[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 202 (Thursday, October 19, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61701-61705]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17224]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, FRL-8231-8]
RIN 2060-AN80
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Semiconductor Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing amendments to the national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for Semiconductor Manufacturing,
published on May 22, 2003. We are proposing amendments to the final
rule to clarify the emission requirements for process vents by
establishing a new maximum achievable control technology (MACT) floor
level of control for combined hazardous air pollutants (HAP) process
vent streams containing inorganic and organic HAP and adding new source
requirements for combined HAP process vents. Requirements for existing
combined HAP process vents would be no control, which is the MACT
floor. The new source combined HAP process vent limit would be the same
level of control as is currently required for new inorganic and organic
HAP process vents.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 4, 2006.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA by November 8, 2006
requesting to speak at a public hearing, EPA will hold a public hearing
on November 20, 2006. If you are interested in attending the public
hearing, contact Lala Alston at (919) 541-5545 to verify that a hearing
will be held.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected], Attention Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086.
Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: EPA Docket
Center (6102T), Attention Docket ID No. EPA7-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total
of two copies.
Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver comments
to: EPA Docket Center (6102T), Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-
0086, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B-108, Washington, DC 20004.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. Please include a total of two copies.
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2002-0086. 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.regulations.gov, 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 www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. Send or deliver information identified as CBI to only the
following address: Mr. Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer,
EPA (C404-02), Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. The www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center,
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, EPA West Building, Room B-102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 EPA
Docket Center is (202) 566-1742. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket materials.
Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding
during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing
to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary
changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of
operation for people who wish to visit the Public Reading Room to
view documents. Consult EPA's Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147
(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm for current information on docket status, locations, and
telephone numbers.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Schaefer, EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Measurement Policy Group (D-243-05), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number (919) 541-0296; fax number (919) 541-1039; e-mail
address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. Entities potentially affected by the direct
final amendments to the national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants for semiconductor manufacturing are those semiconductor
manufacturing facilities. Regulated categories and entities include:
[[Page 61702]]
Table 1.--Regulated Entities Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS \1\ entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................... 334413 Semiconductor crystal
growing facilities,
semiconductor wafer
fabrication facilities,
semiconductor test and
assembly facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that may potentially be
affected by this action. To determine whether your facility is
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7181 of the rule. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of the direct final amendments to
a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver
information identified as CBI only to the following address listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this document. Clearly mark the part or all
the information you claim to be CBI. For CBI information submitted on a
disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or
CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-
ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's proposal will also be available through
the WWW. Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this action
will be posted on EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN at EPA's Web site provides information
and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
How can I get copies of the proposed amendments and other related
information?
EPA has established the official public docket for the proposed
rulemaking under docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086. Information on how
to access the docket is presented above in the ADDRESSES section. In
addition, information may be obtained from the Webpage for the proposed
rulemaking at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pcem/pcempg.html.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. Background
II. Summary of the Proposed Amendments
III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments
IV. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
V. 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 and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
I. Background
On May 22, 2003 (68 FR 27913), we issued the NESHAP for
Semiconductor Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB). The NESHAP
implement section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all
major sources to meet emission standards for HAP reflecting application
of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The NESHAP
establish emission limitations for emission sources at operations used
to manufacture p-type and n-type semiconductors and active solid-state
devices from a wafer substrate.
After promulgation of the NESHAP, it was brought to our attention
that while the NESHAP established separate emission standards for
organic and inorganic HAP from process vents, some plants combine
inorganic and organic vent streams into a single atmospheric process
vent. This situation was quite different from the process vents
examined during the development phase of the rule, which were
segregated into strictly organic or inorganic HAP constituents.
Therefore, we believe the promulgated rule failed to adequately account
for the existence of combined organic and inorganic HAP process vents,
and we are proposing to revise the standards to reflect the actual
existing source MACT floor for these process vents.
II. Summary of the Proposed Amendments
The proposed revisions would establish separate process vent
definitions for organic HAP, inorganic HAP, and combined HAP process
vents. We have not changed the MACT floors calculated in the final rule
for inorganic or organic HAP. We have simply added new definitions to
clarify the applicability of the rule to inorganic, organic, and
combined HAP process vents. Therefore, inorganic HAP process vents will
retain the control requirements set for process vents containing
inorganic HAP in the promulgated rule. This means that existing and new
source requirements for these vents would effectively remain the same.
Similarly, organic process vents will retain the control requirements
set for process vents containing organic HAP in the promulgated rule
and control requirements for these vents will remain unchanged.
However, we have developed a new MACT floor for combined HAP
process vents. The MACT floor for these vents was determined to be no
reduction in emissions from existing sources, and the final rule is
being amended to reflect this. For new and reconstructed combined HAP
process vents, however, the requirement for inorganic HAP is the same
as the requirement for inorganic HAP process vents and the requirement
for organic HAP is the same as the requirement for the organic HAP
process vents.
III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments
Almost all semiconductor manufacturing facilities segregate their
process vent emissions into streams containing either inorganic or
organic pollutants. This has been common practice in the industry since
the early 1980s. Given the prevalence of this practice and the fact
that very few semiconductor manufacturing plants pre-dating the mid-
1980s were still in operation when we issued the final rule,
[[Page 61703]]
the final rule was only intended to regulate emissions from segregated
inorganic or organic HAP process vents.
However, there is at least one older semiconductor manufacturing
plant in operation that reflects the earlier design philosophy of
combining inorganic and organic HAP into a single process vent. This
plant combines inorganic and organic process emission streams into four
combined HAP atmospheric process vents. In addition, this facility adds
process heat into these combined organic/inorganic process vents.
Adding organic HAP streams and process heat into an inorganic HAP
emission stream, which is the predominant HAP emission vent type in the
industry, increases the difficulty and costs of controlling a
semiconductor process vent in two ways. First, wet scrubber technology,
which is the typical control technology utilized to control inorganic
HAP pollutants by this industry, cannot be used to effectively control
organic HAP pollutants at the very low concentrations present in the
semiconductor industry. Therefore, a combined HAP vent stream needs a
much larger and more expensive scrubber to control a combined HAP
process vent than a similar inorganic process vent at a more modern
facility. In addition, a wet scrubber is not an effective control
option for low volume organic pollutant streams such as those in the
semiconductor industry and it would not reduce organic HAP by a
significant amount. Combining inorganic and organic HAP streams just
increases control costs without providing an additional reduction in
pollutant levels.
Second, by adding process heat with combined HAP process vent
streams, a facility must cool the process vent air in order to
effectively control the inorganic HAP emissions with a wet scrubber.
This is a much more significant task than controlling a process vent
where the process heat is already separated out and makes a combined
HAP process vent with process heat even more difficult and expensive to
control. In fact, the most effective way to control an existing
combined HAP process vent would be to reconstruct the vent system to
segregate the process heat from the inorganic HAP stream, which is the
current practice in all semiconductor manufacturing facilities,
constructed over the past 20 years.
Based on this information, we believe it is necessary to revise the
final rule to separately address combined HAP process vents with
process heat. The floor level of control for inorganic process vents
and organic process vents is not being changed by this action. However,
for the limited number of existing combined process vents with process
heat, the rule is being revised to reflect the actual floor level of
control for those vents. The floor level of control for combined HAP
process vents has been determined to be no reduction in emissions. We
are aware of four combined process vents with added process heat
located at major semiconductor sources. We do not know of any existing
combined HAP process vents that do not add process heat. Our research
indicates that none of those vents are currently subject to any
controls to reduce HAP emissions and no work practices are employed
that reduce emissions. Control options above the floor for the four
existing combined HAP process vents with added process heat were
examined. However, we rejected these options because the cost was
estimated to be in excess of $750,000 per ton of HAP emissions
reduction, which is not a reasonable beyond the floor control option.
Therefore, the rule is being amended with the intention that no
emission control is required for existing combined HAP process vents
with added process heat.
For new sources, however, we determined that by utilizing proper
design, a combined HAP vent stream could achieve reductions similar to
those required for inorganic process vents for inorganic HAP and
organic process vents for organic HAP. Therefore, for new and
reconstructed combined HAP process vents including those with added
process heat, the requirement for inorganic HAP components is the same
as the current requirement for inorganic HAP process vents and the
requirement for organic HAP is the same as the requirement for organic
HAP process vents.
IV. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendments do not affect the level of emissions
control required by the existing NESHAP for the nonair, health,
environmental, and energy impacts. In the final rule we estimated that
no additional control would be required. These amendments do not change
the impacts associated with the final rule. The primary purpose of
these amendments is to clarify the final rule requirements. Therefore,
a re-evaluation of costs associated with the final rule was not
necessary.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The information collection requirements in the final rule have not been
changed by these proposed amendments. However, OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned
OMB control number 2060-0382, EPA ICR number 2042.03. A copy of the OMB
approved Information Collection Request (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 purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection 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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant
[[Page 61704]]
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administrations' 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 impacts of today's amendments on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed
amendments would not impose any requirements on small entities. We
continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule
on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such
impacts.
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, 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 EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
We have determined that the proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector in any 1 year. Thus, the proposed rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, EPA
has determined that today's proposed rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because it contains no requirements that apply to such
governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the proposed
rule is not subject to 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 proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected
Semiconductor facilities are owned or operated by State or local
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed
rule. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The proposed rule does not have tribal
implications as specified in EO 13175. It will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
No tribal governments own semiconductors and are subject to the
proposed standards. Thus, EO 13175 does not apply to the proposed rule.
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from
tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under EO 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, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety risk of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.
The proposed rule is not subject to the EO because it is not
economically significant as defined in EO 12866, and because the Agency
does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined
in EO 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant
regulatory action under EO 12866.
[[Page 61705]]
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 112(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
The proposed revisions to the NESHAP for Semiconductor
Manufacturing do not include requirements for technical standards
beyond what the NESHAP requires. Therefore, the requirements of the
NTTAA do not apply to this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 11, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63, of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
2. Section 63.7184 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) through
(e) and adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7184 What emission limitations, operating limits, and work
practice standards must I meet?
* * * * *
(b) Process vents--organic HAP emissions. For each organic HAP
process vent, other than process vents from storage tanks, you must
limit organic HAP emissions to the level specified in paragraph (b)(1)
or (2) of this section. These limitations can be met by venting
emissions from your process vent through a closed vent system to any
combination of control devices meeting the requirements of Sec.
63.982(a)(2).
(1) Reduce the emissions of organic HAP from the process vent
stream by 98 percent by weight.
(2) Reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted organic HAP
from the process vent to less than or equal to 20 parts per million by
volume (ppmv).
(c) Process vents--inorganic HAP emissions. For each inorganic HAP
process vent, other than process vents from storage tanks, you must
limit inorganic HAP emissions to the level specified in paragraph
(c)(1) or (2) of this section. These limitations can be met by venting
emissions from your process vent through a closed vent system to a
halogen scrubber meeting the requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.983 (closed
vent system requirements) and Sec. 63.994 (halogen scrubber
requirements); the applicable general monitoring requirements of Sec.
63.996; the applicable performance test requirements; and the
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements referenced
therein.
(1) Reduce the emissions of inorganic HAP from the process vent
stream by 95 percent by weight.
(2) Reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted inorganic HAP
from the process vent to less than or equal to 0.42 ppmv.
(d) Process vents--combined HAP emissions. For each combined HAP
process vent at a new or reconstructed source, other than process vents
from storage tanks, you must limit inorganic HAP emissions to the level
specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section. These limitations
can be met by venting emissions from your process vent through a closed
vent system to a halogen scrubber meeting the requirements of
Sec. Sec. 63.983 (closed vent system requirements) and 63.994 (halogen
scrubber requirements); the applicable general monitoring requirements
of Sec. 63.996; the applicable performance test requirements; and the
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements referenced
therein. You must limit organic HAP emissions to the level specified in
paragraph (d)(3) or (4) of this section. These limitations can be met
by venting emissions from your process vent through a closed vent
system to any combination of control devices meeting the requirements
of Sec. 63.982(a)(2).
(1) Reduce the emissions of inorganic HAP from the process vent
stream by 95 percent by weight.
(2) Reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted inorganic HAP
from the process vent to less than or equal to 0.42 ppmv.
(3) Reduce the emissions of organic HAP from the process vent
stream by 98 percent by weight.
(4) Reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted organic HAP
from the process vent to less than or equal to 20 parts ppmv.
(e) Storage tanks. For each storage tank, 1,500 gallons or larger,
you must limit total HAP emissions to the level specified in paragraph
(e)(1) or (2) of this section if the emissions from the storage tank
vent contains greater than 0.42 ppmv inorganic HAP. These limitations
can be met by venting emissions from your storage tank through a closed
vent system to a halogen scrubber meeting the requirements of
Sec. Sec. 63.983 (closed vent system requirements) and 63.994 (halogen
scrubber requirements); the applicable general monitoring requirements
of Sec. 63.996; the applicable performance test requirements; and the
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements referenced
therein.
(1) Reduce the emissions of inorganic HAP from each storage tank by
95 percent by weight.
(2) Reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted inorganic HAP
from the process vent to less than or equal to 0.42 ppmv.
(f) You must comply with the applicable work practice standards and
operating limits contained in Sec. 63.982(a)(1) and (2). The closed
vent system inspection requirements of Sec. 63.983(c), as referenced
by Sec. 63.982(a)(1) and (2), do not apply.
3. Section 63.7195 is amended by adding a definition for ``Combined
HAP process vents'', ``Organic HAP process vents'' and ``Inorganic HAP
process vents'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7195 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Combined HAP Process Vent means a process vent that emits both
inorganic and organic HAP to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
Inorganic HAP Process Vent means a process vent that emits only
inorganic HAP to the atmosphere.
Organic HAP Process Vent means a process vent that emits only
organic HAP to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-17224 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P