Federal Standards for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations
Federal RegisterSep 19, 1995
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
[AD-FRL-5272-8]
RIN 2060-AD02
Federal Standards for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations and
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Marine
Tank Vessel Loading Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates standards under section 183(f) of the
Clean Air Act (the Act) and requires reasonably available control
technology (RACT) to limit air emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from new and existing marine
tank vessel loading operations. VOC emissions, together with nitrogen
oxides are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone, which can
impair lung capacity, cause eye, nose and throat irritation, timber and
other valuable crops such as soybeans and cotton. The health effects of
exposure to HAPs can include cancer, respiratory irritation and damage
to the nervous system. An additional set of standards promulgate
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) under
section 112 of the Act for marine tank vessel loading operations and
require existing and new major sources to control emissions using
maximum achievable control technology (MACT) to control HAP.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation is effective September 19, 1995. See
Supplementary Information section concerning judicial review.
ADDRESSES: Technical Support Document. The Technical Support Document
(TSD) for the promulgated standards may be obtained from the U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
Springfield, Virginia 22161, telephone number (703) 487-4650. Please
refer to ``Federal Standards for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations
and National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants For Marine
Tank Vessel Loading Operations--Technical Support Document for Final
Standards,'' Document Number PB95-234514. The TSD contains, (1) a
summary of 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.
Electronic versions of the promulgation TSD as well as this final
rule are available for download from the EPA's Technology Transfer
Network (TTN), a network of electronic bulletin boards developed and
operated by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (select
``CAAA'' ``Title III''). The TTN provides information and technology
exchange in various areas of air pollution control. The service is
free, except for the cost of a phone call. Dial (919) 541-5742 for data
transfer of up to a 14,400 bits per second (bps). If more information
on TTN is needed, contact the systems operator at (919) 541-5384. A
copy of the TSD has also been placed in the Docket at the address given
below.
Docket. Docket No. A-90-44, containing supporting information used
in developing the promulgated standards, is available for public
inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at
the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Waterside
Mall, Room M-1500, Ground Floor, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the
standards or technical aspects, contact Mr. David Markwordt at (919)
541-0837, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial
review of 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
[[Page 48389]]
brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. The Standards
II. Summary of Impacts
III. Significant Changes to the Proposed Standards
A. Public Participation
B. Comments on the Proposed Standards
C. Significant Changes
D. Minor Changes
E. Other Significant Issues
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Act
I. The Standards
A summary of today's final standards is listed in Table 1. Included
in this table are applicability cutoffs based on annual throughput
(under section 183(f)) and HAP emissions (under section 112),
separation of marine tank vessel loading operations at petroleum
refineries (which are now included under the petroleum refineries
source category), and emission standards based on subcategory
determinations for offshore terminals and the Alyeska Pipeline Service
Company's (APSC's) Valdez Marine Terminal (VMT). The promulgated
regulations allow for several alternative compliance technologies to
allow owners or operators maximum compliance flexibility.
Table 1.--Final Standards, National Costs, and Emission Reductions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission reduction, Mg/
Section of act Subcategory Standard yr Annual cost, $MM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
183(f).............. New and existing terminals having 98 percent reduction in emissions if 13,000 (VOC), 900 (HAP). 20-40.
throughput of 1.6 billion using combustion techniques; 95
liters per year (10 million barrels percent reduction in emissions if
per year) of gasoline or 32 billion liters per year (200
million barrels per year) of crude
oil.
112................. Existing major source terminals having 97 percent reduction in HAP emissions. 7,000 (VOC), 750 (HAP).. 20-40.
emissions of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) of 10/25 tons per year or more
from loading of marine tank vessels.
112................. Existing major source terminals 97 percent reduction in HAP emissions Impacts included in Impacts included in
collocated at petroleum refineries for existing sources, 98 percent previous subcategory previous subcategory
having HAP emissions of 10/25 tons reduction in HAP emissions for new data. data.
per year or more from loading of sources; emissions averaging with
marine tank vessels; new major source petroleum refinery emissions points
terminals regardless of HAP emissions is allowed.
from marine tank vessel loading (both
existing and new sources are
regulated under the Gasoline
Refineries NESHAP).
112................. Existing major source terminals having No control............................ None.................... None.
HAP emissions of less than 10/25 tons
per year from loading of marine tank
vessels.
112................. New major source terminals regardless 98 percent reduction in HAP emissions. None.................... None.
of HAP emissions from marine tank
vessel loading.
112 and 183(f)...... Existing major source terminals No control............................ None.................... None.
located more than 0.8 kilometers (0.5
miles) offshore.
112................. New major source terminals located 95 percent reduction in HAP emissions. None.................... None.
more than 0.8 kilometers (0.5 miles)
offshore.
112 and 183(f)...... Alyeska Pipeline Service Company's 98 percent reduction in emissions with 19,000 (VOC), 2,500 20.
Valdez Marine Terminal. maximum throughput limits. (HAP).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources required to reduce emissions are also required to monitor
the performance of control technology installed to achieve the required
emissions reductions. Baseline parameters may be established by owners
or operators during initial performance tests, or continuous emissions
monitoring devices may be used to provide indicators of performance.
The baseline parameters may be based on manufacturer's recommended
operating parameters or other parameters selected by the source and
approved by the Administrator. Sources are also required to develop and
implement an operation and maintenance plan that describes a program of
corrective action for varying (i.e., exceeding baseline parameters) air
pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment used to comply
with these emissions standards. This plan includes operating parameters
that shall be monitored and recorded as indicators of proper operation
of the air pollution control devices.
In developing these final monitoring requirements and compliance
provisions, the Agency has provided significant flexibility to owners
or operators of sources required to reduce emissions in regard to
selecting monitoring protocols, yet has assured compliance with the
standards. Compliance is assured through reporting and recordkeeping
requirements that specify annual reports of system performance. This
reporting interval is compressed to semi-annual for sources that
experience excess emissions.
Owners or operators of all marine tank vessel loading operations
subject to the federal standards promulgated
[[Page 48390]]
under section 183(f) of the Act (RACT sources) are required to commence
construction of its vapor collection system and air pollution control
device(s) within 2 years from September 19, 1995. These RACT sources
are required to complete the installation of the control technology
needed to comply with the standards within 3 years from September 19,
1995. Owners or operators of new RACT sources with an initial startup
after September 21, 1998 are required to comply with all requirements
upon startup. A RACT source may request a waiver of final compliance
for up to 1 year if it can prove that the additional time is necessary
for the installation of controls.
Owners or operators of marine tank vessel loading operations
subject only to the requirements promulgated under section 112(d) of
the Act (MACT standards) are required to install the control technology
needed to comply with the standards within 4 years from September 19,
1995. Owners or operators of new MACT-only sources with initial startup
after September 20, 1999 are required to comply with all requirements
upon startup.
The VMT owners or operators are required to install the control
technology needed to comply with the standards within 30 months from
September 19, 1995.
II. Summary of Impacts
These standards will reduce nationwide emissions of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) from marine tank vessel loading operations by
approximately 4,150 Mg (4,565 tons) after 1999 compared to the
emissions that would result in the absence of the standards. These
standards will reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC)
from marine tank vessel loading operations by approximately 39,000 Mg
(42,900 tons) after 1999 compared to the emissions that would result in
the absence of the standards. No significant adverse secondary air,
water, solid waste, or energy impacts are anticipated from the
promulgation of these standards.
The implementation of this regulation is expected to result in
nationwide annualized costs for existing marine tank vessel loading
operations of $60 million to $100 million beyond baseline based on an
analysis of applying controls to all existing facilities not currently
controlled to the level of the standards. Nationwide capital costs
expected to result from these regulations are approximately $266
million to $440 million.
As discussed in this preamble under Regulatory Flexibility Act
Compliance, the economic impact analysis performed for this rulemaking
showed that the estimated maximum price increases for the affected
products varied, but were not large (less than 1%). These price-
increase estimates reflect the control cost increases for transporting
crude and products. Because these increases are small and because the
elasticities of demand for petroleum products are small, estimated
percent output reductions were minimal. Correspondingly, estimated
employment reductions were also relatively small.
Potentially significant economic impacts on some of the smaller
affected terminal operations were identified, although the decision not
to require emission controls for existing smaller operations greatly
reduces the potential for adverse economic impacts on small terminal
operations. These potential impacts would result from the high per
barrel control cost differential between the smaller and larger
terminal operations that would need to control emissions. Some of these
smaller terminal operations, to the extent that they are competing with
nearby larger or unaffected terminal operations, could have had
difficulty raising prices to cover cost increases and could have been
significantly adversely impacted by this rule.
The potential economic impact on marine tank vessel owners was
substantially reduced because of the decision not to require emission
controls on small existing terminals in this rulemaking. Because only a
small percentage of U.S. marine transported volume of products will be
impacted by the standard, only a relatively small percentage of U.S.
marine tank vessels will need to retrofit. Thus, only the vessels that
will need the least cost to retrofit (most likely the larger, newer,
double-skin vessels) will do so, leading to some degree of dedicated
service. It is expected that vessel owners that do retrofit will be
able to pass most retrofit costs forward in terms of higher prices.
III. Significant Changes to the Proposed Standards
Proposed standards for marine tank vessel loading operations were
published in the Federal Register on May 13, 1994 (59 FR 25004). Under
section 183(f) of the Act, the proposed rule would have required a 98
percent reduction in emissions (or a 95 percent reduction, if recovery
techniques were used) from marine tank vessel loading and unloading
operations that load either 100 million barrels per year of crude oil
or 5 million barrels per year of gasoline. Sources would have had 2
years to comply with these RACT standards. Under section 112(d) of the
Act, the proposed rule also would have required owners or operators of
major sources that emit 1 ton per year or more of HAP from marine tank
vessel loading and unloading operations to reduce total HAP emissions
by at least 93 percent. Sources would have had 3 years to comply with
these MACT standards. The control devices used to meet these standards
were required to be operated at 98 and 95 percent efficiencies for
combustion and recovery control technologies respectively. The EPA also
proposed to regulate emissions from ballasting.
Three alternatives were proposed to ensure vessel tightness: (1)
Pressure test the vessel, (2) perform a leak test on all components
using Method 21 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 60, or (3) load the vessel
at less than atmospheric pressure.
Proposed monitoring requirements required owners or operators to
monitor any valves that could divert flow from a control device if
those bypass valves could not be secured. Monitoring criteria were also
proposed for combustion devices, carbon adsorbers, condensers,
absorbers, and flares. Owners or operators were generally required to
establish operating parameters during an initial performance test and
then monitor combustion temperature for combustion devices, VOC
concentration in the exhaust stream for carbon adsorbers, exhaust
stream temperature for condensers, VOC outlet concentration for
absorbers, and continuous presence of a flame and the vent stream flow
for flares. Criteria to apply for and obtain approval for alternative
monitoring criteria (and for alternative monitoring devices) were also
specified in the proposed rule.
Under the proposed rule, owners or operators of sources required to
install controls would have had to fulfill the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements of the part 63 General Provisions, including
submittal of the following reports: (1) Initial notification that the
source is subject to the standards, (2) notification of initial
performance test, (3) initial notification of compliance status, (4)
annual excess emissions and monitoring system performance report and/or
summary report, and (5) an annual emissions estimation report. These
sources would also have been required to maintain documentation that
vessels loaded at the facility were vapor tight. All information was to
have been made readily available to the Administrator or
[[Page 48391]]
delegated State authority for a minimum of 5 years.
In addition, the Agency requested comment on several issues,
including the subcategorization of certain types of terminals. On
August 31, 1994, the Agency published a notice reopening the comment
period to request comment on amending the Marine Tank Vessel Loading
and the Petroleum Refinery source categories to move marine terminals
collocated at petroleum refineries to the Petroleum Refineries source
category (59 FR 44955). On March 8, 1995, the Agency reopened the
comment period to request comment on extending the proposed compliance
dates (60 FR 12703).
A. Public Participation
Prior to proposal of the standards, interested parties were advised
by public notice in the Federal Register (56 FR 1186) of a meeting of
the National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee to
discuss the regulation of this source category. This meeting was held
on January 31, 1991. 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 the preamble was published in the
Federal Register on May 13, 1994 (59 FR 25004). The preamble to the
proposed standards discussed the availability of the regulatory text
and proposal TSD, 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 regulatory text
and TSD were distributed to interested parties. Electronic versions of
the preamble, regulation, and TSD were made available to interested
parties via the TTN (see ADDRESSES section of this preamble).
To provide interested persons the opportunity for oral presentation
of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed standards, a
public hearing was held on June 15, 1994 in Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. The public comment period was from May 13 to July 18,
1994. The Agency also reopened the public comment period for specific
comments on two occasions--August 31, 1994 (59 FR 44955) and March 8,
1995 (60 FR 12723). In all, over 150 comment letters were received
(including seven duplicates). Additional information received from
interested parties but not submitted directly to the docket was
included in the docket as additional comments on the proposed
regulation. Information submitted after the close of the comment period
is also included in the docket and may appear on the docket index as
public comments in docket category IV-D. The comments have been
carefully considered, and changes have been made to 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 143
commenters composed mainly of States, environmental groups, private
citizens, control device vendors, industry, and trade associations. A
detailed discussion of these comments and responses can be found in the
promulgation TSD, which is referred to in the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. The summary of comments and responses in the TSD serves as
the basis for the revisions that have been made to the regulations
between proposal and promulgation. Most of the comment letters
contained multiple comments. A summary of the revisions to the
regulations along with discussion of the comments on the major issues
is provided below. In the TSD, the comments have been divided into the
following areas:
(1) Applicability of standards.
(2) Inclusion of certain terminals with the petroleum refinery
source category.
(3) Subcategorization issues.
(4) RACT/MACT.
(5) Compliance schedule for Titles I and III standards.
(6) Compliance, performance testing, and monitoring requirements.
(7) Vapor tightness requirements.
(8) Leak detection and repair.
(9) Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
(10) General provisions interaction.
(11) Wording of regulation.
(12) Administrative record/sources of information.
(13) Cost effectiveness/impacts.
(14) Miscellaneous.
(15) Comments on proposed appendices to 40 CFR part 64.
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. A summary of
the major changes is presented below.
(1) Removal of unloading operations (ballasting) from the source
category. In the proposed rule, the Agency included regulations
proscribing emissions from ballasting of vessels following unloading of
vessels. Comments asserted that ballasting operations are performed by
vessel operators, not by the regulated terminal sources. The Agency
agrees with this interpretation of the affected source. The Agency also
agrees that regulating ballasting operations would be difficult to
enforce. The Agency's intent in prohibiting ballasting emissions in the
proposed regulation was to provide a cross-reference with existing
Coast Guard regulations addressing ballasting in vessels. The Coast
Guard rules require vessels to have segregated ballast tanks for crude
oil loadings. The Agency sees no benefit to restating Coast Guard
requirements for ballasting. Moreover, EPA agrees that the relatively
low amount of actual emissions associated with ballasting does not
justify dual regulation of ballasting. As discussed in the proposal
TSD, the total VOC emissions from crude oil tankship ballasting were
estimated to be approximately 950 Mg/yr. Based on the portion of HAP in
crude oil vapor, total HAP emissions from ballasting are less than 120
Mg/yr. Ballasting emissions will diminish in the future because
tankships built since 1980 are required by domestic law and
international agreement to use segregated ballast tanks that do not
emit vapors during ballasting. Therefore, in order to prevent confusion
in the regulated community, the Agency does not address ballasting or
bunkering emissions in the final regulation. The Agency defers to the
U.S. Coast Guard's existing standards (33 CFR parts 155 and 157; and 46
CFR parts 30 et al.).
(2) Extension of the compliance schedule for section 183(f)
(``Title I'') and section 112 (``Title III'') standards. In the
proposed rule, EPA proposed to establish compliance deadlines of 2
years for the section 183(f) standards, and 3 years for the section 112
standards. The Agency received numerous comments regarding these
schedules that stated the length of the compliance periods was
insufficient to comply with the standards. Commenters noted that
facilities' abilities to install pollution control devices are
constrained by several factors, including the following: (1) The
limited number of contractors experienced in installing control
equipment in marine loading facilities; (2) the numerous facilities
that will need to meet the standards at the same time; and (3) the lead
time needed to meet permitting and safety requirements from permitting
authorities and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Commenters stated that EPA had discretion to extend the compliance
period under section 183(f), noting the ambiguity of the term
``effective date'' and that the evidence indicated that the proposed
emission control technologies
[[Page 48392]]
would not be ``reasonably available, considering costs, nonair-quality
benefits, environmental impacts, energy requirements, and safety
factors'' within 2 years. Commenters also noted that EPA had the
authority to provide for a waiver of compliance with MACT standards
under section 112 for up to 1 year if certain findings were made.
On March 8, 1995, EPA reopened the comment period to receive more
comments on the issue of whether the compliance periods for the RACT
and MACT regulations should be extended. Numerous commenters indicated
support for extending the compliance periods, generally reiterating the
views expressed in earlier comments. Some commenters also pointed out
that greater environmental benefits can sometimes be obtained by
granting longer compliance periods, which can allow for better
designed, more robust, safer and more advanced technologies, and in
this instance, could result in greater use of recovery technologies
(rather than incineration). Commenters also noted that previous
attempts by States to regulate tank vessel loading in less than 3 years
resulted in the need for numerous waivers as it became clear that the
deadlines could not be met. One commenter provided a list of several
marine loading terminals in California that had installed emission
control equipment and indicated that almost all of these installation
projects took at least 3 years to complete.
The Agency agrees with the commenters that permitting and safety
approvals from permitting authorities and the Coast Guard, the dearth
of skilled engineering and construction firms, and the history of
facilities being unable to comply with existing regulations compels the
Agency to extend the date for full compliance with the RACT and MACT
rules. In these final standards, EPA allows sources regulated under
section 183(f) 3 years to be in full compliance with the emission
control requirements promulgated under section 183(f). In addition,
RACT sources may request a waiver of up to 1 year to achieve full
compliance with the requirements if they can show that the additional
period is necessary for the installation of controls. The Agency
believes that this result is consistent with section 183(f). Section
183(f) requires the application of ``reasonably available'' control
technology, considering costs, any non-air quality benefits,
environmental impacts, energy requirements, and safety factors. The
overwhelming evidence received by the Agency indicates that most, if
not all, sources that must install emission control devices cannot do
so within 2 years. States that have attempted to enforce such a
requirement have been forced to provide waivers to the regulated
sources. Given the relative scarcity of qualified contractors and the
permitting and other requirements necessary for such construction, it
is clear that the emission control technologies required by this rule
will not be ``reasonably available'' within 2 years of the promulgation
of this rule. Moreover, the information provided to the Agency
indicates that a 2-year deadline may force regulated sources to install
equipment that is less reliable and that may cause safety concerns.
Given the emphasis that Congress put on safety in these regulations and
the fact that the Coast Guard will need to review such installations
prior to operation, a 2-year deadline seems contrary to Congress' broad
intent and may result in conflicts with Coast Guard requirements. The
Agency has in the past provided sources with reasonable time to
complete actions required by the Clean Air Act. See EPA rulemaking on
fuel/fuel additives published on June 27, 1994 (59 FR 33042).
Moreover, EPA believes that the imprecision of the term ``effective
date'' could also provide EPA with the ability to allow compliance
after 2 years. The distinction between ``effective dates'' of
regulations and ``compliance dates'' is important and has been a clear
part of administrative procedure for many years. See, e.g., section
112(i)(3); Natural Resources Defense Council v. Environmental
Protection Agency, 22 F. 3d 1125, 1138 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
The Agency is requiring regulated RACT sources to provide proof
that they have commenced construction of vapor collection systems and
air pollution control devices within 2 years after promulgation of the
final standards. The Agency believes that these actions can reasonably
be achieved within 2 years of promulgation.
The Agency believes that most RACT terminals will be able to meet
the emissions reduction requirements contained in the final standards
within the 3 years following the promulgation date. The Agency
estimates that only 8 terminals subject to the RACT requirements are
not presently controlling emissions to the level specified in the
standards. These terminals are among the largest terminals in the U.S.,
and can reasonably be expected to have in-house staff capable of
assisting in the design and installation of control technology.
Furthermore, the Agency is aware that some of these terminals are
already designing control equipment in anticipation of these final RACT
requirements.
The EPA shall allow existing sources regulated solely under section
112 four years to be in full compliance with the emission control
requirements promulgated under section 112. Sources must generally
comply with MACT standards under section 112 within 3 years of
promulgation. However, section 112(i) of the Act specifically allows
EPA to provide sources with a waiver of up to 1 year to achieve full
compliance with the requirements if they can show that the additional
period is necessary for installing the controls. Commenters stated that
standards containing similar compliance dates for a large number of
sources would result in numerous facilities competing for a limited
number of experienced contractors in order to meet the standards at the
same time. Commenters suggested a staggered compliance schedule for the
sources affected by the standards. Commenters also stated that many
sources would require more than 3 years to install the required control
equipment given the limited number of contractors experienced in
installing control equipment in marine loading facilities and the lead
time needed to meet permitting and safety requirements from permitting
authorities and the U.S. Coast Guard.
The Agency agrees with the commenters that many MACT sources would
probably require 1-year waivers if there was a 3-year compliance date
for MACT sources in the final rule. The Agency notes that these sources
are typically smaller than the sources regulated under RACT, and would
not be as likely to have in-house staff capable of assisting in the
design and installation of control technology. Therefore, the Agency
believes that the sources controlled under section 112 that are not
controlled under section 183(f) should automatically receive a waiver
of 1 year that will allow a total of four years from September 19, 1995
to comply with the MACT emission reduction requirements. The Agency
believes that this total of 4 years is sufficient time for the
estimated 20 sources presently uncontrolled to design and install
control technologies sufficient to meet the MACT standards. The Agency
believes that the staggered compliance schedule (i.e., 3 years for RACT
terminals and 4 years for MACT terminals) coupled with the reduced
number of terminals required to control emissions under the final rule
should alleviate commenters' concerns about the scarcity of qualified
installation consultants and vendors. This extended
[[Page 48393]]
schedule is also expected to address concerns regarding permitting
delays.
The Agency is providing the VMT with 30 months to be in full
compliance with these regulations. The Agency believes, per its
discussions with APSC, that this extension provides sufficient time to
comply with the promulgated rule.
(3) Addition of new subcategories under the section 112 regulations
for offshore terminals and for the Alyeska Pipeline Service
Corporation's Valdez Marine Terminal. In the proposed rule, the Agency
established two subcategories based on size for the section 112 MACT
regulations. The Agency also solicited comments on whether additional
subcategories should be established under the MACT regulations for
specific types of terminals based on particular characteristics of
those types of terminals of which the Agency had no information at that
time. Based on information received in the public comments, the Agency
has determined that two additional subcategories exist within the
marine tank vessel loading operation source category.
(a) Subcategory for offshore terminals. As stated in the
solicitation of comments in the proposed rule, the Agency does not
believe that a facility at least one-half mile offshore is part of a
land-based contiguous site. The Agency also stated that such offshore
terminals present unique regulatory challenges such as costs,
environmental impacts, and/or size constraints. The Agency requested
information regarding the feasibility and costs of controlling
emissions from offshore terminals. The Agency also requested comments
on whether offshore terminals should be grouped into a separate
subcategory and what the control status of terminals in such a
subcategory should be. Comments in response to this request indicated
that these types of vessel loading operations face significant
challenges in controlling emissions that were different from land-
based, contiguous loading operations. These challenges include high
costs, technical complications, and permitting requirements that would
result from requirements to construct new platforms to locate control
equipment adjacent to the offshore terminal or additional subsea or
surface lines to route loading vapors to onshore control equipment.
Commenters noted that these challenges are either non-existent or not
as pronounced for onshore, contiguous terminals. The Agency has
therefore determined that a subcategory for these types of terminals is
justified and has based its definition for offshore terminals on a
minimum distance of one-half mile from the terminal's furthest loading
point to the shore, regardless of the existence of subsea lines. [See
the discussion in section 2.3.2 of the TSD for the rationale supporting
the one-half mile limit].
Once the Agency determined that offshore terminals should be placed
in a subcategory for the MACT standards, the MACT floor was determined
(see Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-B-2). Based on information received
from commenters, (see Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-D-136) the Agency
estimates that there are fewer than 20 offshore terminals having subsea
lines. None of these terminals presently control emissions from marine
tank vessel loading. The Agency is also aware of additional offshore
terminals that do not have subsea lines. Two of these terminals are
known to presently control emissions (see Docket A-90-44, Item Number
IV-D-80). Based on the information available to the Agency, the MACT
floor for this subcategory is no control of HAP emissions (see MACT
floor memorandum in Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-B-2). Data submitted
by commenters showed that the costs associated with the control of
offshore terminals are between two and five times more expensive than
comparable onshore control techniques (see Docket A-90-44, Item numbers
IV-D-108 and IV-D-136). Because of the poor cost effectiveness
resulting from these significantly higher costs, as well as the
environmental, safety, and technical challenges associated with
requiring control more efficient than the MACT floor, the Agency has
selected the MACT floor level of no control for offshore marine tank
vessel loading operations.
The Agency also determined that offshore terminals loading 10
million barrels or more per year of gasoline or 200 million barrels or
more of crude oil should not be required to control VOC or HAP
emissions under section 183(f) RACT requirements. Although one
commenter (see Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-D-80) noted two
controlled offshore terminals, no information was submitted regarding
the specific control techniques used at these two terminals. Since most
of the other comments noted that the significantly higher costs and
poor cost effectiveness shown by these sources (see previous paragraph)
would make control requirements unreasonable for these offshore
terminals, the Agency determined that requirement for controls at
offshore RACT terminals would not be consistent with the requirements
for the technology to be ``reasonable.''
(b) Subcategory for Alyeska Pipeline Service Company's Valdez
Marine Terminal. In the proposed rule, the Agency solicited comment on
the possibility of placing the VMT in a separate subcategory. Comments
from APSC and several other commenters representing State and local
governments, industry, private citizens, and environmental groups were
considered by the Agency in developing this final rule.
The Agency has determined that the VMT should be placed in a
separate subcategory for the following reasons: (1) The VMT is the
largest (by a significant amount) crude oil loading operation in the
U.S.; (2) special circumstances, including climatic and economic
conditions, require keeping the oil moving through the pipeline; (3)
severe meteorological conditions result in increased loading
irregularity; (4) the VMT throughput projections show declining
throughput over the next several years. Several comments from
environmental groups, State and local agencies, and private citizens in
the Valdez area did not object to placing VMT in a separate subcategory
provided that emissions were controlled. Based on all of these factors,
the Agency determined that APSC's VMT should be placed in a separate
subcategory.
Once the subcategory for VMT was established, the Agency determined
the MACT floor for the subcategory (see Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-
B-2). The VMT presently does not control emissions, therefore the MACT
floor is no control. However, the Agency noted that in all of the
comments received concerning the establishment of this subcategory, the
cost effectiveness associated with requiring controls more stringent
than the MACT floor is not prohibitive. The annual emissions reductions
anticipated from controlling VMT are expected to be approximately
19,000 Mg (20,900 tons) of VOC and approximately 2,500 Mg (2,750 tons)
of HAP. The annual costs anticipated with today's regulation of VMT are
expected to be $20 million. The resulting cost effectiveness is
approximately $1,050 per megagram based on VOC or approximately $8,000
per megagram based on HAP. The Agency therefore selected a strategy for
both MACT and RACT standards for VMT that requires a reduction in
emissions by 98 percent efficiency of all throughput loaded from at
least two of the terminal's loading berths. Maximum limits for total
throughput and throughput at uncontrolled berths (above which all VMT
loading berths would be required to reduce emissions by 98 percent) are
included as part of these standards.
[[Page 48394]]
These throughput limits address the projected decreasing throughput
that would necessitate the use of only two berths for routine loading
after 2001. Provisions to allow for scheduled maintenance of the
controlled berths are also established in the VMT standards.
Some commenters initially noted that the cost of controlling VOC
may be high relative to the benefits of controlling VOC at a remote
site in an Arctic ozone attainment area. Additionally, some commenters
initially stated that the benefits of controlling HAP would not appear
to justify the costs. However, the Agency has also considered later
comments from the APSC, the State of Alaska, the Prince William Sound
Regional Citizens Advisory Committee (a local citizens group) and
private citizens in determining MACT/RACT for the VMT. These commenters
agreed that a Federal rule mandating control of primary emissions at
the APSC was acceptable. After careful consideration of the costs, the
environmental impacts and the comments, the Agency decided that MACT
for this subcategory was control beyond the level of the MACT floor
(see Docket A-44-90, Item Number IV-B-2).
(4) Expansion of the petroleum refineries source category to
include marine tank vessel loading operations collocated at petroleum
refinery operations. The preamble to the proposed petroleum refinery
NESHAP published in the Federal Register on July 15, 1994 (59 FR 36130)
requested comments on whether marine tank vessel loading operations at
refineries should be included in emissions averaging. On August 31,
1994, the EPA also reopened the comment period for the proposed NESHAP
for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations (59 FR 44955) to request
comment on whether marine terminals collocated at refineries should be
moved to the petroleum refinery source category. During the comment
period for the gasoline distribution NESHAP, commenters requested that
bulk gasoline terminals contiguous to a refinery be regulated by the
petroleum refinery NESHAP.
Several commenters responding to the marine tank vessel loading
operations proposed NESHAP supported averaging of refinery process unit
emissions with emissions from marine terminals and gasoline
distribution operations that are located at refineries. The commenters
cited more cost effective emission reduction as the advantage of
including these emission points in emissions averaging and specifically
commented that the costs per Mg emission reduction of the marine tank
vessel loading emission controls are high. These commenters also
claimed that emission calculation procedures for loading are well
established and that adding marine loading to the averaging provisions
will not appreciably increase the complexity of enforcement. Other
commenters opposed including marine tank vessel loading and gasoline
distribution in emissions averaging. Some commenters claimed that these
are separate source categories, and the Act does not permit averaging
across source categories. Others were concerned that including marine
loading in averages could result in uncontrolled peak emissions.
In the final rules, emissions from marine tank vessel loading
operations, bulk gasoline terminal or pipeline breakout station storage
vessels, and bulk gasoline terminal loading racks at petroleum
refineries are allowed to be included in emissions averages. The
petroleum refinery source category and source definitions have been
changed to include marine tank vessel loading operations, bulk gasoline
terminal and pipeline breakout station storage vessels, equipment
leaks, and bulk gasoline terminal loading racks classified under SIC
codes 5171 (Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals) and 4613 (Refined
Petroleum Pipelines) that are located at refinery plant sites. Note
that these operations are closely connected with refinery process unit
operations since they transfer products of the refinery process units.
A marine tank vessel loading operation or gasoline terminal or
pipeline breakout station that is collocated at a petroleum refinery
can be considered part of the same source as the refinery subject to
this rule. Because these operations are redefined to be part of the
source subject to the rule, the prohibition against intersource
averaging is not violated. However, all terminals subject to section
183(f) regardless of location will not be allowed to average emissions
with petroleum refinery sources.
In keeping with EPA's stated goal of increasing flexibility in
rulemakings, this decision has been made to provide more opportunities
to average. This decision optimizes the opportunities for refiners to
find cost-effective emission reductions from overall facility
operations on-site. Costs and cost effectiveness of controlling a
particular kind of emission point, such as marine tank vessel loading,
will vary depending on many site-specific factors. Emissions averaging
allows the owner and operator to find the optimal control strategy for
their particular situation.
Including emissions from marine tank vessel loading operations,
bulk gasoline terminal or pipeline breakout station storage vessels,
and bulk gasoline terminal loading racks in emissions averages will
result in equivalent or greater overall HAP emission reduction at each
refinery. The averaging provisions are structured such that ``debits''
generated by not controlling an emission point that otherwise would
require control must be balanced by achieving extra control at other
refinery emission points covered by the NESHAP.
With regard to commenter's concerns about peak emissions, the
quarterly cap on the ratio of debits to credits is intended to limit
the possibility of exposure peaks. Furthermore, because loading
operations occur fairly frequently and emissions from an individual
vessel filling or loading event are relatively small, such emissions
are not expected to cause significant exposure peaks. Moreover, no
evidence has been presented that emissions averaging would permit a
very different mix of emissions to occur than would point-by-point
compliance. That is, peaks of exposures from batch streams, storage,
and loading operations should be equally likely under point-by-point
compliance as under emissions averaging; therefore, emissions averaging
does not represent a less effective control strategy. Furthermore, in
order to receive approval for an emissions average, the owner or
operator is required to demonstrate that the emissions average does not
increase the risk or hazard relative to compliance without averaging.
(5) Revision to the subcategories established based on annual HAP
emissions from 1 ton per year to 10 tons per year of any single HAP or
25 tons per year of total HAP. The proposed standards grouped major
source terminals into two subcategories based on HAP emissions:
Terminals with HAP emissions of 1 ton per year or more and terminals
having HAP emissions of less than 1 ton per year. In the preamble of
the proposed rule, the Agency requested comment on establishing these
subcategories based on size (i.e., HAP emissions). In the public
comments, the Agency found general, though not universal, agreement on
establishing subcategories based on size for this source category.
However, some of the comments encouraged the Agency to raise the HAP
emissions level of the controlled subcategory. The final standards
continue to group major source terminals into subcategories based on
HAP emissions; however, these subcategories were changed to terminals
with emissions of 10 tons per year or more of any single HAP or 25
[[Page 48395]]
tons per year or more of total HAP and terminals having HAP emissions
of less than 10 tons per year of all single HAP or less than 25 tons
per year of total HAP. The Agency based this decision on information
found in the comments received. Commenters noted that prior state
regulations generally (though not invariably) distinguished between
large tank vessel loading facilities that are responsible for the vast
majority of emissions and small tank vessel loading facilities that are
substantially less cost effective to regulate. (As discussed below, the
incremental cost effectiveness of moving from the 10/25 ton per year
distinction to the 1-ton delineation is between $80,000 and $112,000
per megagram, while the cost effectiveness of the 10/25 ton delineation
is between $14,500 and $24,000 per megagram.)
Though section 112 does not provide any language indicating the
criteria for subcategorization, section 112(d)(1) of the Act states
that EPA may distinguish among classes, types, and sizes of sources in
establishing standards. EPA believes that division of this source
category into two subcategories based on size is appropriate in this
instance. (See section 2.3.1 of the promulgation TSD for additional
discussion of the subcategories based on size.)
(6) Incorporation of minimum vapor pressure limit. The Agency
received several comments regarding HAP having low vapor pressures.
Most of these commenters stated that these low vapor pressure HAPs are
not presently controlled under existing State regulations and that the
control of these low vapor pressure compounds presents technical
challenges and imposes significantly greater costs to the affected
industry. The proposed rule enabled individual facilities to determine
which products to control to achieve the 93 percent mass limit.
Therefore, facilities would not have had to control low vapor pressure
liquids under the proposed rule if higher vapor pressure liquids were
available for control. Based on the comments received, the Agency
altered the format of the MACT standards to explicitly exempt low vapor
pressure liquids consistent with State requirements and recalculated
the control requirement for liquids above the vapor pressure limit.
Therefore, the MACT floor for existing sources is no control for
liquids having a vapor pressure below 1.5 psia and 97 percent control
for liquids having a vapor pressure 1.5 psia or greater. Because no low
vapor pressure liquids are required to be controlled at any of the
known existing sources, the MACT floor for new sources is also no
control for liquids having a vapor pressure below 1.5 psia and 98
percent control for liquids having a vapor pressure 1.5 psia or
greater. The format of the standard was changed to an efficiency format
to reflect the new approach.
The issue of cost effectiveness to control emission streams from
the loading of these low vapor pressure materials was also a realistic
concern of the commenters. As the MACT floor for regulation of such
activities is no control, EPA has discretion, based on section 112(d)'s
criteria used for going beyond the floor, to institute a vapor pressure
limit. Because of the high costs cited by commenters, the Agency
elected not to require controls more stringent than the MACT floor for
these low vapor pressure HAP. The Agency therefore selected a vapor
pressure limit of 1.5 psia for determining the HAP emissions reduction
for the final standards. Control of HAP having vapor pressures below
this limit is not required to meet the standards.
(7) Recalculation of the MACT floors. The MACT floors determined
for this final rulemaking are different than those in the proposed
rule. These final rule MACT floors reflect changes in the Agency's
regulation of marine tank vessel loading including: (1) The
establishment of subcategories for offshore terminals and the VMT
terminal; (2) the incorporation of a 1.5 psia minimum vapor pressure
limit instead of the weighted average as was proposed; and (3) the
increase of the levels of the subcategories based on size (i.e., HAP
emissions) from 1 ton per year to 10/25 tons per year. The MACT floors
for the final rule also reflect comments on the proposed rule. However,
the Agency has not changed the way in which the MACT floors for the
final rule have been calculated. With the exception of the MACT floor
for VMT, the MACT floors for existing and new sources in the marine
tank vessel loading source category are shown in Table 1.
Using the criteria established in section 112(d)(3) of the Act, and
after inclusion of information supplied in the public comments, the
MACT floors for existing source marine terminal subcategories subject
to regulation under Title III of the Clean Air Act were determined.
Additional information on the determination of these MACT floors is in
the docket (Docket Number A-90-44, Item Number IV-A-2). There are
approximately 44 major source terminals (not including the VMT) that
emit 10 tons per year or more of any one hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAP. Twenty-three of
these terminals are controlled. The resulting MACT floor level of
control is a 97 percent reduction of HAP emissions. There are
approximately 1,435 terminals that emit less than 10 tons per year of
all individual HAP and less than 25 tons per year of combined HAP.
Seventy-nine of these terminals reduce emissions from marine tank
vessel loading. The resulting MACT floor level of control is no
reduction in HAP emissions. The Agency estimated that there are less
than 30 offshore terminals (i.e., loading terminals located 0.5 miles
or more from shore). The Agency is aware of only 2 controlled offshore
terminals. Therefore the resulting MACT floor level of control is no
reduction in HAP emissions. The VMT is presently uncontrolled. Since
this is the only terminal in the VMT source category, the MACT floor
level of control is no control.
The MACT floors for new source marine terminal subcategories
subject to regulation under Title III of the Act were also calculated
following the criteria in section 112(d)(3) of the Act. For new major
source onshore terminals (not including the VMT) regardless of the
marine tank vessel loading HAP emissions, the best performing source
achieves a 98 percent reduction of controlled emissions. Therefore, the
resulting MACT floor for these sources is 98 percent reduction of HAP
emissions. For new major source offshore terminals whose marine tank
vessel loading HAP emissions exceed the limits for a major source
(i.e., 10 tons of any one HAP, or 25 tons of total HAP), the best
controlled similar source achieves a 95 percent reduction of controlled
emissions. The resulting MACT floor for new offshore major sources is
therefore a 95 percent reduction in HAP emissions. Since the VMT
subcategory only contains a single source, and it is not possible for
an additional source to be added to this subcategory, no new source
MACT floor was calculated for the VMT subcategory.
(8) Incorporation of additional flexibility to the monitoring
requirements and compliance provisions. The proposed rule required
parametric monitoring or continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) as a
means of showing compliance with the standards. Any exceedance of the
parameters or concentration limits established during a performance
test would have resulted in a violation of the standard. Comments
indicated that this approach was too severe and warranted additional
flexibility. Although the Agency continues to believe that parametric
monitoring can be used to determine compliance given availability
[[Page 48396]]
of sufficient test data to establish the relationship between control
performance and associated parameters, in consideration of the lack of
test data establishing the relationship between marine tank vessel
loading emissions control efficiency and parametric monitoring and
because of the batch nature of marine tank vessel loading operations,
the Agency has thoroughly revised the monitoring requirements and
compliance provisions of the final rule. A requirement for an operation
and maintenance (O & M) plan has been added to the final regulation to
ensure proper operation of the air pollution control and monitoring
equipment. The O & M plan contains an inspection schedule for each
component of the control and monitoring equipment. The ``compliance''
language that appeared in Sec. 63.563 of the proposed rule has been
removed. In its place, the final rule contains provisions that require
an unscheduled inspection and corrective actions when operating
parameters exceed the applicable baseline parameters.
Flexibility has also been added to the methods for determining
baseline parameters. Owners or operators of a source required to reduce
emissions may establish baseline parameters during a performance test
or may choose to set the applicable baseline based on a manufacturer's
recommended baseline operating parameter.
Commenters on the proposed rule also requested that additional
operating parameters be added to the regulation and that sources be
allowed to apply for alternatives to the Administrator. Additional
operating parameters have been added to the final regulation for
several control devices. A cross reference to the general provisions
found in 40 CFR part 63 (containing requirements for establishing
alternative monitoring procedures) has been provided to assist sources
seeking approval of alternative monitoring procedures. Commenters also
requested that time intervals of the monitoring requirements be made
consistent for each of the operating parameters. In the final rule,
sources are required to monitor and record data points every 15 minutes
for each operating parameter.
D. Minor Changes
(1) Revisions to definitions and phrasing have been made to clarify
the regulation.
(2) Based on comments received and on changes to the monitoring and
compliance provision requirements, the reporting requirements have been
changed. Under today's final rule, the Agency is requiring the
following one-time reports as specified in the general provisions found
in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A: report of startup, construction or
modification; notification and report of emissions tests and results
and/or initial notification of compliance status; notification and
report of physical/operational changes; notification and report of
waiver applications; and an engineering report describing the vent
system used to vent each vent stream to a control device.
The final rule also requires owners or operators to submit yearly
summary reports and yearly reports of excess emissions and monitoring
system performance reports. However, in order to provide relief from
the reporting requirements to well-controlled sources while assuring
compliance with the standards, the Agency has provided that sources
whose exceedances have durations that total less than 5 percent of the
total reporting time for that reporting period and whose CMS downtime
for the reporting period is less than 10 percent of the total operating
time for that reporting period may submit only the summary report found
in 40 CFR part 63 subpart A instead of both the summary report and the
full excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance
report found in Sec. 63.567(d)(2).
The final rule does not require quarterly reports of excess
emissions or monitoring parameter exceedances. The Agency agreed with
commenters that quarterly reporting did not add sufficient compliance
assurance to warrant the high costs associated with the quarterly
reporting. Quarterly reporting also did not agree with the revised
monitoring and compliance determination requirements found in the final
rule (see section 3(c)(5) of this preamble and section 2.6 of the
promulgation TSD for additional discussion of the revised monitoring
requirements contained in the final rule).
(3) Several commenters requested clarification of the general
provisions found in 40 CFR part 63 as they relate to this rule. A table
identifying the relationship of the final General Provisions
requirements has been added to the final regulation. Language similar
to that in the General Provisions has been added to subpart Y in cases
where a direct reference to the General Provisions was not appropriate.
(4) References to the proposed Performance Specifications 101 and
102 have been updated to incorporate the Agency's promulgation of
Performance Specifications 8 and 9.
E. Other Significant Issues
(1) Regulation Under Sections 183(f) and 112
The EPA proposed to regulate tank vessel loading operations under
both sections 183(f) and 112 of the Act. Some commenters suggested that
regulation under section 112 was inappropriate because section 183(f)
specifically provides for regulation of tank vessel loading operations,
whereas section 112 is a more general standard. On the other hand, one
commenter believed that regulation was more appropriate, at least for
certain facilities, under section 112.
The Agency believes that the best interpretation of the Clean Air
Act requires that standards be issued under both sections 183(f) and
112. The language of section 112 of the Act is clear. ``[T]he
Administrator shall publish * * * a list of all categories and
subcategories of major sources and area sources of [HAP].'' Clean Air
Act section 112(c)(1), 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7412(c)(1) [emphasis added].
Further, the Administrator ``shall promulgate regulations establishing
emission standards for each category or subcategory of major sources
and area sources of hazardous air pollutants listed for regulation
pursuant to subsection (c).'' Clean Air Act section 112(d)(1), 42
U.S.C. Sec. 7412(d)(1). The marine tank vessel loading operations
source category is clearly a category of major sources, as defined in
the Act. The Act is thus clear on its face that this source category
should be regulated under section 112.
The fact that two separate sections of the Act regulate the same
source category does not necessitate that one of the sections should be
ignored. In fact, unless the regulations promulgated under one section
would create an inescapable conflict with regulations promulgated under
the other section, both must be followed. The regulations promulgated
under section 112 are not in conflict with those promulgated under
section 183(f). EPA believes that any source regulated under both
sections would have no problem meeting the requirements of both
standards at the same time.
Congress often provides for regulation of sources under two
separate sections. The legislative history indicates that Congress was
well aware that sources could be subject to dual regulation under
section 112 and other sections of the Act. See page 167 of the Senate
Committee Report (Report 101-228). In addition, where Congress wanted
one section of the Clean Air Act to be exclusive of further regulation
under
[[Page 48397]]
section 112(d), they said so explicitly; see sections 129(h)(2),
112(d)(9). Thus, Congress could have added specific language to section
183(f) preventing the Agency from regulating this source category under
section 112; however, it did not do so.
In addition, neither the statute nor the legislative history
indicates that Congress intended EPA regulations under section 183(f)
to be the exclusive regulation of these sources. In fact, section
183(f) explicitly provides that states may regulate tank vessel loading
processes and, in fact, requires that any such regulations be as
stringent or more stringent than the Agency's regulations under section
183(f).
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 allows members of the public and
industries 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
The information collection requirements in this rule have been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
have been assigned OMB control number (2060-0289). An Information
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by the EPA (ICR No.
1679.02) to reflect the changed information requirements of the final
rule.
This collection of information has an estimated burden per affected
facility of about 685 hours for the first year. In subsequent years,
the burden is approximately 280 hours per affected facility. 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.
Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden to Director, Regulatory Information Division, EPA, 401 M St.,
S.W. (Mail Code 2136), 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 EPA.''
C. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)], the
EPA is required to judge whether a regulation is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of this Executive Order to prepare a regulatory impact
analysis (RIA). 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 from legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the
principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action''
because it will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes
made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations are documented
in the public record (see Docket A-90-44, Item Number IV-H-2).
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the
EPA to consider potential impacts of proposed regulations on small
business ``entities,'' which are small businesses, small organizations,
and small governments. It is EPA's current policy to perform a
regulatory flexibility analysis whenever a regulation is anticipated to
adversely affect any small entities. An economic impact and regulatory
flexibility analysis for this regulation was performed and included
within the regulatory impact analysis that has been submitted to the
public docket (Docket Number A-90-44, Item Number IV-A-2).
The regulatory flexibility analysis identified two types of
businesses that could incur adverse economic impacts from this
standard, marine terminal operations and marine vessel operations. With
regard to marine terminal operations, only the very largest terminal
operations are expected to be affected by this standard. The decision
not to require controls at existing smaller operations greatly reduces
the potential for adverse economic impacts on small terminal
operations. Nevertheless, some of the smaller terminal operations that
will be affected by this regulation could be put under increased
competitive pressure as a result of this rule. Of these terminals,
however, it is expected that few or none are independently owned. The
rest are part of large integrated petroleum operations. The number of
small business terminal operations affected by this regulation is
expected to be minimal.
With regard to marine vessel operations, the economic impact
analysis considered the majority of these operations to be small
businesses. However, the number of vessel operations significantly
impacted from the proposed standard is not expected to be substantial.
Only a relatively small percentage of U.S. marine transported
throughput will be impacted by the standard. Excluding crude oil volume
shipped by large tankers from the VMT, no more than one-third of the
remaining U.S. marine transported throughput is expected be impacted by
the standard. It is expected that an even smaller percentage of U.S.
vessels will need to be retrofitted to accommodate the volume of
affected products. Only the largest and newest vessels (i.e., those
that will cost least to retrofit) will therefore need to be
retrofitted. Moreover, it is expected that vessel owners will be able
to pass forward most retrofit costs in the form of higher prices.
Vessels that cannot retrofit cost effectively and that cannot pass
through costs can be dedicated to transporting unregulated products.
Economic Impacts
The EPA performed an economic impact analysis of the regulatory
requirements in this regulation. Potential price, output, and
employment impacts for affected products and for the marine transport
industry were examined. Detailed results from the analysis are included
in the regulatory impact analysis for this rule that has been submitted
to the public docket.
[[Page 48398]]
Estimated maximum price increases for the affected products varied
but were not large (less than 1%). These price-increase estimates
reflect the control cost increases for transporting crude and products.
Because these increases are small and because the elasticities of
demand for petroleum products are small, estimated percent output
reductions were minimal. Correspondingly, estimated employment
reductions were also relatively small.
Potentially significant economic impacts on some of the smaller
affected terminal operations were identified, although the decision not
to require emission controls for existing smaller operations greatly
reduces the potential for adverse impacts on small terminal operations.
These potential impacts would result from the high per barrel control
cost differential between the smaller and larger terminal operations
that would need to control emissions. Some of these smaller terminal
operations, to the extent that they are competing with nearby larger or
unaffected terminal operations, could have had difficulty raising
prices sufficiently to cover cost increases and could have been
significantly and adversely impacted by this rule if the rule were
applicable to such operations.
The potential economic impact on marine vessel owners was
substantially reduced because of the decision not to require emission
controls for small terminals in this rulemaking. Because only a
relatively small percentage of U.S. marine transported volume of
products will be impacted by the standard, only a relatively small
percentage of U.S. marine vessels will need to retrofit. Thus only the
vessels that will cost least to retrofit (most likely the larger,
newer, double-skin vessels) will do so, leading to some degree of
dedicated service. Vessel owners that do retrofit probably will be able
to pass most retrofit costs forward in terms of higher prices.
E. Unfunded Mandates Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Unfunded Mandates Act), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector of $100 million or more. The budgetary impact
statement must include: (1) An identification of the Federal law under
which the rule is promulgated; (2) a qualitative and quantitative
assessment of anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate and
an analysis of the extent to which such costs to State, local, and
tribal governments may be paid with Federal financial assistance; (3)
if feasible, estimates of the future compliance costs and any
disproportionate budgetary effects of the mandate; (4) if feasible,
estimates of the effect on the national economy; and (5) a description
of the Agency's prior consultation with elected representatives of
State, local, and tribal governments and a summary and evaluation of
the comments and concerns presented. Section 203 provides that if any
small governments may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the
rule, the Agency must establish a plan for obtaining input from and
informing, educating, and advising any such potentially affected small
governments.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative for State,
local, and tribal governments and the private sector, that achieves the
objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why this alternative
is not selected or unless the selection of this alternative is
inconsistent with law.
Because this final rule is estimated to result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments in aggregate or by the private
sector of $60 million to $100 million per year starting in 2000, EPA
has prepared a supplement to the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) in
compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Act. The EPA summarizes that
supplement as follows:
This final rule is promulgated under section 112 and section 183(f)
of the Clean Air Act. The analysis in the RIA developed in preparation
of the proposed rule and revised in preparation of the final rule
contains the information to be considered in response to the
requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act.
Total expenditures resulting from the final rule are estimated at
between $60 million and $100 million (of which less than $75,000 is by
State, local, and tribal governments) per year in 1997-2000; and
$550,000 (of which $38,000 is by State, local, and tribal governments)
per year starting in 2001. There are no federal funds available to
assist State, local, and tribal governments in meeting these costs.
There are important benefits from VOC and HAP emission reductions
because these compounds have significant, adverse impacts on human
health and welfare and on the environment. The rule does not have any
disproportionate budgetary effects on any particular region of the
nation, any State, local, or tribal government, or urban or rural or
other type of community. On the contrary, the rule will result in only
a minimal increase in the average product rates (less than 1 percent).
Moreover, the rule will not have a material effect on the national
economy.
Prior to issuing this rule, the EPA provided numerous opportunities
(e.g., National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee
proceedings; public comment period; public hearing; meetings with
industry, trade associations, state and local air pollution
representatives; State, local, and tribal governments; and concerned
citizens) for consultation with interested parties. In general, State
and local environmental agencies advocated that EPA adopt more
stringent environmental controls. The Agency evaluated the comments and
concerns expressed, and the final rule reflects, to the extent
consistent with sections 112 and 183(f) of the Act, those comments and
concerns. While small governments are not significantly or uniquely
affected by the rule, these procedures, as well as additional public
conferences and meetings, gave small governments an opportunity to give
meaningful and timely input and obtain information, education, and
advice on compliance.
The Agency considered several regulatory options in developing the
rule. As discussed above, the Agency has found that regulation solely
under section 183(f) of the Act would not be consistent with the law.
The options selected in the final rule for all subcategories of sources
except the VMT subcategory are the least costly and least burdensome
alternatives currently available for achieving the objectives of
sections 112 and 183(f) of the Act. Regarding regulation of the VMT,
the Agency notes that the cost effectiveness of controlling VOC at this
terminal is approximately $1,050 per Mg and the cost effectiveness of
controlling HAP is approximately $8,000 per Mg. The Agency initially
received comments stating that the cost of controlling VOC at this
terminal is high relative to the benefits of controlling VOC at a
remote site in an Arctic ozone attainment area. Additionally, some
commenters initially stated that the benefits of controlling HAP would
not appear to justify the costs. However, the Agency has also
considered later comments from the
[[Page 48399]]
APSC, the State of Alaska, the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens
Advisory Committee (a local citizens group) and private citizens in
determining MACT/RACT for the VMT. These commenters agreed that a
Federal rule mandating control of the primary emissions at the APSC was
acceptable. After careful consideration of the costs, the environmental
impacts and the comments, the Agency decided that MACT for this
subcategory was control beyond the level of the MACT floor (see Docket
A-44-90, Item Number IV-B-2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9 and 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tank vessel
standards.
Dated: July 28, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
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 a new entry to the table under
the indicated heading in numerical order to read as follows:
Sec. 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR citation OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * *
* * *
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories.
* * * *
* * *
63.563-63.567....................................... 2060-0289
* * * *
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. By adding a new subpart Y consisting of Secs. 63.560 through
63.567 to read as follows:
Subpart Y--National Emission Standards for Marine Tank Vessel Loading
Operations
Sec.
63.560 Applicability and designation of affected source.
63.561 Definitions.
63.562 Standards.
63.563 Compliance and performance testing.
63.564 Monitoring requirements.
63.565 Test methods and procedures.
63.566 Construction and reconstruction.
63.567 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Subpart Y--National Emission Standards for Marine Tank Vessel Tank
Loading Operations
Sec. 63.560 Applicability and designation of affected source.
(a) Maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards.
(1) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards
in Sec. 63.562(b) and (d) of this subpart are applicable to existing
and new sources with emissions of 10 or 25 tons, as that term is
defined in Sec. 63.561, except as specified in paragraph (d) of this
section, and are applicable to new sources with emissions less than 10
and 25 tons, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561, except as
specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) Existing sources with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons are
not subject to the emissions standards in Sec. 63.562(b) and (d).
(3) The recordkeeping requirements of Sec. 63.567(j)(4) and the
emission estimation requirements of Sec. 63.565(l) apply to existing
sources with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons.
(b) Reasonably available control technology (RACT) standards.
(1) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to RACT standards in
Sec. 63.562(c) and (d) of this subpart are applicable to sources with
throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels, as that term is defined in
Sec. 63.561, except as specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) Sources with throughput less than 10 M barrels and 200 M
barrels, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561, are not subject to the
emissions standards in Sec. 63.562(c) and (d).
(c) General Provisions applicability. Owners or operators of
affected sources, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561, of this
subpart must comply with the requirements of subpart A of this part in
accordance with the provisions for applicability of subpart A to this
subpart in Table 1 of this section.
(d) Exemptions from MACT and RACT standards.
(1) This subpart does not apply to emissions resulting from marine
tank vessel loading operations, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561,
of commodities with vapor pressures less than 10.3 kilopascals (kPa)
(1.5 pounds per square inch, absolute) (psia) at standard conditions,
20 deg.C and 760 millimeters Hg (mm Hg).
(2) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards
in Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3) and (4) and to the RACT standards in
Sec. 63.562(c)(3) and (4) do not apply to marine tank vessel loading
operations where emissions are reduced by using a vapor balancing
system, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561. The provisions
pertaining to the vapor collection system, ship-to-shore compatibility,
and vapor tightness of marine tank vessels in Sec. 63.562(b)(1) and
(c)(2) do apply.
(3) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards
in Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), and (4) do not apply to marine tank vessel
loading operations that are contiguous with refinery operations at
sources subject to and complying with subpart CC of this part, National
Emissions Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from Petroleum
Refineries, except to the extent that any such provisions of this
subpart are made applicable by subpart CC of this part.
[[Page 48400]]
(4) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards
in Sec. 63.562(b) and (d) do not apply to benzene emissions from marine
tank vessel loading operations that are subject to and complying with
40 CFR part 61, subpart BB, National Emissions Standards for Benzene
Emissions from Benzene Transfer Operations, except that benzene
emissions or other HAP emissions (i.e., nonbenzene HAP emissions) from
marine tank vessel loading operations that are not subject to subpart
BB are subject to the provisions of this subpart.
(5) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards
in Sec. 63.562(b) and (d) do not apply to marine tank vessel loading
operations at loading berths that only transfer liquids containing
organic HAP as impurities, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561.
(6) The provisions of this subpart do not apply to marine tank
vessel loading operations at existing offshore loading terminals, as
that term is defined in Sec. 63.561.
(7) The provisions of this subpart do not apply to ballasting
operations, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561.
(e) Compliance dates.
(1) MACT standards compliance dates, except the Valdez Marine
Terminal (VMT) source.
(i) A new or existing source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons,
except the VMT source, and a new source with emissions less than 10 and
25 tons, except the VMT source, that has an initial startup date on or
before September 20, 1999 shall comply with the provisions of this
subpart pertaining to the MACT standards in Sec. 63.562(b) no later
than 4 years after the effective date.
(ii) A new source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons, except the VMT
source, and a new source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons,
except the VMT source, that has an initial startup date after September
20, 1999 shall comply with provisions of this subpart pertaining to the
MACT standards in Sec. 63.562(b) immediately upon startup.
(iii) A source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons that
increases its emissions subsequent to September 20, 1999 such that it
becomes a source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons shall comply with the
provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT standards in
Sec. 63.562(b) within 3 years following the exceedance of the threshold
level.
(2) RACT standards compliance dates, except the VMT source.
(i) A source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels,
except the VMT source, with an initial startup date on or before
September 21, 1998 shall comply with Sec. 63.562(c)(1) no later than 2
years after the effective date.
(ii) A source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels,
except the VMT source, with an initial startup date on or before
September 21, 1998 shall comply with the provisions of this subpart
pertaining to the RACT standards in Sec. 63.562(c) other than
Sec. 63.562(c)(1), no later than 3 years after the effective date.
(iii) A source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels,
except the VMT source, with an initial startup date after September 21,
1998 shall comply with the provisions of this subpart pertaining to the
RACT standards in Sec. 63.562(c) immediately upon startup.
(iv) A source with throughput less than 10 M barrels and 200 M
barrels that increases its throughput subsequent to September 21, 1998
such that it becomes a source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M
barrels shall comply with the provisions of this subpart pertaining to
the RACT standards in Sec. 63.562(c) within 3 years following the
exceedance of the threshold levels.
(v) A source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels may
apply for approval from the Administrator for an extension of the
compliance date of up to 1 year if it can demonstrate that the
additional time is necessary for installation of the control device.
(3) MACT and RACT compliance dates for the VMT source.
The VMT source, as that term is defined in Sec. 63.561, shall
comply with the provisions of this subpart pertaining to the MACT and
RACT standards in Sec. 63.562(d) no later than 30 months after the
effective date.
Table 1 of Sec. 63.560.--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart Y
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to affected
Reference sources in subpart Y Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1(a)(1)............ Yes................. Additional terms are defined in Sec. 63.561; when overlap between
subparts A and Y occurs, subpart Y takes precedence.
63.1(a)(2)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(4)............ Yes................. Subpart Y clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart
A to sources subject to subpart Y in this table.
.63.1(a)(5)........... No.................. Reserved.
63.1(a)(6)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(7)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(8)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(9)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.1(a)(10)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(11)........... Yes................. Sec. 63.567(a) also allows report submissions via facsimile and on
electronic media.
63.1(a)(12)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(13)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.1(a)(14)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.1(b)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(b)(2)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.1(b)(3)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560 specifies applicability.
63.1(c)(1)............ Yes................. Subpart Y clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart
A to sources subject to subpart Y in this table.
63.1(c)(2)............ Yes................. Subpart Y is not applicable to area sources.
63.1(c)(3)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.1(c)(4)............ Yes ..................................................................
[[Page 48401]]
63.1(c)(5)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560 specifies applicability.
63.1(d)............... No.................. Reserved.
63.1(e)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.2.................. Yes................. Additional terms are defined in Sec. 63.561; when overlap between
subparts A and Y occurs, subpart Y takes precedence.
63.3.................. Yes................. Other units used in subpart Y are defined in the text of subpart
Y.
63.4(a)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.4(a)(2)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.4(a)(3)............ Yes
63.4(a)(4)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.4(a)(5)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.4(b)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.4(c)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(a)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(b)(1)(i)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(b)(1)(ii)........ No ..................................................................
63.5(b)(2)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.5(b)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.5(b)(4)-(5)........ No ..................................................................
63.5(b)(6)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.5(c)............... No.................. Reserved.
63.5(d)(1)(i)......... No.................. See Sec. 63.566(b)(2).
63.5(d)(1)(ii)(A)(H).. Yes ..................................................................
63.5(d)(1)(ii)(I)..... No.................. Reserved.
63.5(d)(1)(ii)(J)..... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(d)(1)(iii)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(d)(2)-(4)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.5(e)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.5(f)(1)(i) and (ii) Yes ..................................................................
63.5(f)(1)(iii) and No ..................................................................
(iv).
63.5(f)(2)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.566(c).
63.6(a)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.6(a)(2)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560 specifies applicability.
63.6(b)(1)-(5)........ No.................. Sec. 63.560(e) specifies compliance dates for sources.
63.6(b)(6)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.6(b)(7)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560(e) specifies compliance dates for sources.
63.6(c)(1)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560(e) specifies compliance dates for sources.
63.6(c)(2)............ No ..................................................................
63.6(c)(3)-(4)........ No.................. Reserved.
63.6(c)(5)............ No.................. Sec. 63.560(e) specifies compliance dates for sources.
63.6(d)............... No.................. Reserved.
63.6(e)............... No.................. See Sec. 63.562(e).
63.6(f)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.6(f)(2)(i)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(f)(2)(ii)........ No ..................................................................
63.6(f)(2)(iii)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(f)(2)(iv)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.6(f)(2)(v)......... No.................. See Sec. 63.562(e)(1).
63.6(f)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.6(g)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(h)............... No.................. No opacity monitoring is required under subpart Y.
63.6(i)(1)-(3)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.6(i)(4)(i)(A)...... No ..................................................................
63.6(i)(4)(i)(B)...... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(i)(4)(ii)........ No ..................................................................
63.6(i)(5)-(12)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(i)(13)........... No ..................................................................
63.6(i)(14)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(i)(15)........... No.................. Reserved.
63.6(i)(16)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.6(j)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(a)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.7(a)(2)(i)-(iv).... No.................. See Sec. 63.563(b)(1).
63.7(a)(2)(v)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(a)(2)(vi)........ No ..................................................................
63.7(a)(2)(vii)-(viii) No.................. Reserved.
63.7(a)(2)(ix)........ No ..................................................................
63.7(a)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
[[Page 48402]]
63.7(b)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(c)(1)-(2)........ Yes................. The site-specific test plan must be submitted only if requested by
the Administrator.
63.7(c)(3)(i)-(ii)(A). Yes ..................................................................
63.7(c)(3)(ii)(B)..... No.................. See Sec. 63.565(m)(2).
63.7(c)(3)(iii)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(c)(4)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.7(d)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(e)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(f)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.7(g)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.7(g)(2)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.7(g)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.7(h)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.8(a)(1)-(2)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(a)(3)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.8(a)(4)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(b)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(b)(2)............ No ..................................................................
63.8(b)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(1)(i)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(1)(ii)........ No ..................................................................
63.8(c)(1)(iii)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(2)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(4)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.564(a)(3).
63.8(c)(5)............ No ..................................................................
63.8(c)(6)............ Yes................. See also performance specifications for continuous monitoring
systems Sec. 63.564(a)(4).
63.8(c)(7)(i)(A)-(B).. Yes................. See also Sec. 63.564(a)(5).
63.8(c)(7)(i)(C)...... No ..................................................................
63.8(c)(7)(ii)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(c)(8)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.564(a)(5).
63.8(d)............... No.................. See Sec. 63.562(e)(2)(iv).
63.8(e)(1)-(4)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(e)(5)(i)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.8(e)(5)(ii)........ No ..................................................................
63.8(f)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(f)(2)(i)-(vii)... Yes ..................................................................
63.8(f)(2)(viii)...... No ..................................................................
63.8(f)(2)(ix)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(f)(3)-(6)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.8(g)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.9(a)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(a)(2)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(a)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(a)(4)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(b)(1)(i)......... Yes ..................................................................
63.9(b)(1)(ii)........ No.................. See Sec. 63.567(b)(1)
63.9(b)(1)(iii)....... Yes
63.9(b)(2)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.567(b)(2).
63.9(b)(3)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.567(b)(3).
63.9(b)(4)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.567(b)(4).
63.9(b)(5)............ No.................. See Sec. 63.567(b)(4).
63.9(c)............... No.................. See Sec. 63.567(c).
63.9(d)............... No ..................................................................
63.9(e)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.9(f)............... No ..................................................................
63.9(g)(1)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(g)(2)............ No ..................................................................
63.9(g)(3)............ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(h)(1)-(3)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(h)(4)............ No.................. Reserved.
63.9(h)(5)-(6)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.9(i)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.9(j)............... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(a).............. Yes ..................................................................
63.10(b)(1)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(i)........ No ..................................................................
63.10(b)(2) (ii)-(iii) Yes ..................................................................
[[Page 48403]]
63.10(b)(2)(iv)....... No ..................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(v)........ No ..................................................................
63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(xiv). Yes ..................................................................
63.10(b)(3)........... No.................. See Sec. 63.567(j)(4).
63.10(c)(1)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(c)(2)-(4)....... No.................. Reserved.
63.10(c)(5)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(c)(6)........... No.................. See Sec. 63.564(a)(5).
63.10(c)(7)........... No ..................................................................
63.10(c)(8)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(c)(9)........... No.................. Reserved.
63.10(c)(10)-(13)..... Yes
63.10(c)(14).......... No.................. See Sec. 63.562(d)(2)(iv).
63.10(c)(15).......... No ..................................................................
63.10(d)(1)-(2)....... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(d)(3)........... No.................. See Sec. 63.567(d).
63.10(d)(4)........... Yes ..................................................................
63.10(d)(5)........... No ..................................................................
63.(10)(e)(1)......... Yes
63.10(e)(2)(i)........ Yes ..................................................................
63.10(e)(2)(ii)....... No ..................................................................
63.10(e)(3)(i)-(v).... No.................. See Sec. 63.567(e)
63.10(e)(3)(vi)....... Yes
63.10(e)(3)(vii)-(viii No.................. See Sec. 63.567(e)
).
63.10(e)(4)........... No
63.10(f).............. Yes
63.11................ Yes ..................................................................
63.12-63.15........... Yes ..................................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.561 Definitions.
As used in this subpart, all terms not defined herein shall have
the meaning given them in the Clean Air Act or in subpart A of this
part.
Affected source means a source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons, a
new source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons, a new major source
offshore loading terminal, a source with throughput of 10 M barrels or
200 M barrels, or the VMT source, that is subject to the emissions
standards in Sec. 63.562.
Air pollution control device or control device means a combustion
device or vapor recovery device.
Ballasting operations means the introduction of ballast water into
a cargo tank of a tankship or oceangoing barge.
Baseline operating parameter means a minimum or maximum value of a
process parameter, established for a control device during a
performance test where the control device is meeting the required
emissions reduction or established as the manufacturer recommended
operating parameter, that, if achieved by itself or in combination with
one or more other operating parameters, determines if a control device
is operating properly.
Boiler means a device that combusts any fuel and produces steam or
heats water or any other heat transfer medium. This term includes any
duct burner that combusts fuel and is part of a combined cycle system.
Car-seal means a seal that is placed on a device used to change the
position of a valve (e.g., from open to closed) in such a way that the
position of the valve cannot be changed without breaking the seal.
Combustion device means all equipment, including, but not limited
to, thermal incinerators, catalytic incinerators, flares, boilers, and
process heaters used for combustion or destruction of organic vapors.
Commenced means, with respect to construction of an air pollution
control device, that an owner or operator has undertaken a continuous
program of construction or that an owner or operator has entered into a
contractual obligation to undertake and complete, within a reasonable
time, a continuous program of construction.
Commodity means a distinct product that a source loads onto marine
tank vessels.
Continuous means, with respect to monitoring, reading and recording
(either in hard copy or computer readable form) of data values measured
at least once every 15 minutes.
Crude oil means a naturally occurring mixture consisting
predominantly of hydrocarbons and/or sulfur, nitrogen, and oxygen
derivatives of hydrocarbons that is removed from the earth in a liquid
state or is capable of being so removed.
Exceedance or Variance means, with respect to parametric
monitoring, the operating parameter of the air pollution control device
that is monitored as an indication of proper operation of the control
device is outside the acceptable range or limits for the baseline
parameter given in Sec. 63.563(b)(4) through (9).
Excess emissions means, with respect to emissions monitoring, the
concentration of the outlet stream of the air pollution control device
is outside the acceptable range or limits for the baseline
concentration given in Sec. 63.563(b)(4) through (9).
Flow indicator means a device that indicates whether gas flow is
present in a line or vent system.
Gasoline means any petroleum distillate or petroleum distillate/
alcohol blend having a Reid vapor pressure of 27.6 kPa (4.0 psia) or
greater, that is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.
Impurity means HAP substances that are present in a commodity or
that are produced in a process coincidentally with the primary product
or commodity and that are 0.5 percent total HAP by weight or less. An
impurity does not serve a useful purpose in the production
[[Page 48404]]
or use of the primary product or commodity and is not isolated.
Leak means a reading of 10,000 parts per million volume (ppmv) or
greater as methane that is determined using the test methods in Method
21, appendix A of part 60 of this chapter.
Lightering or Lightering operation means the offshore transfer of a
bulk liquid cargo from one marine tank vessel to another vessel.
Loading berth means the loading arms, pumps, meters, shutoff
valves, relief valves, and other piping and valves necessary to fill
marine tank vessels. The loading berth includes those items necessary
for an offshore loading terminal.
Loading cycle means the time period from the beginning of filling a
single marine tank vessel until commodity flow to the marine tank
vessel ceases.
Maintenance allowance means a period of time that an affected
source is allowed to perform maintenance on the loading berth without
controlling emissions from marine tank vessel loading operations.
Marine tank vessel loading operation means any operation under
which a commodity is bulk loaded onto a marine tank vessel from a
terminal, which may include the loading of multiple marine tank vessels
during one loading operation. Marine tank vessel loading operations do
not include refueling of marine tank vessels.
Marine vessel or Marine tank vessel means any tank ship or tank
barge that transports liquid product such as gasoline or crude oil in
bulk.
Nonvapor-tight means any marine tank vessel that does not pass the
required vapor-tightness test.
Offshore loading terminal means a location that has at least one
loading berth that is 0.81 km (0.5 miles) or more from the shore that
is used for mooring a marine tank vessel and loading liquids from
shore.
Primary fuel means the fuel that provides the principal heat input
to the device. To be considered primary, the fuel must be able to
sustain operation of the device without the addition of other fuels.
Process heater means a device that transfers heat liberated by
burning fuel to fluids contained in tubes, including all fluids except
water that are heated to produce steam.
Recovery device means an individual unit of equipment, including,
but not limited to, a carbon adsorber, condenser/refrigeration unit, or
absorber that is capable of and used for the purpose of removing vapors
and recovering liquids or chemicals.
Routine loading means, with respect to the VMT source, marine tank
vessel loading operations that occur as part of normal facility
operation over a loading berth when no loading berths are inoperable
due to maintenance.
Secondary fuel means any fuel other than the primary fuel. The
secondary fuel provides supplementary heat in addition to the heat
provided by the primary fuel and is generally fired through a burner
other than the primary burner.
Source(s) means any location where at least one dock or loading
berth is bulk loading onto marine tank vessels, except offshore
drilling platforms and lightering operations.
Source(s) with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons means major
source(s) having aggregate actual HAP emissions from marine tank vessel
loading operations at all loading berths as follows:
(1) Prior to the compliance date, of less than 9.1 Mg (10 tons) of
each individual HAP calculated on a 24-month annual average basis after
September 19, 1997 and less than 22.7 Mg (25 tons) of all HAP combined
calculated on a 24-month annual average basis after September 19, 1997,
as determined by emission estimation in Sec. 63.565(l) of this subpart;
and
(2) After the compliance date, of less than 9.1 Mg (10 tons) of
each individual HAP calculated annually after September 20, 1999 and
less than 22.7 Mg (25 tons) of all HAP combined calculated annually
after September 20, 1999, as determined by emission estimation in
Sec. 63.565(l) of this subpart.
Source(s) with emissions of 10 or 25 tons means major source(s)
having aggregate actual HAP emissions from marine tank vessels loading
operations at all loading berths as follows:
(1) Prior to the compliance date, emissions of 9.1 Mg (10 tons) or
more of each individual HAP calculated on a 24-month annual average
basis after September 19, 1997 or of 22.7 Mg (25 tons) or more of all
HAP combined calculated on a 24-month annual average basis after
September 19, 1997, as determined by emission estimation in
Sec. 63.565(l); or
(2) After the compliance date, emissions of 9.1 Mg (10 tons) or
more of each individual HAP calculated annually after September 20,
1999 or of 22.7 Mg (25 tons) or more of all HAP combined calculated
annually after September 20, 1999, as determined by emission estimation
in Sec. 63.565(l).
Source(s) with throughput less than 10 M barrels and 200 M barrels
means source(s) having aggregate loading from marine tank vessel
loading operations at all loading berths as follows:
(1) Prior to the compliance date, of less than 1.6 billion liters
(10 million (M) barrels) of gasoline on a 24-month annual average basis
and of less than 32 billion liters (200 M barrels) of crude oil on a
24-month annual average basis after September 19, 1996; and
(2) After the compliance date, of less than 1.6 billion liters (10
M barrels) of gasoline annually and of less than 32 billion liters (200
M barrels) of crude oil annually after September 21, 1998.
Source(s) with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels means
source(s) having aggregate loading from marine tank vessel loading
operations at all loading berths as follows:
(1) Prior to the compliance date, of 1.6 billion liters (10 M
barrels) or more of gasoline on a 24-month annual average basis or of
32 billion liters (200 M barrels) or more of crude oil on a 24-month
annual average basis after September 19, 1996; or
(2) After the compliance date, of 1.6 billion liters (10 M barrels)
or more of gasoline annually or of 32 billion liters (200 M barrels) or
more of crude oil annually after September 21, 1998.
Terminal means all loading berths at any land or sea based
structure(s) that loads liquids in bulk onto marine tank vessels.
Twenty-four-month (24-month) annual average basis means annual HAP
emissions, with respect to MACT standards, or annual loading
throughput, with respect to RACT standards, from marine tank vessel
loading operations averaged over a 24-month period.
Valdez Marine Terminal (VMT) source means the major source that is
permitted under the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act (TAPAA) (43
U.S.C. Sec. 1651 et seq.). The source is located in Valdez, Alaska in
Prince William Sound.
Vapor balancing system means a vapor collection system or piping
system that is designed to collect organic HAP vapors displaced from
marine tank vessels during marine tank vessel loading operations and
that is designed to route the collected organic HAP vapors to the
storage vessel from which the liquid being loaded originated or to
compress collected organic HAP vapors and commingle with the raw feed
of a process unit.
Vapor collection system means any equipment located at the source,
i.e., at the terminal, that is not open to the atmosphere, that is
composed of piping, connections, and flow inducing devices, and that is
used for containing and transporting vapors displaced during
[[Page 48405]]
the loading of marine tank vessels to a control device or for vapor
balancing. This does not include the vapor collection system that is
part of any marine vessel vapor collection manifold system.
Vapor-tight marine vessel means a marine tank vessel that has
demonstrated within the preceding 12 months to have no leaks. A marine
tank vessel loaded at less than atmospheric pressure is assumed to be
vapor tight for the purpose of this standard.
Volatile organic compounds or VOC is as defined in 40 CFR 51.100(s)
of this chapter.
Sec. 63.562 Standards.
(a) The emissions limitations in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of
this section apply during marine tank vessel loading operations.
(b) MACT standards, except for the VMT source.
(1)(i) Vapor collection system of the terminal. The owner or
operator of a new source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons and an
existing or new source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons shall equip each
terminal with a vapor collection system that is designed to collect HAP
vapors displaced from marine tank vessels during marine tank vessel
loading operations and to prevent HAP vapors collected at one loading
berth from passing through another loading berth to the atmosphere,
except for those commodities exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(ii) Ship-to-shore compatibility. The owner or operator of a new
source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons and an existing or new
source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons shall limit marine tank vessel
loading operations to those vessels that are equipped with vapor
collection equipment that is compatible with the terminal's vapor
collection system, except for those commodities exempted under
Sec. 63.560(d).
(iii) Vapor tightness of marine vessels. The owner or operator of a
new source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons and an existing or
new source with emissions of 10 or 25 tons shall limit marine tank
vessel loading operations to those vessels that are vapor tight and to
those vessels that are connected to the vapor collection system, except
for those commodities exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(2) MACT standards for existing sources with emissions of 10 or 25
tons. The owner or operator of an existing source with emissions of 10
or 25 tons, except offshore loading terminals and the VMT source, shall
reduce captured HAP emissions from marine tank vessel loading
operations by 97 weight-percent, as determined using methods in
Sec. 63.565 (d) and (l).
(3) MACT standards for new sources. The owner or operator of a new
source with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons or a new source with
emissions of 10 or 25 tons, except offshore loading terminals and the
VMT source, shall reduce HAP emissions from marine tank vessel loading
operations by 98 weight-percent, as determined using methods in
Sec. 63.565 (d) and (l).
(4) MACT standards for new major source offshore loading terminals.
The owner or operator of a new major source offshore loading terminal
shall reduce HAP emissions from marine tank vessel loading operations
by 95 weight-percent, as determined using methods in Sec. 63.565 (d)
and (l).
(5) Prevention of carbon adsorber emissions during regeneration.
The owner or operator of a source subject to paragraph (b)(2), (3), or
(4) shall prevent HAP emissions from escaping to the atmosphere from
the regeneration of the carbon bed when using a carbon adsorber to
control HAP emissions from marine tank vessel loading operations.
(6) Maintenance allowance for loading berths. The owner or operator
of a source subject to paragraph (b)(2), (3) or (4), may apply for
approval to the Administrator for a maintenance allowance for loading
berths based on a percent of annual throughput or annual marine tank
vessel loading operation time for commodities not exempted in
Sec. 63.560(d). The owner or operator shall maintain records for all
maintenance performed on the air pollution control equipment. The
Administrator will consider the following in approving the maintenance
allowance:
(i) The owner or operator expects to be in violation of the
emissions standards due to maintenance;
(ii) Due to conditions beyond the reasonable control of the owner
or operator, compliance with the emissions standards during maintenance
would result in unreasonable economic hardship;
(iii) The economic hardship cannot be justified by the resulting
air quality benefit;
(iv) The owner or operator has given due consideration to
curtailing marine vessel loading operations during maintenance;
(v) During the maintenance allowance, the owner or operator will
endeavor to reduce emissions from other loading berths that are
controlled as well as from the loading berth the owner or operator is
seeking the maintenance allowance; and
(vi) During the maintenance allowance, the owner or operator will
monitor and report emissions from the loading berth to which the
maintenance allowance applies.
(c) RACT standards, except the VMT source.
(1) Commencement of construction. The owner or operator of a source
with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels, except the VMT
source, with an initial startup date on or before September 21, 1998
shall provide the Agency no later than 2 years after the effective date
with proof that it has commenced construction of its vapor collection
system and air pollution control device.
(2) (i) Vapor collection system of the terminal. The owner or
operator of a source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels
shall equip each terminal with a vapor collection system that is
designed to collect VOC vapors displaced from marine tank vessels
during loading and to prevent VOC vapors collected at one loading berth
from passing through another loading berth to the atmosphere, except
for those commodities exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(ii) Ship-to-shore compatibility. The owner or operator of a source
with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels shall limit marine
tank vessel loading operations to those vessels that are equipped with
vapor collection equipment that is compatible with the terminal's vapor
collection system, except for those commodities exempted under
Sec. 63.560(d).
(iii) Vapor tightness of marine vessels. The owner or operator of a
source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels shall limit
marine tank vessel loading operations to those vessels that are vapor-
tight and to those vessels that are connected to the vapor collection
system, except for those commodities exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(3) RACT standard for sources with throughput of 10 M or 200 M
barrels, except the VMT source. The owner or operator of a source with
throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels, except the VMT source,
shall reduce captured VOC emissions from marine tank vessel loading
operations by 98 weight-percent when using a combustion device or
reduce captured VOC emissions by 95 weight-percent when using a
recovery device, as determined using methods in Sec. 63.565(d) and (l).
(4) The owner or operator of a source with throughput of 10 M
barrels or 200 M barrels, except the VMT source, may meet the
requirements of paragraph (c)(3) by reducing gasoline loading
[[Page 48406]]
emissions to, at most, 1,000 ppmv outlet VOC concentration.
(5) Prevention of carbon adsorber emissions during regeneration.
The owner or operator of a source with throughput of 10 M barrels or
200 M barrels shall prevent HAP emissions from escaping to the
atmosphere from the regeneration of the carbon bed when using a carbon
adsorber to control HAP emissions from marine tank vessel loading
operations.
(6) Maintenance allowance for loading berths. The owner or operator
of a source with throughput of 10 M barrels or 200 M barrels may apply
for approval to the Administrator for a maintenance allowance for
loading berths based on a percent of annual throughput or annual marine
tank vessel loading operation time for commodities not exempted in
Sec. 63.560(d). The owner or operator shall maintain records for all
maintenance performed on the air pollution control equipment. The
Administrator will consider the following in approving the maintenance
allowance:
(i) The owner or operator expects to be in violation of the
emissions standards due to maintenance;
(ii) Due to conditions beyond the reasonable control of the owner
or operator, compliance with the emissions standards during maintenance
would result in unreasonable economic hardship;
(iii) The economic hardship cannot be justified by the resulting
air quality benefit;
(iv) The owner or operator has given due consideration to
curtailing marine vessel loading operations during maintenance;
(v) During the maintenance allowance, the owner or operator will
endeavor to reduce emissions from other loading berths that are
controlled as well as from the loading berth the owner or operator is
seeking the maintenance allowance; and
(vi) During the maintenance allowance, the owner or operator will
monitor and report emissions from the loading berth to which the
maintenance allowance applies.
(d) MACT and RACT standards for the VMT source.
(1) (i) Vapor collection system of the terminal. The owner or
operator of the VMT source shall equip each terminal subject under
paragraph (d)(2) with a vapor collection system that is designed to
collect HAP vapors displaced from marine tank vessels during marine
tank vessel loading operations and to prevent HAP vapors collected at
one loading berth from passing through another loading berth to the
atmosphere, except for those commodities exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(ii) Ship-to-shore compatibility. The owner or operator of the VMT
source shall limit marine tank vessel loading operations at berths
subject under paragraph (d)(2) of this section to those vessels that
are equipped with vapor collection equipment that is compatible with
the terminal's vapor collection system, except for those commodities
exempted under Sec. 63.560(d).
(iii) Vapor tightness of marine vessels. The owner or operator of
the VMT source shall limit marine tank vessel loading operations at
berths subject under paragraph (d)(2) of this section to those vessels
that are vapor-tight and to those vessels that are connected to the
vapor collection system, except for those commodities exempted under
Sec. 63.560(d).
(2) The owner or operator of the VMT source shall reduce captured
HAP and VOC emissions by 98 weight-percent, as determined using methods
in Sec. 63.565(d) and (l) for loading berths subject under this
paragraph according to paragraphs (d)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), and (iv):
(i) The owner or operator of the VMT source shall equip at least
two loading berths and any additional berths indicated pursuant to
paragraph (d)(2)(iii) with a vapor collection system and air pollution
control device and shall load marine tank vessels over loading berths
equipped with a vapor collection system and control device to the
maximum extent practicable. The owner or operator shall equip all
loading berths that will be used for routine loading after March 19,
1998 with a vapor collection system and control device if the annual
average daily loading rate for all loading berths exceeds the limits in
paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A), (B), and (C) of this section.
(A) For 1995, 1,630,000 barrels per day; and
(B) For 1996, 1,546,000 barrels per day; and
(C) For 1997, 1,445,000 barrels per day.
(ii) Maximum extent practicable means that the total annual average
daily loading over all loading berths not equipped with a vapor
collection system and control device shall not exceed the totals in
paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) and (B):
(A) Loading allowances for marine tank vessel loading operations at
loading berths not equipped with control devices. The following maximum
annual average daily loading rate for routine loading at loading berths
not equipped with control devices in any of the following years shall
not exceed:
(a) For 1998, 275,000 barrels per day;
(b) For 1999, 205,000 barrels per day;
(c) For 2000, 118,000 barrels per day;
(d) For 2001, 39,000 barrels per day; and
(e) For 2002 and subsequent years, no marine tank vessel loading
operations shall be performed at berths not equipped with a vapor
collection system and control device, except as allowed for maintenance
under paragraph (B).
(B) Maintenance allowances for loading berths subject under
paragraph (d)(2)(i). Beginning in the year 2000, the owner or operator
of the VMT source may have a maximum of 40 calendar days per calendar
year use of loading berths not equipped with a vapor collection system
and control device, in accordance with the limits in paragraph
(d)(2)(ii)(B)(a), (b), or (c), to allow for maintenance of loading
berths subject to paragraph (d)(2)(i). Beginning in the year 2002, the
total annual average daily loading of crude oil over all loading berths
not equipped with a vapor collection system and control device shall
not exceed the amount stated in paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(B)(b). The 40 days
allowed for maintenance shall be converted into a compliance measure of
annual average daily loading over the loading berths not equipped with
a vapor collection system and control device as follows:
(a) If the total annual average daily volume of crude oil loaded at
the facility was greater than or equal to 1,100,000 barrels per day in
the prior calendar year, the maintenance allowance shall not exceed an
annual average daily loading of 60,000 barrels per day.
(b) If the total annual average daily volume of crude oil loaded at
the facility was less than 1,100,000 barrels per day and greater than
or equal to 550,000 barrels per day in the prior calendar year, the
maintenance allowance for the calendar year shall not exceed Qm:
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR19SE95.000
Where:
Qm = maintenance allowance, barrels per day
P = prior calendar year's average daily volume of crude oil loaded at
the facility, barrels per day.
(c) If the total annual average daily volume of crude oil loaded at
the facility was less than 550,000 barrels per day in the prior
calendar year, there shall be no maintenance allowance.
(iii) If the average daily loading rate for the loading berths not
equipped with a vapor collection system and control device is greater
than the combined
[[Page 48407]]
amounts in any year listed in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A), (B), and (C) and
(d)(2)(ii)(A) and (B), then the owner or operator of the VMT source
shall equip all loading berths used for routine loading with a vapor
collection system and control device within 2 years of the exceedance
except that in an emergency situation the Administrator may, instead of
requiring controls, approve an alternative plan to reduce loading over
the unequipped berth(s) to a level which will ensure compliance with
the applicable limit. Beginning in the year 2002, the owner or operator
of the VMT source shall equip all uncontrolled loading berths used for
marine tank vessel loading operations beyond the maintenance allowance
in paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(B) with a vapor collection system and control
device.
(iv) The owner or operator of the VMT source shall develop a
program to communicate to relevant facility operations and marine
transportation personnel and engage their active and consistent
participation in honoring the intent and goal of minimizing loaded
volumes over the unequipped berths and maximizing the loaded volumes at
the berths equipped with a vapor collection system and control device
to prevent exceedance of the load volume limits in paragraphs
(d)(2)(ii)(A) and (B). This program is to be presented semi-annually
during the first year of compliance and annually thereafter until the
use of unequipped berths for routine loading is no longer required.
(3) The owner or operator of the VMT source shall submit annual
reports on or before January 31 of each year to the Administrator
certifying the annual average daily loading rate for the previous
calendar year. Beginning on January 31, 1996, for the reported year
1995, the annual report shall specify the annual average daily loading
rate over all loading berths. Beginning on January 31, 1999, for the
reported year 1998, the annual report shall specify the annual average
daily loading rate over all loading berths, over each loading berth
equipped with a vapor collection system and control device, and over
each loading berth not equipped with a vapor collection system and
control device. The annual average daily loading rate under this
section is calculated as the total amount of crude oil loaded during
the calendar year divided by 365 days or 366 days, as appropriate.
(e) Operation and maintenance requirements for air pollution
control equipment and monitoring equipment for affected sources. At all
times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, owners
or operators of affected sources shall operate and maintain a source,
including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable operation and
maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information
available to the Administrator which may include, but is not limited
to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance procedures,
review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the
source.
(1) The Administrator will determine compliance with design,
equipment, work practice, or operational emission standards by
evaluating an owner or operator's conformance with operation and
maintenance requirements.
(2) The owner or operator of an affected source shall develop and
implement a written operation and maintenance plan that describes in
detail a program of corrective action for varying (i.e., exceeding
baseline parameters) air pollution control equipment and monitoring
equipment, based on monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.564, used to
comply with these emissions standards. The plan shall also identify all
routine or otherwise predictable continuous monitoring system
(thermocouples, pressure transducers, continuous emissions monitors
(CEMS), etc.) variances.
(i) The plan shall specify procedures (preventive maintenance) to
be followed to ensure that pollution control equipment and monitoring
equipment functions properly and variances of the control equipment and
monitoring equipment are minimal.
(ii) The plan shall identify all operating parameters to be
monitored and recorded for the air pollution control device as
indicators of proper operation and shall establish the frequency at
which the parameters will be monitored (see Sec. 63.564).
(iii) Owners or operators of affected sources shall incorporate a
standardized inspection schedule for each component of the control
device used to comply with the emissions standards in Sec. 63.562(b),
(c), and (d). To satisfy the requirements of this paragraph, the owner
or operator may use the inspection schedule recommended by the vendor
of the control system or any other technical publication regarding the
operation of the control system.
(iv) Owners or operators shall develop and implement a continuous
monitoring system (CMS) quality control program. The owner or operator
shall develop and submit to the Administrator for approval upon request
a site-specific performance evaluation test plan for the CMS
performance evaluation required in Sec. 63.8(e) of subpart A of this
part. Each quality control program shall include, at a minimum, a
written protocol that describes procedures for initial and any
subsequent calibration of the CMS; determination and adjustment of the
calibration drift of the CMS; preventive maintenance of the CMS,
including spare parts inventory; data recording, calculations, and
reporting; and accuracy audit procedures, including sampling and
analysis methods. The owner or operation shall maintain records of the
procedures that are part of the quality control program developed and
implemented for CMS.
(3) Based on the results of the determination made under paragraph
(e)(2), the Administrator may require that an owner or operator of an
affected source make changes to the operation and maintenance plan for
that source. Revisions may be required if the plan:
(i) Does not address a variance of the air pollution control
equipment or monitoring equipment that has occurred that increases
emissions;
(ii) Fails to provide for operation during a variance of the air
pollution control equipment or the monitoring equipment in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices; or
(iii) Does not provide adequate procedures for correcting a
variance of the air pollution control equipment or monitoring equipment
as soon as reasonable.
(4) If the operation and maintenance plan fails to address or
inadequately addresses a variance event at the time the plan was
initially developed, the owner or operator shall revise the operation
and maintenance plan within 45 working days after such an event occurs.
The revised plan shall include procedures for operating and maintaining
the air pollution control equipment or monitoring equipment during
similar variance events and a program for corrective action for such
events.
(5) The operation and maintenance plan shall be developed by the
source's compliance date. The owner or operator shall keep the written
operation and maintenance plan on record to be made available for
inspection, upon request, by the Administrator for the life of the
source. In addition, if the operation and maintenance plan is revised,
the owner or operator shall keep previous (i.e., superseded) versions
of the plan on record to be made available for inspection upon request
by the Administrator for a period of 5 years after each revision to the
plan.
[[Page 48408]]
(6) To satisfy the requirements of the operation and maintenance
plan, the owner or operator may use the source's standard operating
procedures (SOP) manual, an Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) plan, or other existing plans provided the
alternative plans meet the requirements of this section and are made
available for inspection when requested by the Administrator.
Sec. 63.563 Compliance and performance testing.
(a) The following procedures shall be used to determine compliance
with the emissions limits under Sec. 63.562(b)(1), (c)(2), and (d)(1):
(1) Vent stream by-pass requirements for the terminal's vapor
collection system.
(i) In accordance with Sec. 63.562(b)(1)(i), (c)(2)(i), and
(d)(1)(i), each valve in the terminal's vapor collection system that
would route displaced vapors to the atmosphere, either directly or
indirectly, shall be secured closed during marine tank vessel loading
operations either by using a car-seal or a lock-and-key type
configuration, or the by-pass line from the valve shall be equipped
with a flow indicator, except for those valves used for pressure/vacuum
relief, analyzers, instrumentation devices, sampling, and venting for
maintenance. Marine tank vessel loading operations shall not be
performed with open by-pass lines.
(ii) Repairs shall be made to valves, car-seals, or closure
mechanisms no later than 15 days after a change in the position of the
valve or a break in the car-seal or closure mechanism is detected or no
later than prior to the next marine tank vessel loading operation,
whichever is later.
(2) Ship-to-shore compatibility of vapor collection systems.
Following the date on which the initial performance test is completed,
marine tank vessel loading operations must be performed only if the
marine tank vessel's vapor collection equipment is compatible to the
terminal's vapor collection system; marine tank vessel loading
operations must be performed only when the marine tank vessel's vapor
collection equipment is connected to the terminal's vapor collection
system, as required in Sec. 63.562(b)(1)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and
(d)(1)(ii).
(3) Pressure/vacuum settings for the marine tank vessel's vapor
collection equipment. During the initial performance test required in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or operator of an affected
source shall demonstrate compliance with operating pressure
requirements of 33 CFR 154.814 using the procedures in Sec. 63.565(b).
(4) Vapor-tightness requirements of the marine vessel. The owner or
operator of an affected source shall use the procedures in paragraph
(a)(4)(i), (ii), (iii), or (iv) of this section to ensure that marine
tank vessels are vapor tight, as required in Sec. 63.562(b)(1)(iii),
(c)(2)(iii), and (d)(1)(iii).
(i) Pressure test documentation for determining vapor tightness of
the marine vessel. The owner or operator of a marine tank vessel, who
loads commodities containing HAP not determined to be exempt under
Sec. 63.560(d) at an affected source, shall provide a copy of the
vapor-tightness pressure test documentation described in Sec. 63.567(i)
for each marine tank vessel prior to loading. The date of the test
listed in the documentation must be within the preceding 12 months, and
the test must be conducted in accordance with the procedures in
Sec. 63.565(c)(1). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the affected source must check vapor-tightness
pressure test documentation for marine tank vessels loaded at positive
pressure.
(ii) Leak test documentation for determining vapor tightness of the
marine vessel. If no documentation of the vapor tightness pressure test
as described in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this section is available, the
owner or operator of a marine tank vessel, who loads commodities
containing HAP not determined to be exempt under Sec. 63.560(d) at an
affected source, shall provide the leak test documentation described in
Sec. 63.567(i) for each marine tank vessel prior to loading. The date
of the test listed in the documentation must be within the preceding 12
months, and the test must be conducted in accordance with the
procedures in Sec. 63.565(c)(2). If the marine tank vessel has failed
its most recent vapor-tightness leak test at that terminal, the owner
or operator of the non-vapor-tight marine tank vessel shall provide
documentation that the leaks detected during the previous vapor-
tightness test have been repaired and documented with a successful
vapor-tightness leak test described in Sec. 63.565(c)(2) conducted
during loading. If the owner or operator of the marine tank vessel can
document that repair is technically infeasible without cleaning and gas
freeing or dry-docking the vessel, the owner or operator of the
affected source may load the marine tank vessel. Following the date on
which the initial performance test is completed, an affected source
must check the vapor-tightness leak test documentation for marine tank
vessels loaded at positive pressure.
(iii) Leak test performed during loading using Method 21 for
determining vapor tightness of the marine vessel. If no documentation
of vapor tightness as described in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) or (ii) of this
section is available, the owner or operator of a marine tank vessel,
who loads commodities containing HAP not determined to be exempt under
Sec. 63.560(d) at an affected source, shall perform a leak test of the
marine tank vessel during marine tank vessel loading operation using
the procedures described in Sec. 63.565(c)(2).
(A) If no leak is detected, the owner or operator of a marine tank
vessel shall complete the documentation described in Sec. 63.567(i)
prior to departure of the vessel.
(B) If a leak is detected, the owner or operator of the marine tank
vessel shall document the vapor-tightness failure for the marine tank
vessel prior to departure of the vessel. The leaking component shall be
repaired prior to the next marine tank vessel loading operation at a
controlled terminal unless the repair is technically infeasible without
cleaning and gas freeing or dry-docking the vessel. If the owner or
operator of the vessel provides documentation that repair of such
equipment is technically infeasible without cleaning and gas freeing or
dry-docking the vessel, the equipment responsible for the leak will be
excluded from future Method 21 tests until repairs are effected. A copy
of this documentation shall be maintained by the owner or operator of
the affected source. Repair of the equipment responsible for the leak
shall occur the next time the vessel is cleaned and gas freed or dry-
docked. For repairs that are technically feasible without dry-docking
the vessel, the owner or operator of the affected source shall not load
the vessel again unless the marine tank vessel owner or operator can
document that the equipment responsible for the leak has been repaired.
(iv) Negative pressure loading. The owner or operator of an
affected source shall ensure that a marine tank vessel is loaded with
the product tank below atmospheric pressure (i.e., at negative gauge
pressure). The pressure shall be measured between the facility's vapor
connection and its manual isolation valve, and the measured pressure
must be below atmospheric pressure. Following the date on which the
initial performance test is completed, marine tank vessel loading
operations for nonvapor-tight vessels must be performed below
atmospheric pressure
[[Page 48409]]
(i.e., at negative gauge pressure) in the product tank.
(b) Compliance determination for affected sources. The following
procedures shall be used to determine compliance with the emissions
limits under Sec. 63.562(b), (c), and (d).
(1) Initial performance test. An initial performance test shall be
conducted using the procedures listed in Sec. 63.7 of subpart A of this
part according to the applicability in Table 1 of Sec. 63.560, the
procedures listed in this section, and the test methods listed in
Sec. 63.565. The initial performance test shall be conducted within 180
days after the compliance date for the specific affected source. During
this performance test, sources subject to MACT standards under
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), (4), and (5) and (d)(2) shall determine the
reduction of HAP emissions, as VOC, for all combustion or recovery
devices other than flares. Sources subject to RACT standards under
Sec. 63.562(c)(3), (4), and (5) and (d)(2) shall determine the
reduction of VOC emissions for all combustion or recovery devices other
than flares.
(2) Performance test exemptions. An initial performance test
required in this section and in Sec. 63.565(d) and the continuous
monitoring in Sec. 63.564(e) is not required in the following cases:
(i) When a boiler or process heater with a design heat input
capacity of 44 Megawatts or less is used to comply with
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), or (4), (c)(3) or (4), or (d)(2) and the vent
stream is used as the primary fuel or with the primary fuel;
(ii) When a boiler or process heater with a design heat input
capacity of 44 Megawatts or greater is used to comply with
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3) or (4), (c)(3) or (4), or (d)(2); or
(iii) When a boiler subject to 40 CFR part 266, subpart H,
``Hazardous Waste Burned in Industrial Furnaces,'' that has
demonstrated 99.99 percent destruction or recovery efficiency is used
to comply with Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), or (4), (c)(3) or (4), or
(d)(2).
(3) Operation and maintenance inspections. If the 3-hour or 3-cycle
block average operating parameters in paragraphs (b)(4) through (9) of
this section, outside the acceptable operating ranges, are measured and
recorded, i.e., variances of the pollution control device or monitoring
equipment, the owner or operator of the affected source shall perform
an unscheduled inspection of the control device and monitoring
equipment and review of the parameter monitoring data. The owner or
operator of the affected source shall perform an inspection and review
when total parameter variance time for the control device is greater
than 10 percent of the operating time for marine tank vessel loading
operations on a 30-day, rolling-average basis. The inspection and
review shall be conducted within 24 hours after passing the allowable
variance time of 10 percent. The inspection checklist from the
requirements of Sec. 63.562(e)(2)(iii) and the monitoring data from
requirements in Secs. 63.562(e)(2)(ii) and 63.564 should be used to
identify any maintenance problems that may be associated with the
variance. The unscheduled inspection should encompass all components of
the control device and monitoring equipment that can be inspected while
in operation. If any maintenance problem is identified during the
inspection, the owner or operator of the affected source must take
corrective action (e.g., adjustments to operating controls, etc.) as
soon as practicable. If no immediate maintenance problems are
identified from the inspection performed while the equipment is
operating, a complete inspection in accordance with Sec. 63.562(e)(2)
must be conducted prior to the next marine tank vessel loading
operation and corrective action (e.g., replacement of defective parts)
must be taken as soon as practicable for any maintenance problem
identified during the complete inspection.
(4) Combustion device, except flare. During the initial performance
test required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or
operator shall determine the efficiency of and/or the outlet VOC
concentration from the combustion device used to comply with
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), and (4), (c)(3) and (4), and (d)(2) using the
test methods in Sec. 63.565(d). The owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (b)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Outlet VOC concentration limit for required percent combustion
efficiency. The owner or operator shall establish as an operating
parameter the baseline VOC concentration using the procedures described
in Sec. 63.565(g). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the facility shall be operated with a block average
outlet VOC concentration as determined in Sec. 63.564(e)(1) no more
than 20 percent above the baseline VOC concentration.
(ii) Baseline temperature for required percent combustion
efficiency. The owner or operator shall establish as an operating
parameter the baseline temperature using the procedures described in
Sec. 63.565(f). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the facility shall be operated with the block
average temperature as determined in Sec. 63.564(e)(2) or (3) no more
than 28 deg.C (50 deg.F) below the baseline temperature.
(5) Flare. During the initial performance test required in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or operator shall establish
that the flare used to comply with the emissions standards in
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), and (4), (c)(3) and (4), and (d)(2) is in
compliance with the design requirements for flares cited in
Sec. 63.565(e). Following the date on which the initial determination
of compliance is established, the facility shall operate with the
presence of a pilot flame in the flare, as determined in
Sec. 63.564(f).
(6) Carbon adsorber. During the initial performance test required
in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or operator shall
determine the efficiency of and/or the outlet VOC concentration from
the recovery device used to comply with Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), (4),
and (5), (c)(3), (4), and (5), and (d)(2) using the test methods in
Sec. 63.565(d). The owner or operator shall comply with paragraph
(b)(6)(i) as well as either paragraph (b)(6)(ii) or (iii) of this
section. The owner or operator of affected sources complying with
paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(B) or (C) of this section shall conduct a
performance test once each year.
(i) Compliance determination for carbon bed regeneration. Desorbed
hydrocarbons from regeneration of the off-line carbon bed shall be
vented to the on-line carbon bed.
(ii) Baseline parameters for required percent recovery efficiency.
The owner or operator shall comply with paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(A), (B),
or (C) of this section.
(A) Outlet VOC concentration limit for required percent recovery
efficiency. The owner or operator shall establish as an operating
parameter the baseline VOC concentration using the procedures described
in Sec. 63.565(g). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the facility shall be operated with a block average
outlet VOC concentration as determined in Sec. 63.564(g)(1) no more
than 20 percent above the baseline VOC concentration.
(B) Carbon adsorbers with vacuum regeneration. The owner or
operator shall establish as operating parameters the baseline
regeneration time for the vacuum stage of carbon bed regeneration using
the procedures described in Sec. 63.565(h) and shall establish the
baseline vacuum pressure (negative gauge pressure) using the procedures
described in Sec. 63.565(i). Following the date on which the initial
performance test is completed, the facility shall be operated with
block average regeneration time of the vacuum
[[Page 48410]]
stage of carbon bed regeneration as determined in Sec. 63.564(g)(2) no
more than 20 percent below the baseline regeneration time, and the
facility shall be operated with the block average vacuum pressure
(negative gauge pressure) as determined in Sec. 63.564(g)(2) no more
than 20 percent above the baseline vacuum pressure.
(C) Carbon adsorbers with steam regeneration. The owner or operator
shall establish as operating parameters the baseline total stream flow
using the procedures described in Sec. 63.565(j) and a baseline carbon
bed temperature after cooling of the bed using the procedures in
Sec. 63.565(f)(2). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the facility shall be operated with the total stream
flow, as determined in Sec. 63.564(g)(3), no more than 20 percent below
the baseline stream flow and with the carbon bed temperature (measured
within 15 minutes after completion of the cooling cycle), as determined
in Sec. 63.564(g)(3), no more than 10 percent or 5.6 deg.C (10 deg.F)
above the baseline carbon bed temperature, whichever is less stringent.
(iii) Outlet VOC concentration of 1,000 ppmv for gasoline loading.
Following the date on which the initial performance test is completed,
the facility shall operate with a block average outlet VOC
concentration as determined in Sec. 63.564(g)(1) of no more than 1,200
ppmv VOC.
(7) Condenser/refrigeration unit. During the initial performance
test required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or
operator shall determine the efficiency of and/or the outlet VOC
concentration from the recovery device used to comply with
Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), and (4), (c)(3) and (4), and (d)(2) using the
test methods in Sec. 63.565(d). The owner or operator shall comply with
either paragraph (b)(7)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section.
(i) VOC outlet concentration limit for required percent recovery
efficiency. The owner or operator shall establish as an operating
parameter the baseline VOC concentration using the procedures described
in Sec. 63.565(g). Following the date on which the initial performance
test is completed, the facility shall be operated with a block average
outlet VOC concentration as determined in Sec. 63.564(h)(2) no more
than 20 percent above the baseline VOC concentration.
(ii) Baseline temperature for required percent recovery efficiency.
The owner or operator shall establish as an operating parameter the
baseline temperature using the procedures described in Sec. 63.565(f).
Following the date on which the initial performance test is completed,
the facility shall operate with a block average temperature, as
determined in Sec. 63.564(h)(1), no more than 28 deg.C (50 deg.F) above
the baseline temperature.
(iii) Baseline parameters for 1,000 ppmv VOC concentration limit
for gasoline loading. The owner or operator shall monitor either the
outlet VOC concentration or the outlet temperature of the unit. For
sources monitoring temperature, the owner or operator shall establish
as an operating parameter the baseline temperature using the procedures
described in Sec. 63.565(f). Following the date on which the initial
performance test is completed, the facility shall operate with a block
average outlet VOC concentration, as determined in Sec. 63.564(h)(2),
of no more than 1,200 ppmv VOC or with a block average temperature, as
determined in Sec. 63.564(h)(1), no more than 28 deg.C (50 deg.F) above
the baseline temperature.
(8) Absorber. During the initial performance test required in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or operator shall determine
the efficiency of the absorber and/or the outlet VOC concentration from
the recovery device used to comply with Sec. 63.562(b)(2), (3), and
(4), (c)(3) and (4), and (d)(2) using the test methods in
Sec. 63.565(d). The owner or operator shall comply with either
paragraph (b)(8)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) VOC outlet concentration limit for required percent recovery
efficiency. The owner or operator shall establish as an operating
parameter the baseline VO
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.