# OAR Box 1107 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 26 ) VI-H- 1
Docket Number: 

# A-81-2 1

Printed 4/11/20083:03:46

PM Sheet 26 of 90 P. 1P. 2



# SEP A US . ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N A6ENC Y

RMMrc hTrirt * Park . Nort hCarolin a 2771 1

Memo t o Docke t No . A-81-2 1 Th e attache d SF-8 3 an d preamble/regulatoryrevision s t o the NESHAP fo r Viny l Chlorid e an d Equipmen t Leak s wer e forwarde d t o OMB o n Apri l 14 , 198 9 fo r revie w a s require d unde r Executiv e Orde r 12291 . ShirleyTable r Standard s Developmen t Branc hP. 3

Standar d For m 8 3 (R«v . Septembe r 1933 ) 

# Request fo r OM B Review Importan t Rea d instruction s befor e completin g form . D o no t us e th e same S F 8 3 t o reques t bot h a n Executiv e Orde r 1229 1 revie wan d aporova l unde r th e P a perwor k

Reductio n Act . Answe r al l question s i n Par t I . I f thi s reques t i s fo r revie wunde r E.O . 12291 . complet e Par t I I an d sig n th e regulator y certification . I f thi s reques t i s fo r approva l unde r th e Paperwor k Reductio n Ac t an d 5 CF R 1320 . ski p Par t II . complet e Par t II I an d sig n th e paperwor k certification . Sen d thre e copie s o f thi s form , th e materia ! t o b e reviewed , an d f(

paperwork—thre e copie s of th e supportin g statement , to : Offic e of Informatio n an d Regulator y Affair s Offic e of Managemen t an d Budge t Attention : Docke t Library , Roo m 320 1 Washington . D C 2050 3 PAR TI.—Complet e Thi s Par t fo r Al l Requests . 1 . Department/agency an d Bureau/offic e originatin g reques t U . S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Offic e o f Ai r an

d Radiatio n 3 , Nam e o

f perso n wh o ca n bes

t answe r question s regardin g thi s reques t Shirle y Table r 2 . Agenc y cod e

_2 0

_6 _0

_ Telephon e numbe r ( FT S > 629-525 6 4 . Titl e o f informatio n collectio n o r rulemakin g Revision s t o Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Viny l Chlorid e an d Equipmen t Leak s

5 . Lega l authorit

y fo r informatio n collectio n o r rul e (cite United States Code. Public

Law. or Executive

Order) 4 2 us e 7412 , 7414 , 7416 . 7601(a )
6 . Affecte d publi c (check all that apply) 1 O Individual s o r household s 2 D Stat e o r loca l government s 3 D Farm s

4 Q Businesse

s o r othe r for-profi t Federa l agencies o r employees 6 D Non-profi t institution s 7 D Smal l businesse s o rorganization s PAR TII.—Complet e Thi s Par t Onl y i f th e Request i s fo r OM B Revie wUnde r Executiv

e Orde r 1229 1 7 . Regulatio n Identifie r Numbe r (RIN )

. . or . Non e assigne d D 8 . Typ e o f submissio n (check

one in each category) Classification 1 D Majo r 2 HH Nonmajo r Stage of development 1 0 3 Propose

d o r draf t 2 D Fina l o rinteri m final , wit h prio rproposa l 3 D Fina l o

r interi m final , withou

t prior proposa

l Type

ot review requested 1 O Standard 2 L j Pendin g 3 D Emergenc

y 4 D Statutor

y o r judicia l deadlin e 9 . CF R sectio n affecte d

r.F R 10 . Doe s thi s regulatio n contai n reportin g o r recordkeepin g requirements that requir e OM B approva l unde r th e Paperwor k Reductio n Ac

t an d 5 CF R 1320 ?
. . n Yes O i 2 D I « D i Certificatio n fo r Regulator y Submission s I n submittin g thi s reques t fo r OM B review , th e authorized regulator y contac t ary l th e progra m officia l certif y that th e requirements o f E.O . 1229 1 an d any app l cabl i polic y directive s hav

e bee n complied with . Signatur e o f progra m offje i irector , Offic e o f Ai r ualit yPlannin

g & Standard s Signatur e o f authorized regulator

y contac t Date * 

# A^L

Da! e
12 . (OMB

use only)

Previou s «r<3itto* u obsolet e NS N 7S40-0O634-403 4 8310 8 Stjnd»fdFcrm83(5;» . 5 Prescrib e O

y ( < ; O" R i i^ n ,>nr

i r n : ?P. 4

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 4 0 CF RPar t 6 1 [AD-FRL - ] NATIONAL EMISSION

STANDARD S FORHAZARDOU S AI RPOLLUTANT S REVISION S T O VINY L CHLORIDE ; EQUIPMEN T LEAK S OF VOLATIL E

HAZARDOU S AI RPOLLUTANT S AGENCY : Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) ACTION : Propose d rul e an d publi c hearing ; petitio nfo r reconsideration . SUMMARY : OnNovembe r 26 , 1986 , th e Societ y o f th e Plastic s Industry , Inc . (SPI ) file d wit hEP A a petitio nfo r sta y o f enforcemen t an

d administrativ e reconsideratio no f seve nprovision s i nth e fina l rul e revisin g th e nationa l emissio nstandar d fo r V C (Septembe r 30 , 1986 , 5 1 FR34904) . Th e SP I an d thre e manufacturer s (Do w Chemica l Company , Georgi a Gul f Corporation , and Vist a Chemica l Company ) concurrentl y file d a petitio nfo r review o f th e revision s t o th e V

C standar d wit hth e U.S . Cour t o f Appeal s fo r th e Distric t

o f Columbi a Circuit . Th e petitioner s requeste d revie w o f th e definition s
o f "ethylen e dichlorid e purification, " "leak, " "exhaus t gas, " "relie f valv e discharge, " an

d "3-hou r period; " th e scop e o f th e relief valv e discharg e provisions ; an

d th e lea k detectio nan d eliminatio nprovision s (are a monitoring) . Th e EP A ha s evaluate d th e petitions , an d th e Administrato r proposes t o gran t th e petitioners ' reques t fo r clarificatio no f certai no f thes e provisions . Mino r revision s ar e bein g propose d t o correc t ambiguitie s insevera l definition s
an d i nth e applicabilit y o f certai nregulator y requirement s inth e V C standards . Th e propose d revision s woul d no t increas e th e emission s (an d th e associate d healt hrisks ) allowe d b y th e standard s a s promulgate d i nSeptembe r 1986 . N o changes , however , wil l b e mad e wit hregar d t o are a monitorin g requirement s
o r th e relie f valv e discharg e standard . Thi s actio nprovide s EPA' s response sP. 5

t o petitioners ' requests , an dth e resultin g mino r propose drevision s t o th e standard s ar e se t fort hi nthi s notice . Thi s actio nals o serve s a s notic e tha t th e petitioners ' reques t fo r sta y
o f th e 198 6 revise dprovision s i s bein g denied . I naddition , thi s notic e i s no t intende dt o addres s th e recen t decisio n b y th e D . C . Circui t Cour t o nth e V C standards , Natura l Resource s Defens e Council , Inc . v . EPA , 82 4 F.2 d114 6 (1987) . An y respons e t o tha t decisio n wil l b e mad e i na futur e notic e i nth e FEDERAL REGISTER . A publi c hearin g wil l b e hel dt o provid e intereste dpartie s a nopportunit y fo r ora l presentation s o f data , views , o r argument s concernin g th e propose d revisions . DATES : Comments . Comment s mus t b e receive do no r befor e (contac t AnnEleano r a t FT S 629-5578) . Publi c Hearing . I f anyon e contact s EP A requestin g t o spea k a t a publi c hearin g b

y (contac t AnnEleano r a t FT S 629-5578) , a publi c hearin g wil l b e hel do n(contac t AnnEleano r a t FT S 629-5578 ) beginnin g a t 10:0 0 a.m . Person s intereste di nattendin g th e hearin g shoul d cal l An nEleano r a t (919 ) 541-557 8 t o verif y tha t a hearin g wil l b e held . Reques t t o Spea k a t Hearing . Person s wishin g t o presen t ora l testimon y must contac t EP A

b y (contac t An nEleano r a t FT S 629-5578) . ADDRESSES : Comments . Comment s shoul db e submitte di nduplicat e (i f possible ) to : Centra l Docke t Sectio n(LE-131) , Attention : Docke t No . A-81-21 , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency , 40 1 M Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C . 20460 . Publi c Hearing . I f anyon e contact s EPA requestin g a publi c hearing , i t wil l b e hel da t EPA' s Offic e o f Administratio nAuditorium , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolina . Person s intereste d i nattendin g th e hearin g o r wishin g t o presen t ora l testimony shoul dnotif y

Ms . An nEleanor , Standard s Developmen tP. 6

Branc h(MD-13) , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolin a 27711 , telephon e (919 ) 541-5578 . Docket . A

docket , numbe r A-81-21 , containin g informatio nconsidere db y EP A i nth e developmen t ot" th e promulgate dstandard s an dth e petitio nfo r stay
andreconsideration , t o whic hthi s notic e i s responding , i s availabl e fo r publi c inspectio nbetwee n8:0 0 a.m . and3:3 0 p.m. , Monda y throug hFriday , a t EPA' s Centra l Docke t Section , Sout hConferenc e Center , Roo m 4 , 40 1 M

Street , S.W. , Washington , D.C . 20460 . A reasonabl e fe e ma y b e charge dfo r copying . FO RFURTHE RINFORMATION CONTACT : Fo r furthe r informatio nan dinterpretation s
o f applicability , complianc e requirements , an dreportin g aspect s o f th e revise d standards , contac t th e appropriat e Regional , State , o r loca l offic e contac t a s liste di n4 0 CF R60.4 . Fo r furthe r informatio nonth e backgroun dfo r th e propose drevise d standards , contac t Ms . Shirle y Tabler , Standard s Developmen t Branch , Emissio nStandard s Divisio n(MD-13) , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolin a 27711 , telephon e (919 ) 541-5256 . SUPPLEMENTAR YINFORMATION : I . BACKGROUND . I nDecember , 1975 , EP A designate dVC a s a hazardou s ai r pollutan t unde r Sectio n11 2 o f th e Clea nAi r Ac t (4 2 U.S.C . 7412 ) andpromulgate dfina l rule s fo r V C onOctobe r 21 , 197 6 (4 0 CF R61.6 0 - 61.71) . Th e standard s limi t emission s
o f V C fro m plant s producin g ethylen e dichlorid e (EDC ) vi a oxychlorination , VC , an dpolyviny l chlorid e (PVC ) o r othe r polymer s containin g VC . Thes e plant s
ar e subjec t t o a combinatio no f emissio nlimits , equipment , an dwor k practic e requirements at numerou s point s inth e manufacturin g processes . OnSeptembe r 30 , 198 6 (5 1 F R34904) , EPA promulgate dsevera l administrativ e
an dclarifyin g revision s t o th e nationa l emissio nstandar dfo r VC . Subsequently , o nNovembe r 26 , 1986 , SP I file dwit hEP A a petitio nfo r stay an dadministrativ e

## P. 7

reconsideratio no f seve nprovision s i nth e fina l revision s t o th e V C standard . Th e SPI , Dow

Chemica l Company , Georgi a Gul f Corporation , andVist a Chemica l Company concurrentl y

file da petitio nfo r review o f severa l provision s o f th e revise dstandar dwit hth e U.S . Cour t o f Appeal s fo r th e O.C . Circuit . Th e SP I i s a nonprofi t corporatio nwhos e member s includ e processor s an d manufacturer s o f plastic s o r plasti c products , supplier s o f raw materials , processor s an

dconverter s o f plasti c resins , an dmanufacturer s o f accessor y equipmen t fo r th e plastic s industry . Th e Viny l Institute , a divisio no f SPI , represent s th e majo r domesti c producer s o f VC an dPVC . II . SUMMAR

YO F SPI' S PETITIO N

FO RSTAY/RECONSIDERATIO N AND EPA' S RESPONS E Th e SP I requeste dtha t EP A issu e a sta y

o f th e 198 6 revision s t o th e V C standar dpendin g review o f thos e revise dprovisions . Thei r reques t fo r a sta y
wa s base donth e followin g factors : (1 ) certai nprovisions - o f th e 198 5 proposa l
wer e change dwithou t adequat e notic e o r justificatio nb y EPA ; (2 ) industr y member s represente db y SP I woul dsuffe r irreparabl e harm i f th e effectivenes s
o f th e 198 6 revision s ar e no t staye ddurin g th e revie w period ; an

d(3 ) a sta y wil l caus e n o harm

t o othe r partie s o r th e publi c interest . Th e EP A ha s considere dth e factor s presente db y SP I i nsuppor t o f thei r reques t fo r sta y

o f th e 198 6 VC revision s pendin g EPA' s revie w o f th e revisions . Havin g considere dth e likelihoo do f SPI' s succes s onth e merit s o f it s petitio n fo r reconsideration , th e likelihoo dtha t SP I woul db e irreparabl y harme dabsen t
a stay , th e prospec t tha t other s woul db e harme di nth e even t o f a stay , an d th e publi c interest , th e Administrato r ha s no t staye dth e 198 6 revision s o f th e VC standar da t issu e here . Thi s i s consisten t wit hlong-standin g EP A polic y t o continu e t o enforc e a nexistin g regulatio nunti l an dunles s a revisio n become s formall y

effective . Th e EPA' s polic y ha s bee nconsistentl y approve db

y th e court s i nth e contex t o f Stat e Implementatio nPlans . Se e Trai nv . NRDC ,P. 8

42 1 U.S . 60 , 9 2 (1975 ) ("Thi s litigation , however , i s carrie d ou t o nth e polluter' s tim e no t th e public's , fo r durin g [th e pendenc y o f a SI P revision ] th e origina l regulation s remai nineffect , an d th e polluter' s failur e t o compl y ma y subjec t him

t o a variet y

o f enforcemen t procedures." ) Th e rational e i nTrai napplie s wit hequa l forc e t o regulation s promulgate d unde r Sectio n112 . Therefore , EP A hereby denie s SPI' s reques t fo r a sta y pendin g EPA' s reconsideratio no f th e VC standard . I nth e petitio nfo r revie w o f th e revise d standard , SP I claime d tha t th e 198 6 promulgate d revision s differe d significantl y fro m th e revision s tha t wer e propose d onJanuar y 9 , 198 5 (5 0 F

R1182) . Th e SP I asserte d tha t withou t adequat e notice , EPA' s 198 6 revision s change d key

provision s o f th e V C standar d i na manne r that : (1 ) violate d

cas e law ; (2 ) impose d new penalties ; (3 ) create d multipl e penaltie s fo r th e
same event ; an

d (4 ) expande d th e type s o f equipmen t subjec t t o th e standard . Th e followin g discussio nsummarize s thei r concern s and EPA' s responses . Definitio no f "Exhaus t Gas " Th e SP I requeste d a revie w o f severa l definition s i nth e VC standard . Accordin g t o SPI , th e 198 6 fina l definitio no f "exhaus t gas, " 4 0 CF R61.61(x) , delete d a key

sentenc e fro

m th e propose d definitio nwithou t adequat e explanation . B y omittin g th e sentence , " A lea k .. . i s no t a nexhaus t gas , " SP I wa s
concerne d tha t lea k emission s coul d resul t i nviolation s o f th e exhaus t ga s standar d i f mor e tha n1 0 pp m o f V C ar e emitted . Reconsideratio nwa s requeste d becaus e leak s fro

m equipmen t i nVC servic e woul d excee d th e 1 0 pp m emissio n limitatio nfo r exhaus t gases , thereb y subjectin g industrie s t o a potentia l fin e o f $25,00 0 pe r day fo r eac hleak . It wa s no t EPA' s inten t t o categoriz e every lea k o f greate r tha n1 0 pp m
a s a nexhaus t gas . The sentenc e wa s omitte d i nth e fina l definitio nbecaus e 5P. 9

some emission s whic har e require d t o b e vente d t o a contro l devic e canno t b e automaticall y

categorize da s eithe r a lea k o r exhaus t ga s b y a genera l definition . As state di nth e promulgatio nBI D fo r th e revise dstandard s (pp . 2-5 4 and2-55) , th e fact s o f th e situatio nresultin g i nthes e emission s neede dt o b e considere d whe ndecidin g whic hpar t o f th e V C standar dapplied . Upo nreconsideration , EP A agree s wit hSPI' s concer ntha t th e fina l definitio n
o f "exhaus t gas " doe s no t provid e fo r exemptio nfro m th e exhaus t ga s standar d (1 0 ppm ) whe nsuc ha nemissio ni s judge dt o b e a leak . Therefore , EP A i s proposin g t o modif y th e definitio nb

y addin g two sentence s whic hclarif y tha t a lea k i s no t a nexhaus t gas , an

dtha t equipmen t containin g exhaus t ga s mus t compl y

wit hSectio n61.65(b)(8 ) requirin g lea k detectio nand prevention , whethe r o r no t tha t equipmen t contain s 1 0 percen t b y volum e VC . Thi s propose dadditio nassure s tha t leak s fro m exhaus t ga s stream s ar e subjec t t o th e lea k detectio nandeliminatio nrequirements , bu t tha t suc h leak s wil l no t als o b e classifie da s "exhaus t gas. " Definitio no f "Relie f Valv e Discharge " Th e SP I objecte dt o a sentenc e adde dt o th e 198 6 fina l definitio no f "relie f valv e discharge, " 4 0 CF R61.61(y) , whic hstate dtha t a relie f valv e discharg e woul db e exemp t fro m regulatio ni f vente d t o a contro l device , bu t onl y

i f th e contro l devic e meet s th e 1 0 pp m emissio nlimit . Th e SP I pointe dou t tha t a doubl e violatio ncoul doccu r (i.e. , o f th e relie f valv e discharg e an

dexhaus t ga s standards ) i f a relie f valv e discharg e i s vente d t o a contro l devic e no t meetin g 1 0 ppm . I f interprete dt o impos e doubl e penalties , thi s provision , i nSPI' s view , woul dexcee dEPA' s statutor y authorit y

an dunlawfull y

increas e th e maximu m statutor y

penalt y

se t b y Congres s fo r a singl e even t tha t lead s t o a violatio no f a NESHAP . Th e SP I believe s tha t owners/operator s o f regulate dfacilitie s hav e sufficien tP.1 0

economi c incentiv e (preventin g release s o f thei r product ) t o ensur e tha t pressur e relie f valve s wor k a s designed , regardles s o f th e standar dpromulgated . Moreover , th e fina l definitio ncontradict s pas t regulator y interpretatio n tha t relie f valv e discharge s ducte dt o flare s an dothe r contro l device s ar e exemp t fro

m th e exhaus t ga s standard . Th e EP A agree s tha t ventin g a relie f valv e discharg e (RVD ) t o a combustio ndevic e achieve s significan t emissio nreductio nbenefits . Thes e devices , whe nproperl y designe dan

doperated , generall y hav e efficiencie s
o f 9 8 percen t o r greater . Th e us e o f combustio ndevice s ar e no t expecte d t o increas e th e numbe r o f RVD's . Thus , becaus e regulate dfacilitie s d o hav e some economi c incentiv e t o ensur e tha t RVD' s ar e minimized , th e ne t RV D emissio nreductio nresultin g fro m th e us e o f combustio ndevice s shoul d approac h9 8 percen t o r more . Therefore , mino r revision s t o th e definitio n
o f "relie f valv e discharge " andt o th e RV D provision s [Sectio n61.65(a) ]

ar e bein g propose dt o clarif y tha t a nRV D route d t o a properl y designe d an

d operate dcontro l devic e woul d b e exempte dfro m th e provision s o f th e RV D standard . Thi s chang e woul d preven t misinterpretatio no f th e regulator y requirement s an

dimpositio no f a doubl e penalty . I naddition , new

provision s [Sectio n61.65(d) ] hav e bee nadde dfo r an RV D tha t i s ducte dt o a contro l devic e tha t i s continuall y operatin g whil e emission s fro

m th e releas e ar e presen t a t th e device . A nRV D tha t i s ducte d t o a contro l device , othe r tha na flare , woul db e subjec t t o th e 1 0 pp m limi t

an dth e continuou s emissio nmonitorin g syste m requiremen t containe din Sectio n61.6 8 an

d t o th e reportin g requirement s o f Sectio n61.70 . I nth e
cas e o f flares , emissio nmonitorin g i s no t possible . Therefore , fo r RVD' s route dt o a flare , th e desig nrequirements , for flare s (4 0 CF R60.18 ) woul d apply . Th e EP A

recognize s tha t measuremen t o f relie f valv e discharg e

7P.1 1

volumetri c flo

w rate s an

dga s strea

m compositio ni s no t possibl e usin g th e method s se t fort hi n60.18(f)(3 ) an d(f)(4) . Estimate s o f thes e parameter s will , therefore , nee dt o b e base do nempirica l o r othe r bases , subjec t t o EP A approval . Flar e operation s woul db e monitore di naccordanc e wit h th e requirement s o f Section s 60.18(d ) and60.18(f)(2) . Fo r th e purpos e o f Sectio n60.18(d) , th e volum e an dcomponen t concentratio no f eac hRV D woul d b e estimate d andcalculation s woul db e mad e t o verif y ongoin g complianc e wit hth e desig nan

doperatin g requirement s o f Section s 60.18(c)(3 ) throug h (c)(6) . I f mor e tha non e relie f valv e i s discharge dsimultaneousl y t o a singl e flare , thes e calculation s woul daccoun t fo r th e cumulativ e effec t

o nal l suc hRVD's . I f th e result s o f th e monitorin g containe di n Sectio n60.18(f)(2 ) o r an y othe r informatio nshow tha t th e pilo t flame i s
no t presen t 10 0 percen t o f th e tim e durin g whic hanRVD i s route dt o a flare , th e RVD i s subjec t t o th e provision s o f Sectio n61.65(a) . A repor t describin g th e flar e desig nmus t b e provide dt o th e Administrato r no t late r tha n9 0 day s afte r th e adoptio no f thi s provisio no r withi n3 0 day s o f th e installatio no f a flar e system fo r contro l o f RVD's , whicheve r i s later . Definitio no f a "Leak " Th e SP I objecte dt o EPA' s definin g "indication s o f liqui ddripping "

a s a "leak, " 4 0 CF R61.61(w) . Th e SP I requeste d tha t th e phras e b e delete d

o r revise dt o refe r t o V C sinc e drippin g liquid s ma y no t alway s contai nVC . I nth e VC standard , th e portio no f th e lea k definitio nreferrin g t o "indication s o f liqui ddripping " applie s onl y t o pump s i nV

C service . Th e EP A believe s tha t "indication s o f liqui ddripping " ar e anappropriat e criterio n fo r requirin g repai r action s ondoubl e mechanica l sea l pump s i nV C servic e and , therefore , shoul db e include di nth e definitio no f a leak . A s state d i n th e BI D fo r th e 198 6 promulgate drevisions , visibl e leakag e fro m al l type sP.1 2



### o f pum pseals , includin g doubl e mechanica l seal s require db y th e V C standard , i s generall y

indicativ e o f sea l wea r eve ni f n o V C i s presen t inth e leakin g fluid . T o preven t furthe r sea l wea r resultin g i nmajo r sea l failur e allowin g V C emission s int o th e atmosphere , th e seal s shoul dbe repaire dsoo nafte r leakag e i s initiall y

detected . Afte r furthe r consideratio no f SPI' s concern , however , EP A

agree s tha t some amoun t o f barrie r flui dleakag e i s normal . Therefore , EP A

propose s t o revis e th e standard s fo r pump s [Sectio n61.242-2(d) ] t o clarif y

th e requirement s fo r pum psea l drips . Sectio n61.242-2(d)(4 ) addresse s drip s fro

m pum pseal s tha t contai nVC , an dSectio n61.242-2(d)(6 ) addresse s drip s fro

m pum pseal s tha t d o no t contai nVC . Th e propose drevise dprovision s o f Sectio n61.242-2(d ) ar e designe dt o accomplis htwo purposes . On e i s t o ensur e tha t V C leak s fro m pum pseal s
ar e detecte dan

deliminated . Thi s i s accomplishe db y paragraph s (d)(4)(i) , (ii) , an d(iii) . Th e othe r purpos e i s t o identif y andpreven t pum

psea l failure s b

y causin g abnorma l drippin g (evenwhe nV C i s no t containe di nth e drippin g liquid ) t o b e detecte dandrepair s t o b e made . Thi s i s accomplishe d b y paragraph s (d)(6)(i) , (ii) , (iii) . an d(iv) . Thes e paragraph s requir e th e facilit y

owner/operato r t o establis hcriteri a associate dwit hnorma l operation . Th e inten t o f th e propose drevise dprovision s i s identica l t o th e existin g provisions . Th e differenc e i s tha t th e propose dSectio n61.242.2(d)(6)(i ) allow s a nowner/operato r t o tak e int o accoun t th e smal l numbe r o f liqui d drip s tha t ma y

occu r whe nnew

seal s ar e i nplac e o r ar e otherwis e associate d wit hnorma l operation . Definitio no f "3-hou r period " Th e SP I note dthat , i nth e Septembe r 198 6 fina l rule , EPA adde da definitio no f "3-hou r period " 4 0 CF R61.61(z) , t o clarif y tha t th e emissio nP.1 3

limit s i nth e exhaus t ga s standar d(1 0 ppm ) i s a 3-hou r average . Th e definitio n create s "rolling " average s (2 4 3-hour average s pe r day ) rathe r tha n"block " average s ( 8 3-hou r averages) . Th e SP I objecte dtha t a single , 1-hou r 1 0 pp m exceedanc e coul d resul t inthre e violation s o f th e 1 0 pp m exhaus t ga s standard , unde r th e revise ddefinitio no f "3-hou r period. " Thi s coul dlead t o doubl e o r tripl e penalties , "thereb y exceedin g th e maximum penalt y permissibl e unde r th e Clea nAi r Act. " Upo nreconsideration , EP A propose s t o furthe r revis e th e definitio no f "3-hou r period " t o ensur e tha t a singl e even t o f 1-hou r o r les s a t 1 0 pp m
o r greate r coul dresul t inn o mor e tha na singl e violatio no f th e exhaus t ga s standard . A

phras e ha s bee nadde dt o th e definitio ni nSectio n61.61(z ) t o accomplis hthis . Th e EP A di dno t intend t o penaliz e a plan t thre e time s wheneve r a 1 0 pp m even t occur s withi n1 hour . Rather , EPA wante dt o
ensur e tha t a combinatio no f two o r mor e 1 0 pp m event s whic hwoul d resul t i na 3-hou r exceedanc e d o no t g o unpenalize d jus t becaus e the y occurre d

ove r two separat e 3-hou r "blocks. " Th e propose drevise ddefinitio no f "3-hou r period " satisfie s EPA' s inten t withou t unintentionall y subjectin g
a plan t owner/operato r t o multipl e violations . Definitio no f "Ethylen e Dichlorid e Purification " Accordin g t o SPI , th e 198 6 fina l revision s change dth e definitio no f ED C purification , 4 0 CF R61.61(o) . Th e promulgate d definitio nexclude d produc t storag e followin g th e fina l V C finishin g column , an dthu s exempte d

suc hstorag e fro

m th e exhaus t ga s standard . Th e SP I believe s tha t EP A intende dt o exclud e no t onl y ED C fina l produc t storag e bu t als o intermediat e produc t storag e (befor e th e fina l finishin g column ) base do nEPA' s respons e t o comment s containe di nth e BI D (pp . 2-4 3 an d2-44 ) andi nth e BI D summar y
o f change s sinc e proposa l (pp . 1-2) . Althoughi t support s th e exemptio no f

1 0P.1 4

fina l ED C produc t storag e fro m th e definition , SP I requeste d tha t EP A als o exemp t intermediat e ED C produc t storage . I naddition , on e SP I company , a majo r produce r o f VC monome r an d PV C polymer , provide d informatio nonnin e crud e an

d intermediat e storag e tank s a t on e o f it s facilities . Th e informatio n include d tank sizes , design , emission s estimates , an d costs . Thi s company requeste d EP A

t o exclud e intermediat e and crude , a s wel l a s fina l ED C storag e tanks , fro

m th e definition . Th e EP A agree s tha t i t intende d t o exemp t crud e an d intermediat e storag e tank s fro

m th e exhaus t ga s standard . Th e definitio no f "ED C purification " ha s bee nrevise d t o clarif y tha t emission s fro m crude , intermediate , an d fina l storag e tank s followin g ED C formatio nar e no t subjec t t o th e standards . Inaddition , Sectio n61.65(b)(6) , Openin g o f equipment , ha s als o bee nrevise d t o clarif y

tha t th e requirement s i nthi s sectio nd o no t appl y t o crude , intermediate , o r fina l ED C storag e tanks . A s state d i nth e BI D respons e (pp . 2-4 3 throug h2-45) , EP A evaluate d th e reasonablenes s o f regulatin g ED C storag e tank s unde r th e VC standard . Base d onemission s dat a submitte d b y th e commenters , uncontrolle d V C emission s fro m intermediat e an

d fina l ED C storag e tank s a t a typica l EDC/V C plan t wer e estimate d t o b e 0. 1 t o 2 Mg/yr . A nemissio nreductio na s higha s 1 4 Mg/y r fro m al l plant s woul d b e achieve d base d onventin g existin g ED C storag e tank s t o a nexistin g primar y contro l devic e (incinerators) . Prio r t o th e Septembe r 198 6 rule , EPA conclude d tha t regulatio no f thes e tank s unde r th e V C standar d wa s no t warranted . I nrespons e t o SPI' s petitio nfo r reconsideration , EP A ha s evaluate d th e dat a submitte d b y on e SP I company

(Docke t Entr y

No . VI-B-4 ) fo r nin e crud e
an d intermediat e ED C storag e tank s befor e th e fina l finishin g colum nat on e
o f it s facilities . Thes e tank s ar e currentl y uncontrolled . Th e dat a include d tan k sizes , design , emission s estimates , an d costs . Th e company' s

1 1P.1 5

estimate s o f th e tota l uncontrolle demission s (0.00 2 t o 0.32 3 Mg/y r VC ) fo r th e nin e crud e an

d intermediat e tank s fal l a t th e low endo f th e rang e o f individua l V

C tan k emissio nestimate s mad e b y EPA fo r ED C fina l produc t storag e tanks . Thi s informatio ni s consisten t wit hEPA' s positio ntha t th e regulatio no f crud e an dintermediat e storag e tank s i s unnecessar y becaus e emission s ar e extremel y low . Lea k Detectio nan

dEliminatio n Unde r th e 197 6 V

C standard , 4 0 CF R61.65(b)(8) , companie s installe d

are a monitor s anddevelope dplant-specifi c lea k detectio nandeliminatio n program s tha t include dth e routin e us e o f portabl e monitors . Subsequently , EP A develope da generi c lea k detectio nan deliminatio nprogram (Subpar t V , 4 0 CF R61.24 0 - 61.247 ) base do nequipmen t an ddat a fo r th e organi c chemica l

an dpetroleu

m industries . Th e 198 6 revision s incorporate dth e Subpar t V provision s int o th e V C standard . Th e SP I oppose s th e additio no f th e Subpar t V

provision s t o th e V C standard . Th e SP I argue d tha t existin g program s ar e effectiv e withou t th e Subpar t V provision s an

dtha t EPA' s decisio nt o retai nare a monitorin g requirement s fro m th e 197 6 standar di s questionabl e sinc e the y hav e no t bee nrequire dfo r othe r industrie s subjec t t o Subpar t V . Inaddition , accordin g t o SPI , no justificatio nha s bee n give nfo r requirin g retentio no f are a monitor s i nadditio nt o Subpar t V . Althoug ha program

unde r Sectio n61.65(b)(8 ) demonstratin g les s tha n2 percen t

o f valve s leakin g i s considere d"effective, " suc ha program i s exemp t onl y fro m certai npart s o f Subpar t V . Fo r thes e reasons , SP I request s reinstatemen t

o f th e leak detectio nan deliminatio nrequirement s containe dinth e 197 6 V C standard . Uponreconsideration , EP A propose s t o mak e no change s inth e applicatio no f Subpar t V t o th e V

C standar dan

dth e requirement s fo r fixe d



### 1 2P.1 6

are a monitorin g [Sectio n61.65(b)(8)(i)D . Th e basi s fo r addin g Subpar t V t o th e V

C standar dwa s explaine di ndetai l i nth e preambl e t o th e propose d revision s (5 0 F

R1190-1192 , Januar y 9 , 1985) , an

dth e justificatio nfo r thos e requirement s ha s no t change dsinc e tha t time . Th e EP A believe s tha t th e are a monitorin g an dSubpar t V

approache s bot hhav e benefit s an d

ar e no t redundant . I nparticular , are a monitor s allo w fo r quic k detectio n
o f certai nlarg e VC leak s tha t migh t otherwis e g o undetecte dunti l th e nex t routin e portabl e monitorin g screening , a s wel l a s detectio no f larg e leak s fro m equipmen t no t affecte db y Subpar t V

(e.g. , agitators) . Th e are a monitor s hav e alread y bee npurchase db

y subjec t facilitie s an dth e additiona l

cos t o f monito r operatio ni s relativel y small . Therefore , a compariso nt o othe r industrie s i s no t relevant . Also , are a monitorin g i s ofte nuse da s par t o f a program

t o reduc e leak s t o below 2 percent , an

dtherefore , a s discusse d below , anowner/operato r doe s no t hav e t o conduc t th e lea k detectio n
andrepai r provision s o f Subpart V . An y plan t wit ha

neffectiv e existin g program unde r Sectio n61.65(b)(8 ) fo r detectin g an

drepairin g leak s ca ncontro l equipmen t leak s without complyin g wit hth e Subpart V

provisions . Specifically , i f anowner/operato r ca n demonstrat e tha t les s tha n2. 0 percen t o f valve s ar e leakin g i nany proces s unit , then.tha t proces s uni t i s exemp t fro m Section s 61.242-l(d ) (marking) , 61.242-7(a ) (monitoring) , 61.24 6 (recordkeeping) , and61.24 7 (reporting) . T o demonstrat e tha t les s tha n2. 0 percen t o f valve s ar e leaking , th e owner/operato r
mus t conduc t a performanc e tes t initially , annually , an da t an y othe r time s requeste db

y th e Administrator . If , durin g an y performanc e test , th e per centag e o f leakin g valve s exceed s 2. 0 percent , the nth e owner/operato r mus t compl y wit hSubpar t V

withi n9 0 days . Thi s exemptio nonl y applie s t o th e standard s fo r valve s [Sectio n61.242-7(a)(b)(c) ] becaus e th e othe r standard s i n



### 13P.1 7

Subpar t V

interfac e wit hspecifi c equipmen t requirements/performanc e measure s i nth e V

C standar d[e.g. , leak s fro m relie f valves , Sectio n61.65(b)(4 ) an d rotatin g pumps , Sectio n61.65(b)(3)(i)] . However , thi s exemptio ninclude s al l o f th e recordkeepin g an dreportin g requirement s o f Section s 61.24 6 an d 61.24 7 becaus e thes e requirement s mainl y affec t valves . Th e exemptio nfo r marking , recordkeeping , an dreportin g applie s t o th e entir e proces s unit . Th e exemption s (provide di nth e V C standard ) t o Subpar t V wer e designed , base do ncomment s mad e durin g th e publi c commen t period , t o avoi dunnecessar y change s t o existin g lea k detectio nplan s whic har e effectiv e i ndetectin g
and repairin g VC leaks . Scop e o f Relie f Valv e Discharg e Provision s Th e SP I oppose s EPA' s withdrawa l o f th e 198 5 propose dnumerica l limit s fo r relie f valv e discharge s an dha s requeste dtha t EP A reconside r it s decisio nt o retai nth e emergenc y discharg e provisio no f th e 197 6 standard , 4 0 CF R61.65(a) . Th e SP I claime dtha t th e 197 6 standar d"impermissibl y delegate s rulemakin g authorit y t o enforcemen t personne l andi s unconstitution all y vagu e an

d that , a s applied , th e regulatio ni s unfair , unlawful , arbitrar y
andcapricious. " Th e SP I prefer s th e propose dnumerica l limit s becaus e the y woul dremed

y thes e problem s an

dreduc e th e administrativ e burde no nEP A an d industry . Th e SP I als o believe s tha t th e propose dnumerica l limit s ar e stricte r tha nth e 197 6 emergenc y discharg e provisio nbecaus e "eac hdischarg e causin g
a nexceedanc e o f an y numerica l limi t . . . woul db e considere da violatio n withou t regar dt o whethe r an y individua l discharg e wa s preventable. " Th e EP A ha s reviewe dth e basi s fo r th e decisio nno t t o promulgat e numerica l limit s fo r RVD' s an dha s decide dtha t th e 197 6 standar di s stil l reasonabl e
an dappropriate . Th e 197 6 standar dpermit s onl y "emergency " RVD's , thos e tha t coul dno t hav e bee navoide db y takin g measure s t o preven t th e discharge .



### 1 4P.1 8

A detaile ddiscussio no f th e basi s fo r no t promulgatin g th e numerica l limit s fo r RVD' s i s containe di nth e preambl e fo r th e promulgate damendment s (5 1 F R34905-34906 , Septembe r 30 , 1986) , an dSP I ha s no t provide dan y new informatio ntha t woul daffec t EPA' s decision . I nsummary , th e decisio nt o retai nth e origina l 197 6 RV D standar dwa s mad e afte r considerin g th e revision s i nligh t o f publi c comment s o nth e numerica l limits , and afte r review

o f th e basi s fo r th e decisio nt o reforma t th e standard . I nparticular , severa l publi c comment s onth e 198 5 propose damendment s expresse dconcer ntha t preventabl e RVD' s woul db e allowe d unde r th e revise d standar dan

dtha t th e performanc e allowe dunde r th e revise dstandar dcoul d b e inconsisten t wit htha t allowe dunde r th e origina l standard . Othe r comment s expresse dconcer ntha t th e revise dstandar dinclude dno mechanis m fo r regulatin g ver y larg e RVD's . Th e basi s fo r th e statemen t tha t a larg e EP A resourc e commitmen t i s require d fo r enforcin g th e 197 6 RV D standar dwa s als o questioned . Th e EPA' s review

reveale dtha t th e burde nonit s resource s had diminishe d a s experienc e wit hth e implementatio no f th e standar dincrease d

an da s th e industry' s understandin g o f th e provision s o f th e existin g standar dbecam e clearer . Thus , i t wa s no t necessar y t o revis e th e forma t

o f th e RV

D standard . Compare dt o th e 198 5 proposal , th e existin g standar d als o ha s th e advantage s o f affectin g al l preventabl e RVD' s an dprovidin g bette r regulatio no f larg e volum e RVD's . Therefore , fo r th e reason s stated , EPA' s review

o f th e recor dsupport s th e existin g standard . Base do nth e EPA' s experienc e wit hadministerin g th e V C standar do f Sectio n61.65(a) , on e majo r deficienc y wit hth e typ e o f informatio nsubmitte d i nman y o f th e 10-day

report s o f RVD' s ha s bee nrecognized . Thi s concern s tha t informatio nrequire d t o b e reporte db y th e standar dregarding , "th e actio ntha t

1 5P.1 9

wa s take nt o preven t th e discharge. " Fo r purpose s o f clarification , thi s portio no f th e standar drequire s informatio no nth e actio ntake nt o pre ven t o r addres s th e caus e leadin g u pt o th e RV

D releas e an

dno t onl y

th e actio ntake nafte r a neven t o r caus e occur s tha t result s i na nRVD release . Emissio nMonitorin g Clarificatio n I nadditio nt o th e change s mad e inrespons e t o th e petitio nfo r recon sideration , a mino r clarificatio nha s bee nmad e i nSectio n61.68 , Emissio n monitoring . Th e existin g regulation , Sectio n61.68(b) , state s tha t th e V C monitorin g system(s ) tha t i s use dt o mee t th e continuou s monitorin g require ment s i nparagrap h(a ) (o f Sectio n61.68 ) fo r emission s fro m source s fo r whic h emissio nlimit s ar e prescribe di s t o b e a devic e whic hobtain s ai r sample s o n
a continuou s sequentia l basi s an danalyze s them . Sinc e i t i s obviou s tha t paragrap h(a ) o f Sectio n61.6 8 call s fo r th e monitorin g o f th e emission s from prescribe dsource s fo r viny l chlorid e andno t ambien t ai r samplin g a s require d unde r Sectio n61.65(b)(8 ) fo r lea k detection/elimination , Sectio n61.68(b ) ha s bee nclarifie dt o requir e tha t representativ e (no t air ) sample s fro m on e o r
mor e applicabl e emissio npoint s b e obtaine dan danalyzed . Thi s revisio nmor e accuratel y

reflect s th e origina l intent . III . ADMINISTRATIV E REQUIREMENT S
A . Publi c Hearin g A publi c hearin g wil l b e held , i f requested , t o discus s th e propose d rulemakin g i naccordanc e wit hSectio n307(d)(5 ) o f th e Clea nAi r Act . Person s wishin g t o mak e ora l presentation s shoul dcontac t EP A a t th e addres s give ni nth e ADDRESSE S sectio no f thi s preamble . Ora l presentation s wil l b e limite d t o 1 5 minute s each . An y membe r o f th e publi c ma y fil e a writte n statemen t wit hEP A

before , during , o r withi n3 0 day s afte r th e hearing . Writte nstatement s shoul db e addresse dt o th e Centra l Docke t Sectio naddres s give ninth e ADDRESSE S sectio no f thi s preamble . 1 6P.2 0

A verbati m

transcrip t o f th e hearin g an dwritte nstatement s wil l b e availabl e fo r publi c inspectio nan dcopyin g durin g norma l workin g hour s
a t EPA' s Centra l Docke t Sectio ni nWashington , D.C . (se e ADDRESSE S sectio n
o f thi s preamble) . B . Docke t Th e docke t i s a

norganize dan

dcomplet e fil e o f al l th e informatio n submitte dt o o r otherwis e considere di nth e developmen t o f thi s propose d rulemaking . Th e principa l purpose s o f th e docke t are : (1 ) t o allo w intereste dpartie s t o identif y readil y

an dlocat e document s s o tha t the y
ca neffectivel y

participat e i nth e rulemakin g process ; an d (2 ) t o serv e a s th e recor di ncas e o f judicia l review , excep t fo r interagenc y revie w material s [Sectio n307(d)(7)(A)] . C . Offic e o f Managemen t andBudge t Review s 1 . Paperwor k Reductio nAct . Ther e ar e n o informatio ncollectio n requirement s associate dwit hthi s propose drulemaking . 2 . Unde r Executiv e Orde r 12291 , EP A mus t judg e whethe r a regulator y actio ni s "major " and , therefore , subjec t t o th e requiremen t o f a regulator y impac t analysis . Thi s propose drulemakin g i s no t majo r becaus e i t make s mino r clarifyin g revision s t o anexistin g regulatio nand , therefore , result s i nnon e o f th e significan t advers e economi c effect s describe di nth e Order . Thi s rulemakin g wa s submitte dt o th e Offic e o f Managemen t andBudge t (OMB ) fo r review

a s require d b

y Executiv e Orde r 12291 . An y writte ncomment s fro m OM B t o EP A

an d an y EP A respons e t o thos e comment s ar e include d inDocke t No . A-81-21 . Th e docke t i s availabl e for publi c inspectio na t EPA' s Centra l Docke t Sectio ntha t i s liste dunde r th e ADDRESSE S sectio no f thi s notice .



### 1 7P.2 1

D . Regulator y

Flexibilit y

Ac t Th e Regulator y

Flexibilit y

Ac t o f 198 0 require s th e identificatio no f potentiall y

advers e impact s o f Federa l regulation s upo nsmal l busines s entities . Th e Ac t specificall y require s th e completio no f a Regulator y Flexibilit y

Analysi s inthos e instance s wher e smal l busines s impact s ar e possible . Becaus e thes e propose dmino r revision s impos e n o advers e economi c impacts , a Regulator y Flexibilit y

Analysi s ha s no t bee nconducted . Pursuan t t o th e provision s o f 5 U.S.C . 605(b) , I hearby certif y

tha t th e propose drul e wil l no t hav e a significan t economi c impac t ona substantia l numbe r o f smal l entities . Lis t o f Subject s i n4 0 CF RPar t 6 1 Ai r pollutio ncontrol , Asbestos , Benzene , Beryllium , Hazardou s materials , Mercury , Viny l chloride .

Dat e Administrato r

Certifie dt o b e a tru e copy o f th e origina l



### I RFo r th e reason s se t fort hinth e preamble , i t i s propose dt o amend

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

citatio nfo r Par t 6 1 continue s t o rea da s follows : Authority : Section s 101 , 112 , 114 , 116 , 301 , Clea nAi r Ac t a s amende d (4 2 U.S.C . 7401 , 7412 , 7414 , 7416 , 7601) . 2 . Sectio n61.6 1 i s amende db y revisin g paragraph s (o) , (w) , (x) , (y) , an d (z ) t o read a s follows : § 61.6 1 Definitions .
**** * (o ) "Ethylen e dichlorid e purification " include s an y par t o f th e proces s
o f ethylen e dichlorid e purificatio nfollowin g ethylen e dichlorid e formation , bu t exclude s crude , intermediate , an d fina l ethylen e dichlorid e storag e tanks .

**** * (w ) "Leak " mean s an y o f severa l event s tha t indicat e interruptio no f confinemen t o f viny l chlorid e withi nproces s equipment . Leak s includ e event s regulate dunde r Subpar t V o f thi s par t suc has : (1 ) aninstrumen t readin g o f 10,00 0 pp m o r greate r measure daccordin g t o Metho d2 1 (se e Appendi xA

o f 4 0 CF RPar t 60) ; (2 ) a senso r detectio no f failur e o f a sea l system , failur e o f a barrie r flui dsystem , o r both ; (3 ) detectabl e emission s
a s indicate db

y a ninstrumen t readin g o f greate r tha n50 0 pp m abov e backgroun d fo r equipmen t designate dfo r n o detectabl e emission s measure daccordin g t o Tes t Metho d 2 1 (se e Appendi xA o f 4 0 CF RPar t 60) ; an d (4 ) i nth e cas e o f pum pseal s regulate d unde r § 61.242-2 , indication s o f liqui ddrippin g constitutin g a lea k unde r § 61.242-2 . Leak s als o includ e event s regulate d unde r § 61.65(b)(8)(i ) fo r detectio no f ambien t concentration s i nexces s o f backgroun dconcentrations . A relie f valv e discharg e i s no t a leak .



### 1 9P.2 3

(x ) "Exhaus t gas " mean s an y offga s (th e constituent s o f whic hma y consis t o f an

y fluids , eithe r a s a liqui d and/o r gas ) discharge d directl y

o r ultimatel y

t o th e atmospher e tha t wa s initiall y containe d ino r wa s in direc t contac t wit hth e equipmen t fo r whic hexhaus t ga s limit s ar e prescribe d i n§ 61.62(a ) and (b) ; § 61.63(a) ; § 61.64(a)(1) , (b) , (c) , an d (d) ; § 61.65(b)(1)(H) . (b)(2) , (b)(3) , (b)(5) , (b)(6)(H) , (b)(7) , an d (b)(9)(H) ;
and § 61.65(d) . A

lea k a s define d i nparagrap h(w ) o f thi s sectio ni s no t

a nexhaus t gas . Equipmen t whic hcontain s exhaus t ga s i s subjec t t o Sectio n 61.65(b)(8) , whethe r o r no t tha t equipmen t contain s 1 0 percen t b y volume viny l chloride . (y ) "Relie f Valv e Discharge " mean s an y nonlea k discharg e throug ha relie f valve . (z ) "3-hou r period " mean s an y thre e consecutiv e 1-hour'period s (eac h commencin g onth e hour) , provide d tha t th e numbe r o f 3-hou r period s durin g whic hth e viny l chlorid e concentratio nexceed s 1 0 pp m doe s no t excee d th e numbe r o f 1-hou r period s durin g whic hth e viny l chlorid e concentratio n exceed s 1 0 ppm . 3 . Sectio n61.6 5 i s amende d b y revisin g paragraph s (a ) an d (b)(6) , an

d addin g paragrap h(d ) t o read a s follows : § 61.6 5 Emissio nstandar d fo r ethylen e dichloride , viny l chlorid e an d polyviny l chlorid e plants . A nowne r o r operato r o f anethylen e dichloride , viny l chloride , and/o r polyviny l chlorid e plan t shal l compl y wit hth e requirement s o f thi s section . (a ) Relie f valv e discharge . Excep t fo r anemergenc y relie f discharge , an d excep t a s provide d i n§ 61.65(d) , ther e i s t o b e n o discharg e t o th e atmospher e fro

m an y relie f valv e o

nan y equipmen t i

nviny l chlorid e service . A nemergenc y

relie f discharg e mean s a discharg e whic hcoul d no t hav e bee n

2 0P.2 4



### avoide db

y takin g measure s t o preven t th e discharge . Withi n1 0 day s o f an y relie f valv e discharge , excep t fo r thos e subjec t t o § 61.65(d) , th e owne r
o r operato r o f th e sourc e fro m whic hth e relie f valv e discharg e occur s shal l submi t t o th e Administrato r a repor t i nwritin g containin g informatio n
o nth e source , natur e an dcaus e o f th e discharge , th e dat e an dtime o f th e discharge , th e approximat e tota l viny l chlorid e los s durin g th e discharge , th e metho duse dfo r determinin g th e viny l chlorid e los s (th e calculatio no f th e viny l chlorid e loss) , th e actio ntha t wa s take nt o preven t th e discharge , an dmeasure s adopte dt o preven t futur e discharges . (b ) * * * (6 ) Opening o f equipment . Viny l chlorid e emission s fro m openin g o f equipmen t (excluding crude , intermediate , an dfina l ED C storag e tanks , bu t includin g prepolymerizatio nreactor s use di nth e manufactur e o f bul k resin s
andloadin g o r unloadin g line s tha t ar e no t opene dt o th e atmospher e afte r eac hloadin g o r unloadin g operation ) ar e t o b e minimize da s follows :

**** * 

### (d ) A RV D tha t i s ducte dt o a contro l devic e tha t i s continuall y operatin g whit e emission s fro m th e releas e ar e presen t a t th e devic e i s subjec t t o th e followin g requirements : (1 ) A discharg e fro

m a contro l devic e othe r tha na flar e shal l no t
excee d1 0 pp

m (averag e ove r a 3-hour period ) a s determine db y th e continuou s emissio nmonito r syste m require dunde r § 61.68 . Suc ha discharg e i s subjec t t o th e requirement s o f § 61.70 . (2 ) Fo r a discharg e route dt o a flare , th e flar e shal l compl y wit h th e requirement s o f § 60.18 . (i ) Flar e operation s shal l b e monitore di naccordanc e wit hth e requirement s o f § § 60.18(d ) an d60.18(f)(2) . For th e purpose s o f § 60.18(d) , 2 1P.2 5

th e volum

e an dcomponen t concentratio no f eac hrelie f valv e discharg e shal l b e estimate dan

dcalculation s shal l b e mad e t o verif y ongoin g complianc e wit hth e desig nan

doperatin g requirement s o f § § 60.18(c)(3 ) throug h(c)(6) . I f mor e tha non e relie f valv e i s discharge dsimultaneousl y t o a singl e flare , thes e calculaton s shal l accoun t fo r th e cumulativ e effec t o f al l

suc hrelie f valv e discharges . Thes e calculation s shal l b e mad e andreporte d quarterl y

fo r al l discharge s withi nth e quarter . Failur e t o compl y wit han

y
o f th e requirement s o f thi s paragrap hwil l b e a violatio no f § 61.65(d)(2) . Monitorin g fo r th e presenc e o f a flar e pilo t flame shal l b e conducte di n accordanc e wit h§ 60.18(f)(2) . I f th e result s o f thi s monitorin g o r an y othe r informatio nshow s tha t th e pilo t flame i s no t presen t 10 0 percen t o f th e time durin g whic ha relie f valv e discharg e i s route d t o th e flare , th e relie f valv e discharg e i s subjec t t o th e provision s o f § 61*65(a) . (ii ) A repor t describin g th e flar e desig nshal l b e provide dt o th e Administrato r no t late r tha n9 0 day s afte r th e adoptio no f thi s provisio no r withi n3 0 day s o f th e installatio no f a flar e system fo r contro l o f relie f valv e discharg e whicheve r i s later . Th e flar e desig nrepor t shal l includ e calculation s base dupo nexpecte drelie f valv e discharg e componen t concen tration s an

dne t heatin g value s (fo r PV C thi s calculatio nshal l b e base don value s expecte di f a releas e occurre da t th e instan t th e polymerizatio n starts) ; an

destimate d maximu

m exi t velocitie s base dupo nth e desig nthroa t capacit y

o f th e ga s inth e relie f valve . 4 . Sectio n61.6 8 i s amende db y revisin g th e firs t sentenc e i nparagrap h (b ) t o rea

d a s follows : § 61.6 8 Emissio nmonitoring . ( a ) * * * (b ) The viny l chlorid e monitorin g system(s ) use dt o mee t th e requiremen t inparagraph(a ) o f thi s sectio ni s t o b e a devic e whic hobtain s representativ e 2 2P.2 6



### sample s fro

m on e o r mor e applicabl e emissio npoint s ona continuou s sequentia l basi s an

d analyze s th e sample s wit hga s chromotography or , i f th e owne r o r operato r assume s tha t al l hydrocarbon s measure dar e viny l chloride , wit hinfrare dspectrophotometry , flam e io ndetection , o r a nalternativ e method . * * *

**** * 

### 5 . Sectio n61.242- 2 o f Subpar t V i s amende db

y revisin g paragraph(d ) t o rea da s follows : § 61.242- 2 Standards : Pumps .

**** * 

### (d ) Eac hpum

pequippe dwit ha dua l mechanica l sea l system tha t include s a barrie r flui dsyste m i s exemp t fro

m th e requirement s o f paragraph s (a ) an d (b ) o f thi s section , provide dth e followin g requirement s ar e met : (1 ) * * * (2 ) * * * / (3 ) * * * (4 ) * * * (i ) I f ther e ar e indication s o f liqui ddrippin g fro m th e pum

psea l
a t th e tim

e o f th e weekl y

inspection , th e pum

pshal l b e monitore da s specifie d i n§ 61.24 5 t o determin e th e presenc e o f VO C an d VHA P i nth e barrie r fluid . (ii ) I f th e monito r reading (takin g int o accoun t an

y background readings ) indicate s the presenc e o f VHAP , a leak i s detected . Fo r th e purpos e o f thi s paragraph , th e monito r ma y b e calibrate dwit hVHAP , o r ma y emplo y a ga s chromatograph

y colum nt o limi t the respons e o f th e monito r t o VHAP , at th e optiono f the owne r o r operator .

(iii ) I f a

ninstrumen t reading o f 10,00 0 pp m o r greate r (tota l VOC ) i s measured , a leak i s detected . 2 3

### (5 ) Eac hsenso r a s describe di nparagrap h(d)(3 ) o f thi s sectio n

i s checke ddail y

o r i s equippe dwit hanaudibl e alarm . (6)(i ) The owne r o r operato r determines , base dondesig n consideration s an

doperatin g experience , criteri a applicabl e t o th e presenc e
an dfrequenc y

o f drip s an

dt o th e senso r tha t indicate s failur e o f th e sea l system , th e barrie r flui dsystem , o r both .

(ii ) I f indication s o f liquid s drippin g fro m th e pum

psea l excee d th e criteri a establishe di nparagrap h6(i) , o r if , base donth e criteri a establishe di nparagraph6(i) , th e senso r indicate s failur e o f th e sea l system , th e barrie r flui dsystem , o r both , a lea k i s detected .

(iii ) Whe na lea k i s detected , i t shal l b e repaire da s soo na s practicable , bu t no t late r tha n1 5 calenda r day s afte r i t is,detected , excep t a s provide di n§ 61.242-10 .

(iv ) A firs t attemp t a t repai r shal l b e mad e no late r tha nfive calenda r day s afte r eac hlea k i s detected .

**** *



## 2 4