National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Other Processes Subject to the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5182-6]

RIN 2060-AC19

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Source Categories: Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Synthetic

Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Other Processes Subject to

the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule: clarification.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes clarifying changes and corrections to

certain portions of the ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry

and Other Processes Subject to the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment

Leaks'' (collectively known as the ``hazardous organic NESHAP'' or the

``HON''). This action proposes to remove three compounds (glycerol tri-

(polyoxypropylene)ether, polyethylene [[Page 18072]] glycol, and

polypropylene glycol) from the list of chemical production processes

regulated by the HON. The production of these compounds is also

included in the source category ``Polyether Polyols Production'' and

will be regulated by that national emission standards for hazardous air

pollutants (NESHAP). The EPA is also proposing several changes to the

equipment leak requirements to clarify the intent of certain

provisions, to correct oversights, and to simplify demonstration of

compliance with the regulation.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before May 10, 1995,

unless a hearing is requested by April 20, 1995. If a hearing is

requested, written comments must be received by May 25, 1995.

Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a public hearing must contact the

EPA no later than April 20, 1995. If a hearing is held, it will take

place on April 25, 1995, beginning at 10 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102),

Attention Docket Number A-90-20 (see docket section below), room M-

1500, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, D.C. 20460. The EPA requests that a separate copy also be

sent to the contact person listed below.

Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the

EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle Park,

North Carolina. Persons interested in attending the hearing or wishing

to present oral testimony should notify Mrs. Kim Teal, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711,

telephone (919) 541-5580.

Docket. Dockets No. A-90-20 and A-89-10, containing the supporting

information for the original NESHAP and this action, are available for

public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday, at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Waterside Mall, room M-1500, first floor, 401 M Street SW,

Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-7548 or 260-7549. A

reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Janet S. Meyer, Emission Standards

Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711, telephone number (919) 541-5254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19402), and June 6, 1994 (59 FR 29196),

the EPA promulgated in the Federal Register NESHAP for the synthetic

organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI), and for several other

processes subject to the equipment leaks portion of the rule. These

regulations were promulgated as subparts F, G, H, and I in 40 CFR part

63. Since the rule was issued, the EPA has received inquiries regarding

certain portions of the rule and EPA has concluded that it is necessary

to clarify these provisions and to correct several oversights.

II. Removal of Polyols From Table 1 of Subpart F

The list of SOCMI chemicals currently includes three compounds--

glycerol tri-(polyoxypropylene)ether, polyethylene glycol, and

polypropylene glycol--whose production emissions will be regulated by

the NESHAP for ``Polyether Polyols Production,'' a category of major

sources for which a maximum achievable control technology (MACT)

standard is scheduled to be promulgated by November 15, 1997. According

to documentation for the list of source categories, the definition of

``Polyether Polyols Production'' encompasses all commercially important

polyether polyols, and therefore would clearly include these three

chemical productions currently subject to the HON.

The EPA believes that it would be more reasonable and efficient to

regulate emissions from production of all polyether polyols under only

one rule, rather than regulating some processes under one rule and

other polyol processes under a different rule. Specifically, the

production process for all polyether polyols is very similar, and

typical polyol facilities may manufacture both SOCMI and non-SOCMI

polyether polyols with the same equipment. Thus, EPA concluded that it

would be inappropriate to regulate polyols under the HON. Also, because

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from polyether polyol

production are relatively low, postponing regulation of polyether

polyols would not forestall large HAP emission reductions.

Accordingly, the EPA proposes to remove these three chemicals from

the list of SOCMI chemicals, located in table 1 of subpart F of the

final rule, and to address these production processes under the

subsequent polyether polyols production rule.

II. Proposed Changes to Subpart H

A. Consolidation of Equipment Leak Programs

Since 1981, EPA and States have issued a number of different

guidelines and regulations for controlling emissions from equipment

leaks. Some companies have reported that they have to comply with

anywhere from 5 to 11 different equipment leak programs at one plant

site. These programs principally differ in applicability criteria and

have minor differences in other details of the provisions. Because of

concerns regarding the cost of maintaining separate programs, the

Regulatory Negotiation Committee (Committee) that negotiated the

proposed rule upon which subpart H is based agreed that compliance with

the negotiated rule would also constitute compliance with any

overlapping applicable new source performance standards (NSPS) or

NESHAP (e.g., subpart VV of part 60 or subpart J of part 61).

Unfortunately, this provision (40 CFR Sec. 63.160(b)) does not allow

enough consolidation of programs to adequately address the problem.

Owners and operators of process units subject to the HON still must

maintain multiple programs because process units may have non-HAP

containing process equipment as well as HAP containing process

equipment. Consequently, a number of industry representatives and a

State agency have requested that EPA also allow owners and operators

the option of consolidating all the volatile organic compounds (VOC)

and HAP equipment leak programs into one program for each process unit.

The EPA agrees that consolidation of programs will allow for more

efficient management of programs, reduce cost of compliance, and

improve compliance. As EPA believes that the HON contains more

stringent requirements than any other Federal equipment leak

regulations, EPA proposes to allow override of those requirements with

the provisions of subpart H. It is proposed to add a new paragraph (c)

to Sec. 63.160 to allow an owner or operator to elect to comply with

subpart H for all VOC containing process equipment in the process unit

in lieu of compliance with 40 CFR part 60 subparts VV, GGG, or KKK or

with 40 CFR part 61 subparts F or J. The EPA also encourages States to

allow consolidation of State equipment leak programs under subpart H.

The EPA believes that establishing one program for a plant site or

process unit would reduce costs to States and local agencies for

permitting and enforcing rules as well as reduce the cost of

[[Page 18073]] compliance for owners or operators of sources.

B. Sampling Connection Systems

Subpart H requires that each sampling connection system be equipped

with either a closed-loop or closed-vent system or that a closed-purge

system be used, and that the system either return the purge directly to

the process, collect and recycle the purge, or send the purge to a

control device. Following issuance of the final rule, several chemical

companies inquired whether the purge material could be sent to a

hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) or a

controlled wastewater collection and treatment facility in lieu of

sending the purge to a control device as specified in Sec. 63.172.

Typically, the purge material could not be returned to the process due

to polymerization or other characteristics that severely limited the

utility of the material. The EPA agrees that this control option would

meet the intent of the sampling connection system provisions, which is

to ensure that purged material is captured and either returned to a

process or destroyed. Therefore, it is proposed to add provisions to

Sec. 63.166 to allow treatment of collected purge material at permitted

TSDF or solid waste facilities. The proposed provisions also allow use

of waste management units complying with Secs. 63.133-63.138 of subpart

G. The proposed Sec. 63.166 also includes minor clarifying edits to

paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) through (b)(3). Also, due to numerous

questions, EPA is proposing to add a definition for the term sampling

connection system.

C. Less Frequent Monitoring of Valves in Phase III

Since the final rule was issued, EPA has received inquiries about

the feasibility of using data collected before April 22, 1994 and use

of data that differs slightly from the requirements of Sec. 63.180(b).

Although the preamble to the final rule (59 FR 19446) did state that

the rule was intended to allow owners or operators the flexibility to

initiate phase III of the valve standard at anytime, the revisions to

subpart H did not include an explicit statement that data collected

before April 22, 1994 could be used or that less frequent monitoring

within Phase III could begin. Some of the callers seemed to be

concerned that the requirements for monitoring data specified in

Sec. 63.180(b) precluded use of data collected before the rule was

final. Consequently, it is proposed to add paragraphs to Sec. 63.168

and Sec. 63.174 to specifically allow use of data collected before

April 22, 1994. It is also proposed to clarify that data collected

before April 22, 1994 may have minor deviations from the requirements

in Sec. 63.180(b)(1) through (b)(6). Examples of minor deviations from

the requirements of Sec. 63.180(b)(1) through (b)(6) are use of a

slightly different monitoring frequency or monitoring at a different

leak definition provided the data would still indicate the presence or

absence of a leak.

D. Flow Indicators

In the HON, as well as in other section 111 and 112 standards, EPA

has required the use of flow indicators or car-seal systems to ensure

that emissions are continuously vented to an appropriate control device

[see Sec. 63.172(j)(1) for example]. The EPA has recently learned that,

as these provisions are presently drafted, it appears that either flow

must be measured or that specified equipment (i.e., car-seal systems or

lock and key-type valve configurations) must be used. The intent of

these provisions is to provide a means of indicating when emissions are

bypassing a control device. There was no intention in drafting these

provisions to limit the method used for detecting or monitoring for

potential by-passes of control devices. The EPA has concluded that

these provisions need to be clarified and the clearest way is to expand

the definition of flow indicator to include reference to devices that

do not measure flow and to remove the reference to presence of flow

from the by-pass monitoring requirement. The EPA is proposing to amend

subpart H to clarify this provision by adding a definition for ``flow

indicator'' and by revising paragraph (j)(1) of Sec. 63.172.

E. Safety Issues With Sec. 63.163 and Sec. 63.167

Since the final rule was promulgated, EPA has learned of a few

situations where compliance with the provisions of the rule creates, or

has the potential to create, serious safety hazards for plant or

monitoring personnel. These concerns arise because no provisions

presently exist in some sections of subpart H to exempt unsafe

situations from specific equipment or monitoring requirements. The need

for these provisions was not raised in the Committee discussions or in

the public comments. The EPA believes that the concerns are being

raised now as the rule is being implemented because these safety issues

only arise in a few cases.

Consequently, EPA is proposing to add unsafe-to-monitor provisions

for pumps and an exemption from the requirement to cap, or plug, open-

ended lines or valves for materials that represented a safety or

explosion hazard. The unsafe-to-monitor provision for pumps is

patterned after the unsafe-to-monitor valve provisions. Pumps that are

unsafe-to-monitor are pumps that are located in an area that presents

an imminent danger to personnel due to the presence of toxic materials,

explosive process conditions, or high pressure. This provision would

exempt pumps in unsafe locations from routine monitoring requirements,

but would require monitoring during safe-to-monitor periods.

The EPA is also proposing to exempt open-ended lines or valves

containing materials that represented a safety or explosion hazard from

the requirement to equip the line with a cap or plug. The EPA has

recently learned that in a few processes the requirement to cap, or

plug, the line could result in trapping highly-reactive monomer in the

line. In these cases, the polymerization reaction will cause serious

overpressure and catastrophic equipment failure presenting a safety

hazard to plant personnel and creating the potential for greater

emissions to the atmosphere than if the line were left uncapped.

F. Inaccessible and Difficult-to-Monitor Agitators

The Committee developed the requirements for agitators based on the

assumption that agitators were technologically similar to pumps. In the

Committee discussions, it was assumed that agitators would be just as

accessible as pumps. The EPA has recently learned that there are a few

facilities where agitators are inaccessible, and it simply is not

feasible to monitor this equipment. Consequently, it is proposed to add

an exemption for inaccessible agitators and to provide consideration

for difficult-to-monitor agitators. The proposed provisions in

Secs. 63.173(h) and (i) are patterned after the difficult-to-monitor

valve provisions and the inaccessible connector provision in

Sec. 63.174(h)(1)(iii). Because it is conceivable that there could also

be processes where agitators are located in areas that pose an imminent

danger to monitoring personnel, provisions to exempt unsafe-to-monitor

agitators are also proposed. Recordkeeping requirements for difficult-

to-monitor and unsafe-to-monitor equipment are included in the proposed

revisions to Sec. 63.181(b)(7).

G. Porcelain Connectors

In development of the connector provisions, the Committee exempted

glass and glass-lined connectors from the monitoring requirements

because of [[Page 18074]] the limited potential for on-line repair. The

Committee was concerned that tightening of bolts on glass and glass-

lined connectors presented a high risk of breakage and potential for

significant accidental releases. Since the rule was issued, EPA has

learned that porcelain connectors are also used at some facilities.

Since porcelain connectors, as well as other forms of ceramic

materials, would also have a high risk of breakage during on-line

repairs, EPA is proposing to revise Sec. 63.174(h)(1) to use the more

generic terminology ``ceramic or ceramic-lined'' connector.

H. Pressure Test for Batch Process Equipment

Two changes are being proposed to the pressure test provisions of

Sec. 63.180(f). The pressure test provisions for batch process

equipment were derived from general industry practice and EPA's

experience with testing of tank trucks and railcars for vapor

tightness. In development of these provisions, the Committee assumed

that this testing would be conducted on equipment operating at

pressures greater than atmospheric but less than 10 pounds per square

inch gauge (psig). The EPA has since learned that there are some batch

operations operating at essentially atmospheric pressure for which the

pressure/vacuum test provisions represent the only practical means of

complying with the standard. Unfortunately, the Committee agreed to

language on the test provisions that does not allow pressurization

beyond the operating pressure of the equipment. The EPA believes that

this is an unintentional limitation on the availability of the pressure

test option. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revise Sec. 63.180(f)(1) to

allow pressurization to less than the set pressure of any pressure

relief device or to within safety limits of the operating equipment.

The EPA has also recently become aware that there are batch processes

operating at greater than 10 psig for which the owner or operator also

wishes to use the pressure/vacuum test provisions of the rule. In such

cases, the precision requirements for the pressure gauge

(2.5 mm mercury in the range of the test pressure) could

mean no pressure gauge would be available or no gauge would be

available at a reasonable cost. To determine whether any revision to

these provisions would be appropriate, the EPA reviewed the basis for

the precision specification for the pressure gauge. It was found that

the precision specified in the rule was the result of the assumed range

of test pressures, an assumed test duration of 15 minutes, and a

relative accuracy of 10 percent. Based on these findings

EPA thinks that it would be appropriate to allow an alternative

procedure for cases where a pressure gauge with a precision of

2.5 mm mercury in the range of the test pressure is not

reasonably available. The EPA proposes to allow the owner or operator

to use a pressure gauge with a precision of 10 percent of

the test pressure and to extend the duration of the test for the time

necessary to detect a pressure loss (or rise) that equals a rate of 1

psig/hr.

IV. Proposed Changes to Subpart I

A. Notification and Compliance Dates for Process Changes

Presently, subpart I does not specify compliance dates for process

units or equipment affected by operational changes as is done in

Secs. 63.100(k) through (m) of subpart F. These subpart F provisions

specify the notification and approval requirements for each type of

change as well as the compliance date for equipment affected by the

change. These procedures were included in subpart F to allow HON

sources to follow the administrative procedures in subpart F, subpart

G, and, as appropriate, the administrative procedures of subpart A and

the operating permits rule until final action on the section 112(g)

rule resolves the question of whether individual MACT standard

administrative procedures supersede the administrative procedures of

the section 112(g) rule. These provisions were omitted from subpart I.

To correct this omission paragraphs (g)(3), (g)(4), and (h) are

proposed to be added to Sec. 63.190 to specify compliance dates for

operational changes that are expected to occur.

B. Definitions

Definitions for ``process unit'' and ``source'' are proposed to be

added to Sec. 63.191 to correct an oversight. These definitions were

inadvertently omitted in drafting the final rule. The proposed

definition for ``process unit'' is derived from the original definition

agreed to by the Committee. The proposed definition for ``source'' is

based on the definition for ``source'' in subpart F.

Due to several requests for clarification of the applicability of

subpart I to operations at pharmaceutical facilities, the EPA is also

proposing a revision to the definition of ``pharmaceutical production

process.'' The provisions of subpart I were intended to apply only to

those pharmaceutical production processes that synthesize a

pharmaceutical product. At facilities with solvent recovery

capabilities, waste solvent from the synthesis process is generally

recovered and purified in a step separate from the pharmaceutical

synthesis process. The provisions of subpart I were not intended to

cover such solvent recovery processes. Peripheral operations not

necessary for the production of the drug, such as formulation (the

physical mixing of one or more final products), tablet coating

(physically coating the final product), and solvent recovery

(repurifying the solvent after drug production and reintroducing the

pure solvent into raw solvent storage), are not considered part of the

pharmaceutical production process as defined in subpart I. Therefore,

EPA is proposing to add a phrase to the last sentence in the definition

to clarify that solvent recovery operations located at pharmaceutical

facilities are not subject to the provisions of Subpart I. This

definition for ``pharmaceutical production process'' in subpart I

should be viewed as being unique to subpart I and should not be viewed

as determining applicability in other standards.

C. Bench-Scale Batch Process Equipment

It has recently come to EPA's attention that there are a few

pharmaceutical companies producing products in extremely small batches

using laboratory or small bench-scale equipment. The equipment in these

processes is very small (typically valves and connectors are less than

0.5 inches in diameter) and is closely-spaced. These small bench-scale

processes typically produce a kilogram or less of product per batch and

only a small number of batches are run each year. However, because the

components in these processes are generally in HAP service more than

300 hours per year, the processes would be subject to the provisions of

subparts I and H. The EPA is revising Sec. 63.190(f) of subpart I to

clarify that bench-scale batch processes are not subject to the

provisions of subpart I and H. A definition for ``bench-scale batch

process'' is also being added to Sec. 63.191 of subpart I. The EPA

thinks that this correction is necessary because the equipment cannot

reasonably be monitored and repaired routinely for any rational

benefit. The equipment in these processes is so tightly situated that

access by the monitor probe is essentially precluded and it is

difficult to determine the origin of a leak if one is detected.

Furthermore, due to the size of these units, emissions would be

insignificant due to the small number of components, the amount of time

the components are in HAP [[Page 18075]] service, and the small

quantities of materials processed.

V. Administrative

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements of the previously

promulgated NESHAP were submitted to and approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB). A copy of this Information Collection

Request (ICR) document (OMB control number 1414.02) may be obtained

from Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch (2136); U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW; Washington, DC 20460 or by calling

(202) 260-2740.

Today's proposed changes to the NESHAP should have no impact on the

information collection burden estimates made previously. The changes

consist of new definitions, alternative test procedures, and

clarifications of requirements; not additional requirements.

Consequently, the ICR has not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

The HON rule promulgated on April 22, 1994 was considered

``significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and a regulatory impact

analysis (RIA) was prepared. The amendments issued today clarify the

rule and do not add any additional control requirements. The EPA

believes that these amendments would have a negligible impact on the

results of the RIA and the change is considered to be within the

uncertainty of the analysis.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires the identification

of potentially adverse impacts of Federal regulations upon small

business entities. The Act specifically requires the completion of a

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those instances where small business

impacts are possible. Because this rulemaking imposes no adverse

economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been

prepared.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous

substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 28, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

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

63 subparts F, H and I of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed

to be amended as follows:

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

Authority: Sections 101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air

Act (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq., as amended by Pub. L. 101-549, 104

Stat. 2399).

Subpart F--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air

Pollutants From the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing

Industry

Table 1 of Subpart F--[Amended]

2. Table 1 of subpart F is amended by removing the entries for

glycerol tri-(polyoxypropylene)ether, polyethylene glycol, and

polypropylene glycol and their associated CAS number and group number.

Subpart H--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Equipment Leaks

3. Section 63.160 is amended by adding a new paragraph (c) to read

as follows:

Sec. 63.160 Applicability and designation of source.

* * * * *

(c) If a process unit subject to the provisions of this subpart has

equipment to which this subpart does not apply, but which is subject to

a standard identified in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section,

the owner or operator may elect to apply this subpart to all such

equipment in the process unit. If the owner or operator elects this

method of compliance, all VOC in such equipment shall be considered,

for purposes of applicability and compliance with this subpart, as if

it were organic HAP. Compliance with the provisions of this subpart, in

the manner described in this paragraph, shall be deemed to constitute

compliance with the standard identified in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2)

of this section.

(1) 40 CFR part 60 subpart VV, GGG, or KKK; or

(2) 40 CFR part 61 subpart F or J.

* * * * *

4. Section 63.161 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the

definitions ``flow indicator'' and ``sampling connection system'' to

read as follows:

Sec. 63.161 Definitions.

* * * * *

Flow indicator means a device which indicates whether gas flow is,

or whether the valve position would allow gas flow to be present, in a

line.

* * * * *

Sampling connection system means an assembly of equipment within a

process unit used during periods of representative operation to take

samples of the process fluid. Equipment used to take non-routine grab

samples is not considered a sampling connection system.

* * * * *

5. Section 63.163 is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as

follows:

Sec. 63.166 Standards: Pumps in light liquid service.

* * * * *

(j) Any pump that is designated, as described in

Sec. 63.181(b)(7)(i) of this subpart, as an unsafe-to-monitor pump is

exempt from the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (e) of this

section if:

(1) The owner or operator of the pump determines that the pump is

unsafe to monitor because monitoring personnel would be exposed to an

immediate danger as a consequence of complying with paragraphs (b)

through (d) of this section; and

(2) The owner or operator of the pump has a written plan that

requires monitoring of the pump as frequently as practicable during

safe-to-monitor times, but not more frequently than the periodic

monitoring schedule otherwise applicable.

6. Section 63.166 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to

read as follows:

Sec. 63.166 Standards: Sampling connection systems.

(a) Each sampling connection system shall be equipped with a

closed-purge, closed-loop, or closed-vent system, except as provided in

Sec. 63.162(b) of this subpart. Gases displaced during filling of the

sample container are not required to be collected or captured.

(b) Each closed-purge, closed-loop, or closed-vent system as

required in paragraph (a) of this section shall:

(1) Return the purged process fluid directly to the process line;

or

(2) Collect and recycle the purged process fluid to a process;

(3) Be designed and operated to capture and transport the purged

process fluid to a control device that complies with the requirements

of Sec. 63.172 of this subpart; or

(4) Collect and transport the purged process fluid to a system or

facility identified in paragraph (b)(4)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this

section.

(i) A waste management unit as defined in Sec. 63.111 of subpart G

of this part, if the waste management unit is subject to, and operated

in compliance with the provisions of subpart G of this part applicable

to group 1 wastewater streams. [[Page 18076]]

(ii) A treatment, storage, or disposal facility subject to

regulation under 40 CFR part 264, 265, or 266; or

(iii) A facility permitted, licensed, or registered by a State to

manage municipal or industrial solid waste, if the process fluids are

not hazardous waste as defined in 40 CFR part 261.

* * * * *

7. Section 63.167 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as

follows:

Sec. 63.167 Standards: Open-ended valves or lines.

* * * * *

(e) Open-ended valves or lines containing materials which would

autocatalytically polymerize or, would prevent an explosion, serious

overpressure, or other safety hazard if capped or equipped with a

double block and bleed system as specified in paragraphs (a) through

(c) of this section are exempt from the requirements of paragraph (a)

through (c) of this section.

8. Section 63.168 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(3) to

read as follows:

Sec. 63.168 Standards: Valves in gas/vapor service and in light liquid

service.

(a) * * *

(3) The use of monitoring data generated before April 22, 1994 to

qualify for less frequent monitoring is governed by the provisions of

Sec. 63.180(b)(6) of this subpart.

* * * * *

9. Section 63.172 is amended by revising the first sentence of

paragraph (j)(1) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.172 Standards: Closed-vent systems and control devices.

* * * * *

(j) * * *

(1) Install, set or adjust, maintain, and operate a flow indicator

that takes a reading at least once every 15 minutes. * * *

* * * * *

10. Section 63.173 is amended by adding paragraphs (h), (i) and (j)

to read as follows:

Sec. 63.173 Standards: Agitators in gas/vapor service and in light

liquid service.

* * * * *

(h) Any agitator that is difficult-to-monitor is exempt from the

requirements of paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section if:

(1) The owner or operator determines that the agitator cannot be

monitored without elevating the monitoring personnel more than 2 meters

above a support surface or it is not accessible at anytime in a safe

manner;

(2) The process unit within which the agitator is located is an

existing source or the owner or operator designates less than 3 percent

of the total number of agitators in a new source as difficult-to-

monitor; and

(3) The owner or operator follows a written plan that requires

monitoring of the agitator at least once per calendar year.

(i) Any agitator that is obstructed by equipment or piping that

prevents access to the agitator by a monitor probe is exempt from the

monitoring requirements of paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section.

(j) Any agitator that is designated, as described in

Sec. 63.181(b)(7)(i) of this subpart, as an unsafe-to-monitor agitator

is exempt from the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (d) of this

section if:

(1) The owner or operator of the agitator determines that the

agitator is unsafe to monitor because monitoring personnel would be

exposed to an immediate danger as a consequence of complying with

paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section; and

(2) The owner or operator of the agitator has a written plan that

requires monitoring of the agitator as frequently as practicable during

safe-to-monitor times, but not more frequently than the periodic

monitoring schedule otherwise applicable.

11. Section 63.174 is amended by adding a new paragraph (b)(4) and

by revising the first sentence of paragraph (h)(1) introductory text to

read as follows:

Sec. 63.174 Standards: Connectors in gas/vapor service and in light

liquid service.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) The use of monitoring data generated before April 22, 1994 to

qualify for less frequent monitoring is governed by the provisions of

Sec. 63.180(b)(6).

* * * * *

(h)(1) Any connector that is inaccessible or is ceramic or ceramic-

lined (e.g., porcelain, glass, or glass-lined), is exempt from the

monitoring requirements of paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section and

from the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of Sec. 63.181 and

Sec. 63.182 of this subpart. * * *

* * * * *

12. Section 63.180 is amended by redesignating paragraph (b)(2) as

(b)(2)(i) and revising the first sentence of newly designated paragraph

(b)(2)(i), by adding a paragraph (b)(2)(ii), by revising paragraph

(b)(4)(iii), by revising paragraph (b)(6) by revising paragraph (f)(1),

and by adding a sentence to paragraph (f)(4) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.180 Test methods and procedures.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2)(i) Except as provided for in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this

section, the detection instrument shall meet the performance criteria

of Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, except the instrument

response factor criteria in section 3.1.2(a) of Method 21 shall be for

the average composition of the process fluid not each individual VOC in

the stream. * * *

(ii) If no instrument is available at the plant site that will meet

the performance criteria specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this

section, the instrument readings may be adjusted by multiplying by the

average response factor of the process fluid, calculated on an inert-

free basis as described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section.

(3) * * *

(4) * * *

(iii) The instrument may be calibrated at a higher methane

concentration than the concentration specified for that piece of

equipment. The concentration of the calibration gas may exceed the

concentration specified as a leak by no more than 2,000 parts per

million. If the monitoring instrument's design allows for multiple

calibration scales, then the lower scale shall be calibrated with a

calibration gas that is no higher than 2,000 parts per million above

the concentration specified as a leak and the highest scale shall be

calibrated with a calibration gas that is approximately equal to 10,000

parts per million.

* * * * *

(6) Monitoring data that do not meet the criteria specified in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) of this section may be used to qualify

for less frequent monitoring under the provisions in Sec. 63.168 (d)(2)

and (d)(3) or Sec. 63.174 (b)(3)(ii) or (b)(3)(iii) of this subpart

provided the data meet the conditions specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(i)

and (b)(6)(ii) of this section.

(i) The data were obtained before April 22, 1994.

(ii) The departures from the criteria specified in paragraphs

(b)(1) through (b)(5) of this section or from the specified monitoring

frequency of Sec. 63.168(c) are minor and do not significantly affect

the quality of the data. Examples of minor departures are monitoring at

a slightly different frequency (such as every 6 weeks instead of

monthly or quarterly), following the performance criteria of section

3.1.2(a) of Method 21 of Appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 instead of

paragraph (b)(2) of this section, or monitoring at a different leak

definition [[Page 18077]] if the data would indicate the presence or

absence of a leak at the concentration specified in this subpart.

Failure to use a calibrated instrument is not considered a minor

departure.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) The batch product-process equipment train shall be pressurized

with a gas to a pressure less than the set pressure of any safety

relief devices or valves or to a pressure slightly above the operating

pressure of the equipment, or alternatively the equipment shall be

placed under a vacuum.

(2) * * *

(3) * * *

(4) * * * If such a pressure measurement device is not reasonably

available, the owner or operator shall use a pressure measurement

device with a precision of at least 10 percent of the test

pressure of the equipment and shall extend the duration of the test for

the time necessary to detect a pressure loss or rise that equals a rate

of 1 psig per hour.

* * * * *

13. Section 63.181 is amended by revising the introductory text in

paragraph (b)(7) and by revising paragraph (b)(7)(ii) to read as

follows:

Sec. 63.181 Recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(7) The following information pertaining to all pumps subject to

the provisions of Sec. 63.163(j), valves subject to the provisions of

Sec. 63.168(h) and (i) of this subpart, agitators subject to the

provisions of Sec. 63.173(h) through (j), and connectors subject to the

provisions of Sec. 63.174 (f) through (h) of this subpart shall be

recorded:

(i) * * *

(ii) A list of identification numbers for the equipment that is

designated as difficult to monitor, an explanation of why the equipment

is difficult to monitor, and the planned schedule for monitoring this

equipment.

* * * * *

Subpart I--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated

Regulation for Equipment Leaks

14. Section 63.190 is amended by revising paragraph (f), paragraphs

(g)(1) introductory text and (g)(2) introductory text, by adding

paragraphs (g)(3) and (g)(4), and revising paragraph (i) to read as

follows:

Sec. 63.190 Applicability and designation of source.

* * * * *

(f) The provisions of subparts I and H of this part do not apply to

research and development facilities or to bench-scale batch processes,

regardless of whether the facilities or processes are located at the

same plant site as a process subject to the provisions of subpart I and

H of this part.

(g)(1) If an additional process unit specified in paragraph (b) of

this section is added to a plant site that is a major source as defined

in section 112(a) of the Act, the addition shall be subject to the

requirements for a new source in subparts H and I of this part if:

* * * * *

(2) If any change is made to a process subject to this subpart, the

change shall be subject to the requirements for a new source in

subparts H and I of this part if:

* * * * *

(3) If an additional process unit is added to a plant site or a

change is made to a process unit and the addition or change is

determined to be subject to the new source requirements according to

paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this section:

(i) The new or reconstructed source shall be in compliance with the

new source requirements of subparts H and I of this part upon initial

start-up of the new or reconstructed source or by April 22, 1994,

whichever is later; and

(ii) The owner or operator of the new or reconstructed source shall

comply with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements in subparts H

and I of this part that are applicable to new sources. The applicable

reports include, but are not limited to:

(A) Reports required by Sec. 63.182(b), if not previously

submitted, Sec. 63.182(c) and (d) of subpart H of this part; and

(B) Reports and notifications required by subpart A of this part

that are applicable to subparts H and I of this part, as identified in

Sec. 63.192(a) of this subpart.

(4) If an additional process unit is added to a plant site, if a

surge control vessel or bottoms receiver becomes subject to Sec. 63.170

of subpart H, or if a compressor becomes subject to Sec. 63.164 of

subpart H, and if the addition or change is not subject to the new

source requirements as determined according to paragraphs (g)(1) or

(g)(2) of this section, the requirements in paragraphs (g)(4)(i)

through (g)(4)(iii) of this section shall apply. Examples of process

changes include, but are not limited to, changes in production

capacity, feedstock type, or catalyst type, or whenever there is

replacement, removal, or addition of recovery equipment. For purposes

of this paragraph, process changes do not include: process upsets,

unintentional temporary process changes, and changes that are within

the equipment configuration and operating conditions documented in the

Notification of Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.182(c) of subpart

H of this part.

(i) The added emission point(s) and any emission point(s) within

the added or changed process unit are subject to the requirements of

subparts H and I of this part for an existing source;

(ii) The added emission point(s) and any emission point(s) within

the added or changed process unit shall be in compliance with subparts

H and I of this part by the dates specified in paragraphs (g)(4)(ii)(A)

or (g)(4)(ii)(B) of this section, as applicable.

(A) If a process unit is added to a plant site or an emission

point(s) is added to an existing process unit, the added process unit

or emission point(s) shall be in compliance upon initial start-up of

the added process unit or emission point(s) or by April 22, 1997,

whichever is later.

(B) If a surge control vessel or bottoms receiver becomes subject

to Sec. 63.170 of subpart H, if a compressor becomes subject to

Sec. 63.164 of subpart H, or if a deliberate operational process change

causes equipment to become subject to subpart H of this part, the owner

or operator shall be in compliance upon initial start-up or by April

22, 1997, whichever is later, unless the owner or operator demonstrates

to the Administrator that achieving compliance will take longer than

making the change. The owner or operator shall submit to the

Administrator for approval a compliance schedule, along with a

justification for the schedule. The Administrator shall approve the

compliance schedule or request changes within 120 calendar days of

receipt of the compliance schedule and justification.

(iii) The owner or operator of a process unit or emission point

that is added to a plant site and is subject to the requirements for

existing sources shall comply with the reporting and recordkeeping

requirements of subparts H and I of this part that are applicable to

existing sources, including, but not limited to, the reports listed in

paragraphs (g)(4)(iii)(A) and (g)(4)(iii)(B) of this section.

(A) Reports required by Sec. 63.182 of subpart H of this part; and

(B) Reports and notifications required by subpart A of this part

that are applicable to subparts H and I of this part, as identified in

Sec. 63.192(a) of this subpart.

[[Page 18078]]

(i) If a change that does not meet the criteria in paragraph (g)(4)

of this section is made to a process unit subject to subparts H and I

of this part, and the change causes equipment to become subject to the

provisions of subpart H of this part, then the owner or operator shall

comply with the requirements of subpart H of this part for the

equipment as expeditiously as practicable, but in no event later than 3

years after the equipment becomes subject.

(1) The owner or operator shall submit to the Administrator for

approval a compliance schedule, along with a justification for the

schedule.

(2) The Administrator shall approve the compliance schedule or

request changes within 120 calendar days of receipt of the compliance

schedule and justification.

* * * * *

15. Section 63.191 is amended by adding in alphabetical order

definitions for ``bench-scale batch process,'' ``process unit,'' and

``source'' to paragraph (b) and revising the definition of

``pharmaceutical production process'' in paragraph (b) to read as

follows:

Sec. 63.191 Definitions.

(b) * * *

Bench-scale batch process means a batch process (other than a

research and development facility) that is capable of being located on

a laboratory bench top. This bench-scale equipment will typically

include reagent feed vessels, a small reactor and associated product

separator, recovery and holding equipment. These processes are only

capable of producing small quantities of product.

* * * * *

Pharmaceutical production process means a process that synthesizes

pharmaceutical intermediate or final products using carbon

tetrachloride or methylene chloride as a reactant or process solvent.

Pharmaceutical production process does not mean process operations

involving formulation activities, such as tablet coating or spray

coating of drug particles, or solvent recovery.

* * * * *

Process unit means the equipment assembled and connected by pipes

or ducts to process raw materials and to manufacture a product. For the

purposes of this subpart, process unit includes all unit operations and

associated equipment (e.g., reactors and associated product separators

and recovery devices), associated unit operations (e.g., extraction

columns), any feed and product storage vessels, and any transfer racks

for distribution of final product.

* * * * *

Source means the collection of equipment listed in Sec. 63.190(d)

to which this subpart applies as determined by the criteria in

Sec. 63.190. For purposes of subparts H and I of this part, the term

affected source as used in subpart A of this part has the same meaning

as the term source defined in this definition.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95-8201 Filed 4-7-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P