National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Halogenated Solvent Cleaning

Federal RegisterDec 2, 1994

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63

[AD-FRL-5111-3]

RIN 2060-AC31

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:

Halogenated Solvent Cleaning

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule and test method.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule promulgates national emission standards for

hazardous air pollutants for halogenated solvent cleaners. These

standards implement section 112 of the Clean Air Act (Act) and are

based on the Administrator's determination that halogenated solvent

cleaning machines emit halogenated organic chemicals identified in the

Act list of 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The halogenated solvent

cleaner NESHAP requires batch vapor solvent cleaning machines and in-

line solvent cleaning machines to meet emission standards reflecting

the application of the maximum achievable control technology for major

and area sources; area source batch cold cleaning machines are required

to achieve generally available control technology. The rule regulates

the emissions of the following halogenated HAP solvents: methylene

chloride (MC), perchloroethylene (PCE), trichloroethylene (TCE), 1,1,1-

trichloroethane (TCA), carbon tetrachloride (CT), and chloroform (C).

The EPA is also finalizing Method 307 with the standard. This

method can be used to demonstrate compliance with the idling standard.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 2, 1994. See Supplementary Information section

concerning judicial review.

ADDRESSES: Background Information Document. The background information

document (BID) for the promulgated standards may be obtained from the

U.S. EPA Library (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711,

telephone number (919) 541-2777. Please refer to ``National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Halogenated Solvent Cleaning--

Background Information for Final Standards,'' EPA No. 453/R-94-071. The

BID contains: (1) a summary of all the public comments made on the

proposed standards and the Administrator's response to the comments;

and (2) a summary of the changes made to the standards since proposal.

A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

Docket. A docket, No. A-92-39, containing information considered by

the EPA in development of the promulgated standards, is available for

public inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, at the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (formerly known as the

Air Docket) (MC-6102), 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460 [phone:

(202) 260-7548]. The docket is located at the above address in Room M-

1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). A reasonable fee may be charged

for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the final

standard, contact Mr. Paul Almodovar, Coatings and Consumer Products

Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711,

telephone number (919) 541-0283.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National emission standards for hazardous

air pollutants (NESHAP) for halogenated solvent cleaners were proposed

in the Federal Register on November 29, 1993 (58 FR 62566). This

Federal Register action announces the EPA's final decisions on the

rule. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial review of the NESHAP

is available only by the filing of a petition for review in the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of

today's publication of this rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act,

the requirements that are the subject of today's notice may not be

challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to

enforce these requirements.

I. The Standards

National emission standards for major sources of hazardous air

pollutants established under section 112 of the Act reflect:

``* * * the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of the HAP

* * * that the Administrator, taking into consideration the cost of

achieving such emission reduction, and any nonair quality health and

environmental impacts and energy requirements, determine is

achievable for new or existing sources in the category or

subcategory to which such emission standards applies * * *'' (the

Act section 112(d)(2)).

Area sources are regulated with a MACT standard, unless there is

justification for regulating them under GACT.

The promulgated standard includes multiple alternatives to allow

owners or operators maximum compliance flexibility. These alternatives

include an equipment standard, in conjunction with work practice

requirements, and an alternative overall solvent emissions standard.

The idling emission limit and the alternative overall solvent emission

standard are not available to owners or operators of batch cold

cleaning machines.

If an owner or operator of a batch vapor or in-line cleaning

machine elects to comply with the equipment standard, they must install

one of the control combinations listed in the regulation, use an

automated parts handling system to process all parts, and follow

multiple work practices. As an alternative to selecting one of the

equipment control combinations listed in the regulation, an owner or

operator may demonstrate that the batch vapor or in-line cleaning

machine can meet the idling mode emission limit specified in the

standards. In addition to maintaining this idling mode emission limit,

the owner or operator of a batch vapor or in-line solvent cleaning

machine must use an automated parts handling system to process all

parts and comply with the work practice standards. A third alternative

for complying with these standards is to comply with the overall

solvent emissions limit. An owner or operator complying with the

overall solvent emissions limit is required to ensure that the

emissions from each solvent cleaning machine are less than or equal to

the solvent emission levels specified in the standard. Under this

alternative standard, an owner or operator is not required to use an

automated parts handling system or to comply with the work practice

standards.

The batch cold cleaning machine standard is an equipment standard.

However, those owners or operators choosing the equipment options

without the water layer must also comply with work practice

requirements. There is no idling standard or overall solvent emissions

standard for batch cold cleaning machines. Batch cold cleaning machines

located at nonmajor sources are exempt from title V permit

requirements.

Section 114(a)(3) of the amended CAA requires enhanced monitoring

and compliance certification of all major stationary sources. The

annual compliance certifications certify whether compliance has been

continuous or intermittent. Enhanced monitoring shall be capable of

detecting deviations from each applicable emission limit or standard

with sufficient representativeness, accuracy, precision, reliability,

frequency and timeliness to determine if compliance is continuous

during a reporting period. The monitoring in this regulation satisfies

the requirements of enhanced monitoring.

II. Summary of Impacts

These standards will reduce nationwide emissions of hazardous air

pollutants (HAP) from halogenated solvent cleaning machines by 77,400

Mg/yr (85,300 tons per year), or 63 percent by 1997 compared to the

emissions that would result in the absence of the standards. No adverse

secondary air impacts, water or solid waste impacts are anticipated

from the promulgation of these standards.

The national annual energy usage due to the installation of the

required control devices is expected to increase from 12.9 million KWH/

yr to 66.9 million KWH/yr, which is equivalent to approximately 29.3

thousand barrels of oil. These estimates do not include energy savings

from reduced solvent use.

The implementation of this regulation is expected to result in an

overall annual national net savings of $19 million. This includes a net

annualized savings from installation of control devices of $30.5

million and a total monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping costs of

$11.6 million. These savings will come from the significant decrease in

solvent emissions and, therefore, solvent consumption, which outweigh

the overall cost of air pollution control equipment and monitoring and

recordkeeping costs.

The economic impact analysis done at proposal showed that the

economic impacts from the proposed standard would be insignificant. The

economic impact analysis has not been revised for promulgation because

the changes in costs are not expected to have any effect on the results

of the analysis. While the estimated annual costs for the regulation

have increased since proposal, there are still cost savings for most

affected entities. Only entities with small or medium-sized cleaning

machines will not have cost savings, and the costs for the selected

regulatory alternatives for these entities have changed very little

since proposal. Since those entities that do not have cost savings were

the only ones analyzed in the proposal, and these costs have changed

little, the results from the economic impact analysis at proposal

should still hold for promulgation.

III. Significant Changes to the Proposed Standards

A. Public Participation

Prior to proposal of the standards, interested parties were advised

by public notice in the Federal Register (57 FR 46854), of a meeting of

the National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee to

discuss the halogenated solvent cleaner source recommended for

proposal. This meeting was held on November 17 and 18, 1992. The

meeting was open to the public and each attendee was given an

opportunity to comment on the standards recommended for proposal.

The standards were proposed and published in the Federal Register

on November 29, 1993 (58 FR 62566). The preamble to the proposed

standards discussed the availability of the BID, which described the

regulatory alternatives considered and the impacts of those

alternatives. Public comments were solicited at the time of proposal,

and copies of the BID were distributed to interested parties.

To provide interested persons the opportunity for oral presentation

of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed standards, a

public hearing was offered at proposal; however, one was not requested.

The public comment period was from November 29, 1993 to January 28,

1994. Fifty-seven comment letters were received. The comments have been

carefully considered, and changes have been made in the proposed

standards when determined by the Administrator to be appropriate.

B. Comments on the Proposed Standards

Comments on the proposed standards were received from 57 commenters

composed mainly of States, solvent cleaning machine users, solvent

cleaning machine vendors, industry and industry trade associations. A

detailed discussion of these comments and responses can be found in the

promulgation BID, which is referenced in the ADDRESSES section of this

preamble. The summary of comments and response in the BID serve as the

basis for the revisions that have been made to the standards between

proposal and promulgation. Most of the comment letters contained

multiple comments. The comments have been divided into the following

areas:

Selection of pollutants and source categories for

regulation.

Emission control options.

Regulatory alternatives.

Benefits analysis/economics.

Equipment, idling, work practice and overall solvent

emission limit standards.

Modification and reconstruction considerations.

Monitoring requirements.

Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

Operating permit program.

Clarifications.

Miscellaneous.

C. Significant Changes

Several changes have been made since the proposal of these

standards. The majority of the changes have been made to clarify

portions of the rule that were unclear to the commenters. Other changes

include adding additional control combinations and an equation that

allows cleaning machines that do not have a solvent vapor/air interface

area to comply with the standard by meeting a solvent emission limit

based on cleaning capacity. A summary of the major changes is presented

below.

(1) Several comments were made about the complexity of the rule,

with many commenters offering suggested changes to clarify different

sections. Many of these recommendations have been incorporated into the

final rule. For example, the standards for batch cold cleaning machines

have been moved to a separate section, the operator test has been

included as appendix B, and a table summarizing the applicability of

the General Provisions to this rule has been included in appendix C.

(2) The applicability section of the rule has been clarified to

ensure that the standard regulates only those solvents originally

intended for inclusion; namely, MC, PCE, TCE, TCA, CT, and C. Several

commenters were concerned that, as proposed, the rule could be

interpreted to regulate non-halogenated solvents contaminated by trace

amounts of halogenated solvent. The EPA never intended for these

solvents to be included in these standards.

(3) An equation and table have been added to allow solvent cleaning

machines that do not have a solvent vapor/air interface area to comply

with these standards. Several new cleaning machines are currently being

developed by industry that cannot install the equipment control devices

included in this final rule, do not have an idling mode, and do not

have a solvent vapor/air interface area to relate to the solvent

emission limit. The equation and table in the rule allow owners or

operators of halogenated solvent cleaning machines without a solvent

vapor/air interface area to comply with the standard by meeting an

overall solvent emissions limit based on cleaning capacity that is

equivalent to the overall solvent emissions limit for machines with a

solvent vapor/air interface.

(4) The list of equipment combinations has been modified to remove

overlapping controls and to add carbon adsorbers to the control

combinations.

There are multiple control combinations available for meeting the

rule, many of which are pollution prevention measures. Many of these

options also reduce worker exposure. However, some sources may rely on

lip exhausts instead in order to meet OSHA requirements. Use of a lip

exhaust without any controls, while reducing worker exposure on the one

hand, would dramatically increase the overall emissions to air. Thus,

if lip exhausts are used on solvent cleaning machines, the rule

requires carbon adsorption controls (which have been added explicitly

as a control option in the final rule). Although the lip exhaust-carbon

adsorption combination reduces worker exposure and overall emissions to

air, it may impose additional cost and burden on sources as well as on

the environment for a number of reasons. First, carbon adsorption units

are generally more expensive than other controls listed in the options.

Second, these units may present cross-media impacts such as effluent

discharges if not properly operated and maintained, and spent carbon

beds that have to be disposed of as hazardous waste. Thus, when making

decisions about what controls to install on halogenated solvent

cleaning machines to meet the requirements of this rule, all of these

factors should be weighed and pollution prevention measures are

encouraged wherever possible.

The EPA acknowledges that data show little additional benefit is

achieved by the use of a working-mode cover in the presence of reduced

room draft. Therefore, these controls are no longer included in the

same control combination.

(5) Some changes have also been made to the compliance and

reporting schedules. The initial notification report deadline for

existing sources has been extended from 90 to 270 days after

promulgation. This overrides the 120 day deadline in the final part 63

General Provisions. This was done to allow more time for the delegation

of this rule to the States and to allow more time to process the

reports from the large number of facilities affected by this rule. The

initial statement of compliance report deadline for new and existing

sources has been extended from 30 days to 150 days after the compliance

date to allow time for owners or operators to determine compliance with

the 3-month rolling average emission limit. The compliance time for

existing sources has been extended from 2 to 3 years. This extension

has been provided to allow sources the maximum flexibility in complying

with these standards, including allowing time to consider alternative

cleaning technologies. This change is consistent with the General

Provisions (Sec. 63.6(b)(3)). The exceedance report schedule has been

changed to include a biannual exceedance report if there is not an

exceedance. This change is consistent with the General Provisions

(Sec. 63.10(e)). Exceedance reports must still be submitted quarterly

if there is an exceedance.

(6) Several commenters stated that the rule was complex and

difficult to understand. They stated that additional guidance should be

provided, particularly for small businesses. The EPA agrees that

guidance would be helpful and has developed a brochure summarizing the

rule, and will be developing a guidance manual that is scheduled for

publication in January 1995. This guidance manual includes a detailed

summary of the rule, example forms that can be used for reporting and

recordkeeping, and additional assistance for evaluating alternative

cleaning technologies.

(7) Several commenters recommended that the EPA reduce the

monitoring frequency of the emission control equipment. The EPA

evaluated the monitoring frequencies and has added a provision to the

final rule that allows the hoist monitoring frequency to decrease from

monthly to quarterly if, the owner or operator has operated the hoist

for one year without an exceedance in the hoist speed. The EPA has also

changed the reduced room draft (RRD) monitoring frequency from weekly

to quarterly with weekly monitoring of the parameters used to obtain

the RRD.

(8) Several comments were received on the batch cold cleaning

machine equipment requirement provisions. A number of commenters

reported the use of TCA, MC, and TCE in noncarburetor batch cold

cleaning machine operations. The commenters stated that the proposed

water layer control option was not always possible for these cleaning

machines, particularly when TCA or TCE solvents are used. In order to

address this issue, alternative control equipment options were added to

the final rule to allow for the use of an increased freeboard ratio and

cover, or remote-reservoir and cover, in lieu of a water layer and

cover. An owner or operator complying with these alternative options

must also comply with work practice requirements. The final rule also

allows an owner or operator of a batch cold cleaning machine to use

alternative control equipment, if demonstrated to be equivalent to the

equipment requirements cited in the final rule and approved by the

Administrator.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information

considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket

is a dynamic file, since material is added throughout the rulemaking

development. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the

public and industries involved to readily identify and locate documents

so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process.

Along with the statement of basis and purpose of the proposed and

promulgated standards and the EPA responses to significant comments,

the contents of the docket will serve as the record in case of judicial

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

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

Information collection requirements associated with this regulation

(those included in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A and Subpart T) have been

approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et

seq. and have been assigned OMB control number (2060-0273). An

Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by the

EPA (ICR No. 1652.02) to reflect the changed information requirements

of the final rule and has been submitted to OMB for review. A copy may

be obtained from Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch, EPA 2136, 401

M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-2740.

The annual respondent burden and costs averaged over the first 3

years for batch vapor and in-line cleaning machine subcategories are

359,000 hours and $12.0 million. Since the reporting burden for some of

the required activities will be incurred only once, the average annual

burden for batch vapor and in-line cleaning machine subcategories will

decrease after the first two years of implementation. For the batch

cold cleaning machine subcategory, the annual respondent burden and

costs averaged over the first 3 years are 33,000 hours and $1.1

million. The batch cold cleaning machine subcategory is not expected to

incur costs after the initial activities.

This collection of information is estimated to have an annual

public reporting and recordkeeping burden averaging 42 hours per

facility over the first 3 years. These burden estimates include time

for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering

and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the

collection of information.

Several commenters to the proposed rule in recognizing this burden

noted that the rule was complex and difficult to understand, and

suggested that additional guidance be provided, particularly for small

businesses. To address these concerns the Emission Standards Division

and the Small Business Assistance Program are developing a brochure to

summarize this rule, and will be developing a guidance manual scheduled

to be published in January 1995. This manual will include a detailed

summary of the rule, example forms for reporting and recordkeeping, to

alleviate at least in part the paperwork burden, and additional

material for evaluating alternative cleaning technologies.

Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspects of

this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this

burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch (2/36), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for the

EPA.''

C. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the

Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''

and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the

Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as

one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, OMB has notified EPA

that it considers this a ``significant regulatory action'' within the

meaning of the Executive Order. The EPA has submitted this action to

OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or

recommendations will be documented in the public record.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (or RFA, Pub. L. 96-354, September

19, 1980) requires Federal agencies to give special consideration to

the impact of regulation on small businesses. The RFA specifies that a

final regulatory flexibility analysis must be prepared if a proposed

regulation will have a significant economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. To determine whether a final RFA is required,

a screening analysis, otherwise known as an initial RFA, is necessary.

Regulatory impacts are considered significant if:

(1) Annual compliance costs increase total costs of production by

more than 5 percent; or

(2) Annual compliance costs as a percent of sales are at least 20

percent (percentage points) higher for small entities; or

(3) Capital cost of compliance represents a significant portion of

capital available to small entities; or

(4) The requirements of the regulation are likely to result in

closures of small entities. A ``substantial number'' of small entities

is generally considered to be more than 20 percent of the small

entities in the affected industry. Since the economic analysis deals

only with small entities (in this case, facilities), it is also an

initial RFA, and conclusions about the impacts on small entities can be

drawn from what was done there already. Each of the criteria for

significant impacts will be considered in turn.

The largest increase in total cost of production from increased

emission control is 0.61 percent (SIC 359--Industrial Machinery,

n.e.c.). This figure is well below the significant-impact threshold of

five percent.

Assessing the differential impacts, measured by a comparison of

compliance costs as a percent of sales for small and large entities, is

more difficult as large model facilities were not analyzed in the

economic impact analysis. Treatment of this small business impacts

criterion involves creating two large model facilities.

It is assumed that large facilities use large solvent cleaning

machines, then compliance costs for large cleaning machines are

negative, and are thus savings. To be conservative, it is assumed here

that large model facilities possess five very large solvent cleaning

machines, so that a ``maximum savings'' case is modelled. This case is

important as it models the maximum cost differential between large and

small facilities.

Large model facilities were created for SICs 359 (Industrial

Machinery, n.e.c.) and 254 (Partitions and Fixtures). SIC 359 was

chosen because the small model facilities in this group experience the

highest cost absorption impacts when compared with other small model

facilities. SIC 254 was used because it had the smallest average per-

facility revenue of facilities with greater than 100 employees. Thus,

if they incur the same absolute savings as other large facilities,

their relative percentage savings will be the highest, and they will

experience the greatest cost savings in percentage terms as a result of

the standard. The cost differentials are in no case larger than one

percentage point. Thus, by this criterion, small business impacts are

not deemed significant.

The third criterion focuses on the amount of capital available to

small businesses or facilities. Since the capital costs incurred as a

result of investment in control equipment needed for small businesses

to meet the standard was less than 10 percent of the businesses' total

assets in all 39 affected SIC codes, it was concluded that the total

assets of small facilities will not be so adversely affected as to

prohibit the procurement of outside financing. (Examining an increase

in capital costs as a percentage of total assets is a measure of the

ability of a firm or facility to meet this capital costs increase.) The

conclusion, then, is that lack of available capital will not be an

obstacle for small facilities in complying with the regulation.

Criterion number four stipulates that small business impacts are

significant if compliance leads to closure. The only implication of

closure in the economic impact analysis is found in the section on

earnings impacts. Here it was found that, under worst-case assumptions,

closures might occur in only two SIC codes, 254 and 259 (Miscellaneous

Furniture and Fixtures), given their low rate of profitability in the

baseline. If this indeed occurs, the question of whether or not these

closures make up a substantial portion of small entities must be

addressed. The actual number of impacted facilities in the 39 impacted

SICs is unknown. If it can be assumed that each SIC is impacted in the

same proportion, a proxy for the share of impacted facilities

represented by SIC codes 254 and 259 is the total number of facilities

in these SIC codes as a share of the total number of potentially

impacted firms. SIC codes 254 and 259 hold a combined total 3,194 small

facilities. This makes up 3.4 percent of the total 93,121 small

facilities in all 39 SIC codes. Thus, in the extreme case that some

closures result, the number of closures is estimated to be far less

than the amount required to impact a substantial number of facilities.

In conclusion, and pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that this

rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The basis for the certification is that the

economic impacts for small entities do not meet or exceed the four

criteria in the Guidelines to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980,

as shown above. Further information on the initial RFA is available in

the background information package (see Background Information Document

section near the beginning of this preamble).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9 and 63

Environmental Protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous

substances, Halogenated solvent cleaning machines, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 15, 1994.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, of

the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:

PART 9--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 135-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,

2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33

U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1321, 1326, 1330, 1344,

1345(d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975

Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-1,

300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2, 300j-3,

300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 9601-

9657, 11023, 11048.

2. Section 9.1 is amended by adding in numerical order a new entry

to the table under the indicated heading to read as follows:

Sec. 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------

OMB control

40 CFR citation No.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

for Source Categories:

*****

63.467-63.468.............................................. 2060-0273

*****

------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 63--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

2. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart T to read as follows:

Subpart T--National Emission Standards for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning

Secs.

63.460 Applicability and designation of source.

63.461 Definitions.

63.462 Batch cold cleaning machine standards.

63.463 Batch vapor and in-line cleaning machine standards.

63.464 Alternative standards.

63.465 Test methods.

63.466 Monitoring procedures.

63.467 Recordkeeping requirements.

63.468 Reporting requirements.

63.469 Equivalent methods of control.

Subpart T--National Emission Standards for Halogenated Solvent

Cleaning

Sec. 63.460 Applicability and designation of source.

(a) The provisions of this subpart apply to each individual batch

vapor, in-line vapor, in-line cold, and batch cold solvent cleaning

machine that uses any solvent containing methylene chloride (CAS No.

75-09-2), perchloroethylene (CAS No. 127-18-4), trichloroethylene (CAS

No. 79-01-6), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (CAS No. 71-55-6), carbon

tetrachloride (CAS No. 56-23-5) or chloroform (CAS No. 67-66-3), or any

combination of these halogenated HAP solvents, in a total concentration

greater than 5 percent by weight, as a cleaning and/or drying agent.

The concentration of these solvents may be determined using EPA test

method 18, material safety data sheets, or engineering calculations.

(b) Except as noted in appendix C (General Provisions Applicability

to Subpart T) of this subpart, the provisions of subpart A of this part

(General Provisions) apply to owners or operators of any solvent

cleaning machine meeting the applicability criteria of paragraph (a) of

this section.

commences construction or reconstruction after November 29, 1993, shall

achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart immediately upon

startup or by December 2, 1994, whichever is later.

``(d) Each solvent cleaning machine subject to this subpart that

commenced construction or reconstruction on or before November 29,

1993, shall achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart no

later than.

(e) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority to a

State under section 112(d) of the Act, the authority contained in

paragraph (f) of this section shall be retained by the Administrator

and not transferred to a State.

(f) The authority conferred in Sec. 63.463(d)(9) and Sec. 63.469

will not be delegated to any State.

Sec. 63.461 Definitions.

Unless defined below, all terms used in this subpart are used as

defined in the 1990 Clean Air Act, or in subpart A of 40 CFR part 63:

Administrator means the Administrator of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency or his or her authorized representative

(e.g., State that has been delegated the authority to implement the

provisions of this part.)

Air blanket means the layer of air inside the solvent cleaning

machine freeboard located above the solvent/air interface. The

centerline of the air blanket is equidistant between the sides of the

machine.

Automated parts handling system means a mechanical device that

carries all parts and parts baskets at a controlled speed from the

initial loading of soiled or wet parts through the removal of the

cleaned or dried parts. Automated parts handling systems include, but

are not limited to, hoists and conveyors.

Batch cleaning machine means a solvent cleaning machine in which

individual parts or a set of parts move through the entire cleaning

cycle before new parts are introduced into the solvent cleaning

machine. An open-top vapor cleaning machine is a type of batch cleaning

machine. A solvent cleaning machine, such as a ferris wheel cleaner,

that cleans multiple batch loads simultaneously and is manually loaded

is a batch cleaning machine.

Carbon adsorber means a bed of activated carbon into which an air-

solvent gas-vapor stream is routed and which adsorbs the solvent on the

carbon.

Clean liquid solvent means fresh unused solvent, recycled solvent,

or used solvent that has been cleaned of soils (e.g., skimmed of oils

or sludge and strained of metal chips).

Cleaning capacity means, for a cleaning machine without a solvent/

air interface, the maximum volume of parts that can be cleaned at one

time. In most cases, the cleaning capacity is equal to the volume

(length times width times height) of the cleaning chamber.

Cold cleaning machine means any device or piece of equipment that

contains and/or uses liquid solvent, into which parts are placed to

remove soils from the surfaces of the parts or to dry the parts.

Cleaning machines that contain and use heated, nonboiling solvent to

clean the parts are classified as cold cleaning machines.

Consumption means the amount of halogenated hazardous air pollutant

solvent added to the solvent cleaning machine.

Cover means a lid, top, or portal cover that shields the solvent

cleaning machine openings from air disturbances when in place and is

designed to be easily opened and closed without disturbing the vapor

zone. Air disturbances include, but are not limited to, lip exhausts,

ventilation fans, and general room drafts. Types of covers include, but

are not limited to, sliding, biparting, and rolltop covers.

Downtime mode means the time period when a solvent cleaning machine

is not cleaning parts and the sump heating coils, if present, are

turned off.

Dwell means the technique of holding parts within the freeboard

area but above the vapor zone of the solvent cleaning machine. Dwell

occurs after cleaning to allow solvent to drain from the parts or parts

baskets back into the solvent cleaning machine.

Dwell time means the required minimum length of time that a part

must dwell, as determined by Sec. 63.465(d).

Emissions means halogenated hazardous air pollutant solvent

consumed (i.e., halogenated hazardous air pollutant solvent added to

the machine) minus the liquid halogenated hazardous air pollutant

solvent removed from the machine and the halogenated hazardous air

pollutant solvent removed from the machine in the solid waste.

Existing means any solvent cleaning machine the construction or

reconstruction of which was commenced on or before November 29, 1993.

Freeboard area means; for a batch cleaning machine, the area within

the solvent cleaning machine that extends from the solvent/air

interface to the top of the solvent cleaning machine; for an in-line

cleaning machine, it is the area within the solvent cleaning machine

that extends from the solvent/air interface to the bottom of the

entrance or exit opening, whichever is lower.

Freeboard height means; for a batch cleaning machine, the distance

from the solvent/air interface, as measured during the idling mode, to

the top of the cleaning machine; for an in-line cleaning machine, it is

the distance from the solvent/air interface to the bottom of the

entrance or exit opening, whichever is lower, as measured during the

idling mode.

Freeboard ratio means the ratio of the solvent cleaning machine

freeboard height to the smaller interior dimension (length, width, or

diameter) of the solvent cleaning machine.

Freeboard refrigeration device (also called a chiller) means a set

of secondary coils mounted in the freeboard area that carries a

refrigerant or other chilled substance to provide a chilled air blanket

above the solvent vapor. A primary condenser capable of meeting the

requirements of Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(i) is defined as both a freeboard

refrigeration device and a primary condenser for the purposes of these

standards.

Halogenated hazardous air pollutant solvent or halogenated HAP

solvent means methylene chloride (CAS No. 75-09-2), perchloroethylene

(CAS No. 127-18-4), trichloroethylene (CAS No. 79-01-6), 1,1,1-

trichloroethane (CAS No. 71-55-6), carbon tetrachloride (CAS No. 56-23-

5), and chloroform (CAS No. 67-66-3).

Hoist means a mechanical device that carries the parts basket and

the parts to be cleaned from the loading area into the solvent cleaning

machine and to the unloading area at a controlled speed. A hoist may be

operated by controls or may be programmed to cycle parts through the

cleaning cycle automatically.

Idling mode means the time period when a solvent cleaning machine

is not actively cleaning parts and the sump heating coils, if present,

are turned on.

Idling-mode cover means any cover or solvent cleaning machine

design that allows the cover to shield the cleaning machine openings

during the idling mode. A cover that meets this definition can also be

used as a working-mode cover if that definition is also met.

Immersion cold cleaning machine means a cold cleaning machine in

which the parts are immersed in the solvent when being cleaned. A

remote reservoir cold cleaning machine that is also an immersion cold

cleaning machine is considered an immersion cold cleaning machine for

purposes of this subpart.

In-line cleaning machine or continuous cleaning machine means a

solvent cleaning machine that uses an automated parts handling system,

typically a conveyor, to automatically provide a continuous supply of

parts to be cleaned. These units are fully enclosed except for the

conveyor inlet and exit portals. In-line cleaning machines can be

either cold or vapor cleaning machines.

Leak-proof coupling means a threaded or other type of coupling that

prevents solvents from leaking while filling or draining solvent to and

from the solvent cleaning machine.

Lip exhaust means a device installed at the top of the opening of a

solvent cleaning machine that draws in air and solvent vapor from the

freeboard area and ducts the air and vapor away from the solvent

cleaning area.

Monthly reporting period means any calendar month in which the

owner or operator of a solvent cleaning machine is required to

calculate and report the solvent emissions from each solvent cleaning

machine.

New means any solvent cleaning machine the construction or

reconstruction of which is commenced after November 29, 1993.

Open-top vapor cleaning machine means a batch solvent cleaning

machine that has its upper surface open to the air and boils solvent to

create solvent vapor used to clean and/or dry parts.

Part means any object that is cleaned in a solvent cleaning

machine. Parts include, but are not limited to, discrete parts,

assemblies, sets of parts, and continuous parts (i.e., continuous

sheets of metal).

Primary condenser means a series of circumferential cooling coils

on a vapor cleaning machine through which a chilled substance is

circulated or recirculated to provide continuous condensation of rising

solvent vapors and, thereby, create a concentrated solvent vapor zone.

Reduced room draft means decreasing the flow or movement of air

across the top of the freeboard area of the solvent cleaning machine to

meet the specifications of Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(ii). Methods of achieving

a reduced room draft include, but are not limited to, redirecting fans

and/or air vents to not blow across the cleaning machine, moving the

cleaning machine to a corner where there is less room draft, and

constructing a partial or complete enclosure around the cleaning

machine.

Remote reservoir cold cleaning machine means any device in which

liquid solvent is pumped to a sink-like work area that drains solvent

back into an enclosed container while parts are being cleaned, allowing

no solvent to pool in the work area.

Soils means contaminants that are removed from the parts being

cleaned. Soils include, but are not limited to, grease, oils, waxes,

metal chips, carbon deposits, fluxes, and tars.

Solvent/air interface means, for a vapor cleaning machine, the

location of contact between the concentrated solvent vapor layer and

the air. This location of contact is defined as the mid-line height of

the primary condenser coils. For a cold cleaning machine, it is the

location of contact between the liquid solvent and the air.

Solvent/air interface area means; for a vapor cleaning machine, the

surface area of the solvent vapor zone that is exposed to the air; for

an in-line cleaning machine, it is the total surface area of all the

sumps; for a cold cleaning machine, it is the surface area of the

liquid solvent that is exposed to the air.

Solvent cleaning machine means any device or piece of equipment

that uses halogenated HAP solvent liquid or vapor to remove soils from

the surfaces of materials. Types of solvent cleaning machines include,

but are not limited to, batch vapor, in-line vapor, in-line cold, and

batch cold solvent cleaning machines.

Solvent vapor zone means; for a vapor cleaning machine, the area

that extends from the liquid solvent surface to the level that solvent

vapor is condensed. This condensation level is defined as the midline

height of the primary condenser coils.

Sump means the part of a solvent cleaning machine where the liquid

solvent is located.

Sump heater coils means the heating system on a cleaning machine

that uses steam, electricity, or hot water to heat or boil the liquid

solvent.

Superheated vapor system means a system that heats the solvent

vapor, either passively or actively, to a temperature above the

solvent's boiling point. Parts are held in the superheated vapor before

exiting the machine to evaporate the liquid solvent on them. Hot vapor

recycle is an example of a superheated vapor system.

Vapor cleaning machine means a batch or in-line solvent cleaning

machine that boils liquid solvent generating solvent vapor that is used

as a part of the cleaning or drying cycle.

Water layer means a layer of water that floats above the denser

solvent and provides control of solvent emissions. In many cases, the

solvent used in batch cold cleaning machines is sold containing the

appropriate amount of water to create a water cover.

Working mode means the time period when the solvent cleaning

machine is actively cleaning parts. Working-mode cover means anycover

or solvent cleaning machine design that allows the cover to shield the

cleaning machine openings from outside air disturbances while parts are

being cleaned in the cleaning machine. A cover that is used during the

working mode is opened only during parts entry and removal. A cover

that meets this definition can also be used as an idling-mode cover if

that definition is also met.

Sec. 63.462 Batch cold cleaning machine standards.

(a) Each owner or operator of an immersion batch cold solvent

cleaning machine shall comply with the requirements specified in

paragraph(a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section.

(1) Employ a tightly fitting cover that shall be closed at all

times except during parts entry and removal, and a water layer at a

minimum thickness of 2.5 centimeters (1.0 inch) on the surface of the

solvent within the cleaning machine, or

(2) Employ a tightly fitting cover that shall be closed at all

times except during parts entry and removal and a freeboard ratio of

0.75 or greater.

(b) Each owner or operator of a remote-reservoir batch cold solvent

cleaning machine shall employ a tightly fitting cover over the solvent

sump that shall be closed at all times except during the cleaning of

parts.

complying with paragraphs (a)(2) or (b) of this section shall comply

with the work and operational practice requirements specified in

paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(8) of this section.

(1) All waste solvent shall be collected and stored in closed

containers. The closed container may contain a device that allows

pressure relief, but does not allow liquid solvent to drain from the

container.

(2) If a flexible hose or flushing device is used, flushing shall

be performed only within the freeboard area of the solvent cleaning

machine.

(3) The owner or operator shall drain solvent cleaned parts for 15

seconds or until dripping has stopped, whichever is longer. Parts

having cavities or blind holes shall be tipped or rotated while

draining.

(4) The owner or operator shall ensure that the solvent level does

not exceed the fill line.

(5) Spills during solvent transfer shall be wiped up immediately.

The wipe rags shall be stored in covered containers meeting the

requirements of paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

(6) When an air- or pump-agitated solvent bath is used, the owner

or operator shall ensure that the agitator is operated to produce a

rolling motion of the solvent but not observable splashing against tank

walls or parts being cleaned.

(7) The owner or operator shall ensure that, when the cover is

open, the cold cleaning machine is not exposed to drafts greater than

40 meters per minute (132 feet per minute), as measured between 1 and 2

meters (3.3 and 6.6 feet) upwind and at the same elevation as the tank

lip.

(8) Sponges, fabric, wood, and paper products shall not be cleaned.

(d) Each owner or operator of a batch cold cleaning machine shall

submit an initial notification report as described in Sec. 63.468(a)

and a compliance report as described in Sec. 63.468(b). No further

reporting or recordkeeping is required.

Sec. 63.463 Batch vapor and in-line cleaning machine standards.

(a) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464, each owner or operator of a

solvent cleaning machine subject to the provisions of this subpart

shall ensure that each existing or new batch vapor or in-line solvent

cleaning machine subject to the provisions of this subpart conforms to

the design requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(7)

of this section.

(1) Each cleaning machine shall be designed or operated to meet the

control equipment or technique requirements in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or

(a)(1)(ii) of this section.

(i) An idling and downtime mode cover, as described in

Sec. 63.463(d)(1)(i), that may be readily opened or closed, that

completely covers the cleaning machine openings when in place, and is

free of cracks, holes, and other defects.

(ii) A reduced room draft as described in Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(ii).

(2) Each cleaning machine shall have a freeboard ratio of 0.75 or

greater.

(3) Each cleaning machine shall have an automated parts handling

system capable of moving parts or parts baskets at a speed of 3.4

meters per minute (11 feet per minute) or less from the initial loading

of parts through removal of cleaned parts.

(4) Each vapor cleaning machine shall be equipped with a device

that shuts off the sump heat if the sump liquid solvent level drops to

the sump heater coils.

(5) Each vapor cleaning machine shall be equipped with a vapor

level control device that shuts off sump heat if the vapor level in the

vapor cleaning machine rises above the height of the primary condenser.

(6) Each vapor cleaning machine shall have a primary condenser.

(7) Each cleaning machine that uses a lip exhaust shall be designed

and operated to route all collected solvent vapors through a properly

operated and maintained carbon adsorber that meets the requirements of

paragraph (e)(2)(vii) of this section.

(b) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464, each owner or operator of an

existing or new batch vapor cleaning machine shall comply with either

paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section.

(1) Each owner or operator of a batch vapor cleaning machine with a

solvent/air interface area of 1.21 square meters (13 square feet) or

less shall comply with the requirements specified in either paragraph

(b)(1)(i) or (b)(1)(ii) of this section.

(i) Employ one of the control combinations listed in table 1 of

this subpart or other equivalent methods of control as determined using

the procedure in Sec. 63.469, equivalent methods of control.

Table 1.--Control Combinations for Batch Vapor Solvent Cleaning Machines

With a Solvent/Air Interface Area of 1.21 Square Meters (13 Square Feet)

or Less

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Option Control combinations

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1......... Working-mode cover, freeboard ratio of 1.0, superheated

vapor.

2......... Freeboard refrigeration device, superheated vapor.

3......... Working-mode cover, freeboard refrigeration device.

4......... Reduced room draft, freeboard ratio of 1.0, superheated

vapor.

5......... Freeboard refrigeration device, reduced room draft.

6......... Freeboard refrigeration device, freeboard ratio of 1.0.

7......... Freeboard refrigeration device, dwell.

8......... Reduced room draft, dwell, freeboard ratio of 1.0.

9......... Freeboard refrigeration device, carbon adsorber.

10........ Freeboard ratio of 1.0, superheated vapor, carbon adsorber.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Unlike most of the control techniques available for complying with

this rule, carbon adsorbers are not considered to be a pollution

prevention measure. Use of such units may impose additional cost and

burden for a number of reasons. First, carbon adsorption units are

generally more expensive than other controls listed in the options.

Second, these units may present cross-media impacts such as effluent

discharges if not properly operated and maintained, and spent carbon

beds have to be disposed of as hazardous waste. When making decisions

about what controls to install on halogenated solvent cleaning

machines to meet the requirements of this rule, all of these factors

should be weighed and pollution prevention measures are encouraged

wherever possible.

(ii) Demonstrate that their solvent cleaning machine can achieve

and maintain an idling emission limit of 0.22 kilograms per hour per

square meter (0.045 pounds per hour per square foot) of solvent/air

interface area as determined using the procedures in Sec. 63.465(a) and

appendix A to this part.

(2) Each owner or operator of a batch vapor cleaning machine with a

solvent/air interface area greater than 1.21 square meters (13 square

feet) shall comply with the requirements specified in either paragraph

(b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) of this section.

(i) Employ one of the control combinations listed in table 2 of

this subpart or other equivalent methods of control as determined using

the procedure in Sec. 63.469, equivalent methods of control.

Table 2.--Control Combinations for Batch Vapor Solvent Cleaning Machines

With a Solvent/Air Interface Area Greater than 1.21 Square Meters (13

Square Feet)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Option Control combinations

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1......... Freeboard refrigeration device, freeboard ratio of 1.0,

superheated vapor.

2......... Dwell, freeboard refrigeration device, reduced room draft.

3......... Working-mode cover, freeboard refrigeration device,

superheated vapor.

4......... Freeboard ratio of 1.0, reduced room draft, superheated

vapor.

5......... Freeboard refrigeration device, reduced room draft,

superheated vapor.

6......... Freeboard refrigeration device, reduced room draft,

freeboard ratio of 1.0.

7......... Freeboard refrigeration device, superheated vapor, carbon

adsorber.