12670 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

final regulation set forth below,

therefore, exempts this packaging from

the requirement in § 179.25(c) that

packaging materials be restricted to

those listed in § 179.45, provided that

FDA has listed the packaging as safe for

holding food in the applicable

regulations ((parts 174 through 186) (21

CFR parts 174 through 186)).

III. Conclusions

The agency finds that meats irradiated

at a minimum dose of 44 kGy and

handled in accordance with the

provisions of § 179.25(d) will meet

current standards for commercial

sterility and nutritional adequacy. The

protocol submitted by NASA (Ref. 1) in

its petitions is a scheduled process that

satisfies the requirements of § 179.25(d)

because, among other things, it sets

forth procedures that will ensure that

the minimum dose will be delivered.

The agency concludes, therefore, that

the proposed use of sources of radiation

is safe, and that § 179.26 of the

regulations should be amended as set

forth below.

In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR

171.1(h)), the petitions and the

documents that FDA considered and

relied upon in reaching its decision to

approve the petitions are available for

inspection at the Center for Food Safety

and Applied Nutrition by appointment

with the information contact person

listed above. As provided in 21 CFR

171.1(h), the agency will delete from the

documents any materials that are not

available for public disclosure before

making the documents available for

inspection.

IV. Environmental Impact

The agency has carefully considered

the potential environmental effects of

this action. FDA has concluded that the

action will not have a significant impact

on the human environment, and that an

environmental impact statement is not

required. The agency’s finding of no

significant impact and the evidence

supporting that finding, contained in an

environmental assessment, may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

(address above) between 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday.

V. Objections

Any person who will be adversely

affected by this regulation may at any

time on or before April 7, 1995, file with

the Dockets Management Branch

(address above) written objections

thereto. Each objection shall be

separately numbered, and each

numbered objection shall specify with

particularity the provisions of the

regulation to which objection is made

and the grounds for the objection. Each

numbered objection on which a hearing

is requested shall specifically so state.

Failure to request a hearing for any

particular objection shall constitute a

waiver of the right to a hearing on that

objection. Each numbered objection for

which a hearing is requested shall

include a detailed description and

analysis of the specific factual

information intended to be presented in

support of the objection in the event

that a hearing is held. Failure to include

such a description and analysis for any

particular objection shall constitute a

waiver of the right to a hearing on the

objection. Three copies of all documents

shall be submitted and shall be

identified with the docket number

found in brackets in the heading of this

document. Any objections received in

response to the regulation may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

VI. References

The following references have been

placed on display in the Dockets

Management Branch (address above)

and may be seen by interested persons

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

1. U.S. Army Natick RD & E Center, ‘‘Space

Food Prototype, Production Guide No. 60–

C,’’ April 13, 1993.

2. Memorandum from M. DiNovi,

Chemistry Review Branch, CFSAN, FDA, to

P. Hansen, Biotechnology Policy Branch,

CFSAN, FDA, dated April 29, 1994.

3. Memorandum from H. Irausquin,

Division of Health Effects Evaluation,

CFSAN, FDA, to P. Hansen, Biotechnology

Policy Branch, CFSAN, FDA, dated

November 9, 1994.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 179

Food additives, Food labeling, Food

packaging, Radiation protection,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Signs and symbols.

Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under

authority delegated to the Commissioner

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to

the Director, Center for Food Safety and

Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 179 is

amended as follows:

PART 179—IRRADIATION IN THE

PRODUCTION, PROCESSING AND

HANDLING OF FOOD

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR

part 179 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 403, 409, 703,

704 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic

Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 343, 348, 373, 374).

2. Section 179.26 is amended in the

table in paragraph (b) by adding a new

entry ‘‘7.’’ under the headings ‘‘Use’’

and ‘‘Limitations’’ to read as follows:

§ 179.26 Ionizing radiation for the

treatment of food.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Use Limitations

* * * * *

7. For the sterilization of

frozen, packaged

meats used solely in

the National Aeronautics and Space Administration space

flight programs.

Minimum dose 44

kGy (4.4 Mrad).

Packaging materials used

need not comply

with § 179.25(c)

provided that

their use is otherwise permitted

by applicable

regulations in

parts 174

through 186 of

this chapter.

* * * * *

Dated: February 26, 1995.

Janice F. Oliver,

Deputy Director for Systems and Support,

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

[FR Doc. 95–5672 Filed 3–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63

[AD–FRL–5165–3]

RIN 2060–AD97

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants Final

Standards for Epoxy Resins

Production and Non-Nylon Polyamides

Production

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This action promulgates final

standards that limit emissions of

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from

existing and new epoxy resins and nonnylon polyamides production

operations that are located at major

sources. The EPA is in the process of

developing standards for a wide range of

types of polymer and resin production

facilities. The polymers and resins

covered by this rule use

epichlorohydrin as a feedstock. This

rulemaking would affect epoxy resin

manufacturers that produce basic liquid

epoxy resin, which is often used to

produce a cured resin with desired
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12671

properties for adhesives, coatings, and

other plastic applications. This

rulemaking would also affect non-nylon

polyamide resin manufacturers that use

epichlorohydrin in the production of

wet strength resin, which is used to

increase the tensile strength of paper

products. The rule is estimated to

reduce emissions of HAP, mainly

epichlorohydrin, by approximately 105

tons per year. Epichlorohydrin is

considered a probable human

carcinogen when inhaled and causes

additional toxic effects. The emission

reductions achieved by these standards,

when combined with the emission

reductions achieved by other standards

mandated by the CAA, will contribute

to achieving the primary goal of the Act,

which is to ‘‘enhance the quality of the

Nation’s air resources so as to promote

the public health and welfare and the

productive capacity of its population.’’

These final standards implement section

112(d) and 112(h) of the Clean Air Act

as amended in 1990 (the Act). The

purpose of this final rule is to protect

the public by requiring all new and

existing major sources to control HAP

emissions to the level corresponding to

the maximum achievable control

technology (MACT).

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 8, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A–92–

37, containing information considered

by the EPA in developing the

promulgated NESHAP for epoxy resins

and non-nylon polyamides operations is

available for public inspection and

copying between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except for

Federal holidays, at the EPA’s Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Room M1500, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460;

telephone (202) 260–7548. A reasonable

fee may be charged for copying.

Background Information Document. A

background information document (BID)

for the promulgated NESHAP may be

obtained from the docket; the U. S. EPA

Library (MD–35), Research Triangle

Park, NC 27711; telephone number (919)

541–2777; or from National Technical

Information Services, 5285 Port Royal

Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161;

telephone (703) 487–4650. Please refer

to ‘‘Hazardous Air Pollutants from

Epoxy Resins and Non-Nylon

Polyamide Resins Production—

Information for Promulgated Standards’’

(EPA–453/R–95–001b). The BID

contains a summary of the public

comments made on the proposed

standards for epoxy resins and nonnylon polyamides and EPA responses to

the comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Randy McDonald of the Organic

Chemicals Group, Emission Standards

Division (MD–13), U. S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Research Triangle

Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone

(919) 541–5402.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,

judicial review of national emission

standards for hazardous air pollutants

(NESHAP) is available only by filing a

petition for review in the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the District of Columbia

Circuit within 60 days of today’s

publication of this final rule. Under

section 307(b)(2) of the Act, the

requirements that are the subject of

today’s notice may not be challenged

later in civil or criminal proceedings

brought by the EPA to enforce these

requirements.

The information presented in this

preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background

II. Summary of Promulgated Standards

III. Summary of Considerations Made in

Developing This Rule

IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, Cost,

and Economic Impacts

V. Significant Changes to the Proposed

Standards

A. Public Participation

B. Summary of Significant Comments and

Changes

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

B. Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership Under Executive Order

12875

C. Executive Order 12286

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

F. Miscellaneous

I. Background

Section 112(b) of the Act lists 189

HAP and requires the EPA to establish

national emission standards for all

major sources and some area sources

emitting those HAP. On July 16, 1992

(57 FR 31576), EPA published a list of

major and area sources for which

NESHAP are to be promulgated, and on

December 3, 1993 (58 FR 83941), EPA

published a schedule for promulgating

those standards. The epoxy resins and

non-nylon polyamides production

source categories are included in the list

of major sources to be regulated for

which the EPA is to establish national

emission standards by November 1994.

This NESHAP was proposed in the

Federal Register on May 16, 1994 (59

FR 25387). In addition, 11 letters

commenting on the proposed rule were

received.

II. Summary of Promulgated Standards

The affected sources subject to these

standards are existing and new facilities

producing basic liquid epoxy resins

(BLR) and facilities producing nonnylon polyamide resins or ‘‘wet

strength’’ resins (WSR), that are also

classified as major sources per section

112(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended.

The standards do not apply to research

and laboratory facilities which do not

manufacture products for sale, except in

a de minimis manner.

Table 1 summarizes the standards for

both BLR and WSR facilities. Existing

BLR sources are required to limit HAP

emissions from process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems to 130

pounds per million pounds of product.

In addition, existing BLR sources are

required to control equipment leak

emissions by implementing the leak

detection and repair (LDAR) program

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart H.

Existing WSR sources are required to

limit HAP emissions from process vents,

storage tanks, and wastewater systems

to 10 pounds per million pounds of

product. There is no requirement to

control equipment leak emissions for

existing WSR sources; however, an

alternative standard is specified

whereby sources may implement the

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart

H in lieu of meeting the emission limit

of 10 lb/MM lb product.

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF STANDARDS

Emission source Basic liquid epoxy resins

Wet strength resins

Equivalent standard

Existing Sources

(1) Process vents, storage tanks,

and wastewater.

HAP emission limit of 130 lb/MM

lb product.

HAP emission limit of 10 lb/MM lb

product.

No requirement.
12672 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF STANDARDS—Continued

Emission source Basic liquid epoxy resins

Wet strength resins

Equivalent standard

(2) Equipment leaks ....................... Requirements of 40 CFR 63, subpart H.No requirement ............................. Requirements of 40 CFR 63, subpart H.

New Sources

(1) Process vents, storage tanks,

and wastewater.

98 percent reduction of HAP

emissions from the sum of uncontrolled emission points; or

limit HAP emissions to 5,000 lb/

yr.

HAP emission limit of 7 lb/MM lb

product.

No requirement.

(2) Equipment leads ....................... Requirements of 40 CFR 63, subpart H.No requirement ............................. Requirements of 40 CFR 63, subpart H.

New BLR sources must either reduce

HAP emissions from process vents,

storage tanks, and wastewater systems

by 98 percent, or limit HAP emissions

from this portion of the source to 5,000

pounds per year or less. New BLR

sources must also implement the

requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart

H to control equipment leak emissions.

New WSR sources have the option of

either complying with a HAP emission

limit of 7 pounds per million pounds of

product for the process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems portion

of the source, or implementing the

LDAR program requirements of 40 CFR

part 63, subpart H to control equipment

leak emissions.

Owners or operators of existing

affected sources are required to comply

with these standards within 3 years after

the effective date. All new and

reconstructed sources must comply

immediately upon startup.

Owners or operators of affected

sources must demonstrate initial

compliance following the compliance

methods and procedures of § 63.525.

Continuous compliance is demonstrated

by conducting monitoring in accordance

with § 63.526.

Section 114 (a)(3) of the Act requires

enhanced monitoring and compliance

certifications of all major stationary

sources. The annual compliance

certifications certify whether

compliance has been continuous or

intermittent. Enhanced monitoring shall

be capable of detecting deviations from

each applicable emission limitation or

standard with sufficient

representativeness, accuracy, precision,

reliability, frequency, and timeliness to

determine if compliance is continuous

during a reporting period. The

monitoring in this regulation satisfies

the requirements of enhanced

monitoring. Compliant monitoring

parameter values are established

according to procedures contained in

§ 63.526. A de minimis level is specified

for the BLR source category for emission

points below which monitoring is not

required.

Owners or operators of affected

sources shall maintain records and

submit reports in accordance with

§§ 63.527 and 63.528. Records are

consistent with those required by 40

CFR part 63, subpart A, and also include

the recordkeeping requirements

associated with the LDAR program

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart H

where applicable.

The EPA is also amending the table of

currently approved information

collection request (ICR) control numbers

issued by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) for various regulations.

This amendment updates the table to

accurately display those information

requirements contained in this final

rule. This display of the OMB control

number and its subsequent codification

in the Code of Federal Regulations

satisfies the requirements of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.) and OMB’s implementing

regulations at 5 CFR part 1320.

The ICR was previously subject to

public notice and comment prior to

OMB approval. As a result, EPA finds

that there is ‘‘good cause’’ under section

553(b)(B) of the Administrative

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)) to

amend this table without prior notice

and comment. Due to the technical

nature of the table, further notice and

comment would be unnecessary. For the

same reasons, EPA also finds that there

is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

III. Summary of Considerations Made

in Developing This Rule

The Clean Air Act was created, in

part, ‘‘to protect and enhance the quality

of the Nation’s air resources so as to

promote the public health and welfare

and the productive capacity of its

population’’ (the Act, section 101(b)(1)).

As such, this regulation protects the

public health by reducing emissions of

epichlorohydrin from basic liquid resins

and wet strength resins processes.

Available emission data for the epoxy

resins and non-nylon polyamides source

categories indicate that epichlorohydrin

is the primary pollutant listed in section

112(b)(1) of the CAA that is emitted in

from sources in the source category.

In addition, note that epichlorohydrin

is listed under section 112(r) of the

CAA. The intent of section 112(r),

Prevention of Accidental Releases, is to

focus on chemicals that pose a

significant hazard to the community

should an accident occur, to prevent

their accidental release, and to

minimize consequences should a release

occur. Epichlorohydrin, along with the

other substances listed under section

112(r)(3), is listed because it is known

to cause, or may be reasonably

anticipated to cause death, injury, or

serious adverse effects to human health

or the environment (see 59 FR 4478,

January 31, 1994). Sources that handle

epichlorohydrin in greater quantities

than the established threshold quantity

under section 112(r)(5) will be subject to

the risk management program

requirements under section 112(r)(7)

(see 58 FR 54190, October 20, 1993).

Epichlorohydrin is considered to be a

probable human carcinogen when

inhaled and can cause additional toxic

effects. These effects include

respiratory, skin, and eye irritation,

pulmonary edema, renal lesions, and

hematological and central nervous

system effects. The severity of observed

effects varies depending on the level

and length of exposure. The exposure

duration and level (that is, the amount

inhaled from the air and absorbed

within the body) are strongly influenced

by source-specific characteristics such

as emission rates and local

meteorological conditions. The severity

of effects also depends on multiple
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12673

factors that affect human variability

such as age, genetics, and general health

status (e.g., presence of pre-existing

disease). The EPA does not have the

type of current detailed data on each of

the BLR or WSR facilities covered by

this rule, and the people living around

the facilities, that would be necessary to

conduct an analysis to determine the

actual population exposures to

epichlorohydrin and resulting health

effects. Therefore, EPA does not know

the extent to which the adverse health

effects described above occur in the

populations surrounding these facilities.

However, to the extent the adverse

effects do occur, the promulgated

standard will substantially reduce

emissions and exposures to the level

achievable with maximum achievable

control technology. However, due to the

volatility and relatively low potential

for bioaccumulation of epichlorohydrin,

air emissions are not expected to

deposit on land or water and cause

subsequent adverse health or ecosystem

effects.

The alternatives considered in the

development of this regulation,

including those alternatives selected as

standards for new and existing BLR and

WSR sources, are based on process and

emissions data received from every

existing BLR and WSR facility known to

be in operation. The EPA met with

industry several times to discuss this

data. In addition, facilities, State

regulatory authorities, and

environmental groups had the

opportunity to comment on the

proposed standards and provide

additional information during the

public comment period which followed

proposal. Some facilities did provide

comments; these comments were

considered, and in some cases, the

standards were changed in response to

the comments. Of major concern to the

commenters was the proposed format of

the standards for new sources. After

considering various alternatives, the

EPA decided the format of the standard

could be changed in a way which allays

their concerns.

The final standards give existing

facilities 3 years from the date of

promulgation to comply. This is the

maximum amount allowed under the

Clean Air Act (CAA). New facilities are

required to comply with the standard

upon startup. The EPA sees no reason

why new facilities would not be able to

comply with the requirements of the

standards upon startup. The number of

existing sources affected by this rule is

less than 20; therefore, EPA does not

believe that required retrofits or other

actions cannot be achieved in the time

frame allotted.

Included in the final rule are methods

for determining initial compliance as

well as monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements. All of these

components are necessary to ensure that

sources will comply with the standards

both initially and over time. However,

EPA has made every effort to simplify

the requirements in the rule. The

Agency has also attempted to maintain

consistency with existing regulations by

either incorporating text from existing

regulations or referencing the applicable

sections, depending on which method

would be least confusing for a given

situation.

As described in the preamble to the

proposed rule, two regulatory

alternatives above the MACT floor were

considered for BLR and WSR. For BLR,

the final standards reflect the option

with the lowest overall cost

effectiveness in dollars per megagram of

HAP emission reduction. For WSR the

MACT floor, as well as the two

regulatory alternatives above the floor,

were found to have relatively high cost

effectiveness. However, an alternative

standard was specified that allows

facilities to implement the requirements

of subpart H to control emissions from

equipment leaks. The alternative

standard is much more cost effective,

and will result in a greater overall HAP

emission reduction. However, the

alternative standard is not being

required because the cost was

considered to be too high to justify

requiring more control than that

achieved at the MACT floor. Section

112(d) of the Clean Air Act requires

standards to be set at a level no less

stringent than the MACT floor but

requires consideration of the cost of

achieving further reductions before

requiring reductions beyond the MACT

floor.

Representatives from other interested

EPA offices and programs, as well as

representatives from State regulatory

agencies, are included in the regulatory

development process as members of the

Work Group. The Work Group is

involved in the regulatory development

process, and must review and concur

with the regulation before proposal and

promulgation. Therefore, EPA believes

that the implications to other EPA

offices and programs has been

adequately considered during the

development of these standards.

IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy,

Cost, and Economic Impacts

The environmental impacts for this

rule were not impacted significantly by

changes made to the rule between

proposal and promulgation. The

promulgated standards reduce HAP

emissions from existing BLR sources by

95 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (105

tons per year (tons/yr)) from the

baseline level, a reduction of 78 percent

from baseline. Emissions of HAP from

existing WSR sources will decrease by

2 Mg/yr (2 tons/yr) if facilities elect to

comply with the standard for process

vents, storage tanks, and wastewater

systems, a reduction of 7 percent from

baseline. If facilities elect to comply

with the alternative standard (comply

with the 40 CFR part 63, subpart H

requirements for equipment leaks), HAP

emissions will decrease by 14 Mg/yr (15

tons/yr), a reduction of 52 percent from

baseline.

No additional wastewater generation

results from compliance with the

standards as a result of changing the

new source standard for BLR and WSR

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems emission sources

from an equipment-based standard to a

performance-based standard. No solid

waste is generated from the BLR or WSR

production processes.

The energy impacts for this rule were

not affected by changes made to the rule

between proposal and promulgation.

The standards for the BLR source

category require energy usage of 1.5 ×

106 Btu per year (Btu/yr). Energy usage

for the WSR will be 4 × 106 Btu/yr if

sources comply with the standard for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems; however, if sources

choose to comply with the alternative

standard (subpart H), the additional

energy usage will be negligible. The cost

impacts for this rule were not affected

by changes made to the rule between

proposal and promulgation.

Nationwide, the total annual cost of the

standard to the BLR industry will be

$140,000. If all WSR sources choose to

comply with the standard for process

vents, storage tanks, and wastewater

systems, the total cost of this regulation

to the WSR industry will be $520,000.

If all WSR sources decide to comply

with the alternative standard (subpart

H), the total annual cost will be $52,000.

V. Significant Changes to the Proposed

Standards

A. Public Participation

Prior to proposal of this rule a

meeting of the National Air Pollution

Control Techniques Advisory

Committee (NAPCTAC) was held to

discuss the development of the draft

rule for epoxy resins and non-nylon

polyamide resins production. That

meeting was held on November 18,

1992. The meeting was open to the

public, and each attendee was given an
12674 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

opportunity to comment on the draft

rule.

The proposed rule was published in

the Federal Register on May 16, 1994

(59 FR 25387). The preamble to the

proposal discussed the availability of

the proposal BID (Emissions from Epoxy

Resins Production and Non-Nylon

Polyamides Production—Information

for Proposed Standards (EPA–493/R–

94–033a)), which describes in detail the

regulatory alternatives considered and

the impacts associated with those

alternatives. Public comments were

solicited at the time of proposal, and

copies of the proposal BID were made

available to interested parties.

The public comment period ended on

July 15, 1994. A total of 11 comment

letters were received. The comments

were carefully considered, and, where

determined by the Administrator to be

appropriate, changes were made in the

final rule.

Comments on the proposed rule were

received from BLR and WSR

manufacturers, State and local air

pollution control agencies, and

environmental organizations. A detailed

discussion of these comments and

responses can be found in the

promulgation BID (see ADDRESSES

section). The summary of comments and

responses in the promulgation BID

serves as the basis for the revisions that

have been made to the rule between

proposal and promulgation. The major

comments and responses are

summarized in this preamble.

For the purpose of orderly

presentation, the comments have been

categorized in the promulgation BID

under the following topics:

1. Applicability of the Standard;

2. Description of Emission Control

Technology;

3. Selection of MACT;

4. Selection of Compliance Dates;

5. Selection of Emission Limits or

Equipment/Work Practice

Specifications;

6. Selection of Compliance Methods

and Monitoring Requirements;

7. Selection of Reporting and

Recordkeeping Requirements;

8. Interaction of Polymers and Resins

II NESHAP with the General Provisions;

9. Wording of the Standard; and

10. Miscellaneous.

B. Summary of Significant Comments

and Changes

In response to public comments and

as a result of additional evaluation by

EPA, changes have been made to the

standards. Significant changes are

summarized below, and are explained

fully in the promulgation BID.

1. Several commenters objected to the

format of the standard for new BLR

sources. The commenters pointed out

the inflexibility of the equipment

standard, which would have required

certain control technology (water

scrubbers) and venting configurations

(manifolding all vents to common

control), rather than allowing owners

and operators the flexibility of

controlling the process in a manner of

their own choosing. In response to these

comments, formats for the new source

maximum achievable control

technology (MACT) requirements for

process vents, wastewater, and storage

tank emissions for BLR and WSR have

been changed. For BLR facilities, the

standard is a 98 percent reduction of

HAP from the sum of uncontrolled

process vents, storage, and wastewater

systems emission points or an emission

limit of 5,000 pounds per year (lb/yr)

HAP from the sum of process vents,

storage, and wastewater systems

emission points. For WSR, the

requirement is a limit of 7 lb of HAP per

million (MM) lb resin production from

the sum of process vents, storage, and

wastewater systems emission points.

These changes in format for new source

MACT requirements reflect the same

level of control as the proposed

equipment standard requirements.

2. One commenter argued that the

methods proposed for determining

emissions from storage tanks and

wastewater systems, which were

referenced from the emissions averaging

section of the Hazardous Organic

NESHAP (HON) are not appropriate for

this regulation. Upon further review,

EPA agrees with the commenter’s

arguments concerning estimating

emissions from wastewater, but not

those concerning storage tanks.

Consequently, the methods of

calculating emissions and determining

the effectiveness of certain control

measures on wastewater emission

points have been corrected and now

specify methodologies contained in the

HON, appendix C. The required

emission estimation methods for storage

tanks did not change.

3. One commenter stated that

sampling frequencies specified in the

proposed performance test guidelines

are not feasible for BLR sources. The

EPA has reexamined the proposed

sampling guidelines and agrees with the

commenter’s argument. Therefore, the

frequency of flowrate and concentration

sampling of emission stream

characteristics during a performance test

has been reduced. For continuous BLR

emission points, sampling at 15-minute

intervals for flowrate and concentration

or 1-hour time-integrated sampling of

concentration have replaced the

requirement of simultaneous minute-byminute measurements of flowrate and

concentration. For WSR, sampling of

flowrate every 15 minutes, or least once

per batch step, and integrated

concentration measurements over each

step have replaced the minute-byminute flowrate and concentration

measurements. In addition, EPA has

decided not to require three test runs for

WSR process vents, due to the dynamic

nature of batch emission stream

characteristics. The data obtained from

a batch test run may be representative

of only that batch; therefore, running

repeat tests may not be justified. The

EPA has also specified that owners or

operators of WSR sources perform a

maximum of 8 hours of testing for batch

emission episodes of duration greater

than 8 hours. This provision was

included to prevent the possibility of

excessive testing costs for owners of

batch processes containing very long

emission episodes. Finally, the EPA has

decided to allow owners or operators of

WSR sources to test intermittently if

they can provide evidence that the

periods tested represent periods in

which emissions are greater than the

average emissions over the batch

emission episode.

4. In response to comments relating to

the averaging period for ongoing

compliance determination, the

averaging period for measurements

taken to verify continuous compliance

for continuous BLR sources has been

increased from 1 hour to 24 hours. The

target values for comparison of these

continuous compliance measurements

are the average of the maximum or

minimum values obtained from the

three 1-hour performance tests. The 24-

hour averaging period results in an

average obtained over 96, 15-minute

readings. The EPA believes that

calculating an average over 96 readings

will sufficiently diminish the effect of

excursions on the value of the average.

5. Two commenters stated that the de

minimis levels specified in the HON for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems are appropriate for

BLR sources and should be included in

the final rule. Because EPA has decided

to change the format of the standard for

new BLR sources to a 98 percent overall

reduction from the total of uncontrolled

process vents, storage tanks and

wastewater systems or an absolute cap

of 2.27 Mg/yr (5,000 lb/yr) from the total

of these emission sources, EPA does not

believe de minimis levels for controlling

emission points are necessary, as

owners and operators will be afforded

the flexibility of deciding the degree of

control for a particular emission point,

provided that compliance with the

overall emission limit is achieved.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12675

However, EPA agrees with the

commenters’ suggestion that de minimis

levels should be established for

exempting emission points from

monitoring, because monitoring

emission points with emission stream

flow rates and/or HAP concentrations

below a certain de minimis level is not

reasonable. Therefore, a de minimis

level of 1 pound per year of

uncontrolled HAP emissions has been

established for emission points within

BLR sources below which continuous

monitoring is not required.

6. Two commenters stated that EPA

should not specify in the rule the

wastewater treatment system parameters

to monitor. The commenters stated that

the parameters specified in the

proposed rule are not appropriate for all

treatment systems; that the parameters

are tailored to the treatment system, and

that there should be flexibility to

determine which parameters should be

used in each instance. The commenters

further argued that States, in their role

as permitting authorities, set monitoring

parameters as part of the NPDES permit

system under the Clean Water Act.

Therefore, the commenters maintained,

it is unreasonable for facilities to

monitor two different sets of parameters.

The wastewater monitoring

provisions of the HON, which are

referenced in the final rule, allow

biological treatment system monitoring

parameters to be determined on a caseby-case basis. In light of the issues

raised above by the commenters, and in

accordance with the wastewater

monitoring provisions of the HON, the

final rule has been changed to allow

owners and operators to monitor the

wastewater treatment system parameters

specified by the permitting authority

responsible for enforcing the Clean

Water Act.

7. Several commenters requested

clarification of the compliance dates for

existing, new, and reconstructed

sources, which were not stated in the

proposed rule. In response to these

comments, the final rule specifies that

the compliance date is 3 years from the

date of promulgation for existing

sources; new sources are required to be

in compliance upon startup of the

source.

8. Several commenters requested

clarification of the General Provisions to

part 63 as they relate to this rule. In

response to these comments, a table

identifying the relationship of the

General Provisions requirements has

been added to the final regulation.

9. Several commenters stated that

EPA should clarify that the modification

of existing BLR sources is covered by

the section 112(g) rule, and will be

subject to ‘‘existing source MACT’’ as

defined by the standard.

No additional language has been

added to the regulatory text to address

this comment. Instead, EPA has

provided the following explanation to

clarify the role of section 112(g) in

determining the applicability of existing

and new source MACT. Section

112(2)(B) of the Act requires that ‘‘after

the effective date of a permit program

under title V of this chapter, no person

may modify any major source of

hazardous air pollutants in such State,

unless the Administrator (or the State)

determines that the maximum

achievable control technology emission

limitation for existing sources will be

met.’’ The EPA believes that the

requirement for a ‘‘determination’’

suggests that an administrative review is

needed when an affected source is

subject to a MACT standard, and that

affected source undergoes a physical

change or change in the method of

operation that meets the definition of

‘‘modification’’ in section 112(a) of the

Act. The purpose of this section of the

preamble is to clarify the types of

administrative review for sources in the

epoxy resins and non-nylon polyamides

source categories.

As discussed in the preamble to the

proposed rule implementing section

112(g) of the Act, the EPA believes that

in many if not most cases, an emission

increase that meets the definition of

‘‘modification’’ will not have a

substantive effect on the emission and/

or work practice standards that the

affected sources will have to meet (see

59 FR 15504, April 1, 1994). Before and

after the change, the affected source

must continue to meet the ‘‘existing

source MACT’’ level. The only

circumstance which could affect the

degree of control required is when the

modification of a source creates an

affected source above a threshold in an

applicability definition after the change,

which was under the applicability

threshold before the change. For this

rule, EPA believes there will be no such

circumstances because the regulation

contains no applicability threshold. The

standard is an emission factor format

which applies to BLR and WSR

processes of any size.

The EPA believes that the process

included in today’s rule is sufficient to

satisfy the requirement for a

‘‘determination’’ under section 112(g).

Where a ‘‘modification’’ does not affect

an affected source’s applicability status,

the proposed rule implementing section

112(g) requires that the source notify the

permitting authority prior to startup of

operation of the change (see proposed

§ 63.45(f)).

A similar ‘‘determination’’ is required

for major source construction and

reconstruction under section

112(g)(2)(A) of the Act. The

administrative process for these

determinations is contained in § 63.5 of

the 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, General

Provisions.

10. Revisions to definitions and

phrasing have been made to clarify the

regulation.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket for this rulemaking is A–

92–37. The docket is an organized and

complete file of all the information

submitted to or otherwise considered by

the EPA in the development of this

rulemaking. The principal purposes of

the docket are: (1) To allow interested

parties a means to identify and locate

documents so that they can effectively

participate in the rulemaking process;

and (2) to serve as the record in case of

judicial review (except for interagency

review materials) (section 307(d)(7)(A)

of the Act). The docket is available for

public inspection at the EPA’s Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center, the location of which is given in

the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

B. Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership Under Executive Order

12875

In compliance with Executive Order

12875 we have involved State, local,

and tribal governments in the

development of this rule. These

governments are not directly impacted

by the rule; i.e., they are not required to

purchase control systems to meet the

requirements of this rule. They will

collect permit fees which will be used

to offset the resource burden of

implementing the rule. One

representative of the State governments

has been a member of the EPA Work

Group developing this rule. The Work

Group has met numerous times, and

comments have been solicited from the

Work Group members, including the

State representative; and their

comments have been carefully

considered in the rule development. In

addition, all States were encouraged to

comment on the proposed rule during

the public comment period. The EPA

fully considered comments from States

in the final rulemaking.

C. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to Office of Management and
12676 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Budget (OMB) review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may:

1. Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more, or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy, a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

2. Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency;

3. Materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof; or

4. Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in the Executive Order.’’

The EPA has submitted this action to

OMB for review. The action was

approved by OMB without comment.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

Information collection requirements

associated with this rule have been

approved by OMB under the provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and have been

assigned OMB control number 2060–

0290. An Information Collection

Request (ICR) document has been

prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1681.02), and

a copy may be obtained from Sandy

Farmer, Information Policy Branch, EPA

2136, Washington, DC 20460, or by

calling (202) 260–2740.

The public reporting burden for this

collection of information is estimated to

average 1,253 hours per respondent in

the first year, 765 hours per respondent

in the second year, and 589 hours per

respondent in the third year. This

includes the time required for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection of information.

Send comments regarding the burden

estimate or any other aspect of this

collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing this burden, to

Chief, Information Policy Branch; EPA;

401 M Street, SW. (Mail Code 2136);

Washington, DC 20460; and to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked

‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that a

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be

performed for all rules that have

‘‘significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities.’’ If a

preliminary analysis indicates that a

proposed regulation would have a

significant economic impact on 20

percent or more of small entities, then

a regulatory flexibility analysis must be

prepared.

Present Regulatory Flexibility Act

guidelines for regulations like this one

whose start action notifications (SAN’s)

were filed before April 1992 indicate

that an economic impact should be

considered significant if it meets one of

the following criteria:

1. Compliance increases annual

production costs by more than 5

percent, assuming costs are passed on to

consumers;

2. Compliance costs as a percentage of

sales for small entities are at least 10

percent more than compliance costs as

a percentage of sales for large entities;

3. Capital costs of compliance

represent a ‘‘significant’’ portion of

capital available to small entities,

considering internal cash flow plus

external financial capabilities; or

4. Regulatory requirements are likely

to result in closures of small entities.

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the Administrator certifies that

this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. All of the

affected BLR and WSR producers are

large enough not to satisfy the criteria

for a small business. Consequently, no

significant small business impacts will

result from compliance with these

standards.

F. Miscellaneous

In accordance with section 117 of the

Act, publication of this promulgated

rule was preceded by consultation with

appropriate advisory committees,

independent experts, and Federal

departments and agencies.

This regulation will be reviewed 5

years from the date of promulgation.

This review will include an assessment

of such factors as evaluation of the

residual health risks, any overlap with

other programs, the existence of

alternative methods, enforceability,

improvements in emission control

technology and health data, and the

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9 and

63

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hazardous

substances, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 28, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as set

forth below.

PART 9—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 9

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 1235–

1236y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006,

2601–2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31

U.S.C. 9701; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311,

1313d, 1314, 1321, 1326, 1330, 1344, 1345

(d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243,

3 CFR, 1971–1975 Comp., p. 973; 42 U.S.C.

241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g–1,

300g–2, 300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6,

300j–1, 300j–2, 300j–3, 300j–4, 300j–9, 1857

et seq., 6901–6992k, 7401–7671q, 7542,

9601–9657, 11023, 11048.

2. Section 9.1 is amended by adding

a new entry to the table under the

indicated heading to read as follows:

§ 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork

Reduction Act.

* * * * *

40 CFR citation OMB control No.

* * * * *

National Emission Standards

for Hazardous Air Pollutants

for Source Categories:

* * * * *

63.525–63.528 .......................... 2060–0290

* * * * *

PART 63—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 63

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

2. Part 63 is amended by adding

subpart W consisting of §§ 63.520

through 63.528 to read as follows:

Subpart W—National Emission Standards

for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Epoxy

Resins Production and Non-Nylon

Polyamides Production

Sec.

63.520 Applicability and designation of

sources.

63.521 Compliance schedule.

63.522 Definitions.

63.523 Standards for basic liquid resins

manufacturers.

63.524 Standards for wet strength resins

manufacturers.

63.525 Compliance and performance

testing.

63.526 Monitoring requirements.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12677

63.527 Recordkeeping requirements.

63.528 Reporting requirements.

Subpart W—National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

for Epoxy Resins Production and NonNylon Polyamides Production

§ 63.520 Applicability and designation of

sources.

The provisions of this subpart apply

to all existing, new, and reconstructed

manufacturers of basic liquid epoxy

resins (BLR) and manufacturers of wet

strength resins (WSR) that are located at

a plant site that is a major source, as

defined in section 112(a) of the Clean

Air Act. Research and development

facilities, as defined in § 63.522, are

exempt from the provisions of this

subpart. The affected source is also

defined in § 63.522. If a change occurs

to an existing source that does not

constitute reconstruction then the

additions have to meet the existing

source requirements of the MACT

standards. Any reconstruction of an

existing source, or construction of a new

source, must meet the new source

standard. Affected sources are also

subject to certain requirements of

subpart A of this part, as specified in

Table 1 of this subpart.

§ 63.521 Compliance schedule.

(a) Owners or operators of existing

affected BLR and WSR sources shall

comply with the applicable provisions

of this subpart within 3 years of the

promulgation date.

(b) New and reconstructed sources

subject to this subpart shall be in

compliance with the applicable

provisions of this subpart upon startup.

§ 63.522 Definitions.

Terms used in this subpart are

defined in the Act, in subpart A of this

part, or in this section as follows:

Administrator means the

Administrator of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, or

any official designee of the

Administrator.

Affected source means all HAP

emission points within a facility that are

related to the production of BLR or

WSR, including process vents, storage

tanks, wastewater systems, and

equipment leaks.

Basic liquid epoxy resins (BLR) means

resins made by reacting epichlorohydrin

and bisphenol A to form diglycidyl

ether of bisphenol-A (DGEBPA).

Batch emission episode means a

discrete venting episode that may be

associated with a single unit operation.

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 flow rate equal to the rate of

the charge. If the vessel is then heated,

there will also be another discrete

emission episode resulting from the

expulsion of expanded vessel vapor

space. Both emission episodes may

occur in the same vessel or unit

operation. There are possibly other

emission episodes that may occur from

the vessel or other process equipment,

depending on process operations.

Batch process refers to a

discontinuous process involving the

bulk movement of material through

sequential manufacturing steps. Mass,

temperature, concentration, and other

properties of a system vary with time.

Addition of raw material and

withdrawal of product do not typically

occur simultaneously in a batch process.

Closed-vent system means a system

that is not open to the atmosphere and

is composed of piping, ductwork,

connections, and, if necessary, flowinducing devices that transport gas or

vapor from an emission point to a

control device or back into the process.

Continuous process means a process

where the inputs and outputs flow

continuously throughout the duration of

the process. Continuous processes are

typically steady-state.

Drain system means the system used

to convey wastewater streams from a

process unit, product storage tank, or

feed storage tank to a waste management

unit. The term includes all process

drains and junction boxes, together with

their associated sewer lines and other

junction boxes, manholes, sumps, and

lift stations, down to the receiving waste

management unit. A segregated

stormwater sewer system, which is a

drain and collection system designed

and operated for the sole purpose of

collecting rainfall-runoff at a facility,

and which is segregated from all other

drain systems, is excluded from this

definition.

Equipment leaks means emissions of

hazardous air pollutants from a pump,

compressor, agitator, pressure relief

device, sampling connection system,

open-ended valve or line, or

instrumentation system in organic

hazardous air pollutant service.

Process vent means a point of

emission from a unit operation. Typical

process vents include condenser vents,

vacuum pumps, steam ejectors, and

atmospheric vents from reactors and

other process vessels.

Production-based emission rate

means a ratio of the amount of HAP

emitted to the amount of BLR or WSR

produced.

Research and development facility

means laboratory operations whose

primary purpose is to conduct research

and development into new processes

and products, where the operations are

under the close supervision of

technically trained personnel, and is not

engaged in the manufacture of products

for commercial sale, except in a de

minimis manner.

Storage tank means a tank or other

vessel that is used to store liquids that

contain one or more HAP compounds.

Unit operation means those

processing steps that occur within

distinct equipment that are used, among

other things, to prepare reactants,

facilitate reactions, separate and purify

products, and recycle materials. There

may be several emission episodes

within a single unit operation.

Waste management unit means any

component, piece of equipment,

structure, or transport mechanism used

in storing, treating, or disposing of

wastewater streams, or conveying

wastewater between storage, treatment,

or disposal operations.

Wastewater means aqueous liquid

waste streams exiting equipment at an

affected source.

Wastewater system means a system

made up of a drain system and one or

more waste management units.

Wet strength resins (WSR) means

polyamide/ epichlorohydrin

condensates which are used to increase

the tensile strength of paper products.

§ 63.523 Standards for basic liquid resins

manufacturers.

(a) Owners or operators of existing

affected BLR sources shall operate

sources such that the rate of emissions

of hazardous air pollutants from all

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems combined shall not

exceed 130 pounds per 1 million

pounds of BLR produced.

(b) Owners or operators of new or

reconstructed affected BLR sources shall

reduce uncontrolled emissions from the

sum of uncontrolled process vents,

storage tanks, and wastewater systems

by 98 percent, or limit the total

emissions from these emission points to

5,000 pounds per year.

(1) For process vents, uncontrolled

emissions are defined as gaseous

emission streams past the last recovery

device.

(2) For storage tanks, uncontrolled

emissions are defined as emissions

calculated according to the methodology

specified in § 63.150(g)(3).

(3) For wastewater systems,

uncontrolled emissions are the total

amount of HAP discharged to the drain

system.
12678 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(c) Owners or operators of existing,

new, or reconstructed affected BLR

sources shall comply with the

requirements of subpart H of this part to

control emissions from equipment leaks.

§ 63.524 Standards for wet strength resins

manufacturers.

(a) Owners or operators of existing

affected WSR sources shall either:

(1) Limit the total emissions of

hazardous air pollutants from all

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems to 10 pounds per 1

million pounds of wet strength resins

produced; or

(2) Comply with the requirements of

subpart H of this part to control

emissions from equipment leaks.

(b) Owners or operators of new or

reconstructed affected WSR sources

shall either:

(1) Limit the total emissions of

hazardous air pollutants from all

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems to 7 pounds per 1

million pounds of wet strength resins

produced; or

(2) Comply with the requirements of

subpart H of this part to control

emissions from equipment leaks.

§ 63.525 Compliance and performance

testing.

(a) The owner or operator of any

existing affected BLR source shall, in

order to demonstrate initial compliance

with the applicable emission limit,

determine the emission rate from all

process vent, storage tank, and

wastewater system emission points

using the methods described below.

Compliance tests shall be performed

under normal operating conditions.

(1) The owner or operator shall use

the EPA Test Methods from 40 CFR part

60, appendix A, listed in paragraphs

(a)(1) (i) through (iii) of this section, to

determine emissions from process vents.

Testing of process vents on equipment

operating as part of a continuous

process will consist of conducting three

1-hour runs. Gas stream volumetric flow

rates shall be measured every 15

minutes during each 1-hour run.

Organic HAP or TOC concentration

shall be determined from samples

collected in an integrated sample over

the duration of each 1-hour test run, or

from grab samples collected

simultaneously with the flow rate

measurements (every 15 minutes). If an

integrated sample is collected for

laboratory analysis, the sampling rate

shall be adjusted proportionally to

reflect variations in flow rate. If the flow

of gaseous emissions is intermittent,

determination of emissions from process

vents shall be performed according to

the methods specified in paragraph (e)

of this section. For process vents with

continuous gas streams, the emission

rate used to determine compliance shall

be the average emission rate of the 3 test

runs. For process vents with

intermittent emission streams, the

calculated emission rate or the emission

rate from a single test run may be used

to determine compliance.

(i) Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60,

appendix A, as appropriate, shall be

used for selection of the sampling sites

if the flow measuring device is a pitot

tube. A traverse shall be conducted

before and after each 1-hour sampling

period. No traverse is necessary when

using Method 2A or 2D to determine

flow rate.

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C or 2D of 40 CFR

part 60, appendix A, as appropriate,

shall be used for the determination of

gas stream volumetric flow rate. If

Method 2 or 2C is used, the velocity

measurements shall be made at a single

point, in conjunction with the traverse,

to establish an average velocity across

the stack.

(iii) Method 25A and/or Methods 18

and 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,

as appropriate, shall be used to

determine the concentration of HAP in

the streams.

(iv) Initial determination of de

minimis status for process vents may be

made by engineering assessment, as

specified in § 63.526(a)(1)(iv).

(2) Emissions from wastewater

treatment systems shall be determined

in accordance with the methods

described in 40 CFR part 63, appendix

C.

(3) Emissions from storage tanks shall

be calculated in accordance with the

methods specified in § 63.150(g)(3).

(b) The owner or operator of any

existing affected BLR source shall

determine a production-based emission

rate for each emission point by dividing

the emission rate of each emission point

by the BLR production rate of the

source. The production rate shall be

based on normal operations.

(1) The production-based emission

rate for process vents shall be calculated

by dividing the average emission rate

the average production rate.

(2) The production-based emission

rate for storage tanks shall be calculated

by dividing annual emissions for each

storage tank emission point by the

production rate for a one-year period.

The production rate shall be calculated

using the same data used to calculate

the production-based emission rate in

paragraph (b)(1) of this section,

converted to an annual rate.

(3) The production-based emission

rate for wastewater systems shall be

calculated by dividing annual emissions

for each wastewater system emission

point by the production rate for oneyear period. The production rate shall

be calculated using the same data used

to calculate the production-based

emission rate in paragraph (b)(1) of this

section, converted to an annual rate.

(c) The owner or operator of an

existing affected BLR source shall

calculate the total emissions per product

produced by summing the productionbased emissions for all process vent,

storage tank, and wastewater system

emission points according to the

following equation:

E=∑PV+∑ST+∑WW

where:

E=emissions, pounds (lb) HAP per

million (MM) lb product;

PV=process vent emissions, lb HAP/MM

lb product;

ST=storage tank emissions, lb HAP/MM

lb product; and

WW=wastewater system emissions, lb

HAP/MM lb product.

The source is in compliance with the

standard for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems if the

sum of the equation is less than the

applicable emission limit from

§ 63.523(a).

(d) The owner or operator of any new

or reconstructed affected BLR source

shall demonstrate compliance using the

methods described in this section.

(1) Any owner or operator who elects

to comply with § 63.523(b) by achieving

98 percent control of emissions from

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems shall demonstrate

compliance according to the

requirements of paragraphs (d)(1) (i)

through (iv) of this section.

(i) The owner or operator shall

perform testing as specified in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section to

determine controlled and uncontrolled

emissions from process vents. Sampling

points for determining uncontrolled

emissions shall be located based on the

definition of uncontrolled process vents

in § 63.523(b)(1).

(ii) The owner or operator shall

calculate controlled and uncontrolled

emissions from storage tanks in

accordance with the methods specified

in § 63.150(g)(3).

(iii) The owner or operator shall

determine controlled and uncontrolled

emissions from wastewater systems

using the methodology of 40 CFR part

63, appendix C. Uncontrolled emission

calculations shall be consistent with the

definition of uncontrolled wastewater

system emissions in § 63.523(b)(3).

(iv) The owner or operator shall

calculate the percent reduction in
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12679

emissions from process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems

combined. The affected source is in

compliance if the emission reduction is

greater than or equal to 98 percent.

(2) Any owner or operator who elects

to comply with § 63.523(b) by limiting

HAP emissions from process vents,

storage tanks, and wastewater systems

to 5,000 pounds per year or less shall

demonstrate compliance according to

the requirements of paragraphs (d)(2) (i)

and (ii) of this section.

(i) Emissions from process vents,

storage tanks, and wastewater systems

shall be determined according to

paragraphs (a) (1) through (3) of this

section. Emissions shall be converted to

annual emissions. Annual emission

calculations shall reflect production

levels representative of normal

operating conditions.

(ii) The owner or operator shall

calculate total emissions from all

process vent, storage tank, and

wastewater system emission points. The

affected source is in compliance with

the standard if total emissions are less

than or equal to 5,000 lb/yr.

(e) The owner or operator of any

existing, new, or reconstructed WSR

source that chooses to comply with the

emission limit for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems shall

demonstrate initial compliance by

determining emissions for all process

vent, storage tank, and wastewater

systems emission points using the

methods described in this section.

(1) Emissions of HAP reactor process

vents shall be calculated for each batch

emission episode according to the

methodologies described in paragraph

(e)(1) of this section.

(i) Emissions from vapor

displacement due to transfer of material

into or out of the reactor shall be

calculated according to the following

equation:

E y V P MW

R T

i T = ( )( )( )( )

( )( )

where:

E=mass emission rate;

yi=saturated mole fraction of HAP in the

vapor phase;

V=volume of gas displaced from the

vessel;

R=ideal gas law constant;

T=temperature of the vessel vapor

space; absolute;

PT=pressure of the vessel vapor space;

and

MW=molecular weight of the HAP.

(ii) Emissions from reactor purging

shall be calculated using the

methodology described in paragraph

(e)(1)(i) of this section, except that for

purge flow rates greater than 100

standard cubic feet per minute (scfm),

the mole fraction of HAP will be

assumed to be 25 percent of the

saturated value.

(iii) Emissions caused by heating of

the reactor vessel shall be calculated

according to the following methodology:

E

P

Pa

P

Pa MW

i T i T

= HAP

( ) + ( )

× ×

∑ ∑ 1

1

2

2

2

∆η

where:

E=mass of HAP vapor displaced from

the vessel being heated up;

(Pi)Tn=partial pressure of each HAP in

the vessel headspace at initial (n=1)

and final (n=2) temperature;

Pa1=initial gas pressure in the vessel;

Pa2=final gas pressure; and

MWHAP=the average molecular weight

of HAP present in the vessel.

The moles of gas displaced is

represented by:

∆η = 



 



 − 



 





















V

R

Pa

T

Pa

T

1

1

2

2

where:

>η=number of lb-moles of gas

displaced;

V=volume of free space in the vessel;

R=ideal gas law constant;

Pa1=initial gas pressure in the vessel;

Pa2=final gas pressure;

T1=initial temperature of vessel; and

T2=final temperature of vessel.

The initial pressure of the

noncondensable gas in the vessel shall

be calculated according to the following

equation:

Pa P P 1 atm ic T1 = −∑( )

where:

Pa1=initial partial pressure of gas in the

vessel headspace;

Patm=atmospheric pressure; and

(Pic)T1=initial partial pressure of each

condensable volatile organic

compound (including HAP) in the

vessel headspace, at the initial

temperature (T1).

The average molecular weight of HAP

in the displaced gas shall be calculated

as follows:

MW

mass of HA

mass of HA

HAP molecu

HAP

i

i

n

i

i

n = =

=

∑

∑

(

(

(

P)

P)

lar weight)i

1

1

where n is the number of different HAP

compounds in the emission stream.

(2) Emissions of HAP from process

vents may be measured directly. The

EPA Test Methods listed in paragraph

(e)(2) (i) through (iii) of this section,

from 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, shall

be used to demonstrate compliance with

the requirements of § 63.524 by direct

measurement. Testing shall be

performed for every batch emission

episode of the unit operation. Gas

stream volumetric flow rates shall be

measured at 15-minute intervals, or at

least once during each batch emission

episode. Organic HAP or TOC

concentration shall be determined from

samples collected in an integrated

sample over the duration of each

episode, or from grab samples collected

simultaneously with the flow rate

measurements (every 15 minutes). If an

integrated sample is collected for

laboratory analysis, the sampling rate

shall be adjusted proportionally to

reflect variations in flow rate. Test

conditions shall represent the normal

operating conditions under which the

data used to calculate the production

rate are taken.

(i) Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60,

appendix A, as appropriate, shall be

used for selection of the sampling sites

if the flow measuring device is a pitot

tube. A traverse shall be conducted

before and after each sampling period.

No traverse is necessary when using

Method 2A or 2D.

(ii) Method 2,2A, 2C or 2D of 40 CFR

part 60, appendix A, as appropriate,

shall be used for the determination of

gas stream volumetric flow rate. If

Method 2 or 2C is used, the velocity

measurements shall be made at a single

point than can be used, in conjunction

with the traverse, to establish an average

velocity across the stack.

(iii) Method 25A and/or Methods 18

and 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,

as appropriate, shall be used to
12680 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

determine the concentration of HAP in

the streams.

(iv) The owner or operator may

choose to perform tests only during

those periods of the episode in which

the emission rate for the entire episode

can be determined, or when the

emissions are greater than the average

emission rate of the episode. The owner

or operator who chooses either of these

options must develop an emission

profile for the entire batch emission

episode, based on either process

knowledge or test data collected, to

demonstrate that test periods are

representative. Examples of information

that could constitute process knowledge

include calculations based on material

balances, and process stoichiometry.

Previous test results may be used

provided the results are still relevant to

the current process vent stream

conditions.

(v) For batch emission episodes of

duration greater than 8 hours, the owner

or operator is required to perform a

maximum of 8 hours of testing. The test

period must include the period of time

in which the emission rate is predicted

by the emission profile to be greater

than average emission rate for the batch

emission episode.

(f) The owner or operator of any

affected WSR source that chooses to

comply with the emissions limit for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems shall calculate

emissions from storage tanks in

accordance with the methods specified

in § 63.150(g)(3).

(g) The owner or operator of any

affected WSR source that chooses to

comply with the emission limit for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems shall calculate

emissions from wastewater treatment

systems (if applicable) in accordance

with the methods described in 40 CFR

part 63, appendix C.

(h) The owner or operator of any

affected WSR source that chooses to

comply with the emission limit for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems shall calculate the

average amount of WSR product

manufactured per batch, using data from

performance tests or from emission

calculations, as applicable, to determine

the average WSR production per-batch

production data for an annual period

representing normal operating

conditions.

(1) The owner or operator shall

calculate an average emission rate per

batch as the average of the results from

the performance tests or calculations.

The production-based emission rate

shall be calculated by dividing the

emissions per batch by the average

production per batch.

(2) Compliance shall be determined

according to the methodology described

in paragraph (c) of this section. The

source is in compliance with the

standard for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems if the

sum of the equation in paragraph (c) of

this section is less than the applicable

emission limit from § 63.524.

(i) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source or any affected

WSR source that chooses to comply

with the requirements of subpart H of

this part must demonstrate the ability of

its specific program to meet the

compliance requirements therein to

achieve initial compliance.

§ 63.526 Monitoring requirements.

(a) The owner or operator of any

existing, new, or reconstructed affected

BLR source shall provide evidence of

continued compliance with the

standard. During the initial compliance

demonstration, maximum or minimum

operating parameters, as appropriate,

shall be established for processes and

control devices that will indicate the

source is in compliance. If the operating

parameter to be established is a

maximum, the value of the parameter

shall be the average of the maximum

values from each of the three test runs.

If the operating parameter to be

established is a minimum, the value of

the parameter shall be the average of the

minimum values from each of the three

test runs. Parameter values for process

vents with intermittent emission

streams shall be determined as specified

in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The

owner or operator shall operate

processes and control devices within

these parameters to ensure continued

compliance with the standard. A de

minimis level is specified in paragraph

(a)(1) of this section. Monitoring

parameters are specified for various

process vent control scenarios in

paragraphs (a) (2) through (6) of this

section.

(1) For affected BLR sources,

uncontrolled emission points emitting

less than one pound per year of HAP are

not subject to the monitoring

requirements of paragraphs (a) (2)

through (6) of this section. The owner or

operator shall use the methods specified

in § 63.525(a), as applicable, or as

specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this

section, to demonstrate which emission

points satisfy the de minimis criteria, to

the satisfaction of the Administrator.

(i) For the purpose of determining de

minimis status for emission points,

engineering assessment may be used to

determine process vent stream flow rate

and/or concentration for the

representative operating conditions

expected to yield the highest flow rate

and concentration. Engineering

assessment includes, but is not limited

to, the following:

(A) Previous test results provided the

tests are representative of current

operating practices at the process unit.

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

representative of the process under

representative operating conditions.

(C) Maximum flow rate, HAP

emission rate, concentration, or other

relevant parameter specified or implied

within a permit limit applicable to the

process vent.

(D) Design analysis based on accepted

chemical engineering principles,

measurable process parameters, or

physical or chemical laws or properties.

Examples of analytical methods include,

but are not limited to:

(1) Use of material balances based on

process stoichiometry to estimate

maximum organic HAP concentrations,

(2) Estimation of maximum flow rate

based on physical equipment design

such as pump or blower capacities,

(3) Estimation of HAP concentrations

based on saturation conditions.

(ii) All data, assumptions, and

procedures used in the engineering

assessment shall be documented in

accordance with § 63.527(c).

(2) For affected sources using water

scrubbers, the owner or operator shall

establish a minimum scrubber water

flow rate as a site-specific operating

parameter which must be measured and

recorded every 15 minutes. The affected

source will be considered to be out of

compliance if the scrubber water flow

rate, averaged over any continuous 24-

hour period, is below the minimum

value established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(3) For affected sources using

condensers, the owner or operator shall

establish the maximum condenser outlet

gas temperature as a site-specific

operating parameter which must be

measured and recorded every 15

minutes. The affected source will be

considered to be out of compliance if

the condenser outlet gas temperature,

averaged over any continuous 24-hour

period, is greater than the maximum

value established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(4) For affected sources using carbon

adsorbers or having uncontrolled

process vents, the owner or operator

shall establish a maximum outlet HAP

concentration as the site-specific

operating parameter which must be

measured and recorded every 15

minutes. The affected source will be

considered to be out of compliance if
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12681

the outlet HAP concentration, averaged

over any continuous 24-hour period, is

greater than the maximum value

established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(5) For affected sources using flares,

the presence of the pilot flame shall be

monitored every 15 minutes. The

affected source will be considered to be

out of compliance upon loss of pilot

flame.

(6) Wastewater system parameters to

be monitored are the parameters

specified under 40 CFR part 414,

subpart E. The affected source will be

considered to be out of compliance with

this subpart W if it is found to be out

of compliance with 40 CFR part 414,

subpart E.

(b) The owner or operator of any

existing, new, or reconstructed affected

WSR source that chooses to comply

with the emission limit for process

vents, storage tanks, and wastewater

systems shall provide evidence of

continued compliance with the

standard. As part of the initial

compliance demonstrations for batch

process vents, test data or compliance

calculations shall be used to establish a

maximum or minimum level of a

relevant operating parameter for each

unit operation. The parameter value for

each unit operation shall represent the

worst case value of the operating

parameter from all episodes in the unit

operation. The owner or operator shall

operate processes and control devices

within these parameters to ensure

continued compliance with the

standard.

(1) For batch process vents, the level

shall be established in accordance with

paragraphs (b)(1) (i) through (iv) of this

section if compliance testing is

performed.

(i) If testing is used to demonstrate

initial compliance, the appropriate

parameter shall be monitored during all

batch emission episodes in the unit

operation.

(ii) An average monitored parameter

value shall be determined for each of

the batch emission episodes in the unit

operation.

(iii) If the level to be established for

the unit operation is a maximum

operating parameter, the level shall be

defined as the minimum of the average

parameter values determined in

paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.

(iv) If the level to be established for

the unit operation is a minimum

operating parameter, the level shall be

defined as the maximum of the average

parameter values determined in

paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.

(2) Affected sources with condensers

on process vents shall establish the

maximum condenser outlet gas

temperature as a site-specific operating

parameter, which must be measured

every 15 minutes, or at least once for

batch emission episodes less than 15

minutes in duration. The affected source

will be considered to be out of

compliance if the maximum condenser

outlet gas temperature, averaged over

the duration of the batch emission

episode or unit operation, is greater than

the value established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(3) For affected sources using water

scrubbers, the owner or operator shall

establish a minimum scrubber water

flow rate as a site-specific operating

parameter which must be measured and

recorded every 15 minutes, or at least

once for batch emission episodes less

than 15 minutes in duration. The

affected source will be considered to be

out of compliance if the scrubber water

flow rate, averaged over the duration of

the batch emission episode or unit

operation, is below the minimum flow

rate established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(4) For affected sources using carbon

adsorbers or having uncontrolled

process vents, the owner or operator

shall establish a maximum outlet HAP

concentration as the site-specific

operating parameter which must be

measured and recorded every 15

minutes, or at least once for batch

emission episodes of duration shorter

than 15 minutes. The affected source

will be considered to be out of

compliance if the outlet HAP

concentration, averaged over the

duration of the batch emission episode

or unit operation, is greater than the

value established during the initial

compliance demonstration.

(5) For affected sources using flares,

the presence of the pilot flame shall be

monitored every 15 minutes, or at least

once for batch emission episodes less

than 15 minutes in duration. The

affected source will be considered to be

out of compliance upon loss of pilot

flame.

(6) Wastewater system parameters to

be monitored are the parameters

specified by 40 CFR part 414, subpart E.

The affected source will be considered

to be out of compliance with this

subpart W if it is found to be out of

compliance with 40 CFR part 414,

subpart E.

(c) Periods of time when monitoring

measurements exceed the parameter

values do not constitute a violation if

they occur during a startup, shutdown,

or malfunction, and the facility follows

its startup, shutdown, and malfunction

plan.

(d) The owner or operator of any

affected WSR source that chooses to

comply with the requirements of

subpart H of this part shall meet the

monitoring requirements of subpart H of

this part.

§ 63.527 Recordkeeping requirements.

(a) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source shall keep records

of daily average values of equipment

operating parameters specified to be

monitored under § 63.526(a) or specified

by the Administrator. Records shall be

kept in accordance with the

requirements of applicable paragraphs

of § 63.10 of subpart A of this part, as

specified in the General Provisions

applicability table of this subpart. The

owner or operator shall keep records upto-date and readily accessible.

(1) A daily (24-hour) average shall be

calculated as the average of all values

for a monitored parameter recorded

during the operating day. The average

shall cover a 24-hour period if operation

is continuous, or the number of hours of

operation per operating day if operation

is not continuous.

(2) The operating day shall be the

period defined in the operating permit

or the Notification of Compliance Status

in § 63.9(h) of subpart A of this part. It

may be from midnight to midnight or

another continuous 24-hour period.

(3) In the event of an excursion, the

owner or operator must keep records of

each 15-minute reading during the

period in which the excursion occurred.

(b) The owner or operator of any

affected WSR source that elects to

comply with the emission limit for

process vents, storage tanks, and

wastewater systems shall keep records

of values of equipment operating

parameters specified to be monitored

under § 63.526(b) or specified by the

Administrator. The records that shall be

kept are the average values of operating

parameters, determined for the duration

of each unit operation. Records shall be

kept in accordance with the

requirements of applicable paragraphs

of § 63.10 of subpart A of this part, as

specified in the General Provisions

applicability table in this subpart. The

owner or operator shall keep records upto-date and readily accessible. In the

event of an excursion, the owner or

operator must keep records of each 15-

minute reading for the entire unit

operation in which the excursion

occurred.

(c) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source, as well the owner

or operator of any affected WSR source

that chooses to comply with the

emission limit for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems, who
12682 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

demonstrates that certain process vents

are below the de minimis cutoff for

continuous monitoring specified in

§ 63.526(a)(1)(i), shall maintain up-todate, readily accessible records of the

following information to document that

a HAP emission rate of less than one

pound per year is maintained:

(1) The information used to determine

de minimis status for each de minimis

process vent, as specified in

§ 63.526(a)(1)(i);

(2) Any process changes as defined in

§ 63.115(e) of subpart G of this part that

increase the HAP emission rate;

(3) Any recalculation or measurement

of the HAP emission rate pursuant to

§ 63.115(e) of subpart G of this part; and

(4) Whether or not the HAP emission

rate increases to one pound per year or

greater as a result of the process change.

(d) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source, as well as the

owner or operator of any affected WSR

source who elects to implement the leak

detection and repair program specified

in subpart H of this part, shall

implement the recordkeeping

requirements outlined therein. All

records shall be retained for a period of

5 years, in accordance with the

requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(b)(1).

(e) Any excursion from the required

monitoring parameter, unless otherwise

excused, shall be considered a violation

of the emission standard.

§ 63.528 Reporting requirements.

(a) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source, as well as the

owner or operator of any affected WSR

source that elects to comply with the

emission limit for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems, shall

comply with the reporting requirements

of applicable paragraphs of § 63.10 of

subpart A of this part, as specified in the

General Provisions applicability table in

this subpart. The owner or operator

shall also submit to the Administrator,

as part of the quarterly excess emissions

and continuous monitoring system

performance report and summary report

required by § 63.10(e)(3) of subpart A of

this part, the following recorded

information.

(1) Reports of monitoring data,

including 15-minute monitoring values

as well as daily average values or perunit operation average values, as

applicable, of monitored parameters for

all operating days or unit operations

when the average values were outside

the ranges established in the

Notification of Compliance Status or

operating permit.

(2) Reports of the duration of periods

when monitoring data is not collected

for each excursion caused by

insufficient monitoring data. An

excursion means any of the three cases

listed in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii)

of this section. For a control device

where multiple parameters are

monitored, if one or more of the

parameters meets the excursion criteria

in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this

section, this is considered a single

excursion for the control device.

(i) When the period of control device

operation is 4 hours or greater in an

operating day and monitoring data are

insufficient to constitute a valid hour of

data, as defined in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)

of this section, for at least 75 percent of

the operating hours.

(ii) When the period of control device

operation is less than 4 hours in an

operating day and more than one of the

hours during the period of operation

does not constitute a valid hour of data

due to insufficient monitoring data.

(iii) Monitoring data are insufficient

to constitute a valid hour of data, as

used in paragraphs (a)(2) (i) and (ii) of

this section, if measured values are

unavailable for any of the 15-minute

periods within the hour.

(3) Whenever a process change, as

defined in § 63.115(e) of subpart G of

this part, is made that causes the

emission rate from a de minimis

emission point to become a process vent

with an emission rate of one pound per

year or greater, the owner or operator

shall submit a report within 180

calendar days after the process change.

The report may be submitted as part of

the next summary report required under

§ 63.10(e)(3) of subpart A of this part.

The report shall include:

(i) A description of the process

change; and

(ii) The results of the recalculation of

the emission rate.

(b) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source, as well as the

owner or operator of any affected WSR

source who elects to implement the leak

detection and repair program specified

in subpart H of this part, shall

implement the reporting requirements

outlined therein. Copies of all reports

shall be retained as records for a period

of 5 years, in accordance with the

requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(b)(1).

(c) The owner or operator of any

affected BLR source, as well as the

owner or operator of any affected WSR

source that elects to comply with the

emission limit for process vents, storage

tanks, and wastewater systems shall

include records of wastewater system

monitoring parameters in the

Notification of Compliance Status and

summary reports required by subpart A

of this part.

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART W.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART W

Reference

Applies to subpart W

Comment

BLR WSR

WSR alternative

standard,

and BLR

equipment leak

standard

(40 CFR

part 63,

subpart

H)

§ 63.1(a)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Additional terms defined in § 63.522.

§ 63.1(a)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(4) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Subpart W specifies applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to subpart W.

§ 63.1(a)(5) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.1(a)(6) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(7) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(8) ................... No .......... No .......... No .......... Discusses State programs.

§ 63.1(a)(9) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12683

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART W.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART W—Continued

Reference

Applies to subpart W

Comment

BLR WSR

WSR alternative

standard,

and BLR

equipment leak

standard

(40 CFR

part 63,

subpart

H)

§ 63.1(a)(10) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(11) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(a)(12)–(14) ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(b)(1) ................... No .......... No .......... No .......... § 63.521 of subpart W specifies applicability.

§ 63.1(b)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(b)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(c)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Subpart W specifies applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to sources subject to subpart W.

§ 63.1(c)(2) ................... No .......... No .......... No .......... Area sources are not subject to subpart W.

§ 63.1(c)(3) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.1(c)(4) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.1(c)(5) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies applicable notification requirements.

§ 63.1(d) ........................ N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.1(e) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.2 ............................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Additional terms are defined in § 63.522 of subpart W; when overlap between

subparts A and W occurs, subpart W takes precedence.

§ 63.3 ............................ Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Other units used in subpart W are defined in that subpart; units of measure are

spelled out for subpart H.

§ 63.4(a)(1)–(3) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.4(a)(4) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.4(a)(5) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.4(b) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.4(c) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(a) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Except replace the terms ‘‘source’’ and ‘‘stationary source’’ in § 63.5(a)(1) of

subpart A with ‘‘affected source’’.

§ 63.5(b)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(b)(2) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.5(b)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(b)(4) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(b)(5) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(b)(6) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(c) ........................ N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.5(d)(1)(i) ................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(d)(1)(ii) ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(d)(1)(iii) .............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(d)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(d)(3)–(4) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(e) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.5(f)(1) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Except replace ‘‘source’’ in § 63.5(f)(1) of subpart A with ‘‘affected source’’.

§ 63.5(f)(2) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(a) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(b)(1)–(2) ............. No .......... No .......... No .......... Subpart W specifies compliance dates.

§ 63.6(b)(3)–(4) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(b)(5) ................... ................ Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H includes notification requirements.

§ 63.6(b)(6) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.6(b)(7) ................... No .......... Yes ......... No .......... Sources subject to subpart H must comply according to the schedule in

§ 63.520 of subpart W for new sources subject to subpart H.

§ 63.6(c)(1)–(2) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Except replace ‘‘source’’ in § 63.6(c)(1)–(2) of subpart A with ‘‘affected source’’.

§ 63.6(c)(3)–(4) ............. N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.6(c)(5) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(d) ........................ N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.6(e) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(f)(1) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(f)(2)(i)–(ii) ........... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(f)(2)(iii) ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(f)(2)(iv) ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(f)(3) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(g) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... An alternative standard has been proposed for WSR; however, affected sources

will have the opportunity to demonstrate other alternatives to the Administrator.

§ 63.6(h) ........................ No .......... No .......... No .......... Subpart W does not contain any opacity or visible emissions standards.
12684 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART W.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART W—Continued

Reference

Applies to subpart W

Comment

BLR WSR

WSR alternative

standard,

and BLR

equipment leak

standard

(40 CFR

part 63,

subpart

H)

§ 63.6(i)(1) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(i)(2) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Except replace ‘‘source’’ in § 63.6(2) (i) and (ii) of subpart A with ‘‘affected

source’’.

§ 63.6(i)(3) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(i)(4)(i) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(i)(4)(ii) ................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(i)(5)–(14) ............ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(i)(15) .................. N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.6(i)(16) .................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.6(j) ......................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(a)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies required testing and compliance procedures.

§ 63.7(a)(2)(i)–(vi) ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies that test results must be submitted in the Notification of

Compliance Status due 150 days after the compliance date.

§ 63.7(a)(2)(vii)–(viii) ..... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.7(a)(2)(ix) .............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(a)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(b)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(b)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(c) ........................ No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.7(d) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Except replace ‘‘source’’ in § 63.7(d) of subpart A with ‘‘affected source’’.

§ 63.7(e)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Subpart W also contains test methods specific to BLR and WSR sources.

§ 63.7(e)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(e)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies test methods and procedures.

§ 63.7(f) ......................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies applicable methods and provides alternatives.

§ 63.7(g)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies performance test reporting.

§ 63.7(g)(2) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.7(g)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(h)(1)–(2) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(h)(3)(i) ................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(h)(3)(ii)–(iii) ........ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.7(h)(4)–(5) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(a)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(a)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(a)(3) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.8(a)(4) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(b)(1) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(b)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies locations to conduct monitoring.

§ 63.8(b)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(c)(1)(i) ................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(c)(1)(ii) ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(c)(2)–(3) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(c)(4)–(8) ............. No .......... No .......... No .......... Subpart W specifies monitoring frequencies.

§ 63.8(d) ........................ No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.8(e) ........................ No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.8(f)(1) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(f)(2) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(f)(3) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(f)(4) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(f)(5) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.8(f)(6) .................... Yes ......... Yes ......... No.

§ 63.8(g) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(a) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(1)(i)–(ii) .......... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(1)(iii) .............. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(2) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(3) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(4) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(b)(5) ................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(c) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(d) ........................ Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12685

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART W.—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART W—Continued

Reference

Applies to subpart W

Comment

BLR WSR

WSR alternative

standard,

and BLR

equipment leak

standard

(40 CFR

part 63,

subpart

H)

§ 63.9(e) ........................ No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.9(f) ......................... No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.9(g) ........................ No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.9(h)(1)–(3) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Separate Notification of Compliance Status requirements are specified for subpart H.

§ 63.9(h)(4) ................... N/A ......... N/A ......... N/A ......... Reserved.

§ 63.9(h)(5)–(6) ............. Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies Notification of Compliance Status requirements.

§ 63.9(i) ......................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.9(j) ......................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(a) ...................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(b)(1) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(b)(2) ................. No .......... No .......... No .......... Subparts H and W specify recordkeeping requirements.

§ 63.10(b)(3) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(c)(1)–(6) ........... No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.10(c)(7)–(8) ........... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(c)(9)–(15) ......... No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.10(d)(1) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies performance test reporting requirements.

§ 63.10(d)(2) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... No .......... Subpart H specifies performance test reporting requirements.

§ 63.10(d)(3) ................. No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.10(d)(4) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(d)(5) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.10(e)(1)–(2) ........... No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.10(e)(3) ................. Yes ......... Yes ......... No.

§ 63.10(e)(4) ................. No .......... No .......... No.

§ 63.10(f) ....................... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

§ 63.11–63.15 ............... Yes ......... Yes ......... Yes.

[FR Doc. 95–5590 Filed 3–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[WA–18–1–5933a; FRL–5151–9]

Approval and Promulgation of Small

Business Assistance Program: State of

Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) approves the State of

Washington Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of

Washington for the purpose of

establishing a Small Business Stationary

Source Technical and Environmental

Compliance Assistance Program. The

implementation plan was submitted by

the State to satisfy the Federal mandate

of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), to

ensure that small businesses have access

to the technical assistance and

regulatory information necessary to

comply with the CAA. The rationale for

the approval is set forth in this

document; additional information is

available at the address indicated in the

ADDRESSES section.

DATES: This final rule is effective on

May 8, 1995, unless notice is received

by April 7, 1995 that someone wishes to

submit adverse or critical comments. If

the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Montel Livingston, SIP

Manager, Air and Radiation Branch

(AT–082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, WA 98101.

Documents which are incorporated by

reference are available for public

inspection at the Air and Radiation

Docket and Information Center, 401 M

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Copies of materials submitted to EPA

may be examined during normal

business hours at the following

locations: EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, and

Washington State Department of

Ecology, P.O.Box 47600, PV–11,

Olympia, WA 98504–7600.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David J. Dellarco, Air and Radiation

Branch (AT–082), EPA, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553–

4978.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Implementation of the provisions of

the CAA, as amended in 1990, will

require regulation of many small

businesses so that areas may attain and

maintain the National ambient air

quality standards (NAAQS) and reduce

the emission of air toxics. Small

businesses frequently lack the technical

expertise and financial resources

necessary to evaluate such regulations

and to determine the appropriate

mechanisms for compliance. In

anticipation of the impact of these

requirements on small businesses, the

CAA requires that States adopt a Small

Business Stationary Source Technical

and Environmental Compliance

Assistance Program (PROGRAM), and

submit this PROGRAM as a revision to

the federally-approved SIP. In addition,

the CAA directs the EPA to oversee