[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42108-42170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-13979]
[[Page 42107]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Refractory
Products Manufacturing; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2002 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 42108]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[FRL-7222-9]
RIN 2060-AG68
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Refractory Products Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action replaces Refractories Manufacturing with
Refractory Products Manufacturing on the list of categories of major
sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) published under section
112(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and on the source category schedule
for national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP).
This action also proposes NESHAP for new and existing refractory
products manufacturing sources. The proposed rule would require all
major sources to meet emission standards reflecting the application of
maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The proposed rule would
protect air quality and promote the public health by reducing emissions
of several of the HAP listed in section 112(b)(1) of the CAA, including
ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, hydrogen fluoride (HF), hydrochloric
acid (HCl), methanol, phenol, and polycyclic organic matter (POM).
Exposure to these substances has been demonstrated to cause adverse
health effects such as irritation of the lung, skin, and mucous
membranes, effects on the central nervous system, and damage to the
liver, kidneys, and skeleton. The EPA has classified the HAP
formaldehyde and POM as probable human carcinogens. We estimate that
the proposed rule would reduce nationwide emissions of HAP from these
facilities by as much as 120 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (132 tons per
year (tons/yr)).
DATES: Comments. Submit comments on or before August 19, 2002.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a
public hearing by July 10, 2002, a public hearing will be held on July
22, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Comments. By U.S. Postal Service, send comments (in
duplicate, if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center (6102), Attention Docket Number A-2000-50, U.S. EPA, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. In person or by
courier, deliver comments (in duplicate if possible) to: Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), Attention Docket Number
A-2000-50, Room M-1500, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington DC
20460. The EPA requests that a separate copy of each public comment be
sent to the contact person listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT). Comments may also be submitted electronically by following
the instructions provided in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10
a.m. at the EPA Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina.
Docket. Docket No. A-2000-50 contains supporting information used
in developing the proposed standards. The docket is located at the U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 in Room M-1500, Waterside
Mall (ground floor), and may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Zapata, Minerals and Inorganic
Chemicals Group, Emissions Standards Division (C504-05), U.S. EPA,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919)
541-5167, electronic mail (e-mail) address: [email protected]. For
questions about the public hearing, contact Ms. Tanya Medley, Minerals
and Inorganic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (C504-05),
U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone
number (919) 541-5422, e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments. Comments and data may be submitted
by e-mail to: [email protected]. Electronic comments must be
submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special characters and
encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks in
WordPerfect. All comments and data submitted in electronic
form must note the docket number: A-2000-50. No confidential business
information (CBI) should be submitted by e-mail. Electronic comments
may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not
inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: Susan Zapata, c/o OAQPS
Document Control Officer, C404-02, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The EPA will disclose information identified as CBI only to the
extent allowed by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no
claim of confidentiality accompanies a submission when it is received
by the EPA, the information may be made available to the public without
further notice to the commenter.
Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms.
Tanya Medley at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing. Persons
interested in attending the public hearing must also call Ms. Medley 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.
Docket. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the
information considered by the EPA in the development of this
rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file because material is added
throughout the rulemaking process. The docketing system is intended to
allow members of the public and industries involved to readily identify
and locate documents so that they can effectively participate in the
rulemaking process. Along with the proposed and promulgated standards
and their preambles, the contents of the docket, with certain
exceptions, will serve as the record in the case of judicial review.
(See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The regulatory text and other
materials related to the proposed rulemaking are available for review
in the docket or copies may be mailed on request from the Air Docket by
calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying
docket materials.
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's proposed rule will also be available on
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature, a copy of the rule 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. If more information
regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action include:
[[Page 42109]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category SIC NAICS Examples of regulated entities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial...................................... 3255 327124 Clay refractories manufacturing plants.
Industrial...................................... 3297 327125 Nonclay refractories manufacturing plants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 plant site is regulated by this
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.9782
of the proposed rule. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. Background
A. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?
B. What criteria are used in the development of NESHAP?
C. What is the history of the source category?
D. What is refractory products manufacturing?
E. What are the health effects of pollutants emitted from the
Refractory Products Manufacturing source category?
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. What source category is affected by the proposed rule?
B. What are the primary sources of emissions from major sources
and what are the emissions?
C. What are the affected sources?
D. What are the emission limits?
E. What are the operating limits?
F. What are the work practice standards?
G. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements for
sources subject to emission limits?
H. What are the initial compliance requirements for sources
subject to a work practice standard?
I. What are the continuous compliance requirements for sources
subject to emission limits?
J. What are the continuous compliance requirements for sources
subject to a work practice standard?
K. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards
A. How did we select the source category and any subcategories?
B. How did we select the emission sources to be regulated?
C. How did we define the affected sources?
D. How did we determine the proposed standards for existing
sources?
E. How did we select the emission limits for new sources?
F. How did we select the format of the standard?
G. How did we select the testing and initial compliance
requirements?
H. How did we select the continuous compliance requirements?
I. How did we select the notification, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements?
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy and Economic Impacts
A. What are the air quality impacts?
B. What are the water and solid waste impacts?
C. What are the energy impacts?
D. What are the cost impacts?
E. What are the economic impacts?
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Background
A. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?
Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list categories and
subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP and to establish
NESHAP for the listed source categories and subcategories. The category
of major sources covered by today's proposed rule was listed as
Chromium Refractories Production on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576). Major
sources of HAP are those that have the potential to emit greater than
10 tons/yr of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr of any combination of HAP.
B. What Criteria Are Used in the Development of NESHAP?
Section 112 of the CAA requires that we establish NESHAP for the
control of HAP from both new and existing major sources. The CAA
requires the NESHAP to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in
emissions of HAP that is achievable. This level of control is commonly
referred to as the MACT.
The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP and
is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. In essence, the MACT
floor ensures that the standard is set at a level that assures that all
major sources achieve the level of control at least as stringent as
that already achieved by the better-controlled and lower-emitting
sources in each source category or subcategory. For new sources, the
MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission control that is
achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source. The MACT
standards for existing sources can be less stringent than standards for
new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the average
emission limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of
existing sources in the category or subcategory (or the best-performing
five sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30
sources).
In developing MACT, we also consider control options that are more
stringent than the floor. We may establish standards more stringent
than the floor based on the consideration of cost of achieving the
emissions reductions, any health and environmental impacts, and energy
requirements.
C. What Is the History of the Source Category?
We published an initial list of source categories on July 16, 1992
(57 FR 31576). Chromium Refractories Production was included on the
initial source category list as a major source category. After
obtaining and analyzing information on HAP emissions from chromium
refractories manufacturing plants, we determined that some facilities
were major sources due to HAP emissions from the manufacturing of
nonchromium refractories at these plants. Because the production of
nonchromium refractories at those facilities would not be covered by
other source categories on the current source category list, we decided
to expand the scope of the chromium refractories production source
category to include most manufacturers of refractory products.
Section 112(c) of the CAA allows EPA to revise the source category
list at any time. On November 18, 1999, we revised the source category
name from Chromium Refractories Production to Refractories
Manufacturing (64 FR 63025) to reflect the broadened scope of the
source category. Today's action changes the source category name from
Refractories Manufacturing to Refractory
[[Page 42110]]
Products Manufacturing on the source category list under section 112(c)
of the CAA to further clarify the source category.
D. What Is Refractory Products Manufacturing?
Refractory products are heat-resistant materials that provide the
linings for high-temperature furnaces, reactors, and other processing
units. They include, but are not limited to: Kiln furniture, crucibles,
refractory ceramic fiber (RCF), and materials used as linings for
boilers, kilns, and other processing units and equipment where extremes
of temperature, corrosion, and abrasion would destroy other materials.
Refractory products manufacturing facilities generally can be
classified based on the different types of raw materials and process
operations used. In the broadest sense, refractory products can be
classified by raw materials as either clay refractories or nonclay
refractories. Chromium refractories are a subset of nonclay refractory
products. Classifications of refractory products by process operations
include monolithics, resin-bonded refractories, pitch-impregnated
refractories, pitch-bonded refractories, other formed refractories that
use organic additives, RCF, and fused-cast refractories. Table 1 of
this preamble contains abbreviated definitions of each of these
classifications.
Table 1.--Refractory Products Classifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Product type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By raw material............... Clay............. Products that
contains at least 10
percent clay in the
raw material mix.
Nonclay.......... Products that contain
less than 10 percent
clay in the raw
material mix.
By process.................... Monolithics...... Products that consist
of a mixture of
granular refractory
raw materials that
have not been shaped
or formed.
Resin-bonded..... Cured products that
are produced using a
phenolic resin or
other type of HAP-
forming resin as a
binder.
Pitch-impregnated Fired products that
are subsequently
impregnated with
coal tar or
petroleum pitch.
Pitch-bonded..... Cured products that
are produced using
coal tar or
petroleum pitch as a
binder.
Other formed Dried or cured
products that products that are
are produced products that are
using organic produced using an
additives. organic binder other
than resins, coal
tar, or petroleum
pitch.
RCF.............. Spun or blown bulk
RCF and products
that consist
primarily of RCF.
Fused-cast....... Products manufactured
by casting a molten
refractory raw
material mix into a
form.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are approximately 167 domestic refractory products
manufacturing plants currently in operation located in 30 States and
Puerto Rico. In terms of the number of facilities, the leading States
are Ohio (40 plants), Pennsylvania (28 plants), Illinois (13 plants),
and Missouri (10 plants). Most of these facilities are not likely to be
major sources of HAP.
To produce most refractory products, raw materials are mixed,
formed into shapes, dried or cured, then fired at high temperature in a
kiln. The raw materials used in the refractory can be classified as
either body materials or binders and additives. The body materials used
in the industry are either raw or processed minerals, the most common
of which are clays, silica, alumina, magnesium oxide, bauxite, silicon
carbide, mullite, and graphite. The percentage of clay used in the
mixture defines whether the product is a clay or nonclay refractory
product.
Binders are substances that are added to a granular material to
give it workability and green or dry strength. Nonclay refractory
products generally require binders, whereas clay refractories may not
need binders due to the cohesive nature of clay and the presence of
moisture in the clay. Binders can also serve as lubricants and can
impart other properties to the final product. For example, in addition
to acting as binders, phenolic resins and pitch also increase product
lifetime and durability by adding carbon that remains in the refractory
body after firing. Additives are used to facilitate processing and/or
impart specific properties to the final product. The most widely used
binders and additives are cement, water, silicates, inorganic acids,
phenolic resins, pitch, and lignin compounds, such as calcium
lignosulfonate.
Clays and other raw minerals that are used as body materials in
refractory products manufacturing require mechanical processing, such
as grinding and screening, prior to their use. After processing, body
materials, binders, and additives are proportioned and mixed.
Monolithics typically require no further processing other than bagging
or packaging for shipment. Other types of refractory products must be
formed into shapes by pressing, extruding, molding, or casting. Next,
the formed shapes generally are dried or cured at temperatures of
90 deg. to 260 deg.C (200 deg. to 500 deg.F). Drying and curing are
similar processes with respect to equipment design and operation; the
primary difference between the two processes is that the function of
drying is to reduce the free moisture content of the shapes, whereas
curing activates the resin or binder in the shapes. The final step in
the production of most refractory shapes is firing. Firing serves three
primary functions: to reduce the number of pores in the refractory; to
increase the density of the refractory; and to bond together the
individual refractory grains into a strong, hard mass. Firing typically
is performed in either tunnel kilns, which operate continuously, or in
periodic kilns, which operate as a batch process. Most firing
temperatures are in the range of 1090 deg. to 1540 deg.C (2000 deg. to
2800 deg.F) and the entire firing cycle typically takes 24 to 36 hours.
After firing, the shapes may be finished by grinding, cutting to
specification, or other process; the shapes then are packaged for
shipment.
Some refractory products manufacturing facilities impregnate fired
shapes with coal tar or petroleum pitch to add additional carbon to the
body to increase the durability of the finished product. This process
includes the simultaneous heating of pitch in a
[[Page 42111]]
pitch working tank and heating of fired shapes in a shape preheater to
between 150 deg. and 260 deg.C (300 deg. and 500 deg.F); placing the
shapes and pitch in a sealed vessel, typically called an autoclave; and
applying pressure to force the pitch into the pores of the shapes.
After impregnation, the shapes are cooled (defumed). For certain
applications, the impregnated shapes undergo an additional process
referred to as coking. In the coking process, the shapes are placed in
a coking oven and heated under reducing conditions to drive off the
volatile constituents (i.e., POM) of the pitch.
To produce fused-cast refractories, raw materials are mixed and
loaded into an electric arc furnace where the mixture is heated to a
molten state. The molten material is then poured into molds and allowed
to cool before any final cutting, grinding, or finishing operation.
The production of RCF involves process steps that differ
significantly from the steps used to produce formed refractory
products. To manufacture RCF, alumina, silica, and calcined kaolin are
mixed and fed into a melting furnace. As the molten material pours or
drains from the furnace, it is fiberized into long, thin fibers by
blowing or spinning. The fibers can then be chopped and shipped as bulk
fibers, needled into fiber blankets, or cast into formed fiber
products.
Based on the available data, we have concluded that no existing
facilities that produce fused-cast refractory products or RCF are major
sources of HAP emissions. In addition, we have determined that none of
the existing facilities that produce only monolithics are major HAP
sources. Therefore, facilities that produce only these types of
refractory products would not be regulated under today's rule as
proposed.
E. What Are the Health Effects of Pollutants Emitted From the
Refractory Products Manufacturing Source Category?
The HAP that would be controlled by the proposed rule are
associated with a variety of adverse health effects. These adverse
health effects include chronic health disorders (e.g., irritation of
the lung, skin, and mucous membranes, gastrointestinal effects, and
damage to the kidneys and liver) and acute health disorders (e.g.,
respiratory irritation and central nervous system effects such as
drowsiness, headache, and nausea). The EPA has classified two of the
HAP (formaldehyde and POM) as probable human carcinogens.
The EPA does not have the type of current detailed data on each of
the facilities and the people living around the facilities covered by
today's proposed rule for this source category that would be necessary
to conduct an analysis to determine the actual population exposures to
the HAP emitted from these facilities and the potential for resultant
health effects. Therefore, EPA does not know the extent to which the
adverse health effects described above occur in the populations
surrounding these facilities. However, to the extent the adverse
effects do occur, and this proposed rule reduces emissions, subsequent
exposures would be reduced.
Following is a discussion of the health effects of seven HAP:
ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, HF, HCl, methanol, phenol, and POM.
Although the proposed rule would reduce emissions of HF and HCl from
any new kilns that emit these HAP, it would not reduce emissions of
these HAP from existing sources. We estimate that emissions of methanol
from existing sources would also not be reduced by today's proposed
rule. However, methanol is a constituent of some resins used in resin-
bonded refractory production, and today's proposed rule would regulate
methanol emissions from any affected source that began producing
refractory products made with resins that contain methanol.
1. Ethylene Glycol
Acute (short-term) exposure of humans to ethylene glycol by
ingesting large quantities causes central nervous system depression
(including drowsiness and respiratory failure), gastrointestinal upset,
cardiopulmonary effects, and renal damage. The only effects noted in
the one available study of humans acutely exposed to low levels of
ethylene glycol by inhalation were throat and upper respiratory tract
irritation. Rats and mice exposed chronically (long-term) to ethylene
glycol in their diet exhibited signs of kidney toxicity and liver
effects. No information is available on the reproductive or
developmental effects of ethylene glycol in humans, but several studies
of rodents have shown ethylene glycol to be fetotoxic. The EPA has not
classified ethylene glycol for carcinogenicity.
2. Formaldehyde
Both acute and chronic exposure to formaldehyde irritates the eyes,
nose, and throat, and may cause coughing, chest pains, and bronchitis.
Reproductive effects, such as menstrual disorders and pregnancy
problems, have been reported in female workers exposed to formaldehyde.
Limited human studies have reported an association between formaldehyde
exposure and lung and nasopharyngeal cancer. Animal inhalation studies
have reported an increased incidence of nasal squamous cell cancer. The
EPA considers formaldehyde a probable human carcinogen (Group B2).
3. Hydrogen Fluoride
Acute inhalation exposure to gaseous HF can cause severe
respiratory damage in humans, including severe irritation and pulmonary
edema. Chronic exposure to fluoride at low levels has a beneficial
effect of dental cavity prevention and may also be useful for the
treatment of osteoporosis. Exposure to higher levels of fluoride may
cause dental fluorosis or mottling, while very high exposures through
drinking water or air can result in crippling skeletal fluorosis. One
study reported menstrual irregularities in women occupationally exposed
to fluoride. The EPA has not classified HF for carcinogenicity.
4. Hydrogen Chloride
Hydrogen chloride, also called hydrochloric acid, is corrosive to
the eyes, skin, and mucous membranes. Acute inhalation exposure may
cause eye, nose, and respiratory tract irritation and inflammation and
pulmonary edema in humans. Chronic occupational exposure to HCl has
been reported to cause gastritis, bronchitis, and dermatitis in
workers. Prolonged exposure to low concentrations may also cause dental
discoloration and erosion. No information is available on the
reproductive or developmental effects of HCl in humans. In rats exposed
to HCl by inhalation, altered estrus cycles have been reported in
females, and increased fetal mortality and decreased fetal weight have
been reported in offspring. The EPA has not classified HCl for
carcinogenicity.
5. Methanol
Acute or chronic exposure of humans to methanol by inhalation or
ingestion may result in blurred vision, headache, dizziness, and
nausea. No information is available on the reproductive, developmental,
or carcinogenic effects of methanol in humans. Birth defects have been
observed in the offspring of rats and mice exposed to methanol by
inhalation. A methanol inhalation study using rhesus monkeys reported a
decrease in the length of pregnancy and limited evidence of impaired
learning ability in offspring. The EPA has not classified methanol with
respect to carcinogenicity.
[[Page 42112]]
6. Phenol
Acute inhalation and dermal exposure to phenol is highly irritating
to the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes in humans. Oral exposure to
small amounts of phenol may cause irregular breathing, muscular
weakness and tremors, coma, and respiratory arrest at lethal
concentrations. Anorexia, progressive weight loss, diarrhea, vertigo,
salivation, and a dark coloration of the urine have been reported in
chronically exposed humans. Gastrointestinal irritation and blood and
liver effects have also been reported. No studies of developmental or
reproductive effects of phenol in humans are available, but animal
studies have reported reduced fetal body weights, growth retardation,
and abnormal development in the offspring of animals exposed to phenol
by the oral route. The EPA has classified phenol in Group D, not
classifiable as to human carcinogenicity.
7. Polycyclic Organic Matter
The term polycyclic organic matter defines a broad class of
compounds that includes the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds
(PAH), of which benzo[a]pyrene is a member. Dermal exposures to
mixtures of PAH cause skin disorders in humans and animals. No
information is available on the reproductive or developmental effects
of POM in humans, but animal studies have reported that oral exposure
to benzo[a]pyrene causes reproductive and developmental effects. Human
studies have reported an increase in lung cancer in humans exposed to
POM-bearing mixtures including coke oven emissions, roofing tar
emissions, and cigarette smoke. Animal studies have reported
respiratory tract tumors from inhalation exposure to benzo[a]pyrene and
forestomach tumors, leukemia, and lung tumors from oral exposure to
benzo[a]pyrene. The EPA has classified seven PAH compounds
(benzo[a]pyrene, benz[a]anthracene, chrysene, benzo[b]fluoranthene,
benzo[k]fluoranthene, dibenz[a,h]anthracene, and indeno[1,2,3-
cd]pyrene) as Group B2, probable human carcinogens.
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. What Source Category Is Affected by the Proposed Rule?
Today's proposed rule would apply to the Refractory Products
Manufacturing source category. This source category includes, but is
not limited to, any facility that manufactures refractory bricks and
shapes that are produced using an organic HAP compound, pitch-
impregnated refractory products, chromium refractory products, and
fired clay refractory products. Fired refractory products are those
that have undergone thermal processing in a kiln.
B. What Are the Primary Sources of Emissions From Major Sources and
What Are the Emissions?
At most refractory products manufacturing plants, the primary
sources of HAP emissions are the thermal process units. Other sources
of HAP emissions at these facilities are the raw material processing
and handling equipment.
Thermal process units can emit several HAP, as well as a number of
criteria pollutants. The thermal process units that would be covered by
the proposed rule are: Shape dryers, curing ovens, and kilns that are
used to process resin-bonded, pitch-bonded, and other refractory
products that are produced using an organic HAP compound; defumers,
coking ovens, shape preheaters, and pitch working tanks associated with
pitch-impregnated refractory production; kilns used to fire chromium
refractory products; and kilns used to fire clay refractory products.
The HAP emitted by a specific thermal process unit depend mostly on the
raw materials, binders, and additives used. The criteria pollutants
emitted by thermal process units include particulate matter (PM),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Depending on
the type of resin or additive used, these materials can include phenol,
methanol, ethylene glycol, POM, and other organic compounds. For resin-
bonded refractory production, the thermal process units are the curing
ovens and kilns, which can emit phenol, formaldehyde, ethylene glycol,
and methanol. For pitch-bonded refractory production, the thermal
process units are the curing ovens and kilns. These sources all emit
POM, which is the primary constituent of coal tar and petroleum pitch.
For pitch-impregnated refractory production, the thermal process units
are the coking ovens, defumers, pitch working tanks, and shape
preheaters, which also emit POM. Kilns that are used to fire chromium
refractory products emit particulate chromium and several other HAP
metals. For clay refractory production, the fluorides and chlorides in
the clay form HF and HCl, respectively, which are subsequently emitted
from kilns during firing.
C. What Are the Affected Sources?
Today's proposed rule would establish emission limitations
(emission limits and operating limits) and work practice standards for
several types of refractory products manufacturing sources. Table 2 of
this preamble lists the affected sources that would be subject to the
proposed rule.
Table 2.--Sources That Would Be Affected by the Proposed Refractory
Products Manufacturing Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refractory product type Affected sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resin-bonded........................... Existing and new curing ovens
and kilns.
Pitch-bonded........................... Existing and new curing ovens
and kilns.
Pitch-impregnated...................... Existing and new shape
preheaters, pitch working
tanks, defumers, and coking
ovens.
Other formed products that use organic Existing and new shape dryers
additives. and kilns used to process
refractory shapes that are
made using an organic HAP
compound.
Chromium............................... Existing and new kilns.
Clay................................... Existing and new kilns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. What Are the Emission Limits?
Emission limits are numeric limits on the emissions from affected
sources. Today's proposed rule would specify separate emission limits
for affected sources of organic HAP, HF, and HCl.
1. Existing and New Thermal Process Sources of Organic HAP
Today's proposed rule would establish emission limits for specified
thermal process sources that emit organic HAP. Facilities that operate
these types of sources could meet either of two types of emission
limits: A specified minimum combustion efficiency of an add-on control
device (i.e., a thermal oxidizer or a catalytic oxidizer); or a limit
on the concentration
[[Page 42113]]
of total hydrocarbons (THC) in the emissions. The combustion efficiency
option would apply only to sources that are controlled with a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer for which the carbon dioxide (CO2)
concentration at the outlet of the device is 3 percent or less. To
comply with the combustion efficiency limit, you would be required to
reduce emissions of CO and THC so that the average combustion
efficiency is 99.8 percent or greater. If the outlet CO2
concentration is more than 3 percent, or if you choose to comply with
the THC emission concentration limit, you would be required to reduce
emissions of THC at the outlet of the source or control device to 20
parts per million by volume, dry basis (ppmvd), or less, corrected to
18 percent oxygen (O2). The sources that would be subject to
these organic HAP emission limits include new and existing shape
dryers, curing ovens, kilns, coking ovens, and defumers. In addition,
new shape preheaters would be subject to these same emission limits.
You would also be required to meet the THC emission concentration limit
if you operate an affected source that is not equipped with a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer.
For continuous process sources, the format of the combustion
efficiency and THC emission limits would be a 3-hour block average.
That is, the average combustion efficiency or THC concentration based
on three 1-hour test runs would have to meet the emission limit of at
least 99.8 percent combustion efficiency or no more than 20 ppmvd THC
at 18 percent O2, whichever applies. For batch process
sources, the format of the standard is the average of the highest
rolling 3-hour averages for three test runs. In other words, you would
have to calculate the rolling 3-hour average combustion efficiency of
THC concentration for each 3-hour period of each test run. From each of
the three test runs, you would select the highest rolling 3-hour
average. You would then determine the average of those three highest
rolling averages to determine if your source is in compliance with the
emission limit.
2. New Clay Refractory Kilns
If you own or operate an affected new clay refractory kiln, you
would be required to meet emission limits for both HF and HCl. For
affected tunnel kilns, you would have to meet an HF emission limit of
0.001 kilogram per megagram (kg/Mg) (0.002 pound per ton (lb/ton)) of
product or reduce HF emissions by at least 99.5 percent. You would also
be required to meet an HCl emission limit of 0.0025 kg/Mg (0.005 lb/
ton) of product or reduce uncontrolled HCl emissions by at least 98
percent. If you own or operate a new affected periodic kiln, you would
be required to reduce HF emissions by at least 99.5 percent and HCl
emissions by at least 98 percent.
E. What Are the Operating Limits?
Operating limits are limits on operating parameters of process
equipment or control devices. Today's proposed rule specifies process
and control device operating limits for thermal process sources that
emit organic HAP and clay refractory kilns. For each of these operating
limits, you would be required to measure the appropriate operating
parameters during the performance test and establish limits on the
operating parameters based on those measurements. Following the
performance test, you would be required to monitor those parameters and
ensure that the established limits are not exceeded.
1. Existing and New Thermal Process Sources of Organic HAP
For affected thermal process sources that discharge organic HAP, we
would require operating limits on the organic HAP processing rate and
the operating temperatures of your control devices. The operating limit
on the organic HAP processing rate would require you to measure during
the performance test the rate at which organic HAP are processed in an
affected process unit. To determine the organic HAP processing rate,
you would need data on the mass fractions of organic HAP in each resin,
binder, or additive that contains an organic HAP. You could determine
the mass fraction of organic HAP in a material using EPA Method 311,
``Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings
by Direct Injection into a Gas Chromatograph.'' You could also use
material safety data sheets (MSDS) or product labels to determine the
mass faction of organic HAP in a substance.
For continuous process units, the organic HAP processing rate would
be measured in units of mass of organic HAP per unit time (e.g., pounds
of HAP per hour) contained in the refractory products that undergo
thermal processing. For batch process units, the organic HAP processing
rate would be measured in units of mass of organic HAP per mass of
refractory products that undergo thermal processing (e.g., pounds of
organic HAP per ton of refractory product in the batch). Following the
performance test, you would be required to monitor the organic HAP
processing rate and ensure that the rate does not exceed the rate
established during the performance test. If you decided to start
production of a refractory product that is likely to have an organic
HAP processing rate greater than the rate established during the most
recent performance test, you would be required to conduct a new
performance test for that product and establish a new operating limit
for the organic HAP processing rate.
For sources that are controlled with a thermal oxidizer, you would
be required to monitor the combustion chamber temperature. For affected
sources that are controlled with a catalytic oxidizer, you would be
required to monitor the temperature at the inlet of the catalyst bed.
You would also be required to maintain the catalyst according to
manufacturer's specifications. For either type of control device, you
would be required to measure and record the appropriate temperature
during the performance test. Following the performance test, you would
be required to monitor continuously the control device operating
temperature and ensure that the 3-hour block average temperature does
not fall below the corresponding temperature measured during the
performance test minus 14 deg.C (25 deg.F).
2. New Clay Refractory Kilns
If you have a new clay refractory kiln that is controlled with a
dry lime injection fabric filter (DIFF) or a dry lime scrubber/fabric
filter (DLS/FF), you would be required to monitor fabric filter inlet
temperature and lime feed rate. During the performance test, you would
be required to measure the fabric filter inlet temperature. Following
the performance test, you would be required to continuously measure
fabric filter inlet temperature and ensure that the temperature does
not exceed the temperature established during the performance test plus
14 deg.C (25 deg.F). During the performance test, you would also be
required to measure the lime feed rate and subsequently ensure that the
lime feed rate did not fall below the feed rate established during the
performance test. You would also have to verify that lime is free-
flowing to the control system. In addition, you would be required to
install a bag leak detection system, initiate corrective action within
1 hour of a bag leak detection system alarm, and complete corrective
actions according to your operation, maintenance, and monitoring (OM&M)
plan. You would also have to operate and maintain the fabric filter
such that the alarm is not engaged for more than 5 percent of the total
operating time in a 6-month reporting period. In calculating this
operating
[[Page 42114]]
time fraction, if inspection of the fabric filter demonstrates that no
corrective action is required, no alarm time would be counted. If
corrective action is required, each alarm would be counted as a minimum
of 1 hour, and if you take longer than 1 hour to initiate corrective
action, the alarm time would be counted as the actual amount of time
taken to initiate corrective action.
If you use a DLS/FF, you would also be required to measure the
water injection rate during the performance test. Following the
performance test, you would be required to maintain the water injection
rate at least at the levels established during the performance test.
If you use a wet scrubber (WS), you would be required to measure
the pressure drop across the scrubber, liquid pH, and liquid flow rate
during the performance test. Following the performance test, you would
be required to ensure that the levels of these parameters did not fall
below the corresponding levels established during the performance test.
3. All Affected Sources
Under today's proposed rule, you would be required to prepare a
written OM&M plan and keep the plan up to date for all affected
sources. The plan would have to include procedures for the proper
operation and maintenance of each affected source and its air pollution
control device(s). The plan would also have to include procedures for
monitoring and proper operation of monitoring systems to help assure
both initial and continuous compliance with the emission limits,
operating limits, and work practice standards.
If you own or operate an affected source of organic HAP equipped
with an alternative control device or technique not listed in the
proposed rule, you would have to install a THC continuous emission
monitoring system (CEMS) on the outlet of the control device or in the
stack. You would also be required to comply with Performance
Specification (PS) 8 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, and with Procedure
1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. If you own or operate an affected
chromium refractory products kiln or clay refractory products kiln that
is equipped with an alternative control device or technique not listed
in the proposed rule, you would have to establish operating limits for
the appropriate operating parameters subject to prior written approval
by the Administrator as described in 40 CFR 63.8(f). You would be
required to submit a request for approval of alternative monitoring
procedures that includes a description of the alternative control
device or technique, the type of monitoring device or procedure that
would be used, the appropriate operating parameters that would be
monitored, and the frequency that the operating parameter values would
be determined and recorded. You would establish site-specific operating
limits during your performance test based on the information included
in the approved alternative monitoring procedures request. You would
also be required to install, operate, and maintain the parameter
monitoring system for the alternative control device or technique
according to your OM&M plan. If the Administrator determines that
parameter monitoring cannot assure continuous compliance, a CEMS may be
required.
If you use a control device or technique listed in the proposed
rule, you could establish operating limits for alternative operating
parameters subject to prior written approval by the Administrator on a
case-by-case basis. You would be required to submit the application for
approval of alternative operating parameters no later than the
notification of the performance test. The application would have to
include information justifying the request for alternative operating
parameters (such as why using the alternative operating parameters is
preferable to using the operating parameters in the proposed rule), a
description of the proposed alternative control device operating
parameters, the monitoring approach, the frequency of measuring and
recording the alternative parameters, the averaging period for the
operating limits, how the operating limits are to be calculated, and
information documenting that the alternative operating parameters would
provide equivalent or better assurance of compliance with the relevant
emission limit. You would have to install, operate, and maintain the
alternative parameter monitoring systems in accordance with the
application approved by the Administrator.
F. What Are the Work Practice Standards?
Today's proposed rule would establish work practice standards for
existing shape preheaters that are used to produce pitch-impregnated
refractory products, existing and new pitch working tanks that are used
to produce pitch-impregnated refractory products, existing and new
chromium refractory products kilns, and existing clay refractory
products kilns.
If you operate an affected existing shape preheater, you would be
required to control emissions of POM from the shape preheater by one of
three methods. Two of the methods entail removing the residual pitch
from the surfaces of the baskets or containers that are used for
holding refractory shapes in a shape preheater and autoclave. You would
have to clean the basket surfaces at least every ten impregnation
cycles. Alternatively, you could duct the exhaust from the shape
preheater to a control device that meets the applicable emission limits
for thermal process sources of organic HAP. If you choose to clean the
basket surfaces, you would have two cleaning options. One basket
cleaning option would be to remove residual pitch by abrasive blasting,
provided that the emissions from the abrasive blasting operation are
exhausted to a fabric filter. The other basket cleaning option would be
to subject the baskets to a thermal process cycle that matches or
exceeds the temperature and cycle time of the affected shape preheater
and is ducted to a thermal or catalytic oxidizer that is comparable to
the control device for your defumer or coking oven. For example, if the
operating temperature and cycle time of your shape preheater are
200 deg.C (400 deg.F) and 2 hours, respectively, you could ``clean''
the baskets by placing them in a shape dryer that operates at a
temperature of 200 deg.C (400 deg.F) or higher for at least 2 hours and
is exhausted to a thermal oxidizer that is comparable to your defumer
thermal oxidizer. Subjecting the baskets to a thermal process with a
cycle time and temperature equal to or greater than those of the shape
preheater ensures that POM that would have been emitted from the shape
preheater otherwise is controlled. If you choose to duct shape
preheater emissions to a control device, you could duct the emissions
to the coking oven control device, defumer control device, or to
another thermal or catalytic oxidizer that is comparable to the coking
oven or defumer controls and meets the applicable emission limits for
thermal process sources of organic HAP.
If you have an affected existing or new pitch working tank, you
would be required to duct the exhaust from the tank to either the
coking oven control device, the defumer control device, or an
equivalent thermal or catalytic oxidizer. If you choose to exhaust the
working tank emissions to an alternate thermal or catalytic oxidizer,
the emissions from that control device would have to meet the
applicable emission limits for thermal process sources of organic HAP.
If you have an affected existing or new chromium refractory
products kiln or an affected existing clay refractory products kiln,
you would have to use
[[Page 42115]]
natural gas, or an equivalent fuel, as the kiln fuel.
G. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Sources
Subject to Emission Limits?
Under today's proposed rule, you would be required to conduct an
initial performance test on each affected source to demonstrate initial
compliance with the emission limits. In accordance with 40 CFR
63.7(a)(2), you would be required to conduct the test within 180 days
after the compliance date using specified test methods.
1. Existing and New Thermal Process Sources of Organic HAP
If you have an affected existing or new shape dryer, curing oven,
kiln, coking oven, or defumer, or a new shape preheater, you would be
required to measure emissions of THC in stack gases exhausted to the
atmosphere using EPA Method 25A, ``Determination of Total Gaseous
Organic Concentration Using a Flame Ionization Analyzer.'' If you
choose to comply with the THC concentration limit of 20 ppmvd corrected
to 18 percent O2, you would also have to measure the oxygen
concentration of the stack gas using EPA Method 3A, ``Determination of
Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).'' The oxygen concentration
data are needed for correcting the measured THC concentration to 18
percent O2. The performance test would consist of at least
three 1-hour test runs, and you would be required to measure and record
the stack gas concentrations of THC and oxygen every minute.
If the affected source is controlled with a thermal or catalytic
oxidizer, and the outlet CO2 concentration is 3 percent or
less, you could elect to comply with the combustion efficiency limit.
If you choose to comply with the combustion efficiency limit, you would
be required to measure emissions of CO using EPA Method 10,
``Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Stationary Sources,''
and CO2 using EPA Method 3A, in addition to measuring THC.
The performance test would consist of at least three 1-hour test runs,
and you would be required to measure and record the stack gas
concentrations of THC, CO, and CO2 every minute.
If your source is a continuous process, you would determine
compliance with the emission limit by first determining the hourly
average concentrations for each pollutant and diluent (i.e., THC and
O2 for the THC limit, or CO2, CO, and THC for the
combustion efficiency limit) as the numeric average of the 1-minute
concentrations for each test run. Each test run must last at least 1
hour. The minimum number of 1-minute concentration measurements needed
for each hour of testing would be 50. You would then calculate the
average concentrations for each pollutant as the mean of the three
hourly concentrations for that pollutant. To be in compliance with the
combustion efficiency limit, the average of three 1-hour average
combustion efficiencies for the test would have to be 99.8 percent or
greater.
The test methods and conditions for meeting the combustion
efficiency limit for a continuous process also apply if your source
operates as a batch process. You would also be required to measure
emissions for three test runs. However, for batch processes, each test
run would have to be conducted over all or part of separate batch
cycles.
You would be required to test throughout three complete batch
cycles unless you developed an emissions profile for the duration of
the batch cycle, or met certain conditions for terminating a
performance test run before completion of the batch cycle. If you
choose to develop an emissions profile, you would be required initially
to sample THC emissions throughout a complete batch cycle, regardless
of whether you were complying with the THC limit or the combustion
efficiency limit. You would be required to determine the hourly average
concentrations of THC, corrected to 18 percent O2, for each
hour of the batch cycle. Based on the average hourly THC
concentrations, you would identify the 4-hour period of peak emissions.
That is, the period of 4 consecutive hours when THC concentrations are
highest. During the two subsequent test runs, you would not be required
to sample emissions outside that 4-hour period of peak THC emissions.
To be in compliance with the THC emission limit, the average of the
highest rolling 3-hour average THC concentrations corrected to 18
percent O2 during the period of peak emissions for the three
test runs would have to be 20 ppmvd or less. Likewise, to be in
compliance with the combustion efficiency limit, the average of the
highest rolling 3-hour average combustion efficiencies during the
period of peak emissions for the three test runs would have to be 99.8
percent or greater. During subsequent performance tests, you would have
to complete at least three test runs, but you would only have to test
during the 4-hour period of peak emissions during each run.
If you choose not to develop an emissions profile, you could
terminate testing before the completion of a batch cycle if you met
certain conditions. For each of three test runs, you would have to
begin testing at the start of the batch cycle and continue testing for
at least 3 hours beyond the point in time when the process reaches peak
operating temperature. You could stop testing for that run at that time
if you could show that THC concentrations are not increasing over the
3-hour period since process peak temperature was reached; at least 1
hour has passed since any reduction in the operating temperature of the
control device (thermal or catalytic oxidizer); and either the average
THC concentration at the inlet to the control device for the previous
hour has not exceeded 20 ppmvd, corrected to 18 percent O2,
or your source met the emission limit during each of the previous 3
hours after the process reached peak temperature. For example, if you
were testing to show compliance with the THC limit, and the hourly THC
concentrations after peak process temperature was reached were 12 ppm,
12 ppm, and 11 ppm, respectively, you could stop that test run.
However, if the hourly THC concentrations for those 3 hours were 12
ppm, 14 ppm, and 16 ppm, respectively, you could not stop testing
because THC concentrations would still be increasing. You would have to
satisfy these testing procedures for the remaining two test runs during
two other batch cycles.
For both continuous process and batch process performance tests,
you would be required to conduct performance tests on affected thermal
process sources under the conditions that would result in the highest
levels of organic HAP emissions expected to occur for that affected
source. You would determine these ``worst-case'' conditions by taking
into account the organic HAP processing rate, the process operating
temperatures, and the processing times. The organic HAP processing rate
is the rate at which the mass of organic HAP materials contained in
refractory shapes are processed in an affected thermal process source.
For continuous process units, the organic HAP processing rate would be
measured in units of mass of organic HAP processed per hour (e.g.,
pounds of phenol per hour). For example, if a continuous curing oven is
curing 2 tons per hour (4,000 lbs/hr) of resin-bonded refractory
shapes, the refractory mix contains 5 percent resin, and the resin
contains 10 percent phenol, the organic HAP processing rate (for
phenol) is:
4,000 lbs/hr x \5/100\ x \10/100\ = 20 lbs/hr.
[[Page 42116]]
For batch processes, the organic HAP processing rate would be
measured in units of mass of organic HAP processed per batch cycle
(e.g., pounds of phenol per batch). The organic HAP processing rate
would be determined based on the amount or percentage of organic HAP in
the raw material mix and the weight of the shapes processed. You would
be required to record the total weight and cycle time of each batch.
For example, if you operate a batch process coking oven, and the oven
is loaded with 20 tons (40,000 lbs) of pitch-impregnated refractories
that contain 6 percent pitch, the organic HAP processing rate (for POM)
is:
40,000 lbs/batch x \6/100\ = 2,400 lbs/batch.
If you decided to start production of a refractory product that is
likely to have an organic HAP processing rate greater than the rate
established during the most recent performance test, you would be
required to conduct a new performance test for that product and
establish a new operating limit for the organic HAP processing rate.
You would also have to conduct a new performance test on an affected
uncontrolled kiln following any process changes that are likely to
increase kiln emissions. For example, if the kiln followed a curing
oven, and you shortened the curing oven cycle time significantly, you
would have to repeat the performance test on the kiln because the
shorter curing time could result in a decrease in organic HAP emissions
from the curing oven and an increase in organic HAP emissions from the
kiln.
If the affected source is controlled with a thermal oxidizer, you
would be required to measure the thermal oxidizer combustion chamber
temperature continuously and record the temperature at least every 15
minutes during the performance test. If the affected source is
controlled with a catalytic oxidizer, you would be required to measure
the temperature at the inlet of the catalyst bed continuously and
record the temperature at least every 15 minutes during the performance
test. You would also be required to measure and record the process
operating temperature of the affected source at least once every hour.
If the source is a batch process and is controlled with a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer, you could reduce the operating temperature of
the control device or shut the control device off under the following
conditions: (1) At least 3 hours have passed since the process unit
reached its maximum temperature; (2) the applicable emission limit (THC
concentration or combustion efficiency) has been met during each of the
three 1-hour periods since the process reached peak temperature; (3)
emissions of THC have not increased during the 3-hour period since
maximum process temperature was reached; and (4) either the average THC
concentration at the inlet to the oxidizer has not exceeded 20 ppmvd,
corrected to 18 percent O2, for at least 1 hour, or the
applicable emission limit has been met during each of the four 15-
minute periods immediately following the oxidizer temperature
reduction. In other words, if you measure THC emissions at the inlet to
the oxidizer and the data show that the THC concentration corrected to
18 percent O2 has remained 20 ppmvd or lower for at least 1
hour, you could shut off the oxidizer at the end of the third hour
following the process reaching temperature. Alternatively, you could
continue measuring emissions at the oxidizer outlet for another hour
beyond the 3-hour period that follows the peak process temperature. If
the outlet emissions met the THC or combustion efficiency limit for
four straight 15-minute periods, you could shut off the oxidizer after
the fourth 15-minute period (i.e., at the end of the fourth hour since
the process reached peak operating temperature). If the applicable
emission limit has not been met during any of the four 15-minute
periods immediately following the oxidizer temperature reduction, you
would have to return the oxidizer to its normal operating temperature
as soon as possible and maintain that temperature for at least 1 hour.
You would be required to repeat this procedure (i.e., measure emissions
for at least 1 hour and return the control device to normal temperature
if the emission limit was not met) until the source meets the
applicable emission limit for at least 1 hour.
If you elect to shut off or reduce the temperature of a thermal or
catalytic oxidizer by satisfying these conditions, you could use the
results from the performance test to establish the time at which an
oxidizer could be shut off (or temperature reduced) during the
production of other refractory products that use organic HAP. For any
such product, you would be required to operate the oxidizer at a
temperature at least as high as that established during the performance
test, minus 16 deg.C (25 deg.F), from the start of the batch cycle
until 3 hours have passed since the process reached its peak
temperature. You would have to maintain that oxidizer temperature for
the same length of time beyond the process peak temperature as during
the performance test. For example, if, during the performance test, an
affected curing oven reached peak temperature at 12 hours into the
cycle, and you satisfied all of the conditions for shutting off the
thermal oxidizer at hour 16 of the cycle (i.e., 4 hours after the
curing oven reached peak temperature), you could shut off the thermal
oxidizer 4 hours after reaching the curing oven peak temperature for
any other affected product that is cured in that curing oven. This
provision would apply to curing cycles of any duration; regardless of
the total cycle time, you would have to operate the thermal oxidizer
for at least 4 hours beyond the time at which the process reaches peak
temperature.
If you control emissions from an affected curing oven, shape dryer,
kiln, defumer, coking oven, shape preheater, or pitch working tank
using process modifications or an add-on control device other than a
thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you would be required to install a THC
CEMS. You would also be required to satisfy the requirements of PS-8 of
40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
2. New Clay Refractory Kilns
For each new kiln that manufactures clay refractory products, you
would be required to measure emissions of HF and HCl. You would measure
HF and HCl emissions using EPA Method 26A, ``Determination of Hydrogen
Halide and Halogen Emissions from Stationary Sources-Isokinetic
Method.'' You would be required to conduct the tests for HF and HCl
while the affected kiln is operating at the maximum production level
likely to occur. Each test run would have to be at least 1 hour in
duration.
If you have an affected continuous clay refractory kiln, you would
determine initial compliance with the production-based mass emission
limits for HF and HCl by calculating the mass emissions per unit of
production for each test run using the mass emission rates of HF and
HCl and the production rate (on a fired-product basis) measured during
your performance test. For HF, mass emissions per unit of production
would have to be less than or equal to 0.001 kg/Mg (0.002 lb/ton). For
HCl, mass emissions per unit of production would have to be less than
or equal to 0.0025 kg/Mg (0.005 lb/ton). To determine initial
compliance with any of the percent reduction emission limits, you would
calculate the percent reduction of the specific HAP (HF or HCl)
entering and exiting the control device for each test run using the
mass emission rates measured during your performance test. The percent
of HF reduced would have to be 99.5 percent
[[Page 42117]]
or greater, and the percent of HCl reduced would have to be 98 percent
or greater.
If you have an affected batch process clay refractory kiln, you
would have to comply with the percent reduction limit. You would be
required to test throughout three complete batch cycles unless you
developed an emissions profile. If you choose to develop an emissions
profile, you would be required to sample HF and HCl emissions
throughout one complete batch cycle. Based on the average hourly HF
percent reduction for each hour of the cycle, you would identify the
period of 3 consecutive hours over which HF emissions are highest.
During all subsequent test runs, you would not have to sample emissions
outside that 3-hour period of peak HF emissions.
For both continuous and batch process kilns, you would be required
to measure and record the average uncalcined clay processing rate for
each test run. For continuous kilns, the uncalcined clay processing
rate would be measured as the weight of uncalcined clay processed
divided by the duration of the test run (e.g., tons per hour). For
batch process kilns, the uncalcined clay processing rate would be the
weight of uncalcined clay processed per batch cycle (e.g., tons per
batch).
If you have an affected clay refractory kiln that is controlled
with a DIFF or a DLS/FF, you would be required to measure the fabric
filter inlet temperature at least every 15 minutes. You would also be
required to measure and record the lime feed rate at least hourly and
verify that lime is free-flowing to the control system.
If you have an affected clay refractory kiln that is controlled
with a DLS/FF, you would be required to measure the water injection
rate at least every 15 minutes during the performance test. If you use
a wet scrubber, you would be required to measure the pressure drop
across the scrubber, liquid pH, and liquid flow rate at least every 15
minutes during the performance test.
3. All Affected Sources
In addition to the procedures previously described, you would be
required to follow the procedures specified in EPA Methods 1 to 4 of
appendix A of 40 CFR part 60, where applicable. You would perform
Method 1, ``Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources,'' (or
Method 1A) to select the locations of sampling points and the number of
traverse points. You would perform Method 2, ``Determination of Stack
Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S Pitot Tube),'' (or Method
2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G) to determine gas velocity and volumetric flow
rate. You would perform Method 3, ``Gas Analysis for the Determination
of Dry Molecular Weight,'' (or Method 3A or 3B) to determine the
exhaust gas molecular weight. You would perform Method 4,
``Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases,'' to measure the
moisture content of the exhaust gas.
Prior to the initial performance test, you would be required to
install the continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) that you
would need for demonstrating continuous compliance. During the
performance test, you would use the CPMS to establish the operating
limits (e.g., minimum thermal oxidizer combustion chamber temperature).
H. What Are the Initial Compliance Requirements for Sources Subject to
a Work Practice Standard?
If you own or operate an affected existing shape preheater, an
existing pitch working tank, or a new pitch working tank, you would be
required to select a method for complying with the work practice
standard and provide a description of that method as part of your
initial notification, as required by 40 CFR 63.9(b)(2) of the General
Provisions. For affected shape preheaters, if you choose to comply with
the work practice standard by removing pitch from basket or container
surfaces, you would have to describe the method of removal. If you
choose to comply by subjecting the baskets or containers to a thermal
process cycle, you would have to describe the process, the process unit
operating temperature, the process cycle time, and the emission control
system used on the process unit into which the baskets or containers
are placed. If you choose to comply by capturing and ducting emissions
from the shape preheater to a control device, you would have to
describe the design (e.g., thermal oxidizer combustion chamber
temperature and residence time) and operation of that control device.
For affected existing or new pitch working tanks, you would have to
describe in your initial notification the design (e.g., thermal
oxidizer combustion chamber temperature and residence time) and
operation of the control device to which the emissions from the working
tank are exhausted. You would also have to verify that the control
device is the same as, or is at least equivalent to, the control device
that is used to control organic HAP emissions from an affected defumer
or coking oven.
For affected new or existing chromium refractory products kilns and
for existing clay refractory products kilns, you would have to indicate
in your initial notification the type of fuel used in those kilns.
I. What Are the Continuous Compliance Requirements for Sources Subject
to Emission Limits?
Under today's proposed rule, you would be required to demonstrate
continuous compliance with each emission limitation that applies to
you. You would be required to follow the requirements in your OM&M plan
and in your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP) and document
conformance with both plans. For each affected source equipped with an
add-on air pollution control device (APCD), you would be required to
operate and maintain an emission capture and control system, inspect
each system at least once each calendar year, and record the results of
each inspection. You would be required to install, operate, and
maintain each required CPMS to monitor the operating parameters
established during your initial performance test. The CPMS would have
to collect data at least every 15 minutes, and you would need to record
at least one data point during three of the four 15-minute periods per
hour to have a valid hour of data. You would have to collect all data
while the process is operational. You would have to operate the CPMS at
all times when the process is operating. You would also have to conduct
proper maintenance of the CPMS (including inspections, calibrations,
and validation checks) and maintain an inventory of necessary parts for
routine repairs of the CPMS. Using the 15-minute block average recorded
readings, you would calculate and record the average hourly values of
each operating parameter. You would also be required to repeat any
required performance tests at least every 5 years.
1. Existing and New Thermal Process Sources of Organic HAP
For each affected source, you would have to monitor and maintain
the organic HAP processing rate below the level established during the
performance test. You would also be required to record the process
operating temperature hourly. For batch process sources, you would be
required to record cycle times for each batch cycle. The start of a
cycle would coincide with the heating of the process unit, and the
cycle would end when the process unit is opened for removal of the
refractory products. If you decided to start production of a refractory
product that is likely to have an organic HAP processing rate greater
than the rate
[[Page 42118]]
established during the most recent performance test, you would be
required to conduct a new performance test for that product and
establish a new operating limit for the organic HAP processing rate.
For affected continuous sources that are controlled with a thermal
oxidizer, you would be required to maintain the 3-hour block average
combustion chamber temperature at or above the combustion chamber
temperature established during the performance test minus 14 deg.C
(25 deg.F). For affected continuous sources that are controlled with a
catalytic oxidizer, you would be required to maintain the 3-hour block
average temperature at the inlet of the catalyst bed at or above the
corresponding temperature established during the most recent
performance test minus 14 deg.C (25 deg.F).
For affected batch process sources that are controlled with a
thermal oxidizer, you would be required to maintain the average hourly
combustion chamber temperature at or above the combustion chamber
temperature established during the performance test minus 14 deg.C
(25 deg.F). If you met the conditions for reducing the operating
temperature of the thermal oxidizer during the performance test and
either reduced the temperature or shut off the oxidizer, as specified
in item 13 of Table 4 of the proposed rule, you could likewise reduce
the temperature of the oxidizer during other process cycles. That is,
from the start of the cycle until 3 hours after the process unit
reaches peak temperature, you would have to maintain the hourly
combustion chamber temperature established during the performance test
for the corresponding period. If you were able to shut off the oxidizer
after this 3-hour period during the performance test, you could
likewise shut off the oxidizer for the remainder of the process cycle
following this 3-hour period after peak temperature is reached,
regardless of the cycle duration. For affected batch process sources
that are controlled with a catalytic oxidizer, the requirements would
be the same as described in the previous paragraph for thermal
oxidizers, except that you would have to maintain the temperature at
the inlet of the catalyst bed at or above the corresponding
temperature, minus 16 deg.C (25 deg.F), established during the
performance test. For any affected source controlled with a catalytic
oxidizer, you would also be required to maintain the catalyst according
to manufacturer's specifications.
To document compliance with these operating limits for thermal or
catalytic oxidizers, you would be required to measure and record the
specified average hourly temperatures. You would also be required to
report any average hourly control device operating temperature below
the corresponding temperature measured during the most recent
performance test minus 14 deg.C (25 deg.F). In such cases, you would be
required to promptly initiate and complete corrective actions in
accordance with your OM&M plan following an hourly average control
device operating temperature that is below the corresponding minimum
temperature established during the performance test minus 14 deg.C
(25 deg.F).
If you control emissions from an affected curing oven, shape dryer,
kiln, defumer, coking oven, shape preheater, or pitch working tank
using process modifications or an add-on control device other than a
thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you would demonstrate continuous
compliance by operating a THC CEMS in accordance with Procedure 1 of 40
CFR part 60, appendix F.
2. New Clay Refractory Kilns
For new clay refractory kilns that are controlled with a DIFF or
DLS/FF, you would have to continuously maintain the 3-hour block
average temperature at the fabric filter inlet at or below the average
temperature, plus 14 deg.C (25 deg.F), established during your
performance test. You would have to maintain free-flowing lime in the
feed hopper or silo at all times. You can verify that lime is free-
flowing by a visual check or by means of the output of a load cell,
carrier gas/lime flow indicator, carrier gas pressure drop measurement
system, or other system. If the lime is found not to be free-flowing,
you would have to promptly initiate and complete corrective actions.
You would also have to maintain the lime feeder setting at or above the
level established during your performance test and record the feeder
setting once each day. You would have to initiate corrective action
within 1 hour of a bag leak detection system alarm and complete
corrective actions according to your OM&M plan. You would also have to
operate and maintain the fabric filter such that the alarm is not
engaged for more than 5 percent of the total operating time in any 6-
month reporting period. In calculating this operating time fraction, if
inspection of the fabric filter demonstrates that no corrective action
is required, no alarm time would be counted. If corrective action is
required, each alarm would be counted as a minimum of 1 hour, and if
you take longer than 1 hour to initiate corrective action, the alarm
time would be counted as the actual amount of time taken to initiate
corrective action.
Additionally, for a DLS/FF, you would have to continuously maintain
the 3-hour block average water injection rate at or above the minimum
value established during your performance test. For kilns that are
controlled with a wet scrubber, you would have to continuously maintain
the 3-hour block average scrubber pressure drop, scrubber liquid pH,
scrubber liquid flow rate, and chemical addition rate (if applicable)
at or above the minimum values established during your performance
test.
Finally, you would be required to record the uncalcined clay
processing rate for all affected kilns. For continuous kilns, the
uncalcined clay processing rate would be recorded in units of mass per
unit time (e.g., pounds of uncalcined clay per hour). For batch process
kilns, you would record the uncalcined clay processing rate in units of
mass per batch cycle (e.g., pounds of uncalcined clay per batch).
J. What Are the Continuous Compliance Requirements for Sources Subject
to a Work Practice Standard?
If you have an affected existing shape preheater, an existing pitch
working tank, or a new pitch working tank, you would be required to
perform the appropriate work practice and document that you are
complying with the work practice standard in your Notification of
Compliance Status, as required by 40 CFR 63.9 of the General
Provisions. For affected shape preheaters, you would have three work
practice options: mechanically remove pitch from the basket or
container surfaces, subject the baskets or containers to a thermal
process cycle, or capture and duct emissions from the shape preheater
to a control device. The control device would have to be the same
device that controls emissions from an affected defumer or coking oven,
or a device that is comparable to the control device used for
controlling emissions from an affected defumer or coking oven. That
control device also would have to meet the applicable emission limits
for thermal process sources of organic HAP.
For affected pitch working tanks, you would have to capture and
duct emissions from the affected storage tank to a control device that
controls an affected defumer or coking oven, or is comparable to the
control device used for controlling emissions from an affected defumer
or coking oven. If you choose to exhaust emissions from either a shape
preheater or working tank to a control device other than those used to
[[Page 42119]]
control defumer or coking oven emissions, you must satisfy for those
control devices the same monitoring requirements and operating limits
as for affected defumer and coking oven control devices.
For affected new or existing chromium refractory products kilns and
for existing clay refractory products kilns, you would have to use
natural gas, or equivalent, as the kiln fuel and document the type of
fuel used.
K. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
Requirements?
If you have an affected refractory products manufacturing source,
you would be required to submit initial notifications, notifications of
performance tests, and notifications of compliance status by the
specified dates in the proposed rule, which may vary depending on
whether the affected source is new or existing. In addition to the
information specified in 40 CFR 63.9(h)(2)(i) of the General
Provisions, you would also be required to include the following in your
Notification of Compliance Status: (1) The operating limit parameter
values established for each affected source (with supporting
documentation) and a description of the procedure used to establish the
values; (2) design information and analysis (with supporting
documentation) demonstrating conformance with requirements for capture
and collection systems; (3) your OM&M plan; (4) your SSMP; and (5)
descriptions of the methods you use to comply with any applicable work
practice standards.
You would have to submit semiannual compliance reports containing
statements and information concerning emission limitation deviations,
out of control CPMS, and periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction
(SSM) when actions consistent with the approved SSMP were taken. If
there were no deviations from the emission limits, operating limits, or
work practice standards during the reporting period, you would only be
required to include a statement in your semiannual compliance report
that there were no deviations. If there were deviations from the
emission limits, operating limits, or work practice standards during a
reporting period, you would be required to submit the information
required in today's proposed rule in your semiannual compliance report.
If you have any SSM's during the reporting period, and you take actions
consistent with your SSMP, your compliance report would have to include
the information specified in 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5)(i). In addition, if you
undertake an action that is inconsistent with your approved SSMP, you
would then be required to submit an SSM report within 2 working days of
starting such action and within 7 working days of ending such action.
For all affected sources, you would have to maintain records for at
least 5 years from the date on which the data are recorded. You would
have to keep the records onsite for at least the first 2 years, but
could store the records offsite for the remaining 3 years. You would be
required to keep a copy of each notification and report along with
supporting documentation. You would also be required to keep records
related to the following: (1) Records of SSM; (2) records of
performance tests; (3) records used in the development of any emissions
profile; (4) records to show continuous compliance with each emission
limitation and work practice standard that applies to you; (5) records
of each operating limit deviation, including a description of the cause
of the deviation and the corrective action taken; (6) records of
production rate and organic HAP processing rate, if applicable; (7)
records for any approved alternative monitoring or test procedures; (8)
records for each CPMS; and (9) current copies of your SSMP and OM&M
plan, including any revisions, with records documenting conformance.
The records for CPMS would include records of the applicable operating
limits and monitoring data required in today's proposed rule to
demonstrate continuous compliance.
III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards
A. How Did We Select the Source Category and Any Subcategories?
Section 112(d)(1) of the CAA allows EPA to distinguish among
classes, types, and sizes of sources within a category or subcategory
in establishing emission standards. Section 112(d)(1) allows us to
define subsets of similar emission sources within a source category if
differences in emission characteristics, processes, control device use,
or opportunities for pollution prevention exist within the source
category. As a result of our analyses of data on process and emission
characteristics, we identified four subcategories of the Refractory
Products Manufacturing source category: the manufacture of refractory
products that are made using an organic HAP compound, pitch-impregnated
refractory products manufacturing, chromium refractory products
manufacturing, and clay refractory products manufacturing. We
distinguished between these subcategories because either the HAP
emissions or the affected sources differ significantly among them.
The subcategory that encompasses the production of refractories
that use organic HAP includes resin-bonded refractory curing ovens and
kilns and pitch-bonded refractory curing ovens and kilns. A few
facilities use organic HAP other than resins and pitch as binders or
additives; the shape dryers and kilns used to process refractories that
contain those binders and additives would also be included in this
subcategory. The shape dryers and curing ovens that are included in
this subcategory are similar with respect to function, operating
temperature, and processing time. Likewise, the kilns that are included
in this subcategory are similar in terms of design and operation.
Although the HAP emitted from these sources may differ, the sources all
emit organic HAP which typically are controlled using the same types of
control devices: thermal and catalytic oxidizers. For these reasons, we
concluded that there is justification to cover these thermal process
sources in a single subcategory. For the purposes of establishing MACT
floors, we classified the affected sources within this subcategory into
two groups: shape dryers and curing ovens are covered in one group, and
kilns comprise the other group of affected sources in this subcategory.
The affected sources that are included under the subcategory for
pitch-impregnated refractory production include shape preheaters,
defumers, coking ovens, and the pitch working tanks used for temporary
storage of pitch during the impregnation and defuming processes. These
sources emit organic HAP (specifically, POM) and are controlled with
thermal and catalytic oxidizers. Pitch-impregnated refractory sources
differ in design and operation from the thermal process sources used
for manufacturing resin-bonded, pitch-bonded, and other refractory
products covered by the previous subcategory. Therefore, we concluded
that a separate subcategory is warranted for pitch-impregnated
refractory sources.
The raw materials used for producing chromium refractory products
include chromium in one of two forms: chromium oxide or chromite.
Chromium oxide is a processed compound that is relatively pure and
contains chromium in the trivalent form. Chromite is naturally
occurring chromium ore and contains up to approximately 60 percent
chromium oxide. Because chromium refractory kilns emit chromium
compounds and chromium refractory products are not
[[Page 42120]]
made using organic HAP compounds, we decided to establish a separate
subcategory for chromium refractory kilns.
For clay refractory production, the primary HAP source is the kiln.
Clay refractory kilns do not differ significantly in design from the
kilns used to produce resin-bonded and pitch-bonded refractory
products. However, organic binders and additives typically are not used
in the production of clay refractories. The primary HAP emitted by clay
refractory kilns are HF and HCl. In addition, devices that are
effective in controlling HF and HCl emissions would not be used to
control organic HAP emissions. Therefore, clay refractory kilns
comprise a separate subcategory under the proposed rule for refractory
products manufacturing.
Several refractory products plants produce nonclay refractories
that do not contain organic HAP. For these plants, and plants that
produce only monolithics, HAP emissions consist of small amounts of HAP
metals that are released from raw material processing operations. These
facilities are all area sources that emit much less than 10 tons/yr of
any single HAP and 25 tons/yr of total HAP, and the HAP sources at
these plants generally are well controlled. Because the Refractory
Products Manufacturing source category was listed for major sources and
not for area sources, we decided against including these facilities
within the scope of the proposed rule.
We considered regulating sources of fine mineral fibers associated
with the production of RCF. However, we determined that none of the
existing RCF manufacturing facilities are major sources, and it is
unlikely that any new sources would be constructed that would be major
sources of HAP. The RCF industry is not expected to grow significantly,
and, if new sources were constructed, they most likely would be well
controlled because it would not be economical to allow RCF product to
be emitted in any significant quantities.
We also considered regulating fused-cast refractory products
manufacturing sources. However, we decided against regulating these
facilities. There are only two fused-cast refractory facilities
currently operating, and both are well controlled. Emissions of HAP
from these facilities are much less than 10 tons/yr for any single HAP
and 25 tons/yr of total HAP, and no new facilities or growth is
expected in this sector of the refractories industry.
B. How Did We Select the Emission Sources To Be Regulated?
The primary sources of HAP emissions at most refractory products
manufacturing plants are the thermal process units. Thermal process
units emit the organic constituents of the raw materials, binders, and
additives that comprise refractory product formulations. Several of the
organic constituents of binders and additives used in the refractory
industry are HAP. Many resins contain phenol and formaldehyde, and some
resins also contain methanol and ethylene glycol. The available test
data for resin-bonded refractory sources indicate that approximately 15
percent of the free phenol, 40 percent of the formaldehyde, 100 percent
of the methanol, and 14 percent of the ethylene glycol contained in the
resin are emitted from thermal process sources. Based on these
percentages, we estimate that several existing facilities that use
organic binders and additives to produce refractory products are
potential major sources for at least one of these organic HAP. For this
reason, we decided that regulation of organic HAP from existing and new
shape dryers, curing ovens, and kilns is warranted.
Coal tar and petroleum pitch used in the production of pitch-bonded
and pitch-impregnated refractory products consist of POM. The available
emission data on pitch-impregnated refractory production indicate that
40 to 45 percent of the pitch is volatilized and emitted from thermal
process units. Based on these data, several facilities that produce
pitch-impregnated or pitch-bonded refractory products are potential
major sources of POM emissions. For this reason, we decided that it is
necessary to regulate existing and new pitch-bonded and pitch-
impregnated refractory products thermal process units, the sources of
POM emissions.
The source category Chromium Refractories Production was included
on the initial source category list based on an Agency screening study
conducted in 1985. As part of that study, tests were performed on a
chromium refractory kiln. At the temperature encountered in the kiln
(1540 deg.C (2800 deg.F)), hexavalent chromium, which is a known human
carcinogen, was formed and emitted to the atmosphere as PM. The 1985
study recommended that fabric filters (baghouses) be installed on kilns
used to fire chromium refractories to capture the PM emissions from the
kiln outlets at the ten plants that produced chromium refractories at
that time. Currently, one major source in the refractory products
source category produces chromium refractory products.
At the temperatures encountered in clay refractory kilns, naturally
occurring fluorides and chlorides found in raw clays are released to
the atmosphere as HF and HCl. We estimate that some existing clay
refractory manufacturing facilities are major sources due to HF
emissions from their kilns, and at least one of those facilities could
also be a major source of HCl due to kiln emissions. Because kilns are
the only clay refractory products sources that emit HF and HCl and are
located at major source facilities, we decided to limit the scope of
the proposed rule to kilns for the clay refractory products
subcategory.
C. How Did We Define the Affected Sources?
Affected source means the collection of equipment and processes in
the source category or subcategory to which the emission limitations
and other regulatory requirements apply. The affected source may be the
same collection of equipment and processes as the source category or it
may be a subset of the source category. For each rule, we must decide
which individual pieces of equipment and processes warrant separate
standards in the context of the CAA section 112 requirements and the
industry operating practices.
Most refractory products manufacturing facilities are characterized
by numerous diverse and complex operations. Many of the process units
at typical refractories plants are not sources of HAP emissions. For
this reason, rather than define the affected sources as the plants
themselves, we decided to define the affected sources in terms of the
specific process units that emit HAP and are associated with the
production of specific types of refractory products. These product
types include resin-bonded, pitch-bonded, and other refractory products
that use organic HAP; pitch-impregnated refractory products; chromium
refractory products; and clay refractory products. The affected
sources, which are listed in Table 2 of this preamble, include shape
dryers and curing ovens, kilns, shape preheaters, pitch working tanks,
defumers, and coking ovens.
[[Page 42121]]
D. How Did We Determine the Proposed Standards for Existing Sources?
1. How Did We Determine the MACT Floor for Existing Sources?
Section 112(d)(3) of the CAA specifies that each MACT standard be
at least as stringent as the floor for the sources in the relevant
source category or subcategory. It further specifies that we set
standards for existing sources that are no less stringent than the
average emission limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent
of existing sources (for which the Administrator has emissions
information) where there are 30 or more sources in the category or
subcategory. For source categories with less than 30 sources, the CAA
requires that the floor be based on the average emission limitation
achieved by the best-performing five sources. Our interpretation of the
``average emission limitation'' is that it is a measure of central
tendency, such as the arithmetic average or the mean. If the median is
used when there are at least 30 sources, then the emission level
achievable by the source and its control device that is at the bottom
of the top 6 percent of the best-performing sources (i.e., the 94th
percentile) represents the MACT floor control level. For source
categories or subcategories with less than 30 sources, we interpret the
MACT floor level to correspond to the median of the best-performing
five sources. Finally, in determining the pool of sources from which
the floors are determined, we consider only those facilities that are
major HAP sources or synthetic area HAP sources (i.e., those that would
be major HAP sources in the absence of any emission controls currently
in place). The MACT floors for each subcategory identified during
development of the proposed rule are based on these interpretations.
The affected existing thermal process units that emit organic HAP
include shape dryers, curing ovens, kilns, coking ovens, defumers,
shape preheaters, and pitch working tanks. To rank these sources in
terms of their performance in controlling organic HAP emissions, we
needed uncontrolled and controlled emissions data for each source type.
Because of the limited emissions data available for organic HAP
sources, it is not possible to rank the sources based on actual
emissions reductions. An alternative approach to using actual emissions
data is to rank sources based on the likely performance level of the
control devices in place. The MACT floor technology can then be
selected as the control device(s) matching the 94th percentile unit, or
for subcategories with less than 30 sources, the median of the best-
performing five sources. We used this approach to determine the MACT
floors for organic HAP emissions from thermal process units.
Among the refractory products thermal process sources that are
currently controlled for organic emissions, the majority are controlled
with thermal oxidizers. The other controlled sources are equipped with
catalytic oxidizers. Thermal oxidizer performance levels are largely a
function of three parameters: combustion chamber temperature, residence
time of the gases in the combustion chamber, and the degree of mixing
of the gases in the combustion chamber. Therefore, performance level
rankings should take these parameters into consideration. Based on the
available design and operating data, we were unable to evaluate the
subject thermal oxidizers in terms of their degree of mixing.
Therefore, we based our rankings of thermal oxidizers on combustion
chamber temperature and residence time only, using the Arrhenius
equation, which relates the amount of an organic compound remaining
after combustion for a specific period of time at a specified
temperature.
We were not able to compare quantitatively the performance of
catalytic oxidizers to that of thermal oxidizers. The Arrhenius
equation does not apply to catalytic oxidizers and we were not able to
identify a comparable method for evaluating catalytic oxidizer
performance based on design. Catalytic oxidizer performance is largely
a function of the space velocity and the temperatures at the inlet and
outlet of the catalyst bed. Space velocity is the reciprocal of the
residence time in the catalyst bed and is defined as the flow rate of
the gas entering the catalyst bed divided by the volume of the catalyst
bed. For the catalytic oxidizers currently in operation at refractory
products manufacturing plants, we were able to obtain data on catalyst
bed inlet and outlet temperatures, but could not obtain space velocity
data. For these reasons, our ranking of catalytic oxidizers for today's
proposed rule is largely qualitative.
Before ranking sources according to control technology, we also
differentiated between the various types of thermal process sources
that would be affected by today's proposed rule. We grouped shape
dryers and curing ovens because they are similar in terms of function,
design, and operating parameters. The initial thermal processing step
in the production of refractory shapes is drying or curing. Shape
dryers and curing ovens, which are used to form temporary bonds between
refractory body material grains, typically operate between 90 deg. and
260 deg.C (200 deg. and 500 deg.F). Although there are large variations
among plants, cycle times for shape dryers and curing ovens generally
are in the range of 5 to 20 hours. Based on the data submitted to us in
1998 in response to our information collection requests sent to
refractory products manufacturers, there are a total of 35 shape dryers
and curing ovens that are used to produce resin-bonded, pitch-bonded,
or other refractory products that use organic HAP; and are located at
facilities that are major or synthetic area sources of organic HAP.
Emissions from 21 of the shape dryers and curing ovens are controlled:
16 are controlled with thermal oxidizers, and 5 are controlled with
catalytic oxidizers. The median of the best-performing 12 percent of
these sources (i.e., the 94th percentile) is controlled with a thermal
oxidizer that is designed for a 0.64-second residence time at 815 deg.C
(1500 deg.F). Therefore, this control device represents the MACT floor
for existing shape dryers and curing ovens.
Data from the wood products industry indicate that the performance
of catalytic oxidizers with catalyst bed outlet temperatures of
430 deg. to 480 deg.C (800 deg. to 900 deg.F) is comparable to the
performance of thermal oxidizers designed for a residence time of
approximately 0.5 seconds and combustion chamber temperatures of
820 deg. to 870 deg.C (1500 deg. to 1600 deg.F). Two of the five
catalytic oxidizers used in the refractory products industry to control
curing oven emissions operate with catalyst bed outlet temperatures of
approximately 450 deg.C (850 deg.). Therefore, we concluded that these
two controls are comparable to the MACT floor control level for shape
dryers and curing ovens. We concluded that the other three catalytic
oxidizers, which operate with bed outlet temperatures of approximately
370 deg.C (700 deg.F), are much less effective in controlling organic
emissions than the MACT floor level of control for this group of
sources.
Following the drying or curing, refractory shapes typically are
fired in kilns, which operate at peak temperatures in the range of
1090 deg. to 1540 deg.C (2000 deg. to 2800 deg.F). We estimated that
there are 26 kilns that are used to produce resin-bonded, pitch-bonded,
or other refractory products that contain organic HAP and are located
at facilities that are major or synthetic area sources of organic HAP.
Nine of these kilns are controlled, all with thermal oxidizers. Because
there are less than 30 sources in this group, the MACT floor for this
[[Page 42122]]
group of sources corresponds to the median of the best-performing five
sources, which is a kiln controlled with a thermal oxidizer designed
for a 0.41-second residence time at 760 deg.C (1400 deg.F).
In the pitch-impregnated refractory process, fired refractory
shapes initially are heated in a shape preheater, which typically
operates at temperatures of 150 deg. to 260 deg.C (300 deg. to
500 deg.F). Of the seven shape preheaters located at four pitch-
impregnated refractory manufacturing facilities that are major or
synthetic area sources of organic HAP, two are controlled with thermal
oxidizers and the other five are not equipped with add-on controls. All
four of the facilities periodically clean the deposits of pitch on the
holding baskets or containers by abrasive blasting. Cleaning is done on
an as-needed basis, but a typical cleaning frequency is once every ten
cycles. Of the two controlled preheaters, both are ducted to the
thermal oxidizers that are used to control defumer emissions. The MACT
floor for this group of sources is based on the median of the best-
performing five sources, which corresponds to periodic basket/container
cleaning (i.e., every ten cycles).
As the shapes are heated in the shape preheater, pitch is
transferred to a pitch working tank, which heats the pitch to between
150 deg. and 260 deg.C (300 deg. and 500 deg.F) prior to the pitch
being transferred to the autoclave. There are a total of four pitch
working tanks that are located at facilities that produce pitch-
impregnated refractories and are major or synthetic area sources of
organic HAP. One of these working tanks is uncontrolled. The other
three pitch working tanks are ducted to thermal oxidizers that are used
to control defumer emissions. The thermal oxidizers operate only during
the impregnation-defuming process. As a result, the oxidizers provide
periodic, rather than continuous, control of working tank emissions.
Because there are less than 30 existing sources in this group, the MACT
floor control for existing pitch working tanks is based on the median
of the best-controlled five sources, which corresponds to periodic
control of tank emissions by means of a thermal oxidizer.
After the shapes are impregnated with pitch, they are defumed.
Defuming takes place either in the autoclave or in a separate defumer.
If the defuming step occurs in the autoclave, the autoclave serves as
the defumer. There are five defumers located at facilities that are
major or synthetic area sources of organic HAP; four are controlled
with thermal oxidizers, and one is controlled with a catalytic
oxidizer. The MACT floor for these sources corresponds to the median of
the best-performing five sources, which a defumer controlled with a
thermal oxidizer that is designed for a 0.52-second residence time at
790 deg.C (1450 deg.F). Based on the data from the wood products
industry, which was discussed previously in this preamble, we concluded
that the catalytic unit, which is designed for a catalyst bed outlet
temperature 450 deg.C (845 deg.F) would be comparable to the floor
level of control for existing defumers.
After defuming, the impregnated shapes may undergo an additional
process referred to as coking. In the coking process, the shapes are
placed in a coking oven and heated to between 540 deg. and 870 deg.C
(1000 deg. and 1600 deg.F) under reducing conditions to drive off the
volatile constituents (i.e., POM) of the pitch. Our data indicate that
there are six coking ovens located at facilities that are major or
synthetic area sources of organic HAP. All six of the coking ovens are
controlled with thermal oxidizers. Because there are less than 30
existing sources, the MACT floor for these sources corresponds to the
median of the best-performing five sources, which is a coking oven
controlled with a thermal oxidizer that is designed for a 1.0-second
residence time at 915 deg.C (1680 deg.F).
The HAP emitted from chromium refractory products kilns include
hexavalent chromium, other chromium compounds, and other nonvolatile
HAP metals. Because these HAP are emitted in the form of PM, we
considered establishing an emission standard in the format of a PM
emission limit. However, none of the 32 chromium refractory products
kilns currently in operation are equipped with add-on APCD that have
been demonstrated to reduce HAP metal emissions that occur in the
particulate form. Hence, considering only add-on APCD, the MACT floor,
as defined in section 112 of the Clean Air Act, for existing chromium
refractory kilns would not reduce emissions of chromium or other
nonvolatile HAP metals.
In addition to add-on APCD, we considered other possible MACT
floors for existing chromium refractory products kilns, such as the use
of low-HAP raw materials or fuels, that would reduce emissions of
chromium or other nonvolatile HAP metals.
Emissions of chromium and other nonvolatile HAP metals from kilns
can originate with the raw materials and the kiln fuel. Consequently,
we considered nonchromium raw materials as a potential MACT floor for
chromium refractory kilns. Chromium greatly enhances the ability of
refractory linings to withstand high temperatures and corrosive
environments; where those conditions exist, there is no reliable raw
material substitute for chromium. Therefore, we concluded that there
are no substitutes for chromium oxide or chromite in chromium
refractory products, and raw material substitution is not a feasible
component of the MACT floor for existing chromium refractory products
kilns.
We considered the use of low-HAP fuels as the basis for a MACT
floor standard for existing chromium refractory products kilns. With
the exception of natural gas, the fuels that are commonly used to fire
industrial kilns and furnaces (e.g., fuel oil and coal) contain HAP
metals, which are subsequently emitted when those fuels are burned.
Because fuels can contribute to emissions of chromium and other HAP
metals from kilns, a MACT floor for existing chromium refractory
products kilns could be based on fuel type. Although a few area source
refractory manufacturing plants use fuel oil in kilns, our data
indicate that all of the six facilities that produce fired chromium
refractories, including the one major source in our source category
that produces chromium refractory products, use natural gas to fuel the
kilns that fire chromium refractories. Because natural gas does not
contain HAP metals and, therefore, does not contribute to HAP metal
emissions, the use of natural gas or other equivalent clean fuel is a
feasible MACT floor for existing chromium refractory products kilns.
Having eliminated add-on APCD and raw material substitution as options
for a MACT floor for this subcategory, we concluded that the use of
natural gas or other such clean fuel is the MACT floor for existing
chromium refractory kilns. Under an emission limitation (in this case,
a work practice standard) based on this floor, you would not be
permitted to fire existing chromium refractory products kilns with
coal, fuel oil, waste oil, or other fuels that contain HAP metals.
For clay refractory products kilns, the HAP to be regulated are HF
and HCl. There are a total of 100 clay refractory products kilns, six
of which are located at facilities that are major or synthetic area
sources. However, none of these clay refractory kilns are equipped with
add-on APCD that have been demonstrated to reduce emissions of HF or
HCl. Therefore, considering only add-on APCD, the MACT floor for
existing clay refractory kilns would not reduce emissions of HF or HCl.
In addition to add-on APCD, we considered other possible MACT floors
for existing clay
[[Page 42123]]
refractory products kilns, such as the use of low-HAP raw materials or
fuels, that would reduce emissions of HF or HCl. Because HF and HCl
emissions from clay refractory kilns are largely a function of the
primary raw material (i.e., fire clay), we considered raw material
substitution with fire clays that have low concentrations of fluorides
and chlorides as a possible floor for existing clay refractory kilns.
The available data indicate that the fluoride and chloride contents of
many clays can vary significantly, even within the same deposit. There
are no available data that indicate that any of the fire clay deposits
that are used by major and synthetic area source facilities are
uniformly low in fluorides and chlorides. Furthermore, the procurement
of low-fluoride or low-chloride clays as a measure for controlling
emissions is not practiced in the refractory products industry.
We also considered pre-calcined clay as a possible floor for clay
refractory kilns. Calcining of fire clay prior to incorporating the
clay into a refractory shape drives off the HF and HCl that otherwise
would be emitted from a kiln when firing clay refractory products.
However, none of the 25 facilities that produce fired clay refractories
currently use pre-calcined clay for clay refractory production as a
means of reducing emissions of HF or HCl. Therefore, substitution of
raw clay with calcined clay cannot be considered the MACT floor
technology for existing clay refractory products manufacturers.
Therefore, we concluded that raw material substitution is not a
feasible MACT floor for existing clay refractory products kilns.
We also considered the use of low-HAP fuels as the basis for a MACT
floor standard for existing clay refractory products kilns. Certain
fuels, waste-derived fuels in particular, may contribute to emissions
of HF or HCl when burned. In addition, the fuels that are commonly used
to fire some industrial kilns and furnaces (e.g., fuel oil and coal)
contain HAP metals, which are subsequently emitted when those fuels are
burned. Because fuels can contribute to HAP emissions from kilns, a
MACT floor for existing clay refractory products kilns could be based
on fuel type. Although a few area source facilities use fuel oil to
fire their refractory kilns, our data indicate that all clay refractory
products manufacturers use natural gas to fuel the kilns that fire clay
refractories. Because natural gas does not contribute to emissions of
HF, HCl, or HAP metals, the use of natural gas, or other equivalent
clean fuel, is a feasible MACT floor for existing clay refractory
products kilns. Having eliminated add-on APCD and raw material
substitution as options for a MACT floor for this subcategory, we
concluded that the use of natural gas or other such clean fuel is the
MACT floor for existing clay refractory kilns. An emission limitation
(in this case, a work practice standard) based on this floor would
prohibit the use of coal, fuel oil, waste oil, or equivalent fuels to
fire existing clay refractory products kilns.
2. How Did We Select the Emission Limits for Existing Sources?
Section 112(d)(3) of the CAA specifies that each MACT standard be
at least as stringent as the floor for the sources in the relevant
source category or subcategory. Consequently, the MACT floor represents
the minimum level of control that can be used in establishing emission
limits for existing sources subject to NESHAP. After identifying the
emission limits that correspond to the MACT floors for existing
sources, we consider regulatory alternatives that are more stringent
than the MACT floor levels. Regulatory alternatives are emission
control options, process changes, and other methods for reducing HAP
emissions other than those defined by the MACT floor. The selected
regulatory alternative may be more stringent than the MACT floor, but
the control level must be achievable and reasonable in the
Administrator's judgement considering cost, non-air quality health and
environmental impacts, and energy requirements. The objective in
considering these beyond-the-floor control options is to achieve the
maximum degree of emissions reductions without imposing unreasonable
impacts (section 112(d)(2)of the CAA).
Today's proposed rule would establish emission limits for organic
HAP emitted from affected existing thermal process sources. These
emission limits would apply to the following affected sources: shape
dryers, curing ovens and kilns used to produce refractory products that
contain organic HAP, and pitch-impregnated refractory products defumers
and coking ovens. The emission limits would be presented in two
alternate formats: a THC emission concentration and combustion
efficiency of certain types of add-on control devices.
Today's proposed rule would establish a THC emission limit as a
surrogate for organic HAP emitted from affected thermal process
sources. Affected thermal process sources include shape dryers, curing
ovens, and kilns that are used to produce resin-bonded or pitch-bonded
refractory products; coking ovens and defumers that are used to produce
pitch-impregnated refractory products; and other shape dryers and kilns
that process refractory shapes that use organic HAP that is emitted
during the drying or firing processes.
To determine an appropriate THC concentration limit for refractory
products thermal process sources that are controlled at the MACT floor
level, we reviewed the available emission test data for the refractory
products manufacturing industry. Although we have no THC data on
sources controlled at the MACT floor control levels, we have data on
two sources with thermal oxidizers that we estimate are more effective
in controlling organic emissions than the MACT floor level, and four
sources with thermal oxidizers that we estimate are less effective in
controlling organic emissions than the MACT floor level. Both of the
sources with controls that are more effective than the MACT floor level
easily achieved THC emission concentrations of less than 20 ppmvd,
corrected to 18 percent O2. In addition, one of the four
sources with controls that are less effective than the floor level
achieved a THC emission concentration of less than 20 ppmvd. The THC
emission concentrations for the remaining three sources were at least
30 ppmvd. Based on these data, we concluded that a THC emission limit
of 20 ppmvd is appropriate and representative of the emission level
that the MACT floor controls can achieve. This emission limit also is
consistent with other NESHAP and new source performance standards
(NSPS) for industries that commonly use thermal or catalytic oxidizers
for control of organic HAP emissions. Examples include 40 CFR part 60,
subparts DDD, III, and NNN; and 40 CFR part 63, subparts DD, YY, GGG,
HHH, JJJ, MMM, and PPP.
We reviewed the available emission test data to determine if it
were possible to establish a THC emission concentration limit that
would be more stringent than the MACT floor for existing shape dryers,
curing ovens, kilns, defumers, and coking ovens. However, the available
data indicate that there are no other control devices in use that would
perform better than the MACT floor level thermal oxidizers for these
sources. We also considered establishing an emission limit based on the
estimated level of control that would be achieved by thermal oxidizers
that operate at higher temperatures and/or longer residence time than
do the MACT floor level thermal oxidizers. However, we concluded that
the
[[Page 42124]]
available data do not show that these thermal oxidizers would achieve
better control of organic HAP than do the MACT floor level thermal
oxidizers. Therefore, we decided against establishing a THC emission
concentration limit that was more stringent than the MACT floor level
of control for existing shape dryers, curing ovens, kilns, defumers,
and coking ovens.
Combustion efficiency of a thermal oxidizer is a function of the
concentrations of CO2, CO, and THC in the exhaust stream of
the oxidizer. To establish a combustion efficiency standard for thermal
process sources, we reviewed the available data for CO2, CO,
and THC emissions from sources controlled with thermal oxidizers that
are comparable to the MACT floor technology. In addition to data from
refractory products thermal process sources, data from another industry
(asphalt roofing) were used to supplement the refractory products data.
We believe that using data on asphalt roofing sources is valid because
the exhaust stream characteristics and emission controls for the
asphalt roofing sources are similar to those found in the refractory
products industry.
The data on CO2 emissions indicate that exhaust gas
concentrations of CO2, corrected to 18 percent
O2, for refractory products sources that are controlled to
the MACT floor level typically are between 1.7 and 2.0 percent. The
data on CO emissions indicate that thermal oxidizer outlet
concentrations of 10 to 20 ppmvd are representative of CO
concentrations from sources in the refractory products manufacturing
industry with MACT floor level controls. The data on THC emissions
indicate that thermal oxidizer outlet concentrations of 10 to 20 ppmvd
are representative of THC concentrations from sources in the refractory
products manufacturing industry with MACT floor level controls.
Using the value of 1.7 percent CO2, and the midpoint
values for 10 to 20 ppmvd CO and 10 to 20 ppmvd THC, we calculated the
combustion efficiency to be 99.8 percent. On this basis, we believe
that a combustion efficiency limit of 99.8 percent is achievable for
refractory products thermal process sources that operate combustion-
based controls that are comparable to the MACT floor level of control.
Our analysis of the available data indicates that a combustion
efficiency of 99.8 percent is currently achieved by thermal process
sources in the refractory products industry that are controlled to the
level of the MACT floor. Data from asphalt roofing industry also
demonstrate that sources with emission controls comparable to the MACT
floor controls for the refractory products industry achieve a 99.8
percent combustion efficiency. With a combustion efficiency limit,
affected sources in the refractory products industry that are
controlled with thermal oxidizers that operate below the floor level of
control would have the option of increasing thermal oxidizer operating
temperature in order to reduce CO and THC emissions, and thus increase
the combustion efficiency and avoid having to install new emission
controls.
A combustion efficiency limit of 99.8 percent may not be an
appropriate indicator of the floor level of organic emission control
for some sources because combustion efficiency is largely a function of
the CO2 concentration, and CO2 concentrations in
thermal oxidizer exhaust streams vary from source to source. These
variations can be attributed to differences in process operation, the
amounts of CO2 entering the thermal oxidizer from the
process exhaust stream, and the degree of combustion within the thermal
oxidizer. As the CO2 concentration increases, the
concentrations of CO and THC that correspond to a specified combustion
efficiency limit also increase. For example, at 2.0 percent
CO2, the sum of the THC and CO concentrations can be no more
than 40 ppmvd to achieve a combustion efficiency of 99.8 percent.
However, at 4.0 percent CO2, the source would meet 99.8
percent combustion efficiency even if the sum of the THC and CO
concentrations were 80 ppmvd. For this reason, we concluded that it was
necessary to restrict the use of the combustion efficiency limit for
sources with relatively high CO2 concentrations. To ensure
that owners and operators of affected sources who choose to comply with
this combustion efficiency limit are achieving good control, we decided
to establish an upper limit of 3.0 percent CO2 for affected
thermal process sources. In other words, demonstrating compliance with
the combustion efficiency limit is an option only for sources that have
exhaust gas CO2 concentrations equal to or less than 3.0
percent (corrected to 18 percent O2) at the outlet of the
control device (thermal or catalytic oxidizer). At 3.0 percent
CO2, the combined concentrations of CO and THC can be as
high as 60 ppmvd to achieve a combustion efficiency of 99.8 percent.
As CO2 concentrations decrease, it becomes increasingly
difficult to meet a specified combustion efficiency. For example, at
1.0 percent CO2, the sum of the THC and CO concentrations
can be no greater than 20 ppmvd to meet a combustion efficiency of 99.8
percent. From the perspective of organic HAP emissions control, low
CO2 concentrations do not present a problem because the
lower the concentration of CO2, the higher the control level
needed to comply with the 99.8 percent combustion efficiency limit. If
the CO2 concentration is so low that it cannot be achieved
with a control that is comparable to the MACT floor, the owner or
operator can choose to comply with the 20 ppmvd THC emission limit.
We reviewed the available emission test data to determine if it
were possible to establish a combustion efficiency limit that would be
more stringent than the MACT floor for existing shape dryers, curing
ovens, kilns, defumers, and coking ovens. However, the available data
indicate that there are no other control devices in use that would
perform better than the MACT floor level thermal oxidizers for these
sources. We also considered establishing an emission limit based on the
estimated level of control that would be achieved by thermal oxidizers
that operate at higher temperatures and/or longer residence time than
do the MACT floor level thermal oxidizers. However, we concluded that
the available data do not show that these thermal oxidizers would
achieve better control of organic HAP than do the MACT floor level
thermal oxidizers. Therefore, we decided against establishing a
combustion efficiency limit that was more stringent than the MACT floor
level of control for existing shape dryers, curing ovens, kilns,
defumers, and coking ovens.
The MACT floor for reducing emissions of chromium and other
nonvolatile HAP metals from existing chromium refractory products kilns
is the use of natural gas, or equivalent, as the kiln fuel.
We next considered beyond-the-floor options for establishing an
emission standard for existing chromium refractory kilns. Beyond-the-
floor options are those regulatory alternatives that would be more
stringent than the MACT floor for existing sources. Because no existing
chromium refractory kilns are equipped with APCD that would reduce
emissions of HAP metals, we considered two other source categories that
operate kilns that are similar in design and operation to refractory
products kilns: the ceramics manufacturing industry and the brick and
structural clay products manufacturing industry. Within the ceramics
manufacturing industry, no kilns are equipped with APCD that would be
effective in controlling HAP
[[Page 42125]]
metals. Within the brick and structural clay products industry, two
kilns are equipped with fabric filters. Fabric filters have been
demonstrated to be effective in controlling emissions of PM, including
HAP metals. Therefore, we considered fabric filter control as a
potential regulatory option for establishing an emission limit for
existing chromium refractory products kilns. Both of the fabric filters
used in the brick industry are installed on coal-fired kilns. The
fabric filters were installed specifically because the kilns are fired
with coal, which generally is associated with significantly higher
emissions of PM and HAP metals than would be associated with gas-fired
kilns. The PM emitted from a coal-fired kiln consists largely of fly
ash, which results from the burning of the coal. In the absence of this
fly ash component, PM concentrations from brick (or refractory) kilns
are very small and approach the limits that can be controlled by a
fabric filter. Coal-fired kilns are not used in the refractory products
industry due to contamination of the product with fly ash and the
difficulty in elevating coal-fired kilns to the temperatures needed to
fire refractory products properly. Furthermore, there are no natural
gas-fired brick kilns that are equipped with an APCD for controlling PM
emissions. Consequently, we concluded that coal-fired brick kilns are
not similar to chromium refractory products kilns, all of which are
natural gas-fired. Therefore, the fabric filter controls used on coal-
fired brick kilns are not a regulatory option for establishing an
emission limit for existing chromium refractory products kilns.
Because there are no existing chromium refractory products kilns or
similar sources that are equipped with an add-on APCD that would
control HAP metal emissions, we concluded that there are no beyond-the-
floor control options for existing chromium refractory kilns.
Therefore, today's proposed rule would not establish an emission limit
for existing chromium refractory products kilns. Instead, we are
requiring the use of natural gas fuel, or the equivalent, as a work
practice standard for chromium refractory products kilns.
As is the case for chromium refractory products kilns, the only
feasible MACT floor option for controlling emissions of HF and HCl from
existing clay refractory products kilns corresponds to the use of
natural gas, or the equivalent, as the kiln fuel. We could not
establish an emission limit for HF or HCl for this work practice based
on the available data.
We next considered beyond-the-floor options for establishing an
emission standard for existing clay refractory kilns. Because no
existing clay refractory kilns are equipped with APCD that would reduce
emissions of HF or HCl, we considered the options used for controlling
emissions of HF and HCl from kilns used in the ceramics and brick and
structural clay products manufacturing industries. Within the ceramics
manufacturing industry, no kilns are equipped with APCD that would be
effective in reducing emissions of HF or HCl. Within the brick and
structural clay products industry, several kilns are equipped APCD that
achieve good control of HF and HCl emissions. We considered
establishing a standard that would be more stringent than the MACT
floor for existing clay refractory products kilns, based on the use of
a DIFF, which is one of the most effective HF/HCl APCD currently in use
in the brick and structural clay products industry.
Based on our analyses, we concluded that establishing an emission
standard based on the emissions reductions that would be achievable
using a DIFF would not be reasonable at this time. Our analysis
included estimates of emission reductions that would be achieved by
this approach and the cost impacts on the affected facilities. Based on
our estimates, the capital costs of installing a DIFF on each of the
six existing clay refractory products kilns located at the three
facilities that produce clay refractories and are major sources of HAP
emissions total $5.5 million. The annualized control costs for these
facilities would be $2.2 million per year. Two of these facilities are
small businesses and would incur combined capital costs of $2.4 million
and combined annualized control costs of more than $1.0 million per
year. Based on the cost-to-sales ratios for this option, one of these
small businesses would incur significant adverse economic impacts, and
the other small business would incur substantial adverse economic
impacts. In terms of HAP removal, the annualized control costs overall
for the three facilities would total $34,100 per ton of HAP removed.
Based on these costs and impacts, we determined that the benefits of
installing DIFF on existing clay refractory products kilns do not
justify the cost at this time. Therefore, we are not requiring that
existing clay refractory kilns meet an emission limit more stringent
than the MACT floor level of control. Instead, we are requiring the use
of natural gas fuel, or equivalent, as a work practice standard for
clay refractory products kilns.
3. How Did We Select the Work Practice Standards?
Under section 112(h) of the CAA, we can establish work practice
standards for HAP sources if it is not feasible to establish numerical
emission limits for those sources. Emission standards are deemed not
feasible when emissions cannot be captured or conveyed to a control
device or when it is not practical to measure emissions due to
technological and economic limitations. Today's proposed rule would
establish work practice standards for four types of existing HAP
emission sources: Shape preheaters and pitch working tanks that are
used in the production of pitch-impregnated refractory products,
chromium refractory products kilns, and clay refractory products kilns.
Hazardous air pollutant emissions from shape preheaters result from
the volatilization of POM from the residual pitch on the baskets or
containers that are used to hold and transport shapes to and from the
autoclave, defumer, and, if applicable, coking oven. Facilities that
perform pitch impregnation periodically clean the residual pitch off of
these baskets or containers by abrasive blasting. A typical cleaning
frequency is once every ten cycles, and that practice is the MACT floor
control level for POM emissions from shape preheaters. If the facility
operates a coking oven, the holding baskets undergo the coking cycle,
which also cleans the baskets or containers by burning off any residual
pitch that would volatilize in the shape preheater. Emissions from
shape preheaters are likely to vary depending on the amount of residual
pitch present, which in turn depends on how many impregnation cycles
the baskets have undergone since the baskets were last cleaned. In any
case, emissions are likely to be very low and actually may not be
detectable in the exhaust stream due to the relatively small amounts of
pitch present on basket and container surfaces. For this reason, we
believe that it is not feasible to establish a numerical emission limit
for shape preheaters, and a work practice standard is appropriate for
this type of source.
In addition to coking and abrasive blasting, the other work
practice that is used by one facility to control POM emissions from
shape preheaters is to exhaust preheater emissions to the defumer
control device. We believe that either coking or exhausting emissions
to the defumer control device would be as effective as abrasive
blasting (the MACT floor control) in controlling POM emissions from
shape preheaters. On
[[Page 42126]]
this basis, we concluded that it would be reasonable and appropriate to
require affected facilities to implement at least one of these three
work practices to ensure that POM emissions from shape preheaters are
reduced.
We considered beyond-the-floor options for establishing an emission
standard for existing shape preheaters. We estimated the costs and
emissions reductions associated with controlling preheater emissions
with a thermal oxidizer. Based on our analyses, we concluded that
establishing an emission standard or work practice standard based on
the emissions reductions that would be achieved by controlling
preheater emissions with a thermal oxidizer would not be reasonable at
this time. Although two existing shape preheaters are controlled with a
thermal oxidizer that also controls emissions from a defumer, it
generally is not feasible to exhaust uncontrolled shape preheaters to
existing defumer controls. The exhaust flow rate from a typical
preheater is relatively high compared to defumer exhaust flow rates. As
a result, defumer controls generally are undersized for controlling
emissions from a defumer and a preheater. Therefore, we concluded that
controlling shape preheater emissions would require installing a new
thermal oxidizer. Our analysis included estimates of emission
reductions and the cost impacts that would result from this approach.
Based on our estimates, the annualized costs for this beyond-the-floor
approach for a typical shape preheater would be $59,000 per year. The
corresponding reductions in POM emissions would total 0.03 tons/yr (60
lb/yr). In terms of HAP removal, the annualized control costs for a
typical shape preheater would be $1.9 million per ton of HAP removed.
Based on these costs and impacts, we determined that the benefits of
this beyond-the-floor control option do not justify the cost at this
time. Therefore, we are not requiring affected facilities to control
HAP emissions from existing shape preheaters by exhausting preheater
emissions to a thermal oxidizer.
Emissions from pitch working tanks result primarily from the
displacement of POM from the working tanks as the tanks fill with pitch
and from the heating of the pitch in the working tanks, causing the
pitch to volatilize and be released as POM. Because pitch working tanks
empty and fill with each impregnation cycle, pitch working tank exhaust
flow is intermittent. In addition, exhaust flow rates from working
tanks are very low. For these reasons, it is not practical to measure
working tank emissions, and it is not feasible to establish a numerical
emission limit for working tanks. Therefore, we concluded that a work
practice standard is appropriate for this type of source.
As discussed previously, the MACT floor for existing pitch working
tanks is a work practice that entails exhausting working tank emissions
to the defumer thermal oxidizer. We believe that this practice is an
effective and appropriate method of controlling POM emissions from
working tanks. Consequently, we selected this work practice for
existing pitch working tanks.
We considered beyond-the-floor options for establishing a standard
for existing pitch working tanks. Defumer thermal oxidizers operate
only during impregnation and defuming cycles and do not necessarily
operate during all periods when the pitch working tank is in operation.
Therefore, as a beyond-the-floor control option for pitch working
tanks, we considered requiring affected facilities to use defumer
thermal oxidizers to control working tank emissions during all periods
when the working tank is operating. We estimated that this requirement
would result in operating a typical defumer thermal oxidizer for an
additional 2 hours per day. The estimated annualized cost of this
additional operating time for a defumer thermal oxidizer that operates
at the MACT floor level of control would be $7,900 per year, and the
corresponding reductions in POM emissions would be 0.005 tons/yr (9 lb/
yr) for a typical pitch working tank. In terms of HAP removal, the
annualized control costs for a typical pitch working tank would be $1.7
million per ton of HAP removed. Because the HAP emissions reductions
associated with this beyond-the-floor option would be so low (9 lb/yr),
we concluded that the benefits of this control option do not justify
the cost at this time. For these reasons, we decided against requiring
that the defumer APCD, which also controls working tank emissions, be
operated during all times when the pitch working tank is in operation.
We decided to require the use of natural gas as the kiln fuel
because that work practice is the basis for the MACT floor for existing
chromium and clay refractory products kilns. This work practice would
prevent the future use of kiln fuels that emit HAP metals, HF, or HCl.
In addition, this work practice would impose no additional costs on
existing facilities other than the costs associated with the initial
notification and recordkeeping requirements.
E. How Did We Select the Emission Limits for New Sources?
For new sources, the CAA requires MACT to be based on the degree of
emissions reduction achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar
source. Today's proposed rule would establish emission limits for new
thermal process sources that emit organic HAP and new clay refractory
kilns.
For the subcategories that include thermal process sources that use
organic HAP and pitch-impregnated refractory sources, thermal oxidizer
control is the MACT floor technology for both existing and new affected
thermal process sources or organic HAP. For each group of sources
covered by these two subcategories that would be subject to an emission
limit (i.e., shape dryers, curing ovens, kilns, defumers, coking ovens,
and shape preheaters), the best control is a thermal oxidizer that
operates at a higher temperature and longer residence time than does
the MACT floor level thermal oxidizer for existing sources. However,
when the performance of these best controls is compared to the
performance of the MACT floor controls, the Arrhenius equation, which
is the basis for the control device rankings, indicates that the best
controls and MACT floor controls are indistinguishable with respect to
their effectiveness in controlling organic HAP emissions. The available
emission data on controlled thermal process sources also show no clear
distinctions in performance between the best controls and the MACT
floor controls. For these reasons, we concluded that the best-
performing sources are comparable to the MACT floor controls, and we
decided to require the same emission limits for new sources of organic
HAP as would be required for existing affected sources under the
proposed rule: no more than 20 ppmvd THC, corrected to 18 percent
O2, or at least 99.8 percent combustion efficiency.
Under today's proposed rule, you would be required to satisfy a
work practice standard for existing shape preheaters. However, for new
shape preheaters, you would be required to meet the same emission
limits that are required for other thermal process sources of organic
HAP. That is, you would have to meet either a THC emission
concentration of 20 ppmvd, corrected to 18 percent O2, or a
combustion efficiency of at least 99.8 percent. The data indicate that
the best-controlled preheaters are equipped with thermal oxidizers that
are comparable to the best controls used on the other
[[Page 42127]]
thermal process sources of organic HAP. Therefore, we concluded that
the same emission limits that apply to other new thermal process
sources of organic HAP should apply to new shape preheaters as well.
Pitch working tanks also emit organic HAP. However, we did not
establish emission limits for new pitch working tanks because the low
and intermittent exhaust flow rates that characterize pitch working
tanks preclude accurate measurement of pitch working tank emissions.
Therefore, we decided to establish the same work practice for new pitch
working tanks as would be required for existing pitch working tanks.
That is, the practice of exhausting pitch working tank emissions to the
same control device that controls emissions from an affected defumer or
coking oven, or to a comparable control device.
The HAP emitted from chromium refractory products kilns include
hexavalent chromium, other chromium compounds, and other nonvolatile
HAP metals, all of which are emitted in the form of PM. As discussed
previously, no chromium refractory products kilns are equipped with an
APCD that would be effective in controlling emissions of nonvolatile
HAP metals. Furthermore, there are no similar sources equipped with an
APCD that would reduce emissions of PM or nonvolatile HAP metals.
Consequently, we are not establishing an emission limit for new
chromium refractory products kilns. Instead, we are requiring the use
of natural gas fuel, or equivalent, as a work practice standard for new
chromium refractory products kilns.
No clay refractory kilns currently in operation are equipped with
APCD that would be effective in reducing emissions of HF or HCl.
However, under Section 112(d) of the CAA, emission standards for new
sources can be based on the control levels achieved by similar sources
in other industries. Several kilns used in the brick and structural
clay products industry are equipped with APCD to reduce emissions of HF
and HCl, and emission data are available for some of those controlled
kilns. Because brick kilns are similar in design, operation, and
emission characteristics to clay refractory kilns, we concluded that
the emission data for the best-controlled brick kilns would be
representative of the best APCD available for clay refractory kilns.
The brick industry emission data indicate that kilns controlled
with a DIFF, DLS/FF, or wet scrubber can achieve production-based HF
emission limits of 0.001 kg/Mg (0.002 lb/ton) and an HF control
efficiency of 99.5 percent. The brick industry data for HCl emissions
indicates that a production-based HCl emission limit of 0.0025 kg/Mg
(0.005 lb/ton) and an HCl control efficiency of 98 percent can be
achieved by the best-controlled sources. Based on these data, we
decided it would be appropriate to establish these same emission limits
for new clay refractory products kilns.
F. How Did We Select the Format of the Standard?
In determining the format of the standard for thermal process
sources, we considered several alternatives, including an emission
concentration, emission rate, emission factor, control efficiency, and
combustion efficiency. From our analysis of the available data, we
concluded that THC emission concentration and combustion efficiency
limits are the most practical and appropriate formats for refractory
products thermal process sources.
Due to a lack of HAP emission data on controlled sources, we were
unable to establish HAP emission limits for the types of emission
sources that would be subject to the proposed rule. Therefore, we
considered using THC as a surrogate for organic HAP emissions. We
selected a THC emission concentration format because it has several
advantages over the other formats considered. The test method for THC,
EPA Method 25A, is a relatively straightforward and inexpensive
procedure that provides near real-time results. The emission
concentration format also eliminates the need to measure control device
inlet data, which would be required for a control efficiency standard.
In addition, an emission concentration limit of 20 ppmvd THC is
consistent with several NESHAP for other source categories that use
thermal and catalytic oxidizers for organic HAP control.
As an alternative to the THC emission concentration limit, we
considered a combustion efficiency limit format for the standard.
Combustion efficiency provides a measure of the extent to which carbon
in the exhaust stream, typically in the form of organic compounds, is
converted to CO2. Although it is difficult to correlate
combustion efficiency to the extent to which organic compounds are
destroyed (i.e., destruction efficiency), a high combustion efficiency
is generally accepted as an indication that combustion-based controls
are operating properly.
A combustion efficiency format has distinct advantages over other
potential formats for the refractory products manufacturing industry.
The performance test methods required to show compliance with a
combustion efficiency standard are well established, relatively simple,
continuous, provide near real-time results, and are relatively
inexpensive to perform. A combustion efficiency standard also allows
for higher THC concentrations provided that the outlet concentrations
of CO are relatively low. For example, if the CO2 and CO
concentrations at the outlet of a thermal oxidizer were 2.0 percent and
10 ppm, respectively, the source would meet the 99.8 percent combustion
efficiency with a THC concentration of 30 ppm.
Under today's proposed rule, new clay refractory kilns located at
major source facilities would have the option of meeting production-
based or percent reduction emission limits for HF and HCl. We selected
the production-based format because it accounts for differences in kiln
sizes (i.e., kiln production rates) and, thus, does not penalize the
use of larger kilns, as would be the case for a mass emission rate
format. We included percent reduction emission limits as an alternative
to production-based limits. Production-based emission limits may not be
achievable for kilns that fire clays that have unusually high fluoride
or chloride concentrations. In such cases, affected facilities with
good emission controls could still meet percent reduction standards for
HF and HCl.
G. How Did We Select the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?
We selected EPA Methods 25A for THC, 3A for CO2, and 10
for CO because they are the appropriate methods for determining THC
concentrations and combustion efficiency. All three methods are
standard EPA methods that are widely used and relatively inexpensive to
perform. In addition, these methods provide continuous, near real-time
results.
Several of the performance testing requirements specified in
today's proposed rule apply specifically to continuous process sources,
and other requirements apply only to batch process sources.
We decided to require batch process sources to meet a rolling
average emission limit rather than an block average limit because
organic HAP emissions from batch process sources generally vary
significantly over the course of a cycle. Organic HAP emissions are
likely to be negligible at the start of a cycle, then increase and peak
several hours into the cycle. After peaking, organic HAP emissions
typically decrease and may become negligible before the cycle is
completed. The rolling average format would
[[Page 42128]]
eliminate situations where a batch process source far exceeds the
emission limit during part of the process cycle, but is in overall
compliance simply because the average emissions include several hourly
values during which emissions are negligible.
We decided to allow decreasing the operating temperature of (or
shut off completely) thermal or catalytic oxidizers before the batch
cycle is completed because the cycle time for some sources extends well
beyond the period during which an emission control is needed to meet
the THC emission limit. We believe that there is no need to operate the
control device further if you can demonstrate that the emission limit
can be met with the control device off line or operating at a reduced
temperature.
Under today's proposed rule, you would be required to conduct
performance tests on affected thermal process sources under the
conditions that would result in the highest levels of organic HAP
emissions. Our objective in specifying this requirement is to ensure
continuous compliance with the emission limits; if the source is in
compliance with emission limits under such ``worst case'' conditions,
it should also be in compliance when refractory shapes that contain
other refractory mixes are processed.
We decided to require monitoring of control device operating
temperatures because operating temperatures (i.e., thermal oxidizer
combustion chamber temperatures or catalytic oxidizer bed inlet
temperatures) generally are reliable indicators of the performance of
those control devices. We believe that sources that operate thermal and
catalytic oxidizers at or above the operating temperatures established
during performance tests generally would be meeting the emission
limits. Therefore, establishing operating limits on the operating
temperatures of thermal and catalytic oxidizers would help assure
continuous compliance with the emission limits. We also believe that
this requirement is not labor-intensive, does not require expensive or
complex equipment, and does not require burdensome recordkeeping.
For affected sources that are subject to the THC emission
concentration limit and use alternative control methods, such as
process modifications or add-on control devices other than thermal or
catalytic oxidizers, we decided to require THC CEMS. Thermal and
catalytic oxidizers are the only devices currently used to control
organic emissions from refractory thermal process sources. The
effectiveness of these controls for organic pollutants, including the
types of organic HAP emitted by refractory products sources, is well
established. In view of the uncertainty of how well other control
methods would perform on refractory thermal process sources, we believe
that requiring THC CEMS is warranted for sources that are equipped with
other such controls. In most cases, CEMS provide the best indication
that a source is complying with emission limits.
The performance specifications established in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix B, were developed specifically for providing reasonable
assurance that CEMS are installed and operated properly. Therefore, we
believe that it is warranted to require that affected thermal process
sources equipped with alternative control devices comply with PS-8,
which applies specifically to THC CEMS.
We selected EPA Method 26A for demonstrating compliance with HF and
HCl emission limits because Method 26A is the standard method for
determining emissions of hydrogen halides, including HCl and HF, from
stationary sources. We selected operating limits and monitoring
requirements that we believe would ensure proper operation of add-on
emission control devices that might be used to comply with the proposed
requirements for new clay refractory kilns. We believe that sources
that operate control devices within the operating limits established
during performance tests generally would be meeting the emission
limits. Therefore, establishing operating limits on the control devices
would help assure continuous compliance with the emission limits. At
the same time, the provisions are not labor-intensive, do not require
expensive or complex equipment, and do not require burdensome
recordkeeping. Temperature monitoring and recording equipment and lime
injection rate monitoring and recording equipment are standard features
on DIFF and DLS/FF systems. Water injection rate monitoring and
recording equipment is a standard feature on DLS/FF controls. For wet
scrubbers, pressure drop monitors and liquid flow monitors often are
part of standard scrubber instrumentation. We decided to require you to
conduct performance tests while each affected source is operating at
the maximum production level because exceedances of emission limits are
more likely to occur when production rates are highest. We believe this
requirement helps to ensure that compliance with the emission limits is
maintained continuously without being labor-intensive, requiring
expensive or complex equipment, and requiring burdensome recordkeeping.
The proposed rule would require all continuous process sources to
be tested for at least three test runs of at least 1 hour each because
this requirement is specified in 40 CFR 63.7(e)(3) of the General
Provisions. Requiring a minimum of three 1-hour test runs is typical
for most performance tests required under part 63 for continuous
sources.
For affected batch process sources, we decided to require testing
during three separate batch cycles because emissions from batch
processes can vary significantly over the course of a cycle. Testing
during a single cycle might not account for these variations. On the
other hand, we believe that testing throughout three complete cycles
would be unreasonably costly and unnecessary if test runs could focus
on the periods when emissions are greatest. For this reason, we
included in the proposed rule alternatives to testing for three
complete cycles.
We selected the option of using an emissions profile because such a
profile would identify exactly when peak emissions occur. We believe
that testing during the period of peak emissions would be adequate for
demonstrating compliance with the emission limits. For batch process
clay refractory kilns, we selected a 3-hour peak period because we
believe that 3 hours is adequate in length for encompassing the peak
emissions period. We selected a longer (4-hour) peak period for organic
HAP sources because we believe that organic HAP emissions are likely to
experience greater fluctuations than would PM or HF emissions. When an
emissions profile is used, you would still be required to perform at
least three test runs.
We also incorporated the option of allowing the testing of batch
process sources to be stopped following the 3-hour period that follows
peak process temperature. We decided to include this option because it
may be less burdensome than developing an emissions profile for
particularly long batch cycles. For thermal process sources of organic
HAP, we believe that emissions generally peak within a few hours of the
peak process temperature, if not sooner. Therefore, testing for an
additional 3 hours after peak process temperature is reached should
ensure that the test run encompasses the period of peak emissions. For
clay refractory kilns, emissions of HF and HCl begin when the clays are
heated to approximately 540 deg.C (1000 deg.F). We assume that HF and
HCl emission rates increase for several hours before
[[Page 42129]]
peaking and declining. We believe that requiring that the tests be
performed for at least 3 hours following peak temperature provides
reasonable assurance that the testing period would encompass the peak
emissions period.
H. How Did We Select the Continuous Compliance Requirements?
In determining the proposed continuous compliance requirements, we
first considered establishing continuous emission limits and requiring
the use of CEMS. For thermal processes that emit organic HAP and are
equipped with emission controls that were comparable to, or better
than, the MACT floor level of control, we were able to obtain
continuous THC emission data only for two batch process sources. Both
sources were operated with relatively short cycle times, and we
concluded that those data were not adequate for establishing a
continuous THC emission limit. In addition, we have no continuous
emission data for HAP or HAP surrogates for chromium refractory or clay
refractory products kilns.
We next considered continuous and periodic monitoring of control
device operating parameters. Many plants already perform continuous or
periodic monitoring of operating parameters and already have parameter
measurement devices in place. Operating limits based on continuous
monitoring of APCD operating parameters using CPMS would help to assure
that the APCD continuously operates at the same level of performance as
it did during the initial performance test during which you meet the
emission limits. Therefore, we concluded that continuous monitoring of
control device operating parameters would help assure continuous
compliance with the emission limits. In addition, in most cases, CPMS
are more economical to install and operate compared to the cost of
CEMS.
In the case of thermal process sources subject to the THC emission
concentration limit that use alternative emission controls, we decided
to make an exception to allowing the use of CPMS to demonstrate
continuous compliance. Because of the uncertainty in how well other
control methods would perform on refractory thermal process sources, we
believe that requiring THC CEMS is warranted for sources that are
equipped with alternative controls. Furthermore, to provide reasonable
assurance that those CEMS are operated and maintained properly, we
believe that there is justification for requiring that affected thermal
process sources equipped with alternative control devices comply with
Procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix F.
We decided to require the monitoring and recording of the organic
HAP processing rate and process operating temperature hourly because
these parameters are the primary determinants of organic HAP emissions.
Verifying that the values of these parameters do not exceed the
corresponding levels measured during the performance test would help
assure continuous compliance with the emission limits.
We selected the requirement for monitoring thermal oxidizer
combustion chamber temperature because temperature monitoring is one of
the most reliable methods for evaluating the performance of thermal
oxidizers. The other parameters that affect thermal oxidizer
performance (i.e., the residence time and degree of mixing) are fixed
by design and generally do not vary, whereas the combustion chamber
temperature can be increased or decreased to influence combustion
efficiency and the level of organic pollutant destruction.
We selected the requirement for monitoring the catalyst bed inlet
temperature on catalytic oxidizers because the bed inlet operating
temperature is a reliable indicator of catalytic oxidizer performance.
Although space velocity is also an indicator of the performance of
catalytic oxidizers, space velocity is fixed by design and does not
generally vary. However, catalyst bed inlet temperature can be
regulated to increase or decrease the performance of a catalytic
oxidizer. We also decided to require you to maintain the catalyst
according to manufacturer's specifications because of the danger of the
catalyst being poisoned by contaminants in the exhaust stream.
Poisoning can greatly reduce the effective of catalytic oxidizers in
controlling organic emissions. Therefore, we believe that maintenance
of the catalyst is critical for providing assurance that catalytic
oxidizers continue to perform well.
The requirements that we have selected for monitoring thermal and
catalytic oxidizer operating temperatures are typical of other NESHAP
that regulate organic HAP emissions. The equipment needed for
monitoring operating temperature is standard on many thermal and
catalytic oxidizers. Furthermore, we believe these requirements are not
labor-intensive and do not require burdensome recordkeeping.
For clay refractory kilns that are controlled with a DIFF or DLS/
FF, we decided to require bag leak detection systems, monitoring of
fabric filter inlet temperature, and periodic checks that lime is free-
flowing because we believe that these requirements would help to assure
continuous compliance and identify operating problems at the source. At
the same time, the provisions are not labor-intensive, do not require
expensive or complex equipment, and do not require burdensome
recordkeeping. Bag leak detection systems are often used as a means of
monitoring fabric filter performance. Temperature monitoring and
recording equipment and lime injection rate monitoring and recording
equipment are standard features on DIFF and DLS/FF systems. For kilns
controlled with a DLS/FF, we decided to require monitoring of water
injection rates because water injection rate monitoring and recording
equipment is a standard feature on DLS/FF controls. For kilns
controlled with wet scrubbers, we decided to require monitoring of the
pressure drop across the scrubber, scrubber liquid pH, and liquid flow
rate because these parameters are good indicators of scrubber
performance and the removal of acid gases. In addition, pressure drop
monitors and liquid flow monitors often are part of the standard
instrumentation for wet scrubbers.
I. How Did We Select the Notification, Reporting, and Recordkeeping
Requirements?
We selected the specific notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements that would be required under today's proposed rule because
these requirements are all specified in the General Provisions to part
63 (subpart A). Selecting requirements that are specified in the
General Provisions ensures consistency with other NESHAP.
We selected the specific elements that must be included in your
OM&M plan because we believe that having documented procedures and the
other information on emission control and monitoring equipment included
in the plan is necessary for ensuring compliance and facilitating
enforcement. Having a list of affected sources, control devices, CPMS,
and recordkeeping procedures is needed for compliance inspections.
Monitoring schedules are needed for ensuring that operating limits are
maintained. Established maintenance procedures would help to ensure the
proper operation of control devices and CPMS. Established corrective
action procedures are needed to ensure that, when deviations occur,
problems are diagnosed and rectified quickly.
[[Page 42130]]
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy and Economic Impacts
A. What Are the Air Quality Impacts?
At the current level of control and 1996 production levels, we
estimate nationwide emissions of HAP from the refractory products
manufacturing industry to be about 258 Mg/yr (284 tons/yr). For the
eight refractory products facilities that we estimate to be major
sources, baseline annual HAP emissions are about 161 Mg/yr (177 tons/
yr). We estimate that the rule as proposed would reduce nationwide HAP
emissions by about 120 Mg/yr (132 tons/yr).
Among the major sources, POM emissions account for approximately 55
percent of the total annual HAP emissions. Hydrogen fluoride, phenol,
HCl, and ethylene glycol account for 16 percent, 12 percent, 11
percent, and 6 percent of total annual HAP emissions, respectively.
Formaldehyde and chromium compounds each account for less than 1
percent of total baseline annual HAP emissions. The rule as proposed
would reduce annual POM emissions by as much as 90 Mg/yr (99 tons/yr).
Emissions of phenol and ethylene glycol would be reduced by
approximately 19 Mg/yr (21 tons/year) and 11 Mg/yr (12 tons/yr),
respectively. Implementing today's rule as proposed would also reduce
VOC and CO emissions by 136 Mg/yr (150 tons/yr) and 14 Mg/yr (15 tons/
yr), respectively. The rule as proposed would result in an increase in
annual NOX emissions of about 25 Mg/yr (27 tons/yr) due to
the operation of additional thermal oxidizers to control organic HAP
emissions.
Indirect or secondary air impacts of today's rule as proposed would
result from increased electricity usage associated with operation of
control devices. Assuming that plants would purchase electricity from a
power plant, we estimate that the standards as proposed would increase
secondary emissions of criteria pollutants, including PM less than 10
micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM10), SO2,
NOX, and CO from power plants. Under the rule as proposed,
secondary PM10 emissions would increase by 0.54 Mg/yr (0.6
tons/yr); secondary SO2 emissions would increase by about 22
Mg/yr (24 tons/yr); secondary NOX emissions would increase
about 11 Mg/yr (12 tons/yr); and secondary CO emissions would increase
by about 0.36 Mg/yr (0.4 tons/yr).
We estimate that there will be no new sources within the refractory
products manufacturing industry within the next 3 years. Therefore, we
are not projecting air impacts for new sources under the proposed rule.
B. What Are the Water and Solid Waste Impacts?
To comply with the rule as proposed, we expect that affected
facilities would control organic HAP emissions by installing and
operating thermal oxidizers. Therefore, we project that today's rule as
proposed would have no water or solid waste impacts.
C. What Are the Energy Impacts?
Energy impacts consist of the electricity and fuel needed to
operate control devices and other equipment that would be required
under the proposed rule. Assuming that affected facilities would comply
with the rule as proposed by installing and operating thermal
oxidizers, we project that today's rule as proposed would require
increase overall energy demand (i.e., electricity and natural gas) by
about 730 thousand gigajoules per year (690 billion British thermal
units per year). Electricity requirements are expected to increase by
about 3,910 megawatt-hours per year under the proposed standards.
Natural gas requirements would increase by about 18 million cubic
meters per year (644 million cubic feet per year) under the rule as
proposed.
D. What Are the Cost Impacts?
The estimated total capital costs of today's proposed rule are $3.5
million. These capital costs apply to existing sources and include the
costs to purchase and install thermal oxidizers on affected sources
that are not currently controlled. The estimated annualized cost of the
rule as proposed is $1.6 million. The annualized costs account for the
annualized capital costs of the control and monitoring equipment,
operation and maintenance expenses, performance testing, and
recordkeeping and reporting costs.
E. What Are the Economic Impacts?
The EPA prepared an economic analysis to evaluate the impact the
proposed rule would have on the producers and consumers of
refractories, and society as a whole. The refractories industry
consists of 167 establishments, 8 of which are estimated to be major
sources. The total annualized social cost of the proposed rule is $1.4
million (in 1998 dollars). Our analysis indicates that this cost would
lead to minimal changes in prices and the quantity of refractories
produced in each sector of the refractories market. Prices in the
refractory bricks and shapes sector are estimated to increase by \1/
10th\ of one percent while production may decrease by \1/100th\ of one
percent. Prices for monolithics increase negligibly by \1/100th\ of one
percent and the quantity produced is almost unchanged (a decrease of
only 12 tons per year). The refractory ceramic fiber sector of the
market is not affected by the rule as proposed and, thus, no price or
production level changes are predicted. Of the eight major sources of
HAP emissions, one facility may close due to regulatory costs. However,
EPA recognizes that this facility, as well as the other affected
facilities, have several options to change input materials or
attributes of their production process such that they could
substantially reduce the cost associated with add-on control
technology. Without explicit knowledge of decisions to be made by this
and other facilities in response to the proposed rule, our analysis
assumes only that add-on control technology would be installed. Hence
the cost of add-on controls would exceed total revenues of this
facility, causing it to close. This estimated facility closure in the
market has a minimal influence on prices and productions levels, as is
described above.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to
result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that the proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' because
[[Page 42131]]
none of the listed criteria apply to this action. Consequently, this
action was not submitted to OMB for review under Executive Order 12866.
B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (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'' is 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.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. The EPA may also not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless EPA consults
with State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA
to provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble
to the rule, a federalism summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS
must include a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation
with State and local officials, a summary of the nature of their
concerns and EPA's position supporting the need to issue the
regulation, and a statement of the extent to which the concerns of
State and local officials have been met. Also, when EPA transmits a
draft final rule with federalism implications to OMB for review
pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA must include a certification
from EPA's Federalism Official stating that EPA has met the
requirements of Executive Order 13132 in a meaningful and timely
manner.
The proposed rule would not have a 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.
This determination has been made since none of the affected plant sites
under the proposed rule are owned or operated by State or local
governments. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order
do not apply to the proposed rule. Although section 6 of Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed rule, EPA is providing State
and local officials an opportunity to comment on the proposed rule. A
summary of the concerns raised during the notice and comment process
and EPA's response to those concerns will be provided in the final
rulemaking notice.
C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
The proposed rule would not have tribal implications. It would not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No
affected plant sites are owned or operated by Indian tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the proposed
rule. In the spirit of Executive Order 13175, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and tribal governments,
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on the proposed rule from
tribal officials.
D. 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 (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns the environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, 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 considered by EPA.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. Today's proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
it is based on technology performance and not on health or safety
risks.
E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
F. 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
[[Page 42132]]
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 proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost for the
proposed refractory products manufacturing standards for any 1 year is
estimated at $3.8 million. Thus, today's proposed rule is not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition,
EPA has determined that today's proposed rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because it contains no requirements that apply to such
governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, today's
proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the
UMRA.
G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business whose
parent company has fewer than 500 employees; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government or 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.
Based on a screening of impacts on small entities, I certify that
this action would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We estimate that, of the
facilities affected by the proposed rule, there is one facility owned
by a small company. The estimated compliance cost for this company
represents less than one-half of one percent (0.50%) of company sales.
The proposed rule would also result in a small increase in revenues and
profits for unaffected small entities in the refractories market. This
occurs because the overall market price is expected to increase by a
minimal amount. Small entities in this market would not incur any
additional cost to produce refractories; however, they would be able to
increase their prices slightly in response to market changes from the
proposed rule. Our analysis estimates that the 58 small entities
(owning 76 facilities) operating in the refractories market would
increase revenues by a total of $550,000 and increase profits by
$85,000 (in 1998 dollars).
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed rule will
be submitted for approval to OMB under the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The EPA has prepared an
Information Collection Request (ICR) document (ICR No. 2040.01), and a
copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, by mail at U.S. EPA, Office of
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division (2822), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460; by e-mail at
[email protected]; or by calling (202) 260-2740. You may also
download a copy off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The
information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
The information requirements are based on notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114
of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant
to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of
confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA's policies set
forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
The proposed rule would not require any notifications or reports
beyond those required by the NESHAP General Provisions. The
recordkeeping requirements require only the specific information needed
to determine compliance.
The annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information (averaged over the first 3 years after the
effective date of the rule) is estimated to be 658 labor hours per year
at a total annual cost of $32,100. This burden estimate includes time
for acquisition, installation, and use of monitoring technology and
systems; preparation and a one-time submission of an SSMP, with
immediate reports for any event when the procedures in the plan were
not followed; preparation of an OM&M plan; one-time notifications;
semiannual compliance reports; and recordkeeping. Total capital/startup
costs associated with the monitoring requirements (e.g., costs for
hiring performance test contractors and purchase of monitoring and file
storage equipment) over the 3-year period of the ICR are estimated at
$31,400, with operation and maintenance costs of $730/yr.
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 purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search 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.
Comments are requested on EPA's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the
Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.''
[[Page 42133]]
Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since OMB is required to
make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after June
20, 2002, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if
OMB receives it by July 22, 2002. The final rule will respond to any
OMB or public comments on the information collection requirements
contained in this proposal.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No. 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in their
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, business practices)
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to OMB,
with explanations when an agency does not use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
The proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA
proposes to use the following methods in the proposed rule: EPA Methods
1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 10, 25A, and 26A.
Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify voluntary
consensus standards in addition to these EPA methods. No applicable
voluntary consensus standards were identified for EPA Methods 1A, 2A,
2D, 2F, and 2G. The search and review results have been documented and
are placed in the docket (Docket No. A-2000-50) for the proposed rule.
The voluntary consensus standard ASME C00031, PTC 19-10-1981--Part
10, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' is cited in the proposed rule
for its manual methods for measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and
carbon monoxide content of exhaust gas. This part of ASME C00031, PTC
19-10-1981--Part 10, is an acceptable alternative to Method 3B.
In addition to the voluntary consensus standards EPA proposes to
use in the rule, the search for emissions measurement procedures
identified 14 other voluntary consensus standards. The EPA determined
that 11 of these 14 standards identified for measuring emissions of the
HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in the proposed rule
were impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes of
the proposed rule. Therefore, EPA does not propose to adopt these
standards for this purpose.
Three of the 18 voluntary consensus standards identified in this
search were not available at the time the review was conducted for the
purposes of this proposed rule because they are under development by a
voluntary consensus body: ASME/BSR MFC 13M, ``Flow Measurement by
Velocity Traverse,'' for EPA Method 2 (and possibly 1); ASME/BSR MFC
12M, ``Flow in Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging Pitot Primary
Flowmeters,'' for EPA Method 2; and ISO/DIS 12039, ``Stationary Source
Emissions--Determination of Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, and
Oxygen--Automated Methods,'' for EPA Methods 3A and 10.
Table 4 of the today's proposed rule lists the EPA testing methods
included in the proposed regulation. Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) of the
General Provisions, a source may apply to EPA for permission to use
alternative test methods in place of any of the EPA testing methods.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 23, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
2. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart SSSSS to read as follows:
Subpart SSSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Refractory Products Manufacturing
Sec.
What This Subpart Covers
63.9780 What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.9782 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.9784 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.9786 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards
63.9788 What emission limits, operating limits, and work practice
standards must I meet?
63.9790 What are my options for meeting the emission limits?
General Compliance Requirements
63.9792 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
63.9790 What do I need to know about operation, maintenance, and
monitoring plans?
Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements
63.9796 By what date must I conduct performance tests?
63.9798 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?
63.9800 How do I conduct performance tests and establish operating
limits?
63.9802 How do I develop an emissions profile?
63.9804 What are my monitoring system installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
63.9806 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?
Continuous Compliance Requirements
63.9808 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous
compliance?
63.9810 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?
Notifications, Reports, and Records
63.9812 What notifications must I submit and when?
63.9814 What reports must I submit and when?
63.9816 What records must I keep?
63.9818 In what form and how long must I keep my records?
Other Requirements and Information
63.9820 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
63.9822 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.9824 What material is incorporated by reference?
63.9826 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Tables to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Emission Limits
Table 2 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Operating Limits
Table 3 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Work Practice Standards
Table 4 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Requirements for Performance
Tests
Table 5 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Initial Compliance With
Emission Limits
Table 6 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Initial Compliance with Work
Practice Standards
Table 7 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with
Emission Limits
[[Page 42134]]
Table 8 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with
Operating Limits
Table 9 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with Work
Practice Standards
Table 10 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Requirements for Reports
Table 11 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart SSSSS
What This Subpart Covers
Sec. 63.9780 What is the purpose of this subpart?
This subpart establishes national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) for refractory products manufacturing
facilities. This subpart also establishes requirements to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with the emission limitations.
Sec. 63.9782 Am I subject to this subpart?
You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a refractory
products manufacturing facility that is, is located at, or is part of,
a major source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions according to
the criteria in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
(a) A refractory products manufacturing facility is a plant site
that manufactures refractory products (refractory bricks, refractory
shapes, monolithics, kiln furniture, crucibles, and other materials
used for lining furnaces and other high temperature process units).
Refractory products manufacturing facilities typically process raw
material by crushing, grinding, and screening; mixing the processed raw
materials with binders and other additives; forming the refractory mix
into shapes; and drying and firing the shapes.
(b) A major source of HAP is a plant site that emits or has the
potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons)
or more per year or any combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams
(25 tons) or more per year.
Sec. 63.9784 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
(a) This subpart applies to each new, reconstructed, or existing
affected source at a refractory products manufacturing facility.
(b) The existing affected sources are shape dryers, curing ovens,
and kilns that are used to manufacture refractory products that use
organic HAP; shape preheaters, pitch working tanks, defumers, and
coking ovens that are used to produce pitch-impregnated refractory
products; kilns that are used to manufacture chromium refractory
products; and kilns that are used to manufacture clay refractory
products.
(c) The new or reconstructed affected sources are shape dryers,
curing ovens, and kilns that are used to manufacture refractory
products that use organic HAP; shape preheaters, pitch working tanks,
defumers, and coking ovens used to produce pitch-impregnated refractory
products; kilns that are used to manufacture chromium refractory
products; and kilns that are used to manufacture clay refractory
products.
(d) Shape dryers, curing ovens, kilns, coking ovens, defumers,
shape preheaters, and pitch working tanks that are used exclusively for
research and development (R&D) and are not used to manufacture products
for commercial sale are not subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
(e) A source is a new affected source if you began construction of
the affected source after June 20, 2002, and you met the applicability
criteria at the time you began construction.
(f) An affected source is reconstructed if you meet the criteria as
defined in Sec. 63.2.
(g) An affected source is existing if it is not new or
reconstructed.
Sec. 63.9786 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
(a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
comply with this subpart according to paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) If the initial startup of your affected source is before [DATE
OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], then you
must comply with the emission limitations for new and reconstructed
sources in this subpart no later than [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
RULE IN THE Federal Register].
(2) If the initial startup of your affected source is after [DATE
OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], then you
must comply with the emission limitations for new and reconstructed
sources in this subpart upon initial startup of your affected source.
(b) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the emission limitations for existing sources no later than [3 YEARS
AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal
Register].
(c) You must be in compliance with this subpart when you conduct a
performance test on an affected source.
(d) If you have an existing area source that increases its
emissions or its potential to emit such that it becomes a major source
of HAP, you must be in compliance with this subpart according to
paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Any portion of the existing facility that is a new affected
source or a new reconstructed source must be in compliance with this
subpart upon startup.
(2) All other parts of the existing facility must be in compliance
with this subpart by 3 years after the date the area source becomes a
major source.
(e) If you have a new area source (i.e., an area source for which
construction or reconstruction was commenced after June 20, 2002) that
increases its emissions or its potential to emit such that it becomes a
major source of HAP, you must be in compliance with this subpart upon
initial startup of your affected source as a major source.
(f) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.9812
according to the schedule in Sec. 63.9812 and in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart A. Some of the notifications must be submitted before you are
required to comply with the emission limitations in this subpart.
Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards
Sec. 63.9788 What emission limits, operating limits, and work practice
standards must I meet?
(a) You must meet each emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart
that applies to you.
(b) You must meet each operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart
that applies to you.
(c) You must meet each work practice standard in Table 3 to this
subpart that applies to you.
Sec. 63.9790 What are my options for meeting the emission limits?
To meet the emission limits in Table 1 to this subpart, you must
use one or both of the options listed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section.
(a) Emissions control system. Use an emissions capture and
collection system and an add-on air pollution control device (APCD) and
demonstrate that the resulting emissions or emissions reductions meet
the emission limits in Table 1 to this subpart, and that the capture
and collection system and APCD meet the applicable operating limits in
Table 2 to this subpart.
(b) Process changes. Use raw materials that have little or no
potential to emit HAP during the refractory products manufacturing
process or implement manufacturing process changes and demonstrate that
the resulting emissions or emissions reductions meet the emission
limits in Table 1 to this subpart without an add-on APCD.
[[Page 42135]]
General Compliance Requirements
Sec. 63.9792 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) You must be in compliance with the emission limitations
(including operating limits and work practice standards) in this
subpart at all times, except during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
(b) You must always operate and maintain your affected source,
including air pollution control and monitoring equipment, according to
the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i). During the period between the
compliance date specified for your affected source in Sec. 63.9786 and
the date upon which continuous monitoring systems have been installed
and validated and any applicable operating limits have been
established, you must maintain a log detailing the operation and
maintenance of the process and emissions control equipment.
(c) You must develop and implement a written startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan (SSMP) according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
(d) You must prepare and implement a written operation,
maintenance, and monitoring (OM&M) plan according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.9794.
(e) You must be in compliance with the provisions of subpart A of
this part, except as noted in Table 11 to this subpart.
Sec. 63.9794 What do I need to know about operation, maintenance, and
monitoring plans?
(a) For each continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) required
by this subpart, you must develop, implement, make available for
inspection, and revise, as necessary, an OM&M plan that includes the
information in paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Your OM&M plan must include, at a minimum, the information in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (11) of this section.
(1) A list and identification of each process and add-on APCD to be
monitored, the type of monitoring device that will be used, and the
operating parameters that will be monitored.
(2) Specifications for the sensor, signal analyzer, and data
collection system.
(3) A monitoring schedule that specifies the frequency that the
parameter values will be determined and recorded.
(4) The operating limits for each parameter that represent
continuous compliance with the emission limitations in Sec. 63.9788,
based on values of the monitored parameters recorded during performance
tests.
(5) Procedures for installing the CPMS at a measurement location
relative to each process unit or APCD such that measurement is
representative of control of emissions.
(6) Procedures for the proper operation and routine and long-term
maintenance of each process unit and APCD, including a maintenance and
inspection schedule that is consistent with the manufacturer's
recommendations.
(7) Procedures for the proper operation and maintenance of
monitoring equipment consistent with the requirements in
Secs. 63.8(c)(1), (3), (4)(ii), (7), and (8), and 63.9804.
(8) Ongoing data quality assurance procedures in accordance with
the general requirements of Sec. 63.8(d).
(9) Procedures for evaluating the performance of each CPMS.
(10) Procedures for responding to operating parameter deviations,
including the procedures in paragraphs (10)(i) through (iii) of this
section:
(i) Procedures for determining the cause of the operating parameter
deviation.
(ii) Actions for correcting the deviation and returning the
operating parameters to the allowable limits.
(iii) Procedures for recording the times that the deviation began
and ended, and corrective actions were initiated and completed.
(11) Procedures for keeping records to document compliance and
reporting in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.10(c), (e)(1),
and (e)(2)(i).
(c) Changes to the operating limits in your OM&M plan require a new
performance test. If you are revising an operating limit parameter
value, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of
this section.
(1) Submit a notification of performance test to the Administrator
as specified in Sec. 63.7(b).
(2) After completing the performance tests to demonstrate that
compliance with the emission limits can be achieved at the revised
operating limit parameter value, you must submit the performance test
results and the revised operating limits as part of the Notification of
Compliance Status required under Sec. 63.9(h).
(d) If you are revising the inspection and maintenance procedures
in your OM&M plan, you do not need to conduct a new performance test.
Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements
Sec. 63.9796 By what date must I conduct performance tests?
You must conduct performance tests within 180 calendar days after
the compliance date that is specified for your source in Sec. 63.9786
and according to the provisions in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.9798 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?
(a) You must conduct a performance test every 5 years following the
initial performance test, as part of renewing your 40 CFR part 70 or
part 71 operating permit.
(b) You must conduct a performance test when you want to change the
parameter value for any operating limit specified in your OM&M plan.
(c) If you own or operate a source that is subject to the emission
limits specified in items 2 through 7 of Table 1 to this subpart, you
must conduct a performance test before starting production of any
refractory product for which the organic HAP processing rate is likely
to exceed the maximum organic HAP processing rate established during
the most recent performance test.
(d) If you own or operate a kiln that is subject to the emission
limits specified in item 4 or 7 of Table 1 to this subpart, you must
conduct a performance test on the affected kiln following any process
changes that are likely to increase organic HAP emissions from the
kiln.
Sec. 63.9800 How do I conduct performance tests and establish
operating limits?
(a) You must conduct each performance test in Table 4 to this
subpart that applies to you.
(b) Before conducting the performance test, you must install and
validate all monitoring equipment.
(c) Each performance test must be conducted according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.7 and under the specific conditions in Table 4
to this subpart.
(d) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
(e) You must conduct separate test runs for at least the duration
specified for each performance test required in this section, as
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3) and Table 4 to this subpart. For batch
process sources, each test run must last an entire batch cycle unless
you satisfy the conditions for developing an emissions profile as
specified in item 8(a)(i)(3) or 15(b)(i)(3) of Table 4 to this subpart
or the conditions for terminating a test run prior to the
[[Page 42136]]
completion of a batch cycle as specified in item 8(a)(i)(4) of Table 4
to this subpart.
(f) You must use the data gathered during the performance test and
the equations in paragraphs (f)(1) through (4) of this section to
determine compliance with the emission limitations.
(1) To determine compliance with the total hydrocarbon (THC)
emission concentration limit listed in Table 1 to this subpart, you
must calculate your emission concentration corrected to 18 percent
oxygen for each test run using Equation 1 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN02.000
Where:
C THCC = THC concentration, corrected to 18 percent oxygen,
parts per million by volume, dry basis (ppmvd)
CTHC = THC concentration (uncorrected), ppmvd
CO2 = Oxygen concentration, percent.
(2) To determine compliance with the combustion efficiency limit
listed in Table 1 to this subpart, you must calculate your combustion
efficiency for each test run using Equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN02.001
Where:
CE = Combustion efficiency, percent
CCO2 = Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration, ppm
CCO = Carbon monoxide (CO) concentration, ppm
CTHC = THC concentration (uncorrected), ppm.
(3) To determine compliance with production-based hydrogen fluoride
(HF) and hydrogen chloride (HCl) emission limits in Table 1 to this
subpart, you must calculate your mass emissions per unit of uncalcined
clay processed for each test run using Equation 3 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN02.002
Where:
MP = mass per unit of production, kilograms of pollutant per megagram
(pounds per ton) of uncalcined clay processed
ER = mass emission rate of specific HAP (HF or HCl) during each
performance test run, kilograms (pounds) per hour
P = average uncalcined clay processing rate for the performance test,
megagrams (tons) of uncalcined clay processed per hour.
(4) To determine compliance with any of the emission limits based
on percent reduction across an emissions control system in Table 1 to
this subpart, you must calculate the percent reduction for each test
run using Equation 4 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN02.003
Where:
PR = percent reduction, percent
ERi = mass emission rate of specific HAP (HF or HCl)
entering the control device, kilograms (pounds) per hour
ERo = mass emission rate of specific HAP (HF or HCl) exiting
the control device, kilograms (pounds) per hour.
(g) You must establish each site-specific operating limit in Table
2 to this subpart that applies to you, as specified in Table 4 to this
subpart.
(h) For each affected source that is equipped with an add-on APCD
that is not addressed in Table 2 to this subpart or that is using
process changes as a means of meeting the emission limits in Table 1 to
this subpart, you must meet the requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) and
paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) For sources subject to the THC concentration limit specified in
item 3 or 6 of Table 1 to this subpart, you must satisfy the
requirements specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) You must install a THC continuous emission monitoring system
(CEMS) at the outlet of the control device or in the stack of the
affected source.
(ii) You must meet the requirements specified in Performance
Specification (PS) 8 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
(iii) You must meet the requirements specified in Procedure 1 of 40
CFR part 60, appendix F.
(2) For sources subject to the emission limits specified in item 3,
6, 8, or 9 of Table 1 to this subpart, you must submit a request for
approval of alternative monitoring methods to the Administrator no
later than the notification of intent to conduct a performance test.
The request must contain the information specified in paragraphs
(h)(2)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) A description of the alternative add-on APCD or process
changes.
(ii) The type of monitoring device or method that will be used,
including the sensor type, location, inspection procedures, quality
assurance and quality control measures, and data recording device.
(iii) The operating parameters that will be monitored.
(iv) The frequency that the operating parameter values will be
determined and recorded to establish continuous compliance with the
operating limits.
(v) Averaging time.
(3) You must establish site-specific operating limits during the
performance test based on the information included in the approved
alternative monitoring methods request, and, as applicable, as
specified in Table 4 to this subpart.
Sec. 63.9802 How do I develop an emissions profile?
If you decide to develop an emissions profile for an affected batch
process source, as indicated in item 8(a)(i)(3) or 15(b)(1)(3) of Table
4 to this subpart, you must measure and record emissions of the
applicable pollutant throughout a complete batch cycle of the affected
batch process source using the procedures described in paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section.
(a) If your affected batch process source is subject to the THC
concentration limit specified in item 5(a), 6, or 7 of Table 1 to this
subpart, or to the combustion efficiency limit specified in item 5(b)
of Table 1 to this subpart, you must measure and record the
concentrations of THC and oxygen using the test methods, averaging
periods, and procedures specified in items 9(a) through (e) of Table 4
to this subpart to determine the hourly average THC concentration,
corrected to 18 percent oxygen, for each complete hour of the batch
process cycle.
(b) If your affected batch process source is subject to the HF and
HCl percent reduction emission limits in item 10 of Table 1 to this
subpart, you must measure and record the HF and HCl emission rates
through a series of 1-hour runs using the test method and
[[Page 42137]]
procedures specified in item 15 of Table 4 to this subpart for each
complete hour of the batch process cycle.
Sec. 63.9804 What are my monitoring system installation, operation,
and maintenance requirements?
(a) You must install, operate, and maintain CPMS according to your
OM&M plan and the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (15) of
this section.
(1) You must satisfy all applicable requirements of performance
specifications for CPMS specified in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, upon
promulgation of such performance specifications.
(2) You must satisfy all applicable requirements of quality
assurance (QA) procedures for CPMS specified in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F, upon promulgation of such QA procedures.
(3) You must install each sensor of your CPMS in a location that
provides representative measurement of the appropriate parameter over
all operating conditions, taking into account the manufacturer's
guidelines.
(4) You must use a CPMS that is capable of measuring the
appropriate parameter over a range that extends from a value that is at
least 20 percent less than the lowest value that you expect your CPMS
to measure, to a value that is at least 20 percent greater than the
highest value that you expect your CPMS to measure.
(5) You must use a data acquisition and recording system that is
capable of recording values over the entire range specified in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(6) You must use a signal conditioner, wiring, power supply, and
data acquisition and recording system that are compatible with the
output signal of the sensors used in your CPMS.
(7) You must perform an initial calibration of your CPMS based on
the procedures specified in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
(8) You must use a CPMS that is designed to complete a minimum of
one cycle of operation for each successive 15-minute period. To have a
valid hour of data, you must have at least three of four equally spaced
data values (or at least 75 percent if you collect more than four data
values per hour) for that hour (not including startup, shutdown,
malfunction, or out of control periods).
(9) You must record valid data from at least 90 percent of the
hours during which the process operated.
(10) You must determine and record the 15-minute block averages of
all measurements, calculated after every 15 minutes of operation as the
average of the previous 15 operating minutes (not including periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction).
(11) You must determine and record the 3-hour block averages of all
15-minute recorded measurements, calculated after every 3 hours of
operation as the average of the previous 3 operating hours (not
including periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction).
(12) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration,
initial validation, and accuracy audit.
(13) At all times, you must maintain the monitoring system
including, but not limited to, maintaining necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring system.
(14) You must perform an initial validation of your CPMS under the
conditions specified in paragraphs (a)(14)(i) of this section.
(i) Prior to the initial performance test on the affected source
for which the CPMS is required.
(ii) Within 180 days of your replacing or relocating one or more of
the sensors of your CPMS.
(15) Except for redundant sensors, any device that you use to
conduct an initial validation or accuracy audit of your CPMS must meet
the accuracy requirements specified in paragraphs (15)(i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) The device must have an accuracy that is traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards.
(ii) The device must be at least three times as accurate as the
required accuracy for the CPMS.
(b) For each temperature CPMS that is used to monitor the
combustion chamber temperature of a thermal oxidizer, the catalyst bed
inlet temperature of a catalytic oxidizer, or the inlet temperature of
a fabric filter, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and
(b)(1) through (6) of this section.
(1) Use a temperature CPMS with a minimum accuracy of
1.0 percent of the temperature measured in degrees Celsius
or 2.8 degrees Celsius ( deg.C)(5 degrees Fahrenheit ( deg.F)),
whichever is greater.
(2) Use a data recording system with a resolution of
0.5 percent of the temperature measured in deg.C or
1.4 deg.C (2.5 deg.F), or better.
(3) Perform an initial validation of your CPMS according to the
requirements in paragraph (b)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Place the sensor of a calibrated temperature measurement device
adjacent to the sensor of your temperature CPMS in a location that is
subject to the same environment as the sensor of your temperature CPMS.
The calibrated temperature measurement device must satisfy the accuracy
requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this section. With the process and
control device that is monitored by your CPMS operating normally,
record concurrently and compare the temperatures measured by your
temperature CPMS and the calibrated temperature measurement device.
Using the calibrated temperature measurement device as the reference,
the temperature measured by your temperature CPMS must be within the
accuracy specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(ii) Perform any of the initial validation methods for temperature
CPMS specified in performance specifications for CPMS established in 40
CFR part 60, appendix B.
(4) Perform an accuracy audit of your temperature CPMS at least
quarterly, according to the requirements in paragraph (b)(4)(i), (ii),
or (iii) of this section.
(i) If your temperature CPMS includes a redundant temperature
sensor, record three pairs of concurrent temperature measurements
within a 24-hour period. Each pair of concurrent measurements must
consist of a temperature measurement by each of the two temperature
sensors. The minimum time interval between any two such pairs of
consecutive temperature measurements is 1 hour. The measurements must
be taken during periods when the process and control device that is
monitored by your temperature CPMS are operating normally. Calculate
the mean of the three values for each temperature sensor. The mean
values must agree within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(ii) If your temperature CPMS does not include a redundant
temperature sensor, place the sensor of a calibrated temperature
measurement device adjacent to the sensor of your temperature CPMS in a
location that is subject to the same environment as the sensor of your
temperature CPMS. The calibrated temperature measurement device must
satisfy the accuracy requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this section.
With the process and control device that is monitored by your
temperature CPMS operating normally, record concurrently and compare
the temperatures measured by your temperature CPMS and the calibrated
temperature measurement device. Using the calibrated temperature
measurement device as the reference, the temperature measured by your
temperature CPMS
[[Page 42138]]
must be within the accuracy specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section.
(iii) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for temperature
CPMS specified in QA procedures for CPMS established in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F.
(5) Conduct an accuracy audit of your CPMS following any 24-hour
period throughout which the temperature measured by your CPMS exceeds
the manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature range, or
install a new temperature sensor.
(6) If your CPMS is not equipped with a redundant temperature
sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of all
components for integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
(c) For each pressure CPMS that is used to monitor the pressure
drop across a wet scrubber, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a) and (c)(1) through (7) of this section.
(1) Use a pressure CPMS with a minimum accuracy of 5.0
percent or 0.12 kilopascals (kPa) (0.5 inches of water column (in.
w.c.)), whichever is greater.
(2) Use a data recording system with a resolution of
2.5 percent or 0.06 kPa (0.25 in. w.c.), or better.
(3) Perform an initial validation of your pressure CPMS according
to the requirements in paragraph (c)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Place the sensor of a calibrated pressure measurement device
adjacent to the sensor of your pressure CPMS in a location that is
subject to the same environment as the sensor of your pressure CPMS.
The calibrated pressure measurement device must satisfy the accuracy
requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this section. With the process and
control device that is monitored by your CPMS operating normally,
record concurrently and compare the pressure measured by your pressure
CPMS and the calibrated pressure measurement device. Using the
calibrated pressure measurement device as the reference, the pressure
measured by your pressure CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(ii) Perform any of the initial validation methods for pressure
CPMS specified in performance specifications for CPMS established in 40
CFR part 60, appendix B.
(4) Perform an accuracy audit of your pressure CPMS at least
quarterly, according to the requirements in paragraph (c)(4)(i), (ii),
or (iii) of this section.
(i) If your pressure CPMS includes a redundant pressure sensor,
record three pairs of concurrent pressure measurements within a 24-hour
period. Each pair of concurrent measurements must consist of a pressure
measurement by each of the two pressure sensors. The minimum time
interval between any two such pairs of consecutive pressure
measurements is 1 hour. The measurements must be taken during periods
when the process and control device that is monitored by your CPMS are
operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three pressure
measurement values for each pressure sensor. The mean values must agree
within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(ii) If your pressure CPMS does not include a redundant pressure
sensor, place the sensor of a calibrated pressure measurement device
adjacent to the sensor of your pressure CPMS in a location that is
subject to the same environment as the sensor of your pressure CPMS.
The calibrated pressure measurement device must satisfy the accuracy
requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this section. With the process and
control device that is monitored by your pressure CPMS operating
normally, record concurrently and compare the pressure measured by your
pressure CPMS and the calibrated pressure measurement device. Using the
calibrated pressure measurement device as the reference, the pressure
measured by your pressure CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(iii) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for pressure CPMS
specified in QA procedures for CPMS established in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F.
(5) Conduct an accuracy audit of your CPMS following any 24-hour
period throughout which the pressure measured by your CPMS exceeds the
manufacturer's specified maximum operating pressure range, or install a
new pressure sensor.
(6) At least monthly, check all mechanical connections on your CPMS
for leakage.
(7) If your CPMS is not equipped with a redundant pressure sensor,
at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of all components for
integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
(d) For each liquid flow rate CPMS that is used to monitor the
liquid flow rate in a wet scrubber or the water injection rate for a
dry lime scrubber/fabric filter (DLS/FF), you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) through (7) of this section.
(1) Use a flow rate CPMS with a minimum accuracy of 5.0
percent or 1.9 liters per minute (L/min) (0.5 gallons per minute(gal/
min)), whichever is greater.
(2) Use a data recording system with a resolution of
2.5 percent or 0.95 L/min (0.25 gal/min), or better.
(3) Perform an initial validation of your CPMS according to the
requirements in paragraph (d)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Use a calibrated flow rate measurement system to measure the
liquid flow rate in a location that is adjacent to the measurement
location for your flow rate CPMS and is subject to the same environment
as your flow rate CPMS. The calibrated flow rate measurement device
must satisfy the accuracy requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this
section. With the process and control device that is monitored by your
flow rate CPMS operating normally, record concurrently and compare the
flow rates measured by your flow rate CPMS and the calibrated flow rate
measurement device. Using the calibrated flow rate measurement device
as the reference, the flow rate measured by your flow rate CPMS must be
within the accuracy specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(ii) Perform any of the initial validation methods for liquid flow
rate CPMS specified in performance specifications for CPMS established
in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
(4) Perform an accuracy audit of your flow rate CPMS at least
quarterly, according to the requirements in paragraph (d)(4)(i), (ii),
or (iii) of this section.
(i) If your flow rate CPMS includes a redundant sensor, record
three pairs of concurrent flow rate measurements within a 24-hour
period. Each pair of concurrent measurements must consist of a flow
rate measurement by each of the two flow rate sensors. The minimum time
interval between any two such pairs of consecutive flow rate
measurements is 1 hour. The measurements must be taken during periods
when the process and control device that is monitored by your flow rate
CPMS are operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three flow rate
measurement values for each flow rate sensor. The mean values must
agree within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(ii) If your flow rate CPMS does not include a redundant flow rate
sensor, place the sensor of a calibrated flow rate measurement device
adjacent to the sensor of your flow rate CPMS in a location that is
subject to the same environment as the sensor of your flow rate CPMS.
The calibrated flow rate measurement device must satisfy the
[[Page 42139]]
accuracy requirements of paragraph (a)(15) of this section. With the
process and control device that is monitored by your flow rate CPMS
operating normally, record concurrently and compare the flow rate
measured by your pressure CPMS and the calibrated flow rate measurement
device. Using the calibrated flow rate measurement device as the
reference, the flow rate measured by your flow rate CPMS must be within
the accuracy specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(iii) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for liquid flow
rate CPMS specified in QA procedures for CPMS established in 40 CFR
part 60, appendix F.
(5) Conduct an accuracy audit of your flow rate CPMS following any
24-hour period throughout which the flow rate measured by your CPMS
exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating range, or
install a new flow rate sensor.
(6) At least monthly, check all mechanical connections on your CPMS
for leakage.
(7) If your CPMS is not equipped with a redundant flow rate sensor,
at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of all components for
integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
(e) For each pH CPMS that is used to monitor the pH of a wet
scrubber liquid, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and
(e)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) Use a pH CPMS with a minium accuracy of 0.2 pH
units.
(2) Use a data recording system with a resolution of 0.1 pH units,
or better.
(3) Perform an initial validation of your pH CPMS according to the
requirements in paragraph (e)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Perform a single-point calibration using an NIST-certified
buffer solution that is accurate to within 0.02 pH units at
25 deg.C (77 deg.F). If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored
lies in the acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a buffer solution with a
pH value of 4.00. If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored is
neutral or lies in the basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a buffer
solution with a pH value of 10.00. Place the electrode of your pH CPMS
in the container of buffer solution. Record the pH measured by your
CPMS. Using the certified buffer solution as the reference, the pH
measured by your pH CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(ii) Perform any of the initial validation methods for pH CPMS
specified in performance specifications for CPMS established in 40 CFR
part 60, appendix B.
(4) Perform an accuracy audit of your pH CPMS at least weekly,
according to the requirements in paragraph (e)(4)(i), (ii), or (iii) of
this section.
(i) If your pH CPMS includes a redundant pH sensor, record the pH
measured by each of the two pH sensors. The measurements must be taken
during periods when the process and control device that is monitored by
your pH CPMS are operating normally. The two pH values must agree
within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(ii) If your pH CPMS does not include a redundant pH sensor,
perform a single point calibration using an NIST-certified buffer
solution that is accurate to within 0.02 pH units at
25 deg.C (77 deg.F). If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored
lies in the acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a buffer solution with a
pH value of 4.00. If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored is
neutral or lies in the basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a buffer
solution with a pH value of 10.00. Place the electrode of the pH CPMS
in the container of buffer solution. Record the pH measured by your
CPMS. Using the certified buffer solution as the reference, the pH
measured by your pH CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(iii) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for pH CPMS
specified in QA procedures for CPMS established in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F.
(5) If your CPMS is not equipped with a redundant pH sensor, at
least monthly, perform a visual inspection of all components for
integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
(f) For each bag leak detection system, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (f)(1) through (11) of this section.
(1) Each triboelectric bag leak detection system must be installed,
calibrated, operated, and maintained according to the ``Fabric Filter
Bag Leak Detection Guidance'' (EPA-454/R-98-015, September 1997). That
document is available from the U.S. EPA; Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards; Emissions, Monitoring and Analysis Division; Emission
Measurement Center (D205-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 and is
also available on the Technology Transfer Network (TTN) at the
following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cem.html. Other types of
bag leak detection systems must be installed, operated, calibrated, and
maintained in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's written
specifications and recommendations.
(2) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the
manufacturer to be capable of detecting particulate matter (PM)
emissions at concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual cubic meter
(0.0044 grains per actual cubic foot) or less.
(3) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide an output of
relative PM loadings.
(4) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with a device to
continuously record the output signal from the sensor.
(5) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm
system that will be engaged automatically when an increase in relative
PM emissions over a preset level is detected. The alarm must be located
where it is easily recognized by plant operating personnel.
(6) For positive pressure fabric filter systems, a bag leak
detector must be installed in each baghouse compartment or cell.
(7) For negative pressure or induced air fabric filters, the bag
leak detector must be installed downstream of the fabric filter.
(8) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
(9) The baseline output must be established by adjusting the range
and the averaging period of the device and establishing the alarm set
points and the alarm delay time according to section 5.0 of the
``Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance.''
(10) Following initial adjustment of the system, the owner or
operator must not adjust the sensitivity or range, averaging period,
alarm set points, or alarm delay time except as detailed in the OM&M
plan. In no case may the sensitivity be increased by more than 100
percent or decreased more than 50 percent over a 365-day period unless
such adjustment follows a complete fabric filter inspection which
demonstrates that the fabric filter is in good operating condition.
Record each adjustment.
(11) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and
validation check.
(g) For each lime feed rate measurement device that is used to
monitor the lime feed rate of a dry injection fabric filter (DIFF) or
DLS/FF or the chemical feed rate of a wet scrubber, you must meet the
requirements in paragraph (a) of this section.
(h) For each affected source that is subject to the emission limit
specified in item 3 or 6 of Table 1 to this subpart,
[[Page 42140]]
you must satisfy the requirements of paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of
this section.
(1) Install a THC CEMS at the outlet of the control device or in
the stack of the affected source.
(2) Meet the requirements of PS-8 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
(3) Meet the requirements of Procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F.
(i) Requests for approval of alternate monitoring methods must meet
the requirements in Secs. 63.9800(h)(2) and 63.8(f).
Sec. 63.9806 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?
(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission
limit that applies to you according to Table 5 to this subpart.
(b) You must establish each site-specific operating limit in Table
2 to this subpart that applies to you according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.9800 and Table 4 to this subpart.
(c) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each work practice
standard that applies to you according to Table 6 to this subpart.
(d) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status
containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.9812(e).
Continuous Compliance Requirements
Sec. 63.9808 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance?
(a) You must monitor and collect data according to this section.
(b) At all times, you must maintain your monitoring systems
including, but not limited to, maintaining necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(c) Except for, as applicable, monitoring malfunctions, associated
repairs, and required quality assurance or quality control activities,
you must conduct monitoring in continuous operation at all times your
affected process unit is operating. For purposes of calculating data
averages, you must not use data recorded during monitoring system
malfunction, associated repairs, out of control periods, or required
quality assurance or quality control activities. You must use all the
data collected during all other periods in assessing compliance. A
monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably
preventable failure of the monitoring system to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Any period for which the
monitoring system is out of control and data are not available for
required calculations constitutes a deviation from the monitoring
requirements. Any averaging period for which you do not have valid
monitoring data and such data are required constitutes a deviation, and
you must notify the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 63.9814(e).
Sec. 63.9810 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?
(a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission
limit specified in Table 1 to this subpart that applies to you
according to the requirements specified in Table 7 to this subpart.
(b) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit in Table 2 to this subpart that applies to you according to the
requirements specified in Table 8 to this subpart.
(c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each work
practice standard in Table 3 to this subpart that applies to you
according to the requirements specified in Table 9 to this subpart.
(d) For each affected source that is equipped with an add-on APCD
that is not addressed in Table 2 to this subpart or that is using
process changes as a means of meeting the emission limits in Table 1 to
this subpart, you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each
emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart and each operating limit
established as required in Sec. 63.9800(h)(3) according to the methods
specified in your approved alternative monitoring methods request as
described in Sec. 63.9800(h)(2).
(e) You must report each instance in which you did not meet each
emission limit and each operating limit in this subpart that applies to
you. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction. These
instances are deviations from the emission limitations in this subpart.
These deviations must be reported according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.9814.
(1) During periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must
operate according to your SSMP.
(2) Consistent with Secs. 63.6(e) and 63.7(e)(1), deviations that
occur during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction are not
violations if you demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that
you were operating according to your SSMP and your OM&M plan. The
Administrator will determine whether deviations that occur during a
period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction are violations, according
to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e).
Notifications, Reports, and Records
Sec. 63.9812 What notifications must I submit and when?
(a) You must submit all of the notifications in Secs. 63.7(b) and
(c), 63.8(f)(4), and 63.9(b) through (e) and (h) that apply to you, by
the dates specified.
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2) and (3), if you start up your
affected source before [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], you must submit an Initial Notification not later
than 120 calendar days after [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN
THE Federal Register].
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(3), if you start up your new or
reconstructed affected source on or after [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], you must submit an Initial
Notification not later than 120 calendar days after you become subject
to this subpart.
(d) If you are required to conduct a performance test, you must
submit a notification of intent to conduct a performance test at least
60 calendar days before the performance test is scheduled to begin, as
required in Sec. 63.7(b)(1).
(e) If you are required to conduct a performance test, you must
submit a Notification of Compliance Status as specified in Sec. 63.9(h)
and paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) For each compliance demonstration that includes a performance
test conducted according to the requirements in Table 4 to this
subpart, you must submit the Notification of Compliance Status,
including the performance test results, before the close of business on
the 60th calendar day following the completion of the performance test,
according to Sec. 63.10(d)(2).
(2) In addition to the requirements in Sec. 63.9(h)(2)(i), you must
include the information in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section in your Notification of Compliance Status.
(i) The operating limit parameter values established for each
affected source with supporting documentation and a description of the
procedure used to establish the values.
(ii) Design information and analysis with supporting documentation
demonstrating conformance with requirements for capture/collection
systems in Table 2 to this subpart.
[[Page 42141]]
(iii) A description of the methods used to comply with any
applicable work practice standard.
(iv) For each APCD that includes a fabric filter, analysis and
supporting documentation demonstrating conformance with EPA guidance
and specifications for bag leak detection systems in Sec. 63.9804(f).
Sec. 63.9814 What reports must I submit and when?
(a) You must submit each report in Table 10 to this subpart that
applies to you.
(b) Unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule for
submission of reports under Sec. 63.10(a), you must submit each report
by the date in Table 10 to this subpart and as specified in paragraphs
(b)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in
Sec. 63.9786 and ending on June 30 or December 31 and lasting at least
6 months but less than 12 months. For example, if your compliance date
is March 1, then the first semiannual reporting period would begin on
March 1 and end on December 31.
(2) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no
later than July 31 or January 31 for compliance periods ending on June
30 and December 31, respectively.
(3) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
(4) Each subsequent compliance report must be postmarked or
delivered no later than July 31 or January 31 for compliance periods
ending on June 30 and December 31, respectively.
(5) For each affected source that is subject to permitting
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and if the
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR
71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the first and subsequent compliance
reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established
instead of according to the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of
this section. In such cases, you must notify the Administrator of this
change.
(c) The compliance report must contain the information in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this section.
(1) Company name and address.
(2) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying that, based on information and belief
formed after reasonable inquiry, the statements and information in the
report are true, accurate, and complete.
(3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting
period.
(4) If you had a startup, shutdown or malfunction during the
reporting period, and you took actions consistent with your SSMP and
OM&M plan, the information specified in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).
(5) If there are no deviations from any emission limitations
(emission limit, operating limit, or work practice standard) that apply
to you, a statement that there were no deviations from the emission
limitations during the reporting period.
(6) If there were no periods during which the CPMS was out of
control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), a statement that there were no
periods during which the CPMS was out of control during the reporting
period.
(d) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit,
operating limit, or work practice standard) that occurs at an affected
source where you are not using a CPMS to comply with the emission
limitations in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the
information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) and (d)(1) and (2) of this
section. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(1) The total operating time of each affected source during the
reporting period.
(2) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations
(including unknown cause, if applicable), as applicable, and the
corrective action taken.
(e) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit,
operating limit, or work practice standard) occurring at an affected
source where you are using a CPMS to comply with the emission
limitation in this subpart, you must include the information in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) and (e)(1) through (13) of this section.
This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(1) The total operating time of each affected source during the
reporting period.
(2) The date and time that each startup, shutdown, or malfunction
started and stopped.
(3) The date, time, and duration that each CPMS was inoperative.
(4) The date, time and duration that each CPMS was out of control,
including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8), as required by your OM&M
plan.
(5) The date and time that each deviation from an emission
limitation (emission limit, operating limit, or work practice standard)
started and stopped, and whether each deviation occurred during a
period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction.
(6) A description of corrective action taken in response to a
deviation.
(7) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the
reporting period and the total duration as a percent of the total
source operating time during that reporting period.
(8) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the
reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control
equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other
unknown causes.
(9) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as a percent
of the total source operating time during that reporting period.
(10) A brief description of the process units.
(11) A brief description of the CPMS.
(12) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(13) A description of any changes in CPMS, processes, or controls
since the last reporting period.
(f) If you have obtained a title V operating permit pursuant to 40
CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must report all deviations as
defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring report required by
40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If you submit a
compliance report according to Table 10 to this subpart along with, or
as part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR
70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the compliance
report includes all required information concerning deviations from any
emission limitation (including any operating limit), then submitting
the compliance report will satisfy any obligation to report the same
deviations in the semiannual monitoring report. However, submitting a
compliance report will not otherwise affect any obligation you may have
to report deviations from permit requirements to the permit authority.
Sec. 63.9816 What records must I keep?
(a) You must keep the records listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(3) of this section.
(1) A copy of each notification and report that you submitted to
comply with this subpart, including all
[[Page 42142]]
documentation supporting any Initial Notification or Notification of
Compliance Status that you submitted, according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).
(2) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(3) Records of performance tests as required in
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(viii).
(b) You must keep the records required in Tables 7 through 9 to
this subpart to show continuous compliance with each emission
limitation that applies to you.
(c) You must also maintain the records listed in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (8) of this section.
(1) Records of emission data used to develop an emissions profile,
as indicated in items 8(a)(i)(3) and 15(b)(i)(3) of Table 4 to this
subpart.
(2) Records that document how you comply with any applicable work
practice standard.
(3) For each bag leak detection system, records of each alarm, the
time of the alarm, the time corrective action was initiated and
completed, and a brief description of the cause of the alarm and the
corrective action taken.
(4) For each deviation of an operating limit parameter value, the
date, time, and duration of the deviation, a brief explanation of the
cause of the deviation and the corrective action taken, and whether the
deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction.
(5) For each affected source, records of production rate on a
process throughput basis (either feed rate to the process unit or
discharge rate from the process unit).
(6) Records for any approved alternative monitoring or test
procedures.
(7) Records of maintenance and inspections performed on the control
devices.
(8) Current copies of the SSMP and the OM&M plan, including any
revisions with records documenting conformance.
Sec. 63.9818 In what form and how long must I keep my records?
(a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1).
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record for
5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement,
maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
(c) You must keep each record onsite for at least 2 years after the
date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action,
report, or record, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may keep the
records offsite for the remaining 3 years.
Other Requirements and Information
Sec. 63.9820 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
Table 11 to this subpart shows which parts of the General
Provisions in Secs. 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.
Sec. 63.9822 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or a delegated authority such as
your State, local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA Administrator has
delegated authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that
agency, in addition to the U.S. EPA, has the authority to implement and
enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA Regional Office
to find out if implementation and enforcement to this subpart is
delegated to your State, local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority to this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that cannot be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of
this section.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the applicability requirements in
Secs. 63.9782 and 63.9784, the compliance date requirements in
Sec. 63.9786, and the emission limitations in Sec. 63.9788.
(2) Approval of major changes to test methods under
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of major changes to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f) and
as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(4) Approval of major changes to recordkeeping and reporting under
Sec. 63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
Sec. 63.9824 What material is incorporated by reference?
(a) The following material is incorporated by reference in this
section: chapters 3 and 5 of ``Industrial Ventilation: A Manual of
Recommended Practice,'' American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists, (23rd edition, 1998). The incorporation by reference of
this material will be approved by the Director of the Office of the
Federal Register as of the date of publication of the final rule
according to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. This material is
incorporated as it exists on the date of approval.
(b) The materials referenced in this section are incorporated by
reference and are available for inspection at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, 7th Floor,
Washington, DC. The material is also available for purchase from the
following address: Customer Service Department, American Conference of
Governmental Hygienists (ACGIH), 1330 Kemper Meadow Drive, Cincinnati,
OH 45240, telephone number (513) 742-2020.
Sec. 63.9826 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in 40
CFR 63.2, the General Provisions of this part, and in this section as
follows:
Additive means a minor addition of a chemical, mineral, or metallic
substance that is added to a refractory mixture to facilitate
processing or impart specific properties to the final refractory
product.
Add-on air pollution control device (APCD) means equipment
installed on a process vent that reduces the quantity of a pollutant
that is emitted to the air.
Autoclave means a vessel that is used to impregnate fired and/or
unfired refractory shapes with pitch to form pitch-impregnated
refractory products. Autoclaves can also be used as defumers following
the impregnation process.
Bag leak detection system means an instrument that is capable of
monitoring particulate matter loadings in the exhaust of a fabric
filter in order to detect bag failures. A bag leak detection system
includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that operates on
triboelectric, light-scattering, light-transmittance, or other effects
to monitor relative PM loadings.
Basket means the metal container used to hold refractory shapes for
pitch impregnation during the shape preheating, impregnation, defuming
and, if applicable, coking processes.
Batch process means a process in which a set of refractory shapes
is acted upon as a single unit according to a predetermined schedule,
during which none of the refractory shapes being processed are added or
removed. A batch process does not operate continuously.
Binder means a substance added to a granular material to give it
workability and green or dry strength.
Catalytic oxidizer means an add-on air pollution control device
that is designed specifically to destroy organic
[[Page 42143]]
compounds in a process exhaust gas stream by catalytic incineration. A
catalytic oxidizer includes a bed of catalyst media through which the
process exhaust stream passes to promote combustion and incineration at
a lower temperature than would be possible without the catalyst.
Chromium refractory product means a refractory product that
contains at least 1 percent chromium by weight.
Clay refractory product means a refractory product that contains at
least 10 percent uncalcined clay by weight prior to firing in a kiln.
In this definition, the term ``clay'' means any of the following six
classifications of clay defined by the U.S. Geologic Survey: ball clay,
bentonite, common clay and shale, fire clay, fuller's earth, and
kaolin.
Coking oven means a thermal process unit that operates at a peak
temperature typically between 540 deg. and 870 deg.C (1000 deg. and
1600 deg.F) and is used to drive off the volatile constituents of
pitch-impregnated refractory shapes under a reducing atmosphere.
Combustion efficiency means the ratio of the carbon dioxide
concentration to the sum of the concentrations of carbon dioxide,
carbon monoxide, and total hydrocarbons in the exhaust stream of a
combustion process or combustion-based control device.
Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) means the total
equipment that is used to measure and record temperature, pressure,
liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, or pH on a continuous basis in one or
more locations. ``Total equipment'' includes the sensor, mechanical
components, electronic components, data acquisition system, data
recording system, electrical wiring, and other components of a CPMS.
Continuous process means a process that operates continuously. In a
continuous process unit, the materials or shapes that are processed are
either continuously charged (fed) to and discharged from the process
unit, or are charged and discharged at regular time intervals without
the process unit being shut down. Continuous thermal process units,
such as tunnel kilns, generally include temperature zones that are
maintained at relatively constant temperature and through which the
materials or shapes being processed are conveyed continuously or at
regular time intervals.
Curing oven means a thermal process unit that operates at a peak
temperature between 90 deg. and 340 deg.C (200 deg. and 650 deg.F) and
is used to activate a thermosetting resin, pitch, or other binder in
refractory shapes. Curing ovens also perform the same function as shape
dryers in removing the free moisture from refractory shapes.
Defumer means a process unit that is used for holding pitch-
impregnated refractory products as the products defume or cool
immediately following the impregnation process. This definition
includes autoclaves that are opened to the atmosphere following an
impregnation cycle and used for holding pitch-impregnated refractory
products while the products defume or cool.
Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
(1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard;
(2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart for any affected
source required to obtain such a permit; or
(3) Fails to meet any emission limitation (including any operating
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during startup,
shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is
permitted by this subpart.
Dry injection fabric filter (DIFF) means an add-on air pollution
control device that includes continuous injection of hydrated lime or
other sorbent into a duct or reaction chamber followed by a fabric
filter.
Dry lime scrubber/fabric filter (DLS/FF) means an add-on air
pollution control device that includes continuous injection of
humidified hydrated lime or other sorbent into a reaction chamber
followed by a fabric filter. These systems may include recirculation of
some of the sorbent.
Emission limitation means any restriction on the emissions a
process unit may discharge.
Fabric filter means an add-on air pollution control device used to
capture particulate matter by filtering a process exhaust stream
through filter or filter media; a fabric filter is also known as a
baghouse.
Fired refractory shape means a refractory shape that has been fired
in a kiln.
HAP means any hazardous air pollutant that appears in section
112(b) of the Clean Air Act.
Kiln means a thermal process unit that operates at a peak
temperature greater than 820 deg.C (1500 deg.F) and is used for firing
or sintering refractory, ceramic, or other shapes.
Kiln furniture means any refractory shape that is used to hold,
support, or position ceramic or refractory products in a kiln during
the firing process.
Maximum organic HAP processing rate means the combination of
process and refractory product formulation that has the greatest
potential to emit organic HAP. The maximum organic HAP processing rate
is a function of the organic HAP processing rate, process operating
temperature, and other process operating parameters that affect
emissions of organic HAP. (See also the definition of organic HAP
processing rate.)
Organic HAP processing rate means the rate at which the mass of
organic HAP materials contained in refractory shapes are processed in
an affected thermal process unit. The organic HAP processing rate is a
function of the amount of organic HAP contained in the resins, binders,
and additives used in a refractory mix; the amounts of those resins,
binders, and additives in the refractory mix; and the rate at which the
refractory shapes formed from the refractory mix is processed in an
affected thermal process unit. For continuous process units, the
organic HAP processing rate is expressed in units of mass of organic
HAP per unit of time (e.g., pounds per hour). For batch process units,
the organic HAP processing rate is expressed in units of mass of
organic HAP per unit mass of refractory shapes processed in the batch
(e.g., pounds per ton).
Particulate matter (PM) means, for the purposes of this subpart,
emissions of particulate matter that serve as a measure of total
particulate emissions as measured by EPA Method 5 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A.
Peak emissions period means the period of consecutive hourly
emissions of the applicable pollutant, measured in the units and format
of the applicable emission limit, that is greater than any other period
of consecutive hourly emissions for the same pollutant over the course
of a specified batch process cycle.
(1) The 4-hour THC peak emissions period is the period of 4
consecutive hours over which the sum of the hourly average THC
concentrations, corrected to 18 percent oxygen, is greater than the sum
of the hourly average THC emission concentrations, corrected to 18
percent oxygen, for any other period of 4 consecutive hours during the
same batch process cycle.
(2) The 3-hour HF peak emissions period is the period of 3
consecutive hours over which the sum of the hourly HF emission rates is
greater than the sum of the hourly HF emission rates for
[[Page 42144]]
any other period of 3 consecutive hours during the same batch process
cycle.
Pitch means the residue from the distillation of petroleum or coal
tar.
Pitch-impregnated refractory product means a refractory shape that
has been fired in a kiln, then impregnated with heated coal tar or
petroleum pitch under pressure. After impregnation, pitch-impregnated
refractory shapes may undergo the coking process in a coking oven. The
total carbon content of a pitch-impregnated refractory product is less
than 50 percent.
Pitch working tank means a tank that is used for heating pitch to
the impregnation temperature, typically between 150 deg. and 260 deg.C
(300 deg. and 500 deg.F); temporarily storing heated pitch between
impregnation cycles; and transferring pitch to and from the autoclave
during the impregnation step in manufacturing pitch-impregnated
refractory products.
Plant site means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under
common control, including properties that are separated only by a road
or other public right-of-way. Common control includes properties that
are owned, leased, or operated by the same entity, parent entity,
subsidiary, or any combination thereof.
Refractory product means nonmetallic materials having those
chemical and physical properties that make them applicable for
structures, or as components of systems, that are exposed to
environments above 538 deg.C (1000 deg.F). This definition includes,
but is not limited to: refractory bricks, kiln furniture, crucibles,
refractory ceramic fiber, and other materials used as linings for
boilers, kilns, and other processing units and equipment where extremes
of temperature, corrosion, and abrasion would destroy other materials.
Refractory products that use organic HAP means resin-bonded
refractory products, pitch-bonded refractory products, and other
refractory products that are produced using a substance that is an
organic HAP, that releases an organic HAP during production of the
refractory product, or that contains an organic HAP, such as methanol
or ethylene glycol.
Refractory shape means any refractory piece forming a stable mass
with specific dimensions.
Research and development process unit means any process unit whose
purpose is to conduct research and development for new processes and
products and is not engaged in the manufacture of products for
commercial sale.
Responsible official means one of the following:
(1) For a corporation: a president, secretary, treasurer, or vice-
president of the corporation in charge of a principal business
function, or any other person who performs similar policy or decision-
making functions for the corporation, or a duly authorized
representative of such person if the representative is responsible for
the overall operation of one or more manufacturing, production, or
operating facilities applying for or subject to a permit and either:
(i) The facilities employ more than 250 persons or have gross
annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second quarter
1980 dollars); or
(ii) The delegation of authority to such representatives is
approved in advance by the Administrator;
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: a general partner or
the proprietor, respectively;
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency:
Either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. For
the purposes of this part, a principal executive officer of a Federal
agency includes the chief executive officer having responsibility for
the overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency
(e.g., a Regional Administrator of EPA); or
(4) For affected sources (as defined in this subpart) applying for
or subject to a title V permit: ``responsible official'' means
responsible official as defined in Sec. 63.2.
Shape dryer means a thermal process unit that operates at a peak
temperature between 40 deg. and 700 deg.C (100 deg. and 1300 deg.F) and
is used exclusively to reduce the free moisture content of a refractory
shape. Shape dryers generally are the initial thermal process step
following the forming step in refractory products manufacturing. (See
also the definition of a curing oven).
Shape preheater means a thermal process unit that operates at a
peak temperature between 180 deg. and 320 deg.C (350 deg. and
600 deg.F) and is used to heat fired refractory shapes prior to the
impregnation step in manufacturing pitch-impregnated refractory
products.
Thermal oxidizer means an add-on air pollution control device that
includes one or more combustion chambers and is designed specifically
to destroy organic compounds in a process exhaust gas stream by
incineration.
Uncalcined clay means clay that has not undergone thermal
processing in a calciner.
Wet scrubber (WS) means an add-on air pollution control device that
removes pollutants from a gas stream by bringing them into contact with
a liquid, typically water.
Work practice standard means any design, equipment, work practice,
or operational standard, or combination thereof, that is promulgated
pursuant to section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.
As stated in Sec. 63.9788, you must comply with the emission limits
for affected sources in the following table:
Table 1 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . You must meet the following emission limits . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing curing oven, shape dryer, and As specified in items 2 through 7 of this table.
kiln that is used to process refractory products that
use organic HAP; each new or existing coking oven and
defumer that is used to produce pitch-impregnated
refractory products; each new shape preheater that is
used to produce pitch-impregnated refractory products;
AND each new or existing process unit that is
exhausted to a thermal or catalytic oxidizer that also
controls emissions from an affected shape preheater or
pitch working tank.
2. Continuous process units that are controlled with a a. The 3-hour block average total hydrocarbon (THC)
thermal or catalytic oxidizer. concentration must not exceed 20 parts per million by
volume, dry basis (ppmvd), corrected to 18 percent
oxygen, at the outlet of the control device;
OR
[[Page 42145]]
b. If the carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration at the
outlet of the control device does not exceed 3.0
percent, the 3-hour block average combustion
efficiency must equal or exceed 99.8 percent at the
outlet of the control device, as specified in item
5(d) of Table 4 to this subpart using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.9800(f)(2).
3. Continuous process units that are equipped with a The 3-hour block average THC concentration must not
control device other than a thermal or catalytic exceed 20 ppmvd, corrected to 18 percent oxygen, at
oxidizer or that use process changes to reduce organic the outlet of the process gas stream.
HAP emissions.
4. Continuous kilns that are not equipped with a The 3-hour block average THC concentration must not
control device. exceed 20 ppmvd, corrected to 18 percent oxygen, at
the outlet of the process gas stream.
5. Batch process units that are controlled with a a. The average of the highest rolling 3-hour average
thermal or catalytic oxidizer. THC concentrations must not exceed 20 ppmvd, corrected
to 18 percent oxygen, at the outlet of the control
device;
OR
b. If the CO2 concentration at the outlet of the
control device does not exceed 3.0 percent, the
average of the highest rolling 3-hour average
combustion efficiencies must equal or exceed 99.8
percent at the outlet of the control device, as
specified in item 10(e) of Table 4 to this subpart
using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.9800(f)(2).
6. Batch process units that are equipped with a control The average of the highest rolling 3-hour average THC
device other than a thermal or catalytic oxidizer or concentrations must not exceed 20 ppmvd, corrected to
that use process changes to reduce organic HAP 18 percent oxygen, at the outlet of the process gas
emissions. stream.
7. Batch process kilns that are not equipped with a The average of the highest rolling 3-hour average THC
control device. concentrations must not exceed 20 ppmvd, corrected to
18 percent oxygen, at the outlet of the process gas
stream.
8. Each new continuous kiln that is used to produce a. The 3-hour block average hydrogen fluoride (HF)
clay refractory products. emissions must not exceed 0.001 kilograms per megagram
(kg/Mg) (0.002 pounds per ton (lb/ton)) of uncalcined
clay processed, OR uncontrolled HF emissions must be
reduced by at least 99.5 percent;
AND
b. The 3-hour block average hydrochloric acid (HCl)
emissions must not exceed 0.0025 kg/Mg (0.005 lb/ton)
of uncalcined clay processed, OR uncontrolled HCl
emissions must be reduced by at least 98 percent.
9. Each new batch process kiln that is used to produce a. Uncontrolled HF emissions must be reduced by at
clay refractory products. least 99.5 percent, according to the procedure
specified in item 15(d) of Table 4 to this subpart;
AND
b. Uncontrolled HCl emissions must be reduced by at
least 98 percent, according to the procedure specified
in item 15(e) of Table 4 to this subpart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9788, you must comply with the operating
limits for affected sources in the following table:
Table 2 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Operating Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . You must . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing curing oven, shape dryer, and a. Operate all affected sources according to the
kiln that is used to process refractory products that requirements to this subpart on and after the date on
use organic HAP; each new or existing coking oven and which the initial performance test is conducted or
defumer that is to produce pitch-impregnated required to be conducted, whichever date is earlier;
refractory products; each new shape preheater that is AND
used to produce pitch-impregnated refractory products; b. Capture emissions and vent them through a closed
AND each new or existing process unit that is system;
exhausted to a thermal or catalytic oxidizer that also AND
controls emissions from an affected shape preheater or c. Operate each control device that is required to
pitch working tank. comply with this subpart on each affected source
during all periods that the source is operating,
except where specified in item 13 of Table 4 to this
subpart;
AND
d. Record all operating parameters specified in Table 8
to this subpart for the affected source;
AND
e. Prepare and implement a written operation,
maintenance, and monitoring (OM&M) plan as specified
in Sec. 63.9792(d).
AND
f. Satisfy the applicable operating limits specified in
items 2 through 7 of this table.
2. Each affected continuous process unit............... Maintain the 3-hour block average organic HAP
processing rate (pounds per hour) at or below the
level established during the most recent performance
test.
[[Page 42146]]
3. Continuous process units that are equipped with a Maintain the 3-hour block average operating temperature
thermal oxidizer. in the thermal oxidizer combustion chamber at or above
the average hourly operating temperature established
during the most recent performance test minus 14 deg.
C (25 deg. F).
4. Continuous process units that are equipped with a Maintain the 3-hour block average operating temperature
catalytic oxidizer. at the inlet of the catalyst bed of the oxidizer at or
above the average hourly operating temperature
established during the most recent performance test
minus 14 deg. C (25 deg. F).
5. Each affected batch process unit.................... For each batch cycle, maintain the organic HAP
processing rate (pounds per batch) at or below the
level established during the most recent performance
test.
6. Batch process units that are equipped with a thermal a. From the start of each batch cycle until 3 hours
oxidizer. have passed since the process unit reached maximum
temperature, maintain the average hourly operating
temperature in the thermal oxidizer combustion chamber
at or above the average hourly operating temperature
minus 14 deg. C (25 deg. F) established for the
corresponding period during the most recent
performance test;
AND
b. For each subsequent hour of the batch cycle,
maintain the average hourly operating temperature in
the thermal oxidizer combustion chamber at or above
the average hourly operating temperature minus 14 deg.
C (25 deg. F) established for the corresponding hour
during the most recent performance test, as specified
in item 11 of Table 4 to this subpart.
7. Batch process units that are equipped with a a. From the start of each batch cycle until 3 hours
catalytic oxidizer. have passed since the process unit reached maximum
temperature, maintain the average hourly operating
temperature at the inlet of the catalyst bed at or
above the average hourly operating temperature minus
14 deg. C (25 deg. F) established for the
corresponding period during the most recent
performance test;
AND
b. For each subsequent hour of the batch cycle,
maintain the average hourly operating temperature at
the inlet of the catalyst bed at or above the average
hourly operating temperature minus 14 deg. C (25 deg.
F) established for the corresponding hour during the
most recent performance test, as specified in item 12
of Table 4 to this subpart.
8. Each new kiln that is used to process clay Satisfy the applicable operating limits specified in
refractory products. items 9 through 11 of this table.
9. Each affected kiln that is equipped with a DIFF or a. Initiate corrective action within 1 hour of a bag
DLS/FF. leak detection system alarm and complete corrective
actions in accordance with the OM&M plan;
AND
b. Maintain the 3-hour block average fabric filter
inlet temperature at or below the average temperature
established during the performance test plus 14 deg. C
(25 deg. F);
AND
c. Verify at least once each 8-hour shift that lime is
free-flowing by means of a visual check, checking the
output of a load cell, carrier gas/lime flow
indicator, or carrier gas pressure drop measurement
system;
AND
d. Record feeder setting daily to verify that the
feeder setting is at or above the level established
during the most recent performance test.
10. Each affected kiln that is equipped with a DLS/FF.. Maintain the 3-hour block average water injection rate
at or above the average water injection rate
established during the most recent performance test.
11. Each affected kiln that is equipped with a wet Maintain the 3-hour block average pressure drop across
scrubber (WS). the scrubber, liquid pH, AND liquid flow rate at or
above the levels established during the most recent
performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9788, you must comply with the work practice
standards for affected sources in the following table:
[[Page 42147]]
Table 3 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to one of the following requirements .
For . . . You must . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each basket or container that a. Control POM emissions i. At least every 10 cycles, remove the residual
is used for holding fired from any affected shape pitch from the surfaces of the basket or
refractory shapes in an existing preheater. container by abrasive blasting prior to placing
shape preheater and autoclave the basket or container in the affected shape
during the pitch impregnation preheater;
process. OR
ii. At least every 10 cycles, subject the basket
or container to a thermal process cycle that
meets or exceeds the operating temperature and
cycle time of the affected preheater, AND is
conducted in a process unit that is exhausted to
a thermal or catalytic oxidizer that is
comparable to the control device used on an
affected defumer or coking oven;
OR
iii. Capture emissions from the affected shape
preheater and vent them to the control device
that is used to control emissions from an
affected defumer or coking oven, OR to a
comparable thermal or catalytic oxidizer.
2. Each existing and new pitch Control POM emissions.... Capture emissions from the affected pitch working
working tank. tank and vent them to the control device that is
used to control emissions from an affected
defumer or coking oven, OR to a comparable
thermal or catalytic oxidizer.
3. Each existing and new chromium Minimize fuel-based HAP Use natural gas, or equivalent, as the kiln fuel.
refractory products kiln. emissions.
4. Each existing clay refractory Minimize fuel-based HAP Use natural gas, or equivalent, as the kiln fuel.
products kiln. emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9800, you must comply with the requirements
for performance tests for affected sources in the following table:
Table 4 to Subpart SSSSS to Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the
For . . . You must . . . Using . . . following requirements
. . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each affected source listed in a. Conduct performance i. The requirements of (1) Record the date of
Table 1 to this subpart. tests. the general provisions the test;
in subpart A of this AND
part and the (2) Identify the
requirements to this emission source that
subpart. is tested;
AND
(3) Collect and record
the corresponding
operating parameter
and emission test data
listed in this table
for each run of the
performance test;
AND
(4) Conduct a minimum
of three separate test
runs during the
performance test;
AND
(5) Repeat the
performance test at
least every 5 years;
AND
(6) If complying with
the THC or combustion
efficiency limits
specified in items 2
through 7 of Table 1
to this subpart,
repeat the performance
test under the
conditions specified
in items 2(a)(3) and
(4) of this table.
[[Page 42148]]
b. Select the locations i. Method 1 or 1A of 40 (1) To demonstrate
of sampling ports and CFR, part 60, appendix compliance with the
the number of traverse A. control efficiency
points. (percent reduction)
limits specified in
items 8 and 9 of Table
1 to this subpart,
locate sampling sites
at the inlet of the
control device and at
either the outlet of
the control device or
at the stack prior to
any releases to the
atmosphere;
AND
(2) To demonstrate
compliance with any
other emission limit
specified in Table 1
to this subpart,
locate all sampling
sites at the outlet of
the control device or
at the stack prior to
any releases to the
atmosphere.
c. Determine gas Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, Measure gas velocities
velocity and 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR and volumetric flow
volumetric flow rate. part 60, appendix A. rates at 1-hr
intervals throughout
each test run.
d. Conduct gas Method 3, 3A, or 3B of As specified in the
molecular weight 40 CFR part 60, applicable test
analysis. appendix A. method.
e. Measure gas moisture Method 4 of 40 CFR part As specified in the
content. 60, appendix A. applicable test
method.
2. Each new or existing curing oven, a. Conduct performance (1) Conduct the
shape dryer, and kiln that is used tests. performance test while
to process refractory products that the source is
use organic HAP; each new or operating at the
existing coking oven and defumer maximum organic HAP
that is used to produce pitch- processing rate
impregnated refractory products; reasonably expected to
each new shape preheater that is occur;
used to produce pitch-impregnated AND
refractory products; AND each new or (2) Define the maximum
existing process unit that is organic HAP processing
exhausted to a thermal or catalytic rate as the
oxidizer that also controls combination of process
emissions from an affected shape and product or
preheater or pitch working tank. products having the
greatest potential to
emit organic HAP;
AND
(3) Repeat the
performance test
before starting
production of any
product for which the
organic HAP processing
rate is likely to
exceed the maximum
organic HAP processing
rate established
during most recent
performance test;
AND
(4) Repeat the
performance test on
any affected
uncontrolled kiln
following process
changes (e.g., shorter
curing oven cycle
time) that could
increase organic HAP
emissions from the
affected kiln.
b. Satisfy the
applicable
requirements listed in
items 3 through 13 of
this table.
3. Each affected continuous process a. Perform a minimum of The appropriate test Each test run must be
unit. 3 test runs. methods specified in at least 1 hour in
items 1, 4 and 5 of duration.
this table.
[[Page 42149]]
b. Establish the i. Method 311, OR MSDS (1) Calculate and
operating limit for sheets, OR product record the organic HAP
the maximum organic labels to determine content of all
HAP processing rate. the mass fraction of refractory shapes that
organic HAP in each are processed during
resin, binder, or the performance test,
additive;. based on the mass
AND.................... fraction of organic
Product formulation HAP in the resins,
data that specify the binders, or additives;
mass fraction of each the mass fraction of
resin, binder, and each resin, binder, or
additive in the additive, in the
products that are product; and the
processed during the process feed rate;
performance test;. AND
AND.................... (2) Calculate and
Process feed rate data record the organic HAP
(tons per hour).. processing rate
(pounds per hour) for
each test run;
AND
(3) Calculate and
record the 3-run
average organic HAP
processing rate as the
average of the average
organic HAP processing
rates for each test
run.
c. Record the operating Process data........... During each test run
temperature of the and at least once per
affected source. hour, record the
operating temperature
in the highest
temperature zone of
the affected source.
4. Each continuous process unit that a. Measure emissions of i. Method 25A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
is subject to the THC emission limit THC at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
listed in item 2(a), 3, or 4 of the control device or concentrations of THC
Table 1 to this subpart. in the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average THC
concentration.
b. Measure emissions of i. Method 3A of 40 CFR (1) Each minutes
O2 at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
the control device or concentrations of O2
in the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average O2
concentration.
c. Determine the 1. Equation 1 of Sec. (1) Calculate the
average hourly THC 63.9800(f)(1). hourly average THC and
concentrati on, O2 concentrations for
corrected to 18 each hour of the
percent O2. performance test as
the average of the 1-
minute THC and O2
measurements;
AND
(2) Correct the hourly
average THC
concentration to 18
percent O2 using
Equation 1 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(1).
d. Determine the 3-hour i. The hourly average (1) Calculate the
block average THC concentrati on of THC, hourly THC emission
emission concentrati corrected to 18 concentration,
on, corrected to 18 percent O2. corrected to 18
percent O2. percent O2, for each
hour of the
performance test;
AND
(2) Calculate the 3-
hour block average THC
emission
concentration,
corrected to 18
percent O2, as the
average of the hourly
THC emission
concentrations
corrected to 18
percent O2.
[[Page 42150]]
5. Each continuous process unit that a. Measure emissions of i. Method 25A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
is subject to the combustion THC at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
efficiency limit listed in item 2(b) the control device or concentrations of THC
of Table 1 to this subpart. in the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average THC
concentration.
b. Measure emissions of i. Method 3A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
CO2 at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
the control device. concentrations of CO2
in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average CO2
concentration;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average CO2
concentration for each
hour of the
performance test.
c. Measure emissions of i. Method 10 of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
CO at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
the control device. concentrations of CO
in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average CO
concentration;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average CO
concentration for each
hour of the
performance test.
d. Determine the 3-hour i. The hourly average (1) Calculate the
block average concentrations of CO2, hourly average
combustion efficiency. CO, and THC. combustion efficiency
for each hour of the
performance test
according to Equation
2 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(2);
AND
(2) Calculate the 3-
hour block average
combustion efficiency
as the average of the
three hourly average
combustion
efficiencies.
6. Continuous process units that are a. Establish the i. Continuous recording (1) At least every 15
equipped with a thermal oxidizer. operating limit for of the output of the minutes, measure and
the minimum thermal combustion chamber record the thermal
oxidizer combustion temperature oxidizer combustion
chamber temperature. measurement device. chamber temperature;
AND
(2) Provide at least
one measurement during
at least three 15-
minute periods per
hour of testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average thermal
oxidizer combustion
chamber temperature
for each hour of the
performance test.
[[Page 42151]]
7. Continuous process units that are a. Establish the i. Continuous recording (1) At least every 15
equipped with a catalytic oxidizer. operating limit for of the output of the minutes, measure and
the minimum temperature record the temperature
temperature at the measurement device.. at the oxidizer
inlet of the oxidizer catalyst bed inlet;
catalyst bed.. AND
(2) Provide at least
one catalyst bed. bed
inlet temperature
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average
catalyst bed inlet
temperature for each
hour of the
performance test.
8. Each affected batch process unit.. a. Perform a minimum of i. The appropriate test (1) Each test run must
3 test runs. methods specified in begin with the start
ites 1, 9. and 10 of of a batch cycle,
this table. except as specified in
items 8(a)(i)(3) of
this table;
AND
(2) Each test run must
continue until the end
of the batch cycle,
except as specified in
items 8(a)(i)(3) and
(4) of this table;
AND
(3) If you develop an
emissions profile, as
described in Sec.
63.9802(a), you can
limit each test run to
the 4-hour THC peak
emissions period;
AND
(4) If you do not
develop an emissions
profile, a test run
can be stopped and the
results of that run
considered complete if
you measure emissions
continuously until at
least 3 hours after
the affected process
unit reaches maximum
temperature, AND
emissions of THC are
not increasing during
the 3-hour period
since maximum process
temperature was
reached, AND the
concentration of THC
at the inlet to the
control device does
not exceed 20 ppmvd,
corrected to 18
percent oxygen, OR the
emission limits listed
in items 5 and 6 of
Table 1 to this
subpart have been met
during each of the
final three 1-hour
periods of the test
run, AND, for sources
equipped with a
thermal or catalytic
oxidizer, at least 1
hour has passed since
any reduction in the
operating temperature
of the oxidizer, as
specified in item 13
of this table.
[[Page 42152]]
b. Establish the i. Method 311, OR MSDS (1) Calculate and
operating limit for sheets, OR product record the organic HAP
the maximum organic labels to determine content of all
HAP processing rate. the mass fraction of refractory shapes that
organic HAP in each are processed during
resin, binder, or the performance test,
additive; based on the mass
AND.................... fraction of organic
ii. Product forumlation HAP in the resins,
data that specify the binders, or additives;
mass fraction of each the mass fraction of
resin, binder, and each resin, binder, or
additive in the additive, in the
products that are product, and the batch
processed during the weight prior to
performance test;. processing;
AND.................... AND
iii. Batch weight (2) Calculate and
(tons).. record the organic HAP
processing rate
(pounds per batch) for
each test run;
AND
(3) Calculate and
record the 3-run
average organic HAP
processing rate as the
average of the average
organic HAP processing
rates for each test
run.
c. Record the batch Process data........... Record the total
cycle time. elapsed time from
start to completion of
the batch cycle.
d. Record the operating Process data........... Record the operating
temperature of the temperature of the
affected source. affected source at
least once every hour
of the performance
test.
9. Each batch process unit that is a. Measure emissions of i. Method 25A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
subject to the THC emission limit THC at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
listed in item 5(a), 6, or 7 of the control device or concentrations of THC
Table 1 to this subpart. in the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average THC
concentration.
b. Measure emissions of i. Method 3A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
the outlet of the part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
control device or in concentrations of O2
the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average O2
concentration.
c. Determine the i. Equation 1 of Sec. (1) Calculate the
average hourly THC 63.9800(f)(1). hourly average THC and
concentration, O2 concentrations for
corrected to 18 each hour of the
percent O2. performance test as
the average of the 1-
minute THC and O2
measurements;
AND
(2) Correct the hourly
average THC
concentration to 18
percent O2 using
Equation 1 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(1).
d. Determine the The hourly average Calculate the rolling 3-
rolling 3-hour average concentrations of THC, hour average THC
THC emission corrected to 18 emission concentration
concentrations, percent O2. as the average of the
corrected to 18 hourly THC emission
percent O2, for each concentrations,
test run. corrected to 18
percent O2, for each
period of 3
consecutive hours
during each test run.
[[Page 42153]]
e. Determine the The rolling 3-hour Calculate the average
average of the highest average THC emission of the highest rolling
rolling 3-hour average concentrations, 3-hour average THC
THC concentrations, corrected to 18 concentrations,
corrected to 18 percent O2. corrected to 18
percent O2. percent O2, as the
average of the highest
rolling 3-hour THC
emission
concentrations,
corrected to 18
percent O2, for each
test run.
10. Batch process units that are a. Measure emissions of i. Method 25A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
subject to the combustion efficiency THC at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
limit listed in item 5(b) of Table 1 the control device or concentrations of THC
to this subpart. in the stack. in the exhaust stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average THC
concentration.
b. Measure emissions of i. Method 3A of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
CO2 at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record the
the control device. concentrations of CO2
in the the exhaust
stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average CO2
concentration;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average CO2
concentration for each
hour of the
performance test.
c. Measure emissions of i. Method 10 of 40 CFR (1) Each minute,
CO at the outlet of part 60, appendix A. measure and record,
the control device. the concentrations of
CO in the exhaust
stream;
AND
(2) Provide at least 50
1-minute measurements
for each valid hourly
average CO
concentration;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average CO
concentration for each
hour of the
performance test.
d. Determine the The hourly average Calculate the the
rollowing 3-hour concentrations of CO2, rolling 3-hour average
average combustion CO, and THC. combustion efficiency
efficiencies for each as theaverage of the
test run. hourly combustion
efficiencies
efficiencies according
to Equation 2 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(2) for each
period of 3
consecutive hours
during each test run.
e. Determine the The rolling 3-hour Calculate the average 3-
average of the highest average combustion hour average
rolling 3-hour average efficiencies. combustion
combustion efficiencies as the
efficiencies. average of the highest
rolling 3-hour
combustion
efficiencies for each
test run.
11. Batch process units that are a. Establish the i. Continuous recording (1) At least every 15
equipped with a thermal oxidizer. operating limit for of the output of the minutes, measure and
the minimum thermal combustion chamber record the thermal
oxidizer combustion temperature oxidizer combustion
chamber temperature. measurement device. chamber temperature;
AND
(2) Provide at least
one temperature
measure during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average
temperature for each
hour of the
performance test.
[[Page 42154]]
12. Batch process units that are a. Establish the i. Continuous recording (1) At least every 15
equipped with a catlytic oxidizer. operating limits for of the output of the minutes, measure and
the minimum temperature record the temperature
temperature at the measurement device. at the oxidizer
inlet of the oxidizer catalyst bed inlet;
catalyst bed. AND
(2) Provide at least
one catalyst bed inlet
temperature
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average
catalyst bed inlet
temperature for each
hour of the
performance test.
13. Batch process units that are a. During each test ....................... (1) The oxidizer can be
equipped with a thermal and run, maintain the shut off or the
catalytic oxidizer. operating temperature oxidizer operating
of the oxidizer until temperature can be
emission levels allow reduced if at least 3
the oxidizer to be hours have passed
shut off or the since the affected
operating temperature process unit reached
of the oxidizer to be maximum temperature;
reduced. AND
(2) The applicable
emission limit
specified in items
5(a) and (b) of Table
1 to this subpart is
met during each of the
previous three 1-hour
periods
AND
(3) Average hourly THC
emissions are not
increasing during the
3-hour period since
maximum process
temperature was
reached;
AND
(4) The average THC
concentration at the
inlet to the oxidizer
has not exceeded 20
ppmvd, corrected to 18
percent oxygen, for at
least 1 hour, OR the
applicable emission
limit specified in
items 5(a) and (b) of
Table 1 to this
subpart is met during
each of the four 15-
minute periods
immediately following
the oxidizer
temperature reduction;
AND
(5) If the applicable
emission limit
specifiefd in items
5(a) and (b) of Table
1 to this subpart is
not met during any of
the four 15-minute
periods immediately
following the oxidizer
temperature reduction,
you must return the
oxidizer to its normal
operating temperature
as soon as possible
and maintain that
temperature for at
least 1 hour;
AND
(6) You must continue
the test run until the
applicable emission
limit specified in
items 5(a) and (b) of
Table 1 to this
subpart is met for at
least four consecutive
15-minute periods that
immediately follow the
temperature reduction
14. Each new continuous kiln that is a. Measure emissions of Method 26A of 40 CFR Conduct the test while
used to process clay refractory HF and HC. part 60, appendix A. the emissions units is
products. operating at the
maximum production
level.
[[Page 42155]]
b. Perform a minimum of The appropriate test Each test run must be
3 test runs. methods specified in at least 1 hour in
items 1 and 14(a) of duration.
this table.
c. If complying with i. Production data;.... (1) Record the
the production--based AND.................... production rate (tons
HF or HCl emission ii. Product formulation per hour of fired
limits specified in data that specify the product);
items 8(a) and (b) of mass fraction of AND
table 1 to this uncalcined clay in the (2) Calculate and
subpart, record the products that are record the average
uncalcined clay processed during the rate at which
processing rate. performance test.. uncalcined clay is
processed (tons per
hour) for each test
run;
AND
(3) Calculate and
record the 3-run
average uncalcined
clay processing rate
as the average of the
average uncalcined
clay processing rates
for each test run.
d. If complying with i. The hourly HF (1) Calculate the
the production--based emission rate; hourly production-
HF emission limit AND.................... based HF emission rate
specified in item 8(a) ii. The average for each test run
of Table 1 to this uncalcined clay using Equation 3 of
subpart, determine the processing rate.. Sec. 63.9800(f)(3);
3-hour block average AND
production-based HF (2) Calculate the 3-
emission rate. hour block average
production-based HF
emission rate as the
average of the hourly
production-based HF
emission rates for
each test run.
e. If complying with i. The hourly HCl (1) Calculate the
the production-based emission rate;. hourly production-
HCl emission limit AND.................... based HCl emission
specified in item 8(b) ii. The average rate for each test run
of Table 1 to this uncalcined clay using Equation 3 of
subpart, determine the processing rate.. Sec. 63.9800(f)(3);
3-hour block average AND
production-based HCl (2) Calculate the 3-
emission rate. hour block average
production-based HCl
emission rate as the
average of the hourly
production-based HCl
emission rates for
each test run.
f. If complying with i. The hourly average (1) Calculate the
the percent HF HF emission rates at hourly percent HF
reduction emission the inlet and outlet reduction using
limit specified in to the control device. Equation 4 of Sec.
item 8(a) of Table 1 63.9800(f)(4);
to this subpart, AND
determine the 3-hour (2) Calculate the 3-
block average percent hour block average HF
HF reduction. percent reduction as
the average of the
hourly HF reductions.
g. If complying with i. The hourly average (1) Calculate the
the percent HCl HCl emission rates at hourly percent HCl
reduction emission the inlet and outlet reduction using
limit specified in to the control device. Equation 4 of Sec.
item 8(b) of Table 1 63.9800(f)(4);
to this subpart, AND
determine the 3-hour (2) Calculate the 3-
block average percent hour block average HCl
HCl reduction. percent reduction as
the average of the
hourly percent HCl
reductions.
15. Each new batch process kiln that a. Measure emissions of Method 26A of 40 CFR Conduct the test while
is used to process clay refractory HF and HCl. part 60, appendix A. the emissions units is
products. operating at the
maximum production
level.
[[Page 42156]]
b. Perform a minimum of i. The appropriate test (1) Each test run must
3 test runs. methods specified in consist of a series of
items 1 and 15(a) of 1-hour Method 26A
this table. runs, beginning with
the start of a batch
cycle, except as
specified in item
15(b)(i)(3) of this
table;
AND
(2) Each test run must
continue until the end
of the batch cycle,
except as specified in
item 15(b)(i)(3) of
this table;
AND
(3) If you develop an
emissions profile, as
described in Sec.
63.9802(b), you can
limit each test run to
the 3-hour HF peak
emissions period.
c. Record the average i. Batch weight data;.. (1) Record the batch
uncalcined clay AND.................... weight (tons per
processing rate. ii. Product formulation batch);
data that specify the AND
mass fraction of (2) Calculate and
uncalcined clay in the record the average
refractory products rate at which
processed during the uncalcined clay is
performance test. processed (tons per
batch) for each test
run;
AND
(3) Calculate and
record the 3-run
average uncalcined
clay processing rate
as the average of the
average uncalcined
clay processing rates
for each test run.
d. Determine the 3-run i. The hourly average (1) For each test run,
block average percent HF emission rates at determine the 3-hour
HF reduction for the 3- the inlet and outlet HF peak emissions
hour HF peak emissions to the control device. period, as defined in
period. Sec. 63.9826.
(2) Calculate the
percent HF reduction
for each hour of the 3-
hour HF peak emissions
period using Equation
4 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(4);
AND
(3) Calculate the
average percent HF
reduction for each
test run as the
average of the hourly
percent HF reductions
for the 3-hour HF peak
emissions period for
that run;
AND
(4) Calculate the 3-run
block average HF
percent reduction as
the average of the
percent HF reductions
for each run.
[[Page 42157]]
e. Determine the 3-run i. The hourly average (1) For each test run,
block average percent HCl emission rates at determine the 3-hour
HCl reduction for the the inlet and outlet HF peak emissions
3-hour HF peak to the control device. period, as defined in
emissions period. Sec. 63.9826.
(2) Calculate the
percent HCl reduction
for each hour of the 3-
hour HF peak emissions
period using Equation
4 of Sec.
63.9800(f)(4);
AND
(3) Calculate the
average percent HCl
reduction for each
test run as the
average of the hourly
percent HCl reductions
for the 3-hour HF peak
emissions period for
that run;
AND
(4) Calculate the 3-run
block average HCl
percent reduction as
the average of the
percent HCl reductions
for each run.
16. Each new kiln that is used to a. Document conformance Data from installation Submit analyses and
process clay refractory products and with specifications and calibration of the supporting
is equipped with a DIFF or DLS/FF. and requirements of bag leak detection documentation
the bag leak detection system. demonstrating
system. conformance with EPA
guidance and
specifications for bag
leak detection systems
as part of the
Notification of
Compliance Status.
b. Establish the i. Data from the (1) At least every 15
operating limit for temperature minutes, measure and
the maximum average measurement device record the temperature
fabric filter inlet during the performance at the inlet to the
temperature. test. fabric filter;
AND
(2) Provide at least
one temperature
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
hourly average
temperature for each
hour of the
performance test;
AND
(4) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average
temperature as the
average of the hourly
average temperatures.
c. Establish the i. Data from the lime (1) For continuous lime
operating limit for feeder during the injection systems,
the lime feeder performance test. ensure that lime in
setting. the feed hopper or
silo is free-flowing
at all times during
the performance test;
AND
(2) Record the feeder
setting for the three
test runs;
AND
(3) If the feed rate
setting varies during
the three test runs,
calculate and record
the average feed rate
from the three test
runs.
[[Page 42158]]
17. Each new kiln that is used to a. Establish the i. Data from the water (1) At least every 15
process clay refractory products and operating limit for injection rate minutes, measure the
is equipped with a DLS/FF. the minimum average measurement device water injection rate;
water injection. during the performance AND
test. (2) Provide at least
one water injection
rate measurement
during at least three
15-minute periods per
hour of testing;
AND
(3) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average water
injection rate as the
average of the hourly
average water
injection rates.
18. Each new kiln that is used to a. Establish the i. Data from the (1) At least every 15
process clay refractory products and operating limit for pressure drop minutes, measure the
is equipped with a WS. the minimum average measurement device scrubber pressure
scrubber pressure drop. during the performance drop;
test. AND
(2) Provide at least
one pressure drop
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
average hourly
pressure drop for each
hour of the
performance test;
AND
(4) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average pressure
drop as the average of
the hourly average
pressure drops.
b. Establish the i. Data from the pH (1) At least every 15
operating limit for measurement device minutes, measure
the minimum average during the performance scrubber liquid pH;
scrubber liquid pH. test. AND
(2) Provide at least
one pH measurement
during at least three
15-minute periods per
hour of testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
average hourly pH
values for each hour
of the performance
test;
AND
(4) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average liquid
pH as the average of
the hourly average pH
measurements.
c. Establish the i. Data from the flow (1) At least every 15
operating limit for rate measurement minutes, measure the
the minimum average device during the scrubber liquid flow
scrubber liquid flow performance test. rate;
rate. AND
(2) Provide at least
one flow rate
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
average hourly liquid
flow rate for each
hour of the
performance test;
AND
(4) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average liquid
flow rate as the
average of the average
hourly liquid flow
rates.
[[Page 42159]]
d. Establish the i. Data from the (1) At least every 15
operating limit for chemical feed rate minutes, measure the
the minimum average measurement device scrubber chemical feed
scrubber chemical feed during the performance rate;
rate. test. AND
(2) Provide at least
one chemical feed rate
measurement during at
least three 15-minute
periods per hour of
testing;
AND
(3) Calculate the
average hourly
chemical feed rate for
each hour of the
performance test;
AND
(4) Calculate and
record the 3-hour
block average chemical
feed rate as the
average of the hourly
average chemical feed
rates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9806, you must show initial compliance with
the emission limits for affected sources according to the following
table:
Table 5 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Emission
Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have
For . . . For the following demonstrated initial
emission limit . . . compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each affected source a. Each applicable i. Emissions
listed in Table 1 to this emission limit measured using the
subpart. listed in Table 1 test methods
to this subpart. specified in Table
4 to this subpart
satisfy the
applicable emission
limits specified in
Table 1 to this
subpart;
AND
ii. You establish
and have a record
of the operating
limits listed in
Table 2 to this
subpart over the
performance test
period;
AND
iii. You report the
results of the
performance test in
the Notification of
Compliance Status,
as specified by
Sec. 63.9812
(e)(1) and (2).
2. Each new or existing As specified in You have satisfied
curing oven, shape dryer, items 3 and 4 of the applicable
and kiln that is used to this table. requirements
process refractory products specified in items
that use organic HAP; each 3 and 4 of this
new or existing coking oven table.
and defumer that is used to
produce pitch-impregnated
refractory products; each
new shape preheater that is
used to produce pitch-
impregnated refractory
products; AND each new or
existing process unit that
is exhausted to a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer that
also controls emissions
from an affected shape
preheater or pitch working
tank.
3. Each affected continuous The average THC The 3-hour block
process unit that is concentration must average THC
subject to the THC emission not exceed 20 emission
concentration limit listed ppmvd, corrected to concentration
in item 2(a), 3, or 4 of 18 percent O2. measured during the
Table 1 to this subpart. performance test
using Method 25A is
equal to or less
than 20 ppmvd,
corrected to 18
percent oxygen.
4. Each affected continuous The average The 3-hour average
process block unit that is combustion combustion
subject to the combustion efficiency must efficiency measured
efficiency limit listed in equal or exceed during the
item 2(b) of Table 1 to 99.8 percent. performance test
this subpart. using Methods 3A,
10, and 25A and
calculated using
Equation 2 in Sec.
63.9800(f) is equal
to or greater than
99.8 percent.
5. Each affected batch The average THC The average of the
process unit subject to the concentration must highest rolling 3-
THC emission concentration not exceed 20 hour average THC
limit listed in item 5(a), ppmvd, corrected to emission
6, or 7 of Table 1 to this 18 percent O2. concentrations
subpart. measured during the
performance test
using Method 25A is
equal to or less
than 20 ppmvd,
corrected to 18
percent oxygen.
[[Page 42160]]
6. Each affected batch The average The average of the
process unit that is combustion highest rolling 3-
subject to the combustion efficiency must hour average
efficiency limit listed in equal or exceed combustion
item 5(b) of Table 1 to 99.8 percent. efficiencies
this subpart. measured during the
performance test
using Methods 3A,
10, and 25A and
calculated using
Equation 2 in Sec.
63.9800(f) is equal
to or greater than
99.8 percent.
7. Each affected process a. The average THC i. You have
unit that is equipped with concentration must installed a THC
a control device other than not exceed 20 ppmvd. CEMS at the outlet
a thermal or catalytic of the control
oxidizer. device or in the
stack of the
affected source;
AND
ii. You have
satisfied the
requirements of PS-
8 of 40 CFR part
60, appendix B.
8. Each new kiln that is As specified in You have satisfied
used to process clay items 9 and 10 of the applicable
refractory products. this table. requirements
specified in items
9 and 10 of this
table.
9. Each affected continuous a. The average HF i. The average HF
kiln. emissions must not emissions measured
exceed 0.001 kg/Mg during the
(0.002 lb/ton) of performance test
uncalcined clay using Method 26A is
processed, OR the equal to or less
average than 0.001 kg/Mg
uncontrolled HF (0.002 lb/ton) of
emissions must be fired product;
reduced by at least OR
99.5 percent. ii. The HF emission
reduction measured
during the
performance test is
equal to or greater
than 99.5 percent.
b. The average HCl i. The average HCl
emissions must not emissions measured
exceed 0.0025 kg/Mg during the
(0.005 lb/ton) performance test
uncalcined clay using Method 26A is
processed, OR the equal to or less
average than 0.0025 kg/Mg
uncontrolled HCl (0.005 lb/ton) of
emissions must be fired product;
reduced by at least OR
98 percent. ii. The HCl emission
reduction measured
during the
performance test is
equal to or greater
than 98 percent.
10. Each affected batch a. The average The HF emission
process kiln. uncontrolled HF reduction measured
emissions must be during the
reduced by at least performance test is
99.5 percent. equal to or greater
than 99.5 percent.
b. The average The HCl reduction
uncontrolled HCl emissions measured
emission must be during the
reduced by at least performance test is
98 percent. equal to or greater
than 98 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9806, you must show initial compliance with
the work practice standards for affected sources according to the
following table:
Table 6 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Work
Practice Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have
For each . . . For the following demonstrated initial
standard . . . compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each affected source a. Each applicable i. You have selected
listed in Table 3 to this work practice a method for
subpart. standard listed in performing each of
Table 3 to this the applicable work
subpart. practices listed in
Table 3 to this
subpart.
AND
ii. You have
included in your
Initial
Notification a
description of the
method selected for
complying with any
applicable work
practice standard,
as required by Sec.
63.9(b);
AND
iii. You submit a
signed statement
with the
Notification of
Compliance Status
that you have
implemented the
applicable work
practices listed in
Table 3 to this
subpart;
AND
iv. You have
described in your
OM&M plan the
method for
complying with each
applicable work
practice standard
specified in Table
3 to this subpart.
[[Page 42161]]
2. Each basket or container a. Control POM i. You have
that is used for holding emissions from any implemented at
fired refractory shapes in affected shape least one of the
an existing shape preheater preheater. work practices
and autoclave during the listed in item 1 of
pitch impregnation process. Table 3 to this
subpart;
AND
ii. You have
established a
system for
recording the date
and cleaning method
for each time you
clean an affected
basket or
container.
3. Each affected existing Control POM You have captured
and new pitch working tank. emissions. and vented
emissions from the
affected pitch
working tank to the
device that is used
to control
emissions from an
affected defumer or
coking oven, or to
a thermal or
catalytic oxidizer
that is comparable
to the control
device used on an
affected defumer or
coking oven.
4. Each existing and new Minimize fuel-based You use natural gas,
chromium refractory HAP emissions. or equivalent, as
products kiln. the kiln fuel.
5. Each existing clay Minimize fuel-based You use natural gas,
refractory products kiln. HAP emissions. or equivalent, as
the kiln fuel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9810, you must show continuous compliance with
the emission limits for affected sources according to the following
table:
Table 7 to Subpart SSSSS to Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With
Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must demonstrate
For . . . For the following continuous
emission limit . . . compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each affected source a. Each applicable i. Collecting and
listed in Table 1 to this emission limit recording the
subpart. listed in Table 1 monitoring and
to this subpart. process data listed
in Table 2
(operating limits)
to this subpart;
AND
ii. Reducing the
monitoring and
process data
associated with the
operating limits
specified in Table
2 to this subpart;
AND
iii. Recording the
results of any
control device
inspections.
2. Each new or existing As specified in Satisfying the
curing oven, shape dryer, items 3 though 6 of applicable
and kiln that is used to this table. requirements
process refractory products specified in items
that use organic HAP; each 3 through 6 of this
new or existing coking oven table.
and defumer that is used to
produce pitch-impregnated
refractory products; each
new shape preheater that is
used to produce pitch-
impregnated refractory
products; AND each new or
existing process unit that
is exhausted to a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer that
also controls emissions
from an affected shape
preheater or pitch working
tank.
3. Each affected process a. The average THC i. Collecting the
unit that is equipped with concentration must applicable data
a thermal or catalytic not exceed 20 measured by the
oxidizer. ppmvd; control device
OR.................. temperature
b. The average monitoring system,
combustion as specified in
efficiency must items 4, 5, 7, and
equal or exceed 8 of Table 8 to
99.8 percent. this subpart;
AND
ii. Reducing the
applicable data
measured by the
control device
temperature
monitoring system,
as specified in
items 4, 5, 7, and
8 of Table 8 to
this subpart;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average hourly
control device
operating
temperature at or
above the average
hourly temperature
established during
the most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F);
AND
[[Page 42162]]
iv. Reporting, in
accordance with
Sec. 9814(e), any
average hourly
operating
temperatures below
the control device
average hourly
operating
temperature
measured during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F).
4. Each affected process The average THC Operating and
unit that is equipped with concentration must maintaining a THC
a control device other than not exceed 20 ppmvd. CEMS at the outlet
a thermal or catalytic of the control
oxidizer. device or in the
stack of the
affected source,
according to the
requirements of
Procedure 1 of 40
CFR part 60,
appendix F.
5. Each affected continuous a. The average THC Recording the
process unit. concentration must organic HAP
not exceed 20 processing rate
ppmvd;. (pounds per hour)
OR.................. AND the operating
b. The average temperature of the
combustion affected source, as
efficiency must specified in items
equal or exceed 3(b) and (c) of
99.8 percent. Table 4 to this
subpart.
6. Each affected batch a. The average THC Recording the
process unit. concentration must organic HAP
not exceed 20 processing rate
ppmvd;. (pounds per batch);
OR.................. AND process cycle
b. The average time for each batch
combustion cycle; AND average
efficiency must hourly operating
equal or exceed temperature of the
99.8 percent. affected source, as
specified in items
8(b) through (d) of
Table 4 to this
subpart.
7. Each new kiln that is As specified in Satisfying the
used to process clay items 8 through 10 applicable
refractory products. of this. requirements
specified in items
8 through 10 of
this table.
8. Each affected kiln that a. The average HF i. Maintaining the
is equipped with a DIFF or emissions must not average fabric
DLS/FF. exceed 0.001 kg/Mg filter inlet
(0.002 lb/ton) of temperature at or
uncalcined clay below the average
processed, OR the temperature
average established during
uncontrolled HF the performance
emissions must be test plus 14 deg.C
reduced by at least (25 deg.F);
99.5 percent; AND
AND................. ii. Verifying at
b. the average HCl least once each 8-
emissions must not hour shift that
exceed 0.0025 kg/Mg lime is free-
(0.005 lb/ton) of flowing by means of
uncalcined clay a visual check,
processed, OR the checking the output
average of a load cell,
uncontrolled HCl carrier gas/lime
emissions must be flow indicator, or
reduced by at least carrier gas
98 percent. pressure drop
measurement
systems;
AND
iii. Recording
feeder setting
daily to verify
that the feeder
setting is at or
above the level
established during
the most recent
performance tests;
AND
iv. Initiate
corrective action
within 1 hour of a
bag leak detection
system alarm and
complete corrective
actions the OM M
plan; operate and
maintain the fabric
filter such that
the alarm does not
engage for more
than 5 percent of
the total operating
time in a 6-month
block reporting
period.
9. Each affected kiln that a. The average HF Maintaining the
is equipped with a DLS/FF. emissions must not average water
exceed 0.001 kg/Mg injection rate at
(0.002 lb/ton) of or above the
uncalcined clay average water
processed, OR the injection rate
average established during
uncontrolled HF the most recent
emissions must be performance test.
reduced by at least
99.5 percent;
AND.................
b. The average HCl
emissions must not
exceed 0.0025 kg/Mg
(0.005 lb/ton) of
uncalcined clay
processed, OR the
average
uncontrolled HCl
emissions must be
reduced by at least
98 percent.
10. Each affected kiln that a. The average HF Maintaining the
is equipped with a WS. emissions must not pressure drop
exceed 0.001 kg/Mg across the
(0.002 lb/ton) of scrubber, liquid
uncalcined clay pH, AND liquid flow
processed, OR the rate at or above
average the levels
uncontrolled HF established during
emissions must be the most recent
reduced by at least performance test.
99.5 percent;
AND.................
b. The average HCl
emissions must not
exceed 0.0025 kg/Mg
(0.005 lb/ton) of
uncalcined clay
processed, OR the
average
uncontrolled HCl
emissions must be
reduced by at least
98 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42163]]
As stated in Sec. 63.9810, you must show continuous compliance with
the operating limits for affected sources according to the following
table:
Table 8 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With
Operating Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must demonstrate
For . . . For the following continuous
operating limit . . compliance by . . .
----------------------------------------.-------------------------------
1. Each affected source a. Each applicable Maintaining all
listed in Table 2 to this operating limit applicable process
subpart. listed in Table 2 and control device
to this subpart. operating
parameters within
the limits
established during
the most recent
performance test.
b. Prepare and Conducting annually
implement a written an inspection of
OM&M plan. all duct work,
vents, and capture
devices to verify
that no leaks exist
and that the
capture device is
operating such that
all emissions are
properly vented to
the control device
in accordance with
the OM&M plan.
2. Each new or existing As specified in Satisfying the
curing oven, shape dryer, items 3 through 8 applicable
and kiln that is used to of this table. requirements
process refractory products specified in items
that use organic HAP; each 3 through 8 of this
new or existing coking oven table.
and defumer that is used to
produce pitch-impregnated
refractory products; each
new shape preheater that is
used to produce pitch-
impregnated refractory
products; AND each new or
existing process unit that
is exhausted to a thermal
or catalytic oxidizer that
also controls emissions
from an affected shape
preheater or pitch working
tank.
3. Each affected continuous a. Maintain process i. Recording the
process unit. operating organic HAP
parameters within processing rate
the limits (pounds per hour);
established during AND
the performance ii. Recording the
test. operating
temperature of the
affected source at
least hourly;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
organic HAP
processing rate at
or below the levels
established during
the most recent
performance test.
4. Continuous process units a. Maintain the i. Measuring and
that are equipped with a average hourly recording the
thermal oxidizer. operating thermal oxidizer
temperature in the combustion chamber
thermal oxidizer temperature at
combustion chamber least every 15
at or above the minutes;
average hourly AND
operating ii. Calculating the
temperature hourly average
established during thermal oxidizer
the most recent combustion chamber
performance test. temperature;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
thermal oxidizer
combustion chamber
temperature for
each 1-hour block
period at or above
the temperature
established during
the most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F);
AND
iv. Reporting, in
accordance with
Sec. 63.9814(e),
any temperature
measurements below
the thermal
oxidizer combustion
chamber temperature
measured during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F).
[[Page 42164]]
5. Continuous process units a. Maintain the i. Measuring and
that are equipped with a average hourly recording the
catalytic oxidizer. temperature at the temperatures at the
inlet of the inlet of the
catalyst bed of the catalyst bed of the
oxidizer at or oxidizer at least
above the every 15 minutes;
corresponding AND
average hourly ii. Calculating the
temperature hourly average
established during temperature at the
the most recent inlet of the
performance test. catalyst bed of the
oxidizer;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
temperature at the
inlet of the
catalyst bed of the
oxidizer for each 1-
hour block period
at or above the
corresponding
temperature
established during
the most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F);
AND
iv. Reporting, in
accordance with
Sec. 63.9814(e),
any oxidizer
catalyst bed inlet
temperature
measurements below
the corresponding
temperatures
measured during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F).
6. Each affected batch a. Maintain process i. Recording the
process unit. operating organic HAP
parameters within processing rate
the limits (pounds per batch);
established during AND
the performance ii. Recording the
test. average hourly
operating
temperature of the
affected source;
AND
iii. Recording the
process cycle time
for each batch
cycle;
AND
iv. Maintaining the
organic HAP
processing rate at
or below the level
established during
the most recent
performance test.
7. Batch process units that a. Maintain the i. Measuring and
are equipped with a thermal average hourly recording the
oxidizer. temperature in the thermal oxidizer
thermal oxidizer combustion chamber
combustion chamber temperature at
at or above the least every 15
average hourly minutes;
temperature AND
established for the ii. Calculating the
corresponding 1- hourly average
hour period of the thermal oxidizer
cycle during the combustion chamber
most recent temperature;
performance test. AND
iii. Maintaining the
thermal oxidizer
combustion chamber
temperature for
each 1-hour block
period at or above
the temperature
established for the
corresponding 1-
hour period of the
cycle during the
most recent
performance test;
AND
iv. Reporting, in
accordance with
Sec. 63.9814(e),
any temperature
measurements below
the corresponding
thermal oxidizer
combustion chamber
temperature
measured during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F).
8. Batch process units that a. Maintain the i. Measuring and
are equipped with a average hourly recording the
catalytic oxidizer. temperature at the temperatures at the
inlet of the inlet of the
catalyst bed of the catalyst bed of the
oxidizer at or oxidizer at least
above the every 15 minutes;
corresponding AND
average hourly ii. Calculating the
temperature hourly average
established for the temperature at the
corresponding 1- inlet of the
hour period of the catalyst bed of the
cycle during the oxidizer;
most recent AND
performance test. iii. Maintaining the
temperature at the
inlet of the
catalyst bed for
each 1-hour block
period at or above
the corresponding
temperature
established for the
corresponding 1-
hour period of the
cycle during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F);
AND
[[Page 42165]]
iv. Reporting, in
accordance with
Sec. 63.9814(e),
any oxidizer
catalyst bed inlet
temperature
measurements below
the corresponding
temperatures
measured during the
most recent
performance test
minus 14 deg.C (25
deg.F).
9. Each new kiln that is As specified in Satisfying the
used to process clay items 10 through 12 applicable
refractory products. of this table. requirements
specified in items
10 through 12 of
this table.
10. Kilns that are equipped a. Initiate i. Initiating
with a DIFF or DLS/FF. corrective action corrective action
within 1 hour of a within 1 hour of a
bag leak detection bag leak detection
system alarm and system alarm and
complete corrective completing
actions in corrective actions
accordance with the in accordance with
OM&M plan; and the OM&M plan;
operate and AND
maintain the fabric ii. Operating and
filter such that maintaining the
the alarm does not fabric filter such
engage for more that the alarm does
than 5 percent of not engage for more
the total operating than 5 percent of
time in a 6-month the total operating
block reporting time in a 6-month
period. block reporting
period; in
calculating this
operating time
fraction, if
inspection of the
fabric filter
demonstrates that
no corrective
action is required,
no alarm time is
counted; if
corrective action
is required, each
alarm shall be
counted as a
minimum of 1 hour;
if you take longer
than 1 hour to
initiate corrective
action, the alarm
time shall be
counted as the
actual amount of
time taken by you
to initiate
corrective action.
b. Maintain the i. Collecting the
average fabric fabric filter inlet
filter inlet temperature data,
temperature for as specified in
each 3-hour block item 16(b) of Table
period at or below 4 to this subpart;
the average AND
temperature ii. Reducing the
established during fabric filter inlet
the performance temperature data to
test plus 14 deg.C 1-hour and 3-hour
(25 deg.F). block averages;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average fabric
filter inlet
temperature for
each 3-hour block
period at or below
the average
temperature
established during
the performance
test plus 14 deg.C
(25 deg.F).
c. Maintain free- i. Verifying at
flowing lime in the least once each 8-
feed hopper or silo hour shift that
at all times for lime is free-
continuous flowing via a load
injection systems; cell, carrier gas/
and maintain feeder lime flow
setting at or above indicator, carrier
the level gas pressure drop
established during measurement system,
the performance or other system;
test for continuous recording all
injection systems. monitor or sensor
output, and if lime
is found not to be
free flowing,
promptly initiating
and completing
corrective actions;
AND
ii. Recording the
feeder setting once
each day of
operation to verify
that the feeder
setting is being
maintained at or
above the level
established during
the performance
test.
11. Kilns that are equipped a. Maintain the i. Collecting the
with a DLS/FF. average water water injection
injection rate for rate data, as
each 3-hour block specified in item
period at or above 17 of Table 4 to
the average water this subpart;
injection rate AND
established during ii. Reducing the
the performance water injection
test. rate data to 1-hour
and 3-hour block
averages;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average water
injection rate for
each 3-hour block
period at or above
the average water
injection rate
established during
the performance
test.
[[Page 42166]]
12. Each new kiln that is a. Maintain the i. Collecting the
used to process clay average scrubber scrubber pressure
refractory products and is pressure drop for drop data, as
equipped with a WS. each 3-hour block specified in item
period at or above 18(a) of Table 4 to
the average this subpart;
pressure drop AND
established during ii. Reducing the
the performance scrubber pressure
test. drop data to 1-hour
and 3-hour block
averages;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average scrubber
pressure drop for
each 3-hour block
period at or above
the average
pressure drop
established during
the performance
test.
b. Maintain the i. Collecting the
average scrubber scrubber liquid pH
liquid pH for each data, as specified
3-hour block period in item 18(b) of
at or above the Table 4 to this
average scrubber subpart;
liquid pH AND
established during ii. Reducing the
the performance scrubber liquid pH
test. data to 1-hour and
3-hour block
averages;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average scrubber
liquid pH for each
3-hour block period
at or above the
average scrubber
liquid pH
established during
the performance
test.
c. Maintain the i. Collecting the
average scrubber scrubber liquid
liquid flow rate flow rate data, as
for each 3-hour specified in item
block period at or 18(c) of Table 4 to
above the average this subpart;
scrubber liquid AND
flow rate ii. Reducing the
established during scrubber liquid
the performance flow rate data to 1-
test. hour and 3-hour
block averages;
AND
iii. Maintaining the
average scrubber
liquid flow rate
for each 3-hour
block period at or
above the average
scrubber liquid
flow rate
established during
the performance
test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9810, you must show continuous compliance with
the work practice standards for affected sources according to the
following table:
Table 9 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Work
Practice Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following You must demonstrate
For . . . work practice continuous
standard . . . compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each affected source a. Each applicable i. Performing each
listed in Table 3 to this work practice applicable work
subpart. requirement listed practice standard
in Table 3 to this listed in Table 3
subpart. to this subpart;
AND
ii. Maintaining
records that
document the method
and frequency for
complying with each
applicable work
practice standard
listed in Table 3
to this subpart, as
required by Secs.
63.10(b) and
63.9816(c)(2).
2. Each basket or container a. Control POM i. Controlling
that is used for holding emissions from any emissions from the
fired refractory shapes in affected shape volatilization of
an existing shape preheater preheater. residual pitch by
and autoclave during the implementing one of
pitch impregnation process. the work practices
listed in item 1 of
Table 3 to this
subpart;
AND
ii. Recording the
date and cleaning
method each time
you clean an
affected basket or
container.
3. Each existing and new Control PM emissions Capturing and
pitch working tank. venting emissions
from the affected
pitch working tank
to the control
device that is used
to control
emissions from an
affected defumer or
coking oven, or to
a thermal or
catalytic oxidizer
that is comparable
to the control
device used on an
affected defumer or
coking oven.
4. Each existing and new Minimize fuel-based Using natural gas,
chromium refractory HAP emissions. or equivalent, as
products kiln. the kiln fuel.
5. Each existing clay Minimize fuel-based Using natural gas,
refractory products kiln. HAP emissions. or equivalent, as
the kiln fuel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42167]]
As stated in para.63.9814, you must comply with the requirements
for reports in the following table:
Table 10 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Requirements for Reports
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report must You must submit the
You must submit a(n) . . . contain . . . report . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Compliance report........ The information in Semiannually
Sec. 63.9814(a) according to the
through (f). requirements in
Sec. 63.9814(a)
through (f).
2. Immediate startup, a. Actions taken for By fax or telephone
shutdown, and malfunction the event. within 2 working
report if you had a days after starting
startup, shutdown, or actions
malfunction during the inconsistent with
reporting period that is the plan.
not consistent with your
SSMP.
b. The information By letter within 7
in Sec. working days after
63.10(d)(5)(ii). the end of the
event unless you
have made
alternative
arrangements with
the permitting
authority.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.9818, you must comply with the applicable
General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
Table 11 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart SSSSS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description SSSSS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1........................... Applicability.......... ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.2........................... Definitions............ ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.3........................... Units and Abbreviations ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.4........................... Prohibited Activities.. Compliance date; Yes.
circumvention,
severability.
Sec. 63.5........................... Construction/ Applicability; Yes.
Reconstruction. applications;
approvals.
Sec. 63.6(a)........................ Applicability.......... General Provisions (GP) Yes.
apply unless
compliance extension;
GP apply to area
sources that become
major.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4)................. Compliance Dates for Standards apply at Yes.
New and Reconstructed effective date; 3
sources. years after effective
date; Upon startup; 10
years after
construction or
reconstruction
commences for section
112(f).
Sec. 63.6(b)(5)..................... Notification........... ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)..................... [Reserved]
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)..................... Compliance Dates for Area sources that Yes.
New and Reconstructed become major must
Area Sources That comply with major
Become Major. source standards
immediately upon
becoming major,
regardless of whether
required to comply
when they were area
sources.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2)................. Compliance Dates for Comply according to Yes.
Existing Sources. date in subpart, which
must be no later than
3 years after
effective date; for
section 112(f)
standards, comply
within 90 days of
effective date unless
compliance extension.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4)................. [Reserved]
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)..................... Compliance Dates for Area sources that Yes.
Existing Area Sources become major must
That Become Major. comply with major
source standards by
date indicated in
subpart or by
equivalent time period
(for example, 3 years).
Sec. 63.6(d)........................ [Reserved]
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2)................. Operation & Maintenance Operate to minimize Yes.
emissions at all
times; correct
malfunctions as soon
as practicable;
requirements
independently
enforceable;
information
Administrator will use
to determine if
operation and
maintenance
requirements were met.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)..................... Startup, Shutdown, and ....................... Yes.
Malfunction Plan
(SSMP).
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)..................... Compliance Except You must comply with Yes.
During SSM. emission standards at
all times except
during SSM.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)................. Methods for Determining Compliance based on Yes.
Compliance. performance test,
operation and
maintenance plans,
records, inspection.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)................. Alternative Standard... Procedures for getting Yes.
an alternative
standard.
Sec. 63.6(h)(1)-(9)................. Opacity/Visible ....................... Not applicable.
Emission (VE)
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)................ Compliance Extension... Procedures and criteria Yes.
for Administrator to
grant compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.6(j)........................ Presidential Compliance President may exempt Yes.
Exemption. source category.
[[Page 42168]]
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)-(2)................. Performance Test Dates. Dates for conducting Yes.
initial performance
testing and other
compliance
demonstrations; must
conduct 180 days after
first subject to rule.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)..................... Sec. 114 Authority.... Administrator may Yes.
require a performance
test under CAA Sec.
114 at any time.
Sec. 63.7(b)(1)..................... Notification of Must notify Yes.
Performance Test. Administrator 60 days
before the test.
Sec. 63.7(b)(2)..................... Notification of Must notify Yes.
Rescheduling. Administrator 5 days
before scheduled date
of rescheduled date.
Sec. 63.7(c)........................ Quality Assurance/Test Requirements; test plan Yes.
Plan. approval procedures;
performance audit
requirements; internal
and external QA
procedures for testing.
Sec. 63.7(d)........................ Testing Facilities..... ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)..................... Conditions for Performance tests must No, Sec. 63.9800
Conducting Performance be conducted under specifies
Tests. representative requirements; Yes;
conditions; Cannot Yes.
conduct performance
tests during SSM; not
a violation to exceed
standard during SSM.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)..................... Conditions for Must conduct according Yes.
Conducting Performance to subpart and EPA
Tests. test methods unless
Administrator approves
alternatives.
Sec. 63.7(e)(3)..................... Test Run Duration...... Must have three test Yes; Yes, except where
runs of at least 1 specified in Sec.
hour each; Compliance 63.9800 for batch
is based on arithmetic process sources of
mean of three runs; organic HAP; Yes.
Conditions when data
from an additional
test run can be used.
Sec. 63.7(f)........................ Alternative Test Method ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(g)........................ Performance Test Data ....................... Yes.
Analysis.
Sec. 63.7(h)........................ Waiver of Test......... ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)..................... Applicability of ....................... Yes.
Monitoring
Requirements.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2)..................... Performance Performance Yes
Specifications. Specifications in
appendix B of 40 CFR
part 60 apply.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)..................... [Reserved]
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)..................... Monitoring with Flares. ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.8(b)(1)..................... Monitoring............. Must conduct monitoring Yes.
according to standard
unless Administrator
approves alternative.
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3)................. Multiple Effluents and Specific requirements Yes.
Multiple Monitoring for installing and
Systems. reporting on
monitoring system.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)..................... Monitoring System Maintenance consistent Yes.
Operation and with good air
Maintenance. pollution control
practices.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i).................. Routine and Predictable Reporting requirements Yes.
SSM. for SSM when action is
described in SSMP.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(ii)................. SSM not in SSMP........ Reporting requirements Yes.
for SSM when action is
not described in SSMP.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii)................ Compliance with How Administrator Yes.
Operation and determines if source
Maintenance complying with
Requirements. operation and
maintenance
requirements.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)................. Monitoring System Must install to get Yes.
Installation. representative
emission and parameter
measurements.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)..................... Continuous Monitoring ....................... No, Sec. 63.9808
System (CMS) specifies
Requirements. requirements.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)..................... COMS Minimum Procedures ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)..................... CMS Requirements....... ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate a THC
CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)(i)(A)............... CMS Requirements....... ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate a THC
CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)(i)(B)............... CMS Requirements....... ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate a THC
CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)(i)(C)............... CMS Requirements....... ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)(ii)................. CMS Requirements....... Corrective action Yes.
required when CMS is
out of control.
Sec. 63.8(c)(8)..................... CMS Requirements....... ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(d)........................ CMS Quality Control.... ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate a THC
CEMS.
[[Page 42169]]
Sec. 63.8(e)........................ CMS Performance ....................... Applies only to sources
Evaluation. required to install
and operate a THC CEMS
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)................. Alternative Monitoring ....................... Yes.
Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)..................... Alternative to Relative ....................... Yes.
Accuracy Test.
Sec. 63.8(g)........................ Data Reduction......... ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.8(g)........................ Data Reduction......... ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate THC CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(a)........................ Notification ....................... Yes.
Requirements.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(5)................. Initial Notifications.. ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(c)........................ Request for Compliance ....................... Yes.
Extension.
Sec. 63.9(d)........................ Notification of Special ....................... Yes.
Compliance
Requirements for New
Source.
Sec. 63.9(e)........................ Notification of Notify Administrator 60 Yes.
Performance Test. days prior.
Sec. 63.9(f)........................ Notification of VE/ ....................... Not applicable.
Opacity Test.
Sec. 63.9(g)........................ Additional ....................... Applies only to sources
Notifications When required to install
Using CMS. and operate a THC
CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(h)........................ Notification of ....................... Yes.
Compliance Status.
Sec. 63.9(i)........................ Adjustment of Submittal ....................... Yes.
Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j)........................ Change in Previous ....................... Yes.
Information.
Sec. 63.10(a)....................... Recordkeeping/Reporting ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1).................... Recordkeeping/Reporting ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(iv)............ Records related to ....................... Yes.
Startup, Shutdown, and
Malfunction.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi) and (x-xi)..... CMS Records............ ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(ix).......... Records................ Measurements to Yes.
demonstrate compliance
with emission
limitations;
Performance test,
performance
evaluation, and
visible emission
observation results;
Measurements to
determine conditions
of performance tests
and performance
evaluations.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)............... Records................ Records when under Yes.
waiver.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii).............. Records................ Records when using Not applicable.
alternative to
relative accuracy test.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)............... Records................ All documentation Yes.
supporting Initial
Notification and
Notification of
Compliance Status.
Sec. 63.10(b)(3).................... Records................ Applicability Yes.
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6), (9)-(15)...... Records................ Additional Records for Not applicable.
CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)................ Records................ Records of excess No, Sec. 63.9816
emissions and specifies
parameter monitoring requirements.
exceedances for CMS.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1).................... General Reporting Requirements for Yes.
Requirements. reporting.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2).................... Report of Performance When to submit to Yes.
Test Results. Federal or State
authority.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3).................... Reporting Opacity or VE ....................... Not applicable.
Observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4).................... Progress Reports....... Must submit progress Yes.
reports on schedule if
under compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5).................... Startup, Shutdown, and Contents and Yes.
Malfunction Reports.. submission..
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)................ Additional CMS Reports. ....................... Applies only to sources
required to install
and operate a THC
CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3).................... Reports................ ....................... No, Sec. 63.9814
specifies
requirements.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4).................... Reporting COMS data.... ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.10(f)....................... Waiver for ....................... Yes.
Recordkeeping/
Reporting.
Sec. 63.11.......................... Flares................. ....................... Not applicable.
Sec. 63.12.......................... Delegation............. ....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.13.......................... Addresses.............. ....................... Yes.
[[Page 42170]]
Sec. 63.14.......................... Incorporation by ....................... Yes.
Reference.
Sec. 63.15.......................... Availability of ....................... Yes.
Information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 02-13979 Filed 6-19-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P