[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 9, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6930-6973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2308]
[[Page 6929]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Petroleum
Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and
Sulfur Recovery Units; Final Rule and Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 9, 2005 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 6930]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OAR-2002-0033; AD-FRL-7969-9]
RIN 2060-AK51
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming
Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 11, 2002, pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), the EPA issued national emission standards to control
hazardous air pollutants emitted from catalytic cracking units,
catalytic reforming units, and sulfur recovery units at petroleum
refineries. This action promulgates amendments to several sections of
the existing standards. The amendments will change the affected source
designations and add new compliance options for catalytic reforming
units that use different types of emission control systems, new
monitoring alternatives for catalytic cracking units and catalytic
reforming units, and a new procedure for determining the metal or total
chloride concentration on catalyst particles. The amendments will also
defer technical requirements for most continuous parameter monitoring
systems, clarify testing and monitoring requirements, and make
editorial corrections.
DATES: The final amendments will be effective on April 11, 2005, unless
we receive significant adverse comments by March 11, 2005, or by March
28, 2005 if a public hearing is requested. If such comments are
received, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
indicating which amendments, paragraph, or section will become
effective and which amendments, paragraph, or section are being
withdrawn due to adverse comment. Any distinct amendment, paragraph, or
section of the direct final amendments for which we do not receive
adverse comment will become effective on April 11, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
OAR-2002-0033, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units,
Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units Docket,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0033.
The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other information,
such as copyrighted materials, is not placed on the Internet and will
be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy form in Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0033 (or A-97-36), EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air
Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert B. Lucas, Emission
Standards Division (C439-03), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711, telephone number (919) 541-0884, fax number (919) 541-3470, e-
mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and entities
potentially regulated by this action include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category NAICS code\1\ regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.......................... 32411 Petroleum refineries
that operate
catalytic cracking
units, catalytic
reforming units, or
sulfur recovery
units.
Federal government................ .............. Not affected.
State/local/tribal government..... .............. Not affected.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
[[Page 6931]]
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.1561 of the
NESHAP for petroleum refineries: Catalytic cracking units, catalytic
reforming units, and sulfur recovery units. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the contact person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's direct final rule amendments will also be
available on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN). Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of the
direct final rule amendments will be placed 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.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial
review of the direct final amendments is available only by filing a
petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by April 11, 2005. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the
CAA, only an objection to the final amendments that was raised with
reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be
raised during judicial review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the
CAA, the requirements established by the final amendments may not be
challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by
the EPA to enforce these requirements.
Comments. We are publishing the amendments as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because we view the amendments as
noncontroversial and do not anticipate adverse comments. However, in
the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are publishing
a separate document that will serve as the proposal for the amendments
contained in this direct final rule in the event that significant
adverse comments are filed. If we receive any significant adverse
comments on one or more distinct amendments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public which
provisions will become effective and which provisions are being
withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address all public comments
in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on this direct final rule. Any
parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. Background
II. Summary of the Direct Final Rule Amendments
A. How are we changing the affected source designations?
B. How are we changing the testing and monitoring requirements
for catalytic cracking units?
C. What new procedure is available for determining the metal or
total chloride concentration on catalyst particles?
D. What new alternative is available for calculating the
volumetric flow rate of exhaust gases from catalytic cracking units?
E. What new monitoring alternative is available for a catalytic
cracking unit with a wet scrubber if the unit is subject to the new
source performance standards for petroleum refineries?
F. How are we clarifying the emission limitations for catalytic
reforming units?
G. How are we changing the monitoring requirements for catalytic
reforming units?
H. What new options are available for a catalytic reforming unit
with an internal scrubbing system?
I. What new options are available for a catalytic reforming unit
with a different type of control system?
J. How are we changing the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring systems?
K. What corrections are we making?
III. Summary of Non-Air Health, Environmental, Energy, and Cost
Impacts
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
On April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17762), we issued the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for catalytic cracking
units (CCU), catalytic reforming units (CRU), and sulfur recovery units
(SRU) at petroleum refineries (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU). The NESHAP
establish emissions limits for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted
from vents on the three types of process units, as well as work
practice standards for by-pass lines. The NESHAP implement section
112(d) of the CAA by requiring all petroleum refineries that are major
sources to meet standards reflecting the application of the maximum
achievable control technology (MACT).
After publication of the NESHAP, two industry trade associations
and various individual refineries raised issues and questions regarding
the applicability of the NESHAP and the technical requirements for
installation, operation, and maintenance of continuous parameter
monitoring systems (CPMS). The industry representatives and a control
technology manufacturer also requested that we clarify the requirements
for CRU depressurizing and purging, add more compliance provisions for
CRU with internal scrubbing systems, and include new provisions for CRU
that use emission control technologies other than scrubbers. The
industry representatives also requested clarification of various
performance testing and monitoring provisions. Other questions were
raised at an implementation workshop held in January 2003. Today's
direct final rule amendments respond to the issues raised since
promulgation and will reduce compliance uncertainties, encourage the
use of new control technologies, and improve understanding of the
NESHAP requirements.
In addition, since publication of the NESHAP, we have identified a
number of minor technical and editorial errors requiring correction.
Rather than publish a separate notice of corrections, we are including
those changes along with the amendments.
II. Summary of the Direct Final Rule Amendments
A. How Are We Changing the Affected Source Designations?
One of the issues raised by the industry representatives concerns
the language in 40 CFR 63.1562 where we identified the affected sources
as each CCU that regenerates catalyst, each CRU that regenerates
catalyst, and each SRU and the tail gas treatment unit serving it. In
designating the affected source as the unit rather than the vent or
group of vents on the unit (as originally proposed), we inadvertently
made the NESHAP more stringent for some facilities, and these
facilities did not have an opportunity to comment on the change.
Therefore, we are revising the designation of affected sources to be
[[Page 6932]]
more consistent with the rule as proposed. The direct final rule
amendments define the process unit affected sources as:
The process vent or group of process vents on fluidized
CCU units that is associated with regeneration of the catalyst used in
the unit (i.e., the catalyst regeneration flue gas vent).
The process vent or group of process vents on CRU
(including but not limited to semi-regenerative, cyclic, or continuous
processes), that is associated with regeneration of the catalyst used
in the unit. This affected source includes vents that are used during
the unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, and catalyst
rejuvenation.
The process vent or group of process vents on Claus or
other types of sulfur recovery plant units or the tail gas treatment
units serving sulfur recovery plants that is associated with sulfur
recovery.
B. How Are We Changing the Testing and Monitoring Requirements for
Catalytic Cracking Units?
The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(1) require
the owner or operator to install, operate, and maintain a CPMS
according to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.1572 and Table 3 to subpart
UUU. Facilities that are not subject to the new source performance
standards (NSPS) for petroleum refineries and that elect to meet the
particulate matter (PM) or nickel (Ni) limit in the NESHAP are required
to monitor the gas flow rate to a wet scrubber. After promulgation,
industry representatives recommended that we revise the CCU monitoring
requirements to allow gas flow rate measurements before or after the
control device. The direct final rule amendments revise the
requirements in Table 3 to subpart UUU to allow measurement of the gas
flow rate entering or exiting the control device. This change will
improve implementation of the NESHAP and avoid unnecessary costs of
changing current practices. The direct final rule amendments also
revise the footnotes to Tables 3 and 7 to subpart UUU to change the
citation for the alternative method for determining gas flow rate from
40 CFR 63.1573(a) to 40 CFR 63.1573(a)(1) to accommodate the new
alternative for calculating the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gases
when computing the PM emissions rate.
The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(2) require
the owner or operator to conduct a performance test for certain CCU
according to the requirements in Table 4 to subpart UUU. After
promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we delete the
sampling rate requirements cited for EPA Method 29 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix A). According to the commenters, the sampling rate requirement
is unnecessary because the method already includes appropriate sampling
requirements. We agree and have deleted the 0.028 dry standard cubic
meters per minute (dscm/min)/0.74 dry standard cubic feet per minute
(dscf/min) sampling rate requirement from Table 4 to subpart UUU.
C. What New Procedure Is Available for Determining the Metal or Total
Chloride Concentration on Catalyst Particles?
The owner or operator of a CCU subject to a Ni limit for inorganic
HAP emissions must determine the equilibrium catalyst (E-cat) Ni
concentration value during the initial performance test and at frequent
intervals afterward for monitoring requirements. Several methods are
currently used within the industry for this purpose and are referenced
in the NESHAP, as well as any alternative method satisfactory to the
Administrator. Industry experts and vendors recommended that the NESHAP
allow a new procedure that was not fully developed at the time the
NESHAP were promulgated. The direct final rule amendments add the new
procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles
(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)'' to appendix A of subpart UUU. This
procedure can be used to analyze catalyst particles (Ni compounds and
total chlorides) from CCU, CRU, and other processes specified within
EPA regulations. The direct final rule amendments revise Table 4 to
subpart UUU to reference the new procedure.
D. What New Alternative is Available for Calculating the Volumetric
Flow Rate of Exhaust Gases From Catalytic Cracking Units?
The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(4) require
the owner or operator of a CCU subject to the PM limit in the NSPS for
petroleum refineries to compute the PM emission rate using Equation 1
of 40 CFR 63.1564. This calculation requires measurement of the
volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from the catalyst regenerator
(``Qr''). The direct final rule amendments revise the
definition of ``Qr'' to refer to a new alternative procedure
in 40 CFR 63.1573(a)(2) that can be used to determine the volumetric
flow rate of exhaust gas. This procedure can be used by plants that
have a gas analyzer installed in the catalytic cracking regenerator
exhaust vent prior to the addition of air or other gas streams. The new
alternative allows measurement of the flow rate after an electrostatic
precipitator, but requires measurement of the flow rate before a carbon
monoxide boiler.
E. What New Monitoring Alternative is Available for a Catalytic
Cracking Unit With a Wet Scrubber if the Unit Is Subject to the New
Source Performance Standards for Petroleum Refineries?
The NSPS for petroleum refineries (40 CFR part 60, subpart J)
require a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) for a fluidized
CCU to demonstrate continuous compliance with the opacity limit in 40
CFR 60.102(a)(2). Subpart UUU requires facilities that are already
subject to the NSPS to meet the NSPS requirements, including the
opacity limit and COMS requirements.
Technical experience has shown that COMS are not feasible for wet
scrubber PM control systems. We have already acknowledged the technical
problems associated with the use of COMS on wet scrubbers by requiring
other monitoring methods (CPMS for pressure drop and liquid-to-gas
ratio). However, these requirements apply under other compliance
options and not to CCU already subject to the NSPS.
Some facilities with CCU subject to the NSPS use wet scrubbers to
meet the PM limit and already have alternative monitoring requirements
approved under the NSPS. For these reasons, one industry representative
requested that the NESHAP accept alternative monitoring requirements
that have already been approved under the NSPS. Therefore, we are
adding a new paragraph (f) to 40 CFR 63.1573 to provide for use of the
approved alternative under subpart UUU.
Monitoring alternatives for CCU subject to the NSPS that have
already been approved may not meet the criteria for MACT standards. For
example, the alternative may not include provisions for demonstrating
continuous compliance such as meeting an operating limit, collecting
and reducing monitoring data, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements.
While we cannot automatically approve an alternative that we have not
seen, we see no reason to require a second formal approval process for
the same control system and emission limit. To this end, we have added
procedures for requesting alternative requirements specific to this
situation.
We are requiring that an owner or operator submit a copy of the
approved alternative monitoring method in the notification of
compliance status (or
[[Page 6933]]
before), along with a brief description of the continuous monitoring
system, the applicable operating limit, and the continuous compliance
requirements. We will contact you within 30 calendar days after
receipt, to tell you if the alternative is approved. This alternative
does not eliminate your responsibility to comply with the opacity
limit, which would remain applicable for enforcement purposes. This
option is not available to facilities that elect to comply with the
NSPS requirements in subpart UUU. These facilities must request an
alternative monitoring method under the procedures in 40 CFR 63.8(f).
F. How Are we Clarifying the Emission Limitations for Catalytic
Reforming Units?
The requirements for organic HAP emissions in 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(3)
state that the CRU emissions and operating limits in Tables 15 and 16
to subpart UUU apply to emissions from process vents that occur during
depressuring and purging operations. The NESHAP specify in 40 CFR
63.1566(a)(4) that the limits do not apply to depressurizing and
purging operations when the reactor vent pressure is 5 pounds per
square inch (psig) or less. Applicable process vents include those used
during unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, catalyst
rejuvenation, and reduction or activation purge. Industry
representatives noted the current language is unclear as to whether the
limits apply only to the initial depressurization cycle or include
subsequent depressuring and purging cycles when the reactor pressure is
greater than 5 psig. In response, we are amending 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(3)
to clarify our intent regarding the control of organic HAP emissions
from CRU depressurizing and purging.
Our intent in the NESHAP was that the organic HAP requirements
apply to the initial depressuring and catalyst purging operations that
occur prior to coke burn-off. Organic HAP emissions are expected during
the initial depressurization and catalyst purge cycles. No additional
organic HAP emission controls are used during coke burn-off, beyond the
combustion process inherent during this process, and our data indicate
there are minimal organic emissions from coke burn-off and subsequent
CRU regeneration cycle purges.
Industry representatives suggested that we limit the applicability
of the emissions limit to only the initial depressuring and first
nitrogen purge. We do expect that, after some number of purges, the HAP
concentration in the purge may be less than the required outlet HAP
concentration from a combustion control device. Under the NESHAP, all
purges greater than 5 psig go to a combustion control device (or
equivalent combustion device), regardless of the HAP concentration in
the affected stream.
Initially, we attempted to specify the number of purges to be
controlled because the organic HAP emissions would generally be very
low beyond the first or second purge. However, our information
indicates that the purging processes vary widely (e.g., different
systems use different purge gases, different purge temperatures, and
different amounts of purge gas per unit of catalyst). Consequently,
specifying the number of purges that must be controlled does not
necessarily reflect a performance level. Additionally, recent data show
that, for some CRU purge conditions, subsequent purges after the
initial nitrogen purge may contain substantial amounts of benzene--on
the order of 100 parts per million by volume (ppmv), which translates
to emissions of about 1 ton per year (tpy). For other process purging
conditions, however, subsequent purges have very low levels of HAP. We
concluded that mandating specific purging conditions would reduce
operator flexibility and would make compliance, for certain CRU
processes, to be technically infeasible. We decided, therefore, to
clarify that uncontrolled purging operations greater than 5 psig are
acceptable if the total organic carbon (TOC) concentration is less than
the currently required outlet concentration of a combustion control
device (i.e., less than 20 ppmv), and to provide compliance options for
these purges.
Furthermore, the background information supporting the performance
achievable by a combustion control device indicates that the 20 ppmv
emissions limit was established ``by compound exit concentration''
rather than by a specified indicator of TOC, such as propane. As the
primary HAP of concern from these CRU depressuring and purging vents is
benzene, it is more appropriate to establish the 20 ppmv emission limit
as hexane (i.e., a C6 hydrocarbon) rather than as propane.
We are, therefore, changing the CRU TOC concentration requirements
(which are used as a surrogate for organic HAP) to 20 ppmv TOC or
nonmethane TOC (dry basis as hexane), corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
This applies to both the concentration limit for the control device and
the concentration limit for emissions discharged directly to the
atmosphere.
This approach adds compliance options for ``uncontrolled'' purging
cycles that are greater than 5 psig and less than 20 ppmv TOC (dry
basis as hexane). First, the purging conditions used by the plant to
remove organic HAP from the CRU catalyst during controlled purges prior
to direct release to the atmosphere must be specified in the operation,
maintenance, and monitoring plan. An initial performance test is
conducted on the first directly released catalyst purge (following the
purging conditions specified in the plan) to demonstrate that the
purges specified in the plan effectively achieve the required emission
limit. Subsequently, adherence to the purging procedures as specified
in the plan is used to demonstrate continuous compliance.
Industry representatives also requested that we clarify the
emission limits for organic HAP emissions from CRU in 40 CFR 63.1567(a)
to indicate which limits apply when different reactors in the CRU are
regenerated in separate regeneration systems. The direct final rule
amendments state that, in this case, the emission limits in Table 22 to
subpart UUU apply to each separate regeneration system. The direct
final rule amendments also clarify that the TOC outlet concentration
limit is 20 ppmv dry basis as hexane.
In response to industry comments, we expanded the number of test
methods that can be use to measure organic HAP emissions. For the 98
percent mass emission reduction standard, you can use EPA Method 25 in
40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to directly measure nonmethane TOC as
carbon or the combination of EPA Methods 25A and 18 in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, to determine nonmethane TOC emissions. If the outlet TOC
concentration is expected to be less than 50 ppmv (as carbon), you can
use EPA Method 25A to measure the TOC concentration as hexane. For the
20 ppmv concentration limit, you can measure the TOC concentration
using EPA Method 25A or determine the nonmethane TOC concentration
using the combination of Methods 25A and 18. We made changes to the
equations in 40 CFR 63.1564 and relevant tables to make these
distinctions. We also added a definition of ``nonmethane TOC'' to 40
CFR 63.1579.
The direct final rule amendments also clarify the inorganic HAP
emission and operating limits to indicate that the requirements apply
to each applicable CRU process vent during coke burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation. In response to industry comments, we are also changing
the compliance equations in
[[Page 6934]]
40 CFR 63.1567 to allow for hydrogen chloride (HCl) measurements below
detectable limits of the method after correction for oxygen content.
G. How Are we Changing the Monitoring Requirements for Catalytic
Reforming Units?
The NESHAP allow plants to measure and record the pH of the water
(or scrubbing liquid) exiting the scrubber at least once an hour as an
alternative to a pH CPMS. After promulgation, industry representatives
recommended that we allow alkalinity measurements as an alternative to
pH. Alkalinity measurements are more reliable because they give the
actual acid content of the water (or scrubbing liquid) while pH
measurements indicate only how much (more or less) acid is needed. We
agree and have changed 40 CFR 63.1573(b) to allow plants to measure and
record the alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the
wet scrubber at least once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation using titration as an alternative to a CPMS. We have also
changed Tables 23, 24, 25, and 28 to subpart UUU to include the
alternative for alkalinity measurements. In response to industry
comments, we have also allowed the pH alternative to apply to CRU
meeting the HCl percent reduction standard.
The NESHAP allow plants to measure the catalytic regenerator
exhaust gas flow rate from a CCU as an approved alternative to a CPMS
if the unit does not introduce any other gas streams into the catalyst
regeneration vent (i.e., complete combustion units with no additional
combustion devices). In response to industry comments, we have expanded
the alternative in 40 CFR 63.1573(a) to apply to CRU that operate as a
constant pressure system during the coke burn and rejuvenation cycles.
After promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we
also expand the CRU monitoring requirements to allow gas flow rate
measurements before or after the control device. We agree and have
changed Tables 24 and 25 of subpart UUU accordingly.
In response to questions raised at implementation workshops for
plant personnel, we have added provisions to the performance test
requirements for CRU to reflect differences among semi-regenerative,
cyclic, and continuous processes. The direct final rule amendments
require plants to test semi-regenerative and cyclic units during the
coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation cycle. However, the tests
cannot be done during the first hour or the last 6 hours of the cycle
for a semi-regenerative unit, or during the first hour or the last 2
hours of the cycle for a cyclic regeneration unit. Plants must conduct
the performance test for a continuous regeneration unit no sooner than
3 days after the process unit or control system startup.
H. What New Options Are Available For a Catalytic Reforming Unit With
an Internal Scrubbing System?
Industry representatives expressed concern that the NESHAP do not
contain provisions allowing a CRU with an internal scrubbing system to
meet the percent reduction standard instead of the concentration limit
for HCl emissions.
The direct final rule amendments change the rule language related
to the HCl emissions limits (and other provisions) by removing the
phrase ``using a control device.'' These changes allow CRU with an
internal scrubbing system or alternative emissions reduction technique
to meet either the percent reduction standard or concentration limit.
To improve understanding of the NESHAP, we have added a definition for
``internal scrubbing system.'' The direct final rule amendments also
add provisions to Tables 23 through 28 to subpart UUU for CRU with an
internal scrubbing system meeting the HCl percent reduction standard
and CRU with a fixed-bed or moving-bed gas-solid adsorption system.
The direct final rule amendments establish operating limits and
compliance provisions specific to CRU with an internal scrubbing system
meeting the HCl percent reduction standard. The operating limits
require plants to maintain the daily average pH or alkalinity of the
water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system and
the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio at or above the limit established
during the performance test. Plants must conduct performance tests to
demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable HCl emission
standard and to establish operating limits. Performance test procedures
are given for each type of system. To demonstrate continuous
compliance, plants must install, operate, and maintain CPMS to monitor
during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation, the daily average pH or
alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal
scrubbing system, and the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio. Plants may
use pH strips as an approved alternative to a pH CPMS, or discrete
titration as an alternative to a CPMS for alkalinity.
I. What New Options Are Available For a Catalytic Reforming Unit With a
Different Type of Control System?
Industry representatives and technology vendors expressed concern
that the NESHAP do not include compliance provisions for continuous CRU
that may use process modifications, pollution prevention control
techniques, or alternative control systems other than internal or
external (add-on) wet scrubbers to comply with the emission
limitations. A refinery process design firm provided data indicating
that gas-solid adsorption systems can meet the HCl emission limitations
for CRU. The system also acted as a pollution prevention technique by
reducing the total amount of chloriding agent needed during catalyst
regeneration. The direct final rule amendments add provisions to
accommodate these control scenarios. The new provisions improve the
NESHAP by encouraging the use of new technologies that meet the MACT
level of control.
Plants with a fixed-bed gas-adsorption system must meet two
operating limits during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation:
The daily average temperature of the gas entering or
exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the limit established
during the performance test; and
The HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gas
must not exceed the limit established during the performance test.
Plants must conduct a performance test to demonstrate initial
compliance and to establish operating limits. To demonstrate continuous
compliance, plants must install, operate, and maintain CPMS to monitor
the daily average temperature of the gas entering or exiting the
adsorption system. In addition, plants must monitor HCl during coke
burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using a colormetric tube sampling
system to measure the concentration in the adsorption system exhaust
and at a point within the adsorbent bed not to exceed 90 percent of the
total length of the bed. If the HCl concentration at the sampling
location with the adsorption bed exceeds the operating limit, plants
must follow the procedures in their operation and maintenance plan.
These procedures must require, at a minimum, that plants remeasure the
HCl concentration at both the adsorption system exhaust and at the
sampling location within the adsorbent bed and replace the sorbent
material in the bed before the next regeneration cycle if the HCl
[[Page 6935]]
concentration at either location is above the operating limit.
The direct final rule amendments also establish operating limits
and compliance provisions for CRU with moving-bed gas-solid adsorption
systems. The operating limits are:
The daily average temperature of the gas entering or
exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the limit established
during the performance test;
The weekly average chloride level on the sorbent entering
the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's
recommended limit (1.35 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM
system); and
The weekly average chloride level on the sorbent exiting
the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's
recommended limit (1.8 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM
system).
Plants must conduct a performance test to demonstrate initial
compliance and to establish an operating limit for the daily average
gas temperature. To demonstrate continuous compliance, plants must
monitor the daily average gas temperature using a CPMS. To demonstrate
continuous compliance with the operating limits for chloride level,
plants must collect and analyze samples of the sorbent entering and
exiting the system for total chloride concentration using the new
procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles
(Instrument Analyzer Procedure)'' in appendix A of these direct final
amendments or the specified methods in EPA Publication No. SW-846,
``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods''
(Revision 5, April 1998). Plants must determine and record the weekly
chloride content and maintain the weekly average chloride content below
the design operating limits.
J. How Are We Changing The Requirements For Continuous Parameter
Monitoring Systems?
The technical specifications for CPMS in Table 41 to subpart UUU
were added to the NESHAP after proposal based on provisions we have
included in other NESHAP. We included these provisions to ensure that
CPMS are installed, calibrated, and operated in a manner that would
yield accurate and reliable information on the performance of control
devices. Industry representatives objected to the inclusion of such
detailed requirements after proposal with no opportunity to comment on
the provisions.
We have decided not to include the performance specifications for
CPMS in the rule at this time. As discussed in the preamble to the
Generic MACT NESHAP amendments (67 FR 46260, July 12, 2002), we are
currently developing Performance Specification (PS-17) for CPMS and
quality assurance procedures that will apply to all sources subject to
NESHAP under 40 CFR part 63. A proposed rule for these specifications
is expected to be available in 2005. This approach will avoid the
possibility that the specifications ultimately issued for all NESHAP
differ significantly from those in the Petroleum Refineries NESHAP.
The NESHAP state that each CPMS must be installed, operated, and
maintained according to the requirements in Table 41 of subpart UUU and
in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's or other written
procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment will
monitor accurately. The amendments remove the reference to Table 41
from 40 CFR 63.1572(c) for those CPMS that will be covered by PS-17 and
quality assurance procedures. Until PS-17 is available, facilities must
install, operate, and maintain CPMS in a manner consistent with the
manufacturer's or other written procedures that provide adequate
assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately.
Table 41 to subpart UUU also contains requirements for pH strips
and colormetric sampling systems. These requirements were added to the
NESHAP in response to comments and are not expected to be covered by
the new PS-17 and quality assurance procedures. Consequently, we have
not removed these requirements from the table.
K. What Corrections Are We Making?
We are correcting numbering errors and citations in several
sections of the NESHAP. We are also amending the rule to correct
publication errors in various tables.
We are correcting a unit conversion error in Tables 1 through 3 to
subpart UUU. These tables cite the incremental PM emission rate for
discharged gases that pass through an incinerator or waste heat boiler
in which auxiliary or supplemental liquid or solid fossil fuel is
burned as 43.0 grams per Megajoule of heat input attributable to the
liquid or solid fossil fuel. The corrected value is 43.0 grams per
Gigajoule; no change is being made to the English unit equivalent limit
(0.10 pound per million British thermal units). We are making several
minor corrections to these tables to ensure that both limits are cited
consistently and accurately.
We are correcting Table 5 to subpart UUU to list the proper test
methods required for PM performance tests for metal HAP emissions. The
amended table requires EPA Method 5B or 5F (40 CFR part 60, appendix A)
to determine PM emissions and associated moisture content for a unit
without a wet scrubber; EPA Method 5B is required to determine PM
emissions and associated moisture content for a unit with a wet
scrubber.
We are correcting Table 6 to subpart UUU to specify the use of
Equation 1 (the proper equation for calculation of coke burn-off)
rather than Equation 2.
We are correcting Table 18 to subpart UUU to correct a
typographical error in a cross reference to certain requirements for
flares in the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).
We are correcting Tables 31, 33, and 34 to subpart UUU to clarify
the monitoring and compliance requirements for a sulfur recovery unit
subject to the TRS limit. Under this option, the owner or operator may
use a TRS continuous emission monitoring system or CPMS, and the
continuous compliance requirements depend on the type of monitoring
system. The direct final rule amendments separate the requirements
according to the type of monitoring system and clarify that compliance
is based on a 12-hour rolling average like the NSPS requirements.
We also are clarifying our comment in the explanation column of
Table 44 for the citation 40 CFR 63.6(i), which allows facilities to
request a 1-year extension of compliance if necessary to install
controls. We are revising the table to state that the extension of
compliance under 40 CFR 63.6(i)(4) is not applicable to a facility that
installs catalytic cracking feed hydrotreating and receives an extended
compliance date under 40 CFR 63.1563(c). We are also revising Table 44
to subpart UUU to change the citation to 40 CFR 63.9(b)(3) to indicate
its current reserved status under the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR
part 63).
III. Summary of Non-Air Health, Environmental, Energy, and Cost Impacts
The NESHAP will reduce emissions of many HAP emitted from the
affected sources at petroleum refineries, including particulate metals,
organics, and reduced sulfur compounds. When fully implemented, we
estimate that HAP emissions will be reduced by nearly 11,000 tpy.
Emissions of other pollutants such as volatile organic
[[Page 6936]]
compounds, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide
will be reduced by about 60,000 tpy.
There will not be any adverse non-air health, environmental,
energy, cost (or economic) impacts as a result of the direct final rule
amendments because no new requirements are imposed on any facility. The
new option for CRU will allow for the use of new control technology to
meet the HCl emission limitations, which may reduce the costs and
energy impacts of add-on controls.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 5173, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in
standards that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that the direct final rule amendments are
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The direct final rule amendments consist primarily of new compliance
options, clarifications, and corrections to the NESHAP that impose no
new information collection requirements on industry or EPA. However,
the OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements
in the existing regulation (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0554, EPA Information Collection
Request (ICR) number 1844.02. A copy of the OMB approved ICR may be
obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566-1672.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and
verifying information; 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 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 in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the direct final
rule amendments.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule
amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations
at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impact of today's direct final rule
amendments on small entities, the EPA has concluded that this action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. In determining whether a rule has a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact
of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small
entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility
analyses is to identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which
minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small
entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an agency may conclude that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or
otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities
subject to the rule.
There will be a positive impact on small entities because the
direct final rule amendments add new compliance provisions to increase
flexibility, decrease unnecessary costs, and make clarifying changes to
improve implementation of the NESHAP. These changes are voluntary and
do not impose new costs. We have, therefore, concluded that today's
direct final rule amendments will relieve regulatory burden for all
small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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, the
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 to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to 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 the 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 the 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 the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for
notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of
affected small governments
[[Page 6937]]
to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA
regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental
mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on
compliance with the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that the direct final rule amendments do not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate,
or the private sector in any 1 year. No new costs are attributable to
the direct final rule amendments. Thus, today's direct final rule
amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA. The EPA has also determined that the direct final rule
amendments contain no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments because they contain no
requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon
them. Thus, the direct final rule amendments are not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' 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.''
The direct final rule amendments do not have federalism
implications. They will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132,
because State and local governments do not own or operate any sources
that would be subject to the direct final rule amendments. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the direct final rule
amendments.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (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.'' The direct final rule amendments do
not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175,
because tribal governments do not own or operate any sources subject to
the direct final rule amendments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to the direct final rule amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & 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 an 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, we 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.
We interpret 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. The direct final rule
amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the NESHAP
(and subsequent amendments) are based on technology performance and not
on health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy,
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The direct final rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, Sec. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in the
regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., material
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices)
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The
NTTAA requires Federal agencies to provide Congress, through annual
reports to OMB, with explanations when an agency does not use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The direct final rule amendments include a new procedure,
``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles
(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).'' This procedure was developed in
consultation with industry experts and equipment vendors for the
purpose of determining the metal or total chloride concentration on
catalyst particles. This new procedure was not fully developed at the
time the NESHAP were issued and reflects current practices used by many
plants within the industry. The new procedure is not mandatory; plants
also may use one of several existing EPA methods in ``Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods'' (EPA Publication
SW-846, Revision 5, April 1998) or an alternative method satisfactory
to the Administrator.
Consistent with the NTTAA, we conducted a search to identify
voluntary consensus standards for use in determining the metal or total
chloride concentration on catalyst particles. This search identified
one voluntary consensus standard, ASTM D7085-04, ``Standard Guide for
Determination of Chemical Elements in Fluid Catalytic Cracking
Catalysts by X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (XRF).'' This method
contains detailed sample preparation procedures that may be a useful
supplement to the instrumental method included in the direct final rule
amendments. However, we have not adopted ASTM D7085-04 as an
alternative to the instrumental method because the method does not
include equivalent procedures for determining zero and calibration
drift, instrument energy calibration, and calibration accuracy, or
specific quality assurance procedures for analyzing calibration
standards or catalyst samples.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
[[Page 6938]]
General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the
Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2). The direct final rule amendments will be effective on
April 11, 2005.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 1, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Acting Administrator.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart UUU--[AMENDED]
0
2. Section 63.1562 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) through (3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1562 What parts of my plant are covered by this subpart?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) The process vent or group of process vents on fluidized
catalytic cracking units that are associated with regeneration of the
catalyst used in the unit (i.e., the catalyst regeneration flue gas
vent).
(2) The process vent or group of process vents on catalytic
reforming units (including but not limited to semi-regenerative,
cyclic, or continuous processes) that are associated with regeneration
of the catalyst used in the unit. This affected source includes vents
that are used during the unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, and
catalyst rejuvenation.
(3) The process vent or group of process vents on Claus or other
types of sulfur recovery plant units or the tail gas treatment units
serving sulfur recovery plants, that are associated with sulfur
recovery.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 63.1564(b)(4) is amended by revising the definition of the
symbol ``Qr'' for Equation 1 of to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1564 What are my requirements for metal HAP emissions from
catalytic cracking units?
* * * * *
Qr = Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from catalyst
regenerator before adding air or gas streams. Example: You may measure
upstream or downstream of an electrostatic precipitator, but you must
measure upstream of a carbon monoxide boiler, dscm/min (dscf/min). You
may use the alternative in either Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) or (a)(2), as
applicable, to calculate Qr;
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.1566 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(3);
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(4)(i) introductory text;
0
c. Revising the definitions of the symbols ``E'' and ``Mc''
in Equation 1 of paragraph (b)(4)(i);
0
d. Revising Equation 2 of paragraph (b)(4)(i);
0
e. Redesignating paragraph (b)(5) as (b)(4)(ii);
0
f. Revising Equation 4 in the newly designated paragraph (b)(4)(ii);
and
0
g. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(9) as (b)(5) through
(b)(8).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.1566 What are my requirements for organic HAP emissions from
catalytic reforming units?
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) You can elect to meet a TOC or nonmethane TOC percent
reduction standard or concentration limit, whichever is less stringent
(Option 2).
* * * * *
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(4) of this section, the
emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart apply to
emissions from catalytic reforming unit process vents associated with
initial catalyst depressuring and catalyst purging operations that
occur prior to the coke burn-off cycle. The emission limitations in
Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart do not apply to the coke burn-off,
catalyst rejuvenation, reduction or activation vents, or to the control
systems used for these vents.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) If you elect the percent reduction standard under Option 2,
calculate the emission rate of nonmethane TOC using Equation 1 of this
section (if you use Method 25) or Equation 2 of this section (if you
use Method 25A or Methods 25A and 18), then calculate the mass emission
reduction using Equation 3 of this section as follows:
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.000
Where:
E = Emission rate of nonmethane TOC in the vent stream, kilograms-C per
hour;
* * * * *
Mc = Mass concentration of total gaseous nonmethane organic
(as carbon) as measured and calculated using Method 25 in appendix A to
part 60 of this chapter, mg/dscm; and
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.001
Where:
K5 = Constant, 1.8 x 10-\4\ (parts per million)
-\1\ (gram-mole per standard cubic meter) (gram-C per gram-
mole-hexane) (kilogram per gram) (minutes per hour), where the standard
temperature (standard cubic meter) is at 20 degrees C (uses 72g-C/
g.mole hexane);
C TOC = Concentration of TOC on a dry basis in ppmv as
hexane as measured by Method 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this
chapter;
C methane = Concentration of methane on a dry basis in ppmv
as measured by Method 18 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter. If
the concentration of methane is not determined, assume C
methane equals zero; and
Q s = Vent stream flow rate, dry standard cubic meters per
minute, at a temperature of 20 degrees C. * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.002
Where:
CNMTOC, 3[percnt]O2 = Concentration of
nonmethane TOC on a dry basis in ppmv as hexane corrected to 3 percent
oxygen.
[[Page 6939]]
0
5. Section 63.1567 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(1)(i);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6) as paragraphs (b)(5)
through (b)(7); and
0
c. Adding new paragraph (b)(4).
The addition and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.1567 What are my requirements for inorganic HAP emissions
from catalytic reforming units?
(a) * * *
(1) Meet each emission limitation in Table 22 to this subpart that
applies to you. If you operate a catalytic reforming unit in which
different reactors in the catalytic reforming unit are regenerated in
separate regeneration systems, then these emission limitations apply to
each separate regeneration system. These emission limitations apply to
emissions from catalytic reforming unit process vents associated with
the coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation operations during coke
burn-off and catalyst regeneration. You can choose from the two options
in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (ii) of this section:
(i) You can elect to meet a percent reduction standard for hydrogen
chloride (HCl) emissions (Option 1); or
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Use the equations in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section to determine initial compliance with the emission limitations.
(i) Correct the measured HCl concentration for oxygen
(O2) content in the gas stream using Equation 1 of this
section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.003
Where:
CHCl,3[percnt] O2 = Concentration of
HCl on a dry basis in ppmv corrected to 3 percent oxygen or 1 ppmv,
whichever is greater;
CHCl = Concentration of HCl on a dry basis in ppmv, as
measured by Method 26A in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; and
%O2 = Oxygen concentration in percent by volume (dry basis).
(ii) If you elect the percent reduction standard, calculate the
emission rate of HCl using Equation 2 of this section; then calculate
the mass emission reduction from the mass emission rates using Equation
3 of this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.004
Where:
E HCl, = Emission rate of HCl in the vent stream, grams per
hour;
K6 = Constant, 0.091 (parts per million) -1
(grams HCl per standard cubic meter) (minutes per hour), where the
standard temperature (standard cubic meter) is at 20 degrees Celsius
(C); and
Q s = Vent stream flow rate, dscm/min, at a temperature of
20 degrees C.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.005
Where:
E HCl,i = Mass emission rate of HCl at control device inlet,
g/hr; and
E HCl,o = Mass emission rate of HCl at control device
outlet, g/hr.
(iii) If you are required to use a colormetric tube sampling system
to demonstrate continuous compliance with the HCl concentration
operating limit, calculate the HCl operating limit using Equation 4 of
this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.006
Where:
CHCl,ppmvLimit = Maximum permissible HCl concentration for
the HCl concentration operating limit, ppmv;
CHCl,AveTube = Average HCl concentration from the
colormetric tube sampling system, calculated as the arithmetic average
of the average HCl concentration measured for each performance test
run, ppmv or 1 ppmv, whichever is greater; and
CHCl,RegLimit = Maximum permissible outlet HCl concentration
for the applicable catalytic reforming unit as listed in Table 22 of
this subpart, either 10 or 30 ppmv.
(iv) If you are required to use a colormetric tube sampling system
to demonstrate continuous compliance with the percent reduction
operating limit, calculate the HCl operating limit using Equation 5 of
this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.007
[[Page 6940]]
Where:
CHCl,[percnt]Limit = Maximum
permissible HCl concentration for the percent reduction operating
limit, ppmv;
%HCl ReductionLimit = Minimum permissible HCl reduction for
the applicable catalytic reforming unit as listed in Table 22 of this
subpart, either 97 or 92 percent; and
%HCl ReductionTest = Average percent HCl reduction
calculated as the arithmetic average HCl reduction calculated using
Equation 3 of this section for each performance source test, percent.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.1572 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) introductory
text and (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1572 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
* * * * *
(c) You must install, operate, and maintain each continuous
parameter monitoring system according to the requirements in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator shall install, operate, and maintain each
continuous parameter monitoring system in a manner consistent with the
manufacturer's specifications or other written procedures that provide
adequate assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately. The
owner or operator shall also meet the equipment specifications in Table
41 of this subpart if pH strips or colormetric tube sampling systems
are used.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.1573 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b); and
0
b. Adding new paragraph (f).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 63.1573 What are my monitoring alternatives?
(a) What are the approved alternatives for measuring gas flow rate?
(1) You may use this alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring
system for the catalytic regenerator exhaust gas flow rate for your
catalytic cracking unit if the unit does not introduce any other gas
streams into the catalyst regeneration vent (i.e., complete combustion
units with no additional combustion devices). You may also use this
alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system for the
catalytic regenerator atmospheric exhaust gas flow rate for your
catalytic reforming unit during the coke burn and rejuvenation cycles
if the unit operates as a constant pressure system during these cycles.
If you use this alternative, you shall use the same procedure for the
performance test and for monitoring after the performance test. You
shall:
(i) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system to
measure and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the
catalytic cracking unit or catalytic reforming unit regenerator. Or,
you may determine and record the hourly average volumetric air flow
rate to the catalytic cracking unit or catalytic reforming unit
regenerator using the appropriate control room instrumentation.
(ii) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system
to measure and record the temperature of the gases entering the control
device (or exiting the catalyst regenerator if you do not use an add-on
control device).
(iii) Calculate and record the hourly average actual exhaust gas
flow rate using Equation 1 of this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.008
Where:
Q gas = Hourly average actual gas flow rate, acfm;
1.12 = Default correction factor to convert gas flow from dry standard
cubic feet per minute (dscfm) to standard cubic feet per minute (scfm);
Q air = Volumetric flow rate of air to regenerator, as
determined from the control room instrumentations, dscfm;
Q other = Volumetric flow rate of other gases entering the
regenerator as determined from the control room instrumentations,
dscfm. (Examples of ``other'' gases include an oxygen-enriched air
stream to catalytic cracking unit regenerators and a nitrogen stream to
catalytic reforming unit regenerators.);
Tempgas = Temperature of gas stream in vent measured as near
as practical to the control device or opacity monitor, [deg]K. For wet
scrubbers, temperature of gas prior to the wet scrubber; and
Pvent = Absolute pressure in the vent measured as near as
practical to the control device or opacity monitor, as applicable, atm.
When used to assess the gas flow rate in the final atmospheric vent
stack, you can assume Pvent = 1 atm.
(2) You may use this alternative to calculating Q r, the
volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas for the catalytic cracking
regenerator as required in Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1564, if you have a
gas analyzer installed in the catalytic cracking regenerator exhaust
vent prior to the addition of air or other gas streams. You may measure
upstream or downstream of an electrostatic precipitator, but you shall
measure upstream of a carbon monoxide boiler. You shall:
(i) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system to
measure and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the
catalytic cracking unit regenerator. Or, you can determine and record
the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the catalytic cracking
unit regenerator using the catalytic cracking unit control room
instrumentation.
(ii) Install and operate a continuous gas analyzer to measure and
record the concentration of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and oxygen
of the catalytic cracking regenerator exhaust.
(iii) Calculate and record the hourly average flow rate using
Equation 2 of this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.009
[[Page 6941]]
Where:
Q r = Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from the catalyst
regenerator before adding air or gas streams, dscm/min (dscf/min);
79 = Default concentration of nitrogen and argon in dry air, percent by
volume (dry basis);
%Oxy = Oxygen concentration in oxygen-enriched air stream,
percent by volume (dry basis);
Q oxy = Volumetric flow rate of oxygen-enriched air stream
to regenerator as determined from the catalytic cracking unit control
room instrumentations, dscm/min (dscf/min);
%CO2 = Carbon dioxide concentration in regenerator exhaust,
percent by volume (dry basis);
CO = Carbon monoxide concentration in regenerator exhaust, percent by
volume (dry basis); and
%O2 = Oxygen concentration in regenerator exhaust, percent
by volume (dry basis).
(b) What is the approved alternative for monitoring pH or
alkalinity levels? You may use the alternative in paragraph (b)(1) or
(2) of this section for a catalytic reforming unit.
(1) You shall measure and record the pH of the water (or scrubbing
liquid) exiting the wet scrubber or internal scrubbing system at least
once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using pH
strips as an alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system.
The pH strips must meet the requirements in Table 41 of this subpart.
(2) You shall measure and record the alkalinity of the water (or
scrubbing liquid) exiting the wet scrubber or internal scrubbing system
at least once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation
using titration as an alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring
system.
* * * * *
(f) How do I apply for alternative monitoring requirements if my
catalytic cracking unit is equipped with a wet scrubber and I have
approved alternative monitoring requirements under the new source
performance standards for petroleum refineries?
(1) You may request alternative monitoring requirements according
to the procedures in this paragraph if you meet each of the conditions
in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section:
(i) Your fluid catalytic cracking unit regenerator vent is subject
to the PM limit in 40 CFR 60.102(a)(1) and uses a wet scrubber for PM
emissions control;
(ii) You have alternative monitoring requirements for the
continuous opacity monitoring system requirement in 40 CFR 60.105(a)(1)
approved by the Administrator; and
(iii) You are required by this subpart to install, operate, and
maintain a continuous opacity monitoring system for the same catalytic
cracking unit regenerator vent for which you have approved alternative
monitoring requirements.
(2) You can request approval to use an alternative monitoring
method prior to submitting your notification of compliance status, in
your notification of compliance status, or at any time.
(3) You must submit a copy of the approved alternative monitoring
requirements along with a monitoring plan that includes a description
of the continuous monitoring system or method, including appropriate
operating parameters that will be monitored, test results demonstrating
compliance with the opacity limit used to establish an enforceable
operating limit(s), and the frequency of measuring and recording to
establish continuous compliance. If applicable, you must also include
operation and maintenance requirements for the continuous monitoring
system.
(4) We will contact you within 30 days of receipt of your
application to inform you of approval or of our intent to disapprove
your request.
0
8. Section 63.1574 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii);
0
b. Revising paragraph (c); and
0
c. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (f) introductory text,
revising paragraph (f)(2) introductory text, revising paragraphs
(f)(2)(vi) and (f)(2)(x), and adding new paragraphs (f)(2)(xi) and
(xii).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.1574 What notifications must I submit and when?
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) For each initial compliance demonstration that includes a
performance test, you must submit the notification of compliance
status, including the performance test results, no later than 150
calendar days after the compliance date specified for your affected
source in Sec. 63.1563.
* * * * *
(c) If you startup your new or reconstructed affected source on or
after April 11, 2002, you must submit the initial notification no later
than 120 days after you become subject to this subpart.
* * * * *
(f) As required by this subpart, you must prepare and implement an
operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan for each control system and
continuous monitoring system for each affected source. * * *
(2) Each plan must include, at a minimum, the information specified
in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (xii) of this section.
* * * * *
(vi) Procedures you will use to determine the HCl concentration of
gases from a catalytic reforming unit when you use a colormetric tube
sampling system, including procedures for correcting for pressure (if
applicable to the sampling equipment) and the sampling locations that
will be used for compliance monitoring purposes.
* * * * *
(x) Maintenance schedule for each monitoring system and control
device for each affected source that is generally consistent with the
manufacturer's instructions for routine and long-term maintenance.
(xi) If you use a fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption system to control
emissions from a catalytic reforming unit, you must implement
corrective action procedures if the HCl concentration measured at the
selected compliance monitoring sampling location within the bed exceeds
the operating limit. These procedures must require, at minimum, repeat
measurement and recording of the HCl concentration in the adsorption
system exhaust gases and at the selected compliance monitoring sampling
location within the bed. If the HCl concentration at the selected
compliance monitoring location within the bed is above the operating
limit during the repeat measurement while the HCl concentration in the
adsorption system exhaust gases remains below the operating limit, the
adsorption bed must be replaced as soon as practicable. Your procedures
must specify the sampling frequency that will be used to monitor the
HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gases subsequent to
the repeat measurement and prior to replacement of the sorbent material
(but not less frequent than once every 4 hours during coke burn-off).
If the HCl concentration of the adsorption system exhaust gases is
above the operating limit when measured at any time, the adsorption bed
must be replaced within 24 hours or before the next regeneration cycle,
whichever is longer.
(xii) Procedures that will be used for purging the catalyst if you
do not use a control device to comply with the organic HAP emission
limits for catalytic reforming units. These procedures will include,
but are not limited to, specification of the minimum
[[Page 6942]]
catalyst temperature and the minimum cumulative volume of gas per mass
of catalyst used for purging prior to uncontrolled releases (i.e.,
during controlled purging events); the maximum purge gas temperature
for uncontrolled purge events; and specification of the monitoring
systems that will be used to monitor and record data during each purge
event.
0
9. Section 63.1576 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.1576 What records must I keep, in what form, and for how
long?
(a) * * *
(2) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
* * * * *
0
10. Section 63.1579 is amended by:
0
a. Adding, in alphabetical order, new definitions for the terms
``Internal scrubbing system'' and ``Nonmethane TOC''; and
0
b. Revising the definition for the term ``TOC.''
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 63.1579 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Internal scrubbing system means a wet scrubbing, wet injection, or
caustic injection control device that treats (in-situ) the catalytic
reforming unit recirculating coke burn exhaust gases for acid (HCl)
control during reforming catalyst regeneration upstream of the
atmospheric coke burn vent.
* * * * *
Nonmethane TOC means, for the purposes of this subpart, emissions
of total organic compounds, excluding methane, that serve as a
surrogate measure of the total emissions of organic HAP compounds
including, but not limited to, acetaldehyde, benzene, hexane, phenol,
toluene, and xylenes and nonHAP VOC as measured by Method 25 in
appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, by the combination of Methods 18
and 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, or by an approved
alternative method.
* * * * *
TOC means, for the purposes of this subpart, emissions of total
organic compounds that serve as a surrogate measure of the total
emissions of organic HAP compounds including, but not limited to,
acetaldehyde, benzene, hexane, phenol, toluene, and xylenes and nonHAP
VOC as measured by Method 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter
or by an approved alternative method.
* * * * *
0
11. Tables 1 through 44 to subpart UUU of part 63 are amended to remove
the phrase, ``you must'' and add in its place the phrase ``you shall''
in the introductory text and in the last column heading, where
applicable (i.e., Tables 1 through 3, 6 through 10, 13 through 17, 20
through 24, 27 through 31, 34 through 37, 39, and 41 through 43).
0
12. Table 1 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended to revising entries 1
and 2 to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Metal HAP Emission Limits for
Catalytic Cracking Units.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall meet the following
For each new or existing catalytic emission limits for each
cracking unit . . . catalyst regenerator vent . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to new source performance PM emissions must not the
standard (NSPS) for PM in 40 CFR exceed 1.0 kilogram (kg) per
60.102. 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/1,000 lb) of
coke burn-off in the catalyst
regenerator; if the discharged
gases pass through an
incinerator or waste heat
boiler in which you burn
auxiliary or in supplemental
liquid or solid fossil fuel,
the incremental rate of PM
emissions must not exceed 43.0
grams per Gigajoule (g/GJ) or
0.10 pounds per million
British thermal units (lb/
million Btu) of heat input
attributable to the liquid or
solid fossil fuel; and the
opacity of emissions must not
exceed 30 percent, except for
one 6-minute average opacity
reading in any 1-hour period.
2. Option 1: NSPS requirements not PM emissions must not exceed
subject to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 1.0 kg/1,000 kg (1.0 lb/1,000
60.102. lb) of coke burn-off in the
catalyst regenerator; if the
discharged gases pass through
an incinerator or waste heat
boiler in which you burn
auxiliary or supplemental
liquid or solid fossil fuel,
the incremental rate of PM
must not exceed 43.0 g/GJ
(0.10 lb/million Btu) of heat
input attributable to the
liquid or solid fossil fuel;
and the opacity of emissions
must not exceed 30 percent,
except for one 6-minute
average opacity reading in any
1-hour period.
* * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
13. Table 3 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic
Cracking Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1564(b)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And you use this type You shall install,
For each new or existing catalytic If your catalytic of control device for operate, and maintain a
cracking unit . . . cracking unit is . . . your vent . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to the NSPS for PM in 40 Any size............... Electrostatic Continuous opacity
CFR 60.102. precipitator or wet monitoring system to
scrubber or no control measure and record the
device. opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent.
[[Page 6943]]
2. Option 1: NSPS limits not subject Any size............... Electrostatic Continuous opacity
to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. precipitator or wet monitoring system to
scrubber or no control measure and record the
device. opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent.
3. Option 2: PM limit not subject to a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent.
b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent; or
continuous parameter
monitoring systems to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\ and the
voltage and secondary
current (or total
power input) to the
control device.
c. Any size............ i. Wet scrubber........ (1) Continuous
parameter monitoring
system to measure and
record the pressure
drop across the
scrubber, gas flow
rate entering or
exiting the control
device \1\, and total
liquid (or scrubbing
liquor) flow rate to
the control device.
(2) If you use a wet
scrubber of the non-
venturi jet-ejector
design, you're not
required to install
and operate a
continuous parameter
monitoring system for
pressure drop.
d. Any size............ No electrostatic Continuous opacity
precipitator or wet monitoring system to
scrubber. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regnerator vent.
4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr not subject to a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\.
b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\; or
continuous parameter
monitoring systems to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\ and the
voltage and secondary
current (or total
power input) to the
control device.
[[Page 6944]]
c. Any size............ Wet scrubber........... (1) Continuous
parameter monitoring
system to measure and
record the pressure
drop across the
scrubber, gas flow
rate entering or
exiting the control
device \1\, and total
liquid (or scrubbing
liquor) flow rate to
the control device.
(2) If you use a wet
scrubber of the non-
venturi jet-ejector
design, you're not
required to install
and operate a
continuous parameter
monitoring system for
pressure drop.
d. Any size............ No electrostatic Continuous opacity
precipitator or wet monitoring system to
scrubber. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate \1\.
5. Option 4: Ni lb/1,000 lbs of coke a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
burn-off not subject to the NSPS for per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
PM in 40 CFR 60.102. capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\.
b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic Continuous opacity
per day fresh feed precipitator. monitoring system to
capacity. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\; or
continuous parameter
monitoring systems to
measure and record the
gas flow rate entering
or exiting the control
device \1\ and the
voltage and secondary
current (or total
power input) to the
control device.
c. Any size............ Wet scrubber........... Continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
pressure drop across
the scrubber, gas flow
rate entering or
exiting the control
device \1\, and total
liquid (or scrubbing
liquor) flow rate to
the control device.
d. Any size............ No electrostatic Continuous opacity
precipitator or wet monitoring system to
scrubber. measure and record the
opacity of emissions
from each catalyst
regenerator vent and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to
measure and record the
gas flow rate \1\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) instead of a continuous parameter
monitoring system for gas flow rate.
0
14. Table 4 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 2,
3, 4, and 5; revising footnote 1; and adding new footnote 2 to read as
follows:
[[Page 6945]]
Table 4 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Requirements for Performance Tests for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic
Cracking Units Not Subject to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Particulate Matter (PM)
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each new or existing catalytic
cracking unit catalyst regenerator You shall . . . Using . . . According to these
vent . . . requirements . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2. Option 1: Elect NSPS.............. a. Measure PM Method 5B or 5F (40 CFR You must maintain a
emissions. part 60, appendix A) sampling rate of at
to determine PM least 0.15 dry
emissions and standard cubic meters
associated moisture per minute (dscm/min)
content for units (0.53 dry standard
without wet scrubbers. cubic feet per minute
Method 5B (40 CFR part (dscf/min).
60, appendix A) to
determine PM emissions
and associated
moisture content for
unit with wet
scrubber.
b. Compute PM emission Equations 1, 2, and 3
rate (lbs/1,000 lbs) of Sec. 63.1564 (if
of coke burn-off. applicable).
c. Measure opacity of Continuous opacity You must collect
emissions. monitoring system. opacity monitoring
data every 10 seconds
during the entire
period of the Method
5B or 5F performance
test and reduce the
data to 6-minute
averages.
3. Option 2: PM limit................ a. Measure PM See item 2. of this See item 2. of this
emissions. table. table.
b. Compute coke burn- Equations 1 and 2 of
off rate and PM Sec. 63.1564.
emission rate.
c. Establish your site- Data from the You must collect
specific opacity continuous opacity opacity monitoring
operating limit if you monitoring system. data every 10 seconds
use a continuous during the entire
opacity monitoring period of the Method
system. 5B or 5F performance
test and reduce the
data to 6-minute
averages; determine
and record the hourly
average opacity from
all the 6-minute
averages; and compute
the site-specific
limit using Equation 4
of Sec. 63.1564.
4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr................ a. Measure Method 29 (40 CFR part
concentration of Ni 60, appendix A).
and total metal HAP.
b. Compute Ni emission Equation 5 of Sec.
rate (lb/hr). 63.1564.
c. Determine the XRF procedure in You must obtain 1
equilibrium catalyst appendix A to this sample for each of the
Ni concentration. subpart\1\; or EPA 3 runs; determine and
Method 6010B or 6020 record the equilibrium
or EPA Method 7520 or catalyst Ni
7521 in SW-846\2\; or concentration for each
an alternative to the of the 3 samples; and
SW-846 method you may adjust the
satisfactory to the laboratory results to
Administrator. the maximum value
using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.1571.
d. If you use a i. Equations 6 and 7 of (1) You must collect
continuous opacity Sec. 63.1564 using opacity monitoring
monitoring system, data from continuous data every 10 seconds
establish your site- opacity monitoring during the entire
specific Ni operating system, gas flow rate, period of the initial
limit. results of equilibrium Ni performance test;
catalyst Ni reduce the data to 6-
concentration minute averages; and
analysis, and Ni determine and record
emission rate from the hourly average
Method 29 test. opacity from all the 6-
minute averages.
(2) You must collect
gas flow rate
monitoring data every
15 minutes during the
entire period of the
initial Ni performance
test; measure the gas
flow as near as
practical to the
continuous opacity
monitoring system; and
determine and record
the hourly average
actual gas flow rate
from all the readings.
5. Option 4: Ni lbs/1,000 lbs of coke a. Measure Method 29 (40 CFR part
burn-off. concentration of Ni 60, appendix A).
and total HAP.
[[Page 6946]]
b. Compute Ni emission Equations 1 and 8 of .......................
rate (lb/1,000 lbs of Sec. 63.1564.
coke burn-off).
c. Determine the See item 4.c. of this You must obtain 1
equilibrium catalyst table. sample for each of the
Ni concentration. 3 runs; determine and
record the equilibrium
catalyst Ni
concentration for each
of the 3 samples; and
you may adjust the
laboratory results to
the maximum value
using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.1571.
d. If you use a i. Equations 9 and 10 (1) You must collect
continuous opacity of Sec. 63.1564 with opacity monitoring
monitoring system, data from continuous data every 10 seconds
establish your site- opacity monitoring during the entire
specific Ni operating system, coke burn-off period of the initial
limit. rate, results of Ni performance test;
equilibrium catalyst reduce the data to 6-
Ni concentration minute averages; and
analysis, and Ni determine and record
emission rate from the hourly average
Method 29 test. opacity from all the 6-
minute averages.
(2) You must collect
gas flow rate
monitoring data every
15 minutes during the
entire period of the
initial Ni performance
test; measure the gas
flow rate as near as
practical to the
continuous opacity
monitoring system; and
determine and record
the hourly average
actual gas flow rate
from all the readings.
e. Record the catalyst
addition rate for each
test and schedule for
the 10- day period
prior to the test.
* * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
\2\ EPA Method 6010B, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, EPA Method 6020, Inductively
Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry, EPA Method 7520, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration, and EPA Method
7521, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document
number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services
(NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket
Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.
0
15. Table 5 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 1,
2, and 3 to read as follows:
[[Page 6947]]
Table 5 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial-Compliance With Metal HAP
Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each new and existing
catalytic cracking unit For the following You have
catalyst regenerator vent . emission limit . . . demonstrated initial
. . compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to the NSPS for PM emissions must You have already
PM in 40 CFR 60.102. not exceed 1.0 kg/ conducted a
1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ performance test to
1,000 lb) of coke demonstrate initial
burn-off in the compliance with the
catalyst NSPS and the
regenerator; if the measured PM
discharged gases emission rate is
pass through an less than or equal
incinerator or to 1.0 kg/1,000 kg
waste heat boiler (1.0 lb/1,000 lb)
in which you burn of coke burn-off in
auxiliary or the catalyst
supplemental liquid regenerator. As
or solid fossil part of the
fuel, the Notification of
incremental rate of Compliance Status,
PM must not exceed you must certify
43.0 grams per that your vent
Gigajoule (g/GJ) or meets the PM limit.
0.10 pounds per You are not
million British required to do
thermal units (lb/ another performance
million Btu) of test to demonstrate
heat input initial compliance.
attributable to the If applicable, you
liquid or solid have already
fossil fuel; and conducted a
the opacity of performance test to
emissions must not demonstrate initial
exceed 30 percent, compliance with the
except for one 6- NSPS and the
minute average measured PM rate is
opacity reading in less than or equal
any 1-hour period. to 43.0 g/GJ (0.10
lb/million Btu) of
heat input
attributable to the
liquid or solid
fossil fuel. As
part of the
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your vent
meets the PM
emission limit. You
are not required to
do another
performance test to
demonstrate initial
compliance. You
have already
conducted a
performance test to
demonstrate initial
compliance with the
NSPS and the
average hourly
opacity is no more
than 30 percent.
Except: One 6-
minute average in
any 1-hour period
can exceed 30
percent. As part of
the Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your vent
meets the opacity
limit. You are not
required to do
another performance
test to demonstrate
initial compliance.
You have already
conducted a
performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance with the
applicable
performance
specification. As
part of your
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you certify that
your continuous
opacity monitoring
system meets the
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572. You
are not required to
do a performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance.
2. Option 1: Elect NSPS not PM emission must not The average PM
subject to the NSPS for PM. exceed 1.0 kg/1,000 emission rate,
kg (1.0 lb/1,000 measured using EPA
lb) of coke burn- Method 5B or 5F
off in the catalyst (for a unit without
regenerator; if the a wet scrubber) or
discharged gases 5B (for a unit with
pass through an a wet scrubber),
incinerator or over the period of
waste heat boiler the initial
in which you burn performance test,
auxiliary or is no higher than
supplemental liquid 1.0 kg/1,000 kg
or solid fossil (1.0 lb/1,000 lb of
fuel, the coke burn-off in
incremental rate of the catalyst
PM must not exceed regenerator. The PM
43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/ emission rate is
million Btu) of calculated using
heat input Equations 1 and 2
attributable to the of Sec. 63.1564.
liquid or solid If applicable, the
fossil fuel; and average PM emission
the opacity of rate, measured
emissions must not using EPA Method 5B
exceed 30 percent, emission rate,
except for one 6- measured using EPA
minute average Method 5B or 5F
opacity reading in (for a unit without
any 1-hour period. a wet scrubber) or
Method 5B (for a
unit with a wet
scrubber) over the
period of the
initial performance
test, is no higher
than 43.0 g/GJ
(0.10 lb/million
Btu) of heat input
attributable to the
liquid or solid
fossil fuel. The PM
emission rate is
calculated using
Equation 3 of Sec.
63.1564; no more
than one 6-minute
average measured by
the continuous
opacity monitoring
system exceeds 30
percent opacity in
any 1-hour period
over the period of
the performance
test; and your
performance
evaluation shows
the continuous
opacity monitoring
system meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572.
3. Option 2: Not subject to PM emissions must The average PM
the NSPS for PM. not exceed 1.0 kg/ emission rate,
1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ measured using EPA
1,000 lb) of coke Method 5B or 5F
burn-off in the (for a unit without
catalyst a wet scrubber) or
regenerator. Method 5B (for a
unit with a wet
scrubber), over the
period of the
initial performance
test, is less than
or equal to 1.0 kg/
1,000 kg (1.0 lb/
1,000 lb) of coke
burn-off in the
catalyst
regenerator. The PM
emission rate is
calculated using
Equations 1 and 2
of Sec. 63.1564;
and if you use a
continuous opacity
monitoring system,
your performance
evaluation shows
the system meets
the applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572.
[[Page 6948]]
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
16. Table 6 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 1,
3, and 5 to read as follows:
Table 6 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Continuous Compliance With Metal HAP
Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject to this
For each new and existing emission limit for You shall
catalytic cracking unit . . your catalyst demonstrate
. regenerator vent . . continuous
. compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to the NSPS for a. PM emissions must i. Determining and
PM in 40 CFR 60.102. not exceed 1.0 kg/ recording each day
1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ the average coke
1,000 lb) of coke burn-off rate
burn-off in the (thousands of
catalyst kilograms per hour)
regenerator; if the using Equation 1 in
discharged gases Sec. 63.1564 and
pass through an the hours of
incinerator or operation for each
waste heat boiler catalyst
in which you burn regenerator;
auxiliary or maintaining PM
supplemental liquid emission rate below
or solid fossil 1.0 kg/1,000 kg
fuel, the (1.0 lb/1,000 lbs)
incremental rate of of coke burn-off;
PM must not exceed if applicable,
43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/ determining and
million Btu) of recording each day
heat input the rate of
attributable to the combustion of
liquid or solid liquid or solid
fossil fuel; and fossil fuels
the opacity of (liters/hour or
emissions must not kilograms/hour) and
exceed 30 percent, the hours of
except for one 6- operation during
minute average which liquid or
opacity reading in solid fossil-fuels
any 1-hour period. are combusted in
the incinerator-
waste heat boiler;
if applicable,
maintaining the PM
rate incinerator
below 43 g/GJ (0.10
lb/million Btu) of
heat input
attributable to the
solid or liquid
fossil fuel;
collecting the
continuous opacity
monitoring data for
each catalyst
regenerator vent
according to Sec.
63.1572; and
maintaining each 6-
minute average at
or below 30 percent
except that one 6-
minute average
during a 1-hour
period can exceed
30 percent.
* * * * * * *
3. Option 2: PM limit not PM emissions must Determining and
subject to the NSPS for PM. not exceed 1.0 kg/ recording each day
1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ the average coke
1,000 lb) of coke burn-off rate
burn-off in the (thousands of
catalyst kilograms per hour)
regenerator. and the hours of
operation for each
catalyst
regenerator by
Equation 1 of Sec.
63.1564 (you can
use process data to
determine the
volumetric flow
rate); and
maintaining the PM
emission rate below
1.0 kg/1,000 kg
(1.0 lb/1,000 lb)
of coke burn-off.
* * * * * * *
5. Option 4: Ni lb/1,000 lbs Ni emissions must Determining and
of coke burn-off not not exceed 1.0 mg/ recording each day
subject to the NSPS for PM. kg (0.001 lb/1,000 the average coke
lbs) of coke burn- burn-off rate
off in the catalyst (thousands of
regenerator. kilograms per hour)
and the hours of
operation for each
catalyst
regenerator by
Equation 1 of Sec.
63.1564 (you can
use process data to
determine the
volumetric flow
rate); and
maintaining Ni
emission rate below
1.0 mg/kg (0.001 lb/
1,000 lbs) of coke
burn-off in the
catalyst
regenerator.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
17. Table 7 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 6949]]
Table 7 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits for Metal HAP Emissions From
Catalytic Cracking Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1564(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall demonstrate
For each new or existing catalytic If you use . . . For this operating continuous compliance
cracking unit . . . limit . . . by . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to NSPS for PM in 40 CFR Continuous opacity Not applicable. Complying with Table 6
60.102. monitoring system. of this subpart.
2. Option 1: Elect NSPS not subject Continuous opacity Not applicable. Complying with Table 6
to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system. of this subpart.
3. Option 2: PM limit not subject to a. Continuous opacity The opacity of Collecting the hourly
the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system. emissions from your average continuous
catalyst regenerator opacity monitoring
vent must not exceed system data according
the site-specific to Sec. 63.1572; and
opacity operating maintaining the hourly
limit established average opacity at or
during the performance below the site-
test. specific limit.
b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average Collecting the hourly
monitoring systems-- gas flow rate entering and daily average gas
electrostatic or exiting the control flow rate monitoring
precipitator. device must not exceed data according to Sec.
the operating limit 63.1572 1; and
established during the maintaining the daily
performance test. average gas flow rate
at or below the limit
established during the
performance test.
ii. The daily average Collecting the hourly
voltage and secondary and daily average
current (or total voltage and secondary
power input) to the current (or total
control device must power input)
not fall below the monitoring data
operating limit according to Sec.
established during the 63.1572; and
performance test. maintaining the daily
average voltage and
secondary current (or
total power input) at
or above the limit
established during the
performance test.
c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average Collecting the hourly
monitoring systems-- pressure drop across and daily average
wet scrubber. the scrubber must not pressure drop
fall below the monitoring data
operating limit according to Sec.
established during the 63.1572; and
performance test. maintaining the daily
average pressure drop
above the limit
established during the
performance test.
ii. The daily average Collecting the hourly
liquid-to-gas ratio average gas flow rate
must not fall below and water (or
the operating limit scrubbing liquid) flow
established during the rate monitoring data
performance test. according to Sec.
63.1572 1; determining
and recording the
hourly average liquid-
to-gas ratio;
determining and
recording the daily
average liquid-to-gas
ratio; and maintaining
the daily average
liquid-to-gas ratio
above the limit
established during the
performance test.
4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr not subject to a. Continuous opacity The daily average Ni Collecting the hourly
the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system. operating value must average continuous
not exceed the site- opacity monitoring
specific Ni operating system data according
limit established to Sec. 63.1572;
during the performance determining and
test. recording equilibrium
catalyst Ni
concentration at least
once a week 2;
collecting the hourly
average gas flow rate
monitoring data
according to Sec.
63.1572 1; determining
and recording the
hourly average Ni
operating value using
Equation 11 of Sec.
63.1564; determining
and recording the
daily average Ni
operating value; and
maintaining the daily
average Ni operating
value below the site-
specific Ni operating
limit established
during the performance
test.
[[Page 6950]]
b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.b.i. of this
monitoring systems-- gas flow rate entering table.
electrostatic or exiting the control
precipitator. device must not exceed
the operating limit
established during the
performance test.
ii. The daily average See item 3.b.ii. of
voltage and secondary this table.
current (or total
power input) must not
fall below the level
established in the
performance test.
iii. The monthly Determining and
rolling average of the recording the
equilibrium catalyst equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration must Ni concentration at
not exceed the level least once a week 2;
established during the determining and
performance test. recording the monthly
rolling average of the
equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration once
each week using the
weekly or most recent
value; and maintaining
the monthly rolling
average below the
limit established in
the performance test.
c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.c.i. of this
monitoring systems-- pressure drop must not table.
wetscrubber. fall below the
operating limit
established in the
performance test.
ii. The daily average See item 3.c.ii. of
liquid-to-gas ratio this table.
must not fall below
the operating limit
established during the
performance test.
iii. The monthly Determining and
rolling average recording the
equilibrium catalyst equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration must Ni concentration at
not exceed the level least once a week2;
established during the determining and
performance test. recording the monthly
rolling average of
equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration once
each week using the
weekly or most recent
value; and maintaining
the monthly rolling
average below the
limit established in
the performance test.
5. Option 4: Ni lb/ton of coke burn- a. Continuous opacity The daily average Ni Collecting the hourly
off not subject to the NSPS for PM monitoring system. operating value must average continuous
in 40 CFR 60.102. not exceed the site- opacity monitoring
specific Ni operating system data according
limit established to Sec. 63.1572;
during the performance collecting the hourly
test. average gas flow rate
monitoring data
according to Sec.
63.1572 1; determining
and recording
equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration at
least once a week 2;
determining and
recording the hourly
average Ni operating
value using Equation
12 of Sec. 63.1564;
determining and
recording the daily
average Ni operating
value; and maintaining
the daily average Ni
operating value below
the site-specific Ni
operating limit
established during the
performance test.
b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.b.i. of this
monitoring systems-- gas flow rate to the table.
electrostatic control device must
precipitator. not exceed the level
established in the
performance test.
[[Page 6951]]
ii. The daily average See item 3.b.ii. of
voltage and secondary this table.
current (or total
power input) must not
fall below the level
established in the
performance test.
iii. The monthly See item 4.b.iii. of
rolling average this table.
equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration must
not exceed the level
established during the
performance test.
c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.c.i. of this
monitoring systems-- pressure drop must not table.
wet scrubber. fall below the
operating limit
established in the
performance test.
ii. The daily average See item 3.c.ii. of
liquid-to-gas ratio this table.
must not fall below
the operating limit
established during the
performance test.
iii. The monthly See item 4.c.iii. of
rolling average this table.
equilibrium catalyst
Ni concentration must
not exceed the level
established during the
performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) for gas flow rate instead of a continuous
parameter monitoring system if you used the alternative method in the initial performance test.
\2\ The equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must be measured by the procedure, Determination of Metal
Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure) in appendix A to this subpart; or by EPA
Method 6010B, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, EPA Method 6020, Inductively Coupled
Plasma-Mass Spectrometry, EPA Method 7520, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration, or EPA Method 7521,
Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration; or by an alternative to EPA Method 6010B, 6020, 7520, or 7521
satisfactory to the Administrator. The EPA Methods 6010B, 6020, 7520, and 7521 are included in ``Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The
SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National
Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may
be inspected at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC. These methods are also available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.
0
18. Table 15 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the
heading in column 1 and 2 and by revising entry 2 as follows:
Table 15 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Organic HAP Emission Limits for
Catalytic Reforming Units
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall meet this emission
For each applicable process vent for a limit during initial catalyst
new or existing catalytic reforming depressuring and catalyst
unit . . . purging operations . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2. Option 2............................ Reduce uncontrolled emissions
of total organic compounds
(TOC) or nonmethane TOC from
your process vent by 98
percent by weight using a
control device or to a
concentration of 20 ppmv (dry
basis as hexane), corrected to
3 percent oxygen, whichever is
less stringent. If you vent
emissions to a boiler or
process heater to comply with
the percent reduction or
concentration emission
limitation, the vent stream
must be introduced into the
flame zone, or any other
location that will achieve the
percent reduction or
concentration standard.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
19. Table 16 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the
heading in column 3 and by revising entry 2 as follows:
[[Page 6952]]
Table 16 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Operating Limits for Organic HAP
Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall meet this
operating limit
For each new or existing during initial
catalytic reforming unit . For this type of catalyst
. . control device . . . depressuring and
purging operations .
. .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2. Option 2: Percent a. Thermal The daily average
reduction or concentration incinerator, boiler combustion zone
limit. or process heater temperature must
with a design heat not fall below the
input capacity limit established
under 44 MW, or during the
boiler or process performance test.
heater in which all
vent streams are
not introduced into
the flame zone.
b. No control device Operate at all times
according to your
operation,
maintenance, and
monitoring plan
regarding minimum
catalyst purging
conditions that
must be met prior
to allowing
uncontrolled purge
releases.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
20. Table 17 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the
heading in column 1 as follows:
Table 17 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.-Continuous Monitoring Systems for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic
Reforming Units
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each applicable process vent for You shall install and operate this
a new or existing catalytic If you use this type of control type of continuous monitoring system
reforming unit . . . device . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
21. Table 18 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entry 1
and 2 as follows:
Table 18 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic
Reforming Units
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each new or existing catalytic According to these
reforming unit . . . You shall . . . Using . . . requirements . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1: Vent to a flare......... a. Conduct visible Method 22 (40 CFR part 2-hour observation
emission observations. 60, appendix A). period. Record the
presence of a flame at
the pilot light over
the full period of the
test.
b. Determine that the Not applicable. 40 CFR 63.11(b)(6)
flare meets the through (8).
requirements for net
heating value of the
gas being combusted
and exit velocity.
2. Option 2: Percent reduction or a. Select sampling site Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR Sampling sites must be
concentration limit. part 60, appendix A). located at the inlet
No traverse site (if you elect the
selection method is emission reduction
needed for vents standard) and outlet
smaller than 0.10 of the control device
meter in diameter. and prior to any
releases to the
atmosphere.
b. Measure gas Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D,
volumetric flow rate. 2F, or 2G (40 CFR part
60, appendix A), as
applicable.
[[Page 6953]]
c. Measure TOC Method 25 (40 part 60, Take either an
concentration (for appendix A) to measure integrated sample or
percent reduction nonmethane TOC four grab samples
standard). concentration (in during each run. If
carbon equivalents) at you use a grab
inlet and outlet of sampling technique,
the control device. If take the samples at
the nonmethane TOC approximately equal
outlet concentration intervals in time,
is expected to be less such as 15-minute
than 50 ppm (as intervals during the
carbon), you can use run.
Method 25A to measure
TOC concentration (as
hexane) at the inlet
and the outlet of the
control device. If you
use Method 25A, you
may use Method 18 (40
CFR part 60, appendix
A) to measure the
methane concentration
to determine the
nonmethane TOC
concentration.
d. Calculate TOC or ....................... Calculate emission rate
nonmethane TOC by Equation 1 of Sec.
emission rate and mass 63.1566 (if you use
emission reduction. Method 25) or Equation
2 of Sec. 63.1566
(if you use Method
25A). Calculate mass
emission reduction by
Equation 3 of Sec.
63.1566.
e. For concentration Method 25A (40 CFR part
standard, measure TOC 60, appendix A) to
concentration. measure TOC
(Optional: Measure concentration (as
methane hexane) at the outlet
concentration.) of the control device.
You may elect to use
Method 18 (40 CFR part
60, appendix A) to
measure the methane
concentration.
f. Determine oxygen Method 3A or 3B (40 CFR
content in the gas part 60, appendix A),
stream at the outlet as applicable.
of the control device.
g. Calculate the TOC or Equation 4 of Sec.
nonmethane TOC 63.1566.
concentration
corrected for oxygen
content (for
concentration
standard).
h. Establish each Data from the Collect the temperature
operating limit in continuous parameter monitoring data every
Table 16 of this monitoring systems. 15 minutes during the
subpart that applies entire period of the
to you for a thermal initial TOC
incinerator, or performance test.
process heater or Determine and record
boiler with a design the minimum hourly
heat input capacity average combustion
under 44 MW, or zone temperature.
process heater or
boiler in which all
vent streams are not
introduced into flame
zone.
i. If you do not use a Data from monitoring Procedures in the
control device, systems as identified operation,
document the purging in the operation, maintenance, and
conditions used prior maintenance, and monitoring plan.
to testing following monitoring plan.
the minimum
requirements in the
operation,
maintenance, and
monitoring plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
22. Table 19 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
[[Page 6954]]
Table 19 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Organic HAP
Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1566(b)(7), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each applicable process
vent for a new or existing For the following You have
catalytic reforming unit . . emission limit . . . demonstrated initial
. compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1.................... Visible emissions Visible emissions,
from a flare must measured using
not exceed a total Method 22 over the
of 5 minutes during 2-hour observation
any 2 consecutive period of the
hours. performance test,
do not exceed a
total of 5 minutes.
Option 2.................... Reduce uncontrolled The mass emission
emissions of total reduction of
organic compounds nonmethane TOC
(TOC) or nonmethane measured by Method
TOC from your 25 over the period
process vent by 98 of the performance
percent by weight test is at least 98
using a control percent by weight
device or to a as calculated using
concentration of 20 Equations 1 and 3
ppmv (dry basis as of Sec. 63.1566;
hexane), corrected or the mass
to 3 percent emission reduction
oxygen, whichever of TOC measured by
is less stringent. Method 25A (or
nonmethane TOC
measured by Methods
25A and 18) over
the period of the
performance test is
at least 98 percent
by weight as
calculated using
Equations 2 and 3
of Sec. 63.1566;
or the TOC
concentration
measured by Method
25A (or the
nonmethane TOC
concentration
measured by Methods
25A and 18) over
the period of the
performance test
does not exceed 20
ppmv (dry basis as
hexane) corrected
to 3 percent oxygen
as calculated using
Equation 4 of Sec.
63.1566.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
23. Table 20 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 20 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Organic
HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1566(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall
demonstrate
For each applicable process continuous
vent for a new or existing For this emission compliance during
catalytic reforming unit . . limit . . . initial catalyst
. depressuring and
catalyst purging
operations by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1................. Vent emissions from Maintaining visible
your process vent emissions from a
to a flare that flare below a total
meets the of 5 minutes during
requirements in any 2 consecutive
Sec. 63.11(b). hours.
2. Option 2................. Reduce uncontrolled Maintaining a 98
emissions of total percent by weight
organic compounds emission reduction
(TOC) or nonmethane of TOC or
TOC from your nonmethane TOC; or
process vent by 98 maintaining a TOC
percent by weight or nonmethane TOC
using a control concentration of
device or to a not more than 20
concentration of 20 ppmv (dry basis as
ppmv (dry basis as hexane), corrected
hexane), corrected to 3 percent
to 3 percent oxygen, whichever
oxygen, whichever is less stringent.
is less stringent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
24. Table 21 to Subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 21 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits for Organic HAP Emissions From
Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1566(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall demonstrate
continuous compliance
For each applicable process vent for For this operating during initial catalyst
a new or existing catalytic reforming If you use . . . limit . . . depressuring and
unit . . . purging operations by .
. .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1.......................... Flare that meets the The flare pilot light Collecting flare
requirements in Sec. must be present at all monitoring data
63.11(b). times and the flare according to Sec.
must be operating at 63.1572; and recording
all times that for each 1-hour period
emissions may be whether the monitor
vented to it. was continuously
operating and the
pilot light was
continuously present
during each 1-hour
period.
[[Page 6955]]
2. Option 2.......................... a. Thermal incinerator Maintain the daily Collecting, the hourly
boiler or process average combustion and daily temperature
heater with a design zone temperature above monitoring data
input capacity under the limit established according to Sec.
44 MW or boiler or during the performance 63.1572; and
process heater in test. maintaining the daily
which not all vent average combustion
streams are not zone temperature above
introduced into the the limit established
flame zone. during the performance
test.
b. No control device... Operate at all times Recording information
according to your to document compliance
operation, with the procedures in
maintenance, and your operation,
monitoring plan maintenance, and
regarding minimum monitoring plan.
purging conditions
that must be met prior
to allowing
uncontrolled purge
releases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
25. Table 22 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 22 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Inorganic HAP Emission Limits for
Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(a)(1), you shall meet each emission
limitation in the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall meet this emission
limit for each applicable
catalytic reforming unit
For . . . process vent during coke burn-
off and catalyst rejuvenation .
. .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each existing semi-regenerative Reduce uncontrolled emissions
catalytic reforming unit. of hydrogen chloride (HCl) by
92 percent by weight or to a
concentration of 30 ppmv (dry
basis), corrected to 3 percent
oxygen.
2. Each existing cyclic or continous Reduce uncontrolled emissions
catalytic reforming unit. of HCl by 97 percent by weight
or to a concentration of 10
ppmv (dry basis), corrected to
3 percent oxygen.
3. Each new semi-regenerative, cyclic, Reduce uncontrolled emissions
or continous catalytic reforming unit. of HCl by 97 percent by weight
or to a concentration of 10
ppmv (dry basis), corrected to
3 percent oxygen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
26. Table 23 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 23 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Operating Limits for Inorganic HAP
Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(a)(2), you shall meet each operating limit
in the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each applicable process vent
for a new or existing catalytic You shall meet this operating limit
reforming unit with this type of during coke burn-off and catalyst
control device . . . rejuvenation . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Wet scrubber................... The daily average pH or alkalinity
of the water (or scrubbing liquid)
exiting the scrubber must not fall
below the limit established during
the performance test; and the daily
average liquid-to-gas ratio must
not fall below the limit
established during the performance
test.
2. Internal scrubbing system or no The daily average HCl concentration
control device (e.g., hot regen in the catalyst regenerator exhaust
system) meeting outlet HCl gas must not exceed the limit
concentration limit. established during the performance
test.
3. Internal scrubbing system The daily average pH or alkalinity
meeting HCl percent reduction of the water (or scrubbing liquid)
standard. exiting the internal scrubbing
system must not fall below the
limit established during the
performance test; and the daily
average liquid-to-gas ratio must
not fall below the limit
established during the performance
test.
4. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption The daily average temperature of the
system. gas entering or exiting the
adsorption system must not exceed
the limit established during the
performance test; and the HCl
concentration in the adsorption
system exhaust gas must not exceed
the limit established during the
performance test.
[[Page 6956]]
5. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption The daily average temperature of the
system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM gas entering or exiting the
System). adsorption system must not exceed
the limit established during the
performance test; and the weekly
average chloride level on the
sorbent entering the adsorption
system must not exceed the design
or manufacturer's recommended limit
(1.35 weight percent for the
ChlorsorbTM System); and the weekly
average chloride level on the
sorbent leaving the adsorption
system must not exceed the design
or manufacturer's recommended limit
(1.8 weight percent for the
ChlorsorbTM System).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
27. Table 24 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 24 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for
Inorganic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(1), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall install and operate
If you use this type of control device this type of continuous
for your vent . . . monitoring system . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Wet scrubber........................ Continuous parameter monitoring
system to measure and record
the total water (or scrubbing
liquid) flow rate entering the
scrubber during coke burn-off
and catalyst rejuvenation; and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to measure
and record gas flow rate
entering or exiting the
scrubber during coke burn-off
and catalyst rejuvenation \1\;
and continuous parameter
monitoring system to measure
and record the pH or
alkalinity of the water (or
scrubbing liquid) exiting the
scrubber during coke burn-off
and catalyst rejuvenation. \2\
2. Internal scrubbing system or no Colormetric tube sampling
control device (e.g., hot regen system to measure the HC1
system) to meet HC1 outlet concentration in the catalyst
concentration limit. regenerator exhaust gas during
coke burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation. The colormetric
tube sampling system must meet
the requirements in Table 41
of this subpart.
3. Internal scrubbing system to meet Continuous parameter monitoring
HC1 percent reduction standard. system to measure and record
the gas flow rate entering or
exiting the internal scrubbing
system during coke burn-off
and catalyst rejuvenation; and
continuous parameter
monitoring system to measure
and record the total water (or
scrubbing liquid) flow rate
entering the internal
scrubbing system during coke
burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation; and continuous
parameter monitoring system to
measure and record the pH or
alkalinity of the water (or
scrubbing liquid) exiting the
internal scrubbing system
during coke burn-off and
catalyst rejuvenation. \2\
4. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption Continuous parameter monitoring
system. system to measure and record
the temperature of the gas
entering or exiting the
adsorption system during coke
burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation; and colormetric
tube sampling system to
measure the gaseous HC1
concentration in the
adsorption system exhaust and
at a point within the
absorbent bed not to exceed 90
percent of the total length of
the absorbent bed during coke
burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation. The colormetric
tube sampling system must meet
the requirements in Table 41
of this subpart.
5. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption Continuous parameter monitoring
system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM System).. system to measure and record
the temperature of the gas
entering or exiting the
adsorption system during coke
burn-off and catalyst
rejuvenation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573 (a)(1)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for gas flow rate
or instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for the
cumulative volume of gas.
\2\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b)(1)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for pH of the
water (or scrubbing liquid) or the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b)(2)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for alkalinity of
the water (or scrubbing liquid).
0
28. Table 25 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
[[Page 6957]]
Table 25 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests for Inorganic HAP Emissions for
Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(2) and (3), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies
to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each new and existing catalytic
reforming unit using . . . You shall . . . Using . . . According to these
requirements . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Any or no control system........ a. Select sampling Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR (1) If you operate a
port location(s) and part 60, appendix A), control device and you
the number of as applicable. elect to meet an
traverse points. applicable HCl percent
reduction standard,
sampling sites must be
located at the inlet of
the control device or
internal scrubbing system
and at the outlet of the
control device or internal
scrubber system prior to
any release to the
atmosphere. For a series
of fixed-bed systems, the
outlet sampling site
should be located at the
outlet of the first fixed-
bed, prior to entering the
second fixed-bed in the
series.
(2) If you elect to meet an
applicable HCl outlet
concentration limit,
locate sampling sites at
the outlet of the control
device or internal
scrubber system prior to
any release to the
atmosphere. For a series
of fixed-bed systems, the
outlet sampling site
should be located at the
outlet of the first fixed-
bed, prior to entering the
second fixed-bed in the
series. If there is no
control device, locate
sampling sites at the
outlet of the catalyst
regenerator prior to any
release to the atmosphere.
b. Determine velocity Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D,
and volumetric flow 2F, or 2G (40 CFR
rate. part 60, appendix A),
as applicable..
c. Conduct gas Method 3, 3A, or 3B
molecular weight (40 CFR part 60,
analysis. appendix A), as
applicable.
d. Measure moisture Method 4 (40 CFR part
content of the stack 60, appendix A).
gas.
e. Measure the HCl Method 26 or 26A (40 (1) For semi-regenerative
concentration at the CFR part 60, appendix and cyclic regeneration
selected sampling A). If your control units, conduct the test
locations. device is a wet during the coke burn-off
scrubber or internal and catalyst rejuvenation
scrubbing system, you cycle, but collect no
must use Method 26A. samples during the first
hour or the last 6 hours
of the cycle (for semi-
regenerative units) or
during the first hour or
the last 2 hours of the
cycle (for cyclic
regeneration units). For
continuous regeneration
units, the test should be
conducted no sooner than 3
days after process unit or
control system start up.
(2) Determine and record
the HCl concentration
corrected to 3 percent
oxygen (using Equation 1
of Sec. 63.1567) for
each sampling location for
each test run.
(3) Determine and record
the percent emission
reduction, if applicable,
using Equation 3 of Sec.
63.1567 for each test run.
(4) Determine and record
the average HCl
concentration (corrected
to 3 percent oxygen) and
the average percent
emission reduction, if
applicable, for the
overall source test from
the recorded test run
values.
2. Wet scrubber.................... a. Establish operating i. Data from Measure and record the pH
limit for pH level or continuous parameter or alkalinity of the water
alkalinity. monitoring systems. (or scrubbing liquid)
exiting scrubber every 15
minutes during the entire
period of the performance
test. Determine and record
the minimum hourly average
pH or alkalinity level
from the recorded values.
ii. Alternative pH Measure and record the pH
procedure in Sec. of the water (or scrubbing
63.1573 (b)(1). liquid) exiting the
scrubber during coke burn-
off and catalyst
rejuvenation using pH
strips at least three
times during each test
run. Determine and record
the average pH level for
each test run. Determine
and record the minimum
test run average pH level.
[[Page 6958]]
iii. Alternative Measure and record the
alkalinity method in alkalinity of the water
Sec. 63.1573(b)(2). (or scrubbing liquid)
exiting the scrubber
during coke burn-off and
catalyst rejuvenation
using discrete titration
at least three times
during each test run.
Determine and record the
average alkalinity level
for each test run.
Determine and record the
minimum test run average
alkalinity level.
b. Establish operating i. Data from Measure and record the gas
limit for liquid-to- continuous parameter flow rate entering or
gas ratio. monitoring systems. exiting the scrubber and
the total water (or
scrubbing liquid) flow
rate entering the scrubber
every 15 minutes during
the entire period of the
performance test.
Determine and record the
hourly average gas flow
rate and total water (or
scrubbing liquid) flow
rate. Determine and record
the minimum liquid-to-gas
ratio from the recorded,
paired values.
ii. Alternative Collect air flow rate
procedure for gas monitoring data or
flow rate in Sec. determine the air flow
63.1573(a)(1). rate using control room
instruments every 15
minutes during the entire
period of the initial
performance test.
Determine and record the
hourly average rate of all
the readings. Determine
and record the maximum gas
flow rate using Equation 1
of Sec. 63.1573.
3. Internal scrubbing system or no Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the HCl
control device (e.g., hot regen limit for HCl parameter monitoring concentration in the
system) meeting HCl outlet concentration. system. catalyst regenerator
concentration limit. exhaust gas using the
colormetric tube sampling
system at least three
times during each test
run. Determine and record
the average HCl
concentration for each
test run. Determine and
record the average HCl
concentration for the
overall source test from
the recorded test run
averages. Determine and
record the operating limit
for HCl concentration
using Equation 4 of Sec.
63.1567.
4. Internal scrubbing system a. Establish operating i. Data from Measure and record the pH
meeting HCl percent reduction limit for pH level or continuous parameter alkalinity of the water
standard. alkalinity. monitoring system. (or scrubbing liquid)
exiting the internal
scrubbing system every 15
minutes during the entire
period of the performance
test. Determine and record
the minimum hourly average
pH or alkalinity level
from the recorded values.
ii. Alternative pH Measure and in record pH of
method in Sec. the water (or scrubbing
63.1573(b)(1). liquid) exiting the
internal scrubbing system
during coke burn-off and
catalyst rejuvenation
using pH strips at least
three times during each
test run. Determine and
record the average pH
level for each test run.
Determine and record the
minimum test run average
pH level.
iii. Alternative Measure and record the
alkalinity method in alkalinity water (or
Sec. 63.1573(b)(2). scrubbing liquid) exiting
the internal scrubbing
system during coke burn-
off and catalyst
rejuvenation using
discrete titration at
least three times during
each test run. Determine
and record the average
alkalinity level for each
test run. Determine and
record the minimum test
run average alkalinity
level.
b. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the gas
limit for liquid-to- parameter monitoring entering or exiting the
gas ratio. systems. internal scrubbing system
and the total water (or
scrubbing liquid) flow
rate entering the internal
scrubbing system every 15
minutes during the entire
period of the performance
test. Determine and record
the hourly average gas
flow rate and total water
(or scrubbing liquid) flow
rate. Determine and record
the minimum liquid-to-gas
ratio from the recorded,
paired values.
5. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption a. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the
system. Gas-solid. limit for temperature. parameter monitoring temperature of gas
system. entering or exiting the
adsorption system every 15
minutes. Determine and
record the maximum hourly
average temperature.
[[Page 6959]]
b. Establish operating i. Data from (1) Measure and record the
limit for HCl continuous parameter HCl concentration in the
concentration. monitoring systems. exhaust gas from the fixed-
bed adsorption system
using the colormetric tube
sampling system at least
three times during each
test run. Determine and
record the average HCl
concentration for each
test run. Determine and
record the average HCl
concentration for the
overall source test from
the recorded test run
averages.
(2) If you elect to comply
with the HCl outlet
concentration limit
(Option 2), determine and
record the operating limit
for HCl concentration
using Equation 4 of Sec.
63.1567. If you elect to
comply with the HCl
percent reduction standard
(Option 1), determine and
record the operating limit
for HCl concentration
using Equation 5 of Sec.
63.1567.
6. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption a. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the
system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM System). limit for temperature. parameter monitoring temperature of gas
systems. entering or exiting the
adsorption system every 15
minutes. Determine and
record the maximum hourly
average temperature.
b. Measure the Determination of Metal Measure and record the
chloride level on the Concentration on chloride concentration of
sorbent entering and Catalyst Particles the sorbent material
exiting the (Instrumental entering and exiting the
adsorption system. Analyzer Procedure) adsorption system at least
in appendix A to three times during each
subpart UUU; or EPA test run. Determine and
Method 5050 combined record the average weight
either with EPA percent chloride
Method 9056, or with concentration of the
EPA Method 9253; or sorbent entering the
EPA Method 9212 with adsorption system for each
the soil extraction test run. Determine and
procedures listed record the average weight
within the method.\1\ percent chloride
concentration of the
sorbent exiting the
adsorption system for each
test run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EPA Methods 5050, 9056, 9212 and 9253 are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document
number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services
(NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket
Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. These methods are also
available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.
0
29. Table 26 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 26 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance with Inorganic
HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(4), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have
For the following demonstrated
For . . . emission limit . . initial compliance
. if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each existing semi- Reduce Average emissions
regenerative catalytic uncontrolled HCl measured
reforming unit. emissions of HCl using Method 26
by 92 percent by or 26A, as
weight or to a applicable, over
concentration of the period of the
30 ppmv, (dry performance test,
basis), corrected are reduced by 92
to 3 percent percent or to a
oxygen. concentration
less than or
equal to 30 ppmv
(dry basis)
corrected to 3
percent oxygen.
2. Each existing cyclic or Reduce Average emissions
continuous catalytic reforming uncontrolled of HCl measured
unit and each new semi- emissions of HCl using Method 26
regenerative, cyclic, or by 97 percent by or 26A, as
continuous catalytic reforming weight or to a applicable, over
unit. concentration of the period of the
10 ppmv (dry performance test,
basis), corrected are reduced by 97
to 3 percent percent or to a
oxygen. concentration
less than or
equal to 10 ppmv
(dry basis)
corrected to 3
percent oxygen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 6960]]
0
30. Table 27 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 27 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With
Inorganic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall
demonstrate
continuous
For this emission compliance during
For . . . limit . . . coke burn-off and
catalyst
rejuvenation by .
. .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each existing semi- Reduce Maintaining a 92
regenerative catalytic uncontrolled percent HCl
reforming unit. emissions of HCl emission
by 92 percent by reduction or an
weight or to a HCl concentration
concentration of no more than 30
30 ppmv (dry ppmv (dry basis),
basis), corrected corrected to 3
to 3 percent percent oxygen.
oxygen..
2. Each existing cyclic or Reduce Maintaining a 97
continuous catalytic reforming uncontrolled percent HCl
unit. emissions of HCl control
by 97 percent by efficiency or an
weight or to a HCl concentration
concentration of no more than 10
10 ppmv (dry ppmv (dry basis),
basis), corrected corrected to 3
to 3 percent percent oxygen.
oxygen.
3. Each new semi-regenerative, Reduce Maintaining a 97
cyclic, or continuous catalytic uncontrolled percent HCl
reforming unit. emissions of HCl control
by 97 percent by efficiency or an
weight or to a HCl concentration
concentration of no more than 10
10 ppmv (dry ppmv (dry basis),
basis), corrected corrected to 3
to 3 percent percent oxygen.
oxygen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
31. Table 28 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 28 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With
Operating Limits for Inorganic Hap Emissions From Catalytic Reforming
Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1567(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall
demonstrate
For each new and existing continuous
catalytic reforming unit For this operating compliance during
using this type of control limit . . . coke burn-off and
device or system . . . catalyst
rejuvenation by . .
.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Wet scrubber............. a. The daily average Collecting the
pH or alkalinity of hourly and daily
the water (or average pH or
scrubbing liquid) alkalinity
exiting the monitoring data
scrubber must not according to Sec.
fall below the 63.1572 \1\; and
level established maintaining the
during the daily average pH or
performance test. alkalinity above
the operating limit
established during
the performance
test.
b. The daily average Collecting the
liquid-to-gas ratio hourly average gas
must not fall below flow rate \2\ and
the level total water (or
established during scrubbing liquid)
the performance flow rate
test. monitoring data
according to Sec.
63.1572; and
determining and
recording the
hourly average
liquid-to-gas
ratio; and
determining and
recording the daily
average liquid-to-
gas ratio; and
maintaining the
daily average
liquid-to-gas ratio
above the limit
established during
the performance
test.
2. Internal scrubbing system The daily average Measuring and
or no control device (e.g., HCl concentration recording the HCl
hot regen system) meeting in the catalyst concentration at
HCl concentration limit. regenerator exhaust least 4 times
gas must not exceed during a
the limit regeneration cycle
established during (equally spaced in
the performance time) or every 4
test. hours, whichever is
more frequent,
using a colormetric
tube sampling
system; calculating
the daily average
HCl concentration
as an arithmetic
average of all
samples collected
in each 24-hour
period from the
start of the coke
burn-off cycle or
for the entire
duration of the
coke burn-off cycle
if the coke burn-
off cycle is less
than 24 hours; and
maintaining the
daily average HCl
concentration below
the applicable
operating limit.
3. Internal scrubbing system a. The daily average Collecting the
meeting percent HCl pH or alkalinity of hourly and daily
reduction standard. the water (or average pH or
scrubbing liquid) alkalinity
exiting the monitoring data
internal scrubbing according to Sec.
system must not 63.1572 \1\ and
fall below the maintaining the
limit established daily average pH or
during the alkalinity above
performance test. the operating limit
established during
the performance
test.
b. The daily average Collecting the
liquid-to-gas ratio hourly average gas
must not fall below flow rate \2\ and
the level total water (or
established during scrubbing liquid)
the performance flow rate
test. monitoring data
according to Sec.
63.1572; and
determining and
recording the
hourly average
liquid-to-gas
ratio; and
determining and
recording the daily
average liquid-to-
gas ratio; and
maintaining the
daily average
liquid-to-gas ratio
above the limit
established during
the performance
test.
[[Page 6961]]
4. Fixed-bed gas-solid a. The daily average Collecting the
adsorption systems. temperature of the hourly and daily
gas entering or average temperature
exiting the monitoring data
adsorption system according to Sec.
must not exceed the 63.1572; and
limit established maintaining the
during the daily average
performance test. temperature below
the operating limit
established during
the performance
test.
b. The HCl Measuring and
concentration in recording the
the exhaust gas concentration of
from the fixed-bed HCl weekly or
gas-solid during each
adsorption system regeneration cycle,
must not exceed the whichever is less
limit established frequent, using a
during the colormetric tube
performance test. sampling system at
a point within the
adsorbent bed not
to exceed 90
percent of the
total length of the
adsorption bed
during coke-burn-
off and catalyst
rejuvenation;
implementing
procedures in the
operating and
maintenance plan if
the HCl
concentration at
the sampling
location within the
adsorption bed
exceeds the
operating limit;
and maintaining the
HCl concentration
in the gas from the
adsorption system
below the
applicable
operating limit.
5. Moving-bed gas-solid a. The daily average Collecting the
adsorption system (e.g., temperature of the hourly and daily
ChlorsorbTM System. gas entering or average temperature
exiting the monitoring data
adsorption system according to Sec.
must not exceed the 63.1572; and
limit established maintaining the
during the daily average
performance test. temperature below
the operating limit
established during
the performance
test.
b. The weekly Collecting samples
average chloride of the sorbent
level on the exiting the
sorbent entering adsorption system
the adsorption three times per
system must not week (on non-
exceed the design consecutive days);
or manufacturer's and analyzing the
recommended limit samples for total
(1.35 weight chloride \3\; and
percent for the determining and
ClorsorbTM. recording the
weekly average
chloride
concentration; and
maintaining the
chloride
concentration below
the design or
manufacturer's
recommended limit
(1.35 weight
percent for the
ChlorsorbTM
System).
c. The weekly Collecting samples
average chloride of the sorbent
level on the exiting the
sorbent exiting the adsorption system
adsorption system three times per
must not exceed the week (on non-
design or consecutive days);
manufacturer's and analyzing the
recommended limit samples for total
(1.8 weight percent chloride
for the ClorsorbTM concentration; and
System). determining and
recording the
weekly average
chloride
concentration; and
maintaining the
chloride
concentration below
the design or
manufacturer's
recommended limit
(1.8 weight percent
ChlorsorbTM
System).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If applicable, you can use either alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for pH or
alkalinity if you used the alternative method in the initial
performance test.
\2\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for the gas flow
rate or cumulative volume of gas entering or exiting the system if you
used the alternative method in the initial performance test.
\3\ The total chloride concentration of the sorbent material must be
measured by the procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on
Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)'' in appendix A
to this subpart; or by using EPA Method 5050, Bomb Preparation Method
for Solid Waste, combined either with EPA Method 9056, Determination
of Inorganic Anions by Ion Chromatography, or with EPA Method 9253,
Chloride (Titrimetric, Silver Nitrate); or by using EPA Method 9212,
Potentiometric Determination of Chloride in Aqueous Samples with Ion-
Selective Electrode, and using the soil extraction procedures listed
within the method. The EPA Methods 5050, 9056, 9212 and 9253 are
included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998).
The SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available
for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the
National Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the
EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC. These methods are also available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.
0
32. Table 31 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entry 1
and 3 as follows:
[[Page 6962]]
Table 31 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for HAP Emissions From Sulfur Recovery Units
* * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall install and operate this
For . . . For this limit . . . continuous monitoring system . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing Claus sulfur a. 250 ppmv (dry basis) of SO2 at Continuous emission monitoring
recovery unit part of a sulfur zero percent excess air if you use system to measure and record the
recovery plant of 20 long tons per an oxidation or reduction control hourly average concentration of SO2
day or more and subject to the NSPS system followed by incineration. (dry basis) at zero percent excess
for sulfur oxides in 40 CFR air for each exhaust stack. This
60.104(a)(2). system must include an oxygen
monitor for correcting the data for
excess air.
b. 300 ppmv of reduced sulfur Continuous emission monitoring
compounds calculated as ppmv SO2 system to measure and record the
(dry basis) at zero percent excess hourly average concentration of
air if you use a reduction control reduced sulfur and oxygen (O2)
system without incineration. emissions. Calculate the reduced
sulfur emissions as SO2 (dry basis)
at zero percent excess air.
Exception: You can use an
instrument having an air or SO2
dilution and oxidation system to
convert the reduced sulfur to SO2
for continuously monitoring and
recording the concentration (dry
basis) at zero percent excess air
of the resultant SO2 instead of the
reduced sulfur monitor. The monitor
must include an oxygen monitor for
correcting the data for excess
oxygen.
* * * * * * *
3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each new or 300 ppmv of total reduced sulfur i. Continuous emission monitoring
existing sulfur recovery unit (TRS) compounds, expressed as an system to measure and record the
(Claus or other type, regardless of equivalent SO2 concentration (dry hourly average concentration of TRS
size) not subject to the NSPS for basis) at zero percent oxygen. for each exhaust stack; this
sulfur oxides in 40 CFR monitor must include an oxygen
60.104(a)(2). monitor for correcting the data for
excess oxygen; or
ii. Continuous parameter monitoring
systems to measure and record the
combustion zone temperature of each
thermal incinerator and the oxygen
content (percent, dry basis) in the
vent stream of the incinerator.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
33. Table 33 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 33 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With HAP
Emission Limits for Sulfur Recovery Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1568(b)(5), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have
For . . . For the following demonstrated initial
emission limit . . . compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing a. 250 ppmv (dry You have already
Claus sulfur recovery unit basis) SO2 at zero conducted a
part of a sulfur recovery percent excess air performance test to
plant of 20 long tons per if you use an demonstrate initial
day or more and subject to oxidation or compliance with the
the NSPS for sulfur oxides reduction control NSPS and each 12-
in 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by hour rolling
incineration. average
concentration of
SO2 emissions
measured by the
continuous emission
monitoring system
is less than or
equal to 250 ppmv
(dry basis) at zero
percent excess air.
As part of the
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your vent
meets the SO2
limit. You are not
required to do
another performance
test to demonstrate
initial compliance.
You have already
conducted a
performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance with the
applicable
performance
specification. As
part of your
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your
continuous emission
monitoring system
meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572. You
are not required to
do another
performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance.
[[Page 6963]]
b. 300 ppmv of You have already
reduced sulfur conducted a
compounds performance test to
calculated as ppmv demonstrate initial
SO2 (dry basis) at compliance with the
zero percent excess NSPS and each 12-
air if you use a hour rolling
reduction control average
system without concentration of
incineration. reduced sulfur
compounds measured
by your continuous
emission monitoring
system is less than
or equal to 300
ppmv, calculated as
ppmv SO2 (dry
basis) at zero
percent excess air.
As part of the
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your vent
meets the SO2
limit. You are not
required to do
another performance
test to demonstrate
initial compliance.
You have already
conducted a
performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance with the
applicable
performance
specification. As
part of your
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you must certify
that your
continuous emission
monitoring system
meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572. You
are not required to
do another
performance
evaluation to
demonstrate initial
compliance.
2. Option 1: Elect NSPS. a. 250 ppmv (dry Each 12-hour rolling
Each new or existing sulfur basis) of SO2 at average
recovery unit (Claus or zero percent excess concentration of
other type, regardless of air if you use an SO2 emissions
size) not subject to the oxidation or measured by the
NSPS for sulfur oxides in reduction control continuous emission
40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by monitoring system
incineration. during the initial
performance test is
less than or equal
to 250 ppmv (dry
basis) at zero
percent excess air;
and your
performance
evaluation shows
the monitoring
system meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572.
b. 300 ppmv of Each 12-hour rolling
reduced sulfur average
compounds concentration of
calculated as ppmv reduced sulfur
SO2 (dry basis) at compounds measured
zero percent excess by the continuous
air if you use a emission monitoring
reduction control system during the
system without initial performance
incineration. test is less than
or equal to 300
ppmv, calculated as
ppmv SO2 (dry
basis) at zero
percent excess air;
and your
performance
evaluation shows
the continuous
emission monitoring
system meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572.
3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each 300 ppmv of TRS If you use
new or existing sulfur compounds expressed continuous
recovery unit (Claus or as an equivalent parameter
other type, regardless of SO2 concentration monitoring systems,
size) not subject to the (dry basis) at zero the average
NSPS for sulfur oxides in percent oxygen. concentration of
40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). TRS emissions
measured using
Method 15 during
the initial
performance test is
less than or equal
to 300 ppmv
expressed as
equivalent SO2
concentration (dry
basis) at zero
percent oxygen. If
you use a
continuous emission
monitoring system,
each 12-hour
rolling average
concentration of
TRS emissions
measured by the
continuous emission
monitoring system
during the initial
performance test is
less than or equal
to 300 ppmv
expressed as an
equivalent SO2 (dry
basis) at zero
percent oxygen; and
your performance
evaluation shows
the continuous
emission monitoring
system meets the
applicable
requirements in
Sec. 63.1572.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
34. Table 34 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
[[Page 6964]]
Table 34 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With HAP
Emission Limits for Sulfur Recovery Units
[As stated in Sec. 63.1568(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall
For this emission demonstrate
For . . . limit . . . continuous
compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing a. 250 ppmv (dry Collecting the
Claus sulfur recovery unit basis) of SO2 at hourly average SO2
part of a sulfur recovery zero percent excess monitoring data
plant of 20 long tons per air if you use an (dry basis, percent
day or more and subject to oxidation or excess air)
the NSPS for sulfur oxides reduction control according to Sec.
in 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by 63.1572;
incineration. determining and
recording each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
SO2; maintaining
each 12-hour
rolling average
concentration of
SO2 at or below the
applicable emission
limitation; and
reporting any 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
SO2 greater than
the applicable
emission limitation
in the compliance
report required by
Sec. 63.1575.
b. 300 ppmv of Collecting the
reduced sulfur hourly average
compounds reduced sulfur (and
calculated as ppmv air or O2 dilution
SO2 (dry basis) at and oxidation)
zero percent excess monitoring data
air if you use a according to Sec.
reduction control 63.1572;
system without determining and
incineration. recording each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur;
maintaining each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur at
or below the
applicable emission
limitation; and
reporting any 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur
greater than the
applicable emission
limitation in the
compliance report
required by Sec.
63.1575.
2. Option 1: Elect NSPS. a. 250 ppmv (dry Collecting the
Each new or existing sulfur basis) of SO2 at hourly average SO2
recovery unit (Claus or zero percent excess data (dry basis,
other type, regardless of air if you use an percent excess air)
size) not subject to the oxidation or according to Sec.
NSPS for sulfur oxides in reduction control 63.1572;
40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by determining and
incineration. recording each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
SO2; maintaining
each 12-hour
rolling average
concentration of
SO2 at or below the
applicable emission
limitation; and
reporting any 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
SO2 greater than
the applicable
emission limitation
in the compliance
report required by
Sec. 63.1575.
b. 300 ppmv of Collecting the
reduced sulfur hourly average
compounds reduced sulfur (and
calculated as ppmv air or O2 dilution
SO2 (dry basis) at and oxidation)
zero percent excess monitoring data
air if you use a according to Sec.
reduction control 63.1572;
system without determining and
incineration. recording each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur;
maintaining each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur at
or below the
applicable emission
limitation; and
reporting any 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
reduced sulfur
greater than the
applicable emission
limitation in the
compliance report
required by Sec.
63.1575.
3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each 300 ppmv of TRS i. If you use
new or existing sulfur compounds, continuous
recovery unit (Claus or expressed as an SO2 parameter
other type, regardless of concentration (dry monitoring systems,
size) not subject to the basis) at zero collecting the
NSPS for sulfur oxides in percent oxygen or hourly average TRS
40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). reduced sulfur monitoring data
compounds according to Sec.
calculated as ppmv 63.1572 and
SO2 (dry basis) at maintaining each 12-
zero percent excess hour average
air. concentration of
TRS at or below the
applicable emission
limitation; or
ii. If you use a
continuous emission
monitoring system,
collecting the
hourly average TRS
monitoring data
according to Sec.
63.1572,
determining and
recording each 12-
hour rolling
average
concentration of
TRS; maintaining
each 12-hour
rolling average
concentration of
TRS at or below the
applicable emission
limitation; and
reporting any 12-
hour rolling
average TRS
concentration
greater than the
applicable emission
limitation in the
compliance report
required by Sec.
63.1575.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
35. Table 36 to subpart UUU is amended to revise entry 1 as follows:
[[Page 6965]]
Table 36 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Work Practice Standards for HAP
Emissions From Bypass Lines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall meet one of these
Option equipment standards . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1............................ Install and operate a device
(including a flow indicator,
level recorder, or electronic
valve position monitor) to
demonstrate, either
continuously or at least every
hour, whether flow is present
in the by bypass line. Install
the device at or as near as
practical to the entrance to
any bypass line that could
divert the vent stream away
from the control device to the
atmosphere.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
36. Table 38 to subpart UUU is revised as follows:
Table 38 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Work
Practice Standards for HAP Emissions From Bypass Lines
[As stated in Sec. 63.1569(b)(2), you shall meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this work You have
Option . . . practice standard . demonstrated initial
. . compliance if . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each new or existing a. Option 1: Install The installed
bypass line associated with and operate a equipment operates
a catalytic cracking unit, device (including a properly during
catalytic reforming unit, flow indicator, each run of the
or sulfur recovery unit. level recorder, or performance test
electronic valve and no flow is
position monitor) present in the line
to demonstrate, during the test.
either continuously
or at least every
hour, whether flow
is present in
bypass line.
Install the device
at or as near as
practical to the
entrance to any
bypass line that
could divert the
vent stream away
from the control
device to the
atmosphere.
b. Option 2: Install As part of the
a car-seal or lock- notification of
and-key device compliance status,
placed on the you certify that
mechanism by which you installed the
the bypass device equipment, the
flow position is equipment was
controlled (e.g., operational by your
valve handle, compliance date,
damper level) when and you identify
the bypass device what equipment was
is in the closed installed.
position such that
the bypass line
valve cannot be
opened without
breaking the seal
or removing the
device.
c. Option 3: Seal See item 1.b of this
the bypass line by table.
installing a solid
blind between
piping flanges.
d. Option 4: Vent See item 1.b of this
the bypass line to table.
a control device
that meets the
appropriate
requirements in
this subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
37. Table 39 to subpart UUU is amended by revising entry 1 as follows:
Table 39 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Work
Practice Standards for HAP Emissions From Bypass Lines
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You shall demonstrate
If you elect this standard . . . continuous compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1: Flow indicator, level Monitoring and recording on a
recorder, or electronic valve position continuous basis or at least
monitor. every hour whether flow is
present in the bypass line;
visually inspecting the device
at least once every hour if
the device is not equipped
with a recording system that
provides a continuous record;
and recording whether the
device is operating properly
and whether flow is present in
the bypass line.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
38. Table 40 to subpart UUU is amended to revise entry 4, 5, 6, and 8
as follows:
[[Page 6966]]
Table 40 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Installation,
Operation, and Maintenance of Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems and
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This type of continuous opacity or Must meet these requirements .
emission monitoring system . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
4. SO2 continuous emission monitoring Performance specification 2 (40
system for sulfur recovery unit with CFR part 60, appendix B); span
oxidation control system or reduction value of 500 ppm SO2; use
control system; this monitor must Methods 6 or 6C and 3A or 3B
include an O2 monitor for correcting (40 CFR part 60, appendix A)
the data for excess air. for certifying O2 monitor; and
procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix F) except relative
accuracy test audits are
required annually instead of
quarterly.
5. Reduced sulfur and O2 continuous Performance specification 5 (40
emission monitoring system for sulfur CFR part 60, appendix B),
recovery unit with reduction control except calibration drift
system not followed by incineration; specification is 2.5 percent
this monitor must include an O2 of the span value instead of 5
monitor for correcting the data for percent; 450 ppm reduced
excess air unless exempted. sulfur; use Methods 15 or 15A
and 3A or 3B (40 CFR part 60,
appendix A) for certifying
O2monitor; if Method 3A or 3B
yields O2 concentrations below
0.25 percent during the
performance evaluation, the O2
concentration can be assumed
to be zero and the O2 monitor
is not required; and procedure
1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix
F), except relative accuracy
test audits, are required
annually instead of quarterly.
6. Instrument with an air or O2 Performance specification 5 (40
dilution and oxidation system to CFR part 60, appendix B); span
convert reduced sulfur to SO2 for value of 375 ppm SO2; use
continuously monitoring the Methods 15 or 15A and 3A or 3B
concentration of SO2 instead of for certifying O2 monitor; and
reduced sulfur monitor and O2 monitor. procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix F), except relative
accuracy test audits, are
required annually instead of
quarterly.
* * * * * * *
8. O2 monitor for oxygen concentration. If necessary due to
interferences, locate the
oxygen sensor prior to the
introduction of any outside
gas stream; performance
specification 3 (40 CFR part
60, appendix B; and procedure
1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix
F), except relative accuracy
test audits, are required
annually instead of quarterly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
39. Table 41 to Subpart UUU is revised as follows:
Table 41 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of Continuous
Parameter Monitoring Systems
[As stated in Sec. 63.1572(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use . . . You shall . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. pH strips........................... Use pH strips with an accuracy of 10 percent.
2. Colormetric tube sampling system.... Use a colormetric tube sampling system with a printed numerical scale
in ppmv, a standard measurement range of 1 to 10 ppmv (or 1 to 30 ppmv
if applicable), and a standard deviation for measured values of no
more than 15 percent. System must include a gas detection
pump and hot air probe if needed for the measurement range.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
40. Table 44 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:
Table 44 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Applicability of NESHAP General Provisions to Subpart UUU
[As stated in Sec. 63.1577, you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Applies to supbart UUU Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1........................ Applicability......... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
specifies calendar or
operating day.
Sec. 63.2........................ Definitions........... Yes...................
Sec. 63.3........................ Units and Yes...................
Abbreviations.
Sec. 63.4........................ Prohibited Activities. Yes...................
Sec. 63.5(A)-(C)................. Construction and Yes................... In Sec. 63.5(b)(4),
Reconstruction. replace the reference to
Sec. 63.9 with Sec.
63.9(b)(4) and (5).
[[Page 6967]]
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(i)............... Application for Yes................... Except, subpart UUU
Approval of specifies the application
Construction or is submitted as soon as
Reconstruction--Gener practicable before startup
al Application but not later than 90 days
Requirements. (rather then 60) after the
promulgation date where
construction or
reconstruction had
commenced and initial
startup had not occurred
before promulgation.
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(ii).............. ...................... Yes................... Except that emission
estimates specified in
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H)
are not required.
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(iii)............. ...................... No.................... Subpart UUU specifies
submission of notification
of compliance status.
Sec. 63.5(d)(2).................. ...................... No....................
Sec. 63.5(d)(3).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that Sec.
63.5(d)(3)(ii) does not
apply.
Sec. 63.5(d0(4).................. ...................... Yes...................
Sec. 63.5(e)..................... Approval of Yes...................
Construction or
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f)(1).................. Approval of
Construction or
Reconstruction Based
on State Review.
Sec. 63.5(f)(2).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that 60 days is
changed to 90 days and
cross-reference to
53.9(B)(2) does not apply.
Sec. 63.6(a)..................... Compliance with Yes...................
Standards and
Maintenance--Applicab
ility.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4).............. Compliance Dates for Yes...................
New and Reconstructed
Sources.
Sec. 63.6(b)(5).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
specifies different
compliance dates for
sources.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(b)(7).................. Compliance Dates for Yes...................
New and Reconstructed
Area Sources That
Become Major.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2).............. Compliance Dates for Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Existing Sources. specifies different
compliance dates for
sources subject to Tier II
gasoline sulfur control
requirements.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4).............. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(c)(5).................. Compliance Dates for Yes...................
Existing Area Sources
That Become Major.
Sec. 63.6(d)..................... [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2).............. Operation and Yes...................
Maintenance
Requirements.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i)-(iii)......... Startup, Shutdown, and Yes...................
Malfunction Plan.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iv).............. ...................... Yes................... Except that reports of
actions not consistent
with plan are not required
within 2 and 7 days of
action but rather must be
included in next periodic
report.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(v)-(viii)........ ...................... Yes................... The owner or operator is
only required to keep the
latest version of the
plan.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)-(2)(iii)(C)...... Compliance with Yes...................
Emission Standards.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)(iii)(D).......... ...................... No....................
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)(iv)-(v).......... ...................... Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(f)(3).................. ...................... Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(g)..................... Alternative Standard.. Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(h)..................... Opacity/VE Standards.. Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(i)............... Determining Compliance No.................... Subpart UUU specifies
with Opacity/VE methods.
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(ii).............. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(iii)............. ...................... Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(h)(3).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(h)(4).................. Notification of Yes................... Applies to Method 22 tests.
Opacity/VE
Observation Date.
Sec. 63.6(h)(5).................. Conducting Opacity/VE No....................
Observations.
[[Page 6968]]
Sec. 63.6(h)(6).................. Records of Conditions Yes................... Applies to Method 22
During Opacity/VE observations.
Observations.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(i)............... Report COM Monitoring Yes...................
Data from Performance
Test.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(ii).............. Using COM Instead of No....................
Method 9.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iii)............. Averaging Time for COM Yes...................
during Performance
Test.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iv).............. COM Requirements...... Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(h)(8).................. Determining Compliance Yes...................
with Opacity/VE
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(h)(9).................. Adjusted Opacity Yes...................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)............. Extension of Yes................... Extension of compliance
Compliance. under Sec. 63.6(i)(4)
not applicable to a
facility that installs
catalytic cracking feed
hydrotreating and receives
an extended compliance
date under Sec.
63.1563(c).
Sec. 63.6(i)(15)................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.6(i)(16)................. ...................... Yes...................
Sec. 63.6(j)..................... Presidential Yes...................
Compliance Exemption.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1).................. Performance Test Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Requirements specifies the applicable
Applicability. test and demonstration
procedures.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2).................. Performance Test Dates No.................... Test results must be
submitted in the
Notification of Compliance
Status report due 150 days
after the compliance date.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3).................. Section 114 Authority. Yes...................
Sec. 63.7(b)..................... Notifications......... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
specifies notification at
least 30 days prior to the
scheduled test date rather
than 60 days.
Sec. 63.7(c)..................... Quality Assurance Yes...................
Program/Site-Specific
Test Plan.
Sec. 63.7(d)..................... Performance Test Yes...................
Facilities.
Sec. 63.7(e)..................... Conduct of Tests...... Yes...................
Sec. 63.7(f)..................... Alternative Test Yes...................
Method.
Sec. 63.7(g)..................... Data Analysis, Yes................... Except performance test
Recordkeeping, reports must be submitted
Reporting. with notification of
compliance status due 150
days after the compliance
date.
Sec. 63.7(h)..................... Waiver of Tests Yes...................
Sec. 63.8(a)(1).................. Monitoring Yes...................
Requirements-
Applicability.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2).................. Performance Yes...................
Specifications.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................. Monitoring with Flares Yes...................
Sec. 63.8(b)(1).................. Conduct of Monitoring. Yes...................
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3).............. Multiple Effluents and Yes................... Subpart UUU specifies the
Multiple Monitoring required monitoring
Systems. locations.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1).................. Monitoring System Yes...................
Operation and
Maintenance.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i)-(ii).......... Startup, Shutdown, and Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Malfunctions. specifies that reports are
not required if actions
are consistent with the
SSM plan, unless requested
by the permitting
authority. If actions are
not consistent, actions
must be described in next
compliance report.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii)............. Compliance with Yes...................
Operation and
Maintenance
Requirements.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3).............. Monitoring System Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Installation. specifies that for
continuous parameter
monitoring systems,
operational status
verification includes
completion of manufacturer
written specifications or
installation, operation,
and calibration of the
system or other written
procedures that provide
adequate assurance that
the equipment will monitor
accurately.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................. Continuous Monitoring No.................... Subpart UUU specifies
System Requirements. operational requirements.
[[Page 6969]]
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)(i)-(ii).......... Continuous Monitoring Yes................... Except that these
System Requirements. requirements apply only to
a continuous opacity
monitoring system or a
continuous emission
monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5).................. COM Minimum Procedures Yes...................
Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................. CMS Requirements...... No.................... Except that these
requirements apply only to
a continuous opacity
monitoring system or
continuous emission
monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8).............. CMS Requirements...... Yes...................
Sec. 63.8(d)..................... Quality Control Yes................... Except that these
Program. requirements apply only to
a continuous opacity
monitoring system or
continuous emission
monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits.
Sec. 63.8(e)..................... CMS Performance Yes................... Except that these
Evaluation. requirements apply only to
a continuous opacity
monitoring system or
continuous emission
monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits. Results are to be
submitted as part of the
Notification Compliance
Status due 150 days after
the compliance date.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5).............. Alternative Monitoring Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Methods. specifies procedures for
requesting alternative
monitoring systems and
alternative parameters.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................. Alternative to Yes................... Applicable to continuous
Relative Accuracy emission monitoring
Test. systems if performance
specification requires a
relative accuracy test
audit.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(4).............. Reduction of Yes................... Applies to continuous
Monitoring Data. opacity monitoring system
or continuous emission
monitoring system.
Sec. 63.8(g)(5).................. Data Reduction........ No.................... Subpart UUU specifies
requirements.
Sec. 63.9(a)..................... Notification Yes................... Duplicate Notification of
Requirements--Applica Compliance Status report
bility. to the Regional
Administrator may be
required.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(2), (4)-(5)..... Initial Notifications. Yes................... Except that notification of
construction or
reconstruction is to be
submitted as soon as
practicable before startup
but no later than 30 days
(rather than 60 days)
after the effective date
if construction or
reconstruction had
commenced but startup had
not occurred before the
effective date.
Sec. 63.9(b)(3).................. [Reserved]............
Sec. 63.9(c)..................... Request for Extension Yes...................
of Compliance.
Sec. 63.9(d)..................... New Source Yes...................
Notification for
Special Compliance
Requirements.
Sec. 63.9(e)..................... Notification of Yes................... Except that notification is
Performance Test. required at least 30 days
before test.
Sec. 63.9(f)..................... Notification of VE/ Yes...................
Opacity Test.
Sec. 63.9(g)..................... Additional Yes................... Except that these
Notification requirements apply only to
Requirements for a continuous opacity
Sources with monitoring system or
Continuous Monitoring continuous emission
Systems. monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits.
Sec. 63.9(h)..................... Notification of Yes................... Except that subpart UUU
Compliance Status. specifies the notification
is due no later than 150
days after compliance
date.
Sec. 63.9(i)..................... Adjustment of Yes...................
Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j)..................... Change in Previous Yes...................
Information.
63. 10(a).......................... Recordkeeping and Yes...................
Reporting
Applicability.
Sec. 63.10(b).................... Records............... Yes................... Except that Sec.
63.10(b)(2)(xiii) applies
if you use a continuous
emission monitoring system
to meet the NSPS or you
select to meet the NSPS,
CO, or SO2 reduced sulfur
limit and the performance
evaluation requires a
relative accuracy test
audit.
[[Page 6970]]
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6), (9)-(15)... Additional Records for Yes................... Except that these
Continuous Monitoring requirements apply if you
Systems. use a continuous opacity
monitoring system or a
continuous emission
monitoring system to meet
the NSPS or elect to meet
the NSPS opacity, CO, or
SO2 limits.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............. Records of Excess No.................... Subpart UUU specifies
Emissions and requirements.
Exceedances.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................. General Reporting Yes...................
Requirements.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................. Performance Test No.................... Subpart UUU requires
Results. performance test results
to be reported as part of
the Notification of
Compliance Status due 150
days after the compliance
date.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................. Opacity or VE Yes...................
Observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)................. Progress Reports...... Yes...................
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).............. Startup, Shutdown, and Yes................... Except that reports are not
Malfunction Reports. required if actions are
consistent with the SSM
plan, unless requested by
permitting authority.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii)............. ...................... Yes................... Except that actions taken
during a startup,
shutdown, or malfunction
that are not consistent
with the plan do not need
to be reported within 2
and 7 days of commencing
and completing the action,
respectively, but must be
included in the next
periodic report.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............. Additional CMS Reports Yes................... Except that these
requirements apply only to
a continuous opacity
monitoring system or
continuous emission
monitoring system if you
are subject to the NSPS or
elect to comply with the
NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2
limits. Reports of
performance evaluations
must be submitted in
Notification of Compliance
Status.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................. Excess Emissions/CMS No.................... Subpart UUU specifies the
Performance Reports. applicable requirements.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................. COMS Data Reports..... Yes...................
Sec. 63.10(f).................... Recordkeeping/ Yes...................
Reporting Waiver.
Sec. 63.11....................... Control Device Yes................... Applicable to flares.
Requirements.
Sec. 63.13....................... Addresses............. Yes...................
Sec. 63.14....................... Incorporation by Yes...................
Reference.
Sec. 63.15....................... Available of Yes...................
Information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
41. Subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by adding appendix A to read as
follows:
Appendix A To Subpart UUU of Part 63--Determination of Metal
Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
1.0 Scope and Application.
1.1 Analytes. The analytes for which this method is applicable
include any elements with an atomic number between 11 (sodium) and
92 (uranium), inclusive. Specific analytes for which this method was
developed include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum detectable
Analyte CAS No. limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nickel compounds.................. 7440-02-0 <2 % of span.
Total chlorides................... 16887-00-6 <2 % of span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.2 Applicability. This method is applicable to the
determination of analyte concentrations on catalyst particles. This
method is applicable for catalyst particles obtained from the fluid
catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) regenerator (i.e., equilibrium
catalyst), from air pollution control systems operated for the FCCU
catalyst regenerator vent (FCCU fines), from catalytic reforming
units (CRU), and other processes as specified within an applicable
regulation. This method is applicable only when specified within the
regulation.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives. Adherence to the requirements of
this method will enhance the quality of the data obtained from the
analytical method.
2.0 Summary of Method.
2.1 A representative sample of catalyst particles is collected,
prepared, and analyzed for analyte concentration using either energy
or wavelength dispersive X-ray flourescent (XRF) spectrometry
instrumental analyzers. In both types of XRF spectrometers, the
instrument irradiates the sample with high energy (primary) x-rays
and the elements in
[[Page 6971]]
the sample absorb the x-rays and then re-emit secondary
(fluorescent) x-rays of characteristic wavelengths for each element
present. In energy dispersive XRF spectrometers, all secondary x-
rays (of all wavelengths) enter the detector at once. The detector
registers an electric current having a height proportional to the
photon energy, and these pulses are then separated electronically,
using a pulse analyzer. In wavelength dispersive XRF spectrometers,
the secondary x-rays are dispersed spatially by crystal diffraction
on the basis of wavelength. The crystal and detector are made to
synchronously rotate and the detector then receives only one
wavelength at a time. The intensity of the x-rays emitted by each
element is proportional to its concentration, after correcting for
matrix effects. For nickel compounds and total chlorides, the XRF
instrument response is expected to be linear to analyte
concentration. Performance specifications and test procedures are
provided to ensure reliable data.
3.0 Definitions.
3.1 Measurement System. The total equipment required for the
determination of analyte concentration. The measurement system
consists of the following major subsystems:
3.1.1 Sample Preparation. That portion of a system used for one
or more of the following: sample acquisition, sample transport,
sample conditioning, or sample preparation prior to introducing the
sample into the analyzer.
3.1.2 Analyzer. That portion of the system that senses the
analyte to be measured and generates an output proportional to its
concentration.
3.1.3 Data Recorder. A digital recorder or personal computer
used for recording measurement data from the analyzer output.
3.2 Span. The upper limit of the gas concentration measurement
range displayed on the data recorder.
3.3 Calibration Standards. Prepared catalyst samples or other
samples of known analyte concentrations used to calibrate the
analyzer and to assess calibration drift.
3.4 Energy Calibration Standard. Calibration standard, generally
provided by the XRF instrument manufacturer, used for assuring
accuracy of the energy scale.
3.5 Accuracy Assessment Standard. Prepared catalyst sample or
other sample of known analyte concentrations used to assess analyzer
accuracy error.
3.6 Zero Drift. The difference in the measurement system output
reading from the initial value for zero concentration level
calibration standard after a stated period of operation during which
no unscheduled maintenance, repair, or adjustment took place.
3.7 Calibration Drift. The difference in the measurement system
output reading from the initial value for the mid-range calibration
standard after a stated period of operation during which no
unscheduled maintenance, repair, or adjustment took place.
3.8 Spectral Interferences. Analytical interferences and
excessive biases caused by elemental peak overlap, escape peak, and
sum peak interferences between elements in the samples.
3.9 Calibration Curve. A graph or other systematic method of
establishing the relationship between the analyzer response and the
actual analyte concentration introduced to the analyzer.
3.10 Analyzer Accuracy Error. The difference in the measurement
system output reading and the ideal value for the accuracy
assessment standard.
4.0 Interferences.
4.1 Spectral interferences with analyte line intensity
determination are accounted for within the method program. No action
is required by the XRF operator once these interferences have been
addressed within the method.
4.2 The X-ray production efficiency is affected by particle size
for the very lightest elements. However, particulate matter (PM) 2.5
particle size effects are substantially < 1 percent for most
elements. The calibration standards should be prepared with material
of similar particle size or be processed (ground) to produce
material of similar particle size as the catalyst samples to be
analyzed. No additional correction for particle size is performed.
Alternatively, the sample can be fused in order to eliminate any
potential particle size effects.
5.0 Safety.
5.1 Disclaimer. This method may involve hazardous materials,
operations, and equipment. This test method may not address all of
the safety problems associated with its use. It is the
responsibility of the user of this test method to establish
appropriate safety and health practices and determine the
applicability of regulatory limitations prior to performing this
test method.
5.2 X-ray Exposure. The XRF uses X-rays; XRF operators should
follow instrument manufacturer's guidelines to protect from
accidental exposure to X-rays when the instrument is in operation.
5.3 Beryllium Window. In most XRF units, a beryllium (Be) window
is present to separate the sample chamber from the X-ray tube and
detector. The window is very fragile and brittle. Do not allow
sample or debris to fall onto the window, and avoid using compressed
air to clean the window because it will cause the window to rupture.
If the window should rupture, note that Be metal is poisonous. Use
extreme caution when collecting pieces of Be and consult the
instrument manufacturer for advice on cleanup of the broken window
and replacement.
6.0 Equipment and Supplies.
6.1 Measurement System. Use any measurement system that meets
the specifications of this method listed in section 13. The typical
components of the measurement system are described below.
6.1.1 Sample Mixer/Mill. Stainless steel, or equivalent to
grind/mix catalyst and binders, if used, to produce uniform particle
samples.
6.1.2 Sample Press/Fluxer. Stainless steel, or equivalent to
produce pellets of sufficient size to fill analyzer sample window,
or alternatively, a fusion device capable of preparing a fused disk
of sufficient size to fill analyzer sample window.
6.1.3 Analytical Balance. 0.0001 gram accuracy for
weighing prepared samples (pellets).
6.1.4 Analyzer. An XRF spectrometer to determine the analyte
concentration in the prepared sample. The analyzer must meet the
applicable performance specifications in section 13.
6.1.5 Data Recorder. A digital recorder or personal computer for
recording measurement data. The data recorder resolution (i.e.,
readability) must be 0.5 percent of span. Alternatively, a digital
or analog meter having a resolution of 0.5 percent of span may be
used to obtain the analyzer responses and the readings may be
recorded manually.
7.0 Reagents and Standards.
7.1 Calibration Standards. The calibration standards for the
analyzer must be prepared catalyst samples or other material of
similar particle size and matrix as the catalyst samples to be
tested that have known concentrations of the analytes of interest.
Preparation (grinding/milling/fusion) of the calibration standards
should follow the same processes used to prepare the catalyst
samples to be tested. The calibration standards values must be
established as the average of a minimum of three analyses using an
approved EPA or ASTM method with instrument analyzer calibrations
traceable to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST), if available. The maximum percent deviation of the
triplicate calibration standard analyses should agree within 10
percent of the average value for the triplicate analysis (see Figure
1). If the calibration analyses do not meet this criteria, the
calibration standards must be re-analyzed. If unacceptable
variability persists, new calibration standards must be prepared.
Approved methods for the calibration standard analyses include, but
are not limited to, EPA Methods 6010B, 6020, 7520, or 7521 of SW-
846.\1\ Use a minimum of four calibration standards as specified
below (see Figure 1):
7.1.1 High-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent
to 80 to 100 percent of the span. The concentration of the high-
range calibration standard should exceed the maximum concentration
anticipated in the catalyst samples.
7.1.2 Mid-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent
to 40 to 60 percent of the span.
7.1.3 Low-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent
to 1 to 20 percent of the span. The concentration of the low-range
calibration standard should be selected so that it is less than
either one-forth of the applicable concentration limit or of the
lowest concentration anticipated in the catalyst samples.
7.1.4 Zero Calibration Standard. Concentration of less than 0.25
percent of the span.
7.2 Accuracy Assessment Standard. Prepare an accuracy assessment
standard and determine the ideal value for the accuracy assessment
standard following the same procedures used to prepare and analyze
the
[[Page 6972]]
calibration standards as described in section 7.1. The maximum
percent deviation of the triplicate accuracy assessment standard
analyses should agree within 10 percent of the average value for the
triplicate analysis (see Figure 1). The concentration equivalent of
the accuracy assessment standard must be between 20 and 80 percent
of the span.
7.3 Energy Calibration Standard. Generally, the energy
calibration standard will be provided by the XRF instrument
manufacturer for energy dispersive spectrometers. Energy calibration
is performed using the manufacturer's recommended calibration
standard and involves measurement of a specific energy line (based
on the metal in the energy calibration standard). This is generally
an automated procedure used to assure the accuracy of the energy
scale. This calibration standard may not be applicable to all models
of XRF spectrometers (particularly wavelength dispersive XRF
spectrometers).
8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Transport, and Storage.
[Reserved]
9.0 Quality Control.
9.1 Energy Calibration. For energy dispersive spectrometers,
conduct the energy calibration by analyzing the energy calibration
standard provided by the manufacturer. The energy calibration
involves measurement of a specific energy line (based on the metal
in the energy calibration standard) and then determination of the
difference between the measured peak energy value and the ideal
value. This analysis, if applicable, should be performed daily prior
to any sample analyses to check the instrument's energy scale. This
is generally an automated procedure and assures the accuracy of the
energy scale. If the energy scale calibration process is not
automated, follow the manufacturer's procedures to manually adjust
the instrument, as necessary.
9.2 Zero Drift Test. Conduct the zero drift test by analyzing
the analyte concentration output by the measurement system with the
initial calibration value for the zero calibration standard (see
Figure 2). This analysis should be performed with each set of
samples analyzed.
9.3 Calibration Drift Test. Conduct the calibration drift test
by analyzing the analyte concentration output by the measurement
system with the initial calibration value for the mid-range
calibration standard (see Figure 2). This analysis should be
performed with each set of samples analyzed.
9.4 Analyzer Accuracy Test. Conduct the analyzer accuracy test
by analyzing the accuracy assessment standard and comparing the
value output by the measurement system with the ideal value for the
accuracy assessment standard (see Figure 2). This analysis should be
performed with each set of samples analyzed.
10.0 Calibration and Standardization.
10.1 Perform the initial calibration and set-up following the
instrument manufacturer's instructions. These procedures should
include, at a minimum, the major steps listed in sections 10.2 and
10.3. Subsequent calibrations are to be performed when either a
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) limit listed in section 13
is exceeded or when there is a change in the excitation conditions,
such as a change in the tube, detector, X-ray filters, or signal
processor. Calibrations are typically valid for 6 months to 1 year.
10.2 Instrument Calibration. Calibration is performed initially
with calibration standards of similar matrix and binders, if used,
as the samples to be analyzed (see Figure 1).
10.3 Reference Peak Spectra. Acquisition of reference spectra is
required only during the initial calibration. As long as no
processing methods have changed, these peak shape references remain
valid. This procedure consists of placing the standards in the
instrument and acquiring individual elemental spectra that are
stored in the method file with each of the analytical conditions.
These reference spectra are used in the standard deconvolution of
the unknown spectra.
11.0 Analytical Procedure.
11.1 Sample Preparation. Prepare catalyst samples using the same
procedure used to prepare the calibration standards. Measure and
record the weight of sample used. Measure and record the amount of
binder, if any, used. Pellets or films must be of sufficient size to
cover the analyzer sample window.
11.2 Sample Analyses. Place the prepared catalyst samples into
the analyzer. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for analyzing
the samples.
11.3 Record and Store Data. Use a digital recorder or personal
computer to record and store results for each sample. Record any
mechanical or software problems encountered during the analysis.
12.0 Data Analysis and Calculations.
Carry out the following calculations, retaining at least one
extra significant figure beyond that of the acquired data. Round off
figures after final calculation.
12.1 Drift. Calculate the zero and calibration drift for the
tests described in sections 9.2 and 9.3 (see also Figure 2) as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.010
Where:
CurrentAnalyzerCal.Response = Instrument response for current QC
sample analyses;
InitialCal.Response = Initial instrument response for calibration
standard;
QC Value = QC metric (zero drift or calibration drift), percent of
span;
Span = Span of the monitoring system.
12.2 Analyzer Accuracy. Calculate the analyzer accuracy error
for the tests described in section 9.4 (see also Figure 2) as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.011
Where:
Accuracy Value = Percent difference of instrument response to
the ideal response for the accuracy assessment standard;
CurrentAnalyzerCal.Response = Instrument response for current QC
sample analyses;
IdealCal.Response = Ideal instrument response for the accuracy
assessment standard.
13.0 Method Performance.
13.1 Analytical Range. The analytical range is determined by the
instrument design. For this method, a portion of the analytical
range is selected by choosing the span of the monitoring system. The
span of the monitoring system must be selected such that it
encompasses the range of concentrations anticipated to occur in the
catalyst sample. If applicable, the span must be selected such that
the analyte concentration equivalent to the emission standard is not
less than 30 percent of the span. If the measured analyte
concentration exceeds the concentration of the high-range
calibration standard, the sample analysis is considered invalid.
Additionally, if the measured analyte concentration is less than the
concentration of the low-range calibration standard but above the
detectable limit, the sample analysis results must be flagged with a
footnote stating, in effect, that the analyte was detected but that
the reported concentration is below the lower quantitation limit.
13.2 Minimum Detectable Limit. The minimum detectable limit
depends on the signal-to-noise ratio of the measurement system. For
a well-designed system, the minimum detectable limit should be less
than 2 percent of the span.
[[Page 6973]]
13.3 Zero Drift. Less than 2 percent of the span.
13.4 Calibration Drift. Less than 5 percent of the
span.
13.5 Analyzer Accuracy Error. Less than 10 percent.
14.0 Pollution Prevention. [Reserved]
15.0 Waste Management. [Reserved]
16.0 Alternative Procedures. [Reserved]
17.0 References.
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods. EPA Publication
No. SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, DC.
18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analytic Method Used:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zero \a\ Low-Range \b\ Mid-Range \c\ High-Range \d\ Accuracy Std \e\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample Run:........................
1..............................
2..............................
3..............................
Average............................
Maximum Percent Deviation .........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Average must be less than 0.25 percent of span.
\b\ Average must be 1 to 20 percent of span.
\c\ Average must be 40 to 60 percent of span.
\d\ Average must be 80 to 100 percent of span.
\e\ Average must be 20 to 80 percent of span.
Figure 1. Data Recording Sheet for Analysis of Calibration Samples.
Source Identification:
Run Number:
Test Personnel:
Span:
Date:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current
Initial analyzer Drift (percent
calibration calibration of span)
response response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zero Standard...................................................
Mid-range Standard..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current
Ideal analyzer Accuracy error
calibration calibration (percent of
response response ideal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accuracy Standard...............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 2. Data Recording Sheet for System Calibration Drift Data.
[FR Doc. 05-2308 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P