration, further complicating standard 

setting. 

In the event that a source fails to comply with the 

applicable CAA section 112(d) standards, as a result of a 

malfunction event, EPA would determine an appropriate response 

based on, among other things, the good faith efforts of the 

source to minimize emissions during malfunction periods, 

including preventative and corrective actions, as well as root 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 148 of 406

cause analyses to ascertain and rectify excess emissions. EPA 

would also consider whether the source's failure to comply with 

the CAA section 112(d) standard was, in fact, ―sudden, 

infrequent, not reasonably preventable,‖ and was not instead 

―caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation.‖ 40 

CFR 63.2 (definition of malfunction).

Finally, EPA recognizes that even equipment that is 

properly designed and maintained, can sometimes fail and that 

such failure can sometimes cause an exceedance of the relevant 

emission standard. (See, e.g., State Implementation Plans: 

Policy Regarding Excessive Emissions During Malfunctions, 

Startup, and Shutdown (Sept. 20, 1999); Policy on Excess 

Emissions During Startup, Shutdown, Maintenance, and 

Malfunctions (Feb. 15, 1983)). EPA is therefore proposing to 

include an affirmative defense to civil penalties for 

exceedances of emission limits. See 40 CFR 63.12010 of the 

proposed rule (defining ―affirmative defense‖ to mean, in the 

context of an enforcement proceeding, a response or defense put 

forward by a defendant, regarding which the defendant has the 

burden of proof, and the merits of which are independently and 

objectively evaluated in a judicial or administrative 

proceeding). We also are proposing other regulatory provisions 

to specify the elements that are necessary to establish this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 149 of 406

affirmative defense; the source must prove by a preponderance of 

the evidence that it has met all of the elements set forth in 40 

CFR 63.11895 of the proposed rule. (See 40 CFR 22.24). The 

criteria ensure that the affirmative defense is available only 

where the event that causes an exceedance of the emission limit 

meets the narrow definition of malfunction in 40 CFR 63.2 

(sudden, infrequent, not reasonable preventable and not caused 

by poor maintenance and or careless operation). For example, to 

successfully assert the affirmative defense, the source must 

prove by a preponderance of the evidence that excess emissions 

―[w]ere caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable failure 

of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, process 

equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual 

manner....‖ The criteria also are designed to ensure that steps 

are taken to correct the malfunction, to minimize emissions in 

accordance with 40 CFR 63.11895 of the proposed rule and to 

prevent future malfunctions. For example, the source must prove 

by a preponderance of the evidence that ―[r]epairs were made as 

expeditiously as possible when the applicable emission 

limitations were being exceeded...‖ and that ―[a]ll possible steps 

were taken to minimize the impact of the excess emissions on 

ambient air quality, the environment and human health....‖ In any 

judicial or administrative proceeding, the Administrator may 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 150 of 406

challenge the assertion of the affirmative defense and, if the 

respondent has not met its burden of proving all of the 

requirements in the affirmative defense, appropriate penalties 

may be assessed in accordance with section 113 of the CAA (see 

also 40 CFR 22.77).

V. Impacts of the Proposed PVC Rule

The impacts presented in this section include the impacts 

for PVC production facilities to comply with the proposed rule,

and with the requirements of other subparts referenced by the 

proposed rule.

A. What are the air impacts?

We have estimated the potential emission reductions that 

may be realized through implementation of the proposed emission 

standards. Table 10 of this preamble summarizes the emission 

reductions for compliance for each pollutant and emission point. 

The analysis is documented in the memorandum, Costs and Emission 

Reductions of the MACT Floor Level of Control for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket.

Table 10. Emission Reductions of the Proposed PVC and 

Copolymers Production Standards 

Emission Point

Pollutant Emission Reductions (tpy)

Vinyl 

Chloride Total HAP CDD/CDF (TEQ) HCl

Process vents 0.085 2.26

a 2.45E-08 33

Stripped resin 129 853 0 0

Wastewater 0.40 0.40 0 0
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 151 of 406

Equipment leaks 0 680 0 0

Storage vessels 0 0 0 0

Other emission sources 0 0 0 0

Heat exchange systems 5.3 35 0 0

TOTAL 135 1,570 2.45E-08 33

a Emission reductions for process vents are stated as total organic 

HAP; this value does not include HCl reductions.

We estimated emission reductions of the proposed rule for 

each emission point. For all emission points, we first 

calculated emissions at the current level of control for each

facility (referred to as the baseline level of control), and at 

the proposed level of control. We calculated emission 

reductions as the difference between the proposed level and 

baseline. 

For process vents, we calculated baseline emissions from 

the measured HAP concentrations at the outlet of the control 

devices, and HAP emissions using the proposed emission limits, 

in combination with the vent stream flow rates measured during 

emission tests.

For stripped resins, we calculated emissions assuming that 

all the HAP remaining in the resin would eventually be emitted 

from processes downstream of the resin stripper. This 

assumption results in a calculation of the potential emissions 

at the baseline stripped resin concentration levels, and 

proposed MACT concentration levels. Emissions were calculated 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 152 of 406

from the HAP concentration in the stripped resin, and the resin 

production rate.

For wastewater, we estimated the emissions from the HAP 

concentration in the uncontrolled wastewater streams, in the 

controlled wastewater streams, and the wastewater flow rates or 

generation rates.

For equipment leaks, we estimated emissions for the 

baseline LDAR program in use at each facility, and the proposed 

equipment leaks requirements using model equipment counts, 

average emission factors for leaking equipment provided in 

previous EPA studies, and control efficiencies for LDAR programs 

provided in previous EPA studies. Model equipment counts were 

used because actual equipment counts were not collected in 

survey questionnaires sent to the industry. The survey 

requested information only on regulatory LDAR programs currently 

in place at each facility, and the costs for the facility to 

conduct the LDAR program.

We calculated emissions from heat exchange systems from 

emissions information provided in information survey responses 

provided by affected sources. Emission reductions from heat 

exchange systems were calculated assuming that, once the LDAR 

program was in effect, emissions would be eliminated due to the 

low leak action level that is being proposed.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 153 of 406

B. What are the cost impacts?

We have estimated compliance costs for all existing sources 

to add the necessary controls, monitoring devices, inspections, 

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to comply with the 

proposed rule. Based on this analysis, we anticipate an overall 

total capital investment of 15.6 million, with an associated 

total annualized cost of $19.7 million (using a discount rate of 

7 percent), in 2010 dollars, as shown in Table 11 of this 

preamble. We do not anticipate the construction of any new 

PVCPU in the next 5 years, and, therefore, there are no new 

source cost impacts.

Table 11. Cost Impacts of the Proposed PVC and Copolymers 

Production Standards

Emission Point

Total Capital 

Cost (million 

2010$)

Total

Annualized Cost 

(million 

2010$/yr)

Process vents 12.5 3.4

Stripped resin 0 14.5

Wastewater 0 0.791

Equipment leaks 3.14 0.638

Storage vessels 0 0

Other emission sources 0 0

Heat exchange systems 0 0.309

TOTAL 15.6 19.7

We calculated costs to meet the proposed level of control 

for each emission point. For process vents, we estimated costs 

to meet the proposed level of control for PVCPU that do not 

currently meet the proposed emission limit, based on reported 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 154 of 406

data. For such PVCPU that currently use incinerators in 

combination with acid-gas scrubbers, we estimate the cost of 

compliance through the use of enhanced vinyl chloride recovery 

using a refrigerated condenser to reduce the quantity of vinyl 

chloride combusted to meet the vinyl chloride, HCl, and total 

organic HAP emission limits. If a PVCPU needed only to meet the 

HCl emission limit, we estimated the cost of compliance using a 

packed bed scrubber to reduce HCl emissions. To meet the 

CDD/CDF levels, costs were based on application of activated 

carbon injection in combination with a fabric filter. For PVCPU 

that currently use an absorber for vinyl chloride recovery, cost 

calculations were based on routing the vent gas from the 

absorber to existing incinerators. Costs calculations also 

included capital and annual costs for testing and monitoring of 

vinyl chloride, HCl, total organic HAP, and CDD/CDF. 

For PVCPU not currently meeting the proposed stripped resin 

limits, costs to meet the proposed level of control were based 

on additional steam being used in the resin stripper to further 

remove vinyl chloride and total HAP from the resin. Testing and 

monitoring costs were also included in the costs to meet the 

proposed level of control. We are aware that there may be 

concerns about applying additional heat to the resin because it 

might degrade the product. Therefore, we are requesting comment 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 155 of 406

on this cost assumption. We are also requesting data on the 

performance of resin strippers when additional steam is added, 

and the limits that resin strippers can achieve without 

degrading the product. We note that the proposed limits for 

stripped resins were calculated, based on the resin analysis 

data provided by surveyed facilities, indicating that some 

facilities are already achieving the emission limits without 

affecting their products. 

For PVCPU not currently meeting the proposed wastewater 

stripper outlet concentration limit, costs to meet the proposed

level of control were based on additional steam being used in 

the wastewater stripper to further remove vinyl chloride. 

Annual costs also include additional testing and monitoring 

required to meet the proposed level of control.

For equipment leaks, annual costs to conduct LDAR programs 

were provided by PVC production facilities in responses to data

collection surveys. The average cost difference between PVCPU 

complying with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU and PVCPU complying 

with other equipment leak standards, such as 40 CFR part 61, 

subpart V, was applied to each PVCPU that did not already meet 

the proposed level of control (i.e., 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

UU). We estimated additional costs for an electronic PRD

indicator, based on data collected for other EPA projects. We 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 156 of 406

calculated costs for complying with the proposed level for heat 

exchange systems, based on information collected for other EPA 

projects. No costs were estimated for the remaining emission 

points, because all affected sources already meet the proposed 

levels of control for them.

The analysis is documented in the memorandum, Costs and

Emission Reductions of the Proposed Standards for the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category, and is 

available in the docket.

C. What are the non-air quality health, environmental, and 

energy impacts?

We anticipate affected sources would need to apply 

additional controls to meet the proposed emission limits. These 

controls, such as steam strippers and scrubbers, use water. We 

estimate an annual requirement of 380 million gallons per year 

of additional wastewater would be generated as a result of 

additional steam stripping of PVC resin and water used for 

scrubbers. We also anticipate 106 tpy of dust from activated 

carbon usage that will need to be disposed. 

The energy impacts associated with meeting the proposed 

emission limits would consist primarily of additional 

electricity needs to run added or improved air pollution control 

devices. By our estimate, we anticipate that an additional 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 157 of 406

5,900 megawatt-hours per year would be required for the 

additional and improved control devices.

We anticipate secondary air impacts from adding controls to 

meet the standards. The combustion of fuel needed to generate 

additional electricity would yield slight increases in nitrogen 

oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2)

emissions. Since NOx and SO2 emissions and electric generating 

units are covered by capped emissions trading programs, we do 

not estimate an increase in secondary air impacts for these 

pollutants for this rule form additional electricity demand. 

The combustion of additional fuel from additional electrical 

usage and supplemental fuel for incineration devices would yield 

CO emissions of 1.3 tpy. The analyses are documented in the 

memorandum, Secondary Impacts of the Proposed Level of Control 

for the PVC Production Source Category, and is available in the 

docket.

D. What are the economic impacts of the proposed standards?

We performed an economic impact analysis for PVC consumers 

and producers nationally, using the annual compliance costs 

estimated for this proposed rule. The impacts to producers

affected by this proposed rule are annualized costs of less than 

0.7 percent of their revenues, using the most current year 

available for revenue data. Prices and output for PVC should 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 158 of 406

increase by no more than the impact on cost to revenues for 

producers; thus, PVC prices should increase by less than 0.7 

percent. Hence, the overall economic impact of this proposed 

rule should be low on the affected industries and their 

consumers. For more information, please refer to the Economic 

Impact Analysis for this proposed rulemaking that is in the 

docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 

Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 

this action is a ―significant regulatory action‖ because it 

raises novel legal or policy issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted 

this action to OMB for review under Executive Order 12866 and

Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), and any 

changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been 

documented in the docket for this action.

In addition, EPA prepared an analysis of the potential 

costs and benefits associated with this action. This analysis 

is contained in Cost and Impacts of the PVC and Copolymers 

Proposed Standard, in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. A 

copy of the analysis is available in the docket for this action 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 159 of 406

and the analysis is briefly summarized in section V.B of this 

preamble.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements in this proposed 

rule have been submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork 

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

Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by EPA has been 

assigned EPA ICR No. [XXXX.XX].

The information requirements are based on notification, 

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for 

all operators subject to national emission standards. These 

recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically 

authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information 

submitted to EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is 

safeguarded according to Agency policies set forth in 40 CFR 

part 2, subpart B.

The proposed rule would require maintenance inspections of 

the control devices, and some notifications or reports beyond 

those required by the General Provisions. The recordkeeping 

requirements require only the specific information needed to 

determine compliance. The information collection activities in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 160 of 406

this ICR include the following: performance tests, wastewater 

sampling, resin sampling, LDAR monitoring, heat exchanger 

monitoring, PRD monitoring, operating parameter monitoring, 

preparation of a site-specific monitoring plan, monitoring and 

inspection, one-time and periodic reports, and the maintenance 

of records. Some information collection activities included in 

the NESHAP may occur within the first 3 years, and are presented 

in this burden estimate, but may not occur until 4 or 5 years 

following promulgation of the proposed standards for some 

affected sources. To be conservative in our estimate, the 

burden for these items is included in this ICR. An initial 

notification is required to notify the Designated Administrator 

of the applicability of this subpart, and to identify storage 

vessels, process vents, stripped resin, equipment leaks, 

wastewater, heat exchange systems, and other emission sources 

subject to this subpart. A notification of performance test 

must be submitted, and a site-specific test plan written for the 

performance test, along with a monitoring plan. Following the 

initial performance test, the owner or operator must submit a 

notification of compliance status that documents the performance 

test and the values for the operating parameters. A periodic

report submitted every 6 months documents the values for the 

operating parameters and deviations; a notification of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 161 of 406

inspection of vessels and related inspection records; leaking 

and monitoring information for equipment leaks; and leaking and 

monitoring data for heat exchangers, if greater than leak 

definition. Owners or operators of PVC facilities are required 

to keep records of certain parameters and information for a 

period of 5 years. The annual testing, annual monitoring, 

reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this collection 

(averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of the 

standards) is estimated to be $2.5 million. This includes 3,200

labor hours per year at a total labor cost of $0.3 million per 

year, and total non-labor capital costs of $3.3 million per 

year. This estimate includes initial and annual performance 

tests, conducting and documenting semiannual excess emission 

reports, maintenance inspections, developing a monitoring plan, 

notifications, and recordkeeping. Monitoring and testing cost 

were also included in the cost estimates presented in the 

control costs impacts estimates in section V of this preamble. 

The total burden for the Federal government (averaged over the 

first 3 years after the effective date of the standard) is 

estimated to be 1,098 hours per year, at a total labor cost of 

$50,482 per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

When a malfunction occurs, sources must report them 

according to the applicable reporting requirements of 40 CFR 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 162 of 406

part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. An affirmative defense to civil 

penalties for exceedances of emission limits that are caused by 

malfunctions is available to a source if it can demonstrate that 

certain criteria and requirements are satisfied. The criteria 

ensure that the affirmative defense is available only where the 

event that causes an exceedance of the emission limit meets the 

narrow definition of malfunction in 40 CFR 63.2 (e.g., sudden, 

infrequent, not reasonably preventable and not caused by poor 

maintenance or careless operation) and where the source took 

necessary actions to minimize emissions. In addition, the 

source must meet certain notification and reporting 

requirements. For example, the source must prepare a written 

root cause analysis and submit a written report to the 

Administrator documenting that it has met the conditions and 

requirements for assertion of the affirmative defense. EPA 

considered whether there might be any burden associated with the 

notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements 

associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense. While 

recognizing that any such burdens are only incurred if there has 

been a violation and a source chooses to take advantage of the 

affirmative defense. The PVC industry is currently required to 

comply with the part 61 NESHAP requirement for releases from 

pressure relief valves and reactor manual vent valves, which
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 163 of 406

does not allow a discharge into the atmosphere from these 

valves, except during an emergency. An emergency discharge 

means a ―discharge which could not have been avoided by taking 

measures to prevent the discharge.‖ The owners or operators 

must, within 10 days of any release from a pressure relief valve 

or a reactor manual vent valve, submit a report to the 

Administrator. The report must include the ―nature and cause of 

discharge, the date and time of the discharge, the approximate 

total vinyl chloride loss during the discharge, the method used 

for determining the vinyl chloride loss, the action that was 

taken to prevent the discharge, and measures adopted to prevent 

future discharges. The costs for these reports are already 

accounted for in the ICR burden estimate. Therefore, EPA 

estimates that there would be no additional costs for sources 

that choose to take advantage of the affirmative defense for 

malfunctions since it is already required for compliance with 

the rule. However, there may be other malfunctions that are not 

currently regulated under the part 61 NESHAP that might prompt a 

source to take advantage of an affirmative defense. 

To provide the public with an estimate of the relative 

magnitude of the burden associated with an assertion of the 

affirmative defense position adopted by a source (for those not 

already regulated under the part 61 NESHAP), EPA is including in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 164 of 406

the ICR the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative 

defense might entail. EPA‘s estimate for the required 

notification, reports, and records, including the root cause 

analysis, totals $3,141, and is based on the time and effort 

required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant 

employees, and document the events surrounding a malfunction 

that has caused an exceedance of an emission limit. The 

estimate also includes time to produce and retain the record and 

reports for submission to EPA. EPA provides this illustrative 

estimate of this burden because these costs are only incurred if 

there has been a violation and a source chooses to take 

advantage of the affirmative defense. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA‘s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR 

part 9.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the 

accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested 

methods for minimizing respondent burden, EPA has established a 

public docket for this rule, which includes this ICR, under 

Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0037. Submit any comments 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 165 of 406

related to the ICR to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this notice for where to submit comments to EPA. 

Send comments to OMB at the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, 

Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since 

OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 

and 60 days after [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER], a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full 

effect if OMB receives it by [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF 

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. The final rule will 

respond to any OMB or public comments on the information 

collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an 

agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule 

subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act, or any other statute, unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, 

and small governmental jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule

on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 166 of 406

business, as defined by the Small Business Administration‘s 

regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently owned and operated, and 

is not dominant in its field.

After considering the economic impacts of this proposed

rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposed rule will not impose any requirements 

on small entities. To EPA‘s knowledge, there are no small 

entities subject to the proposed rule. We continue to be 

interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on 

small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such 

impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain a Federal mandate that may 

result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector 

in any one year. The total annualized cost of this rule is 

estimated to be no more than $20 million (2010$) in any one 

year. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 167 of 406

sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.

This rule is also not subject to the requirements of 

section 203 of UMRA, because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This rule only impacts PVC production facilities, 

and, thus, does not impact small governments uniquely or 

significantly. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

The action does not have federalism implications. It will 

not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 

13132. The proposed rule imposes requirements on owners and 

operators of specified major and area sources, and not on State 

or local governments. There are no PVC production facilities 

owned or operated by State or local governments. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with 

EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and State and 

local governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this 

proposed action from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 168 of 406

Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The 

proposed rule imposes requirements on owners and operators of 

specified area sources, and not tribal governments. There are 

no PVC production facilities owned or operated by Indian tribal 

governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this 

proposed action from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 

23, 1997) as applying to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under 

section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to 

influence the regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045, because it is based solely on technology 

performance.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not a ―significant energy action‖ as defined 

in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it 

is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 169 of 406

supply, distribution, or use of energy. EPA estimates that the 

requirements in this proposed action would cause most PVCPU to 

modify existing air pollution control devices (e.g., increase 

the horsepower of their wet scrubbers) or install and operate 

new control devices, resulting in approximately 92,000 megawatthours per year of additional electricity being used.

Given the negligible change in energy consumption resulting 

from this proposed action, EPA does not expect any significant 

price increase for any energy type. The cost of energy 

distribution should not be affected by this proposed action at 

all since the action would not affect energy distribution 

facilities. We also expect that any impacts on the import of 

foreign energy supplies, or any other adverse outcomes that may 

occur with regards to energy supplies, would not be significant. 

We, therefore, conclude that if there were to be any adverse 

energy effects associated with this proposed action, they would 

be minimal. 

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113 (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities, unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 170 of 406

impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. NTTAA 

directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when 

the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS. 

This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA 

proposes to use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas 

Analyses, as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B. This 

standard is available from the American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990. 

No applicable VCS were identified for EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 

2D, 2F, 2G, 21, 107, RCRA SW-846, PS-8, PS-9, and the TCEQ 

Modified El Paso Method.

During the search, if the title or abstract (if provided) 

of the VCS described technical sampling and analytical 

procedures that are similar to EPA‘s reference method, the EPA 

ordered a copy of the standard and reviewed it as a potential 

equivalent method. All potential standards were reviewed to 

determine the practicality of the VCS for this rule. This 

review requires significant method validation data that meet the 

requirements of EPA Method 301 for accepting alternative methods 

or scientific, engineering, and policy equivalence to procedures 

in EPA reference methods. EPA may reconsider determinations of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 171 of 406

impracticality when additional information is available for 

particular VCS. 

The search identified 17 other VCS that were potentially 

applicable for this rule in lieu of EPA reference methods. 

After reviewing the available standards, EPA determined that 17 

candidate VCS (ASTM D3154-00 (2006), ASTM D3464-96 (2007), ASTM 

D3796-90 (2004), ISO 10780:1994, ASME B133.9-1994 (2001), 

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 Part 10, ISO 10396:1993 (2007), ISO 

12039:2001, ASTM D5835-95 (2007), ASTM D6522-00 (2005), CAN/CSA 

Z223.2-M86 (1999), NIOSH Method 2010, Amines, Aliphatic, ASTM 

D6060-96 (2001), EN 1948-3 (1996), EN 1911-1.2.3 (1998), ASTM 

D6735-01, ASTM D4855-97 (2002)) identified for measuring 

emissions of pollutants or their surrogates subject to emission 

standards in the rule would not be practical due to lack of 

equivalency, documentation, validation data and other important 

technical and policy considerations. 

EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed 

rulemaking, and, specifically, invites the public to identify 

potentially applicable VCS, and to explain why such standards 

should be used in this regulation.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 172 of 406

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 

establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. 

Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest 

extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental 

justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as 

appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 

activities on minority populations and low-income populations in 

the United States. 

EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or low-income populations,

because it increases the level of environmental protection for 

all affected populations without having any disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any 

population, including any minority or low-income population. 

An analysis of demographic data shows that the average 

percentage of minorities, percentages of the population below 

the poverty level, and the percentages of the population 17 

years old and younger, in close proximity to the sources, are 

similar to the national averages, with percentage differences of 

3, 1.8, and 1.7, respectively, at the 3-mile radius of concern. 

These differences in the absolute number of percentage points 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 173 of 406

from the national average indicate a 9.4-percent, 14.4-percent, 

and 6.6-percent over-representation of minority populations, 

populations below the poverty level, and the percentages of the 

population 17 years old and younger, respectively.

In determining the aggregate demographic makeup of the 

communities near affected sources, EPA used census data at the 

block group level to identify demographics of the populations 

considered to be living near affected sources, such that they 

have notable exposures to current emissions from these sources. 

In this approach, EPA reviewed the distributions of different 

socio-demographic groups in the locations of the expected 

emission reductions from this rule. The review identified those 

census block groups with centroids within a circular distance of 

a 0.5, 3, and 5 miles of affected sources, and determined the 

demographic and socio-economic composition (e.g., race, income, 

education, etc.) of these census block groups. The radius of 3 

miles (or approximately 5 kilometers) has been used in other 

demographic analyses focused on areas around potential 

sources.

7,8,9,10

 There was only one census block group with its 

 

7

U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). Demographics of People Living 

Near Waste Facilities. Washington DC: Government Printing Office; 1995.

8

Mohai P, Saha R. Reassessing Racial and Socio-economic Disparities in 

Environmental Justice Research. Demography. 2006;43(2): 383–399.

9

Mennis J. Using Geographic Information Systems to Create and Analyze 

Statistical Surfaces of Populations and Risk for Environmental Justice 

Analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 2002;83(1):281-297.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 174 of 406

centroids within 0.5 miles of any source affected by the

proposed rule. EPA‘s demographic analysis has shown that these 

areas, in aggregate, have similar proportions of American 

Indians, African-Americans, Hispanics, and ―Other and Multiracial‖ populations to the national average. The analysis also 

showed that these areas, in aggregate, had similar proportions 

of families with incomes below the poverty level as the national 

average, and similar populations of children 17 years of age and 

younger.

11

EPA defines Environmental Justice to include meaningful 

involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national 

origin, or income with respect to the development, 

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and polices. To promote meaningful involvement, 

EPA has developed a communication and outreach strategy to 

ensure that interested communities have access to this proposed 

rule, are aware of its content, and have an opportunity to 

comment during the comment period. During the comment period, 

EPA will publicize the rulemaking via environmental justice

newsletters, Tribal newsletters, environmental justice

 

10

Bullard RD, Mohai P, Wright B, Saha R, et al. Toxic Waste and Race at 

Twenty 1987-2007. United Church of Christ. March, 2007. 

11

The results of the demographic analysis are presented in Review of 

Environmental Justice Impacts: Polyvinyl Chloride, September 2010, a copy of 

which is available in the docket.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 175 of 406

listservs, and the Internet, including the EPA Office of Policy 

Rulemaking Gateway website 

(http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/RuleGate.nsf/). EPA will also 

conduct targeted outreach to environmental justice communities,

as appropriate. Outreach activities may include providing 

general rulemaking fact sheets (e.g., why is this important for 

my community) for environmental justice community groups, and 

conducting conference calls with interested communities. In 

addition, State and Federal permitting requirements will provide 

State and local governments, and members of affected communities 

the opportunity to provide comments on the permit conditions 

associated with permitting the sources affected by the proposed 

rule
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production--Page 176 of 406

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 63

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

______________________

Dated:

_______________________

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 177 of 406

For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, 

part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is proposed to be 

amended as follows:

PART 63—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as 

follows: 

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

Subpart DDDDDD—[Amended]

2. Section 63.11140 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) 

and adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§63.11140 Am I subject to this subpart?

* * * * * 

(b) * * *

(2) An affected source is a new source under this subpart 

if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected 

source on or after October 6, 2006 but prior to the effective 

date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. 

An affected source that commences construction or reconstruction 

on and after the effective date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register is not subject to this subpart and is 

required to comply with subpart HHHHHHH of this part. 

* * * * *
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 178 of 406

(e) Each affected source that commences construction or 

reconstruction on and after the effective date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register is required to comply 

with subpart HHHHHHH of this part by the compliance dates 

specified in subpart HHHHHHH. On and after the compliance date 

specified in subpart HHHHHHH of this part that applies to your 

affected source, the requirements in §63.11140(d) and §§63.11141 

through 63.11145 of this subpart do not apply to the affected 

source.

3. Part 63 is amended by adding a new subpart HHHHHHH to 

read as follows:

Subpart HHHHHHH—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

§63.11860 What is the purpose of this subpart?

§63.11865 Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?

§63.11870 What is the affected source of this subpart?

§63.11871 What is the relationship to 40 CFR part 61, subpart

F?

§63.11875 When must I comply with this subpart?

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards

§63.11880 What emission limits, operating limits, and standards 

must I meet?

General Compliance Requirements

§63.11885 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

§63.11890 What are my additional general requirements for 

complying with this subpart?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 179 of 406

§63.11895 How do I establish an affirmative defense for 

exceedance of an emission limit during malfunction?

§63.11896 What am I required to do if I make a process change 

to a PVCPU at my affected source?

Testing and Compliance Requirements

§63.11900 By what date must I conduct initial performance 

testing and monitoring, establish any applicable operating 

limits, and demonstrate initial compliance with my emission 

limits and work practice standards?

§63.11905 When must I conduct subsequent performance testing 

and monitoring to demonstrate continuous compliance?

§63.11910 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for storage vessels?

§63.11915 What are my compliance requirements for equipment 

leaks?

§63.11920 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for heat exchange systems?

§63.11925 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for process vents?

§63.11930 What requirements must I meet for closed vent 

systems?

§63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS requirements must I meet to 

demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission 

standards for process vent control devices, resin strippers, and 

wastewater treatment processes?

§63.11940 What continuous monitoring requirements must I meet 

for control devices required to install CPMS to meet the 

emission limits for process vents?

§63.11945 What performance testing requirements must I meet for 

process vents?

§63.11950 What emissions calculations must I use for an 

emission profile by process of my batch process operation?

§63.11955 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for other emission sources?

§63.11956 What are my compliance requirements for ambient 

monitoring?

§63.11960 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for stripped resin?

§63.11965 What are my general compliance requirements for 

wastewater?

§63.11970 What are my initial compliance requirements for 

wastewater?

§63.11975 What are my continuous compliance requirements for 

wastewater?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 180 of 406

§63.11980 What are my test methods and calculation procedures 

for wastewater?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

§63.11985 What notifications and reports must I submit and 

when?

§63.11990 What records must I keep?

§63.11995 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

§63.12000 Who implements and enforces this subpart?

Definitions

§63.12005 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Tables to Sbpart HHHHHHH of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Emission Limits and 

Standards for Existing Affected Sources

Table 2 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Emission Limits and 

Standards for New Affected Sources

Table 3 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63–Emission Limits and 

Standards for Wastewater for New and Existing Affected Sources

Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Summary of Control 

Requirements for Storage Vessels at New and Existing Sources

Table 5 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Applicability of the 

General Provisions to Part 63

Table 6 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Operating Parameters, 

Operating Limits, and Data Monitoring, Recording, and Compliance 

Frequencies for Process Vent Control Devices, Resin Strippers, 

and Wastewater Treatment Processes.

Table 7 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Toxic Equivalency Factors 

Table 8 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Calibration and Accuracy 

Requirements for Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems

Table 9 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Methods and Procedures for 

Conducting Performance Tests for Process Vents

Table 10 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Methods and Procedures 

for Conducting Performance Tests for Stripped Resin and 

Wastewater

What This Subpart Covers

§63.11860 What is the purpose of this subpart?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 181 of 406

This subpart establishes national emission standards for 

hazardous air pollutants emitted from the production of 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymers. This subpart also 

establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous 

compliance with the emission standards. 

§63.11865 Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?

You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymers process unit (PVCPU) as 

defined in §63.12005 that is located at, or is part of, a major 

source or an area source as defined in §63.2. Your PVCPU is not 

subject to this subpart if it is a research and development 

facility, as defined in section 112(c) (7) of the Clean Air Act. 

§63.11870 What is the affected source of this subpart?

(a) The affected source for this subpart is each 

individual PVCPU.

(b) An existing affected source is one for which 

construction was commenced before [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN 

THE FEDERAL REGISTER] at a major or area source.

(c) A new affected source is one for which construction is 

commenced on or after [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER] at a major or area source.

(d) If components of an existing affected source are 

replaced such that the replacement meets the definition of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 182 of 406

reconstruction in §63.2 and the reconstruction commenced on or 

after [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], then 

the existing affected source becomes a reconstructed source and 

is subject to the relevant standards for a new affected source.

The reconstructed source must comply with the requirements for a 

new affected source upon initial startup of the reconstructed 

source or by the effective date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register, whichever is later.

§63.11871 What is the relationship to 40 CFR part 61, subpart 

F?

After the applicable compliance date specified in 

§63.11875(a), (b), or (c), an affected source that is also 

subject to the provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F, is 

required to comply with the provisions of this subpart and not 

40 CFR part 61, subpart F.

§63.11875 When must I comply with this subpart?

(a) If you own or operate an existing affected source, you 

must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions in this 

subpart no later than 3 years after the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. On or 

after the date 3 years after the effective date of publication 

of the final rule in the Federal Register, any such existing 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 183 of 406

affected source is no longer subject to the provisions of 40 CFR 

part 61, subpart F.

(b) If you start up a new affected source on or before the 

effective date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 

Register, you must achieve compliance with the provisions of 

this subpart no later than the effective date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register. On or after the 

effective date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 

Register, any such new affected source is not subject to the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F. 

(c) If you start up a new affected source after the 

effective date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 

Register, you must achieve compliance with the provisions of 

this subpart upon startup of your affected source. Upon 

startup, any such new affected source is not subject to the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 61, subpart F.

(d) You must meet the notification requirements in §§63.9 

and 63.11985 according to the dates specified in those sections. 

Some of the notifications must be submitted before you are 

required to comply with the emission limits and standards in 

this subpart.

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 184 of 406

§63.11880 What emission limits, operating limits, and standards 

must I meet?

(a) You must comply with each emission limit and standard

specified in Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart that applies to 

your existing affected source, and you must comply with each 

emission limit and standard specified in Tables 2, 3, and 4 to 

this subpart that applies to your new affected source.

(b) You must establish an operating limit for each 

operating parameter required to be monitored in §§63.11925, 

63.11960, 63.11970, and 63.11975. As specified in those 

sections, you must establish each operating limit as an 

operating range, minimum operating level, or maximum operating 

level. You must comply with each established operating limit.

(c) You must comply with the emission limits and standards

specified in §§63.11910 through 63.11980 that apply to your 

affected source.

General Compliance Requirements

§63.11885 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

Table 5 to this subpart specifies which parts of the 

General Provisions in subpart A of this part apply to you.

§63.11890 What are my additional general requirements for 

complying with this subpart?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 185 of 406

(a) The emission limits, operating limits, and work 

practice standards specified in this subpart apply at all times, 

including periods of SSM.

(b) At all times, you must operate and maintain your 

affected source, including associated air pollution control 

components and monitoring system components, in a manner 

consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices 

for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable 

operation and maintenance procedures are being used will be 

based on information available to the Administrator, which may 

include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of 

operation and maintenance procedures, review of operation and 

maintenance records, and inspection of the source.

(c) You must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate all 

monitoring system components according to §63.8, §63.11935(b) 

and (c), and paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) Except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, 

repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, and 

required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control 

activities (including, as applicable, calibration checks and 

required zero and span adjustments), you must operate the 

continuous monitoring system at all times the affected source is 

operating. A monitoring system malfunction is any sudden, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 186 of 406

infrequent, not reasonably preventable failure of the monitoring 

system to provide data. Monitoring system failures that are 

caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not 

malfunctions. You are required to complete monitoring system 

repairs in response to monitoring system malfunctions and to 

return the monitoring system to operation as expeditiously as 

practicable.

(2) You may not use data recorded during monitoring system 

malfunctions, repairs associated with monitoring system 

malfunctions, or required monitoring system quality assurance or 

control activities in calculations used to report emissions or 

operating levels. You must use all the data collected during 

all other required data collection periods in assessing the

operation of the control device and associated control system. 

You must report any periods for which the monitoring system 

failed to collect required data.

(d) A deviation means any of the cases listed in 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (7) of this section.

(1) Any instance in which an affected source subject to 

this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source, fails to 

meet any requirement or obligation established by this subpart, 

including, but not limited to, any emission limit, operating 

limit, or work practice standard.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 187 of 406

(2) When a performance test indicates that emissions of a 

pollutant in Table 1, 2, or 3 to this subpart are exceeding the 

emission standard for the pollutant specified in Table 1, 2, or 

3 to this subpart.

(3) When a 3-hour block average from a continuous 

emissions monitor, as required by §63.11925(c), exceeds an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(4) When the average value of a monitored operating 

parameter, based on the data averaging period for compliance 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart, does not meet the 

operating limit established in §63.11880(b).

(5) When an affected source discharges to the atmosphere 

from any of the sources specified in paragraphs (d)(5)(i) 

through (iv) of this section.

(i) A pressure relief device, as defined in §63.12005.

(ii) A bypass, as defined in §63.12005.

(iii) A closed vent system in vacuum service.

(iv) A closure device on a pressure vessel.

(6) Any instance in which the affected source subject to 

this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source, fails to 

meet any term or condition specified in paragraph (d)(6)(i) or 

(ii) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 188 of 406

(i) Any term or condition that is adopted to implement an 

applicable requirement in this subpart.

(ii) Any term or condition that is included in the 

operating permit for any affected source required to obtain such 

a permit.

(7) Any failure to collect required data, except for 

periods of monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated 

with monitoring system malfunctions, and required monitoring 

system quality assurance or quality control activities 

(including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero 

and span adjustments).

§63.11895 How do I establish an affirmative defense for 

exceedance of an emission limit during malfunction?

In response to an action to enforce the standards set forth 

in §63.11880, you may assert an affirmative defense to a claim 

for civil penalties for exceedances of such standards that are 

caused by malfunction, as defined in §63.2. Appropriate 

penalties may be assessed, however, if you fail to meet your 

burden of proving all of the requirements in the affirmative 

defense. The affirmative defense shall not be available for 

claims for injunctive relief.

(a) To establish the affirmative defense in any action to 

enforce such a limit, you must timely meet the notification 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 189 of 406

requirements in paragraph (b) of this section, and must prove by 

a preponderance of evidence that:

(1) The excess emissions:

(i) Were caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable 

failure of air pollution control and monitoring system devices, 

process components, or a process to operate in a normal or usual 

manner; and

(ii) Could not have been prevented through careful 

planning, proper design, or better operation and maintenance 

practices; and

(iii) Did not stem from any activity or event that could 

have been foreseen and avoided, or planned for; and

(iv) Were not part of a recurring pattern indicative of 

inadequate design, operation, or maintenance; and

(2) Repairs were made as expeditiously as possible when 

the applicable emission limitations were being exceeded. Off 

shift and overtime labor were used, to the extent practicable to 

make these repairs; and

(3) The frequency, amount, and duration of the excess 

emissions (including any bypass) were minimized to the maximum 

extent practicable during periods of such emissions; and

(4) If the excess emissions resulted from a bypass of 

control device components or a process, then the bypass was 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 190 of 406

unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe 

property damage; and

(5) All possible steps were taken to minimize the impact 

of the excess emissions on ambient air quality, the environment,

and human health; and

(6) All emissions monitoring and control systems were kept 

in operation, if at all possible, consistent with safety and 

good air pollution control practices; and

(7) All of the actions in response to the excess emissions 

were documented by properly signed, contemporaneous operating 

logs; and

(8) At all times, the facility was operated in a manner 

consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions; and

(9) A written root cause analysis has been prepared, the 

purpose of which is to determine, correct, and eliminate the 

primary causes of the malfunction and the excess emissions 

resulting from the malfunction event at issue. The analysis 

must also specify, using best monitoring methods and engineering 

judgment, the amount of excess emissions that were the result of 

the malfunction.

(b) The owner or operator of the facility experiencing an 

exceedance of its emission limit(s) during a malfunction must

notify the Administrator by telephone or facsimile (FAX) 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 191 of 406

transmission as soon as possible, but no later than 2 working

days after the initial occurrence of the malfunction, if it 

wishes to avail itself of an affirmative defense to civil 

penalties for that malfunction. The owner or operator seeking 

to assert an affirmative defense must also submit a written 

report to the Administrator within 45 days of the initial 

occurrence of the exceedance of the standard in §63.11880 to 

demonstrate, with all necessary supporting documentation, that 

it has met the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this 

section. The owner or operator may seek an extension of this 

deadline for up to 30 additional days by submitting a written 

request to the Administrator before the expiration of the 45-day 

period. Until a request for an extension has been approved by 

the Administrator, the owner or operator is subject to the 

requirement to submit such report within 45 days of the initial 

occurrence of the exceedance.

§63.11896 What am I required to do if I make a process change 

to a PVCPU at my affected source? 

If you make a process change to an existing affected source

that does not meet the criteria to become a new affected source 

in §63.11870(c), you must comply with the requirements in 

paragraph (a) of this section. If you make a process change to 

a new affected source, you must comply with the requirements in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 192 of 406

paragraph (b) of this section. If you must comply with the 

provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, you must 

also meet the testing and reporting requirements in paragraphs 

(c) and (d) of this section. Refer to §63.12005 for the 

definition of process changes.

(a) If you replace any components of an existing affected 

source or make a process change to an existing affected source

resulting in a change to the characteristics of any emission 

point, such that a different emission limit, operating parameter 

limit, or work practice requirement applies, and the criteria to 

become a new affected source in §63.11870(c) are not met, you 

must demonstrate that the changed or added emission point is in 

compliance with the applicable requirements for an existing 

affected source. You must demonstrate initial compliance with 

the emission limits and establish any applicable operating 

limits in §63.11880 within 180 days of the date of start-up of 

the changed process unit. You must demonstrate compliance with 

any applicable work practice standards upon startup of the 

changed process unit.

(b) If you replace any components of a new affected 

source, or make a process change to a new affected source

resulting in a change to the characteristics of any emission 

point, such that a different emission limit, operating parameter 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 193 of 406

limit, or work practice requirement applies, you must 

demonstrate that all changed emission points are in compliance 

with the applicable requirements for a new affected source. You 

must demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and 

establish any applicable operating limits in §63.11880 within

180 days of the date of startup of the changed process unit. 

You must demonstrate compliance with any applicable work 

practice standards upon startup of the changed process unit.

(c) For process changes, you must demonstrate continuous 

compliance with your emission limits and standards, operating 

limits, and work practice standards according to the procedures 

and frequency in §§63.11910 through 63.11980.

(d) For process changes, you must submit the report 

specified in §63.11985(b)(4)(iii).

Testing and Compliance Requirements

§63.11900 By what date must I conduct initial performance 

testing and monitoring, establish any applicable operating 

limits, and demonstrate initial compliance with my emission 

limits and work practice standards?

(a) For existing affected sources, you must establish any 

applicable operating limits required in §63.11880 and 

demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and 

standards specified in Tables 1, 3, and 4 to this subpart, as 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 194 of 406

applicable, no later than 180 days after the compliance date 

specified in §63.11875 and according to the applicable 

provisions in §63.7(a)(2).

(b) For existing affected sources, you must demonstrate 

initial compliance with any applicable work practice standards 

required in §63.11880 no later than the compliance date 

specified in §63.11875 and according to the applicable 

provisions in §63.7(a)(2).

(c) For new or reconstructed affected sources, you must 

establish any applicable operating limits required in §63.11880,

and demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and 

standards specified in Tables 2, 3, and 4 to this subpart, as 

applicable, no later than 180 days after the effective date of 

publication of the final rule in the Federal Register or within 

180 days after startup of the source, whichever is later, 

according to §63.7(a)(2)(ix).

(d) For new and reconstructed affected sources, you must 

demonstrate initial compliance with any applicable work practice 

standards required in §63.11880 no later than the startup date 

of the affected source or the effective date of publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register, whichever is later, and 

according to the applicable provisions in §63.7(a)(2).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 195 of 406

(e) If you demonstrate initial compliance using a 

performance test and a force majeure is about to occur, occurs, 

or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim of force 

majeure, then you must follow the procedures in §63.7(a)(4).

§63.11905 When must I conduct subsequent performance testing 

and monitoring to demonstrate continuous compliance?

Following the date of your initial demonstration of 

compliance in §63.11900, you must conduct subsequent performance 

testing and monitoring to demonstrate continuous compliance with 

your emission limits, operating limits, and work practice 

standards according to the procedures and frequency in 

§§63.11910 through 63.11980. If you make a process change as 

specified in §63.11896, such that a different emission limit or 

operating parameter limit applies, you must conduct a 

performance test according to §63.11896.

§63.11910 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for storage vessels?

You must comply with the requirements specified in Table 4 

to this subpart for each storage vessel.

(a) For each fixed roof storage vessel used to comply with 

the requirements specified in Table 4 to this subpart, you must 

meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this 

section. If you elect to use a fixed roof storage vessel vented 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 196 of 406

to a closed vent system and control device, the closed vent 

system and control device must meet the requirements in 

§§63.11925 through 63.11950.

(1) Design requirements. 

(i) The fixed roof must be installed in a manner such that 

there are no visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces 

between roof section joints or between the interface of the roof 

edge and the tank wall.

(ii) Each opening in the fixed roof must be equipped with 

a closure device designed to operate such that when the closure 

device is secured in the closed position there are no visible 

cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces in the closure device 

or between the perimeter of the opening and the closure device.

(2) Operating requirements. 

(i) Except as specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this 

section, the fixed roof must be installed with each closure 

device secured in the closed position.

(ii) Opening of closure devices or removal of the fixed 

roof is allowed under conditions specified in paragraphs

(a)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.

(A) A closure device may be opened or the roof may be 

removed when needed to provide access.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 197 of 406

(B) A conservation vent that vents to the atmosphere is 

allowed during normal operations to maintain the tank internal 

operating pressure within tank design specifications. Normal 

operating conditions that may require these devices to open are 

during those times when the internal pressure of the storage 

vessel is outside the internal pressure operating range for the 

storage vessel as a result of loading or unloading operations or 

diurnal ambient temperature fluctuations.

(3) Inspection and monitoring requirements.

(i) Visually inspect the fixed roof and its closure 

devices for defects initially and at least once per calendar 

year except as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this 

section. Defects include, but are not limited to, visible 

cracks, holes, or gaps in the roof sections or between the roof 

and the wall of the storage vessel; broken, cracked, or 

otherwise damaged seals or gaskets on closure devices; and 

broken or missing hatches, access covers, caps, or other closure 

devices.

(ii) The inspection requirement specified in paragraph 

(a)(3)(i) of this section does not apply to parts of the fixed 

roof that you determine are unsafe to inspect because operating 

personnel would be exposed to an imminent or potential danger as 

a consequence of complying with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 198 of 406

section, provided you comply with the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.

(A) You prepare and maintain at the plant site written 

documentation that identifies all parts of the fixed roof that 

are unsafe to inspect and explains why such parts are unsafe to 

inspect.

(B) You develop and implement a written plan and schedule 

to conduct inspections the next time alternative storage 

capacity becomes available and the storage vessel can be emptied 

or temporarily removed from service, as necessary, to complete 

the inspection. The required inspections must be performed as 

frequently as practicable but do not need to be performed more 

than once per calendar year. You must maintain a copy of the 

written plan and schedule at the plant site.

(4) Repair requirements. 

(i) Make first efforts to repair a defect no later than 5 

days after detection, and complete repair as soon as possible,

but no later than 45 days after detection. You must comply with 

the requirements in this paragraph (a)(4)(i) except as provided 

in paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.

(ii) Repair of a defect may be delayed beyond 45 days if 

you determine that repair of the defect requires emptying or 

temporary removal from service of the storage vessel and no 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 199 of 406

alternative storage capacity is available at the site to accept 

the removed material. In this case, repair the defect the next 

time alternative storage capacity becomes available and the 

storage vessel can be emptied or temporarily removed from 

service.

(b) If you elect to use an internal floating roof storage 

vessel or external floating roof storage vessel to comply with 

the requirements specified in Table 4 to this subpart, you must 

meet all requirements of §§63.1060 through 63.1067 of subpart WW 

of this part for internal floating roof storage vessels or 

external floating roof storage vessels, as applicable.

(c) For each pressure vessel used to comply with the 

requirements specified in Table 4 to this subpart, you must meet 

the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this 

section.

(1) Whenever the pressure vessel is in hazardous air 

pollutants (HAP) service, you must operate the pressure vessel 

as a closed system that does not vent to the atmosphere, e.g., 

during filling, emptying, and purging. The vent stream during 

filling, emptying, and purging must meet the process vent 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, as applicable, 

by routing to a closed vent system and control device that is 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 200 of 406

designed and operated in accordance with §§63.11925 through 

63.11950.

(2) Each opening in the pressure vessel must be equipped 

with a closure device designed to operate such that when the 

closure device is secured in the closed position there are no 

visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open spaces in the closure 

device or between the perimeter of the opening and the closure 

device.

(3) All potential leak interfaces must be monitored 

annually for leaks using the procedures specified in §63.11915.

You must comply with the recordkeeping provisions specified in 

§63.11990(b) and the reporting provisions specified in 

§63.11985(a)(1), (b)(1), and (c)(8). For any leak detected, you 

must submit the report specified in paragraph (c)(4) of this 

section.

(4) Pressure vessel closure devices must not discharge to 

the atmosphere. Any such release (e.g., leak) constitutes a 

violation of this rule. Within 10 days of any such release, you 

must submit to the Administrator the report specified in 

§63.11985(c)(8). This report is required even if you elect to 

follow the procedures specified in §63.11895 to establish an 

affirmative defense.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 201 of 406

§63.11915 What are my compliance requirements for equipment 

leaks?

For equipment (as defined in §63.12005) in HAP service, you 

must comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (c) 

of this section.

(a) Requirement for certain equipment in subpart UU of 

this part. You must comply with §§63.1020 through 63.1025, 

§63.1027, and §§63.1029 through 63.1039 of subpart UU of this 

part. 

(b) Requirements for pumps, compressors, and agitator 

seals. You must meet the requirements specified for each type 

of equipment in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section. 

For each type of equipment specified in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (5) of this section, you must also meet the requirements 

of paragraph (a) of this section.

(1) Rotating pumps. HAP emissions from seals on all 

rotating pumps in HAP service are to be minimized by installing 

sealless pumps, pumps with double mechanical seals or equivalent

equipment, or procedures approved by the Administrator. If 

double mechanical seals are used, HAP emissions from the seals 

are to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two 

seals so that any leak that occurs is into the pump; by ducting 

any HAP between the two seals through a control system from 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 202 of 406

which the concentration of HAP in the exhaust gases does not 

exceed 10 parts per million ; or equivalent equipment or 

procedures approved by the Administrator. 

(2) Reciprocating pumps. HAP emissions from seals on all 

reciprocating pumps in HAP service are to be minimized by 

installing double outboard seals, or equivalent equipment or 

procedures approved by the Administrator. If double outboard 

seals are used, HAP emissions from the seals are to be minimized 

by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any 

leak that occurs is into the pump; by ducting any HAP between 

the two seals through a control system from which the 

concentration of HAP in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 

ppm; or equivalent equipment or procedures approved by the 

Administrator. 

(3) Rotating compressors. HAP emissions from seals on all 

rotating compressors in HAP service are to be minimized by 

installing compressors with double mechanical seals, or 

equivalent equipment, or procedures approved by the 

Administrator. If double mechanical seals are used, HAP

emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining the 

pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is 

into the compressor; by ducting any HAP between the two seals 

through a control system from which the concentration of HAP in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 203 of 406

the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent 

equipment or procedures approved by the Administrator. 

(4) Reciprocating compressors. HAP emissions from seals 

on all reciprocating compressors in HAP service are to be 

minimized by installing double outboard seals, or equivalent

equipment, or procedures approved by the Administrator. If 

double outboard seals are used, HAP emissions from the seals are 

to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two 

seals so that any leak that occurs is into the compressor; by 

ducting any HAP between the two seals through a control system 

from which concentration of HAP in the exhaust gases does not 

exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent equipment or procedures approved by 

the Administrator. 

(5) Agitators. HAP emissions from seals on all agitators 

in HAP service are to be minimized by installing agitators with 

double mechanical seals, or equivalent equipment, or procedures 

approved by the Administrator. If double mechanical seals are 

used, HAP emissions from the seals are to be minimized by 

maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak 

that occurs is into the agitated vessel; by ducting any HAP

between the two seals through a control system from which the 

concentration of HAP in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 204 of 406

ppm; or equivalent equipment or procedures approved by the 

Administrator.

(c) Requirements for pressure relief devices. For 

pressure relief devices, you must meet the requirements of this 

paragraph (c) and paragraph (a) of this section. Any release to 

the atmosphere from a pressure relief device in HAP service, as 

defined in §63.12005, constitutes a violation of this rule. You 

must install, maintain, and operate release indicators as 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section unless 

the pressure relief device meets the process vent emission 

limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart by routing to a closed 

vent system and control device designed and operated in 

accordance with the requirements in §§63.11925 through 63.11950. 

For any pressure relief devices, you must comply with the 

recordkeeping provisions in §63.11990(c) and reporting 

provisions in §§63.11985(a)(2), (b)(2), and (c)(8). For any 

release, you must submit the report specified in 

§63.11985(c)(8), as described in paragraph (c)(3) of this 

section.

(1) A release indicator must be properly installed on each 

pressure relief device in such a way that it will indicate when 

an emission release has occurred.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 205 of 406

(2) Each indicator must be equipped with an alert system 

that will notify an operator immediately and automatically when 

the pressure relief device is open. The alert must be located 

such that the signal is detected and recognized easily by an 

operator.

(3) For any instance that the release indicator indicates 

that a pressure relief device is open, you must notify operators 

that a pressure release has occurred, and, within 10 days of the 

release, you must submit to the Administrator the report 

specified in §63.11985(c)(8). This report is required even if 

you elect to follow the procedures specified in §63.11895(b) to 

establish an affirmative defense.

§63.11920 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for heat exchange systems?

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, 

you must perform monitoring to identify leaks of total 

strippable volatile organic compounds from each heat exchange 

system subject to the requirements of this subpart according to 

the procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section. 

(1) Monitoring locations for closed-loop recirculation 

heat exchange systems. You must collect and analyze a sample 

from the location(s) described in either paragraph (a)(1)(i) or 

(ii) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 206 of 406

(i) Each cooling tower return line prior to exposure to 

air for each heat exchange system.

(ii) Selected heat exchanger exit line(s) so that each 

heat exchanger or group of heat exchangers within a heat 

exchange system is covered by the selected monitoring 

location(s).

(2) Monitoring locations for once-through heat exchange 

systems. You must collect and analyze a sample from the 

location(s) described in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. 

You may also elect to collect and analyze an additional sample 

from the location(s) described in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this 

section.

(i) Selected heat exchanger exit line(s) so that each heat 

exchanger or group of heat exchangers within a heat exchange 

system is covered by the selected monitoring location(s).

(ii) The inlet water feed line for a once-through heat 

exchange system prior to any heat exchanger. If multiple heat 

exchange systems use the same water feed (i.e., inlet water from 

the same primary water source), you may monitor at one 

representative location and use the monitoring results for that 

sampling location for all heat exchange systems that use that 

same water feed.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 207 of 406

(3) Monitoring method. Determine the total strippable 

volatile organic compounds concentration at each monitoring 

location using the analytical method specified in either 

paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.

(i) Determine the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (in parts per million by volume) as 

methane from the air stripping testing system using ―Air 

Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for Determination of 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water Sources,‖ 

Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, January 31, 2003 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) using a flame ionization 

detector analyzer.

(ii) Determine the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (in parts per billion by weight) in the 

cooling water using Method 8021B, ―Aromatic and Halogenated 

Volatiles by Gas Chromatography Using Photoionization and/or 

Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors,‖ dated December 1996

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14). The target list of 

compounds shall be generated based on a pre-survey sample and 

analysis by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and process 

knowledge to include all compounds that can potentially leak 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 208 of 406

into the cooling water. If Method 8021B, ―Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas Chromatography Using

Photoionization and/or Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors,‖ 

dated December 1996 (incorporated by reference, see §63.14) is 

not applicable for all compounds that can potentially leak into 

the cooling water for a given heat exchange system, you cannot 

use this monitoring method for that heat exchange system.

(4) Monitoring frequency. Determine the total strippable 

volatile organic compounds concentration at each monitoring 

location at the frequencies specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) 

through (iii) of this section.

(i) For heat exchange systems for which you have not 

delayed repair of any leaks, monitor at the frequencies 

specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.

(A) For heat exchange systems at an existing affected 

source, monitor at least monthly. You may elect to monitor more 

frequently than the minimum frequency specified in this 

paragraph (a)(4)(i)(A).

(B) For heat exchange systems at a new affected source, 

monitor at least once every 12 hours. You may elect to monitor 

more frequently than the minimum frequency specified in this 

paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 209 of 406

(ii) For heat exchange systems for which you have delayed 

repair, as provided in paragraph (f) of this section, monitor at 

least monthly. You may elect to monitor more frequently than 

the minimum frequency specified in this paragraph (a)(4)(ii).

(iii) If you elected to monitor the inlet water feed line

for a once-through heat exchange system, as provided in 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, you must monitor the inlet 

water feed line at the same frequency used to monitor the heat 

exchange exit line(s), as required in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of 

this section.

(b) A heat exchange system is exempt from the monitoring 

requirements in paragraph (a) of this section if it meets the 

criteria in either paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section.

(1) All heat exchangers within the heat exchange system 

operate with the minimum pressure on the cooling water side at 

least 35 kilopascals greater than the maximum pressure on the 

process side.

(2) The heat exchange system does not contain any heat 

exchangers.

(c) The leak action level is specified in paragraphs 

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

(1) For a heat exchange system at an existing affected 

source, the leak action level is a total strippable volatile 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 210 of 406

organic compounds concentration (as methane) in the stripping 

gas of 2.9 parts per million by volume or a total strippable 

volatile organic compounds concentration in the cooling water 

of 38 parts per billion by weight.

(2) For a heat exchange system at a new affected source, 

the leak action level is a total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (as methane) in the stripping gas of 2.3

parts per million by volume or a total strippable volatile 

organic compounds concentration in the cooling water of 30 

parts per billion by weight.

(d) A leak is defined as specified in paragraph (d)(1) or 

(2) of this section, as applicable.

(1) For once-through heat exchange systems for which you 

monitor the inlet water feed, as described in paragraph 

(a)(2)(ii) of this section, a leak is detected if the difference 

in the measurement value of the sample taken from a location 

specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section and the 

measurement value of the corresponding sample taken from the 

location specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section 

equals or exceeds the leak action level.

(2) For all other heat exchange systems, a leak is 

detected if a measurement value taken according to the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 211 of 406

requirements in paragraph (a) of this section equals or exceeds 

the leak action level.

(e) If a leak is detected, you must repair the leak to 

reduce the measured concentration to below the applicable action 

level as soon as practicable, but no later than 45 days after 

identifying the leak, except as specified in paragraphs (f) and 

(g) of this section. Repair includes re-monitoring as specified 

in paragraph (a) of this section to verify that the measured 

concentration is below the applicable action level. Actions 

that you can take to achieve repair include but are not limited 

to any action specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this 

section.

(1) Physical modifications to the leaking heat exchanger, 

such as welding the leak or replacing a tube.

(2) Blocking the leaking tube within the heat exchanger.

(3) Changing the pressure so that water flows into the 

process fluid.

(4) Replacing the heat exchanger or heat exchanger bundle.

(5) Isolating, bypassing, or otherwise removing the 

leaking heat exchanger from service until it is otherwise 

repaired.

(f) If you detect a leak when monitoring a cooling tower 

return line or heat exchanger exit line under paragraph (a) of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 212 of 406

this section, you may conduct additional monitoring following 

the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section to further 

isolate each heat exchanger or group of heat exchangers in 

regulated material service within the heat exchange system for 

which the leak was detected. If you do not detect any leaks 

when conducting additional monitoring for each heat exchanger or 

group of heat exchangers , the heat exchange system is excluded 

from repair requirements in paragraph (d) of this section.

(g) The delay of repair action level is defined as either 

a total strippable volatile organic compounds concentration (as 

methane) in the stripping gas of 29 parts per million by volume

or a total strippable volatile organic compounds concentration

in the cooling water of 380 parts per billion by weight. You 

may delay the repair of a leaking heat exchanger when one of the 

conditions in paragraphs (g)(1) or (2) of this section is met. 

You must determine if a delay of repair is necessary as soon as 

practicable, but no later than 45 days after first identifying 

the leak.

(1) If the repair is technically infeasible without a 

shutdown and the total strippable volatile organic compounds

concentration is initially and remains less than the delay of 

repair action level for all monitoring periods during the delay 

of repair, you may delay repair until the next scheduled 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 213 of 406

shutdown of the heat exchange system. If, during subsequent 

monitoring, the total strippable volatile organic compounds

concentration is equal to or greater than the delay of repair 

action level, you must repair the leak within 30 days of the 

monitoring event in which the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds was equal to or exceeded the delay of repair action 

level.

(2) If the necessary equipment, parts, or personnel are 

not available and the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration (as methane) is initially and remains 

less than the delay of repair action level for all monitoring 

periods during the delay of repair, you may delay the repair for 

a maximum of 120 days from the day the leak was first 

identified. You must demonstrate that the necessary equipment,

parts, or personnel were not available. If, during subsequent 

monthly monitoring, the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration is equal to or greater than the delay of 

repair action level, you must repair the leak within 30 days of 

the monitoring event in which the leak was equal to or exceeded 

the total strippable volatile organic compounds delay of repair 

action level.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 214 of 406

(h) To delay the repair under paragraph (g) of this 

section, you must record the information in paragraphs (h)(1) 

through (h)(4) of this section.

(1) The reason(s) for delaying repair.

(2) A schedule for completing the repair as soon as 

practical.

(3) The date and concentration of the leak as first 

identified and the results of all subsequent monitoring events 

during the delay of repair.

(4) An estimate of the potential emissions from the 

leaking heat exchange system following the procedures in 

paragraphs (g)(4)(i) and (g)(4)(ii) of this section.

(i) Determine the total strippable volatile organic 

compounds concentration in the cooling water, in parts per 

billion by weight. If the Modified El Paso Method is used, 

calculate the total strippable volatile organic compounds 

concentration in the cooling water using equation 7-1 from ―Air 

Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for Determination of 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water Sources,‖ 

Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling Procedures 

Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, prepared by Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, January 31, 2003 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) and the total strippable 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 215 of 406

volatile organic compounds concentration measured in the 

stripped air.

(ii) Calculate the emissions for the leaking heat exchange 

system by multiplying the volatile organic compounds

concentration in the cooling water, parts per billion by weight, 

by the flow rate of the cooling water at the selected monitoring 

location and by the expected duration of the delay. The flow 

rate may be based on direct measurement, pump curves, heat 

balance calculations, or other engineering methods.

§63.11925 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for process vents?

Each process vent must meet the requirements of paragraphs 

(a) through (f) of this section.

(a) Emission limits. Each process vent stream must meet 

the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart prior to the 

vent stream being exposed to the atmosphere. The emission 

limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart apply at all times.

(b) Closed vent systems and control devices. Each control 

device used to comply with paragraph (a) of this section must 

meet the requirements of §§63.11925 and 63.11940, and all 

process vent streams treated by the control device must be 

routed through a closed vent system meeting the requirements in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 216 of 406

§63.11930. You must not use a flare to comply with the emission 

limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(c) General monitoring requirements. Except as provided 

in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section, for each 

control device used to comply with the process vent emission 

limit specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you must 

install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring 

systemsCPMS to monitor each operating parameter specified in 

§63.11940(a) through (i) to comply with your operating limit(s) 

required in §63.11880(b)

(1) Hydrogen chloride continuous emission monitoring 

system (CEMS). According to the schedule specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, 

respectively, new affected sources must comply with paragraph 

(c)(1)(i) of this section, and existing affected sources must 

comply with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, in lieu of 

establishing operating limits in §63.11880(b) and using CPMS to 

comply with the operating limits, as specified in §63.11940(a) 

through (i).

(i) New affected sources, beginning no more than 6-months 

after the date of promulgation of a performance specification 

for hydrogen chloride CEMS, must install and operate a hydrogen 

chloride CEMS to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 217 of 406

with the hydrogen chloride emission limit for process vents, as 

specified in paragraphs (d)(2) through (4) and (e) of this 

section.

(ii) Existing affected sources, upon promulgation of a 

performance specification for hydrogen chloride CEMS, have the 

option to install a hydrogen chloride CEMS to demonstrate 

initial and continuous compliance with the hydrogen chloride

emission limit for process vents, as specified in paragraphs (d) 

and (e) of this section.

(2) Dioxin/furan CEMS. According to the schedule 

specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section, 

respectively, new affected sources must comply with paragraph 

(c)(2)(i) of this section, and existing affected sources must 

comply with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, in lieu of 

establishing operating limits in §63.11880(b) and using CPMS to 

comply with the operating limits as specified in §63.11940(a) 

through (i):

(i) New affected sources, beginning no more than 6 months 

after the date of promulgation of a performance specification 

for dioxin/furan CEMS, must install and operate a dioxin/furan 

CEMS to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the 

dioxin/furan emission limit for process vents, as specified in 

paragraphs (d)(2) through (4) and (e) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 218 of 406

(ii) Existing sources, upon promulgation of a performance 

specification for dioxin/furan CEMS, have the option to install 

a dioxin/furan CEMS to demonstrate initial and continuous 

compliance with the dioxins/furan emission limit for process 

vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) through (4) and (e) of 

this section. 

(3) Total hydrocarbon CEMS. In lieu of establishing 

operating limits in §63.11880(b) and using CPMS to comply with 

the operating limits as specified in §63.11940(a) through (i), 

new and existing affected sources have the option to install a 

total hydrocarbon CEMS to demonstrate initial and continuous 

compliance with the total organic HAP emission limit for process 

vents, as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) through (4) and (e) of 

this section.

(d) Initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance 

with the process vent emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart, you must comply with paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of 

this section.

(1) You must conduct an initial inspection as specified in 

§63.11930(d) for each closed vent system.

(2) For each CEMS and CPMS required or that you elect to 

use as specified in paragraph (c) of this section, you must 

prepare the quality control program and site-specific 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 219 of 406

performance evaluation test plan specified in §63.11935(b) and 

site-specific monitoring plan specified in §63.11935(c), 

respectively. 

(3) For each CEMS and CPMS specified in paragraph (d)(2) 

of this section, you must install, operate, and maintain the 

CEMS and CPMS as specified in §§63.11935(b) and (c), 

respectively, and you must conduct an initial site-specific 

performance evaluation test according to your site-specific 

monitoring plan and §§63.11935(b)(3) and (c)(4), respectively.

(4) For each emission limit for which you use a CEMS to 

demonstrate compliance, you must demonstrate initial compliance 

with the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based 

on 3-hour block averages of CEMS data collected at the minimum 

frequency specified in §§63.11935(b)(2) and 63.11890(c), and 

calculated using the data reduction method specified in 

§63.11935(e). For a CEMS used on a batch operation, you may use 

a data averaging period based on an operating block in lieu of 

the 3-hour averaging period.

(5) For each emission limit for which you do not use a 

CEMS to demonstrate compliance, you must meet the requirements 

of paragraphs (d)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section.

(i) You must conduct an initial performance test according 

to the requirements in §63.11945 to demonstrate compliance with 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 220 of 406

the total organic HAP, vinyl chloride, hydrogen chloride, or

dioxin/furan emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(ii) During the performance test specified in paragraph 

(d)(5)(i) of this section, for each CPMS installed and operated 

as specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, you must 

establish an operating limit as the operating parameter range, 

minimum operating parameter level, or maximum operating 

parameter level specified in §63.11935(d). Each operating limit 

must be based on the data averaging period for compliance 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart using data collected at the 

minimum frequency specified in §§63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c),

and calculated using the data reduction method specified in 

§63.11935(e). For a CPMS used on a batch operation, you may use 

a data averaging period based on an operating block in lieu of 

the averaging period specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(e) Continuous compliance. To demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart for each process vent, you must comply with paragraphs 

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

(1) You must meet the requirements in §63.11930 for each 

closed vent system.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 221 of 406

(2) You must operate and maintain each CEMS and CPMS 

required in paragraph (c) of this section as specified in 

§63.11935(b) and (c), respectively.

(3) For each emission limit for which you use a CEMS to 

demonstrate compliance, you must meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) You must conduct a periodic site-specific CEMS 

performance evaluation test according to your quality control 

program and site-specific performance evaluation test plan 

specified in §63.11935(b)(1).

(ii) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based on 3-hour 

block averages of CEMS data, the minimum data collection 

frequency specified in §§63.11935(b)(2) and 63.11890(c), and the 

data reduction method specified in §63.11935(e). For a CEMS 

used on a batch operation, you may use a data averaging period 

based on an operating block in lieu of the 3-hour averaging 

period.

(4) For each emission limit for which you do not use a 

CEMS to demonstrate compliance, you must meet the requirements 

of paragraphs (e)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 222 of 406

(i) Except for hydrogen chloride, you must conduct an 

annual performance test according to the requirements in 

§63.11945 for each pollutant in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(ii) For each CPMS operated and maintained as specified in 

paragraph (e)(2) of this section, you must meet the requirements 

specified in paragraphs (e)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) of this 

section.

(A) You must conduct periodic site-specific CPMS

performance evaluation tests according to your site-specific 

monitoring plan and §63.11935(c).

(B) For each control device being monitored, you must 

continuously collect CPMS data consistent with §63.11890(c) and 

your site-specific monitoring plan. You must continuously 

determine the average value of each monitored operating 

parameter based on the data collection and reduction methods 

specified in §§63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11935(e), and the 

applicable data averaging period for compliance specified in 

Table 6 to this subpart for all periods the process is 

operating. For a CPMS used on a batch operation, you may use a 

data averaging period based on an operating block in lieu of the 

averaging periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(C) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each 

operating limit established in paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 223 of 406

section using these average values calculated in paragraph 

(e)(4)(ii)(B) of this section.(5) Each closed vent systems and 

control device used to comply with an emission limit in Table 1 

or 2 to this subpart must be operated at all times when 

emissions are vented to, or collected by, these systems or 

devices. 

(f) To demonstrate compliance with the dioxin/furan toxic 

equivalency emission limit specified in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart, you must determine dioxin/furan toxic equivalency as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Measure the concentration of each dioxin/furan tetrathrough octachlorinated-congener emitted using Method 23 at 40 

CFR part 60, appendix A-7.

(2) For each dioxin/furan (tetra-through octachlorinated) 

congener measured in accordance with paragraph (f)(1) of this 

section, multiply the congener concentration by its 

corresponding toxic equivalency factor specified in Table 7 to 

this subpart.

(3) Sum the products calculated in accordance with 

paragraph (f)(2) of this section to obtain the total 

concentration of dioxins/furans emitted in terms of toxic 

equivalency.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 224 of 406

§63.11930 What requirements must I meet for closed vent 

systems?

(a) General. To route emissions from process vents 

subject to the HAP emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart to a control device, you must use a closed vent system 

and meet the requirements of this section and all provisions 

referenced in this section. However, if you operate and 

maintain your closed vent system in vacuum service as defined in 

§63.12005, you must meet the requirements in paragraph (h) of 

this section and are not required to meet the requirements in 

paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section.

(b) Collection of emissions. Each closed vent system must 

be designed and operated to collect the HAP vapors from the 

process vent, and to route the collected vapors to a control 

device.

(c) Bypass. For each closed vent system that contains a 

bypass as defined in §63.12005 (e.g., diverting a vent stream 

away from the control device or causing air intrusion into the 

control device), you must not discharge to the atmosphere 

through the bypass. Any such release constitutes a violation of 

this rule. The use of any bypass diverted to the atmosphere 

during a performance test invalidates the performance test. You 

must comply with the provisions of either paragraph (c)(1) or 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 225 of 406

(2) of this section for each closed vent system that contains a 

bypass that could divert a vent stream to the atmosphere.

(1) Bypass flow indicator. Install, maintain, and operate 

a flow indicator as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through 

(iv) of this section. 

(i) The flow indicator must be properly installed at the 

entrance to any bypass.

(ii) The flow indicator must be equipped with an alarm 

system that will alert an operator immediately, and 

automatically when flow is detected in the bypass. The alarm 

must be located such that the alert is detected and recognized 

easily by an operator.

(iii) If the alarm is triggered, you must immediately 

initiate procedures to identify the cause of the alarm. If any 

closed vent system has discharged to the atmosphere through a 

vent or bypass, you must initiate procedures to stop the bypass 

discharge.

(iv) For any instances where the flow indicator alarm is 

triggered, you must submit to the Administrator within 10 days 

of the discharge the report specified in §63.11985(c)(8). This 

report is required even if you elect to follow the procedures 

specified in §63.11895 to establish an affirmative defense and 

submit the reports specified in §63.11985(c)(4). 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 226 of 406

(2) Bypass valve configuration. Secure the bypass valve 

in the non-diverting position with a car-seal or a lock-and-key 

type configuration.

(i) You must visually inspect the seal or closure 

mechanism at least once every month to verify that the valve is 

maintained in the non-diverting position, and the vent stream is 

not diverted through the bypass. A broken seal or closure 

mechanism or a diverted valve constitutes a violation from the 

emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. You must 

maintain the records specified in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this 

section.

(ii) For each seal or closure mechanism, you must comply 

with either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.

(A) For each instance that you change the bypass valve to 

the diverting position, you must submit to the Administrator 

within 10 days of the action the report specified in 

§63.11985(c)(8). This report is required even if you elect to 

follow the procedures specified in §63.11895 to establish an 

affirmative defense and submit the reports specified in 

§63.11985(c)(4).

(B) You must install, maintain, and operate a bypass flow 

indicator as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this 

section and you must meet the requirements in paragraph 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 227 of 406

(c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section for each instance that the 

flow indicator alarm is triggered.

(d) Closed vent system inspection and monitoring 

requirements. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, you must inspect each closed vent system as specified 

in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section.

(1) Hard-piping inspection. If the closed vent system is 

constructed of hard-piping, you must comply with the 

requirements specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this 

section.

(i) Conduct an initial inspection according to the 

procedures in paragraph (e) of this section.

(ii) Conduct annual inspections for visible, audible, or 

olfactory indications of leaks.

(2) Ductwork inspection. If the closed vent system is 

constructed of ductwork, you must conduct initial and annual 

inspections according to the procedures in paragraph (e) of this 

section.

(3) Equipment that is unsafe-to-inspect. You may 

designate any parts of the closed vent system as unsafe-toinspect if you determine that personnel would be exposed to an 

immediate danger as a consequence of complying with the initial 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 228 of 406

and annual closed vent system inspection requirements of this 

subpart.

(e) Closed vent system inspection procedures. Except as 

provided in paragraph (e)(4) of this section, you must comply 

with all provisions of paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3) of this 

section.

(1) General. Inspections must be performed during periods 

when HAP is being collected by or vented through the closed vent 

system. A leak is indicated by an instrument reading greater 

than 500 parts per million by volume above background or by 

visual inspection. 

(2) Inspection procedures. Each closed vent system 

subject to this paragraph (e)(2) must be inspected according to 

the procedures specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (vii) 

of this section.

(i) Inspections must be conducted in accordance with 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, except as otherwise 

specified in this section.

(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this 

section, the detection instrument must meet the performance 

criteria of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, except 

the instrument response factor criteria in section 8.1.1.2 of 

Method 21 must be for the representative composition of the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 229 of 406

process fluid and not of each individual volatile organic 

compound in the stream. For process streams that contain 

nitrogen, air, water, or other inerts that are not organic HAP 

or volatile organic compound, the representative stream response 

factor must be determined on an inert-free basis. You may 

determine the response factor at any concentration for which you

will monitor for leaks.

(iii) If no instrument is available at the plant site that 

will meet the performance criteria of Method 21 at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-7 specified in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this 

section, the instrument readings may be adjusted by multiplying 

by the representative response factor of the process fluid, 

calculated on an inert-free basis as described in paragraph 

(e)(2)(ii) of this section.

(iv) The detection instrument must be calibrated before 

use on each day of its use by the procedures specified in Method 

21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.

(v) Calibration gases must be as specified in paragraphs 

(e)(2)(v)(A) through (D) of this section.

(A) Zero air (less than 10 parts per million by volume 

hydrocarbon in air).

(B) Mixtures of methane in air at a concentration less 

than 10,000 parts per million by volume. A calibration gas 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 230 of 406

other than methane in air may be used if the instrument does not 

respond to methane or if the instrument does not meet the 

performance criteria specified in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this 

section. In such cases, the calibration gas may be a mixture of 

one or more of the compounds to be measured in air.

(C) If the detection instrument‘s design allows for 

multiple calibration scales, then the lower scale must be 

calibrated with a calibration gas that is no higher than 2,500 

parts per million by volume.

(D) Perform a calibration drift assessment, at a minimum, 

at the end of each monitoring day. Check the instrument using 

the same calibration gas(es) that were used to calibrate the 

instrument before use. Follow the procedures specified in 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, Section 10.1, except 

do not adjust the meter readout to correspond to the calibration 

gas value. Record the instrument reading for each scale used as 

specified in paragraph (g)(4) of this section. Divide these 

readings by the initial calibration values for each scale and 

multiply by 100 to express the calibration drift as a 

percentage. If any calibration drift assessment shows a 

negative drift of more than 10 percent from the initial 

calibration value, then all equipment monitored since the last 

calibration with instrument readings below the appropriate leak 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 231 of 406

definition and above the leak definition multiplied by the value 

specified in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(D)(1) of this section must be 

re-monitored. If any calibration drift assessment shows a 

positive drift of more than 10 percent from the initial 

calibration value, then, at your discretion, all equipment since 

the last calibration with instrument readings above the 

appropriate leak definition and below the leak definition 

multiplied by the value specified in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(D)(2) 

of this section may be re-monitored.

(1) 100 minus the percent of negative drift, divided by 

100.

(2) 100 plus the percent of positive drift, divided by 

100.

(vi) You may elect to adjust or not adjust instrument 

readings for background. If you elect not to adjust readings 

for background, all such instrument readings must be compared 

directly to 500 parts per million by volume to determine whether 

there is a leak. If you elect to adjust instrument readings for 

background, you must measure background concentration using the 

procedures in this section. You must subtract the background 

reading from the maximum concentration indicated by the 

instrument.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 232 of 406

(vii) If you elect to adjust for background, the 

arithmetic difference between the maximum concentration 

indicated by the instrument and the background level must be 

compared with 500 parts per million by volume for determining 

whether there is a leak.

(3) Instrument probe. The instrument probe must be 

traversed around all potential leak interfaces as described in 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.

(4) Unsafe-to-inspect written plan requirements. For 

equipment designated as unsafe-to-inspect according to the 

provisions of paragraph (d)(3) of this section, you must 

maintain and follow a written plan that requires inspecting the 

equipment as frequently as practical during safe-to-inspect 

times, but not more frequently than the annual inspection 

schedule otherwise applicable. You must still repair unsafe-toinspect equipment according to the procedures in paragraph (f) 

of this section if a leak is detected.

(f) Closed vent system leak repair provisions. The 

provisions of this paragraph (f) apply to closed vent systems 

collecting HAP from an affected source.

(1) Leak repair general for hard-piping. If there are 

visible, audible, or olfactory indications of leaks at the time 

of the annual visual inspections required by paragraph 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 233 of 406

(d)(1)(ii) of this section, you must follow the procedure 

specified in either paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.

(i) You must eliminate the leak.

(ii) You must monitor the equipment according to the 

procedures in paragraph (e) of this section and comply with the 

leak repair provisions in paragraph (f)(2) of this section.

(2) Leak repair schedule. Leaks must be repaired as soon 

as practical, except as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section. 

(i) A first attempt at repair must be made no later than 5 

days after the leak is detected.

(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section, repairs must be completed no later than 15 days after 

the leak is detected or at the beginning of the next 

introduction of vapors to the system, whichever is later.

(3) Delay of repair. Delay of repair of a closed vent 

system for which leaks have been detected is allowed if repair 

within 15 days after a leak is detected is technically 

infeasible or unsafe without a closed vent system shutdown, as 

defined in §63.12005, or if you determine that emissions 

resulting from immediate repair would be greater than the 

emissions likely to result from delay of repair. Repair of such 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 234 of 406

equipment must be completed as soon as practical, but not later 

than the end of the next closed vent system shutdown.

(g) Closed vent system records. For closed vent systems, 

you must record the information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) 

through (5) of this section, as applicable.

(1) Bypass records. For each closed vent system that 

contains a bypass that could divert a vent stream away from the 

control device and to the atmosphere, or cause air intrusion 

into the control device, you must keep a record of the 

information specified in either paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of 

this section, as applicable.

(i) You must maintain records of any alarms triggered 

because flow was detected in the bypass, including the date and 

time the alarm was triggered, the duration of the flow in the 

bypass, as well as records of the times of all periods when the 

vent stream is diverted from the control device or the flow 

indicator is not operating.

(ii) Where a seal mechanism is used to comply with 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section, hourly records of flow are not 

required. In such cases, you must record that the monthly 

visual inspection of the seals or closure mechanisms has been 

done, and must record the occurrence of all periods when the 

seal mechanism is broken, the bypass valve position has changed, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 235 of 406

or the key for a lock-and-key type lock has been checked out, 

and records of any car-seal that has been broken.

(2) Inspection records. For each instrumental or visual 

inspection conducted in accordance with paragraph (d)(1) or (2) 

of this section for closed vent systems collecting HAP from an 

affected source during which no leaks are detected, you must 

record that the inspection was performed, the date of the 

inspection, and a statement that no leaks were detected.

(3) Leak records. When a leak is detected from a closed

vent system collecting HAP from an affected source, the 

information specified in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (vi) of 

this section must be recorded and kept for 5 years.

(i) The instrument and the equipment identification number 

and the operator name, initials, or identification number.

(ii) The date the leak was detected and the date of the 

first attempt to repair the leak.

(iii) The date of successful repair of the leak.

(iv) The maximum instrument reading measured by the 

procedures in paragraph (e) of this section after the leak is 

successfully repaired.

(v) Repair delayed and the reason for the delay if a leak 

is not repaired within 15 days after discovery of the leak. You 

may develop a written procedure that identifies the conditions 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 236 of 406

that justify a delay of repair. In such cases, reasons for 

delay of repair may be documented by citing the relevant 

sections of the written procedure.

(vi) Copies of the compliance reports as specified in 

§63.11985(b)(9), if records are not maintained on a computerized 

database capable of generating summary reports from the records.

(4) Instrument calibration records. You must maintain 

records of the information specified in paragraphs (g)(4)(i) 

through (vi) of this section for monitoring instrument 

calibrations conducted according to sections 8.1.2 and 10 of 

Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, and paragraph (e) of 

this section.

(i) Date of calibration and initials of operator 

performing the calibration.

(ii) Calibration gas cylinder identification, 

certification date, and certified concentration.

(iii) Instrument scale(s) used.

(iv) A description of any corrective action taken if the 

meter readout could not be adjusted to correspond to the 

calibration gas value in accordance with section 10.1 of Method 

21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.

(v) Results of each calibration drift assessment required 

by paragraph (e)(2)(v)(D) of this section (i.e., instrument 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 237 of 406

reading for calibration at end of the monitoring day and the 

calculated percent difference from the initial calibration 

value).

(vi) If you make your own calibration gas, a description 

of the procedure used.

(5) Unsafe-to-inspect records. If you designate equipment 

as unsafe-to-inspect as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, you must keep the records specified in paragraph 

(g)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) You must maintain the identity of unsafe-to-inspect 

equipment as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this section. 

(ii) You must keep a written plan for inspecting unsafeto-inspect equipment as required by paragraph (e)(4) of this 

section and record all activities performed according to the 

written plan.

(h) Closed vent systems in vacuum service. If you operate 

and maintain a closed vent system in vacuum service as defined 

in §63.12005, you must comply with the requirements in 

paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this section, and you are not 

required to comply with any other provisions of this section. 

Any incidence where a closed vent system designed to be in 

vacuum service is operating and not in vacuum service 

constitutes a violation of this rule, unless the closed vent 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 238 of 406

system is meeting the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (g) 

of this section for closed vent systems that are not in vacuum 

service. Any such incidence during a performance test 

invalidates the performance test. 

(1) In vacuum service alarm. You must install, maintain, 

and operate a pressure gauge and alarm system that will alert an 

operator immediately and automatically when the pressure is such 

that the closed vent system no longer meets the definition of in 

vacuum service as defined in §63.12005. The alarm must be 

located such that the alert is detected and recognized easily by 

an operator.

(2) In vacuum service alarm procedures. If the alarm is 

triggered for a closed vent system operating in vacuum service 

as specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this section, you must 

immediately initiate procedures to identify the cause of the 

alarm. If the closed vent system is not in vacuum service, you 

must initiate procedures to get the closed vent system back in 

vacuum service as defined in §63.12005, or you must immediately 

comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (g) of 

this section for closed vent systems that are not in vacuum 

service.

(3) In vacuum service alarm records and reports. For any 

incidences where a closed vent system designed to be in vacuum 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 239 of 406

service is not in vacuum service, you must submit to the 

Administrator within 10 days of the incident the report 

specified in §63.11985(c)(8). This report is required even if 

you elect to follow the procedures specified in §63.11895 to 

establish an affirmative defense and submit the reports 

specified in §63.11985(c)(4).

§63.11935 What CEMS and CPMS requirements must I meet to 

demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission 

standards for process vent control devices, resin strippers, and 

wastewater treatment processes?

(a) General requirements for CEMS and CPMS. You must meet 

the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section for each CEMS 

specified in §63.11925(c) used to demonstrate compliance with 

the emission limits for process vents in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. You must meet the CPMS requirements in paragraph (c) 

of this section and establish your operating limits in paragraph 

(d) of this section for each operating parameter specified in 

Table 6 to this subpart for each process vent control device, 

resin stripper, or wastewater treatment process specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) For each control device specified in §63.11925(c) that 

is used to comply with the emission limits for process vents in 

Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, except that flow indicators 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 240 of 406

specified in §63.11940(e) are not subject to the requirements of 

this section.

(2) For each resin stripper specified in §63.11960(c) and 

used to comply with the emission limit for resin in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart.

(3) For each wastewater treatment process specified in 

§63.11975(a) and used to comply with the emission limit for 

wastewater in Table 3 to this subpart.

(b) CEMS. You must install, operate, and maintain each 

CEMS according to paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this section

and continuously monitor emissions.

(1) You must prepare your quality control program and 

site-specific performance evaluation test plan, as specified in 

§63.8(d) and (e). You must submit your performance evaluation 

test plan to the Administrator for approval, as specified in 

§63.8(e)(3).

(2) The monitoring equipment must be capable of providing 

a continuous record, recording data at least once every 15 

minutes.

(3) You must conduct initial and periodic site-specific 

performance evaluations and any required tests of each CEMS 

according to your quality control program and site-specific 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 241 of 406

performance evaluation test plan prepared as specified in 

§63.8(d) and (e).

(4) If supplemental gases are added to the control device, 

you must correct the measured concentrations in accordance with 

§63.11945(d)(1).

(5) You must operate and maintain the CEMS in continuous 

operation according to the quality control program and 

performance evaluation test plan. CEMS must record data at 

least once every 15 minutes.

(6) CEMS must meet the minimum accuracy and calibration 

frequency requirements specified in the performance 

specifications specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of 

this section, as applicable.

(i) A hydrogen chloride or dioxin/furan CEMS must meet the 

requirements of the promulgated performance specification for 

the CEMS.

(ii) A total hydrocarbon CEMS must meet the requirements 

of 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, performance specification 8A.

(7) Before commencing or ceasing use of a CEMS system, you 

must notify the Administrator as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before 

starting use of the continuous emissions monitoring system. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 242 of 406

(ii) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before 

stopping use of the continuous emissions monitoring system, in 

which case you must also conduct a performance test within 60 

days of ceasing operation of the system.

(c) CPMS. You must install, maintain, and operate each 

CPMS as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this 

section and continuously monitor operating parameters.

(1) As part of your quality control program and sitespecific performance evaluation test plan prepared as specified 

in §63.8(d) and (e), you must prepare a site-specific monitoring 

plan that addresses the monitoring system design, data 

collection, and the quality assurance and quality control 

elements specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of this 

section and §63.8(d). You are not required to submit the plan 

for approval unless requested by the Administrator. You may 

request approval of monitoring system quality assurance and 

quality control procedure alternatives to those specified in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of this section in your sitespecific monitoring plan.

(i) The performance criteria and design specifications for 

the monitoring system equipment, including the sample interface, 

detector signal analyzer, and data acquisition and calculations.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 243 of 406

(ii) Sampling interface (e.g., thermocouple) location such 

that the monitoring system will provide representative 

measurements. 

(iii) Equipment performance checks, calibrations, or other 

audit procedures.

(iv) Ongoing operation and maintenance procedures in 

accordance with provisions in §63.8(c)(1) and (3).

(v) Ongoing reporting and recordkeeping procedures in 

accordance with provisions in §63.10(c), (e)(1), and (e)(2)(i).

(2) The monitoring equipment must be capable of providing 

a continuous record, recording data at least once every 15 

minutes.

(3) You must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS 

required in this paragraph (c) according to the procedures and 

requirements in your site-specific monitoring plan.

(4) You must conduct an initial and periodic site-specific 

performance evaluation tests of each CPMS according to your 

site-specific monitoring plan. 

(5) All CPMS must meet the specific parameter (e.g., 

minimum accuracy and calibration frequency) requirements 

specified in §63.11940 and Table 8 to this subpart.

(6) Monitoring equipment for temperature, pressure, 

volumetric flow rate, mass flow rate, and conductivity must be 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 244 of 406

capable of measuring the appropriate parameter over a range that 

extends at least 20 percent beyond the normal expected operating 

range of values for that parameter. The data recording system 

associated with affected CPMS must have a resolution that is 

equal to or better than one-half of the required system 

accuracy.

(d) Establish operating limit. For each operating 

parameter that must be monitored in §63.11925(c) for process 

vent control devices, in §63.11960(c) for resin strippers, and 

in §63.11975(a) for wastewater treatment processes, you must 

establish an operating limit as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (6) of this section. You must establish each operating 

limit as an operating parameter range, minimum operating 

parameter level, or maximum operating parameter level as 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart. Where this subpart does 

not specify which format to use for your operating limit (e.g., 

operating range or minimum operating level), you must determine 

which format is best to establish proper operation of the 

control device, resin stripper, or treatment process such that 

you are meeting the emission limits specified in Table 1, 2, or 

3 to this subpart. 

(1) For process vent control devices, the operating limit 

established for each monitored parameter specified in §63.11940
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 245 of 406

must be based on the operating parameter values recorded during 

any performance test conducted to demonstrate compliance in 

§63.11925(d)(4) and (e)(4) and may be supplemented by 

engineering assessments and/or manufacturer‘s recommendations. 

You are not required to conduct performance tests over the 

entire range of allowed operating parameter values. The 

established operating limit must represent the conditions for 

which the control device is meeting the emission limits 

specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(2) For resin strippers, the operating limit established 

for each monitoring parameter specified in §63.11960(c) must be 

based on the operating parameter values recorded during any 

resin sampling event specified in §63.11960(b)(2) or (4) or 

§63.11960(c)(3) or (5). You may use engineering assessments 

and/or manufacturer‘s recommendations to supplement the initial 

performance test results when establishing the operating limit. 

The established operating limit must represent the conditions 

for which the resin stripper is meeting the emission limits 

specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.

(3) For wastewater treatment processes treating a 

wastewater stream to achieve the vinyl chloride concentration 

specified Table 3 to this subpart, the operating limit

established for each monitored parameter specified in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 246 of 406

§63.11975(a)(1) must be based on the operating parameter level

recorded during any sampling event specified in 

§63.11970(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or §63.11975(a)(3). You may use

engineering assessments and/or manufacturer‘s recommendations to 

supplement the initial testing results when establishing the 

operating limit. The established operating limit must represent 

the conditions for which the treatment process is meeting the 

requirements specified in Table 3 to this subpart.

(4) You must include as part of the notification of 

compliance status or the operating permit application or 

amendment, the information in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iv) 

of this section, as applicable, for each process vent control 

device, resin stripper, and wastewater treatment process 

requiring operating limits.

(i) Descriptions of monitoring devices and monitoring 

frequencies for each emission point and operating scenario.

(ii) The established operating limit of the monitored 

parameter(s).

(iii) The rationale for the established operating limit, 

including any data and calculations used to develop the 

operating limit and a description of why the operating limit 

indicates proper operation of the control device, resin 

stripper, or wastewater treatment process.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 247 of 406

(iv) The rationale used to determine which format to use 

for your operating limit (e.g., operating range, minimum 

operating level, or maximum operating level), where this subpart 

does not specify which format to use. 

(5) For batch processes, you may establish operating 

limits for individual batch emission episodes, including each 

distinct episode of process vent emissions or each individual 

type of batch process that generates wastewater, if applicable. 

You must provide rationale in a batch precompliance report as 

specified in §63.11985(c)(2) instead of the notification of 

compliance status for the established operating limit. You must 

include any data and calculations used to develop the operating 

limits and a description of why each operating limit indicates 

proper operation of the control device during the specific batch 

emission episode, or of the wastewater treatment process or 

resin stripper during the individual batch operation generating 

wastewater or stripped resin.

(6) If you elect to establish separate operating limits

for different batch emission episodes within a batch process as 

specified in paragraph (d)(5) of this section, you must maintain 

daily records indicating each point at which you change from one 

operating limit to another, even if the monitoring duration for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 248 of 406

an operating limit is less than 15 minutes. You must maintain a 

daily record according to §63.11990(e)(4)(i).

(e) Reduction of CPMS and CEMS data. You must reduce CEMS 

and CPMS data to 1-hour averages according to §63.8(g) to 

compute the average values for demonstrating compliance 

specified in §§63.11925(e)(3)(ii), 63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 

63.11960(c)(2), and 63.11975(a)(2) for CEMS and CPMS, as 

applicable.

§63.11940 What continuous monitoring requirements must I meet 

for control devices required to install CPMS to meet the 

emission limits for process vents? 

As required in §63.11925(c), you must install and operate 

the applicable CPMS specified in paragraphs (a) through (i) of 

this section for each control device you use to comply with the 

emission limits for process vents in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart. You must monitor, record, and calculate CPMS data 

averages as specified in Table 6 to this subpart. Paragraph (j) 

of this section provides an option to propose alternative 

monitoring parameters or procedures.

(a) Flow indicator. If flow to a control device could be 

intermittent, you must install, calibrate, and operate a flow 

indicator at the inlet or outlet of the control device to 

identify periods of no flow.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 249 of 406

(b) Incinerator monitoring. If you are using an 

incinerator to meet an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified in 

§63.11925(c), you must equip the incinerator with the monitoring 

equipment specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this 

section, as applicable. 

(1) If an incinerator other than a catalytic incinerator 

is used, you must install a temperature monitoring device in the 

fire box or in the ductwork immediately downstream of the fire 

box in a position before any substantial heat exchange occurs.

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section, where a catalytic incinerator is used, you must install 

temperature monitoring devices in the gas stream immediately 

before and after the catalyst bed. You must monitor the 

temperature differential across the catalyst bed.

(3) Instead of complying with paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section, and if the temperature differential between the inlet 

and outlet of the catalytic incinerator during normal operating 

conditions is less than 10 degrees Celsius (18 degrees 

Fahrenheit), you may elect to monitor the inlet temperature and 

conduct catalyst checks as specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and 

(ii) of this section. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 250 of 406

(i) You must conduct annual sampling and analysis of the 

catalyst activity (i.e., conversion efficiency) following the 

manufacturer‘s or catalyst supplier‘s recommended procedures. 

If problems are found during the catalyst activity test, you 

must replace the catalyst bed or take other corrective action 

consistent with the manufacturer‘s recommendations within 15 

days or by the next time any process vent stream is collected by 

the control device, whichever is sooner.

(ii) You must conduct annual internal inspections of the 

catalyst bed to check for fouling, plugging, or mechanical 

breakdown. You must also inspect the bed for channeling, 

abrasion, and settling. If problems are found during the annual 

internal inspection of the catalyst, you must replace the 

catalyst bed or take other corrective action consistent with the 

manufacturer‘s recommendations within 15 days or by the next 

time any process vent stream is collected by the control device, 

whichever is later. If the catalyst bed is replaced and is not 

of like or better kind and quality as the old catalyst then you 

must conduct a new performance test according to §63.11945 to 

determine destruction efficiency. If a catalyst bed is replaced 

and the replacement catalyst is of like or better kind and 

quality as the old catalyst, then a new performance test to 

determine destruction efficiency is not required.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 251 of 406

(c) Absorber and acid gas scrubber monitoring. If you are 

using an absorber or acid gas scrubber to meet an emission limit 

in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS 

as specified in §63.11925(c), you must install the monitoring 

equipment specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) Install and operate the monitoring equipment as 

specified in either paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. 

(i) A flow meter to monitor the absorber or acid gas 

scrubber influent liquid flow.

(ii) A flow meter to monitor the absorber or acid gas 

scrubber influent liquid flow and the gas stream flow using one 

of the procedures specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(A), (B), or 

(C) of this section. You must monitor the liquid-to-gas ratio 

determined by dividing the flow rate of the absorber or acid gas 

scrubber influent by the gas flow rate. The units of measure 

must be consistent with those used to calculate this ratio 

during the performance test.

(A) Determine gas stream flow using the design blower 

capacity, with appropriate adjustments for pressure drop.

(B) Measure the gas stream flow at the absorber or acid 

gas scrubber inlet.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 252 of 406

(C) If you have previously determined compliance for a

scrubber that requires a determination of the liquid-to-gas 

ratio, you may use the results of that test provided the test 

conditions are representative of current operation.

(2) Install and operate the monitoring equipment as 

specified in either paragraph (c)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this 

section. 

(i) Install and operate pressure gauges at the inlet and 

outlet of the absorber or acid gas scrubber to monitor the 

pressure drop through the absorber or acid gas scrubber.

(ii) If the difference in the inlet gas stream temperature 

and the inlet liquid stream temperature is greater than 38

degrees Celsius, you may install and operate a temperature 

monitoring device at the scrubber gas stream exit.

(iii) If the difference between the specific gravity of 

the scrubber effluent scrubbing fluid and specific gravity of 

the scrubber inlet scrubbing fluid is greater than or equal to 

0.02 specific gravity units, you may install and operate a 

specific gravity monitoring device on the inlet and outlet of 

the scrubber.

(3) If the scrubbing liquid is a reactant (e.g., lime, 

ammonia hydroxide), you must install and operate one of the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 253 of 406

devices listed in either paragraph (c)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of 

this section.

(i) A pH monitoring device to monitor the pH of the 

scrubber liquid effluent.

(ii) A caustic strength monitoring device to monitor the 

caustic strength of the scrubber liquid effluent.

(iii) A conductivity monitoring device to monitor the 

conductivity of the scrubber liquid effluent.

(d) Regenerative adsorber monitoring. If you are using a 

regenerative adsorber to meet an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart and you are required to use CPMS as specified in 

§63.11925(c), you must install and operate the applicable 

monitoring equipment listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of 

this section, and comply with the requirements in paragraphs 

(d)(6) and (7) of this section. If the adsorption system water 

is deemed as wastewater or process vents as specified in 

§63.11935, it is subject to the requirements in this subpart. 

(1) For non-vacuum regeneration systems, an integrating 

regeneration stream flow monitoring device having an accuracy of 

±10 percent, capable of recording the total regeneration stream 

mass for each regeneration cycle. For non-vacuum regeneration 

systems, an integrating regeneration stream flow monitoring 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 254 of 406

device capable of continuously recording the total regeneration 

stream mass flow for each regeneration cycle.

(2) For non-vacuum regeneration systems, an adsorber bed 

temperature monitoring device, capable of continuously recording 

the adsorber bed temperature after each regeneration and within 

15 minutes of completing any temperature regulation (cooling or 

warming to bring bed temperature closer to vent gas temperature) 

portion of the regeneration cycle.

(3) For non-vacuum and non-steam regeneration systems, an 

adsorber bed temperature monitoring device capable of 

continuously recording the bed temperature during regeneration, 

except during any temperature regulating (cooling or warming to 

bring bed temperature closer to vent gas temperature) portion of 

the regeneration cycle.

(4) For a vacuum regeneration system, a pressure 

transmitter installed in the vacuum pump suction line capable of 

continuously recording the vacuum level for each minute during 

regeneration. You must establish a minimum target and a length 

of time at which the vacuum must be below the minimum target 

during regeneration.

(5) A device capable of monitoring the regeneration 

frequency (i.e., operating time since last regeneration) and 

duration. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 255 of 406

(6) You must perform a verification of the adsorber during 

each day of operation. The verification must be through visual 

observation or through an automated alarm or shutdown system 

that monitors and records system operational parameters. The 

verification must verify that the adsorber is operating with 

proper valve sequencing and cycle time.

(7) You must conduct weekly measurements of the carbon bed 

outlet volatile organic compounds concentration, as specified in 

this paragraph (d)(7), over the last 5 minutes of an adsorption 

cycle for each carbon bed. For regeneration cycles longer than 

1 week, you must perform the measurement over the last 5 minutes 

of each adsorption cycle for each carbon bed. The outlet 

concentration of volatile organic compounds must be measured

using a portable analyzer, in accordance with Method 21 at 40 

CFR part 60, appendix A–7, for open-ended lines. Alternatively, 

outlet concentration of HAP(s) may be measured using 

chromatographic analysis using Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A-6. 

(e) Non-regenerative adsorber monitoring. If you are 

using a non-regenerative adsorber, or canister type system that 

is sent off site for regeneration or disposal, to meet an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and you are 

required to use CPMS as specified in §63.11925(c), you must 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 256 of 406

install a system of dual adsorber units in series and conduct 

the monitoring and bed replacement as specified in paragraphs 

(e)(1) through (4) of this section. 

(1) Establish the average adsorber bed life by conducting 

daily monitoring of the outlet volatile organic compound or HAP

concentration, as specified in this paragraph (e)(1), of the 

first adsorber bed in series until breakthrough occurs for the 

first three adsorber bed change-outs. The outlet concentration 

of volatile organic compounds must be measured using a portable 

analyzer, in accordance with Method 21 at 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix A–7, for open-ended lines. Alternatively, outlet 

concentration of HAP may be measured using chromatographic 

analysis using Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A-6. 

Breakthrough of the bed is defined as the time when the level of 

HAP detected is at the highest concentration allowed to be 

discharged from the adsorber system.

(2) Once the average life of the bed is determined, 

conduct ongoing monitoring as specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) 

through (iii) of this section. 

(i) Except as provided in paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and (iii) 

of this section, conduct daily monitoring of the adsorber bed 

outlet volatile organic compound or HAP concentration, as 

specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 257 of 406

(ii) You may conduct monthly monitoring if the adsorbent 

has more than 2 months of life remaining, as determined by the 

average primary adsorber bed life, established in paragraph 

(e)(1) of this section, and the date the adsorbent was last 

replaced.

(iii) You may conduct weekly monitoring if the adsorbent 

has more than 2 weeks of life remaining, as determined by the 

average primary adsorber bed life, established in paragraph 

(e)(1) of this section, and the date the adsorbent was last 

replaced.

(3) The first adsorber in series must be replaced 

immediately when breakthrough is detected between the first and 

second adsorber. The original second adsorber (or a fresh 

canister) will become the new first adsorber and a fresh 

adsorber will become the second adsorber. For purposes of this 

paragraph (e)(3), ―immediately‖ means within 8 hours of the 

detection of a breakthrough for adsorbers of 55 gallons or less, 

and within 24 hours of the detection of a breakthrough for 

adsorbers greater than 55 gallons.

(4) In lieu of replacing the first adsorber immediately, 

you may elect to monitor the outlet of the second canister 

beginning on the day the breakthrough between the first and 

second canister is identified and each day thereafter. This 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 258 of 406

daily monitoring must continue until the first canister is 

replaced. If the constituent being monitored is detected at the 

outlet of the second canister during this period of daily 

monitoring, both canisters must be replaced within 8 hours of 

the time of detection of volatile organic compounds or HAP at 90 

percent of the allowed level (90 percent of breakthrough 

definition).

(f) Condenser monitoring. If you are using a condenser to 

meet an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and you 

are required to use CPMS as specified in §63.11925(c), you must 

install and operate a condenser exit gas temperature monitoring 

device.

(g) Sorbent injection monitoring. If you are using 

sorbent injection as an emission control technique to comply 

with an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and you 

are required to use CPMS as specified in §63.11925(c), you must 

equip sorbent injection systems with the monitoring equipment 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of this section, as 

applicable. You must also meet the requirements in paragraph 

(h) of this section for the fabric filters used for sorbent 

collection. 

(1) A flow meter to monitor the rate of sorbent injection. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 259 of 406

(2) A flow meter to monitor the sorbent injection system 

carrier gas flow rate.

(3) You must install and operate a temperature monitoring 

device to monitor the temperature in the ductwork immediately 

downstream of the fire box of the combustion device. Also, if 

you are using a particulate matter control device upstream of 

the adsorbent injection system, you must install and operate a 

temperature monitoring device to monitor the temperature in the 

ductwork immediately downstream of the particulate matter 

control device. 

(h) Fabric filter monitoring. If you are using a fabric 

filter to meet an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart 

and you are required to use CPMS as specified in §63.11925(c), 

you must equip the fabric filter with a bag leak detection 

system that meets the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) through 

(11) of this section. You must conduct the performance 

evaluation specified in paragraph (h)(12) of this section.

(1) Each bag leak detection system must be installed, 

operated, calibrated, and maintained in a manner consistent with 

the manufacturer‘s written specifications and recommendations 

and in accordance with the guidance provided in Fabric Filter 

Bag Leak Detection Guidance, EPA–454/R–98–015, September 1997 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) such that the alarm does 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 260 of 406

not sound more than 5 percent of the operating time during a 6-

month period. You must calculate the alarm time as specified in 

paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (iv).

(i) If inspection of the fabric filter demonstrates that 

no corrective action is required, no alarm time is counted.

(ii) If corrective action is required, each alarm time 

shall be counted as a minimum of 1 hour.

(iii) If you take longer than 1 hour to initiate 

corrective action, each alarm time (i.e., time that the alarm 

sounds) is counted as the actual amount of time taken by you to 

initiate corrective action.

(iv) Your maximum alarm time is equal to 5 percent of the 

operating time during a 6-month period.

(2) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the 

manufacturer to be capable of detecting particulate matter 

emissions at concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual cubic 

meter or less.

(3) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide 

output of relative or absolute particulate matter loadings. 

(4) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with a 

device to continuously record the output signal from the sensor.

(5) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an 

alarm system that will alert an operator automatically when an 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 261 of 406

increase in particulate matter emissions over a preset level is 

detected. The alarm must be located such that the alert is 

detected and recognized easily by an operator.

(6) For positive pressure fabric filter systems that do 

not duct all compartments of cells to a common stack, a bag leak 

detection system must be installed in each fabric filter 

compartment or cell. If a negative pressure or induced air 

filter is used, the bag leak detector must be installed 

downstream of the fabric filter. If multiple bag leak detectors 

are required, the system‘s instrumentation and alarm may be 

shared among detectors.

(7) Calibration of the bag leak detection system must, at 

a minimum, consist of establishing the relative baseline output 

level by adjusting the range and the averaging period of the 

device and establishing the alarm set points and the alarm delay 

time.

(8) Following initial adjustment, you must not adjust the 

sensitivity or range, averaging period, alarm set points, or 

alarm delay time, except as established in an operation and 

maintenance plan required in paragraph (h)(10) of this section 

that is to be submitted with the notification of compliance 

status report. In no event may the sensitivity be increased 

more than 100 percent or decreased by more than 50 percent over 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 262 of 406

a 365-day period unless such adjustment follows a complete 

baghouse inspection that demonstrates the baghouse is in good 

operating condition.

(9) If the alert on a bag leak detection system is 

triggered, you must, within 1 hour of an alarm, initiate the 

procedures to identify the cause of the alarm and take 

corrective action as specified in the corrective action plan 

required in paragraph (h)(11) of this section. 

(10) You must maintain an operation and maintenance plan 

describing the items in paragraphs (h)(10)(i) through (v) of 

this section.

(i) Installation of the bag leak detection system.

(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak 

detection system, including how the alarm set-point will be 

established.

(iii) Operation of the bag leak detection system, 

including quality assurance procedures.

(iv) How the bag leak detection system will be maintained, 

including a routine maintenance schedule and spare parts 

inventory list.

(v) How the bag leak detection system output will be 

recorded and stored.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 263 of 406

(11) You must maintain a corrective action plan describing 

corrective actions to be taken, and the timing of those actions 

when the particulate matter concentration exceeds the setpoint 

and activates the alarm. Corrective actions may include, but 

are not limited to the actions listed in paragraphs (h)(11)(i) 

through (vi) of this section.

(i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air leaks, torn or 

broken bags or filter media, or any other conditions that may 

cause an increase in particulate matter emissions.

(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media.

(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or 

otherwise repairing the control device.

(iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter compartment. 

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe or 

otherwise repairing the bag leak detection system. 

(vi) Shutting down the control device producing the 

particulate matter emissions.

(12) You must conduct an initial performance evaluation of 

each continuous monitoring system and bag leak detection system, 

as applicable, in accordance with your quality control program 

site-specific performance evaluation test plan (or site-specific 

monitoring plan specified in §63.11935(c) for CPMS), according 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 264 of 406

to §63.8(d). For the purposes of this subpart, the provisions 

of §63.8(d), also apply to the bag leak detection system.

(i) Other control devices. If you use a control device 

other than those listed in this subpart to comply with an 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and you are 

required to use CPMS as specified in §63.11925(c), you must 

comply with the requirements as specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 

and (2) of this section.

(1) Submit a description of the planned monitoring,

recordkeeping and reporting procedures as required in 

§63.11985(b)(5)(iv). The Administrator will approve, deny, or 

modify the proposed monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements as part of the review of the plan or through the 

review of the permit application or by other appropriate means.

(2) You must establish operating limits for monitored 

parameters that are approved by the Administrator. To establish 

the operating limit, the information required in §63.11935(d) 

must be submitted in the notification of compliance status 

report specified in §63.11985(a). 

(j) Alternatives to monitoring requirements. 

(1) You may request approval to use alternatives to the 

continuous operating parameter monitoring listed in this 

section, as specified in §63.11985(c)(5).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 265 of 406

(2) You may request approval to monitor a different 

parameter than those established in §63.11935(d) or to set 

unique monitoring parameters, as specified in §63.11985(c)(6).

Until permission to use an alternative monitoring procedure, 

method, or parameter has been granted by the Administrator, you 

remain subject to the requirements of this subpart.

§63.11945 What performance testing requirements must I meet for 

process vents?

(a) General. For each control device used to meet a total 

organic HAP, vinyl chloride, hydrogen chloride, and/or 

dioxin/furan emission limit for process vents in Table 1 or 2 to 

this subpart, you must conduct the initial and periodic 

performance tests required in §63.11925(d) and (e) and as 

specified in §63.11896 using the applicable test methods and 

procedures specified in Table 9 to this subpart and paragraphs 

(b) through (d) of this section.

(b) Process operating conditions. You must conduct 

performance tests under the conditions specified in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (3) of this section, as applicable. Upon 

request, the owner or operator shall make available to the 

Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the 

conditions of performance tests.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 266 of 406

(1) Continuous process vents. For continuous process 

vents, you must conduct all performance tests at maximum 

representative operating conditions for the process. For 

continuous compliance, you must operate the control device as 

close as possible to your operating limit(s) for the control 

device established during the initial or subsequent performance 

tests specified in §63.11925 (d) and (e). If an operating limit 

is a range, then you must operate the control device as close as 

possible to the maximum or minimum operating limit for the 

control device, whichever results in higher emissions (i.e., 

lower emission reduction). 

(2) Batch process operations. Testing must be conducted 

at absolute worst-case conditions or hypothetical worst-case 

conditions as specified in paragraph (c) of this section.

(3) Combination of both continuous and batch unit 

operations. You must conduct performance tests when the batch 

process vents are operating at absolute worst-case conditions or 

hypothetical worst-case conditions, as specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) and (2) of this section, and at maximum representative 

operating conditions for the process. For continuous 

compliance, you must operate the control device as close as 

possible to your operating limit(s) for the control device 

established during the initial or subsequent performance tests 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 267 of 406

specified in §63.11925 (d) and (e). If an operating limit is a 

range, then you must operate the control device as close as 

possible to the maximum or minimum operating limit for the 

control device, whichever results in higher emissions (i.e., 

lower emission reduction), unless the Administrator specifies or 

approves alternate operating conditions. 

(c) Batch worst-case conditions. The absolute worst-case 

conditions for batch process operations must be characterized by 

the criteria presented in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The 

hypothetical worst-case conditions for batch process operations 

must be characterized by the criteria presented in paragraph 

(c)(2) of this section. In all cases, a site-specific plan must 

be submitted to the Administrator for approval prior to testing 

in accordance with §63.7(c). The test plan must include the 

emission profile described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. 

(1) Absolute worst-case conditions. For batch process 

operations, absolute worst-case conditions are defined by the 

criteria presented in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section if the 

maximum load is the most challenging condition for the control 

device. Otherwise, absolute worst-case conditions are defined 

by the conditions in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section. You 

must consider all relevant factors, including load and compound-
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 268 of 406

specific characteristics in defining absolute worst-case 

conditions. 

(i) A 1-hour period of time in which the inlet to the 

control device contains the highest HAP mass loading rate, in 

pounds per hour, capable of being vented to the control device. 

An emission profile as described in paragraph (c)(3) of this 

section must be used to identify the 1-hour period of maximum 

HAP loading. 

(ii) The period of time when the HAP loading or stream 

composition (including non-HAP) is most challenging for the 

control device. These conditions include, but are not limited 

to the following: 

(A) Periods when the stream contains the highest combined 

organic load, in pounds per hour, described by the emission 

profiles in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. 

(B) Periods when the streams contain HAP constituents that 

approach limits of solubility for scrubbing media. 

(C) Periods when the streams contain HAP constituents that

approach limits of adsorptivity for adsorption systems. 

(2) Hypothetical worst-case conditions. For batch process 

operations, hypothetical worst-case conditions are simulated 

test conditions that, at a minimum, contain the highest hourly 

HAP load of emissions that would be predicted to be vented to 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 269 of 406

the control device from the emissions profile described in 

paragraphs (c)(3)(ii) or (iii) of this section. 

(3) Emission profile. For batch process operations, you 

must develop an emission profile for the vent to the control 

device that describes the characteristics of the vent stream at 

the inlet to the control device under worst-case conditions. 

The emission profile must be developed based on any one of the 

procedures described in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (iii) of 

this section. 

(i) Emission profile by process. The emission profile 

must consider all batch emission episodes that could contribute 

to the vent stack for a period of time that is sufficient to 

include all processes venting to the stack and must consider 

production scheduling. The profile must describe the HAP load 

to the device that equals the highest sum of emissions from the 

episodes that can vent to the control device in any given hour. 

Emissions per episode must be calculated using the procedures 

specified in §63.11950. Emissions per episode must be divided 

by the duration of the episode only if the duration of the 

episode is longer than 1 hour. 

(ii) Emission profile by equipment. The emission profile 

must consist of emissions that meet or exceed the highest 

emissions, in pounds per hour that would be expected under 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 270 of 406

actual processing conditions. The profile must describe 

equipment configurations used to generate the emission events, 

volatility of materials processed in the equipment, and the 

rationale used to identify and characterize the emission events. 

The emissions may be based on using a compound more volatile 

than compounds actually used in the process(es), and the 

emissions may be generated from all equipment in the process(es) 

or only selected equipment. 

(iii) Emission profile by capture and control device 

limitation. The emission profile must consider the capture and 

control system limitations and the highest emissions, in pounds 

per hour that can be routed to the control device, based on 

maximum flowrate and concentrations possible because of 

limitations on conveyance and control equipment (e.g., fans and 

lower explosive level alarms).

(d) Concentration correction calculation. If a combustion 

device is the control device and supplemental combustion air is 

used to combust the emissions, the concentration of total 

organic HAP, vinyl chloride, and hydrogen chloride must be 

corrected as specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this 

section. If a control device other than a combustion device is 

used to comply with an outlet concentration emission limit for 

batch process vents, you must correct the actual concentration 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 271 of 406

for supplemental gases as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section.

(1) Determine the concentration of total organic HAP, 

vinyl chloride, or hydrogen chloride corrected to 3-percent 

oxygen (Cc) using Equation 1 of this section.

d

c m

O

C C

20 9 2

17 9

. %

.

(Eq. 1)

Where:

Cc = Concentration of total organic HAP, vinyl chloride, 

or hydrogen chloride corrected to 3-percent oxygen, 

dry basis, parts per million by volume. 

Cm = Concentration of total organic HAP, vinyl chloride, 

or hydrogen chloride, dry basis, parts per million 

by volume.

%O2d = Concentration of oxygen, dry basis, percentage by 

volume.

(2) To determine the oxygen concentration, you must use 

the emission rate correction factor (or excess air), integrated 

sampling and analysis procedures of Method 3, 3A, or 3B at 40 

CFR part 60, appendix A-2, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, ―Flue 

and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus] 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14). 

(3) Correct the measured concentration for supplemental 

gases using Equation 2 of this section. Process knowledge and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 272 of 406

representative operating data may be used to determine the 

fraction of the total flow due to supplemental gas.

a

s a

a m

Q

Q Q

C C

(Eq. 2)

Where:

Ca = Corrected outlet concentration of HAP, dry basis, 

parts per million by volume (ppmv).

Cm = Actual concentration of HAP measured at control 

device outlet, dry basis, ppmv.

Qa = Total volumetric flow rate of all gas streams 

vented to the control device, except supplemental 

gases.

Qs = total volumetric flow rate of supplemental gases.

§63.11950 What emissions calculations must I use for an 

emission profile by process of my batch process operation?

Except as specified in paragraph (i) of this section, if 

you choose to develop an emission profile by process for your 

batch process operation as specified in §63.11945(c)(3)(i) when 

determining your absolute worst-case conditions, you must 

calculate emissions from episodes caused by vapor displacement, 

purging a partially filled vessel, heating, depressurization, 

vacuum operations, gas evolution, air drying, or empty vessel 

purging, using the applicable procedures in paragraphs (a) 

through (h) of this section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 273 of 406

(a) Vapor displacement. You must calculate emissions from 

vapor displacement due to transfer of material using Equation 3 

of this section. 

n

i

Pi MWi

RT

V

E

1

(Eq. 3)

Where:

E = Mass of HAP emitted.

V = Volume of gas displaced from the vessel.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; absolute.

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP.

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.

(b) Gas sweep of a partially filled vessel. You must 

calculate emissions from purging a partially filled vessel using 

Equation 4 of this section. The pressure of the vessel vapor 

space may be set equal to 760 millimeters of mercury (mmHg). 

You must multiply the HAP partial pressure in Equation 4 of this 

section by a HAP-specific saturation factor determined in 

accordance with Equations 5 through 7 of this section. Solve 

Equation 5 of this section iteratively beginning with saturation 

factors (in the right-hand side of the equation) of 1.0 for each 

condensable compound. Stop iterating when the calculated 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 274 of 406

saturation factors for all compounds are the same to two 

significant figures for subsequent iterations. Note that for 

multi-component emission streams, saturation factors must be 

calculated for all condensable compounds, not just the HAP.

m

j

T j

T

n

i

i i

P P

P

RT

Vt E PMW

1

1

( )

(Eq. 4) 

Where:

E = Mass of HAP emitted.

V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable gas at the 

temperature and pressure of the vessel vapor space.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; absolute.

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP at saturated 

conditions.

Pj = Partial pressure of individual condensable compounds 

(including HAP) at saturated conditions.

PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space.

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP.

t = Time of purge.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.

j = Identifier for a condensable compound.

m = Number of condensable compounds (including HAP) in the 

emission stream.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 275 of 406

n

i

sat

i i i

i

i

K A V S V

K A

S

1

(Eq. 5)

n

i

T i

i

sat

i

P P

VP V

1

(Eq. 6)

1/ 3

i

o

i o M

M

K K

(Eq. 7)

Where:

Si = Saturation factor for individual condensable 

compounds.

Pi = Partial pressure of individual condensable compounds 

at saturated conditions.

PT = Pressure of the vessel vapor space.

A = Surface area of liquid.

V = Purge flow rate of the noncondensable gas.

Vi

sat = Volumetric flow rate of individual condensable 

compounds at saturated vapor pressure.

Ki = Mass transfer coefficient of individual condensable 

compounds in the emission stream.

Ko = Mass transfer coefficient of reference compound 

(e.g., 0.83 cm/s for water).

Mo = Molecular weight of reference compound (e.g., 18.02 

for water).

Mi = Molecular weight of individual condensable compounds 

in the emission stream.

n = Number of condensable compounds in the emission 

stream.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 276 of 406

(c) Heating. You must calculate emissions caused by the 

heating of a vessel to a temperature lower than the boiling 

point using the procedures in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. 

If the contents of a vessel are heated to the boiling point, you 

must calculate emissions using the procedures in paragraph 

(c)(2) of this section.

(1) If the final temperature to which the vessel contents 

are heated is lower than the boiling point of the HAP in the 

vessel, you must calculate the mass of HAP emitted per episode 

using Equation 8 of this section. The average gas space molar 

volume during the heating process is calculated using Equation 9 

of this section. The difference in the number of moles of 

condensable in the vessel headspace between the initial and 

final temperatures is calculated using Equation 10 of this 

section. 

,2 ,1

1

,2

1

,1

ln n i i

i

T i

n

i

T i

HAP avg n n

P P

P P

E MW N

(Eq. 8)

Where:

E = Mass of HAP vapor displaced from the vessel being 

heated.

Navg = Average gas space molar volume during the heating 

process.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 277 of 406

PT = Total pressure in the vessel.

Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP compounds at 

initial temperature (T1).

Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP compounds at 

final temperature (T2).

MWHAP = Average molecular weight of the HAP compounds 

calculated using Equation 13 of this section.

ni,1 = Number of moles of condensable in the vessel 

headspace at initial temperature (T1).

ni,2 = Number of moles of condensable in the vessel 

headspace at final temperature (T2).

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

ln = Natural logarithm.

2

1

1

1

2R T T

VPT Navg

(Eq. 9)

Where:

Navg = Average gas space molar volume during the heating 

process.

V = Volume of free space in vessel.

PT = Total pressure in the vessel.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T1 = Initial temperature of the vessel.

T2 = Final temperature of the vessel.

n

i

i

n

i

i i i P

RT

V

P

RT

V

n n

1

,1

1 1

,2

2

,2 ,1

(Eq. 10)

Where:
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 278 of 406

V = Volume of free space in vessel.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T1 = Initial temperature in the vessel.

T2 = Final temperature in the vessel.

Pi,1 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP compounds at 

T1.

Pi,2 = Partial pressure of the individual HAP compounds at 

T2.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

(2) If the final temperature to which the vessel contents 

are heated is at the boiling point or higher, you must calculate 

emissions using the procedure in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) 

of this section.

(i) To calculate the emissions from heating to the boiling 

point use Equations 11, 12, and 13 of this section. (Note that 

Pa2=0 in the calculation of Δη in Equation 12 of this section.) 

m

j

T j

HAP

n

i

i

P P

PMW

E

1

1

(Eq. 11)

Where:

E = Mass of HAP emitted.

Δη = The number of moles of noncondensable displaced from 

the vessel, as calculated using Equation 12 of this 

section.

PT = Pressure in the receiver.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 279 of 406

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP determined at 

the exit temperature of the condenser or at the 

conditions of the dedicated receiver.

Pj = Partial pressure of the individual condensable 

(including HAP) determined at the exit temperature of 

the condenser or at the conditions of the dedicated 

receiver.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.

j = Identifier for a condensable compound.

MWHAP = The average molecular weight of HAP in vapor exiting 

the dedicated receiver, as calculated using Equation 

13 of this section with partial pressures determined 

at the exit temperature and exit pressure conditions 

of the condenser or at the conditions of the 

dedicated receiver.

m = Number of condensable compounds (including HAP) in 

the emission stream.

2

2

1

1

T

Pa

T

Pa

R

V

(Eq. 12)

n

i

n

i

i T i T

i T i T i

HAP

P P

P P MW

MW

1

1

1 2

1 2

(Eq. 13)

Where:

Δη = Number of moles of noncondensable gas displaced from 

the vessel.

V = Volume of free space in the vessel.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T1 = Initial temperature of vessel contents, absolute.

T2 = Final temperature of vessel contents, absolute.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 280 of 406

Pan = Partial pressure of noncondensable gas in the vessel 

headspace at initial (n=1) and final (n=2) 

temperature.

MWHAP = The average molecular weight of HAP in vapor exiting 

the dedicated receiver.

(Pi)Tn = Partial pressure of each HAP in the vessel headspace 

at initial (T1) and final (T2) temperature of the 

receiver.

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.

(ii) While boiling, the vessel must be operated with a 

properly operated process condenser. An initial demonstration 

that a process condenser is properly operated must be conducted 

during the boiling operation and documented in the notification 

of compliance status report described in §63.11985(a). You must 

either measure the liquid temperature in the receiver or the 

temperature of the gas stream exiting the condenser and show it 

is less than the boiling or bubble point of the HAP(s) in the 

vessel; or perform a material balance around the vessel and 

condenser and show that at least 99 percent of the recovered HAP 

vaporized while boiling is condensed. This demonstration is not 

required if the process condenser is followed by a condenser 

acting as a control device or if the control device is monitored 

using a CEMS.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 281 of 406

(d) Depressurization. You must calculate emissions from 

depressurization using Equation 14 of this section.

n

i

Pi MWi m

j

P Pj

m

j

P Pj

RT

V

E

1

1

2

1

1

( )( )

( )

( )

ln

(Eq. 14)

Where:

E = Emissions.

V = Free volume in vessel being depressurized.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T = Temperature of the vessel, absolute.

P1 = Initial pressure in the vessel.

P2 = Final pressure in the vessel.

Pj = Partial pressure of the individual condensable 

compounds (including HAP).

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP compounds.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

m = Number of condensable compounds (including HAP) in 

the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.

j = Identifier for a condensable compound.

ln = Natural logarithm.

(e) Vacuum systems. You must calculate emissions from 

vacuum systems using Equation 15 of this section if the air 

leakage rate is known or can be approximated. The receiving 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 282 of 406

vessel is part of the vacuum system for purposes of this 

subpart. 

m

j

T j

n

i

i i

nc P P

P MW

MW

La t

E

1

1

( )

( )( )

(Eq. 15)

Where:

E = Mass of HAP emitted.

PT = Absolute pressure of receiving vessel or ejector 

outlet conditions, if there is no receiver.

Pi = Partial pressure of the HAP at the receiver 

temperature or the ejector outlet conditions.

Pj = Partial pressure of condensable (including HAP) at 

the receiver temperature or the ejector outlet 

conditions.

La = Total air leak rate in the system, mass/time.

MWnc = Molecular weight of noncondensable gas.

t = Time of vacuum operation.

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP in the 

emission stream, with HAP partial pressures 

calculated at the temperature of the receiver or 

ejector outlet, as appropriate.

(f) Gas evolution. You must calculate emissions from gas 

evolution using Equation 15 in paragraph (e) of this section 

with mass flow rate of gas evolution, Wg, substituted for La. 

(g) Air drying. You must calculate emissions from air 

drying using Equation 16 of this section:
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 283 of 406

2 100

2

1 100

1

PS

PS

PS

PS

E B

(Eq. 16)

Where:

E = Mass of HAP emitted.

B = Mass of dry solids.

PS1 = HAP in material entering dryer, weight percent.

PS2 = HAP in material exiting dryer, weight percent.

(h) Empty vessel purging. You must calculate emissions 

from empty vessel purging using Equation 17 of this section 

(Note: The term e-Ft/v can be assumed to be 0):

)

/ ( )( ) (Ft v

e

n

i

Pi MWi

RT

V

E 1

1

(Eq. 17)

Where:

V = Volume of empty vessel.

R = Ideal gas law constant.

T = Temperature of the vessel vapor space; absolute.

Pi = Partial pressure of the individual HAP at the 

beginning of the purge.

MWi = Molecular weight of the individual HAP.

F = Flow rate of the purge gas.

t = Duration of the purge.

n = Number of HAP compounds in the emission stream.

i = Identifier for a HAP compound.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 284 of 406

(i) Engineering assessments. You must conduct an 

engineering assessment to calculate HAP emissions for each batch 

emission episode that is not due to vapor displacement, 

partially filled vessel purging, heating, depressurization, 

vacuum operations, gas evolution, air drying, or empty vessel 

purging. An engineering assessment may also be used to support 

a finding that the emissions estimation equations in this 

section are inappropriate. All data, assumptions, and 

procedures used in the engineering assessment must be 

documented, are subject to preapproval by the Administrator, and 

must be reported in the batch precompliance report. An 

engineering assessment may include, but is not limited to, the 

items listed in paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this section. 

(1) Previous test results provided the tests are 

representative of current operating practices at the process 

unit.

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

the process under representative operating conditions.

(3) Maximum flow rate, HAP emission rate, concentration, 

or other relevant parameter specified or implied within a permit 

limit applicable to the process vent.

(4) Design analysis based on accepted chemical engineering 

principles, measurable process parameters, or physical or 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 285 of 406

chemical laws or properties. Examples of analytical methods 

include, but are not limited to the following:

(i) Use of material balances based on process 

stoichiometry to estimate maximum organic HAP concentrations.

(ii) Estimation of maximum flow rate based on physical 

equipment design such as pump or blower capacities.

(iii) Estimation of HAP concentrations based on saturation 

conditions.

§63.11955 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for other emission sources?

(a) For each process component (including prepolymerization reactors used in the manufacture of bulk resins) 

that contains a gas, vapor, liquid, or solid material containing

HAP, except for the process components specified in paragraphs

(a)(1) through (3) of this section, before opening the process 

component for any reason, the quantity of total HAP is to be 

reduced to an amount that occupies a volume of no more than 2.0

percent of the component‘s containment volume or 25 gallons, 

whichever is larger, at standard temperature and pressure.

(1) Process components that, during opening, are vented to 

a closed vent system and control device meeting the requirements 

in §§63.11925 through 63.11950.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 286 of 406

(2) Pressure relief devices meeting the requirements in

§63.11915(c).

(3) Process vent bypasses meeting the requirements 

specified in §63.11930(c).

(b) Before opening a polymerization reactor for any 

reason, the quantity of vinyl chloride is not to exceed 0.04 

pounds per ton of PVC product, with the product determined on a 

dry solids basis.

(c) Any gas or vapor HAP removed from a process component 

in accordance with paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section is 

to be vented to a closed vent system and control device meeting 

the requirements in §63.11925.

§63.11956 What are my compliance requirements for ambient 

monitoring?

You must operate a reliable and accurate vinyl chloride 

monitoring system for detection of major leaks and 

identification of the general area of the affected source where 

a leak is located. A vinyl chloride monitoring system means a 

device which obtains air samples from one or more points on a 

continuous sequential basis and analyzes the samples with gas 

chromatography or, if you assume that all hydrocarbons measured 

are vinyl chloride, analyzes the samples with infrared 

spectrophotometry, flame ion detection, or an equivalent or 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 287 of 406

alternative method. You must operate the vinyl chloride 

monitoring system according to a program that you develop for 

your affected source. You must submit a description of the 

program to the Administrator within 45 days of your compliance 

date, unless a waiver of compliance is granted by the 

Administrator, or the program has been approved and the 

Administrator does not request a review of the program. 

Approval of a program will be granted by the Administrator 

provided the Administrator finds:

(a) The location and number of points to be monitored and 

the frequency of monitoring provided for in the program are 

acceptable when they are compared with the number of pieces of 

equipment in vinyl chloride service and size and physical layout 

of the affected source.

(b) It contains a definition of leak which is acceptable 

when compared with the background concentrations of vinyl 

chloride in the areas of the plant to be monitored by the vinyl 

chloride monitoring system. Measurements of background 

concentrations of vinyl chloride in the areas of the plant to be 

monitored by the vinyl chloride monitoring system are to be 

included with the description of the program. The definition of 

leak for a given plant may vary among the different areas within 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 288 of 406

the plant and is also to change over time as background 

concentrations in the plant are reduced.

(c) It contains an acceptable plan of action to be taken 

when a leak is detected.

(d) It provides for an acceptable calibration and 

maintenance schedule for the vinyl chloride monitoring system 

and portable hydrocarbon detector. For the vinyl chloride 

monitoring system, a daily span check is to be conducted with a 

concentration of vinyl chloride equal to the concentration 

defined as a leak according to paragraph (b) of this section. 

The calibration is to be done with either:

(1) A calibration gas mixture prepared from the gases 

specified in sections 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 of Method 106 and in 

accordance with section 10.1 of Method 106, or

(2) A calibration gas cylinder standard containing the 

appropriate concentration of vinyl chloride. The gas 

composition of the calibration gas cylinder standard is to have 

been certified by the manufacturer. The manufacturer must have 

recommended a maximum shelf life for each cylinder so that the 

concentration does not change greater than ±5 percent from the 

certified value. The date of gas cylinder preparation, 

certified vinyl chloride concentration, and recommended maximum 

shelf life must have been affixed to the cylinder before 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 289 of 406

shipment from the manufacturer to the buyer. If a gas 

chromatograph is used as the vinyl chloride monitoring system, 

these gas mixtures may be directly used to prepare a 

chromatograph calibration curve as described in Sections 8.1 and 

9.2 of Method 106. The requirements in Sections 7.2.3.1 and 

7.2.3.2 of Method 106 for certification of cylinder standards 

and for establishment and verification of calibration standards 

are to be followed.

§63.11960 What are my initial and continuous compliance 

requirements for stripped resin?

(a) Emission limits. You must meet the applicable vinyl 

chloride and total HAP emission limits for stripped resin 

specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. 

(b) Demonstration of initial compliance. For each 

stripped resin stream specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (6) of this section to demonstrate initial compliance. 

You must demonstrate compliance for each resin stripper or for 

each group of resin strippers used to process the same type of 

resin.

(1) For each resin stripper required to meet the emission 

limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you 

must prepare the site-specific monitoring plan specified in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 290 of 406

§63.11935(c)(1) for CPMS. You must install, operate, and 

maintain CPMS meeting the requirements of §63.11935(c) and 

capable of continuously monitoring the parameters specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section. You must conduct an initial 

site-specific performance evaluation test of each CPMS according 

to your site-specific monitoring plan.

(2) You must conduct an initial performance test for the 

resin stripper, measuring the concentration of vinyl chloride in 

the stripped resin at the outlet of each resin stripper as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Use the test method(s) and procedures specified in 

paragraph (d) of this section.

(ii) Collect samples on a day when the PVCPU (or 

collection of PVCPUs, as applicable, if demonstrating compliance 

with a group of strippers) is producing the resin grade of which 

you manufacture the most, based on total mass of resin produced

in the month preceding the sampling event.

(iii) For continuous processes, collect 1 grab sample for 

each 8 hours or per grade of PVC produced, whichever is more 

frequent, during a 24-hour sampling period.

(iv) For batch processes, collect 1 grab sample for each 

batch during a 24-hour sampling period. Sampling must be 

completed immediately after stripping.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 291 of 406

(3) Demonstrate initial compliance with the vinyl chloride 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average vinyl 

chloride concentration for each stripper for each resin grade 

produced during the 24-hour sampling period, using the vinyl 

chloride concentrations measured for the grab samples collected 

as specified in paragraph (b)(2)(iii) or (iv) of this section.

(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the vinyl chloride 

emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based on the 24-

hour arithmetic average concentration calculated in either 

paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.

(A) If more than one resin grade was produced during the 

24-hour sampling period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average vinyl chloride concentration for each 

stripper, or for each group of strippers used to process the 

same type of resin, using the 24-hour average vinyl chloride 

concentrations calculated in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section 

and the mass of each resin grade produced during the 24-hour 

sampling period.

(B) If only one resin grade was produced during the 24-

hour sampling event, use the 24-hour arithmetic average vinyl 

chloride concentration for the one resin grade in paragraph 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 292 of 406

(b)(3)(i) of this section for each stripper or calculate the 24-

hour arithmetic average vinyl chloride concentration for all 

strippers used to process the one grade of resin.

(4) You must measure the concentration of total HAP in the 

stripped resin at the outlet of the resin stripper as specified 

in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Use the test method(s) and procedures specified in 

paragraph (d) of this section.

(ii) Collect samples on a day when the PVCPU (or 

collection of PVCPUs, as applicable, if demonstrating compliance 

with a group of strippers) is producing the resin grade of which 

you manufacture the most, based on total mass of resin produced 

in the month preceding the sampling event.

(iii) For continuous processes, you must collect 1 grab 

sample for each 8 hours or per grade of PVC produced, whichever 

is more frequent, during a 24-hour sampling period.

(iv) For batch processes, you must collect 1 grab sample 

for each batch during a 24-hour sampling period. Sampling must 

be completed immediately after stripping.

(5) Demonstrate initial compliance with the total HAP 

emission limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart as specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) and (ii) of this 

section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 293 of 406

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for each stripper for each resin grade produced 

during the 24-hour sampling period, using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab samples collected in 

paragraph (b)(4)(iii) or (iv) of this section and the 

calculation procedures specified in paragraph (e) of this 

section.

(ii) Demonstrate compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based 

on each 24-hour arithmetic average concentration calculated in 

either paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section.

(A) If more than one resin grade was produced during the 

24-hour sampling period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average total HAP concentration for each stripper, or 

for each group of strippers used to process the same type of 

resin, using the 24-hour average total HAP concentrations

calculated in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this section and the mass 

of each resin grade produced during the 24-hour sampling period.

(B) If only one resin grade was produced during the 24-

hour sampling event, use the 24-hour arithmetic average total 

HAP concentration for the one resin grade in paragraph (b)(5)(i) 

of this section for each stripper or calculate the 24-hour 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 294 of 406

arithmetic average vinyl chloride concentration for all 

strippers used to process the one grade of resin.

(6) During the initial vinyl chloride and total HAP 

performance tests specified in paragraphs (b)(2) and (4) of this 

section, you must collect the CPMS data specified in paragraph 

(b)(1) of this section. Using this CPMS data, you must 

establish an operating limit according to the procedures 

specified in §63.11935(d) for each applicable operating 

parameter specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this 

section. Each operating limit must be based on the data 

averaging period for compliance specified in Table 6 to this 

subpart using data collected at the minimum frequency specified 

in §§63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and calculated using the 

data reduction method specified in §63.11935(e). For a CPMS

used on a batch operation, you may use a data averaging period 

based on an operating block in lieu of the averaging period 

specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(c) Demonstration of continuous compliance. For each 

stripped resin stream specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (6) of this section to demonstrate continuous 

compliance. Compliance must be demonstrated for each resin 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 295 of 406

stripper or for each group of resin strippers used to process 

the same type of resin.

(1) For each resin stripper required to meet the emission 

limit for stripper resin in Table 1 or 2 to this section, you 

must operate and maintain CPMS meeting the requirements of 

§63.11935(c) and capable of continuously recording the operating 

parameters specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv) of 

this section, as applicable. You must conduct periodic sitespecific CPMS performance evaluation tests according to your 

site-specific monitoring plan and §63.11935(c).

(i) For each resin steam stripper, you must monitor the 

ratio of steam feed rate to the flow rate of the resin entering 

the stripper and the temperature of the stripped resin exiting 

the stripper before any cooling process. The ratio of steam 

feed rate to entering resin flow rate is calculated by dividing 

the steam feed rate by the resin flow rate. 

(ii) For each resin vacuum stripper, you must monitor the 

vacuum level maintained in the column, the maximum flow rate of 

the resin entering the stripper, and the temperature of the 

stripped resin exiting the stripper before any cooling process. 

If steam is used, you must monitor the ratio of steam feed rate 

to the flow rate of the resin entering the resin stripper 

instead of the maximum flow rate of the resin entering the resin 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 296 of 406

stripper. The ratio of steam feed rate to entering resin flow 

rate is calculated by dividing the steam feed rate by the resin 

flow rate.

(iii) If you are using process components other than a 

steam or vacuum stripper to meet a vinyl chloride or total HAP 

level specified for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart, you must request approval to use an alternative process 

component by submitting to the Administrator the information 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this 

section.

(A) A description of the proposed stripping process.

(B) A description of the operating parameter(s) to be 

monitored to ensure the stripping process is operated in 

conformance with its design and achieves the performance level 

as specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and an explanation 

of the criteria used to select the operating parameter(s).

(C) A description of the methods and procedures that will 

be used to demonstrate that the parameter specified in paragraph 

(c)(1)(iii)(B) of this section indicates proper operation of the 

resin stripper, the schedule for this demonstration, and a 

statement that you will establish an operating limit for the 

monitored operating parameter as part of the notification of 

compliance status report specified in §63.11935(d).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 297 of 406

(iv) Alternatives to monitoring requirements. 

(A) You may request approval to use alternatives to the 

continuous operating parameter monitoring listed in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, as specified in 

§63.11985(c)(5).

(B) You may request approval to monitor a different 

operating parameter than those established in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section or to set a unique 

monitoring parameter, as specified in §63.11985(c)(6).

(C) Until permission to use an alternative operating

procedure, method, or operating parameter has been granted by 

the Administrator, you remain subject to the requirements of 

this subpart.

(2) You must ensure that each operating parameter 

monitored in paragraph (c)(1) through (4) of this section for 

the stripper meets the operating limit established in paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section. You must continuously determine the 

average value of each monitored operating parameter based on the 

data collection and reduction methods specified in 

§63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and the applicable data averaging 

period for resin strippers specified in Table 6 to this subpart

for all periods the process is operating. You must follow the 

data measurement and recording frequencies and data averaging 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 298 of 406

periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart. For a CPMS used 

on a batch operation, you may use a data averaging period based 

on an operating block in lieu of the averaging periods specified 

in Table 6 to this subpart. 

(3) On a daily basis, you must measure the concentration 

of vinyl chloride in the stripped resin at the outlet of the

resin stripper for continuous processes, or immediately after 

stripping for batch processes, using the test method(s) and 

procedures specified in paragraph (d) of this section, and the 

procedures specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this 

section.

(4) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the 

vinyl chloride emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart on 

a daily basis using the procedures specified for initial 

compliance in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(5) On a monthly basis, you must measure the concentration 

of total HAP in the stripped resin at the outlet of the resin 

stripper for continuous processes, or immediately after 

stripping for batch processes, as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section. Individual sampling 

events may be 3 to 5 weeks apart, but you must conduct a minimum 

of 12 sampling events per calendar year.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 299 of 406

(6) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the 

total HAP emission limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to 

this subpart as specified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) 

of this section.

(i) Calculate the 24-hour arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for each stripper for each resin grade produced 

during the 24-hour sampling period, using the individual HAP 

concentrations measured for the grab samples collected as 

specified in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) or (iv) of this section and 

the calculation procedures specified in paragraph (e) of this 

section.

(ii) In the first 12 months following your demonstration 

of initial compliance in paragraph (b)(4) and (5) of this 

section, you must demonstrate continuous compliance with the 

total HAP emission limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to 

this subpart on a monthly basis as specified in paragraph (b)(4) 

and (5) of this section.

(iii) Beginning 13 months following your initial 

demonstration of compliance in paragraph (b)(5) of this section, 

demonstrate continuous compliance with the total HAP emission 

limit for stripped resin in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart based 

on a 12-month rolling average concentration, calculated as the 

average of the 12 most recent 24-hour arithmetic average 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 300 of 406

concentrations in either paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(A) or (B) of this 

section.

(A) If more than one resin grade was produced during the 

24-hour sampling period, calculate the 24-hour weighted 

arithmetic average total HAP concentration for each stripper, or 

for each group of strippers used to process the same type of 

resin, using the 24-hour average total HAP concentrations 

calculated in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this section and the mass 

of each resin grade produced during the 24-hour sampling period. 

(B) If only one resin grade was produced during the 24-

hour sampling event, use the arithmetic average total HAP 

concentration for the one resin grade in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of 

this section for each stripper or calculate the 24-hour 

arithmetic average vinyl chloride concentration for all 

strippers used to process the one grade of resin.

(d) Performance test methods and procedures for 

determining concentration of vinyl chloride and total HAP. You 

must determine the concentration of vinyl chloride and total HAP 

using the test methods and procedures specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1) through (5) of this section. Upon request, the owner or 

operator shall make available to the Administrator such records 

as may be necessary to determine the conditions of performance 

tests.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 301 of 406

(1) You must conduct performance tests during maximum 

representative operating conditions for the process and when the 

resin stripper is operating as close as possible to your 

operating limits established during the initial performance 

test, as required in §63.11935(d)(2), or during a subsequent 

performance test, as provided in §63.11935(d)(2). If an 

operating limit is a range, then you must operate the stripper

as close as possible to the maximum or minimum operating limit

for the resin stripper, whichever results in higher emissions 

(i.e., lower emission reduction). If the resin stripper will be 

operating at several different sets of operating conditions, you 

must supplement the testing with additional testing, modeling 

and/or engineering assessments to demonstrate compliance with 

the operating limit. Alternative operating conditions may be 

used if specified or approved by the Administrator.

(2) For measuring total HAP, you must propose a method in 

your test plan prepared in §63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for 

conducting sampling and analysis using the methods specified in 

paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. You must submit 

the test plan for approval as specified in §63.8(d) and (e).

(i) Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, appendix B, Section 8.0 

for sample collection, preservation, storage, and transport.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 302 of 406

(ii) Method 8260B Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas 

Chromatography/Mass spectrometry (GC/MS) in ―Test Methods for 

Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,‖ Revision 3, 

February 2007, EPA Publication No. SW-846, Third Edition 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) for sample analysis.

(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you must use Method 107 

at 40 CFR part 61, appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, transport, and analysis.

(4) When using the methods in paragraphs (d)(2) and (3) of 

this section, for sample collection, preservation, transport, 

and analysis, you must minimize loss of HAP and maintain sample 

integrity.

(5) For batch process operations, you must obtain samples

when the batch process is operating at absolute worst-case 

conditions or hypothetical worst-case conditions, as specified 

in §63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and the stripper is operating at 

conditions for the monitored operating parameters that achieve 

normal emission reduction. For combined continuous and batch 

process operations, you must obtain sample when the batch 

processes are operating at absolute worst-case conditions and 

the stripper is operating at conditions for the monitored 

operating parameters that achieve normal emission reduction.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 303 of 406

(e) Method for calculating total HAP concentration. For 

each stripped resin sample measured using the methods specified 

in paragraph (d) of this section, calculate the sum of the 

measured individual HAP compound concentrations by using 

Equation 1 to this section. 

n

i

HAP Ci

C

1

(Eq. 1)

Where:

CHAP = Concentration of total HAP compounds in the stripped 

resin, in parts per million by weight (ppmw).

Ci = Concentration of each individually identified HAP 

compound in the stripped resin, in ppmw, where a value 

of zero should be used for any HAP concentration that

is below the detection limit.

§63.11965 What are my general compliance requirements for 

wastewater? 

(a) Initial control level determination. You must meet 

the control level (i.e., emission limit or standard) specified 

in Table 3 to this subpart for each wastewater stream. To 

determine the applicable control level for each wastewater 

stream, you must follow the procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) and 

(2) of this section.

(1) You must measure the concentrations of vinyl chloride 

and total HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part as 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 304 of 406

(i) You must collect wastewater samples at the location 

specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) for vinyl chloride and 

paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) for total HAP listed in Table 9 to 

subpart G of this part.

(A) For vinyl chloride, collect samples at the location 

that the wastewater stream is generated and prior to the 

wastewater stream being exposed to the atmosphere, stored, 

combined with any other liquid stream, treated (e.g., stripping, 

distillation, thin film evaporating), or discharged to a 

wastewater treatment plant.

(B) For total HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this 

part, collect samples at the point of determination, as defined 

in subpart G of this part.

(ii) You must measure the concentration of vinyl chloride 

and total HAP (based on the HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of this part) using the test methods and procedures specified in 

§63.11980(a) and Table 10 to this subpart and the calculation 

method specified in §63.11980(b).

(2) You must determine the annual average flow rate as 

specified in paragraph (d) of this section.

(b) Requirements for wastewater streams that must be 

treated to reduce the vinyl chloride concentration. Each 

wastewater stream that has a vinyl chloride concentration equal 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 305 of 406

to or greater than 10 parts per million by weight, determined 

pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) of this section must be treated to 

reduce the concentration of vinyl chloride at the outlet of the 

treatment process as specified in Table 3 to this subpart. You 

must meet the wastewater treatment process requirements of 

either paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section. You must also 

meet the continuous compliance requirements specified in 

§63.11975.

(1) Route wastewater streams through hard piping from the 

point of generation directly to the treatment process and route 

the vent stream from the treatment process to a closed vent 

system and control device meeting the requirements of §§63.11925 

through 63.11945.

(2) Meet the requirements for wastewater tanks, surface 

impoundments, containers, individual drain systems, and 

oil/water separators used to manage the wastewater from the 

point of generation through the treatment process as specified 

in §§63.133 through 63.137 and all requirements of subpart G of 

this part referenced therein.

(c) Requirements for wastewater streams that must be 

treated to reduce the concentration of the total HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart G of this part. For each wastewater stream 

that contains greater than or equal to 1,000 parts per million
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 306 of 406

by weight total HAP in paragraph §63.11970(a)(2) or 

§63.11975(d)(3), and has an annual average flow rate greater 

than or equal to 10 liters per minute in §63.11970(a)(2) or 

§63.11975(e)(2), as determined pursuant to paragraphs (a)(1) and 

(a)(2) of this section, you must meet the requirements in 

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

(1) Comply with the applicable requirements for wastewater 

tanks, surface impoundments, containers, individual drain 

systems, and oil/water separators as specified in §§63.133 

through 63.137. 

(2) Comply with the applicable requirements specified in 

§63.138 for control of total HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of this part. Alternatively, you may elect to comply with the 

wastewater treatment provisions specified in §63.132(g).

(3) Comply with the applicable monitoring and inspection 

requirements specified in §63.143.

(4) Comply with the applicable reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements specified in §§63.146 and 63.147.

(d) Determination of the annual average flow rate. The 

annual average flow rate for the wastewater stream must be 

representative of actual or anticipated operation of the PVCPU 

generating the wastewater over a designated 12-month period. 

You must consider the total annual wastewater volume generated 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 307 of 406

by the PVCPU. You must use one or more of the procedures 

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section to 

determine the flow rate. Documentation to determine the annual 

average flow rate is not required for wastewater streams with an 

annual average flow rate of 10 liters per minute or greater.

(1) Knowledge of the wastewater. You may use knowledge of 

the wastewater stream and/or the process to determine the annual 

average flow rate. You must use the maximum expected annual 

average production capacity of the process unit, knowledge of 

the process, and/or mass balance information to either: 

estimate directly the annual average wastewater flow rate; or 

estimate the total annual wastewater volume and then divide the 

total volume by 525,600 minutes in a year. When knowledge is 

used to determine the annual average flow rate, you must provide 

sufficient information to document the flow rate for wastewater

streams determined to have an annual average flow rate of less 

than 10 liters per minute. 

(2) Historical records. You may use historical records to 

determine the annual average flow rate. Derive the highest 

annual average flow rate of wastewater from historical records 

representing the 5 most recent years of operation, or, if the 

process unit has been in service for less than 5 years but at 

least 1 year, from historical records representing the total 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 308 of 406

operating life of the process unit. When historical records are 

used to determine the annual average flow rate, you must provide 

sufficient information to document the flow rate for wastewater

streams determined to have an annual average flow rate of less 

than 10 liters per minute.

(3) Measurements of flow rate. You may take measurements 

to determine the annual average flow rate. If you elect to 

measure flow rate, you must measure flow rate measurements at or 

near the point of determination, as defined in subpart G of this 

part. When measurement data are used to determine the annual 

average flow rate, you must provide sufficient information to 

document the flow rate measurements for wastewater streams 

determined to have an annual average flow rate of less than 10 

liters per minute. 

§63.11970 What are my initial compliance requirements for 

wastewater?

(a) Demonstration of initial compliance for wastewater

streams that must be treated. For each wastewater stream that 

must be treated as specified in §63.11965(b) and (c), you must 

meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this 

section, respectively, to demonstrate initial compliance. 

(1) For each wastewater stream that must be treated to 

reduce the vinyl chloride concentration limit specified in Table 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 309 of 406

3 to this subpart, and for which you elect to treat the stream 

according to §63.11965(b)(1), you must follow the requirements 

of paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.

(i) For each wastewater treatment process, you must 

prepare the site-specific monitoring plan specified in 

§63.11935(c) for CPMS. You must install, operate, and maintain

CPMS meeting the requirements of §63.11935 and capable of 

continuously monitoring the parameters specified in 

§63.11975(a)(1). You must conduct an initial site-specific 

performance evaluation test of each CPMS according to your sitespecific monitoring plan and §63.11935(c)(2).

(ii) You must conduct an initial performance test for the 

wastewater treatment process, measuring the concentration of 

vinyl chloride in the wastewater stream at the outlet of the 

wastewater treatment process before the wastewater is exposed to 

the atmosphere and using the test method(s) and procedures 

specified in §63.11980(a). 

(iii) During the initial performance test conducted as 

specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii)of this section, you must use 

the CPMS data collected pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this 

section to establish an operating limit for the wastewater 

treatment process according to the procedures specified in 

§63.11935(d) for each operating parameter specified in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 310 of 406

§63.11975(a)(1). Each operating limit must be based on the data 

averaging period for the wastewater treatment process specified 

in Table 6 to this subpart using data collected at the minimum 

frequency specified in §§63.11935(c)(2) and 63.11890(c), and 

calculated using the data reduction method specified in 

§63.11935(e). For a CPMS used on a batch operation, you may use 

a data averaging period based on an operating block in lieu of 

the averaging period specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(2) For each wastewater stream that must be treated to 

meet the vinyl chloride emission limit in Table 3 to this 

subpart, and for which you elect to treat the stream according 

to §63.11965(b)(2), you must demonstrate initial compliance as 

specified in subpart G, as referenced in 63.11965(b)(2).

(3) For each wastewater stream that contains greater than 

or equal to 1,000 parts per million by weight of total HAP and 

has an annual average flow rate greater than or equal to 10 

liters per minute, determined using the procedures and methods 

specified in §63.11965(a)(1) and (2) respectively, you must 

demonstrate initial compliance as specified in subpart G, as 

referenced in §63.11965(c).

(b) Demonstration of initial compliance for wastewater

streams that are not required to be treated for vinyl chloride. 

For each wastewater stream that has a vinyl chloride 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 311 of 406

concentration less than 10 parts per million by weight, you must 

use the measurement specified in §63.11965(a)(1) to demonstrate 

initial compliance.

(c) Demonstration of initial compliance for wastewater

streams that are not required to be treated for total HAP. You 

must follow the procedure in either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of 

this section to demonstrate initial compliance.

(1) For each wastewater stream that has a total HAP

concentration of less than 1,000 parts per million by weight, 

you must use the measurement in §63.11965(a)(1)(i)(B) to 

demonstrate compliance.

(2) For each wastewater stream that has an annual average 

flow rate of less than 10 liters per minute, you must use the 

flow rate initially determined as specified in §63.11965(a)(2).

§63.11975 What are my continuous compliance requirements for 

wastewater? 

For each wastewater stream that must be treated to reduce 

the concentration of vinyl chloride as specified in 

§63.11965(b)(1), you must demonstrate continuous compliance as 

specified in either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. For 

each wastewater stream for which you initially determine in 

§63.11970(c) that treatment is not required to reduce total HAP 

concentration, you must demonstrate continuous compliance as 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 312 of 406

specified in paragraph (e) of this section. For each wastewater 

stream that must be treated to reduce the concentration of total 

HAP as specified in §63.11965(c), you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in paragraph (c) of this 

section. For each wastewater stream for which you initially 

determine in §63.11970(b) that treatment is not required to 

reduce the vinyl chloride concentration, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section.

(a) For each wastewater stream that must be treated to 

reduce the concentration of vinyl chloride, and for which you 

elect to treat the stream according to §63.11965(b)(1), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance as specified in paragraphs 

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

(1) For each wastewater treatment process, you must 

operate and maintain CPMS meeting the requirements of 

§63.11935(c) and capable of continuously recording the 

parameters specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iv) of 

this section, as applicable. You must conduct periodic sitespecific CPMS performance evaluation tests according to your 

site-specific monitoring plan and §63.11935(c).

(i) For wastewater steam strippers, you must monitor the 

ratio of steam feed rate into the stripper to wastewater stream 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 313 of 406

flow rate into the stripper and the temperature of the 

wastewater exiting the stripper before any cooling process. The 

steam feed to wastewater flow ratio is calculated by dividing 

the steam feed rate by the wastewater stream flow rate. You 

must follow the data measurement and recording frequencies and 

data averaging periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(ii) For wastewater vacuum strippers, you must monitor the 

vacuum level maintained in the column, the maximum flow rate of 

the wastewater stream, and the temperature of the wastewater 

exiting the stripper before any cooling process. If steam is 

used, you must monitor the ratio of steam feed rate into the 

stripper to wastewater stream flow rate into the stripper 

instead of monitoring the flow rate of the wastewater stream. 

The steam feed to wastewater flow ratio is calculated by 

dividing the steam feed rate by the wastewater stream flow rate.

You must follow the data measurement and recording frequencies 

and data averaging periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(iii) If you are using a wastewater treatment process 

other than a steam or vacuum stripper, you must submit the 

information specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) 

of this section.

(A) A description of the proposed treatment process.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 314 of 406

(B) A description of the parameter(s) to be monitored to 

ensure that the treatment process is operated in conformance 

with its design and that it achieves the emission standard 

specified in Table 3 to this subpart, and an explanation of the 

criteria used to select the parameter(s).

(C) A description of the methods and procedures that will 

be used to demonstrate that the parameter specified in paragraph 

(a)(1)(iii)(B) of this section indicates proper operation of the 

treatment process, the schedule for this demonstration, and a 

statement that you will establish an operating limit for the 

monitored operating parameter as part of the notification of 

compliance status report specified in §63.11935(d).

(iv) Alternatives to monitoring requirements. 

(A) You may request approval to use alternatives to the 

continuous operating parameter monitoring listed in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, as specified in 

§63.11985(c)(5).

(B) You may request approval to monitor a different 

parameter than those established in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through 

(iii) of this section or to set unique monitoring parameter, as 

specified in §63.11985(c)(6).

(C) Until permission to use an alternative monitoring 

procedure, method, or parameter has been granted by the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 315 of 406

Administrator, you remain subject to the requirements of this 

subpart.

(2) You must ensure that each operating parameter 

monitored in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for a treatment 

process meets the operating limit established in 

§63.11970(a)(1)(iii). You must continuously determine the 

average value of each monitored operating parameter based on the 

data collection and reduction methods specified in 

§63.11935(c)(2) and (e), and the applicable data averaging 

period for the wastewater treatment process specified in Table 6 

to this subpart for all periods the process is operating. You 

must follow the data measurement and recording frequencies and 

data averaging periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

For a CPMS used on a batch operation, you may use a data 

averaging period based on an operating block in lieu of the 

averaging periods specified in Table 6 to this subpart.

(3) To demonstrate compliance with the emission limit for 

vinyl chloride specified in Table 3 to this subpart, you must 

follow the procedures specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through 

(iii) of this section.

(i) Take monthly measurements of the vinyl chloride 

concentration using the procedures and methods for vinyl 

chloride specified in §63.11965(a)(1).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 316 of 406

(ii) In the first 12 months following your demonstration 

of initial compliance in §63.11970(a)(1), you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the vinyl chloride emission limit in 

Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly basis, using the monthly 

concentration measurement specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of 

this section.

(iii) Beginning 13 months following your initial 

demonstration of compliance in §63.11970(a)(1), demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the vinyl chloride emission limit in 

Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly basis, using a 12-month 

rolling average concentration, calculated as the average of the 

12 most recent monthly concentration measurements specified in 

paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section.

(b) For each wastewater stream that must be treated to 

reduce the concentration of vinyl chloride, and for which you 

elect to treat the stream according to §63.11965(b)(2), you must 

demonstrate continuous compliance as specified in subpart G of 

this part, as referenced in §63.11965(b)(2).

(c) For each wastewater stream that must be treated to 

reduce the concentration of total HAP as specified in 

§63.11965(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance as 

specified in subpart G of this part, as referenced in 

§63.11965(c).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 317 of 406

(d) For each wastewater stream for which you initially 

demonstrate in §63.11970(b) that treatment is not required to 

reduce the vinyl chloride concentration, you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(4) of this section.

(1) Conduct monthly performance tests, measuring the vinyl 

chloride concentration using the procedures and methods for 

vinyl chloride specified in §63.11965(a)(1).

(2) In the first 12 months following your demonstration of 

initial compliance in §63.11970(b), you must demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the vinyl chloride emission limit in 

Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly basis, using the monthly 

concentration measurement specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this 

section.

(3) Beginning 13 months following your initial 

demonstration of compliance in §63.11970(b), demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the vinyl chloride emission limit in 

Table 3 to this subpart on a monthly basis, using a 12-month 

rolling average concentration, calculated as the average of the 

12 most recent monthly concentration measurements specified in 

paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(4) If any monthly performance test specified in 

paragraph (d)(2) or (3) of this section shows that the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 318 of 406

concentration of vinyl chloride in the wastewater stream is 

greater than or equal to the vinyl chloride emission limit in 

Table 3 to this subpart, then you must use a treatment process 

to reduce the vinyl chloride concentration as specified in 

§63.11965(b) and you must demonstrate compliance as specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section.

(e) For each wastewater stream for which you initially 

demonstrate in §63.11970(c) that treatment is not required to 

reduce the total HAP concentration, you must conduct monthly 

performance tests, following the procedure specified in 

paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section on a monthly basis.

(1) Sample and measure the concentration of total HAP 

using the procedures and methods for total HAP specified in 

§63.11965(a)(1) and demonstrate that the total HAP concentration 

(based on the HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) 

is less than 1,000 parts per million by weight. The dataaveraging period for demonstrating compliance is specified in 

subpart G of this part.

(2) Re-establish that the annual average flow rate of the 

stream is less than 10 liters per minute, using the procedure 

and methods specified in §63.11965(a)(2).

(3) If any monthly performance test specified in paragraph 

(e)(1) of this section shows that the concentration of total HAP 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 319 of 406

is greater than or equal to 1,000 parts per million by weight 

and the annual average flow rate measured in paragraph (e)(2) of 

this section is greater than or equal to 10 liters per minute, 

then you must use a treatment process to reduce the vinyl 

chloride concentration as specified in §63.11965(c) and you must 

demonstrate compliance as specified in paragraph (b) of this 

section.

§63.11980 What are my test methods and calculation procedures 

for wastewater?

(a) Performance test methods and procedures. You must 

determine the concentration of vinyl chloride and total HAP 

(based on the list of HAP in Table 9 to subpart G of this part) 

using the test methods and procedures specified in paragraphs 

(a)(1) through (5) of this section. Upon request, the owner or 

operator shall make available to the Administrator such records 

as may be necessary to determine the conditions of performance 

tests.

(1) You must conduct performance tests during maximum 

representative operating conditions for the process and when the 

wastewater treatment process is operating as close as possible 

to your operating limits established during the performance test 

conducted to demonstrate initial compliance, as required in 

§63.11970, or during a subsequent performance test conducted to 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 320 of 406

demonstrate continuous compliance, as provided in §63.11975. 

If an operating limit is a range, then you must operate the 

wastewater treatment process as close as possible to the maximum 

or minimum operating limit, whichever results in higher 

emissions (i.e., lower emission reduction). If the wastewater 

treatment process will be operating at several different sets of 

operating conditions, you must supplement the testing with 

additional testing, modeling and/or engineering assessments to 

demonstrate compliance with the operating limit. Alternative 

operating conditions may be used if specified or approved by the 

Administrator as specified in 63.11940(j).

(2) For measuring total HAP, you must propose a method in 

your test plan prepared in §63.7(c)(3) and (e)(2)(i) for 

conducting sampling and analysis using the methods specified in 

paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. You must 

submit the test plan for approval as specified in §63.8(d) and 

(e).

(i) Using Method 107 at 40 CFR part 61, appendix B, 

Section 8.0 for sample collection, preservation, storage, and 

transport.

(ii) For sample analysis for total HAP except methanol, 

using Method 8260B Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas 

Chromatography/Mass spectrometry (GC/MS) in ―Test Methods for 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 321 of 406

Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,‖ Revision 3, 

February 2007, EPA Publication No. SW-846, Third Edition 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) for sample analysis.

(iii) For sample analysis for methanol, using Method 305 

at 40 CFR 63, appendix A, Sections 6.0 and 7.0.

(3) For measuring vinyl chloride, you must use Method 107 

at 40 CFR part 61, appendix B, Section 8.0 for sample 

collection, preservation, storage, transport, and analysis.

(4) When using the test methods in paragraph (a)(2) or (3) 

of this section, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs

(a)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.

(i) Sample collection may consist of grab or composite 

samples.

(ii) Samples must be taken before the wastewater stream is 

exposed to the atmosphere.

(iii) You must ensure that sample collection, 

preservation, transport, and analysis minimizes loss of HAP and 

maintains sample integrity.

(5) For batch process operations, you must obtain samples 

when the batch process is operating at absolute worst-case 

conditions or hypothetical worst-case conditions, as defined for 

process vents in §63.11945(c)(1) and (2), and the wastewater 

treatment process is operating at conditions specified in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 322 of 406

paragraph (a)(1) of this section. For combined continuous and 

batch process operations, you must obtain sample when the batch 

processes are operating at absolute worst-case conditions and 

the wastewater treatment process is operating at conditions for 

the monitored operating parameters that achieve normal emission 

reduction.

(b) Method for calculating total HAP concentration. For 

each wastewater stream measured using the methods specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section, calculate the sum of the measured 

concentrations of individual HAP listed in Table 9 to subpart G 

of this part by using Equation 1 to this section. 

n

i

T Ci

C

1

9

(Eq. 1)

Where:

CT9 = Concentration of total HAP that are listed in Table 9 

to subpart G of this part, in the stream, in parts per 

million by weight (ppmw).

Ci = Concentration of each individually identified HAP that 

is listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part, in 

ppmw.

Notifications, Reports, and Records

§63.11985 What notifications and reports must I submit and 

when?

In addition to the notifications and reports required in 

subpart A of this part, as specified in Table 5 to this subpart, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 323 of 406

you must submit the additional information and reports specified 

in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section, as applicable.

(a) Notification of compliance status. When submitting 

the notification of compliance status required in §63.9(h), you 

must also include the information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (9) of this section, as applicable.

(1) You must include an identification of the storage 

vessels subject to this subpart, including the capacity and 

liquid stored for each vessel. You must submit the information 

specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section for each pressure 

vessel.

(2) You must include the information specified in 

§63.1039(a) for equipment leaks.

(3) You must include an identification of the heat 

exchange systems that are subject to the requirements of this 

subpart.

(4) You must include the operating limit for each 

monitoring parameter identified for each control device, resin 

stripper, and wastewater treatment process used to meet the 

emission limits in Table 1, 2 or 3 to this subpart, as 

determined pursuant to §63.11935(d). This report must include 

the information in §63.11935(d), as applicable.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 324 of 406

(5) You must include the records specified in paragraphs 

(d)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents.

(i) You must include the performance test records 

specified in §63.11990(f)(1), as applicable. These reports must 

include one complete test report for each test method used for 

each process vent. A complete test report must include a brief 

process description, sampling site description, description of 

sampling and analysis procedures and any modifications to 

standard procedures, quality assurance procedures, record of 

operating conditions during the test, record of preparation of 

standards, record of calibrations, raw data sheets for field 

sampling, raw data sheets for field and laboratory analyses, 

documentation of calculations, and any other information 

required by the test method. For additional tests performed for 

the same kind of emission point using the same method, the 

results and any other information required in applicable 

sections of this subpart must be submitted, but a complete test 

report is not required.

(ii) You must include the information specified in 

paragraphs (a)(5)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section for batch 

process vent operations.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 325 of 406

(A) Descriptions of worst-case operating and/or testing 

conditions for control devices including results of emissions 

profiles.

(B) Calculations used to demonstrate initial compliance 

according to §§63.11945 and 63.11950, including documentation of 

the proper operation of a process condenser(s) as specified in 

§63.11950(c)(2)(ii).

(C) Data and rationale used to support an engineering 

assessment to calculate emissions in accordance with 

§63.11950(i).

(iii) If you use a fabric filter, you must include the 

fabric filter operation and maintenance plan as specified in 

§63.11940(h)(10). You must submit analyses and supporting 

documentation demonstrating conformance with Fabric Filter Bag 

Leak Detection Guidance, EPA–454/R–98–015, September 1997 

(incorporated by reference, see §63.14) and specifications for 

bag leak detection systems as part of the notification of 

compliance status report.

(iv) If you use a control device other than those listed 

in §63.11940 for your process vent, you must include a 

description of the parameters to be monitored to ensure the 

control device is operated in conformance with its design and 

achieves the specified emission limitation and an explanation of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 326 of 406

the criteria used to select the parameter; and a description of 

the methods and procedures that will be used to demonstrate that 

the parameter indicates proper operation of the control device, 

the schedule for this demonstration, and a statement that you 

will establish an operating limit for the monitored parameter as 

specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.

(6) Reserved.

(7) You must include the records specified in paragraphs 

(a)(7)(i) through (iii) of this section, as applicable, for 

resin strippers.

(i) You must include an identification of each resin 

stripper and resin type subject to the requirements of this 

subpart. 

(ii) You must include results of the initial testing used 

to determine the annual average concentration of vinyl chloride 

and the annual average flow rate and concentration of total HAP

that are listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part.

(iii) You must record the approved test method specified 

in §63.11980(a) for sample introduction, instrument calibration 

and sample analysis for the laboratory determination of vinyl 

chloride and the laboratory determination of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 327 of 406

(8) You must include the records specified in paragraphs 

(a)(8)(i) through (vi) of this section, as applicable, for 

wastewater.

(i) You must include an identification of each wastewater

stream subject to the requirements of this subpart, and the 

control level required. You must also include a description of 

the treatment process to be used for each wastewater stream.

(ii) You must include results of the initial sampling used 

to determine the annual average concentration of vinyl chloride 

and the annual average concentration of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part.

(iii) You must include the annual average flow rate 

calculated using the procedures in §63.11965(d) for each 

wastewater stream that you have determined is not subject to 

treatment as specified in §63.11970(b) because it has an annual 

average flow rate of less than 10 liters per minute.

(iv) You must record the test method specified in 

§63.11980(a)(2) for sample introduction, instrument calibration 

and sample analysis for the laboratory determination of vinyl 

chloride and laboratory determination of total HAP that are 

listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 328 of 406

(v) You must include any other applicable information that 

is required by the reporting requirements specified in §63.146 

of subpart G.

(vi) If you use a wastewater treatment process other than

a steam or vacuum stripper for wastewater, you must include a 

description of the parameters to be monitored to ensure the 

control measure is operated in conformance with its design and 

achieves the specified emission limitation and an explanation of 

the criteria used to select the parameter; and a description of 

the methods and procedures that will be used to demonstrate that 

the parameter indicates proper operation of the control device, 

the schedule for this demonstration, and a statement that you 

will establish an operating limit for the monitored parameter as 

specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.

(9) You must include a certification of compliance, signed 

by a responsible official, as applicable that states the 

following:

(i) ―This facility complies with the requirements in this 

subpart for storage vessels.‖

(ii) ―This facility complies with the requirements in this 

subpart for equipment leaks.‖

(iii) ―This facility complies with the requirements in 

this subpart for heat exchange systems.‖
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 329 of 406

(iv) ―This facility complies with the requirements in this 

subpart for HAP emissions from process vents.‖ 

(v) ―This facility complies with the requirements in this 

subpart for other emission sources.‖

(vi) ―This facility complies with the requirements in this 

subpart for the stripped resin.‖

(vii) ―This facility complies with the requirements in 

this subpart for wastewater.‖

(b) Compliance reports. When submitting the excess 

emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report 

and summary report required in §63.10(e)(3), you must also 

include the information specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(10) of this section, as applicable. This report is referred to 

in this subpart as your compliance report.

(1) You must include a copy of the inspection record 

specified in §63.11990(b)(2) for each storage vessel when a 

defect, failure, or leak is detected. You must also include a 

copy of the applicable information specified in §63.1039(b)(5) 

through (8) of subpart UU of this part for each pressure vessel.

(2) You must include the information specified in 

§63.1039(b) for equipment leaks, except for releases from 

pressure relief devices. For any releases from pressure relief 

devices, you must submit the report specified in paragraph 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 330 of 406

(c)(8) of this section instead of the information specified in 

§63.1039(b)(1) through (3) of subpart UU of this part.

(3) You must include the information specified in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section for heat 

exchange systems.

(i) The number of heat exchangers.

(ii) The number of heat exchangers found to be leaking. 

(iii) A summary of the monitoring data used to indicate a 

leak, including the number of leaks determined to be equal to or 

greater than the leak definition.

(iv) If applicable, the date a leak was identified, the 

date the source of the leak was identified, and the date of 

repair.

(v) If applicable, a summary of each delayed repair, 

including the original date and reason for the delay and the 

date of repair, if repaired during the reporting period.

(vi) If applicable, an estimate of total strippable 

volatile organic compounds emissions for each delayed repair 

over the reporting period.

(4) You must include the records specified in paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents, resin strippers, and wastewater. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 331 of 406

(i) Deviations using CEMS or CPMS. For each deviation 

from an emission limit or operating limit where a CEMS or CPMS 

is being used to comply with an emission limit in this rule, you 

must include the information in paragraphs (b)(4)(i)(A) through

(E) of this section.

(A) For CEMS, the 3-hour block average value calculated 

for any period when the value is higher than an emission limit 

in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart or when the value does not meet 

the data availability requirements defined in §63.11890(c).

(B) For CPMS, the average value calculated for any day 

(based on the data averaging periods for compliance specified in 

Table 6 to this subpart) that does not meet your operating limit

established according to §63.11935(d) or that does not meet the 

data availability requirements specified in §63.11890(c).

(C) The cause for the calculated emission level or 

operating parameter level to not meet the established emission 

limit or operating limit.

(D) For deviations caused by lack of monitoring data, the 

duration of periods when monitoring data were not collected.

(E) Operating logs of batch process operations for each 

day during which the deviation occurred, including a description 

of the operating scenario(s) during the deviation.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 332 of 406

(ii) New operating scenario. Include each new operating 

scenario that has been operated since the time period covered by 

the last compliance report and has not been submitted in the 

notification of compliance status report or a previous 

compliance report. For each new operating scenario, you must 

provide verification that the operating conditions for any 

associated control or treatment device have not been exceeded

and constitute proper operation for the new operating scenario. 

You must provide any required calculations and engineering 

analyses that have been performed for the new operating 

scenario. For the purposes of this paragraph (b)(4)(ii), a 

revised operating scenario for an existing process is considered 

to be a new operating scenario when one or more of the data 

elements listed in §63.11990(e)(4) have changed.

(iii) Process changes. You must document process changes, 

or changes made to any of the information submitted in the 

notification of compliance status report or a previous 

compliance report, that is not within the scope of an existing 

operating scenario, in the compliance report. The notification 

must include all of the information in paragraphs (b)(4)(iii)(A) 

through (C) of this section.

(A) A description of the process change.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 333 of 406

(B) Revisions to any of the information reported in the 

original notification of compliance status report as provided in 

paragraph (a) of this section.

(C) Information required by the notification of compliance 

status report, as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, for 

changes involving the addition of processes or equipment at the 

affected source. 

(5) You must submit the applicable information specified 

in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section for process 

vents. 

(i) For catalytic incinerators for which you have selected 

the alternative monitoring specified in §63.11940(b)(3), results 

of the annual catalyst sampling and inspections required by 

§63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii) including any subsequent corrective 

actions taken.

(ii) For regenerative adsorbers, results of the adsorber 

bed outlet volatile organic compounds concentration measurements 

specified in §63.11940(d)(7). 

(iii) For non-regenerative adsorbers, results of the 

adsorber bed outlet volatile organic compounds concentration 

measurements specified in §63.11940(e)(2).

(iv) Other control device reporting provisions. If you 

are using a control device other than those listed in this 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 334 of 406

subpart, you must submit the information as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(5)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section.

(A) A description of the proposed control device.

(B) A description of the parameter(s) to be monitored to 

ensure the control device is operated in conformance with its 

design and achieves the performance level as specified in this 

subpart and an explanation of the criteria used to select the 

parameter(s).

(C) The frequency and content of monitoring, recording, 

and reporting if monitoring and recording is not continuous, or 

if compliance reports, as specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(A) of 

this section, will not contain 3-hour block average values when 

the monitored parameter value does not meet the established

operating limit. The rationale for the proposed monitoring, 

recording, and reporting system must be included. 

(6) You must include the records specified in §63.11990(j) 

for other emission sources.

(7) For resin stripper operations, you must include 

results of monthly concentration measurements for each resin 

type discharged from the PVCPU that did not meet the control 

level requirements in Table 1 or 2, as applicable.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 335 of 406

(8) You must include the information specified in 

paragraphs (b)(8)(i) and (ii) of this section for your 

wastewater streams.

(i) Results of monthly concentration measurements for each

wastewater stream discharged from the affected source that did 

not meet the control level requirements in Table 3 to this 

subpart. 

(ii) If you must comply with §63.11965, you must include 

any other applicable information that is required by the 

reporting requirements specified in §63.146.

(9) For closed vent systems subject to the requirements of 

§63.11930, you must include the information specified in 

paragraphs (b)(9)(i) through (iv) of this section, as 

applicable.

(i) As applicable, records as specified in 

§63.11930(g)(1)(i) for all times when flow was detected in the 

bypass line, the vent stream was diverted from the control 

device, or the flow indicator was not operating.

(ii) As applicable, records as specified in 

§63.11930(g)(1)(ii) for all occurrences of all periods when a 

bypass of the system was indicated (the seal mechanism is 

broken, the bypass line valve position has changed, or the key 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 336 of 406

for a lock-and-key type lock has been checked out, and records 

of any car-seal that has been broken).

(iii) Records of all times when monitoring of the system 

was not performed as specified in §63.11930(d) and (e), or 

repairs were not performed as specified in §63.11930(f), or 

records were not kept as specified in §63.11930(g)(2).

(iv) Records of each time an alarm on a closed vent system 

operating in vacuum service is triggered as specified in 

§63.11930(h) including the cause for the alarm and the 

corrective action taken.

(10) Overlap with title V reports. Information required 

by this subpart, which is submitted with a title V periodic 

report, does not need to be included in a subsequent compliance 

report required by this subpart or subpart referenced by this 

subpart. The title V report must be referenced in the 

compliance report required by this subpart.

(c) Other notifications and reports. You must submit the 

other notification and reports, as specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (10) of this section, as applicable.

(1) Notification of inspection. To provide the 

Administrator the opportunity to have an observer present, you 

must notify the Administrator at least 30 days before an 

inspection required by §§63.11910 through 63.11920 and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 337 of 406

§63.11930. If an inspection is unplanned and you could not have 

known about the inspection 30 days in advance, then you must 

notify the Administrator at least 7 days before the inspection. 

Notification must be made by telephone immediately followed by 

written documentation demonstrating why the inspection was 

unplanned. Alternatively, the notification including the 

written documentation may be made in writing and sent so that it 

is received by the Administrator at least 7 days before the 

inspection. If a delegated State or local agency is notified, 

you are not required to notify the Administrator. A delegated 

State or local agency may waive the requirement for notification 

of inspections.

(2) Batch precompliance report. You must submit a batch 

precompliance report at least 6 months prior to the compliance 

date of this subpart that includes a description of the test 

conditions, data, calculations, and other information used to 

establish operating limits according to §63.11935(d) for all 

batch operations. If you use an engineering assessment as 

specified in §63.11950(i), you must also include data or other 

information supporting a finding that the emissions estimation 

equations in §63.11950(a) through (h) are inappropriate. We 

will either approve or disapprove the report within 90 days 

after we receive it. If we disapprove the report, you must 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 338 of 406

still be in compliance with the emission limitations and work 

practice standards of this subpart by your compliance date. To 

change any of the information submitted in the report, you must 

notify us 60 days before you implement the planned change.

(3) Notification of process change. If you change or add 

to your plant site or affected source, as discussed in 

§63.11896, you must submit a notification describing the change 

or addition.

(4) Affirmative defense notification and report.

(i) As specified in §63.11895(b), if your affected source

experiences an exceedance of its emission limit(s) during a 

malfunction, you must notify the Administrator by telephone or 

facsimile (fax) transmission as soon as possible, but no later 

than 2 business days after the initial occurrence of the

malfunction, if you wish to avail yourself of an affirmative 

defense to civil penalties for that malfunction. 

(ii) If you seek to assert an affirmative defense, you 

must follow the procedures in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this 

section and submit a written report as specified in §63.11895 to 

the Administrator within 45 days of the initial occurrence of 

the exceedance of the standard in §63.11880 to demonstrate, with 

all necessary supporting documentation, that you have met the 

requirements set forth in §63.11895(a). 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 339 of 406

(5) Request for approval to use alternative monitoring 

methods. Prior to your initial notification of compliance 

status, you may submit requests for approval to use alternatives 

to the continuous operating parameter monitoring specified in 

this rule, as provided for in §§63.11940(j)(1), 

63.11960(c)(1)(iv)(A), and 63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(A), following the 

same procedure as specified in §63.8. The information specified 

in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section must be 

included.

(i) A description of the proposed alternative system.

(ii) Information justifying your request for an 

alternative method, such as the technical or economic 

infeasibility, or the impracticality, of the affected source

using the required method.

(6) Request for approval to monitor alternative 

parameters. Prior to your initial notification of compliance 

status, you may submit requests for approval to monitor a 

different parameter than those established in §63.11935(d) and 

as provided for in §§63.11940(j)(2), 63.11960(c) (1)(iv)(B), and 

63.11975(a)(1)(iv)(B), following the same procedure as specified 

for alternative monitoring methods in §63.8. The information 

specified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iii) of this section 

must be included in the request.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 340 of 406

(i) A description of the parameter(s) to be monitored to 

ensure the control technology or pollution prevention measure is 

operated in conformance with its design and achieves the 

specified emission limit and an explanation of the criteria used 

to select the parameter(s).

(ii) A description of the methods and procedures that will 

be used to demonstrate that the parameter indicates proper 

operation of the control device, the schedule for this 

demonstration, and a statement that you will establish an 

operating limit for the monitored parameter(s) as part of the 

notification of compliance status if required under this 

subpart, unless this information has already been submitted.

(iii) The frequency and content of monitoring, recording, 

and reporting, if monitoring and recording is not continuous. 

The rationale for the proposed monitoring, recording, and 

reporting system must be included.

(7) Reserved.

(8) Pressure relief device, closed vent system in vacuum 

service, bypass deviation, or pressure vessel closure device 

deviation report. If any pressure relief device in HAP service 

or any piece of equipment or closed vent system has discharged 

to the atmosphere as specified in §§63.11910(c)(4), 63.11915(c), 

63.11930(c), or 63.11930(h), you must submit to the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 341 of 406

Administrator within 10 days of the discharge the following 

information:

(i) The source, nature, and cause of the discharge.

(ii) The date, time, and duration of the discharge.

(iii) An estimate of the quantity of vinyl chloride and 

total HAP emitted during the discharge and the method used for 

determining this quantity.

(iv) The actions taken to prevent this discharge. 

(v) The measures adopted to prevent future such 

discharges.

(9) Commencing and ceasing operation of continuous 

emissions monitoring systems. Before starting or stopping the 

use of CEMS you must notify the Administrator as specified in 

§63.11935(b)(7). 

(10) Data Submittal.

(i) As of January 1, 2012, and within 60 days after the 

date of completing each performance test (see §60.8) required by 

this subpart, you must submit performance test data, except 

opacity data, electronically to EPA‘s Central Data Exchange 

(CDX) by using the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) (see 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html). Only data 

collected using test methods compatible with ERT are subject to 

this requirement to be submitted electronically to EPA‘s CDX. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 342 of 406

(ii) Within 60 days after the date of completing each CEMS 

performance evaluation test (see §60.13), you must submit the 

relative accuracy test audit data electronically into EPA‘s CDX

by using the ERT, as mentioned in paragraph (10)(i) of this 

section. Only data collected using test methods compatible with 

ERT are subject to this requirement to be submitted 

electronically to EPA‘s CDX.

(iii) All reports required by this subpart not subject to 

the requirements in paragraphs (10)(i) and (ii) of this section 

must be sent to the Administrator at the appropriate address 

listed in §63.13. The Administrator or the delegated authority 

may request a report in any form suitable for the specific case 

(e.g., by electronic media such as Excel spreadsheet, on CD or 

hard copy). The Administrator retains the right to require 

submittal of reports subject to paragraphs (10)(i) and (ii) of 

this section in paper format.

§63.11990 What records must I keep? 

You must keep records as specified in paragraphs (a) 

through (j) of this section, as applicable.

(a) Copies of reports. You must keep a copy of each 

notification and report that you submit to comply with this 

subpart, including all documentation supporting any notification 

or report. You must also keep copies of the current versions of 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 343 of 406

the site-specific performance evaluation test plan, sitespecific monitoring plan, and the equipment leak detection and 

repair plan.

(b) Storage vessels. For storage vessels, you must 

maintain the records specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) 

of this section.

(1) You must keep a record of the dimensions of the 

storage vessel, an analysis of the capacity of the storage 

vessel, and an identification of the liquid stored. 

(2) Inspection records for fixed roofs complying with 

§63.11910 including the information specified in paragraphs 

(b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) Record the date of each inspection required by 

§63.11910(a)(3).

(ii) For each defect detected during an inspection 

required by §63.11910(a)(3), record the location of the defect, 

a description of the defect, the date of detection, and 

corrective action taken to repair the defect. In the event that 

repair of the defect is delayed in accordance with 

§63.11910(a)(4)(ii), also record the reason for the delay and 

the date that completion of repair of the defect is expected.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 344 of 406

(3) For degassing and cleaning events, you must maintain 

the records specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this 

section.

(i) Keep records of the storage vessel identification and 

date of each degassing and cleaning event.

(ii) Estimate and keep records of the emissions from each 

degassing and cleaning event.

(4) For pressure vessels, you must keep the records

specified in paragraph (c) of this section for each pressure 

vessel.

(5) For internal and external floating roof storage 

vessels, you must maintain the records required in §63.1065 of 

subpart WW of this part.

(c) Equipment leaks. For equipment leaks, you must 

maintain the records specified in §63.1038 of subpart UU of this 

part for equipment leaks and a record of the information 

specified in §63.11930(g)(4) for monitoring instrument 

calibrations conducted according to §63.11930(e)(2).

(d) Heat exchange systems. For a heat exchange system

subject to this subpart, you must keep the records specified in 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this section.

(1) Identification of all heat exchangers at the facility 

and the measured or estimated average annual HAP concentration 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 345 of 406

of process fluid or intervening cooling fluid processed in each 

heat exchanger. 

(2) Identification of all heat exchange systems. For each 

heat exchange system that is subject to this subpart, you must 

include identification of all heat exchangers within each heat 

exchange system, identification of the individual heat 

exchangers within each heat exchange system, and, for closedloop recirculation systems, the cooling tower included in each 

heat exchange system.

(3) Identification of all heat exchange systems that are 

exempt from the monitoring requirements according to the 

provisions in §63.11920(b) and the provision under which the 

heat exchange system is exempt.

(4) Results of the following monitoring data for each 

monitoring event.

(i) Date/time of event.

(ii) Heat exchange exit line flow or cooling tower return 

line flow at the sampling location, gal/min.

(iii) Monitoring method employed.

(iv) If the ―Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso 

Method) for Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Water Sources,‖ Revision Number One, dated January 2003, 

Sampling Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 346 of 406

Monitoring, prepared by Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, January 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference, see 

§63.14) is used according to §63.11920(a)(3)(i) or (h)(4)(i):

(A) Barometric pressure.

(B) El Paso air stripping apparatus water flow (ml/min) 

and air flow, ml/min, and air temperature, °C.

(C) FID reading (parts per million by volume).

(D) Calibration information identified in Section 5.4.2 of 

the ―Air Stripping Method (Modified El Paso Method) for 

Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Water 

Sources,‖ Revision Number One, dated January 2003, Sampling 

Procedures Manual, Appendix P: Cooling Tower Monitoring, 

prepared by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, January 

31, 2003 (incorporated by reference, see §63.14).

(v) If Method 8021B, ―Aromatic and Halogenated Volatiles 

by Gas Chromatography Using Photoionization and/or Electrolytic 

Conductivity Detectors,‖ dated December 1996 (incorporated by 

reference, see §63.14) is used according to §65.610(a)(3)(ii):

(A) The type of detector used.

(B) The list of target analytes.

(C) The measured cooling water concentration for each of 

target analyte (parts per billion by weight).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 347 of 406

(D) Calibration and surrogate recovery information 

identified in Section 8.0 of Method 8021B, ―Aromatic and 

Halogenated Volatiles by Gas Chromatography Using

Photoionization and/or Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors,‖ 

dated December 1996 (incorporated by reference, see §63.14).

(5) The date when a leak was identified and the date when 

the heat exchanger was repaired or taken out of service.

(6) If a repair is delayed, the reason for the delay, the 

schedule for completing the repair, and the estimate of 

potential emissions for the delay of repair. 

(e) Process vents, resin strippers, and wastewater. You 

must include the records specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through 

(4) of this section, as applicable, for process vents, resin 

strippers, and wastewater.

(1) Continuous records. Where this subpart requires a 

continuous record using CEMS or CPMS, you must maintain, at a 

minimum, the records specified in §63.10(b)(2)(vii)(A).

(2) Excluded data. In any average computed to determine 

compliance, you must exclude monitoring data recorded during 

periods specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this 

section.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 348 of 406

(i) Periods of non-operation of the process unit (or 

portion thereof), resulting in cessation of the emissions to 

which the monitoring applies.

(ii) Periods of no flow to a control device.

(iii) Monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated 

with monitoring system malfunctions, or required monitoring 

system quality assurance or control activities, as specified in

§63.11890(c)(2).

(3) Records of calculated emission and operating parameter 

values. You must retain for 5 years a record of CEMS and CPMS 

data as specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this 

section, unless an alternative recordkeeping system has been 

requested and approved.

(i) Except as specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) of this 

section, retain for 5 years the records of the average values 

for each continuously monitored operating parameter and 

pollutant specified in §§63.11925(e)(3)(ii), 

63.11925(e)(4)(ii)(B), 63.11960(c)(2), and 63.11975(a)(2) for 

CEMS and CPMS.(ii) In lieu of calculating and recording the 

average value specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) of this section, 

if all 1-hour averages specified in §63.11935(e) demonstrate 

compliance with your parameter operating limit or the applicable 

pollutant emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 349 of 406

block average period , you may record a statement that all 

recorded 1-hour averages met the operating limit or emission 

limit, as applicable, and retain for 5 years this statement and 

all recorded CPMS or CEMS data for the block average period.

(4) Information to be included in records. You must keep 

records of each operating scenario as specified in paragraphs 

(e)(4)(i) through (viii) of this section, as applicable.

(i) You must keep a schedule or log of operating 

scenarios, updated each time a different operating scenario is 

put into effect.

(ii) A description of the process and the type of process 

components used.

(iii) An identification of related process vents, 

wastewater streams, or resin strippers including their 

associated emissions episodes.

(iv) The applicable control requirements of this subpart 

for process vents, resin strippers, and/or treatment processes.

(v) The control device, resin stripper, and/or treatment 

process, including a description of operating and testing 

conditions.

(vi) Combined emissions that are routed to the same 

control device, resin stripper, and/or treatment process.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 350 of 406

(vii) The applicable monitoring requirements of this 

subpart and any operating limit that assures compliance for all 

emissions routed to the control device resin stripper, and/or 

treatment process.

(viii) Calculations and engineering analyses required to 

demonstrate compliance.

(f) Process vents. You must include the records specified 

in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section, as applicable, for 

process vents.

(1) Records of performance tests as required in 

§63.10(b)(2)(viii). You must also collect the applicable 

control device operating parameters required in §63.11940 over 

the full period of the performance test.

(2) If you use a control device to comply with this 

subpart and you are required to use CPMS, you must keep up-todate and readily accessible records for your process vents as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section, 

as applicable.

(i) If you use a flow indicator, you must keep records of 

periods of no flow to the control device, including the start 

and stop time and dates of periods of flow and no flow. 

(ii) If you use a catalytic incinerator for which you have 

selected the alternative monitoring specified in 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 351 of 406

§63.11940(b)(3), you must also maintain records of the results 

of the annual catalyst sampling and inspections required by 

§63.11940(b)(3)(i) and (ii) including any subsequent corrective 

actions taken.

(iii) If you use a regenerative adsorber as specified in 

§63.11940(d), the records specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(iii)(A) 

through (H) of this section, as applicable, must be kept.

(A) Records of total regeneration stream mass flow for 

each adsorber-bed regeneration cycle.

(B) Records of the temperature of the adsorber bed after 

each regeneration and within 15 minutes of completing any 

cooling cycle.

(C) For non-vacuum and non-steam regeneration systems, 

records of the temperature of the adsorber bed during each 

regeneration except during any temperature regulating (cooling 

or warming to bring bed temperature closer to vent gas 

temperature) portion of the regeneration cycle.

(D) If adsorber regeneration vacuum is monitored pursuant 

to §63.11940(d)(4), records of the vacuum profile over time and 

the amount of time the vacuum level is below the minimum vacuum 

target for each adsorber-bed regeneration cycle.

(E) Records of the regeneration frequency and duration.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 352 of 406

(F) Daily records of the verification inspections, 

including the visual observations and/or any activation of an 

automated alarm or shutdown system with a written entry into a 

log book or other permanent form of record.

(G) Records of the maximum volatile organic compound or 

HAP outlet concentration observed over the last 5 minutes of the 

adsorption cycle for each adsorber bed. Records must be weekly 

or for every regeneration cycle if the regeneration cycle is

greater than 1 week.

(H) Records of the date and time the adsorbent had last 

been replaced.

(iv) If you use a non-regenerative adsorber as specified 

in §63.11940(e), the records specified in paragraphs 

(f)(2)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section, as applicable, must 

be kept.

(A) A record of the average life of the bed, as determined 

by §63.11940(e)(1), including the date the average life was 

determined.

(B) Daily, weekly, or monthly records of the maximum 

volatile organic compound or HAP outlet concentration, as 

specified by §63.11940(e)(2). 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 353 of 406

(C) Records of bed replacement including the date and time 

the adsorbent had last been replaced, and the date and time in 

which breakthrough is detected.

(v) If you use sorbent injection as specified in 

§63.11940(g), you must keep records of the type and brand of 

sorbent used. If the type or brand of sorbent is changed, you 

must maintain documentation that the substitute will provide the 

same or better level of control as the original sorbent.

(vi) If you use a fabric filter as specified in 

§63.11940(h), you must maintain the records specified in 

paragraphs (f)(2)(vi)(A) through (C) of this section for each 

bag leak detector used.

(A) An operation and maintenance plan as described in 

§63.11940(h)(10).

(B) A corrective action plan as described in 

§63.11940(h)(11). 

(C) Records of any bag leak detection system alarm, 

including the date and time, with a brief explanation of the 

cause of the alarm and the corrective action taken.

(g) Closed vent systems. You must keep the records 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (6) of this section, and 

you must record any additional information as specified in 

§63.11930, as applicable.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 354 of 406

(1) Each alarm triggered because flow was detected in a 

bypass as specified in §63.11930(g)(1)(i).

(2) Inspections of seals or closure mechanisms as 

specified in §63.11930(g)(1)(ii).

(3) Copies of compliance reports for closed vent system 

leak inspections as specified in §63.11985(b)(9) and 

§63.11930(g)(2) and (3).

(4) Instrument calibration records as specified in 

§63.11930(g)(4).

(5) Unsafe-to-inspect equipment as specified in 

§63.11930(g)(5).

(6) Pressure alarms as specified by §63.11930(h)(2) and 

(3). 

(h) Resin stripper. For resin strippers, you must 

maintain the records specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) 

of this section.

(1) All sampling data, including monthly measurements of 

the concentration of vinyl chloride and total HAP compounds in 

the stripped resin exiting the resin stripper for each type of 

resin produced.

(2) The applicable operating parameters required in 

§63.11960(c) over the full period of the sampling.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 355 of 406

(3) The quantity (tons) of resin produced per grade per 

day.

(i) Wastewater. For wastewater treatment processes, you 

must maintain the records specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through 

(6) of this section.

(1) A description of the wastewater generation activities 

and treatment process.

(2) Records of the control level determinations specified 

in §63.11965(a)(1)(i) and (ii) for each wastewater stream and

the type of treatment applied if required in §63.11965(b) and 

(c). 

(3) Records of the initial performance test specified in 

§63.11970(a) including the operating parameters monitored during 

testing and the average of each parameter, averaged over the 

testing period.

(4) Records of the annual average flow rate as determined 

in §63.11965(a)(2) and §63.11975(e)(2), including documentation 

of how the average flow rate was determined.

(5) All testing data, including monthly measurements of 

the concentrations of vinyl chloride and the concentration of 

total HAP that are listed in Table 9 to subpart G of this part 

in each wastewater stream required to be measured, as specified 

in §63.11975. You must also record the applicable operating 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 356 of 406

parameters required in §63.11975(a) over the full period of the 

sampling. 

(6) You must keep any other applicable records that are

required by the recordkeeping requirements specified in §63.147 

of subpart G of this part.

(j) Other emission sources. You must keep the records 

specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) All engineering calculations, testing, sampling, and 

monitoring results and data specified in §63.11955.

(2) Each occurrence that you do not comply with the 

requirements in §63.11955.

§63.11995 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

(a) You must keep records for 5 years in a form suitable 

and readily available for expeditious review, as specified in 

§63.10(b)(1).

(b) You must keep each record on site for at least 2 

years, as specified in §63.10(b)(1). You can keep the records 

off site for the remaining 3 years. Records may be maintained 

in hard copy or computer-readable format including, but not 

limited to, on paper, microfilm, hard disk drive, floppy disk, 

compact disk, magnetic tape, or microfiche.

§63.12000 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 357 of 406

(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the 

Administrator, as defined in §63.2, or a delegated authority 

such as your state, local, or tribal agency. If the 

Administrator has delegated authority to your state, local, or 

tribal agency, then that agency (as well as the Administrator) 

has the authority to implement and enforce this subpart. You 

should contact your EPA Regional Office to find out if this 

subpart is delegated to your State, local, or tribal agency.

(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority 

of this subpart to a state, local, or tribal agency, the 

authorities listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this 

section are retained by the Administrator and are not 

transferred to the state, local, or tribal agency, however, the 

EPA retains oversight of this subpart and can take enforcement 

actions, as appropriate.

(1) Approval of alternatives to the emission limits, 

operating limits, and work practice standards specified in this 

subpart.

(2) Approval of a major change to test methods, as defined 

in §63.90, approval of any proposed analysis methods, and 

approval of any proposed test methods.

(3) Approval of a major change to monitoring, as defined 

in §63.90.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 358 of 406

(4) Approval of a major change to recordkeeping and 

reporting, as defined in §63.90.

Definitions

§63.12005 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air 

Act, in §63.2, and in this section, as follows:

Affirmative defense means, in the context of an enforcement 

proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a defendant, 

regarding which the defendant has the burden of proof, and the 

merits of which are independently and objectively evaluated in a 

judicial or administrative proceeding.

Batch emission episode means a discrete venting episode 

that is associated with a single unit operation. A unit 

operation may have more than one batch emission episode. For 

example, a displacement of vapor resulting from the charging of 

a vessel with HAP will result in a discrete emission episode 

that will last through the duration of the charge and will have 

an average flowrate equal to the rate of the charge. If the 

vessel is then heated, there will also be another discrete 

emission episode resulting from the expulsion of expanded vapor. 

Both emission episodes may occur in the same vessel or unit 

operation. There are possibly other emission episodes that may 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 359 of 406

occur from the vessel or other process components, depending on

process operations.

Batch operation means a noncontinuous operation involving 

intermittent or discontinuous feed into process components, and, 

in general, involves the emptying of the process components 

after the operation ceases and prior to beginning a new 

operation. Addition of raw material and withdrawal of product 

do not occur simultaneously in a batch operation.

Batch process vent means a vent from a batch operation from 

a PVCPU or vents from multiple PVCPUs within a process that are 

manifolded together into a common header, through which a HAPcontaining gas stream is, or has the potential to be, released 

to the atmosphere. Batch process vents also include vents with 

intermittent flow from continuous operations that are not 

combined with any stream that originated as a continuous gas 

stream from the same continuous process. Examples of batch 

process vents include, but are not limited to, vents on 

condensers used for product recovery, polymerization reactors, 

and process tanks. The following are not batch process vents 

for the purposes of this subpart:

(1) Continuous process vents.

(2) Bottoms receivers.

(3) Surge control vessels.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 360 of 406

(4) A gas stream routed to other processes for reaction or 

other use in another process (i.e., for chemical value as a 

product, isolated intermediate, byproduct, coproduct, or for 

heat value).

(5) Vents on storage tanks, wastewater emission sources, 

or pieces of process components subject to the emission limits 

and work practice standards for storage vessels, equipment

leaks, and wastewater.

(6) Drums, pails, and totes.

(7) Vents from a pressure relief device having an 

actuation pressure of 2 psig or higher.

Bottoms receiver means a tank that collects bottoms from 

continuous distillation before the stream is sent for storage or 

for further downstream processing. A rundown tank is an example 

of a bottoms receiver.

Bulk process means a process for producing polyvinyl 

chloride resin that is characterized by a two-step anhydrous 

polymerization process: the formation of small resin particles 

in a pre-polymerization reactor using small amounts of vinyl 

chloride monomer, an initiator, and agitation; and the growth of 

the resin particles in a post-polymerization reactor using 

additional vinyl chloride monomer. Resins produced using the 

bulk process are referred to as bulk resins.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 361 of 406

Bypass means to direct a process vent or closed vent system 

stream to the atmosphere such that it does not first pass 

through an emission control device.

Calendar year means the period between January 1 and 

December 31, inclusive for a given year.

Capacity means the nominal figure or rating given by the 

manufacturer of the storage vessel, condenser, or other process 

component.

Car-seal means a seal that is placed on a device that is 

used to change the position of a valve (e.g., from opened to 

closed) in such a way that the position of the valve cannot be 

changed without breaking the seal.

Closed vent system means a system that is not open to the 

atmosphere and is composed of piping, ductwork, connections, 

and, if necessary, flow inducing devices that collect or 

transport gas or vapor from an emission point to a control 

device.

Combustion device means an individual unit used for the 

combustion of organic emissions, such as a flare, incinerator, 

process heater, or boiler.

Conservation vent means an automatically operated (e.g., 

weight-loaded or spring-loaded) safety device used to prevent 

the operating pressure of a storage vessel from exceeding the 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 362 of 406

maximum allowable working pressure of the process component. 

Conservation vents open and close to permit only the intake or 

outlet relief necessary to keep the storage vessel within 

permissible working pressures, and reseal automatically.

Container means a portable unit in which a material can be 

stored, transported, treated, disposed of, or otherwise handled. 

Examples of containers include, but are not limited to, drums, 

pails, and portable cargo containers known as ―portable tanks‖ 

or ―totes.‖ Container does not include transport vehicles or 

barges.

Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) means the 

total equipment that may be required to meet the data 

acquisition and availability requirements of this subpart, used 

to sample, condition (if applicable), analyze, and provide a 

record of emissions.

Continuous operation means any operation that is not a 

batch operation.

Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) means the 

total equipment that may be required to meet the data 

acquisition and availability requirements of this part, used to 

sample, condition (if applicable), analyze, and provide a record 

of process or control system parameters.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 363 of 406

Continuous record means documentation, either in hard copy 

or computer readable form, of data values measured at least once 

every 15 minutes and recorded at the frequency specified in 

§63.11990(e)(1).

Continuous process vent means the point of discharge to the 

atmosphere (or the point of entry into a control device, if any) 

of a gas stream if the gas stream has the following 

characteristics: 

(1) Some, or all, of the gas stream originates as a 

continuous flow from any continuous PVCPU operation during 

operation of the PVCPU.

(2) The discharge to the atmosphere (with or without 

passing through a control device) meets at least one of the 

following conditions:

(i) Is directly from any continuous operation.

(ii) Is from any continuous operation after passing solely 

(i.e., without passing through any other unit operation for a 

process purpose) through one or more recovery devices within the 

PVCPU.

(iii) Is from a device recovering only mechanical energy 

from a gas stream that comes either directly from any continuous 

operation, or from any continuous operation after passing solely 

(i.e., without passing through any other unit operation for a 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 364 of 406

process purpose) through one or more recovery devices within the 

PVCPU.

(3) The gas stream is in the gas phase from the point of 

origin at the continuous operation to the point of discharge to 

the atmosphere (or to the point of entry into a control device, 

if any).

(4) The gas stream is discharged to the atmosphere either 

on site, off site, or both. If the gas stream is discharged to 

an off-site or on-site location that you do not own or operate, 

you must comply with the requirements in §63.113(a)(i) of this 

part. 

(5) The gas stream is not any of the following items: 

(i) A pressure relief device discharge having an actuation 

pressure of 2 psig or higher.

(ii) A leak from equipment subject to this subpart.

(iii) A gas stream exiting a control device used to comply 

with the emission limits and work practice standards of this 

subpart.

(v) A gas stream transferred to other processes (on site 

or off site) for reaction or other use in another process (i.e., 

for chemical value as a product, isolated intermediate, byproduct, or co-product, or for heat value).
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 365 of 406

(vi) A storage vessel vent or transfer operation vent 

subject to the provisions of this subpart.

(vii) A vent from a waste management unit subject to the 

provisions of subpart G of this subpart, as specified in this 

subpart.

(viii) A gas stream exiting an analyzer (but they must be 

controlled as sample purge).

(6) The gas stream would meet the characteristics 

specified in paragraphs (1) through (6) of this definition, but, 

for purposes of avoiding applicability, has been deliberately 

interrupted, temporarily liquefied, or routed through any 

process component for no process purpose.

Control device means, with the exceptions noted in this 

definition, a combustion device, recovery device, recapture 

device, or any combination of these devices used to comply with 

this subpart. Process condensers are not control devices.

Control system means the combination of the closed vent 

system and the control devices used to collect and control 

vapors or gases from a regulated emission source.

Cooling tower means a heat removal device used to remove 

the heat absorbed in circulating cooling water systems by 

transferring the heat to the atmosphere using natural or 

mechanical draft.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 366 of 406

Cooling tower return line means the main water trunk lines 

at the inlet to the cooling tower before exposure to the 

atmosphere.

Corrective action plan means a description of all 

reasonable interim and long-term measures, if any, that are 

available, and an explanation of why the selected corrective 

action is the best alternative, including, but not limited to, 

any consideration of cost-effectiveness.

Day means a calendar day, unless otherwise specified in 

this subpart.

Degassing means the process of removing HAP organic gases 

from a storage vessel.

Dioxin/furan means total tetra- through octachlorinated 

dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans.

Dispersion process means a process for producing polyvinyl 

chloride resin that is characterized by the formation of the 

polymers in soap micelles that contain small amounts of vinyl 

chloride monomer. Emulsifiers are used to disperse vinyl 

chloride monomer in the water phase. Initiators used in the 

dispersion process are soluble in water. Resins produced using 

the dispersion process are referred to as latex or dispersion 

resins.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 367 of 406

Empty or emptying means the partial or complete removal of

stored liquid from a storage vessel. Storage vessels that 

contain liquid only as a result of the liquid clinging to the 

walls or bottoms, or resting in pools due to bottom 

irregularities, are considered completely empty.

Equipment means each pump, compressor, agitator, pressure 

relief device, sampling connection system, open-ended valve or 

line, valve, connector, and instrumentation system in HAP 

service; and any control devices or systems used to comply with 

this subpart.

Fill or filling means the introduction of liquid into a 

storage vessel, but not necessarily to capacity.

First attempt at repair, for the purposes of this subpart, 

means to take action for the purpose of stopping or reducing 

leakage of organic material to the atmosphere, followed by 

monitoring as specified in §63.11930(f) to verify whether the 

leak is repaired, unless the owner or operator determines by 

other means that the leak is not repaired. 

Fixed roof storage vessel means a vessel with roof that is 

mounted (i.e., permanently affixed) on a storage vessel and that 

does not move with fluctuations in stored liquid level.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 368 of 406

Flow indicator means a device that indicates whether gas 

flow is, or whether the valve position would allow gas flow to 

be, present in a line.

Grade means the subdivision of PVC resin classification 

which describes it as a unique resin, i.e., the most exact 

description of a resin with no further subdivision.

Heat exchange system means a device or collection of 

devices used to transfer heat from process fluids to water 

without intentional direct contact of the process fluid with the 

water (i.e., non-contact heat exchanger) and to transport and/or 

cool the water in a closed-loop recirculation system (cooling 

tower system) or a once-through system (e.g., river or pond 

water). For closed-loop recirculation systems, the heat 

exchange system consists of a cooling tower, all heat exchangers 

that are serviced by that cooling tower, and all water lines to 

and from the heat exchanger(s). For once-through systems, the 

heat exchange system consists of one or more heat exchangers 

servicing an individual process unit and all water lines to and 

from the heat exchanger(s). Intentional direct contact with 

process fluids results in the formation of a wastewater.

In HAP service means that a process component either 

contains or contacts a liquid that is at least 5 percent HAP by 

weight or a gas that is at least 5 percent by volume HAP as 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 369 of 406

determined according to the provisions of §63.180(d). The 

provisions of §63.180(d) also specify how to determine that a 

process component is not in HAP service.

In vacuum service means that the process component is 

operating at an internal pressure that is at least 5 kilopascals 

(kPa) (0.7 pounds per square inch absolute) below ambient 

pressure.

Incinerator means an enclosed combustion device with an 

enclosed fire box that is used for destroying organic compounds. 

Auxiliary fuel may be used to heat waste gas to combustion 

temperatures. Any energy recovery section present is not 

physically formed into one manufactured or assembled unit with 

the combustion section; rather, the energy recovery section is a 

separate section following the combustion section and the two 

are joined by ducts or connections carrying flue gas. This 

energy recovery section limitation does not apply to an energy 

recovery section used solely to preheat the incoming vent stream 

or combustion air.

Maximum representative operating conditions means process 

operating conditions that result in the most challenging 

condition for the control device. The most challenging 

condition for the control device may include, but is not limited 

to, the highest or lowest HAP mass loading rate to the control 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 370 of 406

device, the highest or lowest HAP mass loading rate of 

constituents that approach the limits of solubility for 

scrubbing media, the highest or lowest HAP mass loading rate of 

constituents that approach limits of solubility for scrubbing 

media.

Maximum true vapor pressure means the equilibrium partial 

pressure exerted by the total HAP in the stored or transferred 

liquid at the temperature equal to the highest calendar-month 

average of the liquid storage or transfer temperature for 

liquids stored or transferred above or below the ambient 

temperature or at the local maximum monthly average temperature 

as reported by the National Weather Service for liquids stored 

or transferred at the ambient temperature, as determined by any 

one of the following methods or references:

(1) In accordance with methods described in American 

Petroleum Institute Publication 2517, Evaporative Loss From 

External Floating-Roof Tanks (incorporated by reference, see 

§63.14).

(2) As obtained from standard reference texts.

(3) As determined by the American Society for Testing and 

Materials Method D2879–10 (incorporated by reference, see 

§63.14).

(4) Any other method approved by the Administrator.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 371 of 406

Nonstandard batch means a batch process that is operated 

outside of the range of operating conditions that are documented 

in an existing operating scenario but is still a reasonably 

anticipated event. For example, a nonstandard batch occurs when 

additional processing or processing at different operating 

conditions must be conducted to produce a product that is 

normally produced under the conditions described by the standard 

batch. A nonstandard batch may be necessary as a result of a 

malfunction, but it is not itself a malfunction.

Operating block means a period of time that is equal to the 

time from the beginning to end of batch process operations 

within a process.

Operating day means a 24-hour period between 12 midnight 

and the following midnight during which PVC is produced at any 

time in the PVCPU. It is not necessary for PVC to be produced 

for the entire 24-hour period.

Operating scenario means, for the purposes of reporting and 

recordkeeping, any specific operation of a regulated process as 

described by reports specified in §63.11985(b)(3) and records 

specified in §63.11990(e)(4).

Plant site means all contiguous or adjoining property that 

is under common control including properties that are separated 

only by a road or other public right-of-way. Common control 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 372 of 406

includes properties that are owned, leased, or operated by the 

same entity, parent entity, subsidiary, or any combination 

thereof.

Polymerization reactor means any vessel in which vinyl 

chloride is partially or totally polymerized into polyvinyl 

chloride. For bulk processes, the polymerization reactor 

includes pre-polymerization reactors and post-polymerization 

reactors.

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) means a synthetic thermoplastic 

polymer that is derived from the polymerization of vinyl 

chloride and has the general chemical structure (-H2CCHCl-)n. 

Polyvinyl chloride is typically a white powder or colorless 

granule. Polyvinyl chloride is produced by different processes, 

including (but not limited to), suspension, dispersion/emulsion, 

bulk, and solution processes.

Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production process unit 

or PVCPU means a collection of process components assembled and 

connected by hard-piping or duct work, used to process raw 

materials and to manufacture polyvinyl chloride and/or polyvinyl 

chloride copolymers. A PVCPU includes, but is not limited to, 

polymerization reactors; resin stripping operations; blend 

tanks; centrifuges; dryers; product separators; recovery 

devices; feed, intermediate, and product storage vessels such as 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 373 of 406

reactant storage tanks, holding tanks, mixing and weighing

tanks, and final product storage tanks or storage silos; 

finished product loading operations; heat exchange systems; 

wastewater strippers; wastewater treatment systems; connected 

ducts and piping; equipment components including pumps, 

compressors, agitators, pressure relief devices, sampling 

connection systems, open-ended valves or lines, valves, and 

connectors. A PVCPU does not include chemical manufacturing 

process units, as defined in §63.101, that produce vinyl 

chloride monomer or other raw materials used in the PVC 

polymerization process.

Polyvinyl chloride copolymer means a synthetic 

thermoplastic polymer that is derived from the simultaneous 

polymerization of vinyl chloride and another vinyl monomer such 

as vinyl acetate. Polyvinyl chloride copolymer is produced by 

different processes, including, but not limited to, suspension, 

dispersion/emulsion, bulk, and solution processes.

Pressure relief device means a safety device used to 

prevent operating pressures from exceeding the maximum allowable 

working pressure of the process component. A common pressure 

relief device is a spring-loaded pressure relief valve. Devices 

that are actuated either by a pressure of less than or equal to 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 374 of 406

2.5 pounds per square inch gauge or by a vacuum are not pressure 

relief devices.

Pressure vessel means a vessel that is used to store 

liquids or gases and is designed not to vent to the atmosphere 

as a result of compression of the vapor headspace in the 

pressure vessel during filling of the pressure vessel to its 

design capacity.

Process change means an addition to or change in a PVCPU 

and/or its associated process components that creates one or 

more emission points or changes the characteristics of an 

emission point such that a new or different emission limit, 

operating parameter limit, or work practice requirement applies

to the added or changed emission points. Examples of process 

changes include, but are not limited to, changes in production 

capacity, production rate, or catalyst type, or whenever there 

is replacement, removal, or addition of recovery device 

components. For purposes of this definition, process changes do 

not include process upsets, changes that do not alter the 

process component configuration and operating conditions, and 

unintentional, temporary process changes. A process change does 

not include moving within a range of conditions identified in 

the standard batch, and a nonstandard batch does not constitute 

a process change. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 375 of 406

Process component means any unit operation or group of 

units operations or any part of a process or group of parts of a 

process that are assembled to perform a specific function (e.g., 

polymerization reactor, dryers, etc.) Process components 

include equipment, as defined in this section.

Process condenser means a condenser whose primary purpose 

is to recover material as an integral part of a batch process. 

All condensers recovering condensate from a batch process at or 

above the boiling point or all condensers in line prior to a 

vacuum source are considered process condensers. Typically, a 

primary condenser or condensers in series are considered to be 

integral to the batch regulated process if they are capable of 

and normally used for the purpose of recovering chemicals for 

fuel value (i.e., net positive heating value), use, reuse or for 

sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. This definition does not 

apply to a condenser that is used to remove materials that would 

hinder performance of a downstream recovery device as follows:

(1) To remove water vapor that would cause icing in a 

downstream condenser.

(2) To remove water vapor that would negatively affect the 

adsorption capacity of carbon in a downstream carbon adsorber.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 376 of 406

(3) To remove high molecular weight organic compounds or 

other organic compounds that would be difficult to remove during 

regeneration of a downstream adsorber.

Process tank means a tank or other vessel (e.g., pressure 

vessel) that is used within an affected source to both: (1) 

collect material discharged from a feedstock storage vessel, 

process tank, or other PVCPU process component, and (2) 

discharge the material to another process tank, process 

component, byproduct storage vessel, or product storage vessel.

Process unit means the process components assembled and 

connected by pipes or ducts to process raw and/or intermediate 

materials and to manufacture an intended product. For the 

purpose of this subpart, process unit includes, but is not 

limited to, polyvinyl chloride production process.

Process vent means batch process vent or continuous process 

vent from process components including polymerization reactors, 

resin strippers, vinyl chloride monomer recovery systems, slip 

gauges, unloading and loading lines, samples, wastewater 

collection and treatment systems, and other process components 

prior to the resin stripper.

Product means a polymer produced using the same monomers 

and varying in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators, etc.); 

catalysts; or in the relative proportions of monomers, that is 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 377 of 406

manufactured by a process unit. With respect to polymers, more 

than one recipe may be used to produce the same product, and 

there can be more than one grade of a product. Product also 

means a chemical that is not a polymer, which is manufactured by 

a process unit. By-products, isolated intermediates, 

impurities, wastes, and trace contaminants are not considered 

products.

Recipe means a specific composition, from among the range 

of possible compositions that may occur within a product, as 

defined in this section. A recipe is determined by the 

proportions of monomers and, if present, other reactants and 

additives that are used to make the recipe.

Recovery device means an individual process component 

capable of and normally used for the purpose of recovering 

chemicals for fuel value (i.e., net positive heating value), 

use, reuse or for sale for fuel value, use, or reuse. Examples 

of process components that may be recovery devices include 

absorbers, adsorbers, condensers, oil-water separators or 

organic-water separators, or organic removal devices such as 

decanters, strippers (e.g., wastewater steam and vacuum 

strippers), or thin-film evaporation units. For purposes of

this subpart, recovery devices are control devices.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 378 of 406

Repaired, for the purposes of this subpart, means equipment 

that is adjusted or otherwise altered to eliminate a leak as 

defined in the applicable sections of this subpart; and unless 

otherwise specified in applicable provisions of this subpart, is 

inspected as specified in §63.11930(f) to verify that emissions 

from the equipment are below the applicable leak definition.

Resin stripper means a unit that removes organic compounds 

from a raw polyvinyl chloride and copolymer product. In the 

production of a polymer, stripping is a discrete step that 

occurs after the polymerization reaction and before drying or 

other finishing operations. Examples of types of stripping 

include steam stripping, vacuum stripping, or other methods of 

devolatilization. For the purposes of this subpart, 

devolatilization that occurs in dryers or other finishing 

operations is not resin stripping. Resin stripping may occur in 

a polymerization reactor or in a batch or continuous stripper 

separate from the polymerization reactor where resin stripping 

occurs.

Root cause analysis means an assessment conducted through a 

process of investigation to determine the primary cause, and any 

other significant contributing cause(s), of a discharge of gases 

in excess of specified thresholds.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 379 of 406

Sensor means a device that measures a physical quantity or 

the change in a physical quantity, such as temperature, 

pressure, flow rate, pH, or liquid level.

Slip gauge means a gauge that has a probe that moves 

through the gas/liquid interface in a storage vessel and 

indicates the level of product in the vessel by the physical 

state of the material the gauge discharges.

Solution process means a process for producing polyvinyl 

chloride resin that is characterized by the anhydrous formation 

of the polymer through precipitation. Polymerization occurs in 

an organic solvent in the presence of an initiator where vinyl 

chloride monomer and co-monomers are soluble in the solvent, but 

the polymer is not. The PVC polymer is a granule suspended in 

the solvent, which then precipitates out of solution. 

Emulsifiers and suspending agents are not used in the solution 

process. PVC resins produced using the solution process are 

referred to as solution resins.

Specific gravity monitoring device means a unit of 

equipment used to monitor specific gravity and having a minimum 

accuracy of ±0.02 specific gravity units.

Standard procedure means a formal written procedure 

officially adopted by the plant owner or operator and available 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 380 of 406

on a routine basis to those persons responsible for carrying out 

the procedure.

Storage vessel means a tank or other vessel (e.g., pressure 

vessel) that is part of an affected source and is used to store 

a gaseous, liquid, or solid feedstock, byproduct, or product

that contain organic HAP. Storage vessel does not include:

(1) Vessels permanently attached to motor vehicles such as 

trucks, railcars, barges, or ships;

(2) Process tanks;

(3) Vessels with capacities smaller than 10,040 gallons;

(4) Vessels storing organic liquids that contain organic 

HAP only as impurities;

(5) Bottoms receiver tanks;

(6) Surge control vessels; and

(7) Wastewater storage tanks. Wastewater storage tanks are 

covered under the wastewater provisions.

Stripped resin means the material exiting the resin 

stripper that contains polymerized vinyl chloride.

Supplemental combustion air means the air that is added to

a vent stream after the vent stream leaves the unit operation. 

Air that is part of the vent stream as a result of the nature of 

the unit operation is not considered supplemental combustion 

air. Air required to operate combustion device burner(s) is not 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 381 of 406

considered supplemental combustion air. Air required to ensure 

the proper operation of catalytic oxidizers, to include the 

intermittent addition of air upstream of the catalyst bed to 

maintain a minimum threshold flow rate through the catalyst bed 

or to avoid excessive temperatures in the catalyst bed, is not 

considered to be supplemental combustion air.

Surge control vessel means feed drums, recycle drums, and 

intermediate vessels used as a part of any continuous operation. 

Surge control vessels are used within an affected source when 

in-process storage, mixing, or management of flow rates or 

volumes is needed to introduce material into continuous 

operations.

Suspension process means a process for producing polyvinyl 

chloride resin that is characterized by the formation of the 

polymers in droplets of liquid vinyl chloride monomer or other 

co-monomers suspended in water. The droplets are formed by 

agitation and the use of protective colloids or suspending 

agents. Initiators used in the suspension process are soluble 

in vinyl chloride monomer. Polyvinyl chloride resins produced 

using the suspension process are referred to as suspension 

resins.

Treatment process means a specific technique or collection 

of techniques that remove or destroy the organics in a 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 382 of 406

wastewater or residual stream such as a steam stripping unit, 

thin-film evaporation unit, waste incinerator, biological 

treatment unit, or any other process or collection of processes 

applied to wastewater streams or residuals to comply with 

§§63.11965 and 63.11970. Most treatment processes are conducted 

in tanks.

Type of resin means the broad classification of resin 

referring to the basic manufacturing process for producing that 

resin, including, but not limited to, suspension, 

dispersion/emulsion, bulk, and solution processes.

Unloading operations means the transfer of organic liquids 

from a transport vehicle, container, or storage vessel to 

process components within the affected source.

Wastewater means water that comes into direct contact with 

HAP or results from the production or use of any raw material, 

intermediate product, finished product, by-product, or waste 

product containing HAP but that has not been discharged 

untreated as wastewater. Examples are product tank drawdown or 

feed tank drawdown; water formed during a chemical reaction or 

used as a reactant; water used to wash impurities from organic 

products or reactants; water used to cool or quench organic 

vapor streams through direct contact; water discarded from a 

control device; and condensed steam from jet ejector systems 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 383 of 406

pulling vacuum on vessels containing organics. Gasholder seal 

water is not wastewater until it is removed from the gasholder.

Work practice standard means any design, equipment, work 

practice, or operational standard, or combination thereof that 

is promulgated pursuant to section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.

Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Emission Limits and 

Standards for Existing Affected Sources

For this 

type of 

emission 

point...

And for this air 

pollutant...

And for an 

affected source

producing this 

type of PVC 

resin...

You must meet this 

emission limit...

Process 

vents1

Vinyl chloride All resin types 0.32 parts per 

million by volume at 

3-percent oxygen 

(ppmv).

Total organic HAP All resin types 12 ppmv. 

(For compliance 

determination, 

demonstrate that 

total hydrocarbon is 

less than or equal 

to 2 ppmv measured 

as propane).

Hydrogen chloride All resin types 150 ppmv.

Dioxins/furans 

(toxic equivalency 

basis)

All resin types 0.023 ng/dscm at 3-

percent oxygen.

Stripped 

resin

Vinyl chloride Bulk 7.1 parts per 

million by weight 

(ppmw).

Dispersion 55 ppmw.

All other 

resins2

0.48 ppmw.

Total HAP Bulk 170 ppmw.

Dispersion 110 ppmw.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 384 of 406

For this 

type of 

emission 

point...

And for this air 

pollutant...

And for an 

affected source

producing this 

type of PVC 

resin...

You must meet this 

emission limit...

All other 

resins2

76 ppmw.

Wastewater Vinyl chloride All resin types See Table 3 to this 

subpart.

Total HAP All resin types

1 Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.

2 Includes, but is not limited to, PVCPUs using the suspension 

process and solution process.

Table 2 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Emission Limits and 

Standards for New Affected Sources

For this 

type of 

emission 

point...

And for this air 

pollutant...

And for an 

affected source

producing this 

type of PVC 

resin...

You must meet this 

emission limit...

Process 

vents1

Vinyl chloride All resin types 3.2 parts per 

billion by volume at 

3-percent oxygen 

(ppbv).

Total organic HAP All resin types 0.22 ppmv.

(For compliance 

determination, 

demonstrate that 

total hydrocarbon is 

less than or equal 

to 2 ppmv measured 

as propane).

Hydrogen chloride All resin types 0.17 ppmv.

Dioxins/furans 

(toxic equivalency 

basis)

All resin types 0.0087 ng/dscm at 3-

percent oxygen.

Stripped 

resin

Vinyl chloride Bulk 7.1 parts per 

million by weight 

(ppmw).

Dispersion 41 ppmw.

All other 

resins2

0.20 ppmw.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 385 of 406

For this 

type of 

emission 

point...

And for this air 

pollutant...

And for an 

affected source

producing this 

type of PVC 

resin...

You must meet this 

emission limit...

Total HAP Bulk 170 ppmw.

Dispersion 58 ppmw.

All other 

resins2

42 ppmw.

Wastewate

r

Vinyl chloride All resin types See Table 3 to this 

subpart.

Total HAP All resin types

1 Emission limits at 3 percent oxygen, dry basis.

Table 3 to subpart HHHHHHH – Emission Limits and Standards for 

Wastewater for New and Existing Affected Sources

If a wastewater stream 

is determined to have 

a... Then...

And the wastewater

stream must meet the 

following limit or 

standard:

Vinyl chloride 

concentration less than 

10 parts per million by 

weight (ppmw) at the 

point of generation

You are not 

required to use a 

wastewater 

treatment process 

to reduce your 

vinyl chloride 

emissions and

compliance must be 

demonstrated as 

specified in

§63.11970(b)

Less than 10 ppmw vinyl 

chloride. 1

HAP concentration 

(based on HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart G of 

this part) less than 

1,000 ppmw; or 

Annual average flow 

rate less than 10 

liters per minute 

You are not 

required to use a 

wastewater 

treatment process 

to reduce your 

total HAP emissions 

(for HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart 

G of this part) and

compliance must be 

demonstrated as 

specified in

§63.11970(c)

Less than 1,000 ppmw of 

HAP listed in Table 9 

to subpart G of this 

part and less than 10 

liters per minute 

annual average flow 

rate.2
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 386 of 406

If a wastewater stream 

is determined to have 

a... Then...

And the wastewater

stream must meet the 

following limit or 

standard:

Vinyl chloride 

concentration greater 

than or equal to 10 

ppmw at the point of 

generation

You must use a 

wastewater 

treatment process 

and demonstrate 

compliance as 

specified in 

§§63.11965(b) and 

63.11970(a), 

respectively1

Existing sources

0.11 ppmw vinyl 

chloride at the 

stripper outlet.1

New sources

0.0060 ppmw vinyl 

chloride at the 

stripper outlet.1

HAP concentration 

(based on HAP listed in 

Table 9 to subpart G of 

this part) greater than 

or equal to 1,000 ppmw;

HAP and 

Annual average flow 

rate greater than or 

equal to 10 liters per 

minute

You must use a 

wastewater 

treatment process

and demonstrate 

compliance as 

specified in 

§§63.11965(c) and 

63.11970(a), 

respectively

The provisions in 

subpart G of this part, 

as referenced in 

§63.11965(c)(1) through 

(4).2

1Refer to §63.11975(a)(3) and (d) for the data averaging period 

for determining compliance.

2Refer to subpart G of this part for the data averaging period 

for determining compliance.

Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Summary of Control 

Requirements for Storage Vessels at New and Existing Sources

If the storage vessel 

capacity (gallons) is...

And the vapor 

pressure1 (psia) is...

Then, you must use the 

following type of 

storage vessel: ...

≥ 20,000 but < 40,000 ≥ 4 Internal floating 

roof, external 

floating roof, or 

fixed roof vented to a 

closed vent system and 

control device 

achieving 95 percent 

reduction.2

≥ 40,000 ≥ 0.75 Internal floating 

roof, external 

floating roof, or 

fixed roof vented to a 

closed vent system and 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 387 of 406

If the storage vessel 

capacity (gallons) is...

And the vapor 

pressure1 (psia) is...

Then, you must use the 

following type of 

storage vessel: ...

control device 

achieving 95 percent 

reduction.2

Any capacity > 11.1 Pressure vessel.3

All other capacity and vapor pressure 

combinations

Fixed roof.4

1 Maximum true vapor pressure of total HAP at storage 

temperature.

2 If using a fixed roof storage vessel vented to a closed vent 

system and control device, you must meet the requirements in 

§63.11910(a) for fixed roof storage vessels. If using an 

internal floating roof storage vessel or external floating roof 

storage vessels, you must meet the requirements in §63.11910(b) 

for internal floating roof storage vessels or external floating 

roof storage vessels, as applicable.

3 Meeting the requirements of §63.11910(c) for pressure vessels.

4 Meeting the requirements in §63.11910(a) for fixed roof storage 

vessels.

Table 5 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Applicability of the 

General Provisions to Part 63

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.1(a)(1)-

(a)(4), (a)(6), 

(a)(10)-(a)(12), 

(b)(1), (b)(3), 

(c)(1), (c)(2),

(c)(5), (e)

Applicability. Yes.

§63.1(a)(5), 

(a)(7)-(a)(9), 

(b)(2), (c)(3), 

(c)(4), (d)

Reserved. No.

§63.2 Definitions. Yes. Additional 

definitions are 

found in 

§63.12005.

§63.3 Units and abbreviations. Yes.

§63.4 Prohibited activities and

circumvention.

Yes.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 388 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.5 Preconstruction review and 

notification requirements.

Yes.

§63.6(a), 

(b)(1)-(b)(5), 

(b)(7), (c)(1), 

(c)(2), (c)(5), 

(e)(1)(iii), 

(f)(2), (f)(3), 

(g), (i), (j)

Compliance with standards and 

maintenance requirements.

Yes. §63.11875

specifies 

compliance 

dates.

§63.6(b)(6), 

(c)(3), (c)(4), 

(d), (e)(2), 

(e)(3)(ii), 

(h)(2)(ii), 

(h)(3), 

(h)(5)(iv)

[Reserved] No.

§63.6(e)(1)(i), 

(e)(1)(ii), 

(e)(3), (f)(1)

Startup, shutdown, and

malfunction provisions.

No. See 

§63.11890(

b) for 

general 

duty 

requiremen

t.

§63.6(h)(1), 

(h)(2)(i), 

(h)(2)(iii), 

(h)(4), 

(h)(5)(i)-

(h)(5)(iii), 

(h)(5)(v), 

(h)(6)-(h)(9)

Compliance with opacity and 

visible emission standards.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not specify 

opacity or 

visible emission 

standards.

§63.7(a)(1), 

(a)(2)(ix), 

(a)(3), (a)(4), 

(b)-(d), (e)(2)-

(e)(4), (f)-(h)

Performance testing 

requirements.

Yes.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 389 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.7(e)(1) Performance testing. No. See 

especialll

y 

§63.11945 

63.11960(d

), 

63.11980(a

) 

§63.8(a)(1), 

(a)(2), (a)(4), 

(b), (c)(1)(i), 

(c)(1)(ii), 

(c)(2)-(c)(4), 

(c)(6)-(c)(8)

Monitoring requirements. Yes. Except cross 

reference in 

§63.8(c)(1)(i) 

to §63.6(e)(1) 

is replaced with 

a crossreference to 

§63.11890(b).

§63.8(a)(3) [Reserved] No.

§63.8(c)(1)(iii) Requirement to develop SSM plan 

for continuous monitoring 

systems.

No.

§63.8(c)(5) Continuous opacity monitoring 

system minimum procedures.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not have 

opacity or 

visible emission 

standards.

§63.8(d)(3) Written procedures for 

continuous monitoring systems 

(CMS).

Yes, 

except for

last 

sentence, 

which 

refers to 

an SSM 

plan. SSM 

plans are 

not 

required.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 390 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.8(g) Reduction of monitoring data. Yes. Except that the 

minimum data 

collection 

requirements are 

specified in 

§63.11890(e).

§63.9(a), 

(b)(1), (b)(2), 

(b)(4)(i), 

(b)(4)(v), 

(b)(5), (c)-(e), 

(g)(1), (g)(3), 

(h)(1)-(h)(3), 

(h)(5), (h)(6), 

(i), (j)

Notification requirements. Yes.

§63.9(f) Notification of opacity and 

visible emission observations.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not have 

opacity or 

visible emission 

standards.

§63.9(g)(2) Use of continuous opacity 

monitoring system data.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not require 

the use of 

continuous 

opacity 

monitoring 

system.

§63.9(b)(3), 

(b)(4)(ii)-(iv), 

(h)(4)

[Reserved] No.

§63.10(a), 

(b)(1)

Recordkeeping and reporting

requirements.

Yes.

§63.10(b)(2)(i) Recordkeeping of occurrence and 

duration of startups and 

shutdowns.

No.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 391 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.10(b)(2)(ii) Recordkeeping of malfunctions. No. See 

63.11985(c

)(4) and 

(8) for 

recordkeep

ing of (1) 

occurrence 

and 

duration 

and (2) 

actions 

taken 

during 

malfunctio

n. See 

also 

63.11985(b

)(4)(i), 

for 

deviation 

reporting.

§63.10(b)(2)(iii

)

Maintenance records. Yes.

§63.10(b)(2)(iv)

, (b)(2)(v)

Actions taken to minimize 

emissions during SSM.

No.

§63.10(b)(2)(vi) Recordkeeping for CMS 

malfunctions.

Yes.

§63.10(b)(2)(vii

)–(ix)

Other CMS requirements. Yes.

§63.10(b)(2)(xi)

-(xiv)

Other recordkeeping 

requirements.

Yes.

§63.10(b)(3) Recordkeeping requirement for 

applicability determinations.

Yes. 

§63.10(c)(1), 

(c)(5), (c)(6)

Additional recordkeeping 

requirements for sources with 

continuous monitoring systems. 

Yes.

§63.10(c)(2)–

(4), (c)(9)

[Reserved]
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 392 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.10(c)(7) Additional recordkeeping 

requirements for CMS –

identifying exceedances and 

excess emissions.

Yes.

§63.10(c)(8) Additional recordkeeping 

requirements for CMS –

identifying exceedances and 

excess emissions.

Yes.

§63.10(c)(10) Recording nature and cause of 

malfunctions.

No. See 

63.11985(c

)(4) and 

(8) for 

recordkeep

ing of (1) 

occurrence 

and 

duration 

and (2) 

actions 

taken 

during 

malfunctio

n. See 

also 

63.11985(b

)(4)(i), 

for 

deviation 

reporting.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 393 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

63.10(c)(11) Recording corrective actions No. See 

63.11985(

c)(4) and 

(8) for 

recordkee

ping of 

(1) 

occurrenc

e and 

duration 

and (2) 

actions 

taken 

during 

malfuncti

on. See 

also 

63.11985(

b)(4)(i), 

for 

deviation 

reporting

.

§63.10(c)(13) –

(14)

Records of the total process 

operating time during the 

reporting period and procedures 

that are part of the continuous 

monitoring system quality 

control program.

Yes.

§63.10(c)(15) Use SSM plan. No.

§63.10(d)(1) General reporting requirements. Yes.

§63.10(d)(2) Performance test results. Yes.

§63.10(d)(3) Opacity or visible emissions 

observations.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not specify 

opacity or 

visible emission 

standards.

§63.10(d)(4) Progress reports. Yes.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 394 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.10(d)(5) SSM reports. No. See 

63.11985(c

)(4) and 

(8) for 

recordkeep

ing of (1) 

occurrence 

and 

duration 

and (2) 

actions 

taken 

during 

malfunctio

n. See 

also 

63.11985(b

)(4)(i), 

for 

deviation 

reporting.

§63.10(e)(1) Additional continuous 

monitoring system reports—

general.

Yes.

§63.10(e)(2)(i) Results of continuous 

monitoring system performance 

evaluations.

Yes.

§63.10(e)(2)(ii) Results of continuous opacity 

monitoring system performance 

evaluations.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not require 

the use of 

continuous 

opacity 

monitoring 

system.

§63.10(e)(3) Excess emissions/continuous 

monitoring system performance 

reports.

Yes.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 395 of 406

Citation Subject

Applies to 

subpart 

HHHHHHH Explanation

§63.10(e)(4) Continuous opacity monitoring 

system data reports.

No. Subpart HHHHHHH 

does not require 

the use of 

continuous 

opacity 

monitoring 

system.

§63.10(f) Recordkeeping/reporting waiver. Yes.

63.11(a) Control device and work 

practice requirements –

applicability.

Yes.

§63.11(b) Flares. No. Facilities 

subject to 

subpart HHHHHHH 

do not use 

flares as 

control devices, 

as specified in 

§63.11925(b).

§63.11(c)–(e) Alternative work practice for 

monitoring equipment for leaks.

Yes.

§63.12 State authority and 

delegations.

Yes. §63.12000

identifies types 

of approval 

authority that 

are not 

delegated.

§63.13 Addresses. Yes.

§63.14 Incorporations by reference. Yes. Subpart HHHHHHH 

incorporates 

material by 

reference.

§63.15 Availability of information and 

confidentiality.

Yes.

§63.16 Performance track provisions. Yes.

Table 6 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Operating Parameters, 

Operating Limits, and Data Monitoring, Recording, and Compliance 

Frequencies for Process Vents, Stripped Resin, and Wastewater. 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 396 of 406

For these 

control 

devices, you 

must monitor 

these 

operating 

parameters...

Establish 

the 

following 

operating 

limit 

during your

initial 

performance

test...

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous 

compliance using these minimum frequencies.

Data 

measurement

Data 

recording

Data averaging 

period for 

compliance

Process Vents

Any Control device

Flow to/from 

the control 

device

N/A Continuous N/A

Date and time of 

flow start and 

stop

Incinerators

Temperature 

(in fire box 

or downstream 

ductwork 

prior to heat 

exchange)

Minimum 

temperature Continuous Every 15 minutes

3-hour block 

average

Temperature 

differential 

across 

catalyst bed

Minimum 

temperature 

differentia

l

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Inlet 

temperature 

to catalyst 

bed and 

catalyst 

condition

Minimum 

inlet 

temperature 

and 

catalyst 

condition 

as 

specified 

in 63.11940 

(b) (3)

Continuous 

for 

temperature

, annual 

for 

catalyst 

condition

Every 15 

minutes for 

temperature

, annual 

for 

catalyst 

condition 

3-hour block 

average for 

temperature, 

annual for 

catalyst 

condition

Absorbers and Acid Gas Scrubbers

Influent 

liquid flow

Minimum 

inlet liquid 

flow

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Influent 

liquid flow 

and gas 

stream flow

Minimum 

influent 

liquid flow 

to gas 

stream flow 

ratio

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Pressure drop

Minimum 

pressure 

drop

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 397 of 406

For these 

control 

devices, you 

must monitor 

these 

operating 

parameters...

Establish 

the 

following 

operating 

limit 

during your

initial 

performance

test...

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous 

compliance using these minimum frequencies.

Data 

measurement

Data 

recording

Data averaging 

period for 

compliance

Exhaust gas 

temperature

Maximum 

exhaust gas 

temperature

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Change in 

specific 

gravity of 

scrubber 

liquid

Minimum 

change in 

specific 

gravity

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

pH of 

effluent 

liquid 

Minimum pH Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Causticity of 

effluent 

liquid

Minimum 

causticity Continuous Every 15 minutes

3-hour block 

average

Conductivity 

of effluent 

liquid

Minimum 

conductivity Continuous Every 15 minutes

3-hour block 

average

Regenerative Adsorber

Regeneration 

stream flow

Minimum 

total flow 

per 

regeneration 

cycle

Continuous N/A

Total flow for 

each 

regeneration 

cycle

Adsorber bed 

temperature

Maximum 

temperature

Continuousl

y after 

regeneratio

n and 

within 15 

minutes of 

completing 

any 

temperature 

regulation

Every 15 

minutes 

after 

regeneratio

n and 

within 15 

minutes of 

completing 

any 

temperature 

regulation

3-hour block 

average
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 398 of 406

For these 

control 

devices, you 

must monitor 

these 

operating 

parameters...

Establish 

the 

following 

operating 

limit 

during your

initial 

performance

test...

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous 

compliance using these minimum frequencies.

Data 

measurement

Data 

recording

Data averaging 

period for 

compliance

Adsorber bed 

temperature

Minimum 

temperature 

Continuousl

y during 

regeneratio

n except 

during any 

temperature 

regulating 

portion of 

the 

regeneratio

n cycle

N/A

Average of 

regeneration 

cycle

Vacuum and 

duration of 

regeneration

Minimum 

vacuum and 

period of 

time for 

regeneration

Continuous N/A

Average vacuum 

and duration of 

regeneration

Regeneration 

frequency 

Minimum 

regeneration 

frequency 

and duration

Continuous N/A

Date and time 

of regeneration 

start and stop

Adsorber 

operation 

valve 

sequencing 

and cycle 

time

Correct 

valve 

sequencing 

and minimum 

cycle time

Daily Daily N/A

Non - Regenerative Adsorber

Average 

adsorber bed 

life

N/A

Daily until 

breakthroug

h for 3 

adsorber 

bed changeouts

N/A N/A
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 399 of 406

For these 

control 

devices, you 

must monitor 

these 

operating 

parameters...

Establish 

the 

following 

operating 

limit 

during your

initial 

performance

test...

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous 

compliance using these minimum frequencies.

Data 

measurement

Data 

recording

Data averaging 

period for 

compliance

Outlet VOC 

concentration 

of the first 

adsorber bed 

in series

Limits in 

Table 1 or 

2 of this 

subpart

Daily, 

except 

monthly (if 

more than 2 

months bed 

life 

remaining) 

or weekly 

(if more 

than 2 

weeks bed 

life 

remaining)

N/A Daily, weekly, 

or monthly 

Condenser

Temperature

Maximum 

outlet 

temperature

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Sorbent injection monitoring 

Sorbent 

injection 

rate

Minimum 

injection 

rate

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Sorbent 

injection 

carrier gas 

flow rate

Minimum 

carrier gas 

flow rate

Continuous Every 15 

minutes

3-hour block 

average

Downstream 

firebox 

temperature

Minimum 

temperature Continuous Every 15 minutes

3-hour block 

average

Upstream 

particulate 

matter 

control 

device 

downstream 

temperature

Minimum 

temperature Continuous Every 15 minutes

3-hour block 

average

Fabric Filter 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 400 of 406

For these 

control 

devices, you 

must monitor 

these 

operating 

parameters...

Establish 

the 

following 

operating 

limit 

during your

initial 

performance

test...

Monitor, record, and demonstrate continuous 

compliance using these minimum frequencies.

Data 

measurement

Data 

recording

Data averaging 

period for 

compliance

Alarm time 

Maximum 

alarm time 

is not 

established 

on a sitespecific

basis but 

is 

specified 

in 

§63.11940(h

)(1)

Continuous N/A

Maximum alarm 

time specified 

in 

§63.11940(h)(1)

Stripped Resin

Stripper

Steam to feed 

ratio1

Minimum 

steam to 

feed ratio

Continuous Every 15 

minutes Daily

Vacuum level Minimum 

vacuum

Continuous Every 15 

minutes 

Daily

Resin exit 

temperature

Minimum 

temperature Continuous Every 15 minutes 

Daily

Resin inlet 

flow rate

Maximum 

flow rate Continuous Every 15 minutes 

Daily

Wastewater

Stripper

Steam to feed 

ratio1

Minimum 

steam to 

feed ratio

Continuous Every 15 

minutes 

Daily

Bottoms exit 

temperature

Minimum 

exit 

temperature

Continuous Every 15 

minutes 

Daily

Vacuum level

Minimum 

vacuum 

level

Continuous Every 15 

minutes 

Daily

Wastewater 

inlet flow 

rate

Maximum 

flow rate Continuous Every 15 minutes 

Daily

1 Steam to feed ratio is calculated based on the steam feed rate into 

the stripper and the wastewater flow rate into the stripper.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 401 of 406

Table 7 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Toxic Equivalency Factors

Dioxin/furan congener

Toxic equivalency

factor

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 1

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 1

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0.1

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0.1

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0.1

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0.01

octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0.0003

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran 0.1

2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran 0.3

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran 0.03

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1

2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran 0.01

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran 0.01

octachlorodibenzofuran 0.0003

Table 8 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Calibration and Accuracy 

Requirements for Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems

If you 

monitor this 

parameter...

Then your accuracy 

requirements are...

And your inspection / 

calibration frequency

requirements are...

Temperature 

(noncryogenic 

temperature 

ranges)

± 1 percent of 

temperature measured 

or 2.8 degrees 

Celsius (5 degrees 

Fahrenheit) whichever 

is greater

Every 12 months.

Temperature

(cryogenic 

temperature 

ranges)

± 2.5 percent of 

temperature measured 

or 2.8 degrees 

Celsius (5 degrees 

Fahrenheit) whichever 

is greater

Every 12 months.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 402 of 406

If you 

monitor this 

parameter...

Then your accuracy 

requirements are...

And your inspection / 

calibration frequency

requirements are...

Liquid flow 

rate

± 2 percent of the 

normal range of flow

Every 12 months.

You must select a measurement 

location where swirling flow or 

abnormal velocity distributions 

due to upstream and downstream 

disturbances at the point of 

measurement do not exist.

Gas flow rate ± 5 percent of the 

flow rate or 10 cubic 

feet per minute, 

whichever is greater

Every 12 months

Check all mechanical connections 

for leakage at least annually.

At least annually, conduct a 

visual inspection of all 

components of the flow CPMS for 

physical and operational 

integrity and all electrical 

connections for oxidation and 

galvanic corrosion if your flow 

CPMS is not equipped with a 

redundant flow sensor.

pH or caustic 

strength

± 0.2 pH units Every 8 hours of process 

operation check the pH or 

caustic strength meter‘s 

calibration on at least two 

points. 

Conductivity ± 5 percent of normal 

range

Every 12 months.

Mass flow 

rate

± 5 percent of normal 

range

Every 12 months.

Pressure ± 5 percent or 0.12 

kilopascals (0.5 

inches of water 

column) whichever is 

greater

Calibration is required every 12

months.

Check all mechanical connections 

for leakage at least annually. 

At least annually perform a 

visual inspection of all 

components for integrity, 

oxidation and galvanic corrosion 

if CPMS is not equipped with a 

redundant pressure sensor.
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 403 of 406

Table 9 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Methods and Procedures for 

Conducting Performance Tests for Process Vents

For each control 

device used to meet

the emission limit in 

Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart for the 

following pollutant... You must... Using...

Total organic HAP Measure the total 

hydrocarbon 

concentration at the 

outlet of the control 

device or in the stack 

Method 25A at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A. 

Conduct each test run 

for a minimum of 1 hour. 

Vinyl chloride Measure the vinyl 

chloride concentration 

at the outlet of the 

control device or in the 

stack

Method 18 at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-6. 

Conduct each test run 

for a minimum of 1 hour.

Hydrogen chloride Measure hydrogen 

chloride concentrations 

at the outlet of the 

control device or in the 

stack

Method 26 at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-8, 

collect 60 dry standard 

liters of gas per test 

run; or

Method 26A at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A-8, 

collect 1 dry standard 

cubic meter of gas per 

test run.

Dioxin/furan Measure dioxin/furan 

concentrations on a 

toxic equivalency basis 

(and report total mass 

per isomer) at the 

outlet of the control 

device or in the stack

Method 23 at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-7 and 

collect 5 dry standard 

cubic meters of gas per 

test run.

Any pollutant from a 

continuous, batch, or 

combination of 

continuous and batch 

process vent(s) 

Select sampling port 

locations and the number 

of traverse points

Method 1 or 1A at 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A-1. 

Determine gas velocity 

and volumetric flow rate

Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 

2F, or 2G at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-1 and A-2
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 404 of 406

For each control 

device used to meet

the emission limit in 

Table 1 or 2 to this 

subpart for the 

following pollutant... You must... Using...

Conduct gas molecular 

weight analysis and 

correct concentrations 

the specified percent 

oxygen in Table 1 or 2 

to this subpart 

Method 3, 3A, or 3B at

40 CFR part 60, appendix 

A-2 using the same 

sampling site and time 

as HAP samples

Measure gas moisture 

content

Method 4 at 40 CFR part 

60, appendix A-3

Table 10 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63—Methods and Procedures 

for Conducting Performance Tests for Stripped Resin and 

Wastewater

For 

demonstrating

...

For the 

following 

emission 

points and 

types of 

processes..

.

Collect samples according to 

the following schedule...

Using the 

following test 

methods...

Vinyl 

Chloride... Total HAP...

Each stripped resin stream

Initial 

compliance Continuous

During a 24 

hour 

period, 

every 8 

hours or 

for each 

grade, 

whichever 

is more 

frequent 

During a 24 

hour period, 1 

grab sample 

every 8 hours 

or for each 

grade, 

whichever is 

more frequent

For vinyl 

chloride Method 

107; and

For total HAP, 

your proposed 

method as 

specified in 

§63.11960(d)(2)

, incorporating 

Method 107 and 

Method 8260B.

Batch 1 grab 

sample for 

each batch 

produced 

during a 24 

hour period

1 grab sample 

for each batch 

produced during 

a 24 hour 

period

Continuous 

compliance

Continuous On a daily 

basis, 1 

grab sample 

every 8 

hours or 

On a monthly 

basis, 1 grab 

sample every 8 

hours or for 

each grade, 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 405 of 406

For 

demonstrating

...

For the 

following 

emission 

points and 

types of 

processes..

.

Collect samples according to 

the following schedule...

Using the 

following test 

methods...

Vinyl 

Chloride... Total HAP...

for each 

grade, 

whichever 

is more 

frequent

whichever is 

more frequent, 

during a 24 

hour period

Batch On a daily 

basis, 1 

grab sample 

for each 

batch 

produced 

during a 24 

hour period

On a monthly 

basis, 1 grab 

sample for each 

batch produced 

during a 24 

hour period

Each wastewater stream

Initial 

compliance

N/A 1 grab 

sample 

If you are not 

required to use 

a treatment 

process, 1 grab 

sample; or

If you are 

required to use 

a treatment 

process, the 

sampling 

frequency 

specified in 

subpart G of 

this part, as 

referenced in 

§63.11965(c)(1) 

through (4)

If you are not 

required to use 

a treatment 

process, for 

vinyl chloride 

Method 107; and

For total HAP, 

your proposed 

method as 

specified in 

§63.11980(a)(2)

,incorporating 

Methods 107, 

305, and 

8260B. For 

vinyl chloride, 

Method 107; or

If you are 

required to use 

a treatment 

process, the 

test methods 

specified in 

subpart G of 

this part, as 

Continuous 

compliance

N/A 1 grab 

sample per 

month

If you are not 

required to use 

a treatment 

process, 1 grab 

sample per 

month; or

If you are 

required to use 
*** E.O. 12866 and 13563 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, 

Quote, or Release During Review***

Page 406 of 406

For 

demonstrating

...

For the 

following 

emission 

points and 

types of 

processes..

.

Collect samples according to 

the following schedule...

Using the 

following test 

methods...

Vinyl 

Chloride... Total HAP...

a treatment 

process, the 

sampling 

frequency 

specified in 

subpart G of 

this part, as 

referenced in 

§63.11965(c)(1) 

through (4)

referenced in 

§63.11965(c)(1) 

through (4).