[Federal Register: August 10, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 153)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46683-46700]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10au05-13]
[[Page 46683]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Cellulose
Products Manufacturing; Final Rule and Proposed Rule
[[Page 46684]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OAR-2003-0193; FRL-7948-5]
RIN 2060-AL91
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Cellulose Products Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on amendments to the
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for
cellulose products manufacturing, which were issued on June 11, 2002,
under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The amendments revise the
work practice standards, general and initial compliance requirements,
definitions, and General Provisions applicability, as well as correct
typographical, formatting, and cross-referencing errors in the final
rule. We are issuing the amendments as a direct final rule, without
prior proposal, because we view the amendments as noncontroversial and
anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section
of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to amend the NESHAP for cellulose products
manufacturing if adverse comments are filed.
DATES: The direct final rule is effective on October 11, 2005, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by September 9, 2005, or by September 26,
2005, if a hearing is requested by August 22, 2005. If adverse comments
are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register indicating which sections will become effective, and which
provisions are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. If anyone
contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing, a public
hearing will be held on August 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2003-
0193, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: air-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: EPA Docket Center, EPA, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
duplicate copy, if possible.
Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B-108, Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
We request that a separate copy also be sent to the contact person
listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0193.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket
, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31,
2002 (67 FR 38102).
Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hardcopy
at the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.
Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10
a.m. at the EPA's Environmental Research Center Auditorium, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina or at an alternate site nearby.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bill Schrock, Organic Chemicals
Group, Emission Standards Division (C504-04), Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-5032, facsimile number (919)
541-3470, electronic mail (e-mail) address schrock.bill@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action include those listed in the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NAICS code* Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................. 326121............................. cellulose food casing
operations.
325221............................. rayon operations.
326199, 325211..................... cellulosic sponge operations.
326199............................. cellophane operations.
325199............................. cellulose ether operations.
Federal Government........................ ................................... Not affected.
[[Page 46685]]
State/local/tribal government............. ................................... Not affected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* North American Industrial Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in Sec.
63.5485 of the national emission standards. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document.
Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Mr. Bill
Schrock, Organic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (Mail
Code C504-05), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711,
telephone number (919) 541-5605, electronic mail address
schrock.bill@epa.gov., at least 2 days in advance of the potential date
of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public
hearing must also call Mr. Bill Schrock to verify the time, date, and
location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested
parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning
these proposed emission standards.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's document will also be available on the
WWW through EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of this action will be
posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution
control.
Comments. We are publishing the direct final rule amendments
without prior proposal because we view the amendments as
noncontroversial and do not anticipate adverse comments. However, in
the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are publishing
a separate document that will serve as the proposal to amend the
national emission standards for cellulose products manufacturing
operations if adverse comments are filed. If we receive any adverse
comments on one or more distinct amendments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public which
provisions will become effective, and which provisions are being
withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address all public comments
in a subsequent final rule, should the Agency determine to issue one.
Any of the distinct amendments in today's direct final rule for which
we do not receive adverse comment will become effective on the
previously mentioned date. We will not institute a second comment
period on the direct final rule amendments. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial
review of the direct final rule amendments is available only by filing
a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by October 11, 2005. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the
CAA, only an objection to the direct final rule amendments which was
raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment
can be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2)
of the CAA, the requirements established by the direct final rule
amendments may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
Outline. The following outline is provided to aid in reading the
preamble to the direct final rule.
I. Background
A. Work Practice Standards
B. General Compliance Requirements
C. Initial Compliance Requirements
D. Definitions
E. Applicability of General Provisions
F. Miscellaneous Corrections
II. Summary of Amendments
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
The EPA, under section 112 of the CAA, promulgated the NESHAP for
cellulose products manufacturing on June 11, 2002 (67 FR 40044). The
final rule, codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUU, includes emission
limits, operating limits, and work practice standards, as well as
general, initial, and continuous compliance requirements and
notification, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements. Following
promulgation of the rule, UCB Films, Inc. and Teepak, LLC petitioned
the Agency for specific changes to the final rule, and Dow Chemical Co.
informally requested that we issue specific amendments to the final
rule.
In response to industry's requests, today's action issues
amendments to subpart UUUU of 40 CFR part 63 to revise the work
practice standards, general and initial compliance requirements,
definitions, and General Provisions applicability. The amendments also
include corrections of typographical, formatting, and cross-referencing
errors identified after the final rule was published. The amendments
are described below.
A. Work-Practice Standards
The cellophane operation at the UCB Films facility in Tecumseh,
Kansas includes a number of casting machines, each of which includes
concentrated sulfuric acid baths referred to as ``A-tanks.'' Above the
A-tanks are retractable hoods that can be moved up or down. To capture
emissions, the hoods over the A-tanks are moved into the down position,
and the vent streams from the A-tanks are routed to a thermal oxidizer.
For operational purposes, the hoods over the A-tanks are at times kept
in the up position, and during those times the vent streams from the A-
tanks are diverted to the stack. UCB Films has asked whether the
provision in the final rule requiring vent streams at cellophane
operations to be routed through closed-vent systems to control devices
possibly could be construed to apply to these A-tank hoods and,
therefore, could require UCB Films to operate its casting machines with
the A-tank hoods in the down position at all times.
The cellophane operation at the UCB Films facility is the only one
currently
[[Page 46686]]
operating in the U.S. Consequently, the maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) floor for cellophane operations was established based
on the current emission limitation at the UCB Films facility. This MACT
floor accounted for the A-tank hoods at the UCB Films facility at times
being kept in the up position. Consequently, the closed-vent system
requirement, as currently stated, would be inconsistent with MACT for
cellophane operations. Therefore, through the amendments to the final
rule, we are now making clear that we did not intend for the closed-
vent system provision to apply to retractable hoods over sulfuric acid
baths at a cellophane operation, such as the A-tank hoods at the UCB
Films facility. The final rule does not prohibit UCB Films from
operating its casting machines with the A-tank hoods in the up
position.
B. General Compliance Requirements
In response to comments on the proposed rule, we changed the
deadline for completing a performance test or other initial compliance
demonstration from 180 days before to 180 days after the compliance
date. To ensure that a record of compliance would be kept between the
compliance date and the date when operating limits for the continuous
monitoring systems (CMS) are established (i.e., the date of the
performance test or other initial compliance demonstration), we
included a provision in Sec. 63.5515(b)(1) of the final rule that
requires affected sources to maintain an operation and maintenance
(O&M) log of the process and emissions control equipment during that
period.
Dow has requested that we limit the O&M log to emission control
equipment because the amount and type of data associated with operation
and maintenance of the process are unclear and onerous. For example,
with the current text in the final rule, companies would be required to
document when a pump used to inject water treatment chemicals into
boiler feedwater for steam generation was replaced or repaired. Plant
operators would be required to record literally thousands of data
points related to the operation of ``any'' aspect of the production
unit, even though it would have no bearing on emissions or the
compliance parameters required by the final rule. According to Dow,
this broad scope was certain to be inconsistently applied, and it would
be difficult, if not impossible, to demonstrate compliance.
Dow has also requested that we clarify that the O&M log requirement
is needed only for those control devices used to comply with the
standard, not every control device unassociated with the scope of the
final rule. Some control devices may be installed for odor or State
requirements and do not need to be included in the O&M log. For
example, one of Dow's cellulose ether facilities has a scrubber that,
under a State permit, is used to control non-hazardous air pollutants
emissions, and the facility does not need to monitor or conduct a
performance test on this scrubber in order to comply with the final
rule. According to Dow, with the current text in the final rule, the
facility would have to maintain data on the scrubber for no other
purpose than that stated in Sec. 63.5515(b)(1).
Consequently, Dow has recommended that EPA revise Sec.
63.5515(b)(1) to replace the term ``process and emissions control
equipment'' with the term ``control technique used to comply with the
rule.'' Dow has recommended using the term ``control technique'' rather
than ``emissions control equipment'' because ``control technique'' is
defined in Sec. 63.5610 of the final rule. Dow believes that this
revision would clarify the requirement and strike a more appropriate
balance without being unnecessarily burdensome. The Agency agrees with
the rationale provided by Dow that a more narrow definition for items
to be contained in the O&M log is appropriate. Therefore, through the
amendments to the final rule, we are making the suggested revision to
Sec. 63.5515(b)(1).
C. Initial Compliance Requirements
1. Material Balance Compliance Option
One of Dow's cellulose ether facilities uses a material balance to
calculate the amount of HAP reacted, i.e., destroyed in the process.
According to Dow, this facility's demonstration of overall control
efficiency is similar to the viscose process material balance. Dow has
requested that EPA provide cellulose ether affected sources with a
material balance compliance option similar to that for the viscose
process affected sources. This option would allow the cellulose ether
affected sources to demonstrate initial compliance using a month-long
initial compliance demonstration and demonstrate continuous compliance
by maintaining a material balance and using it to document the percent
reduction of total organic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions.
The Agency was unaware that any cellulose ether facilities were using
the material balance technique to calculate their control efficiency
and, therefore, did not provide this as a compliance option for
cellulose ether facilities in the final rule. We consider this a valid
approach for calculating control efficiency and extending this option
to the cellulose ether affected sources makes the final rule consistent
with the viscose process affected sources. Therefore, through the
amendments to the final rule, we are providing the requested material
balance compliance option for cellulose ether operations, with the
clarification that the start point from which the percent reduction is
determined must be the onset of extended cookout. Extended cookout is a
means of reducing HAP emissions by allowing the reaction to occur for a
longer period of time than economically desired, thus allowing for more
of the HAP to be consumed in the reaction. This clarification that the
start point for the material balance compliance option is necessary
because cellulose ether affected sources actually consume much of the
HAP in their reaction (e.g., ethylene oxide), while viscose process
affected sources eventually regenerate all of the HAP in their reaction
(as either carbon disulfide or hydrogen sulfide).
2. Additional Testing
Tables 3 and 5 to the final rule require viscose process affected
sources to prepare and maintain a material balance that includes the
``pertinent data'' used to determine the percent reduction of total
sulfide emissions. To prepare and maintain such a material balance,
emissions information to determine control efficiency would be needed
in addition to that gathered through the initial performance test.
According to Teepak, the ``pertinent data'' language in the final rule
possibly could be construed to require additional testing to complete
the material balance, although such additional testing is not
explicitly required in the final rule and would be inconsistent with
language in the preamble. Teepak has recommended that EPA revise Sec.
63.5535(g)(1) to clarify that no additional emission tests are
required. The Agency did not intend to require additional emissions
tests be conducted by use of the term ``pertinent data'' and agrees
with Teepak's request. Therefore, through the amendments to the final
rule, we are making the suggested revision to Sec. 63.5535(g)(1) for
viscose process affected sources. For consistency, we are providing the
same clarification for those cellulose ether affected sources that
choose the material balance compliance option.
3. Batch Emission Episodes
For those sources that choose to conduct an initial performance
test, Dow has noted that the final rule does
[[Page 46687]]
not address the testing of batch emission episodes lasting less than 1
hour. According to Dow, the final rule is unclear and has conflicting
requirements between the regulatory text and tables regarding whether
(1) the batch emission episode provisions in Sec. 63.490(c) apply to
calculating the emission rate, as stated in table 4 to the final rule,
(2) three 1-hour tests are required, as stated in Sec. 63.5535(d), or
(3) a 3-hour test is required, as stated in table 3 to the final rule.
Dow has recommended that EPA clarify in Sec. 63.5535(d) and (e) that
batch process vent tests follow the provisions listed in table 4 and
Sec. 63.490(c), which Dow has interpreted as allowing testing on a
batch emission episode. Upon review of the subject testing requirements
the Agency agrees with Dow's assessment that the language in the text
and tables conflict and need clarification. Therefore, through the
amendments to the final rule, we are making the suggested revision to
Sec. 63.5535(d) and (e). To account for the testing of batch emission
episodes, which may last less than 1 hour per test run, we are also
removing the ``3-hour'' term used in table 3 to the final rule to
describe the performance test. This revision also eliminates any
confusion with the requirement in Sec. 63.5535(d) for three 1-hour
test runs.
4. Uncontrolled Emissions
Both Teepak and Dow have noted that table 3 to the final rule
requires operations to demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limit by ``measuring'' the average uncontrolled emissions during the
compliance demonstration or performance test. However, the final rule
does not require month-long initial performance tests, nor does it
require any additional testing after the initial performance tests of
control device efficiency. Teepak has recommended that EPA change the
term ``measured'' in table 3 to the final rule to ``determined'' to
clarify that no additional testing or measurement was intended for
cellulose food casing operations or any other viscose process affected
source. Dow has recommended that EPA revise tables 3 and 4 to the final
rule to allow engineering assessments to be used as an alternative for
determining the uncontrolled emissions from process vents. According to
Dow, engineering assessments are allowed in other NESHAP, including the
Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON), the Pharmaceutical NESHAP, and the
Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP.
The Agency agrees with Dow and Teepak that using the term
``determined'' instead of ``measured'' is consistent with the approach
of using an engineering assessment as an alternative for determining
uncontrolled emissions. Through the amendments to the final rule, we
are making the clarification to table 3 to the final rule suggested by
Teepak for viscose process affected sources. For consistency, we are
providing the same clarification for those cellulose ether affected
sources that choose to demonstrate initial compliance using a month-
long compliance demonstration. We are also making the revision to table
3 to the final rule suggested by Dow for cellulose ether affected
sources. This revision should provide cellulose ether affected sources
with some flexibility in determining uncontrolled emissions, whether
they are conducting an initial performance test or a month-long
compliance demonstration. For consistency, we are also providing the
viscose process affected sources with the same option to use
engineering assessments. We are not making the revision to table 4 to
the final rule suggested by Dow because this issue will already be
addressed in the revision to table 3 of the final rule. Table 4 of the
final rule is designed to describe the performance testing
requirements, and if a source is using other means (e.g., engineering
assessments) to determine uncontrolled emissions, then those means
should be described in table 3 of the final rule.
5. Equations
Dow has noted that Sec. 63.5535(e)(2) requires sources to
calculate the ``total sulfide emission rate.'' According to Dow, it is
not necessary for a source to calculate the total sulfide emission rate
if it does not use sulfur compounds, specifically carbon disulfide, in
its process. Dow has recommended that EPA clarify the final rule so
that Sec. 63.5535(e)(2) is used only for viscose processes that
actually use carbon disulfide. Through the amendments to the final
rule, we are revising Sec. 63.5535(e) to require sources to use the
equations ``as applicable.'' This revision should account for those
sources (e.g., cellulose ether affected sources) for which an equation
(e.g., total sulfide emission equation) may not apply.
6. Establishing Operating Limits
Section 63.5535(h)(1) of the final rule references Sec.
63.505(b)(2) regarding the establishment of operating limits for
continuous processes. Section 63.505(b)(2) requires sources to use the
average of the maximum values to establish a maximum level and the
average of the minimum values to establish a minimum level. Teepak has
argued that this procedure inappropriately restricts the range in which
their scrubbers can be operated to ensure compliance with the emission
reduction requirements. According to Teepak, the capabilities of the
scrubber under a range of conditions, not simply the average
capabilities, should be used to determine maximum and minimum operating
limits. Teepak has recommended that we replace the procedures of Sec.
63.505(b)(2) with those of Sec. 63.505(c), which require sources to
establish parameter operating levels based on performance tests,
supplemented by engineering assessments and/or manufacturer's
recommendations. According to Teepak, this change would allow the
development of true operating limits of the control or recovery device.
Teepak has also recommended that we revise table 3 to the final rule to
clarify that a range of scrubber operating values is acceptable.
The Agency agrees with Teepak that the use of average values to
establish the minimum and maximum operating limits for the scrubbers
will not result in an effective measure for assessing the operational
performance of the scrubbers. By using the averages for establishing
both the minimum and maximum values for the scrubber operating range,
an overly restrictive range is set, while the scrubbers can be
demonstrated to operate effectively operate over a much broader range.
Therefore, through the amendments to the final rule, we are making the
suggested revisions to Sec. 63.5535(h)(1), (5), and (6). We are also
revising tables 2, 3, and 6 to final rule. For consistency, we are
applying the requirement to use Sec. 63.505(c) to both continuous and
batch processes.
D. Definitions
1. Process Unit/Source Category
In response to a comment on the proposed rule, we added a
definition for ``cellulose ether process unit'' to the final rule to
help define the boundaries around equipment for equipment leak
monitoring. We also revised the definition for ``cellulose ether
operation'' to provide greater clarification of what it includes, and
we revised the definition for ``cellulose ether process'' to
specifically exclude solids handling. However, the requirements in the
final rule refer only to the definitions for ``cellulose ether
operation'' and ``cellulose ether process unit,'' which do not exclude
solids handling equipment. Dow has argued that, without clear
definitions, the
[[Page 46688]]
regulated industry cannot delineate the equipment included in the
process unit and subject to the final rule. As ``cellulose ether
process unit'' is currently defined, equipment in the solids handling
process would be a part of the cellulose ether process unit and would
be subject to the equipment leak provisions. According to Dow, it is
doubtful that the HAP concentration in the solids handling equipment
would exceed 5 percent, and unnecessary records would be needed to
document that the equipment is not monitored. Dow has recommended that
EPA revise the definition for ``cellulose ether process unit'' to
specifically include the term ``cellulose ether process.'' According to
Dow, revising this definition would be a clear and simple approach to
exclude equipment not a part of the cellulose ether process unit and,
therefore, not subject to equipment leaks monitoring. Dow has also
recommended that EPA revise the definition for ``Cellulose Ethers
Production source category'' to refer to ``the collection of cellulose
ether operations'' to provide a similar clarification.
The Agency agrees with Dow that revising the definitions will
provide clarity and consistency to what equipment is subject to the
equipment leak monitoring. Additionally, based on a review of the
information presented to EPA during the initial development of these
provisions the solids handling equipment is unlikely to exceed the 5
percent HAP threshold and, as the rule is currently written,
unnecessary records would need to be kept. Through the amendments to
the final rule, we are making the suggested revisions to the
definitions for ``cellulose ether process unit'' and ``Cellulose Ethers
Production source category.'' For consistency, we are also revising
several other definitions. We are revising the definitions for
``cellulose food casing process unit,'' ``cellulosic sponge process
unit,'' and ``rayon process unit'' to specifically include the term
``viscose process.'' We are revising the definition for ``cellophane
process unit'' to specifically include the terms ``viscose process''
and ``solvent coating process.'' Finally, we are revising the
definition for ``Miscellaneous Viscose Processes source category'' to
specifically include the collection of ``cellulose food casing, rayon,
cellulosic sponge, and cellophane operations.''
Dow has also recommended that EPA revise the tables in the final
rule to refer to the definition for ``cellulose ether process unit''
instead of ``cellulose ether operation.'' According to Dow, this change
would allow EPA to clearly define the equipment subject to control.
Specifically, Dow believes that EPA needs to define the boundaries of
the process unit to determine where a wastewater process stream is
discarded and, thus, becomes a wastewater. According to Dow, with the
broadly defined term ``cellulose ether operation,'' no stream ever
exits the process and becomes discarded.
We do not believe that replacing the term ``cellulose ether
operation'' with ``cellulose ether process unit'' in the tables is
necessary or even desirable. Such a revision would effectively exclude
from regulation those equipment, such as heat exchanger systems,
wastewater and waste management units, and cooling towers, that are not
associated with the cellulose ether process unit but are located at a
cellulose ether operation. Additionally, these sources were considered
in establishing the MACT floor. Consequently, we are not making this
suggested revision to the final rule.
2. Process Vent
In response to a comment on the proposed rule, we revised the
definition of ``process vent'' in the final rule to refer to ``a point
of discharge to the atmosphere * * * of a HAP-containing gas stream
from the process operation.'' Noting that the term ``process
operation'' is not defined in the final rule, Dow has recommended that
EPA replace it with the term ``unit operation.'' According to Dow, the
term ``unit operation'' is already defined in the final rule because
Sec. 63.5610 references the definitions from Sec. 63.101 of the HON.
Dow has also expressed concern that the definition for ``process vent''
in the final rule does not define the basis for the concentration of a
process vent, e.g., HAP or total organic compound (TOC). Consequently,
Dow has recommended that EPA revise the definition for ``process vent''
to state that it does not include ''* * * vents with * * * a
concentration less than 50 parts per million by volume (ppmv) of HAP or
TOC * * *'' EPA agrees with Dow's comment concerning the definition of
process vent. Specifically, we agree that through the reference to
Sec. 63.101 of the HON and our definition of ``process vent'' we have
created an inconsistency in the rule. To correct this inconsistency we
are incorporating the characteristics of the vent stream from the HON
into our process vent definition. Through the amendments to the final
rule, we are making the suggested clarifications to the definition for
``process vent.''
E. Applicability of General Provisions
Facilities subject to the final rule are required to submit
periodic compliance reports containing, among other things, information
on episodes of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that occurred during
each reporting period. UCB Films has asked whether the routine breaks
of film (commonly called ``wet breaks'') that occur in its casting
machines possibly could be construed as falling within the definition
for ``malfunction.'' The wet breaks would not affect UCB's ability to
meet the standards. We do not consider this type of routine event to
fall within the definition for ``malfunction'' and believe it should
not be included within the reporting requirement. See 67 FR 72875,
72881 (December 9, 2002); 68 FR 32586, 32592-32593 (May 30, 2003). For
consistency, this interpretation also applies to routine breaks of
cellulose food casing and rayon.
UCB Films also requested clarification of the reporting obligations
for its casting machines when they are temporarily turned off to fix
wet breaks. Clarification may also be needed, according to UCB Films,
regarding the subsequent restart of the casting machines after the wet
breaks are fixed. The recent revisions to the 40 CFR part 63 General
Provisions state that there is no duty to report the number or duration
of these events or to describe each one individually in the startup,
shutdown, and malfunction report as long as the provisions of the
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan are followed and the report
contains a statement to that effect; see Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i) and 68 FR
32592. No changes to subpart UUUU of 40 CFR part 63 are needed to
address this issue.
F. Miscellaneous Corrections
Through the amendments to the final rule, we are also correcting
various typographical, formatting, and cross-referencing errors found
in the final rule and updating the cross-references, where necessary,
to include the amended sections.
II. Summary of Amendments
Today's amendments to subpart UUUU are described in Table 1 of this
preamble.
[[Page 46689]]
Table 1.--Summary of Amendments to Subpart UUUU of 40 CFR Part 63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.5490(d)...................... Change ``meet'' to ``met'' for
verb tense consistency.
Sec. 63.5515(b)(1) and (f) Remove the requirement in
introductory paragraph. paragraph (b)(1) to maintain a
log for O&M of process
equipment and state that the
O&M log is only required for
control devices used to comply
with the rule.
Replace the phrase ``to of this
subpart'' in (f) introductory
paragraph with ``to this
subpart.''
Sec. 63.5535 (d), (e) introductory Revise paragraph (d) to
paragraph, (g)(1), and (h). reference Sec. 63.490(c) for
batch process vents.
Revise (e) introductory
paragraph to reference Sec.
63.490(c) for batch process
vents. Also note that sources
must use the equations as
applicable.
Revise paragraph (g)(1) to
specify that no additional
testing is required for
viscose process affected
sources required to conduct an
initial performance test to
determine the control
efficiency of their non-
recovery control devices.
Replace references to Sec.
63.505(b) (2) and (3) in
paragraphs (h) (1) and (2)
with references to Sec.
63.505(c) for procedures used
to establish operating limits.
Combine paragraphs (h) (1) and
(2) to apply to both
continuous and batch
processes. Renumber paragraphs
(h) (3) through (10) as
paragraphs (h) (2) through
(9).
Revise paragraphs (h) (5) and
(6) to require affected
sources to record the range of
scrubber parameter values,
rather than the average.
Renumber paragraph (h) as
paragraph (i) and add a new
paragraph (h) that includes an
initial compliance option for
cellulose ether operations
similar to the material
balance option for the viscose
process affected sources. For
cellulose ether operations
using extended cookout under
this option, specify that the
start point from which the
percent reduction is
determined must be the onset
of extended cookout. Also
specify that no additional
testing is required for
cellulose ether affected
sources required to conduct an
initial performance test to
determine the control
efficiency of their non-
recovery control devices.
Sec. 63.5545(e)(4)................... Change the citation, which
describes the data to be
excluded from continuous
emissions monitoring system
(CEMS) data averages, from
paragraph (a)(5) to paragraph
(e)(5) of this section.
Sec. 63.5610 (a) and (g)............. Revise paragraph (a) by
changing the citation for
operating limit provisions
from Sec. 63.505(b) to Sec.
63.505(c).
Revise the definitions of
``Cellulose Ethers Production
source category'' and
``Miscellaneous Viscose
Processes source category'' in
paragraph (g) to include a
reference to the types of
operations that are included
in the source categories
(cellulose ether, cellophane,
cellulose food casing,
cellulosic sponge, and rayon).
Revise the definition of
``cellulose ether process
unit'' in paragraph (g) to
include the term ``cellulose
ether process.'' Revise the
definitions of ``cellulose
food casing process unit,''
``cellulosic sponge process
unit,'' and ``rayon process
unit'' to include the term
``viscose process.'' Revise
the definition of ``cellophane
process unit'' to include the
terms ``viscose process'' and
``solvent coating process.''
Revise the definition of
``process vent'' in paragraph
(g)to replace the undefined
term ``process operation''
with the defined term ``unit
operation'' and to define the
concentration basis for
process vents as HAP or TOC.
Table 1, items 1.c. i and ii, 1.f. ii Remove the numbering for
and iii, 9, 10, and 11. individual requirements under
items 1.c. i and ii.
Revise items 1.f. ii and iii,
item 10, and item 11 to
clarify that the standards for
closed-vent systems at
cellophane operations do not
apply to retractable hoods
over sulfuric acid baths at a
cellophane operation.
Revise item 9 to replace the
phrase ``liquid streams in
open system 2'' with ``liquid
streams in open systems.''
Designate the affected source
text under item 11 as ``a.''
Table 2, items 3 and 4................. Revise items 3 and 4 to require
affected sources to maintain
the scrubber parameters within
a range of values established
during the compliance
demonstration, rather than
above or below an average
value.
Table 3, introductory statement and Revise the introductory
items 1.a.i. (1) and (2); 1.b.i. (1) statement for Table 3 to
and (2); 1.c.i.(1); 1.c.ii.(1); include Sec. 63.5535(h) in
1.d.i.(1); 1.e.i.(1); 1.f.i.(1); the list of referenced
1.f.ii and 2.a.i.(1); 3.a; 6.a.i.(1); provisions.
and 12.a.i.(2). Regarding the requirement in
items 1.a.i.(1), 1.b.i.(1),
1.c.i.(1), 1.c.ii.(1),
1.d.i.(1), 1.e.i.(1),
1.f.i.(1), 2.a.i.(1), 3.a, and
6.a.i.(1) to ``measure''
average uncontrolled emissions
during the month-long
compliance demonstration,
change ``measured'' to
``determined.'' Provide
sources with the option to use
engineering assessments to
determine uncontrolled
emissions.
[[Page 46690]]
Revise items 1.a.i.(2) and
1.b.i.(2) to replace the term
``average operating parameter
values'' with ``range of
operating parameter values.''
Revise items 1.f. ii and iii to
clarify that the standards and
initial compliance
requirements for closed-vent
systems at cellophane
operations do not apply to
retractable hoods over
sulfuric acid baths at a
cellophane operation.
Revise item 2.a.i to change
``folling'' to ``rolling.''
Split item 3.a. into two parts--
items 3.a and 3.b. Item 3.a
applies to cellulose ether
operations using a performance
test to demonstrate initial
compliance. Item 3.b applies
to cellulose ether operations
using a material balance
compliance demonstration to
demonstrate initial
compliance. Include under item
3.b the requirements
associated with the material
balance compliance
demonstration. Include under
items 3.a and 3.b the option
to use engineering assessments
to determine uncontrolled
emissions.
Revise items 3.a.i. (1) and (2)
to remove the term ``3-hour.''
Remove the numbering for
individual requirements under
item 12.a.i.(2).
Table 4, introductory statement and Revise the introductory
items 3 and 4.a.i.(2).(b). statement for Table 4 to
include Sec. 63.5535(h)(1)
in the list of referenced
provisions. Reposition the
requirements for item 3 into
their proper columns. Correct
the misspelling for
``potentially'' in item
4.a.i.(2).(b).
Table 5, items 1.a. ii and iii; 3.a; Revise items 1.a. ii and iii to
5.a. i, ii, and iv; and 8. clarify that the standards and
continuous compliance
requirements for closed-vent
systems do not apply to
retractable hoods over
sulfuric acid baths at a
cellophane operation.
Under item 1.a.ii, designate
the work practice standard for
closed-vent systems as
``iii,'' instead of ``c.''
Split item 3.a. into two parts--
items 3.a and 3.b. Item 3.a
applies to cellulose ether
operations using a performance
test to demonstrate initial
compliance. Item 3.b applies
to cellulose ether operations
using a material balance
compliance demonstration to
demonstrate initial
compliance. Include under item
3.b the requirements
associated with the material
balance continuous compliance
option.
Under items 5.a. i, ii, and iv,
remove the numbering for
individual emission limits and
standards (e.g., remove
``(1),'' ``(2),'' and
``(3)''). Also, change the
numbering for individual
continuous compliance
requirements (e.g., change
``(a),'' ``(b),'' and ``(c)''
to ``(1),'' ``(2),'' and
``(3)'').
Correct the misspelling for
``wastewater'' in item 8.
Table 6, items 3 and 4................. Revise items 3 and 4 to require
affected sources to maintain
the scrubber parameters within
a range of values established
during the compliance
demonstration, rather than
above or below an average
value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 5173, October 4, 1993), EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in
standards 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 entitlement, 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.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that the direct final rule amendments are not a
``significant regulatory action'' because they do not meet any of the
above criteria. Consequently, this action was not submitted to OMB for
review under Executive Order 12866.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action makes clarifying changes to the final rule and imposes
no new information collection requirements on the industry. This action
revises a work practice standard, general and initial compliance
requirements, definitions, and General Provisions applicability, as
well as correct typographical, formatting, and cross-referencing errors
in the final rule. The OMB has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations under the
provisions of the Paper Work Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0488 (EPA ICR No. 1974.02).
Copies of the Information Collection Request (ICR) document(s) may
be obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at the Office of Environmental
Information, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. EPA (2822T); 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at
auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may also be
[[Page 46691]]
http://www.epa.gov/icr. Include the ICR number in any correspondence.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and
verifying information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
respond to a collection of information; search existing data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the direct final
rule amendments.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small business
that has fewer than 1,000 employees for NAICS codes 325221, 325188, and
325199; fewer than 750 employees for NAICS code 325211; or fewer than
500 employees for NAICS codes 326121 and 326199; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's direct final rule
amendments on small entities, the EPA has concluded that this action
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The direct final rule amendments will not impose any new
requirements on small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA's regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
The EPA has determined that the direct final rule amendments do not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate,
or the private sector in any 1 year, nor do the direct final rule
amendments significantly or uniquely impact small governments, because
the amendments contain no requirements that apply to such governments
or impose obligations upon them. Thus, the requirements of the UMRA do
not apply to the direct final rule amendments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
The direct final rule amendments do not have federalism
implications. The amendments will not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order
13132. None of the affected facilities are owned or operated by State
governments. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order
do not apply to the direct final rule amendments.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between the EPA, State and local
governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on the direct final
rule amendments from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The direct final rule amendments do
not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175,
because tribal governments do not own or operate any sources subject to
the amendments in the direct final rule. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to the direct final rule amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that EPA determines (1) is ``economically significant'' as defined
under Executive Order 12866, and (2) the environmental health or safety
risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, then EPA must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives that EPA
considered.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required
[[Page 46692]]
under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to
influence the rule. The direct final rule amendments are not subject to
Executive Order 13045, because the action is based on technology
performance and not on health or safety risks. Furthermore, the direct
final rule amendments have been determined not to be ``economically
significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The direct final rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
because the amendments are not considered a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (Public Law 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use
voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and procurement
activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law
or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This action
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider
the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996, generally
provides that, before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing the direct final
rule amendments and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the
U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of the direct final rule amendments
in the Federal Register. The direct final rule amendments are not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The direct final rule
will become effective on October 11, 2005, unless adverse comments are
received by September 26, 2005.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Cellulose products
manufacturing, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 1, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart UUUU--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.5490 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.5490 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
* * * * *
(d) An affected source is a new affected source if you began
construction of the affected source after August 28, 2000 and you met
the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.5485 at the time you began
construction.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 63.5515 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (f)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.5515 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(b) * * *
(1) During the period, if any, between the compliance date
specified for your affected source in Sec. 63.5495 and the date upon
which continuous monitoring systems (CMS) have been installed and
validated and any applicable operating limits have been set, you must
maintain a log detailing the operation and maintenance of any control
technique used to comply with this subpart.
* * * * *
(f) You are not required to conduct a performance test when you use
any of the units specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (5) of this
section to comply with the applicable emission limit or work practice
standard in table 1 to this subpart. You are also exempt from the
continuous compliance, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements
specified in tables 5 through 9 to this subpart for any of these units.
This exemption applies to units used as control devices or wastewater
treatment units.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.5535 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (d), (e) introductory text, (g)(1), and (h);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (h) as paragraph (i); and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.5535 What performance tests and other procedures must I use?
* * * * *
(d) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance
test required in this section, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3). Each
test run must last at least 1 hour, except as specified in Sec.
63.490(c) for batch process vents.
(e) Except as specified in Sec. 63.490(c) for batch process vents,
you may use the equations in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this
section as applicable to determine the control efficiency for each
performance test.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) Viscose process affected sources that must use non-recovery
control devices to meet the applicable emission limit in table 1 to
this subpart must conduct an initial performance test of their non-
recovery control devices according to the requirements in table 4 to
this subpart to determine the control efficiency of their non-recovery
control devices and incorporate this information in their material
balance. No additional performance tests are required.
* * * * *
(h) Cellulose ether affected sources using the material balance
compliance demonstration must conduct a month-long initial compliance
demonstration according to the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1)
through (4) of this section and table 3 to this subpart.
(1) Cellulose ether affected sources that must use non-recovery
control devices to meet the applicable emission limit in table 1 to
this subpart must conduct an initial performance test of their non-
recovery control devices according to the requirements in table 4 to
this subpart to determine the control efficiency of their non-recovery
control devices and incorporate this information in their material
balance. No additional performance tests are required.
(2) Cellulose ether affected sources that use recovery devices to
meet the
[[Page 46693]]
applicable emission limit in table 1 to this subpart must determine the
quantity of organic HAP fed to the process and the quantity of organic
HAP recovered using the recovery device and incorporate this
information in their material balance.
(3) Cellulose ether affected sources that use cellulose ether
process changes to meet the applicable emission limit in table 1 to
this subpart must determine the quantity of organic HAP used before and
after the process change and incorporate this information in their
material balance. For cellulose ether affected sources that use
extended cookout, the start point from which the percent reduction is
determined must be the onset of extended cookout.
(4) Using the pertinent material balance information obtained
according to paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this section, cellulose
ether affected sources must calculate the monthly average percent
reduction for their affected source over the month-long period of the
compliance demonstration.
* * * * *
(i) During the period of each compliance demonstration, you must
establish each site-specific operating limit in table 2 to this subpart
that applies to you according to the requirements in paragraphs (i)(1)
through (9) of this section.
(1) For continuous, batch, and combinations of continuous and batch
process vents, establish your site-specific operating limit using the
procedures in Sec. 63.505(c), except that, if you demonstrate initial
compliance using a month-long compliance demonstration, references to
``performance test'' mean ``compliance demonstration'' for purposes of
this subpart.
(2) For condensers, record the outlet (product side) gas or
condensed liquid temperature averaged over the same period as the
compliance demonstration while the vent stream is routed and
constituted normally. Locate the temperature sensor in a position that
provides a representative temperature.
(3) For thermal oxidizers, record the firebox temperature averaged
over the same period as the compliance demonstration. Locate the
temperature sensor in a position that provides a representative
temperature.
(4) For water scrubbers, record the range of the pressure drop and
flow rate of the scrubber liquid over the same time period as the
compliance demonstration while the vent stream is routed and
constituted normally. Locate the pressure and flow sensors in a
position that provides a representative measurement of the parameter.
(5) For caustic scrubbers, record the range of the pressure drop,
flow rate of the scrubber liquid, and pH, conductivity, or alkalinity
of the scrubber liquid over the same time period as the compliance
demonstration while the vent stream is routed and constituted normally.
Locate the pressure sensors, flow sensors, and pH, conductivity, or
alkalinity sensors in positions that provide representative
measurements of these parameters. Ensure the sample is properly mixed
and representative of the fluid to be measured.
(6) For flares, record the presence of a pilot flame. Locate the
pilot flame sensor in a position that provides an accurate and
continuous determination of the presence of the pilot flame.
(7) For biofilters, record the pressure drop across the biofilter
beds, inlet gas temperature, and effluent pH averaged over the same
time period as the compliance demonstration while the vent stream is
routed and constituted normally. Locate the pressure, temperature, and
pH sensors in positions that provide representative measurement of
these parameters. Ensure the sample is properly mixed and
representative of the fluid to be measured.
(8) For carbon adsorbers, record the total regeneration stream mass
or volumetric flow during each carbon bed regeneration cycle during the
period of the compliance demonstration. Record the temperature of the
carbon bed after each carbon bed regeneration cycle during the period
of the compliance demonstration (and within 15 minutes of completion of
any cooling cycle(s)). Record the operating time since the end of the
last carbon bed regeneration cycle and the beginning of the next carbon
bed regeneration cycle during the period of the compliance
demonstration. Locate the temperature and flow sensors in positions
that provide representative measurement of these parameters.
(9) For oil absorbers, record the flow of absorption liquid through
the absorber, the temperatures of the absorption liquid before and
after the steam stripper, and the steam flow through the steam stripper
averaged during the same period of the compliance demonstration. Locate
the temperature and flow sensors in positions that provide
representative measurement of these parameters.
0
5. Section 63.5545 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.5545 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(4) The CEMS data must be reduced to operating data averages
computed using valid data from at least 75 percent of the hours during
the averaging period. To have a valid hour of data, you must have four
or more data points equally spaced over the 1-hour period (or at least
two data points during an hour when calibration, quality assurance, or
maintenance activities are being performed), except as specified in
paragraph (e)(5) of this section.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.5610 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and the
paragraph (g) definitions for cellophane process unit, cellulose ether
process unit, Cellulose Ether Production source category, cellulose
food casing process unit, cellulosic sponge process unit, Miscellaneous
Viscose Processes source category, process vent, and rayon process unit
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.5610 What definitions apply to this subpart?
(a) For all affected sources complying with the batch process vent
testing provisions in Sec. 63.490(c) and the operating limit
provisions in Sec. 63.505(c), the terms used in this subpart and in
subpart U of this part are defined in Sec. 63.482 and paragraph (g) of
this section.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
Cellophane process unit means all equipment associated with the
viscose process or solvent coating process which collectively function
to manufacture cellophane and any associated storage vessels, liquid
streams in open systems (as defined in Sec. 63.149), and equipment (as
defined in Sec. 63.161) that are used in the manufacturing of
cellophane.
* * * * *
Cellulose ether process unit means all equipment associated with a
cellulose ether process which collectively function to manufacture a
particular cellulose ether and any associated storage vessels, liquid
streams in open systems (as defined in Sec. 63.149), and equipment (as
defined in Sec. 63.161 or 63.1020) that are used in the manufacturing
of a particular cellulose ether.
Cellulose Ethers Production source category means the collection of
cellulose ether operations that use the cellulose ether process to
manufacture a particular cellulose ether.
* * * * *
[[Page 46694]]
Cellulose food casing process unit means all equipment associated
with the viscose process which collectively function to manufacture
cellulose food casings and any associated storage vessels, liquid
streams in open systems (as defined in Sec. 63.149), and equipment (as
defined in Sec. 63.161) that are used in the manufacturing of
cellulose food casings.
* * * * *
Cellulosic sponge process unit means all equipment associated with
the viscose process which collectively function to manufacture
cellulosic sponges and any associated storage vessels, liquid streams
in open systems (as defined in Sec. 63.149), and equipment (as defined
in Sec. 63.161) that are used in the manufacturing of cellulosic
sponges.
* * * * *
Miscellaneous Viscose Processes source category means the
collection of cellulose food casing, rayon, cellulosic sponge, and
cellophane operations that use the viscose process to manufacture a
particular cellulose product. These cellulose products include
cellulose food casings, rayon, cellulosic sponges, and cellophane.
* * * * *
Process vent means a point of discharge to the atmosphere (or the
point of entry into a control device, if any) of a HAP-containing gas
stream from the unit operation. Process vents do not include vents with
a flow rate less than 0.005 standard cubic meter per minute or with a
concentration less than 50 parts per million by volume (ppmv) of HAP or
TOC, vents on storage tanks, vents on wastewater emission sources, or
pieces of equipment regulated under equipment leak standards.
* * * * *
Rayon process unit means all equipment associated with the viscose
process which collectively function to manufacture rayon and any
associated storage vessels, liquid streams in open systems (as defined
in Sec. 63.149), and equipment (as defined in Sec. 63.161) that are
used in the manufacturing of rayon.
* * * * *
0
7. Table 1 is amended by revising entries 1.c.i and ii, 1.f.ii and iii,
and 9 through 11 to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . at . . . You must . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
1. the sum of all viscose process c. each existing rayon i. reduce total uncontrolled sulfide emissions
vents. operation. (reported as carbon disulfide) by at least
35% within 3 years after the effective date
based on a 6-month rolling average; for each
vent stream that you control using a control
device, route the vent stream through a
closed-vent system to the control device; and
comply with the work practice standard for
closed-vent systems; and ii. reduce total
uncontrolled sulfide emissions (reported as
carbon disulfide) by at least 40% within 8
years after the effective date based on a 6-
month rolling average; for each vent stream
that you control using a control device,
route the vent stream through a closed-vent
system to the control device; and comply with
the work practice standard for closed-vent
systems.
* * * * * * *
f. each existing or new i. * * * ii. for each vent stream that you
cellophane operation. control using a control device (except for
retractable hoods over sulfuric acid baths at
a cellophane operation), route the vent
stream through a closed-vent system to the
control device; and iii. comply with the work
practice standard for closed-vent systems
(except for retractable hoods over sulfuric
acid baths at a cellophane operation).
* * * * * * *
9. liquid streams in open systems.. each existing or new comply with the applicable provisions or Sec.
cellulose ether operation. 63.149, except that references to ``chemical
manufacturing process unit'' ether means
``cellulose ether process unit'' for the
purposes of this subpart.
10. closed-vent system used to each existing or new conduct annual inspections, repair leaks, and
route emissions to a control affected source (except maintain records as specified in Sec.
device. for retractable hoods over 63.148.
sulfuric acid baths at a
cellophane operation).
11. closed-vent system containing a a. each existing or new (i) install, calibrate, maintain, and operate
bypass line that could divert a affected source (except a flow indicator as specified in Sec.
vent stream away from a control for retractable hoods over 63.148(f)(1); or (ii) secure the bypass line
device, except for equipment sulfuric acid baths at a valve in the closed position with a car-seal
needed for safety purposes cellophane operation). or lock-and-key type configuration and
(described in Sec. 63.148(f)(3). inspect the seal or closure mechanism at
least once per month as specified in Sec.
63.148(f)(2)).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
8. Table 2 is amended by revising entries 3 and 4 to read as follows:
[[Page 46695]]
Table 2 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Operating Limits
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following control technique . .
. You must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
3. water scrubber...................... maintain the daily average
scrubber pressure drop and
scrubber liquid flow rate
within the range of values
established during the
compliance demonstration.
4. caustic scrubber.................... maintain the daily average
scrubber pressure drop,
scrubber liquid flow rate, and
scrubber liquid pH,
conductivity, or alkalinity
within the range of values
established during the
compliance demonstration.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
9. Table 3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory statement;
0
b. Revising entries 1.a.i.(1) and (2), 1.b.i.(1) and (2), 1.c.i.(1),
1.c.ii.(1), 1.d.i.(1), 1.e.i.(1), 1.f.i.(1), and 1.f.ii and iii;
0
c. Revising entries 2.a.i and 2.a.i.(1);
0
d. Revising entry 3.a and adding item 3.b;
0
e. Revising entry 6.a.i.(1); and
0
f. Revising entry 12.a.i.(2) to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
[As required in Sec. Sec. 63.5530(a) and 63.5535(g) and (h), you must demonstrate initial compliance with the
appropriate emission limits and work practice standards according to the requirements in the following table]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following You have demonstrated
For . . . At . . . emission limit or work initial compliance if .
practice standard . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. the sum of all viscose a. each existing cellulose i. reduce total (1) the average
process vents. food casing operation. uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 25% based on a 6- month-long compliance
month rolling average; demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
25%;
(2) you have a record of
the range of operating
parameter values over
the month-long
compliance
demonstration during
which the average
uncontrolled total
sulfide emissions were
reduced by at least
25%;
* * * * * * *
b. each new cellulose food i. reduce total (1) the average
casing operation. uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 75% based on a 6- month-long compliance
month rolling average; demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
75%;
(2) you have a record of
the range of operating
parameter values over
the month-long
compliance
demonstration during
which the average
uncontrolled total
sulfide emissions were
reduced by at least
75%;
* * * * * * *
c. each existing rayon i. reduce total (1) the average
operation. uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 35% within 3 month-long compliance
years after the demonstration or using
effective date based on engineering
a 6-month rolling assessments, are
average; for each vent reduced by at least 35%
stream that you control within 3 years after
using a control device, the effective date;
route the vent stream
through a closed-vent
system to the control
device; and comply with
the work practice
standard for closed-
vent systems; and
* * * * * * *
ii. reduce total (1) the average
uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 40% within 8 month-long compliance
years after the demonstration or using
effective date based on engineering
a 6-month rolling assessments, are
average; for each vent reduced by at least 40%
stream that you control within 8 years after
using a control device, the effective date;
route the vent stream
through a closed-vent
system to the control
device; and comply with
the work practice
standard for closed-
vent systems.
[[Page 46696]]
* * * * * * *
d. each new rayon operation... i. reduce total (1) the average
uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 75%; based on a 6- month-long compliance
month rolling average; demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
75%;
* * * * * * *
e. each existing or new i. reduce total (1) the average
cellulosic sponge operation. uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 75% based on a 6- month-long compliance
month rolling average; demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
75%;
* * * * * * *
f. each existing or new i. reduce total (1) the average
cellophane operation. uncontrolled sulfide uncontrolled total
emissions (reported as sulfide emissions,
carbon disulfide) by at determined during the
least 75% based on a 6- month-long compliance
month rolling average; demonstration or using
ii. for each vent engineering
stream that you control assessments, are
using a control device reduced by at least
(except for retractable 75%;
hoods over sulfuric
acid baths at a
cellophane operation),
route the vent stream
through a closed-vent
system to the control
device; and iii. comply
with the work practice
standard for closed-
vent systems (except
for retractable hoods
over sulfuric acid
baths at a cellophane
operation)
* * * * * * *
2. the sum of all solvent a. each existing or new i. reduce uncontrolled (1) the average
coating process vents. cellophane operation. toluene emissions by at uncontrolled toluene
least 95% based on a 6- emissions, determined
month rolling average; during the month-long
compliance
demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
95%;
* * * * * * *
3. the sum of all cellulose a. each existing or new i. reduce total (1) average uncontrolled
ether process vents. cellulose ether operation uncontrolled organic total organic HAP
using a performance test to HAP emissions by at emissions, measured
demonstrate initial least 99%; ii. for each during the performance
compliance; or. vent stream that you test or determined
control using a control using engineering
device, route the vent estimates are reduced
stream through a closed- by at least 99%;
vent system to the (2) you have a record of
control device; and the average operating
iii. comply with the parameter values over
work practice standard the performance test
for closed-vent during which the
systems; or average uncontrolled
total organic HAP
emissions were reduced
by at least 99%; and
(3) you comply with the
initial compliance
requirements for closed-
vent systems; or
b. each existing or new i. reduce total (1) average uncontrolled
cellulose ether operation uncontrolled organic total organic HAP
using a material balance HAP emissions by at emissions, determined
compliance demonstration to least 99% based on a 6- during the month-long
demonstrate initial month rolling average; compliance
compliance. ii. for each vent demonstration or using
stream that you control engineering estimates
using a control device, are reduced by at least
route the vent stream 99%;
through a closed-vent (2) you have a record of
system the control the average operation
device; and iii. comply parameter values over
with the work practice the month-long
standard for closed- compliance
vent systems. demonstration during
which the average
uncontrolled total
organic HAP emissions
were reduced by at
least 99%;
(3) you prepare a
material balance that
includes the pertinent
data used to determine
the percent reduction
of total organic HAP
emissions;
(4) if you use extended
cookout to comply, you
measure the HAP charged
to the reactor, record
the grade of product
produced, and then
calculate reactor
emissions prior to
extended cookout by
taking a percentage of
the total HAP charged.
[[Page 46697]]
* * * * * * *
6. each toluene storage a. each existing or new i. reduce uncontrolled (1) the average
vessel. cellophane operation. toluene emissions by at uncontrolled toluene
least 95% based on a 6- emissions, determined
month rolling average; during the month-long
compliance
demonstration or using
engineering
assessments, are
reduced by at least
95%;
* * * * * * *
12. heat exchanger system a. each existing or new i. monitor and repair * * * (2) if your heat
that cools process affected source. the heat exchanger exchanger system is not
equipment or materials in system according to exempt, you identify in
the process unit. Sec. 63.104(a) your Notification of
through (e), except Compliance Status
that reference to Report the HAP or other
``chemical representative
manufacturing process substance that you will
unit'' mean ``cellulose monitor, or you prepare
food casing, rayon, and maintain a site-
cellulosic sponge, specific plan
cellophane, or containing the
cellulose either information required by
process unit'' for the Sec. 63.104(c) (1)
purposes of this (i) through (iv) that
subpart. documents the
procedures you will use
to detect leaks by
monitoring surrogate
indicators of the leak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
10. Table 4 is amended by revising the introductory statement and
entries 3 and 4.a.i.(2)(b) to read as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests
[As required in Sec. Sec. 63.5530(b) and 63.5535(a), (b), (g)(1), and (h)(1), you must conduct performance tests, other initial compliance
demonstrations, and CEMS performance evaluations and establish operating limits according to the requirements in the following table]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the
For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . following requirements
. . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
3. the sum of all solvent a. each existing or new i. measure toluene emissions.. (1) EPA Method 18 in appendix (a) you must conduct
coating process vents. cellophane operation. A to part 60 of this chapter; testing of emissions
or at the inlet and
outlet of each
control device;
(b) you may use EPA
Method 18 to
determine the control
efficiency of any
control device for
organic compounds;
for a combustion
device, you must use
only HAP that are
present in the inlet
to the control device
to characterize the
percent reduction
across the combustion
device;
(c) you must conduct
testing of emissions
from continuous
solvent coating
process vents and
combinations of batch
and continuous
solvent coating
process vents at
normal operating
conditions, as
specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1) and
63.5535;
(d) you must conduct
testing of emissions
from batch solvent
coating process vents
as specified in Sec.
63.490(c), except
that the emission
reductions required
for process vents
under this subpart
supersede the
emission reductions
required for process
vents under subpart U
of this part; and
(e) you must collect
CPMS data during the
period of the initial
compliance
demonstration and
determine the CPMS
operating limit
during the initial
compliance
demonstration; or
[[Page 46698]]
* * * * * * *
4. the sum of all cellulose a. each existing or new i. measure total organic HAP * * * (2) ASTM D6420-99 * * * (b) you may use
either process vents. cellulose either operation. emissions. ASTM D6420-99
(available for
purchase from at
least one of the
following addresses:
100 Barr Harbor
Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA
19428-2959; or
University Microfilms
International, 300
North Zeeb Road, Ann
Arbor, MI 48106) as
an alternative to EPA
Method 18 only where:
the target
compound(s) are those
listed in Section 1.1
of ASTM D6420-99; and
the target
concentration is
between 150 ppbv and
100 ppmv; for target
compound(s) not
listed in Section 1.1
of ASTM D6420-99, but
potentially detected
by mass spectrometry,
the additional system
continuing
calibration check
after each run, as
detailed in Section
10.5.3 of the ASTM
method, must be
followed, met,
documented, and
submitted with the
data report even if
there is no moisture
condenser used or the
compound is not
considered water
soluble; and for
target compound(s)
not listed in Section
1.1 of ASTM D6420-99
and not amenable to
detection by mass
spectrometry, ASTM
D6420-99 does not
apply; target
concentration is
between 150 ppbv and
100 ppmv; for target
compound(s).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
11. Table 5 is amended by:
0
a. Revising entries 1.a. ii. and iii;
0
b. Revising entry 3.a and adding entry 3.b;
0
c. Revising entries 5.a. i, ii, and iv; and
0
d. Revising entry 8 to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Continuous Compliance With Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission You must demonstrate
For . . . At . . . limit or work practice continuous compliance by
standard . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. the sum of all viscose process a. each existing or * * * ii. for each vent * * *
vents. new viscose process stream that you control
affected source. using a control device
(except for retractable
hoods over sulfuric acid
baths at a cellophane
operation), route the
vent stream through a
closed-vent system to the
control device; and iii.
comply with the work
practice standard for
closed-vent systems
(except for retractable
hoods over sulfuric acid
baths at a cellophane
operation).
* * * * * * *
3. the sum of all cellulose either a. each existing or i. reduce total (1) complying with the
process vents. new cellulose ether uncontrolled organic HAP continuous compliance
operation using a emissions by at least requirements for closed-
performance test to 99%; ii. for each vent vent systems; or
demonstrate initial stream that you control
compliance; or using a control device,
route the vent stream
through a closed-vent
system to the control
device; and, iii. comply
with the work practice
standard for closed-vent
systems; or
b. each existing or i. reduce total (1) maintaining a
new cellulose ether uncontrolled organic HAP material balance that
operation using a emissions by at least 99% includes the pertinent
material balance based on a 6-month data used to determine
compliance rolling average; ii. for the percent reduction of
demonstration to each vent stream that you total organic HAP
demonstrate initial control using a control emissions; (2)
compliance device, route the vent documenting the percent
stream through a closed- reduction of total
vent system to control organic HAP emissions
device; and iii. comply using the pertinent data
with the work practice from the material
standard for closed-vent balance; (3) if using
systems. extended cookout to
comply, monitoring
reactor charges and
keeping records to show
that extended cookout
was employed; (4)
complying with the
continuous compliance
requirements for closed-
vent systems.
[[Page 46699]]
* * * * * * *
5. each carbon disulfide unloading a. each existingor i. reduce uncontrolled (1) keeping a record
and storage operation. new viscose process carbon disulfide documenting the 83%
affected source. emissions by at least 83% reduction in carbon
based on a 6-month disulfide emissions; and
rolling average if you (2) if venting to a
use an alternative control device to reduce
control technique not emissions, complying
listed in this table for with the continuous
carbon disulfide compliance requirements
unloading and stroage for closed-vent systems;
operations; if using a
control device to reduce
emissions, route
emissions through a
closed-vent system to the
control device; and
comply with the work
practice standard for
closed-vent systems;
ii. reduce total (1) maintaining a
uncontrolled sulfide material balance that
emissions by at least includes the pertinent
0.14% from viscose data used to determine
process vents based on a the percent reduction of
6-month rolling average; total sulfide emissions;
for each vent stream that (2) documenting the
you control using a percent reduction of
control device, route the total sulfide emissions
vent stream through a using the pertinent data
closed-vent system to the from the material
control device; and balance; and (3)
comply with the work complying with the
practice standard for continuous compliance
closed-vent systems; requirements for closed-
vent systems;
* * * * * * *
iv. install a nitrogen (1) keeping a record
unloading system; reduce certifying that a
total uncontrolled nitrogen unloading
sulfide emissions by at system is in use; (2)
least 0.045% from viscose maintaining a material
process vents based on a balance that includes
6-month rolling average; the pertinent data used
for each vent stream that to determine the percent
you control using a reduction of total
control device, route the sulfide emissions; (3)
vent stream through a documenting the percent
closed-vent system to the reduction of total
control device; and sulfide emissions using
comply with the work the pertinent data from
practice standard for the material balance;
closed-vent systems and (4) complying with
the continuous
compliance requirements
for closed-vent systems.
* * * * * * *
8. all sources of wastewater each existing or new applicable wastewater complying with the
emissions. cellulose either provisions of Sec. applicable wastewater
operation. 63.105 and Sec. Sec. continuous compliance
63.132 through 63.140. provisions of Sec. Sec.
63.105, 63.143, and
63.148.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
12. Table 6 is amended by revising entries 3 and 4 to read as follows:
Table 6 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following control For the following operating You must demonstrate continuous compliance by .
technique . . . limit . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
3. water scrubber........... maintain the daily average collecting the scrubber pressure drop and
scrubber pressure drop and scrubber liquid flow rate data according to
scrubber liquid flow rate Sec. 63.5545; reducing the scrubber parameter
within the range of values data to daily averages; and maintaining the
established during the daily scrubber parameter values within the
compliance demonstration. range of values established during the
compliance demonstration.
4. caustic scrubber......... maintain the daily average collecting the scrubber pressure drop, scrubber
scrubber pressure drop, liquid flow rate, and scrubber liquid pH,
scrubber liquid flow rate, and conductivity, or alkalinity data according to
scrubber liquid pH, Sec. 63.5545; reducing the scrubber parameter
conductivity, or alkalinity data to daily averages; and maintaining the
within the range of values daily scrubber parameter values within the
established during the range of values established during the
compliance demonstration. compliance demonstration.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 46700]]
[FR Doc. 05-15733 Filed 8-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P