National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on amendments to the

national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for

off-site waste and recovery operations (OSWRO) that the EPA promulgated

on July 1, 1996, under authority of section 112 of the Clean Air Act

(CAA). The rule applies to owners and operators of facilities that are

major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) and manage certain

wastes, used oil, or used solvents received from off-site locations.

The EPA is amending specific provisions in the rule to resolve issues

and questions raised after promulgation of the final rule. In addition,

the EPA is amending other rule language to correct technical omissions;

to make specific requirements consistent and up-to-date with recent

decisions made by the Agency for other related air rules; and to

correct typographical, printing, and grammatical errors. The amendments

do not significantly change the EPA's original projections for the

rule's environmental benefits, compliance costs, burden on industry, or

the number of affected facilities.

DATES: Effective Date. This rule is effective on September 20, 1999

without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by

August 19, 1999. If we receive such comment, we will publish a timely

withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule

will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Interested parties having adverse comments on this

action may submit these comments in writing (in duplicate, if possible)

to Docket No. A-92-16 at the following address: Air and Radiation

Docket and Information Center (6102), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Room 1500, Washington, DC 20460. The EPA

requests that a separate copy of the comments also be sent to the

contact person listed below. The docket is located at the above address

in Room M-1500, Waterside mall (ground floor).

Today's document and other materials related to this direct final

rulemaking are available for review in the docket. Copies of this

information may be obtained by request from the Air Docket by calling

(202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket

materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Elaine Manning, Waste and Chemical

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

Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711,

telephone number (919) 541-5499, facsimile number (919) 541-0246,

electronic mail address ``[email protected]''.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by this action include the following

types of facilities if the facility receives ``off-site material'' as

defined in the rule, and the facility is determined to be a major

source of HAP emissions as defined in 40 CFR 63.2.

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

Category Examples of regulated entities

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

Industry.......................... Businesses that receive waste, used

oil, or used solvent from off-site

locations and manage this material

in any of the following waste

management or recovery operations:

hazardous waste treatment, storage,

and disposal facilities (TSDF);

hazardous wastewater treatment

operations exempted from air

emission control requirements in 40

CFR part 264 or 265; nonhazardous

wastewater treatment facilities

other than publicly-owned treatment

works; used solvent recovery

operations; recovery operations

that recycle or reprocess hazardous

waste and are exempted from

regulation as a TSDF in 40 CFR part

264 or 265; and used oil re-

refineries.

Federal Government................ Federal agency facilities that

operate any of the waste management

or recovery operations that meet

the description of the entities

listed under the ``Industry''

category in this table.

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

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a

guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this

action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA is now

aware could potentially be regulated by this action.

A comprehensive list of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

codes cannot be compiled for businesses potentially regulated by this

action due to the structure of the rule. The rule may be applicable to

any business that receives waste, used oil, or used solvent from an

off-site location and then manages this material in one of the

operations or processes specified in the rule. Thus, for many

businesses subject to the rule, the regulated sources (i.e., off-site

waste management or recovery operations) are only a small part of the

overall manufacturing process or service conducted at the facility. In

these cases, the SIC code indicates the primary product produced or

service provided at the facility rather than the presence of an off-

site waste management or recovery operation at the site which is

operated to support the predominate function of the facility. For

example, SIC code classifications likely to have off-site waste

management or recovery operations at some (but not all) facilities

include, but are not limited to, petroleum refineries (SIC code 2911),

industrial organic chemical manufacturing (SIC code 286x), plastic

materials and synthetics manufacturing (SIC code 282x), and

miscellaneous chemical products manufacturing (SIC code 289x). However,

the EPA also is aware of off-site waste management or recovery

operations potentially subject to the rule being located at a few

facilities listed under SIC codes for refuse systems, waste management,

business services, miscellaneous services, and nonclassifiable. Thus,

the SIC code alone for a given facility does not determine whether the

facility is or is not potentially subject to this rule.

To determine whether your facility is regulated by the action, you

should carefully examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.680

under 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD. If you have questions regarding the

applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this

document.

Internet

The text of today's document is also available on the EPA's web

site on the Internet under recently signed rules at the following

address: http://

[[Page 38951]]

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/rules.html. The EPA's Office of Air and Radiation

(OAR) homepage on the Internet also contains a wide range of

information on the air toxics program and many other air pollution

programs and issues. The OAR's homepage address is: http://www.epa.gov/

oar/.

Electronic Access and Filing Addresses

The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public

version, has been established for this rulemaking under Docket No. A-

92-16 (including comments and data submitted electronically). A public

version of this record, including printed, paper versions of electronic

comments, which does not include any information claimed as

confidential business information (CBI), is available for inspection

from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The official rulemaking record is located at the address

listed in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document.

Interested parties having adverse comments on this action may

submit those comments electronically to the EPA's Air and Radiation

Docket and Information Center at: ``A-and-R-D[email protected].''

Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use

of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data

will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 6.1 file format or

ASCII file format. All comments and data in electronic form must be

identified by the docket number (A-92-16). No CBI should be submitted

through electronic mail. Electronic comments may be filed online at

many Federal Depository Libraries.

Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of an NESHAP is

available only by filing 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 final rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the

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

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

enforce these requirements.

Outline

The information in this document is organized as follows.

I. Statutory Authority

II. Background

III. Amendments to Subpart DD--National Emission Standards for Off-

Site Waste and Recovery Operations

A. Applicability

B. Definitions

C. Standards: General

D. Standards: Off-Site Material Treatment

E. Standards: Tanks

F. Standards: Process Vents

G. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and Control Devices

H. Testing Methods and Procedures

I. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

J. Notification and Reporting Requirements

K. HAP List for Subpart DD

IV. Amendments to Subpart OO--National Emission Standards for

Tanks--Level 1

A. Definitions

B. Standards--Tank Fixed Roof

C. Test Methods and Procedures

D. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

V. Amendments to Subpart PP--National Emission Standards for

Containers

A. Definitions

B. Test Methods and Procedures

C. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

VI. Amendments to Subpart QQ--National Emission Standards for

Surface Impoundments

A. Definitions

B. Test Methods and Procedures

C. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

VII. Amendments to Subpart RR--National Emission Standards for

Individual Drain Systems

VIII. Amendments to Subpart VV--National Emission Standards for Oil-

Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators

A. Definitions

B. Standards--Pressurized Separator

C. Test Methods and Procedures

D. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

IX. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

C. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnerships

D. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

E. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Statutory Authority

The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections

101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et

seq.).

II. Background

The EPA, under 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD promulgated National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Off-Site Waste and

Recovery Operations (hereinafter referred to as the ``OSWRO NESHAP'')

on July 1, 1996 (see 61 FR 34140). The OSWRO NESHAP establishes

standards to control HAP emissions from certain waste management and

recovery operations that are not subject to Federal air standards under

other subparts in 40 CFR parts 61 or 63. Subpart DD specifies the

rule's applicability, standards for affected sources, compliance

requirements, and reporting and recordkeeping provisions. In addition,

subpart DD cross-references other subparts in 40 CFR part 63 for the

specific air emissions control requirements to be used for affected

tanks, surface impoundments, containers, individual drain systems, and

oil-water and organic-water separators. The cross-referenced subparts

are Subpart OO--National Emission Standards for Tanks--Level 1, Subpart

PP--National Emission Standards for Containers, Subpart QQ--National

Emission Standards for Surface Impoundments, Subpart RR--National

Emission Standards for Individual Drain Systems, and Subpart VV--

National Emission Standards for Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water

Separators.

Since the promulgation of the OSWRO NESHAP, the EPA has received

many inquiries asking for the Agency's interpretation of specific

provisions of the rule. In addition, the Chemical Manufacturers

Association (CMA), the Environmental Technology Council (ETC), and the

Hazardous Waste Management Association (HWMA) petitioned for judicial

review of the final rule, as provided for in CAA section 307(b), with

respect to certain provisions regarding rule applicability,

definitions, process vent standards, test methods, and inspection and

monitoring requirements.

To resolve issues and questions raised after promulgation of the

final rule, the EPA decided that technical amendments to subparts DD,

OO, PP, QQ, RR, and VV in 40 CFR part 63 are appropriate and to use a

direct final rulemaking action to promulgate these amendments. Also, as

part of this action, the EPA is amending other rule language to correct

technical omissions; to make specific requirements consistent and up-

to-date with recent EPA decisions made for other related air rules; and

to correct terminology, typographical, printing, and grammatical

errors. The amendments do not significantly change the EPA's original

projections for the rule's compliance costs, environmental benefits,

burden on industry, or the number of affected facilities.

The EPA is publishing these amendments to subparts DD, OO, PP, QQ,

RR, and VV in 40 CFR part 63 without prior proposal, because we

[[Page 38952]]

view the amendments to be noncontroversial and anticipate no adverse

comment. The amendments do not change the substantive requirements of

the rule. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal

Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will

serve as the proposal of the identical amendments to these subparts if

adverse comments are filed. The amendments will be effective 60 days

from today's date without further notice, unless we receive adverse

comment by the date specified in the DATES section at the beginning of

this document. If the EPA receives adverse comment on these amendments,

we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing

the public that the amendments will not take effect. We will address

the comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We

will not institute a second comment period for these amendments. Any

parties interested in commenting on the amendments must do so at this

time (see ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document).

III. Amendments to Subpart DD--National Emission Standards for Off-

Site Waste and Recovery Operations

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, to clarify the

Agency's intent for applying and implementing specific rule

requirements and to correct unintentional omissions and editorial

errors. Also, we are amending the OSWRO NESHAP to make the applicable

provisions of the rule consistent (to the extent permissible and

practicable under the CAA) with a related set of air standards for

hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDF)

established under the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) in 40

CFR part 264, subpart CC and 40 CFR part 265, subpart CC. A summary of

amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, and the rationale for the

amendments is presented below.

A. Applicability

The EPA is amending Sec. 63.680 to clarify which types of materials

received at a plant site are ``off-site materials'' and to clarify the

designation of the affected sources at a plant site subject to the rule

as discussed below. In addition, the EPA is extending the compliance

date by 7 months to February 1, 2000. We believe this is appropriate to

allow affected sources time to comply with today's amended rule.

1. ``Off-Site Material''

The OSWRO NESHAP applies to those plant sites that are a ``major

source'' as defined in 40 CFR 63.2 and receive ``off-site material'' as

specified in subpart DD. For implementing the OSWRO NESHAP, a material

is an ``off-site material'' if the material meets all three of the

criteria specified in Sec. 63.680(b)(1). To clarify that a given

material must meet all three criteria to be considered an ``off-site

material,'' the wording in Sec. 63.680(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(1)(iii) is

revised by replacing the word ``material'' with the phrase ``waste,

used oil, or used solvent.''

Section 63.680(b)(2) lists specific categories of wastes that are

not considered ``off-site material'' regardless if the waste contains

HAP or is received from an off-site location. The rule language is

amended to clarify the compliance liability of an owner or operator

potentially subject to the OSWRO NESHAP but receiving a waste that is

exempted from the rule because it is already complying with air

emission control requirements under the National Emission Standards for

Benzene Waste Operations (40 CFR part 61, subpart FF) or the National

Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the

Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry under 40 CFR part 63

(the HON). Section 63.680(b)(2)(v) is revised to clarify that a waste

is not an ``off-site material'' under the OSWRO NESHAP when it is

transferred from a chemical manufacturing plant or other facility

subject to the HON provisions for wastewater under 40 CFR part 63,

subpart G (i.e., Sec. 63.132 through 63.147), and the owner or operator

of the facility from which the waste is transferred complies with the

HON provisions in Sec. 63.132(g). Similarly, Sec. 63.680(b)(2)(vi) is

revised to clarify that a waste is not an ``off-site material'' under

the OSWRO NESHAP when it is transferred from a chemical manufacturing

plant, petroleum refinery, or coke by-product recovery plant subject to

40 CFR part 61, subpart FF, and the owner or operator of the facility

from which the waste is transferred complies with the provisions of

Sec. 61.342(f) of the Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP.

Finally, the list of wastes not considered off-site material under

the OSWRO NESHAP is amended by adding another waste category under

Sec. 63.680(b)(2)(viii). This category is RCRA hazardous waste stored

for 10 days or less at a transfer facility and in compliance with the

provisions for hazardous waste transporters in 40 CFR part 263. When

the EPA was developing the OSWRO NESHAP, the Agency did not intend that

subpart DD be applicable to those waste management operations that

serve to consolidate multiple, small hazardous waste shipments into a

single, larger load which then can be more efficiently delivered to the

final destination for the waste. For example, a hazardous waste

transporter may use a fleet of trucks to pickup small shipments of

hazardous waste from many different waste generators; deliver these

shipments to an interim transfer facility where the small shipments are

unloaded; store the waste in the shipping containers at the

transporter's facility for a short period (10 days or less); and then,

when a sufficient quantity of waste has been collected, consolidate the

containers as a single load on another truck or railcar for shipment of

the waste to the facility where the waste is to be treated or disposed.

2. Designation of Affected Sources

Section 63.680(c) is revised to clarify for a plant site subject to

the OSWRO NESHAP which processes, units, and equipment are designated

as affected sources under the rule. These amendments are format and

editorial revisions that do not substantively change the affected

sources regulated under the rule, but are made to clarify the EPA's

intent and improve ease of implementing these affected source

designations.

First, the designation of ``off-site material management units'' in

Sec. 63.680(c)(1) is revised to clarify that a given tank or container

cannot be subject to both the air standards for off-site material

management units (as applicable to the particular type of unit) and for

process vents. Language is added to clarify that if a tank or container

is equipped with a vent that serves as a process vent for one of the

six treatment processes specified in the rule, then the unit is not

part of the ``off-site material management unit'' affected source.

Instead, the unit (i.e., the process vent on this unit) is subject to

the standards for process vents in Sec. 63.683(c). The standards for

off-site material management units in Sec. 63.683(b) do not apply to

the unit. An example of such a case is the vent on a distillate

receiver vessel serving a distillation column used for reprocessing

used solvent. Although the distillate receiver vessel meets the

definition for a ``tank'' in the rule, it is not regulated as a tank

under Sec. 63.683(b), but instead the vessel is considered part of the

``process vent'' affected source.

[[Page 38953]]

Second, the designation of ``process vents'' in Sec. 63.680(c)(2)

is revised to explicitly state the six types of treatment processes

vented to the atmosphere that are considered ``process vent'' affected

sources under the OSWRO NESHAP. The EPA intended the air standards for

process vents under the OSWRO NESHAP to apply to the same types of

processes that the Agency regulates under related RCRA air rules for

process vents in 40 CFR part 264, subpart AA, and 40 CFR part 265,

subpart AA. These processes are distillation processes, fractionation

processes, thin-film evaporation processes, solvent extraction

processes, steam stripping processes, and air stripping. The revision

to Sec. 63.680(c)(2) includes detailed descriptions for each of the six

treatment process types. The description included for each type of

process is consistent with the definition used by the EPA for the

process under the RCRA air rules in 40 CFR part 264, subpart AA, and 40

CFR part 265, subpart AA.

Finally, the criteria designating which equipment components are

subject to the equipment leak standards under the OSWRO NESHAP are

moved from Sec. 63.683(b)(3) to Sec. 63.680(c)(3). This is a format and

editorial revision to facilitate ease of understanding and implementing

the rule and does not change the criteria used to designate which

equipment components are subject to the leak standards under the rule.

B. Definitions

The amendments revise several existing rule definitions and add two

new definitions to Sec. 63.681. These definition changes are made in

support of other amendments that the EPA has made to subpart DD to

resolve applicability issues and to clarify the intent of certain

standards under the rule.

The definition for a ``used solvent'' as used in Sec. 63.680(b) to

determine which types of materials received at a plant site are ``off-

site materials'' is revised to mean a mixture of aliphatic hydrocarbons

or a mixture of one and two ring aromatic hydrocarbons used as a

solvent which because of such use is contaminated by physical or

chemical impurities. This wording revision is made to clarify that only

solvents considered under the rule to be an ``off-site material'' are

those spent or otherwise contaminated solvents resulting from use by a

consumer (e.g., solvents used for cleaning, degreasing, paint

stripping, etc.) and subsequently returned to a facility for recycling

or reprocessing.

The ``process vent'' definition is revised to be consistent with

revisions made to Sec. 63.680(c)(2) designating the ``process vent''

affected sources under the OSWRO NESHAP (see section III.A.2 of this

document). Additional wording is also added to the definition for a

``process vent'' to clarify that for the purpose of implementing the

OSWRO NESHAP, a process vent is neither a vent used as a safety device

(as defined in the rule) nor an open-ended line or other vent that is

subject to the rule's equipment leak control requirements in

Sec. 63.691.

A new definition is added for the term ``off-site material

service'' for use in the revisions made to Sec. 63.680(c)(3)

designating the equipment leak affected sources under the OSWRO NESHAP

(see section III.A.2 of this document). ``Off-site material service''

means any time when a pump, compressor, agitator, pressure relief

device, sampling connection system, open-ended valve or line, valve,

connector, or instrumentation system contains or contacts off-site

material.

The definition for ``HAP'' or ``hazardous air pollutants'' as used

throughout subpart DD is clarified. The definition is revised to mean

the specific organic chemical compounds, isomers, and mixtures listed

in Table 1 of subpart DD. The definition for ``volatile organic

hazardous air pollutant concentration'' (also referred to as ``VOHAP

concentration'') is revised to clarify that the VOHAP concentration of

an off-site material by definition is measured using Method 305 in 40

CFR part 63, appendix A. However, as an alternative to using Method

305, an owner or operator may determine the HAP concentration of an

off-site material using any one of the alternative test methods

specified in Sec. 63.694(b)(2)(ii). When one of these alternative test

methods is used to determine the speciated HAP concentration of an off-

site material, the individual compound concentration may be adjusted by

the corresponding fm305 value listed in Table 1 of subpart

DD to determine an equivalent VOHAP concentration.

The definition for ``point-of-treatment'' is revised to clarify

procedures for demonstrating compliance with the off-site material

treatment standards in Sec. 63.684. ``Point-of-treatment'' is revised

to mean the point after the treated material exits the treatment

process but before the first point downstream of the process where the

organic constituents in the treated material have the potential to

volatilize and be released to the atmosphere. For applying this

definition to the rule, the first point downstream of the treatment

process exit is not a fugitive emission point due to an equipment leak

from any of the following equipment components: pumps, compressors,

valves, connectors, instrumentation systems, or safety devices.

Several definition amendments are made to clarify the requirements

for air emission control equipment under Sec. 63.693. The definition

for a ``control device'' is revised to clarify that a control device

means equipment used for recovering, removing, oxidizing, or destroying

organic vapors. The definition for a ``cover'' is revised to clarify

that a cover must provide a continuous barrier over the off-site

material, and that each cover opening (e.g., access hatches, sampling

ports) must be in the closed position when the opening is not in use. A

new definition is added to the rule for the term ``flow indicator'' in

conjunction with amendments to the closed-vent system standards in

Sec. 63.693(c) (see section III.G.1 of this document). A ``flow

indicator'' means a device that indicates whether gas is flowing, or

whether the valve position would allow gas to flow in a bypass line.

Finally, the definition for a ``safety device'' is amended to mean

a closure device (e.g., a pressure relief valve, frangible disc,

fusible plug) which functions to prevent physical damage or permanent

deformation to equipment by venting gases or vapors from the equipment

during unsafe conditions resulting from an unplanned, accidental, or

emergency event. The EPA has made this revision to the wording of the

definition to provide owner and operator flexibility in the use and

location of these necessary devices. Wording changes clarify that a

safety device may be used on not just the air pollution control

equipment operated to comply with the rule but also on the controlled

source's process and ancillary equipment. Also, instead of venting a

safety device directly to the atmosphere when emergency relief is

necessary, a common practice at some facilities is to vent the safety

device directly to equipment designed specifically and solely to

contain or control the vented gases and vapors. The EPA made a second

wording change to clarify that the EPA did not intend to preclude from

the control equipment operating conditions allowed under the rule, the

opening of a safety device when used with additional safety equipment.

C. Standards: General

Several revisions are made to the exemptions from air standards

allowed

[[Page 38954]]

under the OSWRO NESHAP for ``off-site material management unit'' and

``process vent'' affected sources. These amendments do not

significantly change the HAP emission reductions and the implementation

costs expected for the rule. Also, the format and organization used for

the section is revised to improve the ease of understanding and

applying the standards. The requirements and exemptions are grouped

together by affected source type. For example, all of the requirements

and exemptions applicable to off-site material management units are now

found in Sec. 63.683(b).

1. Off-Site Material Management Unit Exemptions

Amendments are made to two of the exemptions for off-site material

management units in Sec. 63.683(b). First, the exemption in

Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(iii) for a tank or surface impoundment used for a

biological treatment process is revised to eliminate a redundant

qualification condition. As originally published, to qualify for this

exemption the OSWRO NESHAP required an owner or operator to demonstrate

that the biological treatment process achieves two conditions: (1) an

overall HAP reduction efficiency of 95 percent or more, and (2) a HAP

biodegradation efficiency of 95 percent or more. Upon review of this

requirement, the EPA concluded that demonstrating a HAP biodegradation

efficiency of 95 percent or more also means that the process achieves

an overall HAP reduction efficiency of at least 95 percent.

Consequently, requiring an owner or operator electing to qualify for

this exemption to perform the determination of overall HAP reduction

efficiency is unnecessary. Therefore, Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(iii) is amended

by deleting the requirement to demonstrate that the process achieves a

HAP reduction efficiency greater than or equal to 95 percent.

The exemption in Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(iv) for an off-site material

management unit in which RCRA hazardous waste is managed according to

the applicable conditions specified by the RCRA Land Disposal

Restrictions (LDR) in 40 CFR part 268, is amended. This provision is

revised to clarify application of the exemption to those situations

when the off-site material is a type of hazardous waste not prohibited

from land disposal or is composed of a mixture of different hazardous

wastes. The EPA previously addressed this question in amendments to

related RCRA air rules in 40 CFR part 264, subpart CC and 40 CFR part

265, subpart CC (see 62 FR 64636, December 8, 1997). The preamble to

these amendments provides a detailed discussion of this provision, how

it interacts with the RCRA LDR, and how the EPA interprets the

application of this exemption in specific situations (see 62 FR 64643).

The EPA is amending Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(iv) by adopting the same rule

language used for the provision in the RCRA air rules.

2. Process Vent Exemptions

Amendments for process vents in Sec. 63.683(c) add new provisions

to exempt certain vents that are part of a ``process vent'' affected

source from the air rule standards. Three specific exemptions for

process vents are provided in the amended rule. These exemptions do not

significantly change the level of HAP emission reduction achieved under

the OSWRO NESHAP for process vents.

The first exemption is added to be consistent with an exemption

already provided in the rule for off-site material management units. A

process vent is exempted from the air emission control requirements of

the OSWRO NESHAP if the HAP emissions from the vent are already being

controlled in compliance with the provisions specified in another

subpart in 40 CFR part 61 or 40 CFR part 63.

The EPA is also adding exemptions for certain process vent streams

with low flow, low HAP concentration characteristics, in response to

comments received after promulgation of the rule, regarding the

technical difficulty and high cost of controlling these process vent

streams to achieve standards under the OSWRO NESHAP. The EPA

acknowledges that, under certain circumstances, it may be technically

difficult and costly to control a low flow, low HAP concentration vent

stream to a level that achieves the standard for process vents

specified in the rule (i.e., removal or destruction of the HAP from

each individual affected process vent gas stream by 95 percent or more

on a mass basis). For example, use of a thermal vapor incinerator to

control a low flow, low organic HAP concentration vent stream may only

achieve a 95 percent emission reduction by incurring the substantially

higher equipment and operating costs required to overcome the technical

limitations of enclosed combustion control devices. Other conventional

air emission control devices commonly used at existing OSWRO sources

(e.g., carbon adsorbers, condensers, catalytic vapor incinerators) also

have technological constraints relative to controlling low flow, low

concentration vent streams. Consequently, the level of potential HAP

emission reduction that can be achieved for the low flow, low organic

HAP concentration vent streams typically emitted from processes

regulated by the OSWRO NESHAP is limited, in practical terms, by the

technical limitations of conventional air pollution control devices and

the costs to overcome these limitations.

The EPA reconsidered the potential HAP emission reduction levels

achievable when conventional air emission control devices are applied

to low flow, low organic HAP concentration vent streams from OSWRO

processes. The EPA decided that it is reasonable and appropriate to

exempt from the air emission control requirements under the OSWRO

NESHAP those process vent streams for which the potential for HAP

emission reduction is small and the application of conventional air

emission control devices is not practical.

To exempt very low flow rate vent streams, the EPA selected an

approach consistent with the approach the Agency has used for other

NESHAP to exempt these types of process vent streams. A process vent is

exempted from the air emission control requirements of the OSWRO NESHAP

if the owner or operator determines the process vent stream flow rate

to be less than 0.005 standard cubic meters per minute. Considering the

range of the vent stream organic HAP concentrations typically emitted

from the types of processes regulated by the OSWRO NESHAP, the

potential HAP emission reductions achieved by controlling process vent

streams below this flow rate cutoff value are extremely low regardless

of the organic HAP concentration level.

The EPA decided that it is not appropriate to exempt OSWRO process

vent streams with flow rates greater than 0.005 standard cubic meters

per minute independent of considering the organic HAP concentration of

the vent stream. Even though a given process vent stream has a low

organic HAP concentration, the level of total organic HAP emissions to

the atmosphere can still be substantial if the gas stream volume

emitted is moderately high. Considering the organic HAP concentration

of process vent streams for OSWRO sources, the EPA concluded that

requiring control of those process vent streams having both a flow rate

below 6.0 standard cubic meters per minute and a total organic HAP

concentration less than 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) does not

provide sufficient HAP emission reductions from these sources to

justify the substantial compliance costs for the OSWRO facility owner

and operator. Therefore, the EPA is

[[Page 38955]]

amending the OSWRO NESHAP to exempt those affected process vent streams

having a flow rate less than 6.0 standard cubic meters per minute and a

total HAP concentration in the vent stream less than 20 ppmv. This

process vent exemption requires that both the process vent flow rate

and the organic HAP concentration criteria be met to qualify for the

exemption.

D. Standards: Off-Site Material Treatment

Use of air emission controls for an affected off-site material

management unit or process vent is not required under the OSWRO NESHAP

if the HAP contained in the off-site material is removed or destroyed

before placing the material in the affected unit. To comply with this

provision, the rule provides alternative treatment standards in

Sec. 63.684. Revisions are made to several of the alternative treatment

standards allowed under the rule. These amendments do not significantly

change the HAP emission reductions and the implementation costs

expected for the rule.

Some facility owners and operators misinterpreted the VOHAP

concentration treatment alternative under Sec. 63.684(b)(1)(ii), as

published in the July 1996 version of the rule, to apply only to off-

site material streams with a VOHAP concentration less than 500 parts

per million by weight (ppmw), and that the EPA was requiring treatment

of these low HAP streams contrary to the general standards stated in

Sec. 63.683. This is not the EPA's intent, and the rule language is

amended to clarify that this alternative is used for the situation

where the off-site material entering a treatment process is composed of

a mixture of off-site material streams having an average VOHAP

concentration greater than 500 ppmw with off-site material streams

having an average VOHAP concentration less than 500 ppmw.

The HAP efficiency treatment alternative in Sec. 63.684(b)(3) is

amended to clarify that this treatment alternative is not applicable to

a biological degradation process conducted in open tanks or surface

impoundments (for open biodegradation processes an owner or operator

may comply with Sec. 63.684(b)(4)). Demonstrating an overall HAP

reduction efficiency for a treatment process that is open to the

atmosphere does not ensure that the HAP in the off-site material is

actually destroyed or removed. A portion or all of the volatile organic

HAP constituents present when the off-site material enters the process

may volatilize directly to the atmosphere from the exposed surface of

the material in an open tank or surface impoundment before this

material finally exits the process.

Also in Sec. 63.684(b)(3), a correction is made to the value of the

HAP removal efficiency performance level required in circumstances

where the off-site material stream entering the treatment process has

an average VOHAP concentration equal to or greater than 10,000 ppmw at

the point-of-delivery. The value for HAP removal efficiency performance

level is corrected to read 99 percent (not 95 percent as published in

July 1996). A treatment process can only meet the second condition of

the standard that requires the average VOHAP concentration of the off-

site material at the point-of-treatment to be less than 100 ppmw by

achieving a HAP removal efficiency of at least 99 percent.

The biodegradation treatment alternative in Sec. 63.684(b)(4) is

amended to clarify that this alternative applies only to a biological

degradation treatment process conducted in open tanks or surface

impoundments. Also, consistent with the amendment made by the EPA to

the exemption in Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(iii) for a tank or surface

impoundment used for biological treatment (see section III.B.1 of this

document), Sec. 63.684(b)(4)(i) is revised to eliminate the redundant

condition requiring determination of the overall HAP reduction

efficiency for the biodegradation process.

Provisions are added in Sec. 63.684(e)(4) requiring the owner or

operator to establish and implement a procedure to monitor appropriate

parameters that demonstrate proper operation of a biological treatment

unit according to the evaluation required in Sec. 63.694(h). Under this

requirement, the owner or operator must list the operating parameters

monitored and state the frequency of monitoring to ensure that the

biological treatment unit is operating between the minimum and maximum

operating parameter values to establish that the unit is continuously

achieving the relevant performance requirement.

E. Standards: Tanks

The standards for a tank required under Sec. 63.685(b)(1) to use

Tank Level 1 controls are amended to provide two alternatives for

complying with the rule. First, an alternative is added to the rule

(see Sec. 63.685(c)(2)(ii)) to explicitly clarify that the owner or

operator of the tank may instead choose to use the more stringent Tank

Level 2 controls to comply with the rule. The EPA's intent is that an

owner or operator may select a more stringent control level than the

minimum control requirement. Second, an alternative is added to the

rule (see Sec. 63.685(c)(2)(iii)) for the special circumstance when a

tank is used as an interim transfer point to transfer off-site material

from containers to another off-site material management unit. An

example of such a tank is an in-ground tank into which organic-

contaminated debris is dumped from roll-off boxes or dump trucks, and

then this debris is promptly transferred from the tank to a

macroencapsulation unit by a backhoe. This alternative allows the cover

to be removed during those periods of time when the material transfer

activity is occurring. At all other times, air emissions from the tank

must be controlled in accordance with the provisions specified in 40

CFR part 63, subpart OO--National Emission Standards for Tanks--Level

1. The EPA previously included provisions for these types of tanks in

the related air rules for waste management units under the RCRA subpart

CC air rules in 40 CFR parts 264 and 265 (see docket A-92-16, document

VI-B-2).

The standards in Sec. 63.685(b)(4) for a tank that manages off-site

material having a maximum HAP vapor pressure that is equal to or

greater than 76.6 kilopascals (kPa) are amended to provide two

additional compliance alternatives. These additional compliance

alternatives are using either (1) a pressure tank, or (2) a tank

located inside an enclosure vented through a closed vent system to an

enclosed combustion device. These two additional control alternatives

provide a level of HAP emission control equivalent to the original

control requirement (i.e., venting the tank directly to a control

device), while at the same time providing greater compliance

flexibility to the owners and operators subject to the rule.

The requirements in Sec. 63.685(h) for owners and operators

electing to use the Tank Level 2 control alternative of a pressure tank

are amended to allow the purging of inert materials from the pressure

tank. Inert material purging is a short duration maintenance procedure

required by good engineering practice to ensure proper operation of

this type of tank system.

The requirements in Sec. 63.685(i) for owners and operators

electing to use the Tank Level 2 control alternative of an enclosure

vented to an enclosed combustion control device are amended to add a

provision allowing a safety device to open anytime conditions require

it to do so to avoid an unsafe condition. The EPA included this safety

provision for all of the other tank control alternatives under the

OSWRO NESHAP, but the provision

[[Page 38956]]

inadvertently was not included in the regulatory language for this Tank

Level 2 control alternative when the final rule was published in July

1996.

F. Standards: Process Vents

The air emission control requirements for process vents in

Sec. 63.690(b) are amended to clarify that for the purpose of complying

with this standard, the EPA considers a primary condenser associated

with an affected process to be part of the process and not the air

emission control device. The primary condenser is a condenser for which

the predominant function is the recovery or capture of solvents or

other organics for use, reuse, or sale. The EPA considers a secondary

condenser or other organic recovery device that is operated downstream

of the primary condenser to be a control device for the purpose of

complying with the OSWRO NESHAP.

G. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and Control Devices

Amendments to the standards for closed-vent systems and control

devices in Sec. 63.693 correct technical omissions, update specific

requirements consistent with recent decisions made by the EPA for other

NESHAP, and correct terminology, typographical, printing, and

grammatical errors. These amendments do not significantly change the

HAP emission reductions and implementation costs expected for the rule.

1. Closed-Vent System Requirements

The inspecting and monitoring requirements for a closed-vent system

in Sec. 63.693(b)(5) are amended to add an alternative procedure. This

alternative allows an owner or operator to inspect and monitor the

closed-vent system according to the procedure specified in 40 CFR part

63, subpart H--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Equipment Leaks (specifically the procedure in

Sec. 63.172(f) through (h)). Although some details of the subpart H

procedure vary from the procedure already specified in the OSWRO

NESHAP, both procedures achieve the same overall result of ensuring

that the closed-vent system continues to operate properly after its

initial installation and testing. This amendment allows those owners

and operators who are already inspecting and monitoring other closed-

vent systems at their facility using the subpart H procedure to comply

with another NESHAP allowing the flexibility to use a common procedure

for all of the affected closed-vent systems at the facility.

Section 63.693(c) is amended to update the requirements for those

situations when a closed-vent system bypass device is installed to be

consistent with other recently promulgated NESHAP. The revised language

does not significantly change the technical requirements but does

clarify the requirements for an owner or operator choosing to use a

flow indicator to comply with the provision. The rule requires that

this device merely indicate the presence of gas flow through the bypass

line or duct. The device does not need to measure or quantify the flow

rate (although a flow measurement device can be used to comply with

this provision of the rule if an owner or operator chooses to do so).

2. General Control Device Requirements

The requirements in Sec. 63.693(b)(8) for using a design analysis

to demonstrate that a given control device achieves the applicable

performance requirements of the rule are amended. If the design

analysis prepared by the owner or operator is determined by the

Administrator to be incomplete or deficient, the amended rule allows

the Administrator to first request that the design analysis be revised

or amended by the owner or operator to correct the deficiencies

identified by the Administrator. If the owner or operator and the

Administrator still do not agree on the acceptability of using this

revised design analysis to demonstrate that the control device achieves

the applicable performance requirements, then the disagreement is to be

resolved using the results of a performance test conducted by the owner

or operator.

3. Carbon Adsorption System Requirements

The monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.693(d)(3) for carbon

adsorption control devices are amended to clarify the requirements.

Section 63.693(d)(3)(i) is amended to clarify that owners and operators

choosing this monitoring alternative for regenerative-type carbon

adsorption systems must monitor both total regeneration stream mass

flow and the carbon bed temperature. Section 63.693(d)(3)(ii) is

amended to add a requirement that the daily average concentration level

of organic compounds in the exhaust stream from the control device must

be monitored. The EPA considers an averaging time to be necessary to

properly determine compliance.

The spent carbon management requirements in Sec. 63.693(d)(4) are

amended to add two more alternatives. The amendments add the

alternatives of using: (1) a thermal treatment unit using air emission

controls according to the control device standards under the OSWRO

NESHAP, or (2) a thermal treatment unit using organic air emission

controls according to another NESHAP in 40 CFR part 61 or 40 CFR part

63. These changes make this requirement consistent with other air rules

that affect similar waste management sources (see section

264.1088(c)(3)(ii) and section 265.1089(c)(3)(ii)).

4. Condenser Requirements

The monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.693(e)(3) for condenser

control devices are amended to clarify the requirements. Section

63.693(e)(3)(i) and (ii) are amended to require monitoring of either

the daily average exhaust gas temperature or the daily average

concentration level of organic compounds in the exhaust stream. The EPA

considers monitoring one of these parameters to be necessary to

properly determine compliance.

5. Vapor Incinerator Requirements

The monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.693(f) for vapor

incinerators are amended to add a requirement that owners and operators

measure and record the daily average of the particular parameter being

monitored (i.e., temperature or concentration). The EPA considers

monitoring these parameters to be necessary to properly determine

compliance.

6. Boiler and Process Heater Requirements

The monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.693(g) for boilers and

process heaters are amended to include provisions requiring that the

monitoring systems for boilers and process heaters used as control

devices measure and record the daily average of the particular

parameter being monitored (i.e., temperature or concentration). The

provision of a daily averaging time for control device monitoring

parameters is necessary to properly determine compliance.

7. Flare Requirements

The requirements in Sec. 63.693(h) for flares are amended to

clarify the compliance demonstration and monitoring procedures to be

used for a flare. Section 63.693(h)(2) is added to the rule to specify

the procedure an owner or operator must use to demonstrate that the

flare achieves the requirements in 40 CFR 63.11(b). This amendment is

added because the cross-reference to the General Provisions in 40 CFR

part 63, subpart A, as specified in

[[Page 38957]]

the version of the final rule published in July 1996, does not explain

the specific flare compliance demonstration procedure that an owner or

operator is to use for the OSWRO NESHAP.

The flare monitoring requirements are now specified in

Sec. 63.693(h)(3) and are amended to require that the owner or operator

record for each 1-hour period whether the required pilot flame monitor

was continuously operating and whether a flame was present during each

hour as required. This change is made to add an averaging time.

H. Testing Methods and Procedures

1. Alternative Methods for Determination of Average VOHAP Concentration

The EPA is adding three more alternative methods in

Sec. 63.694(b)(ii) that an owner or operator may choose to determine

the average HAP concentration of an off-site material. The methods

added are Method 625 in 40 CFR part 136, appendix A, and Method 8260

and Method 8270 in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/

Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication No. SW-846, Third Edition,

September 1986, as amended by Update I, November 15, 1992 (or any more

recent, updated version of these methods approved by the EPA). The EPA

developed these methods for use in implementing rules under the Clean

Water Act and RCRA, respectively. The methods measure the concentration

of organic pollutants in municipal and industrial wastewaters.

Commenters suggested that these methods are also applicable to the

OSWRO NESHAP for the determination of off-site material HAP

concentration. After review of the methods, the EPA decided that using

the three methods for direct measurement of the HAP concentration of

certain off-site material is reasonable and adding them to the OSWRO

NESHAP is appropriate. The EPA believes that with the addition of these

methods, the rule now provides a range of alternatives for determining

the HAP concentration of an off-site material such that every owner and

operator of facilities subject to the OSWRO NESHAP have available

practical and inexpensive VOHAP determination alternatives.

It is important to note that for each of the alternative methods

allowed under Sec. 63.694(b)(ii) (i.e., the listed methods other than

Methods 305 and 25D), there is a published list of chemical compounds

that the EPA considers the method appropriate to measure. An owner or

operator may only use an alternative method to measure compounds that

are on the list associated with that method, unless the specified

validation procedures are also performed. Furthermore, for a VOHAP

concentration determination, the owner or operator must evaluate the

total mass of HAP compounds in an off-site material (i.e., all

compounds listed in Table 1 of subpart DD). Therefore, the owner or

operator is responsible for determining that the analytical method used

for a VOHAP concentration determination is sufficient to evaluate all

of the applicable organic compounds contained in the off-site material.

If an owner or operator chooses to use an alternative to Method 305 to

analyze an off-site material that contains unknown compounds or many

different compounds, performing ``screening'' analyses may first be

necessary to verify that the alternative method chosen is, in fact,

appropriate to evaluate all the necessary compounds.

The alternative test methods measure the total concentration of the

HAP constituents listed in Table 1 of subpart DD. The VOHAP

concentration of an off-site material by definition is the fraction by

weight of those compounds listed in Table 1 as measured using Method

305. Owners and operators may choose to ``correct'' the HAP values

measured by an alternative method to equate to the VOHAP values that

would be measured using Method 305. This correction is made by

multiplying the total concentration measured values times the

appropriate ``fm305 factor'' listed in Table 1 of subpart DD

to obtain the Method 305 VOHAP concentration equivalent.

Method 625 is appropriate for determining the HAP concentration of

an off-site material provided that the corrections for the measured

compounds in Table 7 of the method are made. Methods 8260 and 8270 are

also considered appropriate provided that formal quality assurance

procedures are established, followed, and recorded to address those

elements of the methods considered relevant for measuring the actual

concentration of organic compounds. The quality assurance program must

address procedures to minimize the loss of compounds due to

volatilization, biodegradation, reaction, or sorption during the sample

collection, storage, and preparation steps, as well as addressing the

overall accuracy and precision of the specific method used.

None of the alternative methods specify sample collection and

handling procedures considered adequate by the EPA to minimize the

volatilization of organics from the sample before analysis. Therefore,

to ensure that a representative sample of an off-site material is

analyzed, an owner or operator that chooses to use either Method 624,

625, 1624, 1625, 8260, or 8270 for the OSWRO NESHAP is required to

develop and follow a written sampling plan. This plan describes a step-

by-step procedure for collecting representative samples of the off-site

materials such that material integrity is maintained and minimal loss

of organics from the sample occurs throughout the collection and

analysis process. An example of an acceptable sampling plan is one that

incorporates sample collection and sample handling procedures similar

to those specified in Method 25D. The sampling plan is to be maintained

on-site in the facility records.

The provisions in Sec. 63.694(c)(ii) listing the alternative

methods for determining the average VOHAP concentration of an off-site

material at the point-of-treatment are revised and simplified to cross-

reference all of the methods allowed under Sec. 63.694(b)(ii).

2. Equation Corrections

The equation in Sec. 63.694(b)(2)(iii) used for calculating the

average VOHAP concentration of an off-site material is amended to

correct the rule citation used to define the term ``Ci.''

The correct citation is Sec. 63.694. The same correction is made for

the terms ``Ci'' in the equation in Sec. 63.694(c)(3), ``y''

and ``Cy'' in the equation in Sec. 63.694(e)(4), and

``Qbj'' and ``Cbl'' in the equation in

Sec. 63.694(g)(4).

The equation in Sec. 63.694(c)(3) used for calculating the average

VOHAP concentration on a mass-weighted basis is corrected to clarify

the inputs to the equation. In the equation, the value for

Qt is the sum of the Qi's used in the equation.

This value represents the sum or total off-site material quantity used

to characterize the off-site material over the averaging period. Each

VOHAP concentration determination must have a corresponding off-site

material quantity that represents the amount of material generated or

received over the averaging period used to determine the VOHAP

concentration value. To calculate a mass-weighted average VOHAP

concentration over the averaging period, multiply each VOHAP

concentration by the quantity of material it represents and then divide

by the total quantity of material (i.e., the sum of the individual off-

site material quantities).

3. Procedure for Determination of No Detectable Emissions

Several amendments are made to the procedure for determination of

no

[[Page 38958]]

detectable emissions in Sec. 63.694(k). As discussed in the appropriate

later sections of this document, the same changes are made to the

procedure as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subparts OO, PP, QQ, and VV.

The procedure is amended to allow either methane or n-hexane to be

used as the calibration gas for the detection instrument. It is the

EPA's intent that the calibration procedure be consistent with the

procedure as applied to related air rules (e.g., see the equipment leak

test methods and procedures at sections 264.1063 and 265.1063).

Therefore, the requirement for calibration gases in Sec. 63.694(k)(4)

is amended to provide the owner or operator the choice of using methane

or n-hexane as allowed under these other rules.

Section 63.694(k)(6) is amended to allow an owner or operator the

option of choosing to adjust or not adjust the detection instrument

readings to account for the background organic concentration level.

Frequently at a source, the maximum organic concentration value

measured by the detection instrument is well below the organic

concentration value that defines ``no detectable emissions.'' In this

case, requiring an ambient background correction is an unnecessary

step. Thus, the EPA decided that it is reasonable and appropriate for

the correction of the measured value for the ambient background level

to be an option used at the owner's or operator's discretion. If an

owner or operator chooses to adjust the instrument readings for the

background level, the background level value must be determined

according to the procedures in Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.

Finally, the procedure is amended to add provisions for

determination of no detectable emissions from a seal used around a

rotating shaft that passes through a cover opening. In this case, if

the arithmetic difference between the maximum organic concentration

indicated by the instrument and the background level is less than

10,000 ppmv, then the potential leak interface is determined to operate

with no detectable organic emissions. This addition is made for

consistency with other related EPA air rules regarding the

determination of no detectable emissions.

4. Determination of Process Vent Stream Flow Rate and Total HAP

Concentration

A new Sec. 63.694(m) is added to subpart DD specifying the testing

methods and procedures that an owner or operator must follow to

determine a process vent stream flow rate and total organic HAP

concentration. These new requirements are added to the rule to support

the amendments to Sec. 63.683(b) adding exemptions for process vents

based on the vent stream flow rate and total organic HAP concentration

(see section III.F of this document). The procedures and test methods

added to the rule for these determinations are the EPA reference

methods in appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 for measuring gas stream flow

rates and organic concentrations.

I. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

Section 63.695 is amended to consolidate the inspection and

monitoring requirements under subpart DD in this section, update the

control device monitoring requirements to be consistent with recent

decisions made by the EPA for compliance assurance monitoring of

sources subject to using air emission controls under a NESHAP, and to

make minor technical modifications. The amendments do not significantly

change the estimated inspection and monitoring costs for the rule.

The inspection requirements for covers, closed-vent systems, and

transfer systems in Sec. 63.695 are amended to make allowances for

units or equipment that an owner or operator determines to be unsafe to

inspect on an annual interval. The rule requires that the owner or

operator perform an initial inspection of the control equipment used to

comply with the rule, and follow-up inspections at least once per

calendar year. A new paragraph under Sec. 63.695(f) is added to the

rule that provides that following the initial inspection of an air

pollution control device, an owner or operator may perform subsequent

inspections at intervals longer than 1 year when the owner or operator

determines that performing the applicable inspection and monitoring

procedures would expose a worker to dangerous, hazardous, or otherwise

unsafe conditions. In such a case, the owner or operator is required

to: (1) Prepare written documentation that explains the reasons why the

equipment is unsafe to inspect or monitor on an annual basis; and (2)

develop and implement a written plan and schedule to inspect and

monitor the air pollution control equipment using the applicable

procedures specified in this section during times when a worker can

safely access the air pollution control equipment. The required

inspections and monitoring must be performed as frequently as

practicable but do not need to be performed more frequently than the

periodic schedule that would otherwise be applicable to the air

pollution control equipment under the provisions of the rule. For

example, when the rule requires a cover to be inspected at least once

per calendar year, inspection of a cover designated as ``unsafe to

inspect'' need not be performed more frequently than once during a

calendar year if during that year unscheduled process shutdowns or

other unexpected events create multiple times when a worker could

safely access the cover.

A provision is added to the inspection requirements in

Sec. 63.695(b)(1) for tanks and in Sec. 63.695(d)(1) for transfer

systems to clarify that in the case where a tank or transfer system is

buried partially or entirely underground, inspection is required only

for those portions of the equipment and those connections to the

equipment (such as fill ports, access hatched, or gauge wells) that

extend to or above the ground surface and can be opened to the

atmosphere. It was not the EPA's intent that those portions of the tank

or transfer system that are located below ground and, consequently, not

easily accessible, be inspected annually. The EPA previously included

this provision in other related air rules for waste management units

(e.g., the RCRA subpart CC air rules in 40 CFR parts 264 and 265).

The control device monitoring requirements under the rule are

revised and updated to be consistent with the EPA's application of

compliance assurance monitoring to sources under a NESHAP. A new

Sec. 63.695(e) is added to consolidate the control device monitoring

requirements. This section establishes the technical specifications for

continuous monitoring of control device operating parameters;

establishes the criteria for calculating the daily average value for

each monitored operating parameter; incorporates a requirement that the

owner or operator establish appropriate operating parameter limits for

the range of conditions at which the control device must be operated to

continuously achieve the applicable performance requirements; and

defines the conditions under which an excursion for a given control

device is determined to have occurred based on the monitoring data

results.

The EPA considers an excursion to be a failure to achieve the

applicable standards due to improper operation of the control device.

The rule allows one excused excursion for a control device per

semiannual period for any reason. Should any additional excursions

occur during this period (other than those that occur during the

specific conditions listed in Sec. 63.695(e)(6)(i)), each of these

[[Page 38959]]

additional excursions is a violation of the standard. Conditions under

which an excursion of the operating parameter limit is not a violation

of the standard are: (1) periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction

if during the period the affected unit or facility is operated

according to the facility's startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan;

and (2) periods of non-operation of the unit or process that is vented

to the control device that result in cessation of HAP emissions to

which the monitoring applies.

J. Notification and Reporting Requirements

The notification requirements in Sec. 63.697(a) are amended to

allow owners and operators of existing sources subject to the amended

OSWRO NESHAP, to file an initial notification (as required in

Sec. 63.9(b)) on or before 30 days after the date that today's

amendments become effective. This provision is added to the rule in

recognition by the EPA that, as a result of the clarifying amendments

made by today's direct final rulemaking, there may be some facility

owners and operators who now understand, for the first time, that their

facility is subject to the OSWRO NESHAP.

The reporting requirements in Sec. 63.697(b)(4) are amended by

adding language to clarify the type of information the owner or

operator should include in the semiannual report regarding control

device excursions. The semiannual report must include a description of

all excursions, as defined in the subpart, that have occurred during

the 6-month reporting period. This includes excursions caused when the

daily average value of a monitored operating parameter is outside the

established operating parameter limit as well as excursions caused by a

lack of adequate monitoring data.

K. HAP List for Subpart DD

Table 1 in subpart DD lists the specific organic chemical

compounds, isomers, and mixtures that are HAP for the purpose of

implementing the requirements of OSWRO NESHAP. Two changes are made to

this table. First, the listing for the compound, 1,1-dimethyl

hydrazine, is deleted from Table 1. As discussed in the preamble for

the final rule (see 61 FR 34140), 1,1-dimethyl hydrazine was one of the

specific compounds that EPA decided to delete from its proposed HAP

list for this rulemaking because of the low potential for the compound

to be emitted from the type of waste management and recovery operations

subject to the rule. This compound inadvertently was not deleted from

the version of Table 1 published in July 1996.

Table 1 also is amended to clarify that for the glycol ethers

chemical group listing in the table, only those glycol ethers that have

a Henry's Law constant value equal to or greater than 0.1 Y/X (1.8 x

10--6 atm/gm-mole/m3) at 25 deg.C must be

included in the determination of the VOHAP concentration. The group of

glycol ether chemicals contains a large number of compounds that have

Henry's Law constant values both above and below this cutoff value.

Therefore, rather than attempt to list the specific glycol ether

compounds in the table and potentially omit a given glycol ether HAP,

the criteria for identifying which glycol ether compounds must be

included in the VOHAP determination was added to the rule.

IV. Amendments to Subpart OO--National Emission Standards for

Tanks--Level 1

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart OO, to clarify several

specific rule requirements, to correct minor typographical and

terminology errors, and to make the provisions of subpart OO consistent

with the technical amendments made to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, where

applicable. The amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart OO, are

summarized below.

A. Definitions

The definition for a ``safety device'' specified in Sec. 63.901 is

amended to incorporate the same changes made to the definition for a

``safety device'' for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.681. These

changes are discussed in section III.B of this document.

B. Standards--Tank Fixed Roof

The standards for fixed roof tanks in Sec. 63.902 are amended with

additional language to clarify the EPA's intent for compliance with two

specific provisions. First, Sec. 63.902(a) is amended to specifically

state that the standards under this section do not apply to a fixed

roof tank that is also equipped with an internal floating roof. Second,

Sec. 63.902(b) is amended with additional language to specifically

state that a facility owner or operator is allowed to install a closure

device on a tank manifold system or header vent when a series of tanks

have their vents (i.e., tank openings) connected to a common header.

This amendment makes EPA's application of the fixed roof standards to a

tank connected to a manifold system consistent with other air rules

that affect similar waste management sources (see 62 FR 64648, December

8, 1997).

C. Test Methods and Procedures

The procedure for determination of no detectable organic emissions

specified in Sec. 63.905 is amended to incorporate the same revisions

and additions made to the procedure for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in

Sec. 63.694(k). The specific amendments are discussed in section III.G

of this document.

D. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

The inspection and monitoring provisions for owners and operators

that use a tank equipped with a fixed roof is amended by adding a new

paragraph (d) to Sec. 63.906 which allows alternative inspection

intervals longer than 1 year when an owner or operator determines that

performing a required inspection or monitoring procedures would expose

a worker to dangerous, hazardous, or otherwise unsafe conditions. The

alternative inspection interval provision is the same as that for 40

CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.695(f). The alternative inspection

interval provision and related compliance requirements are discussed in

section III.I of this document.

V. Amendments to Subpart PP--National Emission Standards for

Containers

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP, to clarify several

definitions, to correct minor typographical and terminology errors, and

to make the provisions of subpart PP consistent with the technical

amendments made to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, where applicable. The

amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP, are summarized below.

A. Definitions

Two of the definitions in Sec. 63.921 are revised to clarify the

EPA's intent in applying each definition to provisions in the rule. The

definition for an ``empty container'' is revised to remove redundant

language regarding a container that meets the definition of an ``empty

container'' used for implementing RCRA hazardous waste rules (see 40

CFR 261.7(b)). The definition for a ``safety device'' is amended to

incorporate the same revision made to the definition for a ``safety

device'' for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.681. This change is

discussed in section III.B of this document.

B. Test Methods and Procedures

The procedure for determination of no detectable organic emissions

specified in Sec. 63.925 is amended to incorporate the same revisions

and additions made

[[Page 38960]]

to the procedure for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.694(k). The

specific amendments are discussed in section III.G of this document.

C. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

The EPA has received questions regarding the implementation of the

inspection requirements for containers using either Container Level 1

or Container Level 2 controls as specified under the rule. The EPA is

amending several provisions in Sec. 63.926 to clarify which containers

are required to be inspected and when these inspections need to be

performed.

The regulatory language in Sec. 63.926(a)(1) is amended to clarify

when the initial inspection must be performed for a container that

already contains a regulated material when it is delivered to a

facility. A visual inspection is required when the owner or operator

first accepts possession of the container at the facility site if the

container is not emptied (i.e., does not meet the conditions for an

``empty container'' as defined in the rule) within 24 hours after the

container has been accepted at the facility site.

For a container that is delivered to an affected facility

containing a regulated material but is not emptied within the allowed

24-hour period, the container must be inspected according to the

requirements of the rule by the calendar day on which the facility

owner or operator accepts possession of the container. For the purpose

of compliance with subpart PP, this date of acceptance is the date of

signature by the facility owner or operator on the manifest or shipping

papers accompanying the container. It is allowable under subpart PP to

have a party other than the owner or operator of the affected facility

perform the inspection prior to the acceptance date. For example, if an

owner or operator of an affected facility accepts a shipment of

containers that arrives at the facility on a truck, it is allowable

under the rule to have the shipper or transporter perform the visual

inspection of the individual containers before or during loading of the

containers onto the truck for transport to the affected facility. In

this case, the party performing the inspections (e.g., the container

shipper or transporter) needs to provide the owner or operator of the

recipient facility with written documentation to verify that the

containers have been inspected in accordance with the requirements of

Sec. 63.926. Regardless of who performs the inspections, it is

ultimately the responsibility of the owner or operator of the affected

facility to ensure that the inspections have been performed in

compliance with all of the applicable requirements under subpart PP.

Section 63.926(a)(2) is amended to clarify the conditions under

which additional visual inspections must be conducted for those

containers, using either Container Level 1 or Container Level 2

controls that remain at the facility for more than 1 year. When a

container, filled or partially filled with regulated-material, remains

unopened at the facility site for a period of 1 year or more, the

container and its cover and closure devices must be visually inspected

by the owner or operator initially, and thereafter, at least once every

calendar year.

Section 63.926(a)(3) is amended to provide additional compliance

alternatives to owners and operators for those situations when a

defective container is found during an inspection. The rule is amended

to allow the owner or operator the alternatives of either emptying the

regulated-material from the defective container or repairing the

defective container. If the owner or operator elects to empty the

regulated material from the defective container, the owner or operator

must empty the defective container (i.e., meet the conditions for an

``empty container'' as defined in the rule) and transfer the removed

material to either: (1) a container that meets the applicable standards

under subpart PP; or (2) to a tank, process, or treatment unit that

meets the applicable standards under a NESHAP referencing subpart PP.

The defective container must be emptied no later than 5 calendar days

after detection of the defect. The emptied defective container must be

either repaired, destroyed, or used for purposes other than management

of regulated-material. If the owner or operator elects to repair the

defective container, first efforts at repair of the defect must be made

no later than 24 hours after detection, and repair must be completed as

soon as possible but no later than 5 calendar days after detection. If

repair of a defect cannot be completed within 5 calendar days, then the

regulated-material must be emptied from the container and the container

must not be used to manage regulated-material until the defect is

repaired.

VI. Amendments to Subpart QQ--National Emission Standards for

Surface Impoundments

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQ, to clarify several

definitions, to correct minor typographical and terminology errors, and

to make the provisions of subpart QQ consistent with the technical

amendments made to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, where applicable. The

amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQ, are summarized below.

A. Definitions

Two of the definitions in Sec. 63.941 are revised to clarify the

EPA's intent in applying the definitions. The definition for a

``cover'' is amended by adding examples of types of surface impoundment

covers (e.g., a floating membrane cover placed on the surface of the

material in the surface impoundment, an air-supported structure

installed over the surface impoundment). The definition for a ``safety

device'' is amended to incorporate the same change made to the

definition for a ``safety device'' for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in

Sec. 63.681. This change is discussed in section III.B of this

document.

B. Test Methods and Procedures

The procedure for determination of no detectable organic emissions

specified in Sec. 63.945 is amended to incorporate the same revisions

and additions made to the procedure for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in

Sec. 63.694(k). The specific amendments are discussed in section III.G

of this document.

C. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

The inspection and monitoring provisions for air pollution control

equipment are amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to Sec. 63.946

which allows alternative inspection intervals longer than 1 year when

an owner or operator determines that performing a required inspection

or monitoring procedure would expose a worker to dangerous, hazardous,

or otherwise unsafe conditions. The alternative inspection interval

provision is the same as that for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in

Sec. 63.695(f). The alternative inspection interval provision and

related compliance requirements are discussed in section III.I of this

document.

VII. Amendments to Subpart RR--National Emission Standards for

Individual Drain Systems

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart RR, to clarify the

EPA's intent with regard to the types of wastewater streams to which

air emission controls must be applied in accordance with 40 CFR part

63, subpart RR. A definition for a ``regulated-material'' is added to

Sec. 63.961 to mean the wastewater streams, residuals, and any other

materials specified by the referencing

[[Page 38961]]

subpart to be managed in accordance with the standards under subpart

RR. The definition is needed to clarify the EPA's intent that this rule

apply to waste streams and residuals in addition to wastewater. In

conjunction with this change, a change is made throughout subpart RR to

replace the word ``wastewater'' with the term ``regulated material.''

VIII. Amendments to Subpart VV--National Emission Standards for

Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators

The EPA is amending 40 CFR part 63, subpart VV, to add a new air

emission control alternative, to clarify several specific rule

requirements, to correct minor typographical and terminology errors,

and to make the provisions of subpart VV consistent with the technical

amendments made to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, where applicable. The

amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart VV, are summarized below.

A. Definitions

The definition for a ``safety device'' specified in Sec. 63.1041 is

amended to incorporate the same changes made to the definition for a

``safety device'' for 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.681. These

changes are discussed in section III.B of this document.

B. Standards--Pressurized Separator

A new section, Sec. 63.1045, is added to subpart VV which allows

owners and operators to control air emissions from an oil-water or

organic-water separator by using a pressurized separator that is

operated as a closed-system. The provision requires that the

pressurized separator be designed not to vent to the atmosphere as a

result of compression of the vapor headspace during operation of the

separator at its design capacity. All separator openings must be

equipped with closure devices designed to operate with no detectable

organic emissions as determined using the procedure specified in the

subpart. Whenever a regulated-material is in the separator, the

separator must be operated as a closed system that does not vent to the

atmosphere except under emergency and maintenance conditions specified

in the rule.

C. Test Methods and Procedures

The procedure for determination of no detectable organic emissions

specified in Sec. 63.1046(a) is amended to incorporate the same

revisions and additions made to the procedure for 40 CFR part 63,

subpart DD, in Sec. 63.694(k). The specific amendments are discussed in

section III.G of this document.

D. Inspection and Monitoring Requirements

The inspection and monitoring provisions for owners and operators

that use a tank equipped with a fixed roof is amended by adding a new

paragraph (e) to Sec. 63.1047 which allows alternative inspection

intervals longer than 1 year when an owner or operator determines that

performing a required inspection or monitoring procedure would expose a

worker to dangerous, hazardous, or otherwise unsafe conditions. This

alternative inspection interval provision is the same as that for 40

CFR part 63, subpart DD, in Sec. 63.695(f). The alternative inspection

interval provision and related compliance requirements are discussed in

section III.I of this document.

IX. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket is intended to be an organized and complete file of the

administrative records complied by the EPA in the development of this

rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file because material is added

throughout the rulemaking development. The docketing system is intended

to allow members of the public and industries involved to readily

identify and locate documents so that they can effectively participate

in the rulemaking process. Along with the proposed and promulgated

standards and their preambles, the contents of the docket, except for

certain interagency documents, will serve as the record for judicial

review. (See CAA section 307(d)(7)(A).) The docket for this rulemaking

containing the information considered by the EPA in development of the

amendments is Docket No. A-92-16. This docket is available for public

inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except for Federal holidays, at the following address: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center (MC-6102), 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460;

telephone: (202) 260-7548. The docket is located at the above address

in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). A reasonable fee may be

charged for copying.

B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

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

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

therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive 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 obligation of recipients

thereof; or

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

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

the Executive Order.

It has been determined that this action amending the OSWRO NESHAP

is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive

Order 12866 and therefore not subject to OMB review.

C. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnerships

Under Executive Order 12875, the EPA may not issue a regulation

that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a

State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal government

provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs

incurred by those governments or the EPA consults with those

governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875

requires the EPA to provide OMB a description of the extent of the

EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local

and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any

written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting

the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875

requires the EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected

officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal

governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development

of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

The OSWRO NESHAP does not create a mandate on State, local, or

tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on

these entities, and State, local, and tribal governments are not

directly impacted by this rule; i.e., they are not required to purchase

control systems to meet the requirements of this rule. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 1(a) of

[[Page 38962]]

Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this action.

D. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any

rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as

defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental

health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets

both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety

effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned

regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably

feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those

regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that

the analyses required under section 5-501 of the Order has the

potential to influence the regulation. These amendments to the OSWRO

NESHAP are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the OSWRO

NESHAP is based on technology performance and not on health or safety

risks. In addition, the amendments are not economically significant

regulatory actions as defined by E.O. 12866.

E. Executive Order 13084: Consultations and Coordination with Indian

Tribal Governments

Under Executive Order 13084, the EPA may not issue a regulation

that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects

the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the

Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or the EPA

consults with those governments. If the EPA complies by consulting,

Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to provide to the OMB, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of the EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to

develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters

that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''

The OSWRO NESHAP does not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of Indian tribal governments. The rule does not impose any

enforceable duties on tribal governments unless they own or operate a

facility subject to the OSWRO NESHAP. Indian tribal governments which

own or operate facilities subject to the OSWRO NESHAP would incur

compliance costs; however, the EPA does not believe that there are

many, if any, tribal governments which either own or operate such

facilities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive

Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the

effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the

EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-

benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal

mandates'' that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100

million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for

which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally

requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective

or least-burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the

rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are

inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA

to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-

effective or least-burdensome alternative if the Administrator

publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was

not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements

that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, it must

have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency

plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small

governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have

meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and

informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements.

The amendments to the OSWRO NESHAP will likely reduce the costs of

complying with the rule for many affected owners and operators. These

amendments do not increase expenditures by State, local, and tribal

governments or the private sector. Therefore, the EPA has not prepared

a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternatives

because these amendments are estimated to result in the expenditure by

State and local governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector of

less than $100 million in any 1 year. Because small governments will

not be affected by this rule, the EPA is not required to develop a plan

with regard to small governments. Therefore, the requirements of the

Unfunded Mandates Act do not apply to this action.

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. The EPA determined that these amendments to the OSWRO

NESHAP do not have a significant impact on a substantial number of

small entities. The EPA has also determined that it is not necessary to

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with this

action. These amendments will not result in increased impacts to small

entities and will result in reduced impacts in all cases.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements of the previously

promulgated NESHAP were submitted to and approved by the OMB. A copy of

this Information Collection Request (ICR) document (OMB control number

1717.02) may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OP Regulator Information

Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW (mail

code 2136), Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-2740.

Today's amendments to the OSWRO NESHAP have no impact on the

information collection burden estimates made previously. No additional

certifications or filings were

[[Page 38963]]

promulgated. Therefore, the ICR has not been revised.

I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally

provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating

the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,

to each house of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United

States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior

to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. These amendments

are not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). These

amendments will be effective July 20, 1999.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272

note) directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its

regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with

applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards

are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,

sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or

adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Where available and

potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards are not used by

the EPA, the NTTAA requires the Agency to provide Congress, through

OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such standards. This

section summarizes the EPA's response to the requirements of the NTTAA

for the test methods added to the OSWRO NESHAP as part of today's

amendments.

The OSWRO NESHAP involves technical standards. The amendments to

the OSWRO NESHAP include the addition of test methods and procedures

necessary for the determination of compliance and enforcement of air

standards under the rule. Today's amendments increase the number of

alternative test methods available to an owner or operator to determine

the VOHAP concentration of an off-site material and provide for the use

of other methods (i.e., those specified in the rule) subject to EPA

approval. The EPA has determined that the owner or operator of an

affected source must use the specified EPA reference methods when

needed. While the American Society of Testing and Materials and other

organizations have published a number of test methods and procedures

applicable to organic content and material specifications which could

be used to determine the flow rate and organic concentration of a

process vent stream, these methods are not applicable to determining

the volume, concentration, and type of air emissions from the affected

sources. The use of these voluntary consensus standards would,

therefore, have been impractical.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Containers,

Hazardous air pollutants, Incorporation by reference, Individual drain

systems, Oil-water separators, Organic-water separators, Recycling,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surface impoundments, Tanks,

Used oil, Used solvent, Waste management.

Dated: July 7, 1999.

Carol W. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, title 40, chapter I,

part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart DD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants from Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations

2. Section 63.680 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(2)(viii) and

by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(v), (b)(1)(ii), (b)(1)(iii), (b)(2)(v),

(b)(2)(vi), (c), (d), and (e) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.680 Applicability and designation of affected sources.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(v) A recovery operation that recycles or reprocesses used solvent

which is an off-site material and the operation is not part of a

chemical, petroleum, or other manufacturing process that is required to

use air emission controls by another subpart of 40 CFR part 63 or 40

CFR part 61.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) * * *

(ii) The waste, used oil, or used solvent is not produced or

generated within the plant site, but the material is delivered,

transferred, or otherwise moved to the plant site from a location

outside the boundaries of the plant site; and (iii) The waste, used

oil, or used solvent contains one or more of the hazardous air

pollutants (HAP) listed in Table 1 of this subpart based on the

composition of the material at the point-of-delivery, as defined in

Sec. 63.681 of this subpart.

(2) * * *

(v) Waste that is transferred from a chemical manufacturing plant

or other facility for which both of the following conditions apply to

the waste:

(A) The management of the waste at the facility is required either

under part 63 subpart F--National Emission Standards for Organic

Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry or under another subpart in 40 CFR part 63 to

meet the air emission control standards for process wastewater

specified in 40 CFR 63.132 through 63.147; and

(B) The owner or operator of the facility from which the waste is

transferred has complied with the provisions of 40 CFR 63.132(g)(1)(ii)

and (g)(2).

(vi) Waste that is transferred from a chemical manufacturing plant,

petroleum refinery, or coke by-product recovery plant which is subject

to 40 CFR part 61, subpart FF--National Emission Standards for Benzene

Waste Operations, and for which both of the following conditions apply

to the waste:

(A) The waste is generated at a facility that is not exempted under

the provisions of 40 CFR 61.342(a) from meeting the air emission

control standards of 40 CFR part 61, subpart FF; and

(B) The owner or operator of the facility from which the waste is

transferred has complied with the provisions of 40 CFR 61.342(f)(2).

(vii) * * *

(viii) Hazardous waste that is stored for 10 days or less at a

transfer facility in compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR 263.12.

(c) Affected sources. (1) Off-site material management units. For

each operation specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(vi) of

this section that is located at the plant site, the affected source is

the entire group of off-site material management units associated with

the operation. An off-site material management unit is a tank,

container, surface impoundment, oil-water separator, organic-water

separator, or transfer system used to manage off-site material. For the

purpose of implementing the standards under this

[[Page 38964]]

subpart, a unit that meets the definition of a tank or container but

also is equipped with a vent that serves as a process vent for any of

the processes listed in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of this

section is not an off-site material management unit but instead is a

process vent and is to be included in the appropriate affected source

group under paragraph (c)(2) of this section. Examples of such a unit

may include, but are not limited to, a distillate receiver vessel, a

primary condenser, a bottoms receiver vessel, a surge control tank, a

separator tank, and a hot well.

(2) Process vents. For each operation specified in paragraphs

(a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(vi) of this section that is located at the

plant site, the affected source is the entire group of process

equipment associated with the process vents for the processes listed in

paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of this section.

(i) Distillation process used for the treatment, recycling, or

recovery of off-site material. Distillation means a process, either

batch or continuous, separating one or more off-site material feed

streams into two or more exit streams having different component

concentrations from those in the feed stream or streams. The separation

is achieved by the redistribution of the components between the liquid

and vapor phases as they approach equilibrium within the distillation

unit.

(ii) Fractionation process used for the treatment, recycling, or

recovery of off-site material. Fractionation means a liquid mixture

separation process or method used to separate a mixture of several

volatile components of different boiling points in successive stages,

each stage removing from the mixture some proportion of one of the

components.

(iii) Thin-film evaporation process used for the treatment,

recycling, or recovery of off-site material. Thin-film evaporation

means a liquid mixture separation process or method that uses a heating

surface consisting of a large diameter tube that may be either straight

or tapered, horizontal or vertical. Liquid is spread on the tube wall

by a rotating assembly of blades that maintain a close clearance from

the wall or actually ride on the film of liquid on the wall.

(iv) Solvent extraction process used for the treatment, recycling,

or recovery of off-site material. Solvent extraction means a separation

process or method in which a solid or a solution is contacted with a

liquid solvent (the material and the solvent being relatively insoluble

in each other) to preferentially dissolve and transfer one or more

components into the solvent.

(v) Steam stripping process used for the treatment, recycling, or

recovery of off-site material. Steam stripping means a liquid mixture

separation process or method in which vaporization of the volatile

components of a liquid mixture occurs by the introduction of steam

directly into the process.

(vi) Gas stripping process used for the treatment, recycling, or

recovery of off-site material. Gas stripping means a desorption process

or method used to transfer one or more volatile components from a

liquid mixture into a gas stream either with or without the application

of heat to the liquid. Packed towers, spray towers, and bubble-cap,

sieve, or valve-type plate towers are examples of the process

configurations used for contacting the gas and a liquid.

(3) Equipment leaks. For each operation specified in paragraphs

(a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(vi) of this section that is located at the

plant site, the affected source is the entire group of equipment

components for which each component meets all of the conditions

specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (c)(3)(iii) of this section.

If any one of these conditions do not apply to an equipment component,

then that component is not part of the affected source for equipment

leaks.

(i) The equipment component is a pump, compressor, agitator,

pressure relief device, sampling connection system, open-ended valve or

line, valve, connector, or instrumentation system;

(ii) The equipment component contains or contacts off-site material

having a total HAP concentration equal to or greater than 10 percent by

weight; and

(iii) The equipment component is intended to operate for 300 hours

or more during a calendar year in off-site material service, as defined

in Sec. 63.681 of this subpart.

(d) Facility-wide exemption. The owner or operator of affected

sources subject to this subpart is exempted from the requirements of

Secs. 63.682 through 63.699 of this subpart in situations when the

total annual quantity of the HAP that is contained in the off-site

material received at the plant site is less than 1 megagram per year.

For a plant site to be exempted under the provisions of this paragraph

(d), the owner or operator must meet the requirements in paragraphs

(d)(1) through (d)(3) of this section.

(1) The owner or operator must prepare an initial determination of

the total annual HAP quantity in the off-site material received at the

plant site. This determination is based on the total quantity of the

HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart as determined at the point-of-

delivery for each off-site material stream.

(2) The owner or operator must prepare a new determination whenever

the extent of changes to the quantity or composition of the off-site

material received at the plant site could cause the total annual HAP

quantity in the off-site material received at the plant site to exceed

the limit of 1 megagram per year.

(3) The owner or operator must maintain documentation to support

the owner's or operator's determination of the total annual HAP

quantity in the off-site material received at the plant site. This

documentation must include the basis and data used for determining the

HAP content of the off-site material.

(e) Compliance dates. (1) Existing sources. The owner or operator

of an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction

before October 13, 1994, must achieve compliance with the provisions of

this subpart on or before the date specified in paragraph (e)(1)(i) or

(e)(1)(ii) of this section as applicable to the affected source.

(i) For an affected source that commenced construction or

reconstruction before October 13, 1994 and receives off-site material

for the first time before February 1, 2000, the owner or operator of

this affected source must achieve compliance with the provisions of the

subpart on or before February 1, 2000 unless an extension has been

granted by the Administrator as provided in 40 CFR 63.6(i).

(ii) For an affected source that commenced construction or

reconstruction before October 13, 1994, but receives off-site material

for the first time on or after February 1, 2000, the owner or operator

of the affected source must achieve compliance with the provisions of

this subpart upon the first date that the affected source begins to

manage off-site material.

(2) New sources. The owner or operator of an affected source for

which construction or reconstruction commences on or after October 13,

1994, must achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart on or

before July 1, 1996, or upon initial startup of operations, whichever

date is later as provided in 40 CFR 63.6(b).

* * * * *

3. Section 63.681 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the

definitions of ``Flow indicator'' and ``Hazardous air pollutants,'' by

removing the definition of ``HAP,'' and by revising the definitions of

``Control device,'' ``Cover,'' ``Point-of-treatment,'' ``Process

vent,'' ``Safety device,'' ``Used solvent,'' ``Volatile organic

hazardous air pollutant concentration,'' and ``Waste stabilization

process'' to read as follows:

[[Page 38965]]

Sec. 63.681 Definitions.

* * * * *

Control device means equipment used for recovering, removing,

oxidizing, or destroying organic vapors. Examples of such equipment

include but are not limited to carbon adsorbers, condensers, vapor

incinerators, flares, boilers, and process heaters.

Cover means a device or system that provides a continuous barrier

over the material managed in a off-site material management unit to

prevent or reduce air pollutant emissions to the atmosphere. A cover

may have openings needed for operation, inspection, sampling,

maintenance, and repair of the unit provided that each opening is

closed when not in use (e.g., access hatches, sampling ports). A cover

may be a separate piece of equipment which can be detached and removed

from the unit or a cover may be formed by structural features

permanently integrated into the design of the unit.

* * * * *

Flow indicator means a device that indicates whether gas is

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

bypass line.

* * * * *

Hazardous air pollutants or HAP means the specific organic chemical

compounds, isomers, and mixtures listed in Table 1 of this subpart.

* * * * *

Off-site material service means any time when a pump, compressor,

agitator, pressure relief device, sampling connection system, open-

ended valve or line, valve, connector, or instrumentation system

contains or contacts off-site material.

* * * * *

Point-of-treatment means a point after the treated material exits

the treatment process but before the first point downstream of the

treatment process exit where the organic constituents in the treated

material have the potential to volatilize and be released to the

atmosphere. For the purpose of applying this definition to this

subpart, the first point downstream of the treatment process exit is

not a fugitive emission point due to an equipment leak from any of the

following equipment components: pumps, compressors, valves, connectors,

instrumentation systems, or safety devices.

* * * * *

Process vent means an open-ended pipe, stack, or duct through which

a gas stream containing HAP is continuously or intermittently

discharged to the atmosphere from any of the processes listed in

Sec. 63.680(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of this section. For the

purpose of this subpart, a process vent is none of the following: a

pressure-relief vent or other vent that is used as a safety device (as

defined in this section); an open-ended line or other vent that is

subject to the equipment leak control requirements under Sec. 63.691 of

this subpart; or a stack or other vent that is used to exhaust

combustion products from a boiler, furnace, process heater,

incinerator, or other combustion device.

* * * * *

Safety device means a closure device such as a pressure relief

valve, frangible disc, fusible plug, or any other type of device which

functions to prevent physical damage or permanent deformation to

equipment by venting gases or vapors during unsafe conditions resulting

from an unplanned, accidental, or emergency event. For the purpose of

this subpart, a safety device is not used for routine venting of gases

or vapors from the vapor headspace underneath a cover such as during

filling of the unit or to adjust the pressure in this vapor headspace

in response to normal daily diurnal ambient temperature fluctuations. A

safety device is designed to remain in a closed position during normal

operations and open only when the internal pressure, or another

relevant parameter, exceeds the device threshold setting applicable to

the equipment as determined by the owner or operator based on

manufacturer recommendations, applicable regulations, fire protection

and prevention codes, standard engineering codes and practices, or

other requirements for the safe handling of flammable, combustible,

explosive, reactive, or hazardous materials.

* * * * *

Used solvent means a mixture of aliphatic hydrocarbons or a mixture

of one and two ring aromatic hydrocarbons that has been used as a

solvent and as a result of such use is contaminated by physical or

chemical impurities.

* * * * *

Volatile organic hazardous air pollutant concentration or VOHAP

concentration means the fraction by weight of those compounds listed in

Table 1 of this subpart that are in an off-site material as measured

using Method 305 in appendix A of this part and expressed in terms of

parts per million (ppm). As an alternative to using Method 305, an

owner or operator may determine the HAP concentration of an off-site

material using any one of the other test methods specified in

Sec. 63.694(b)(2)(ii) of this subpart. When a test method specified in

Sec. 63.694(b)(2)(ii) of this subpart other than Method 305 is used to

determine the speciated HAP concentration of an off-site material, the

individual compound concentration may be adjusted by the corresponding

fm305 value listed in Table 1 of this subpart to determine a

VOHAP concentration.

* * * * *

Waste stabilization process means any physical or chemical process

used to either reduce the mobility of hazardous constituents in a waste

or eliminate free liquids as determined by Test Method 9095--Paint

Filter Liquids Test in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,

Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication No. SW-846, Third Edition,

September 1986, as amended by Update I, November 15, 1992. (As an

alternative, an owner or operator may use any more recent, updated

version of Method 9095 approved by the EPA.) A waste stabilization

process includes mixing the waste with binders or other materials and

curing the resulting waste and binder mixture. Other synonymous terms

used to refer to this process are ``waste fixation'' or ``waste

solidification.'' A waste stabilization process does not include the

adding of absorbent materials to the surface of a waste, without

mixing, agitation, or subsequent curing, to absorb free liquid.

4. Section 63.683 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 63.683 Standards: General.

(a) The general standards under this section apply to owners and

operators of affected sources as designated in Sec. 63.680(c) of this

subpart.

(b) Off-site material management units. (1) For each off-site

material management unit that is part of an affected source, the owner

or operator must meet the requirements in either paragraph (b)(1)(i),

(b)(1)(ii), or (b)(1)(iii) of this section except for those off-site

material management units exempted under paragraph (b)(2) of this

section.

(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the off-site

material management unit in accordance with the applicable standards

specified in Secs. 63.685 through 63.689 of this subpart.

(ii) The owner or operator removes or destroys HAP in the off-site

material before placing the material in the off-site material

management unit by treating the material in accordance with the

standards specified in Sec. 63.684 of this subpart.

(iii) The owner or operator determines before placing off-site

material in the off-site material management unit that the average

VOHAP concentration of the off-site material is less than 500 parts per

million by weight (ppmw) at the

[[Page 38966]]

point-of-delivery. The owner or operator must perform an initial

determination of the average VOHAP concentration of the off-site

material using the procedures specified in Sec. 63.694(b) of this

subpart. This initial determination must be performed either before the

first time any portion of the off-site material stream is placed in the

unit or by the compliance date, whichever date is later. Thereafter,

the owner or operator must review and update, as necessary, this

determination at least once every calendar year following the date of

the initial determination for the off-site material stream.

(2) An off-site material management unit is exempted from the

requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section when the owner or

operator meets one of the exemptions provided in paragraphs (b)(2)(i)

through (b)(2)(iv) of this section as applicable to the unit.

(i) An off-site material management unit is exempted from the

requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section if the off-site

material management unit is also subject to another subpart under 40

CFR part 63 or 40 CFR part 61, and the owner or operator is controlling

the HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart that are emitted from the

unit in compliance with the provisions specified in the other

applicable subpart under part 61 or part 63.

(ii) At the discretion of the owner or operator, one or a

combination of off-site material management units may be exempted from

the requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section when these units

meet the condition that the total annual quantity of HAP contained in

the off-site material placed in the units exempted under this paragraph

(b)(2)(ii) is less than 1 megagram per year. For the off-site material

management units selected by the owner or operator to be exempted from

the requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner or

operator must meet the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(A) and

(b)(2)(ii)(B) of this section. An owner or operator may change the off-

site material management units selected to be exempted under this

paragraph (b)(2)(ii) by preparing a new designation for the exempt-

units as required by paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) of this section and

performing a new determination as required by paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B)

of this section.

(A) The owner or operator must designate each of the off-site

material management units selected by the owner or operator to be

exempt under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section by either submitting

to the Administrator a written notification identifying the exempt-

units or permanently marking the exempt-units at the plant site. If an

owner or operator chooses to prepare and submit a written notification,

this notification must include a site plan, process diagram, or other

appropriate documentation identifying each of the exempt-units. If an

owner or operator chooses to permanently mark the exempt-units, each

exempt-unit must be marked in such a manner that it can be readily

identified as an exempt-unit from the other off-site material

management units located at the plant site.

(B) The owner or operator must prepare an initial determination of

the total annual HAP quantity in the off-site material placed in the

units exempted under this paragraph (b)(2)(ii). This determination is

based on the total quantity of the HAP listed in Table 1 of this

subpart as determined at the point where the off-site material is

placed in each exempted unit. The owner or operator must perform a new

determination whenever the extent of changes to the quantity or

composition of the off-site material placed in the exempted units could

cause the total annual HAP content in the off-site material to exceed 1

megagram per year. The owner or operator must maintain documentation to

support the most recent determination of the total annual HAP quantity.

This documentation must include the basis and data used for determining

the HAP content of the off-site material.

(iii) A tank or surface impoundment is exempted from the

requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section if the unit is used

for a biological treatment process that meets the requirements in

either paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(A) or (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section and

the owner or operator complies with the monitoring requirements in

Sec. 63.684(e)(4) of this subpart.

(A) The HAP biodegradation efficiency (Rbio) for the

biological treatment process is equal to or greater than 95 percent.

The HAP biodegradation efficiency (Rbio) shall be determined

in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.694(h) of this subpart.

(B) The total actual HAP mass removal rate (MRbio) for

the off-site material treated by the biological treatment process is

equal to or greater than the required HAP mass removal rate (RMR) for

the off-site material. The total actual HAP mass removal rate

(MRbio) must be determined in accordance with the

requirements of Sec. 63.694(i) of this subpart. The required HAP mass

removal rate (RMR) must be determined in accordance with the

requirements of Sec. 63.694(e) of this subpart.

(iv) An off-site material management unit is exempted from the

requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section if the off-site

material placed in the unit is a hazardous waste that meets the

conditions specified in either paragraph (b)(2)(iv)(A) or (b)(2)(iv)(B)

of this section.

(A) The hazardous waste meets the numerical organic concentration

limits, applicable to the hazardous waste, as specified in 40 CFR part

268--Land Disposal Restrictions, listed in the table, ``Treatment

Standards for Hazardous Waste'' in 40 CFR 268.40.

(B) The organic hazardous constituents in the hazardous waste have

been treated by the treatment technology established by the EPA for the

hazardous waste in 40 CFR 268.42(a), or have been removed or destroyed

by an equivalent method of treatment approved by the EPA under 40 CFR

268.42(b).

(v) A tank used for bulk feed of off-site material to a waste

incinerator is exempted from the requirements specified in paragraph

(b)(1) of this section if the tank meets all of the conditions

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(v)(A) through (b)(2)(v)(C) of this

section.

(A) The tank is located inside an enclosure vented to a control

device that is designed and operated in accordance with all applicable

requirements specified under 40 CFR part 61, subpart FF--National

Emission Standards for Benzene Waste Operations for a facility at which

the total annual benzene quantity from the facility waste is equal to

or greater than 10 megagrams per year;

(B) The enclosure and control device serving the tank were

installed and began operation prior to July 1, 1996; and

(C) The enclosure is designed and operated in accordance with the

criteria for a permanent total enclosure as specified in ``Procedure

T--Criteria for and Verification of a Permanent or Temporary Total

Enclosure'' under 40 CFR 52.741, appendix B. The enclosure may have

permanent or temporary openings to allow worker access; passage of

material into or out of the enclosure by conveyor, vehicles, or other

mechanical or electrical equipment; or to direct air flow into the

enclosure. The owner or operator must annually perform the verification

procedure for the enclosure as specified in Section 5.0 to ``Procedure

T--Criteria for and Verification of a Permanent or Temporary Total

Enclosure.''

[[Page 38967]]

(c) Process vents. (1) For each process vent that is part of an

affected source, the owner or operator must meet the requirements in

either paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (c)(1)(ii) of this section except for

those process vents exempted under paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the process

vent in accordance with the standards specified in Sec. 63.690 of this

subpart.

(ii) The owner or operator determines before placing off-site

material in the process equipment associated with the process vent that

the average VOHAP concentration of the off-site material is less than

ppmw at the point-of-delivery. The owner or operator must perform an

initial determination of the average VOHAP concentration of the off-

site material using the procedures specified in Sec. 63.694(b) of this

subpart before any portion of the off-site material stream is placed in

the unit. Thereafter, the owner or operator must review and update, as

necessary, this determination at least once every calendar year

following the date of the initial determination for the off-site

material stream.

(2) A process vent is exempted from the requirements of paragraph

(c)(1) of this section when the owner or operator meets one of the

exemptions provided in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(iii) of this

section.

(i) A process vent is exempted from the requirements in paragraph

(c)(1) of this section if the process vent is also subject to another

subpart under part 63 or 40 CFR part 61, and the owner or operator is

controlling the HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart that are emitted

from the process vent in compliance with the provisions specified in

the other applicable subpart under part 61 or part 63.

(ii) A process vent is exempted from the requirements specified in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section if the owner or operator determines

that the process vent stream flow rate is less than 0.005 cubic meters

per minute (m3/min) at standard conditions (as defined in 40

CFR 63.2). The process vent stream flow rate shall be determined in

accordance with the procedures specified in Sec. 63.694(m) of this

subpart. Documentation must be prepared by the owner or operator and

maintained at the plant site to support the determination of the

process vent stream flow rate. This documentation must include

identification of each process vent exempted under this paragraph and

the test results used to determine the process vent stream flow rate.

(iii) A process vent is exempted from the requirements specified in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section if the owner or operator determines

that the process vent stream flow rate is less than 6.0 m\3\/min at

standard conditions (as defined in 40 CFR 63.2) and the total HAP

concentration is less than 20 ppmv. The process vent stream flow rate

and total HAP concentration shall be determined in accordance with the

procedures specified in Sec. 63.694(m) of this subpart. Documentation

must be prepared by the owner or operator and maintained at the plant

site to support the determination of the process vent stream flow rate

and total HAP concentration. This documentation must include

identification of each process vent exempted under this paragraph

(c)(2)(iii) and the test results used to determine the process vent

stream flow rate and total HAP concentration. The owner or operator

must perform a new determination of the process vent stream flow rate

and total HAP concentration when the extent of changes to operation of

the unit on which the process vent is used could cause either the

process vent stream flow rate to exceed the limit of 6.0 m3/

min or the total HAP concentration to exceed the limit of 20 ppmv.

(d) Equipment leaks. The owner or operator must control equipment

leaks from each equipment component that is part of the affected source

specified in Sec. 63.680(c)(3) of this subpart by implementing leak

detection and control measures in accordance with the standards

specified in Sec. 63.691 of this subpart.

5. Section 63.684 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b)

introductory text, (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) introductory text, (b)(4)

introductory text, (b)(5), (d), (e), (f), and (g) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.684 Standards: Off-site material treatment.

(a) The provisions of this section apply to the treatment of off-

site material to remove or destroy HAP for which Sec. 63.683(b)(1)(ii)

of this subpart references the requirements of this section for such

treatment.

(b) The owner or operator shall remove or destroy the HAP contained

in off-site material streams to be managed in the off-site material

management unit in accordance with Sec. 63.683(b)(1)(ii) of this

subpart using a treatment process that continuously achieves, under

normal operations, one or more of the performance levels specified in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) of this section (as applicable to the

type of treatment process) for the range of off-site material stream

compositions and quantities expected to be treated.

(1) * * *

(ii) In the case when off-site material streams entering the

treatment process are a mixture of off-site material streams having an

average VOHAP concentration equal to or greater than 500 ppmw at the

point-of-delivery with off-site material streams having average VOHAP

concentrations less than 500 ppmw at the point-of-delivery, then the

VOHAP concentration of the off-site material must be reduced to a level

at the point-of-treatment that meets the performance level specified in

either paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) or (b)(1)(ii)(B) of this section.

* * * * *

(3) HAP reduction efficiency. For any treatment process except a

treatment process that uses biological degradation and is performed in

an open tank or surface impoundment, the treatment process must achieve

the applicable performance level specified in either paragraph

(b)(3)(i) or (b)(3)(ii) of this section.

* * * * *

(4) Biological degradation performed in an open tank or surface

impoundment. A treatment process using biological degradation and

performed in an open tank or surface impoundment must achieve the

performance level specified in either paragraph (b)(4)(i) or (b)(4)(ii)

of this section.

* * * * *

(5) Incineration. The treatment process must destroy the HAP

contained in the off-site material stream using one of the combustion

devices specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through (b)(5)(iv) of this

section.

(i) An incinerator for which the owner or operator has been issued

a final permit under 40 CFR part 270, and the incinerator is designed

and operated in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 264,

subpart O--Incinerators, or

(ii) An incinerator for which the owner or operator has certified

compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR part 265,

subpart O--Incinerators.

(iii) A boiler or industrial furnace for which the owner or

operator has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270, and the

combustion unit is designed and operated in accordance with the

requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H--Hazardous Waste Burned in

Boilers and Industrial Furnaces.

(iv) A boiler or industrial furnace for which the owner or operator

has certified compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR

part 266,

[[Page 38968]]

subpart H Hazardous Waste Burned in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces.

* * * * *

(d) When the owner or operator treats the off-site material to meet

one of the performance levels specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through

(b)(4) of this section, the owner or operator shall demonstrate that

the treatment process achieves the selected performance level for the

range of expected off-site material stream compositions expected to be

treated. An initial demonstration shall be performed as soon as

possible but no later than 30 days after first time an owner or

operator begins using the treatment process to manage off-site material

streams in accordance with the requirements of either

Sec. 63.683(b)(1)(ii) or Sec. 63.683(b)(2)(ii) of this subpart as

applicable to the affected off-site material management unit or process

equipment. Thereafter, the owner or operator shall review and update,

as necessary, this demonstration at least once every calendar year

following the date of the initial demonstration.

(e) When the owner or operator treats the off-site material to meet

one of the performance levels specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through

(b)(4) of this section, the owner or operator shall ensure that the

treatment process is achieving the applicable performance requirements

by continuously monitoring the operation of the process when it is used

to treat off-site material by complying with paragraphs (e)(1) through

(e)(3) or, for biological treatment units, paragraph (e)(4) of this

section:

(1) A continuous monitoring system shall be installed and operated

for each treatment that measures operating parameters appropriate for

the treatment process technology. This system shall include a

continuous recorder that records the measured values of the selected

operating parameters. The monitoring equipment shall be installed,

calibrated, and maintained in accordance with the equipment

manufacturer's specifications or other written procedures that provide

reasonable assurance that the monitoring equipment is operating

properly. The continuous recorder shall be a data recording device that

records either an instantaneous data value at least once every 15

minutes or an average value for intervals of 15 minutes or less.

(2) For each monitored operating parameter, the owner or operator

shall establish a minimum operating parameter value or a maximum

operating parameter value, as appropriate, to define the range of

conditions at which the treatment process must be operated to

continuously achieve the applicable performance requirements of this

section.

(3) When the treatment process is operating to treat off-site

material, the owner or operator shall inspect the data recorded by the

continuous monitoring system on a routine basis and operate the

treatment process such that the actual value of each monitored

operating parameter is greater than the minimum operating parameter

value or less than the maximum operating parameter value, as

appropriate, established for the treatment process.

(4) When the treatment process is a biological treatment process

that is complying with paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the owner or

operator must establish and implement a written procedure to monitor

the appropriate parameters that demonstrate proper operation of the

biological treatment unit in accordance with the evaluation required in

Sec. 63.694(h) of this subpart. The written procedure must list the

operating parameters that will be monitored and state the frequency of

monitoring to ensure that the biological treatment unit is operating

between the minimum operating parameter values and maximum operating

parameter values to establish that the biological treatment unit is

continuously achieving the performance requirement.

(f) The owner or operator must maintain records for each treatment

process in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.696(a) of this

subpart.

(g) The owner or operator must prepare and submit reports for each

treatment process in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.697(a)

of this subpart.

* * * * *

6. Section 63.685 is amended by adding paragraph (i)(3) and by

revising paragraphs (b), (c)(2), (f)(1)(ii)(A), (g)(2)(i)(B), (h)(2),

(h)(3), and (i) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec. 63.685 Standards: Tanks.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator shall control air emissions from each

tank subject to this section in accordance with the following

applicable requirements:

(1) For a tank that is part of an existing affected source but the

tank is not used to manage off-site material having a maximum HAP vapor

pressure kilopascal (kPa) that is equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa nor

is the tank used for a waste stabilization process as defined in

Sec. 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator shall determine

whether the tank is required to use either Tank Level 1 controls or

Tank Level 2 controls as specified for the tank by Table 3 of this

subpart based on the off-site material maximum HAP vapor pressure and

the tank's design capacity. The owner or operator shall control air

emissions from a tank required by Table 3 to use Tank Level 1 controls

in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.

The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required

by Table 3 to use Tank Level 2 controls in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.

(2) For a tank that is part of a new affected source but the tank

is not used to manage off-site material having a maximum HAP vapor

pressure that is equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa nor is the tank used

for a waste stabilization process as defined in Sec. 63.681 of this

subpart, the owner or operator shall determine whether the tank is

required to use either Tank Level 1 controls or Tank Level 2 controls

as specified for the tank by Table 4 of this subpart based on the off-

site material maximum HAP vapor pressure and the tank's design

capacity. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank

required by Table 4 to use Tank Level 1 controls in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. The owner or operator

shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 4 to use Tank

Level 2 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d)

of this section.

(3) For a tank that is used for a waste stabilization process, the

owner or operator shall control air emissions from the tank by using

Tank Level 2 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph

(d) of this section.

(4) For a tank that manages off-site material having a maximum HAP

vapor pressure that is equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa, the owner or

operator must control air emissions by using one of the tanks specified

in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (b)(4)(iii) of this section.

(i) A tank vented through a closed-vent system to a control device

in accordance with the requirements specified in paragraph (g) of this

section;

(ii) A pressure tank designed and operated in accordance with the

requirements specified in paragraph (h) of this section; or

(iii) A tank located inside an enclosure that is vented through a

closed-vent system to an enclosed combustion control device in

accordance with the requirements specified in paragraph (i) of this

section.

[[Page 38969]]

(c) * * *

(2) The owner or operator must control air emissions from the tank

in accordance with the requirements in either paragraph (c)(2)(i),

(c)(2)(ii), or (c)(2)(iii) of this section, as applicable to the tank.

(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the tank in

accordance with the provisions specified in subpart 00 of 40 CFR part

63--National Emission Standards for Tanks--Level 1.

(ii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements in paragraph

(c)(2)(i) of this section, an owner or operator may control air

emissions from the tank in accordance with the provisions for Tank

Level 2 controls as specified in paragraph (d) of this section.

(iii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements in paragraph

(c)(2)(i) of this section when a tank is used as an interim transfer

point to transfer off-site material from containers to another off-site

material management unit, an owner or operator may control air

emissions from the tank in accordance with the requirements in

paragraphs (c)(2)(iii)(A) and (c)(2)(iii)(B) of this section. An

example of such a tank is an in-ground tank into which organic-

contaminated debris is dumped from roll-off boxes or dump trucks, and

then this debris is promptly transferred from the tank to a

macroencapsulation unit by a backhoe.

(A) During those periods of time when the material transfer

activity is occurring, the tank may be operated without a cover.

(B) At all other times, air emissions from the tank must be

controlled in accordance with the provisions specified in 40 CFR part

67, subpart 00--National Emission Standards for Tanks--Level 1.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) * * *

(ii) * * *

(A) The primary seal shall be a liquid-mounted seal or a metallic

shoe seal, as defined in Sec. 63.681 of this subpart. The total area of

the gaps between the tank wall and the primary seal shall not exceed

212 square centimeters (cm2) per meter of tank diameter, and the width

of any portion of these gaps shall not exceed 3.8 centimeters (cm). If

a metallic shoe seal is used for the primary seal, the metallic shoe

seal shall be designed so that one end extends into the liquid in the

tank and the other end extends a vertical distance of at least 61

centimeters (24 inches) above the liquid surface.

* * * * *

(g) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) To remove accumulated sludge or other residues from the bottom

of the tank.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(2) All tank openings shall be equipped with closure devices

designed to operate with no detectable organic emissions as determined

using the procedure specified in Sec. 63.694(k) of this subpart.

(3) Whenever an off-site material is in the tank, the tank shall be

operated as a closed system that does not vent to the atmosphere except

under either of the following conditions as specified in paragraph

(h)(3)(i) or (h)(3)(ii) of this section.

(i) At those times when opening of a safety device, as defined in

Sec. 63.681 of this subpart, is required to avoid an unsafe condition.

(ii) At those times when purging of inerts from the tank is

required and the purge stream is routed to a closed-vent system and

control device designed and operated in accordance with the

requirements of Sec. 63.693 of this subpart.

(i) The owner or operator who elects to control air emissions by

using an enclosure vented through a closed-vent system to an enclosed

combustion control device shall meet the requirements specified in

paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this section.

* * * * *

(3) Opening of a safety device, as defined in Sec. 63.681 of this

subpart, is allowed at any time conditions require it to do so to avoid

an unsafe condition.

7. Section 63.686 is amended by revising the paragraph (b)

introductory text and adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.686 Standards: Oil-water and organic-water separators.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator shall control air emissions from each

separator subject to this section by using one of the following:

* * * * *

(3) A pressurized separator that operates as a closed system in

accordance with all applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63,

subpart VV--National Emission Standards for Oil-Water Separators and

Organic-Water Separators.

8. Section 63.687 is amended by revising the paragraph (b)

introductory text to read as follows:

Sec. 63.687 Standards: Surface impoundments.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator shall control air emissions from each

surface impoundment subject to this section by using one of the

following:

* * * * *

9. Section 63.688 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to

read as follows:

Sec. 63.688 Standards: Containers.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator shall control air emissions from each

container subject to this section in accordance with the following

requirements, as applicable to the container, except when the special

provisions for waste stabilization processes specified in paragraph (c)

of this section apply to the container.

(1) For a container having a design capacity greater than 0.1 m\3\

and less than or equal to 0.46 m\3\, the owner or operator must control

air emissions from the container in accordance with the requirements in

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

(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the container

in accordance with the standards for Container Level 1 controls as

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP--National Emission Standards

for Containers.

(ii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements in paragraph

(b)(1)(i) of this section, an owner or operator may choose to control

air emissions from the container in accordance with the standards for

either Container Level 2 controls or Container Level 3 controls as

specified in subpart PP of this part 63--National Emission Standards

for Containers.

(2) For a container having a design capacity greater than 0.46 m\3\

and the container is not in light-material service as defined in

Sec. 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator must control air

emissions from the container in accordance with the requirements in

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

(3) For a container having a design capacity greater than 0.46 m\3\

and the container is in light-material service as defined in

Sec. 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator must control air

emissions from the container in accordance with the requirements in

either paragraph (b)(3)(i) or (b)(3)(ii) of this section.

(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the container

in accordance with the standards for Container Level 2 controls as

specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP--National Emission Standards

for Containers.

(ii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements in paragraph

(b)(3)(i) of

[[Page 38970]]

this section, an owner or operator may choose to control air emissions

from the container in accordance with the standards for Container Level

3 controls as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP--National

Emission Standards for Containers.

(c) When a container subject to this subpart and having a design

capacity greater than 0.1 m\3\ is used for treatment of an off-site

material by a waste stabilization process as defined in Sec. 63.681 of

this subpart, the owner or operator shall control air emissions from

the container at those times during the process when the off-site

material in the container is exposed to the atmosphere in accordance

with the standards for Container Level 3 controls as specified in 40

CFR part 63, subpart PP--National Emission Standards for Containers.

10. Section 63.689 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (c), (d)

introductory text, and (d)(5) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec. 63.689 Standards: Transfer systems.

* * * * *

(b) For each transfer system that is subject to this section and is

an individual drain system, the owner or operator shall control air

emissions in accordance with the standards specified in 40 CFR part 63,

subpart RR--National Emission Standards for Individual Drain Systems.

(c) For each transfer system that is subject to this section but is

not an individual drain system, the owner or operator shall control air

emissions by using one of the transfer systems specified in paragraphs

(c)(1) through (c)(3) of this section.

(1) A transfer system that uses covers in accordance with the

requirements specified in paragraph (d) of this section.

(2) A transfer system that consists of continuous hard-piping. All

joints or seams between the pipe sections shall be permanently or semi-

permanently sealed (e.g., a welded joint between two sections of metal

pipe or a bolted and gasketed flange).

(3) A transfer system that is enclosed and vented through a closed-

vent system to a control device in accordance with the requirements

specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (c)(3)(ii) of this section.

(i) The transfer system is designed and operated such that an

internal pressure in the vapor headspace in the enclosure is maintained

at a level less than atmospheric pressure when the control device is

operating, and

(ii) The closed-vent system and control device are designed and

operated in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.693 of this

subpart.

(d) Owners and operators controlling air emissions from a transfer

system using covers in accordance with the provisions of paragraph

(c)(1) of this section shall meet the requirements specified in

paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(6) of this section.

* * * * *

(5) Whenever an off-site material is in the transfer system, the

cover shall be installed with each closure device secured in the closed

position except as specified in paragraph (d)(5)(i) or (d)(5)(ii) of

this section.

* * * * *

11. Section 63.690 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 63.690 Standards: Process vents.

(a) The provisions of this section apply to the control of air

emissions from process vents for which Sec. 63.683(c)(1)(i) of this

subpart references the use of this section for such air emission

control.

(b) The owner or operator must route the vent stream from each

affected process vent through a closed-vent system to a control device

that meets the standards specified in Sec. 63.693 of this subpart. For

the purpose of complying with this paragraph (b), a primary condenser

is not a control device; however, a second condenser or other organic

recovery device that is operated downstream of the primary condenser is

considered a control device.

12. Section 63.691 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 63.691 Standards: Equipment leaks.

(a) The provisions of this section apply to the control of air

emissions from equipment leaks for which Sec. 63.683(b)(3) of this

subpart references the use of this section for such air emission

control.

(b) The owner or operator shall control the HAP emitted from

equipment leaks in accordance with the applicable provisions specified

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

(1) The owner or operator controls the HAP emitted from equipment

leaks in accordance with Sec. 61.242 through Sec. 61.247 in 40 CFR part

61, subpart V--National Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks; or

(2) The owner or operator controls the HAP emitted from equipment

leaks in accordance with Sec. 63.162 through Sec. 63.182 in subpart H--

National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from

Equipment Leaks.

13. Section 63.693 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 63.693 Standards: Closed-vent systems and control devices.

(a) The provisions of this section apply to closed-vent systems and

control devices used to control air emissions for which another

standard references the use of this section for such air emission

control.

(b) For each closed-vent system and control device used to comply

with this section, the owner or operator shall meet the following

requirements:

(1) The owner or operator must use a closed-vent system that meets

the requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this section.

(2) The owner or operator must use a control device that meets the

requirements specified in paragraphs (d) through (h) of this section as

applicable to the type and design of the control device selected by the

owner or operator to comply with the provisions of this section.

(3) Whenever gases or vapors containing HAP are vented through a

closed-vent system connected to a control device used to comply with

this section, the control device must be operating except at those

times listed in either paragraph (b)(3)(i) or (b)(3)(ii) of this

section.

(i) The control device may be bypassed for the purpose of

performing planned routine maintenance of the closed-vent system or

control device in situations when the routine maintenance cannot be

performed during periods that the emission point vented to the control

device is shutdown. On an annual basis, the total time that the closed-

vent system or control device is bypassed to perform routine

maintenance shall not exceed 240 hours per each calendar year.

(ii) The control device may be bypassed for the purpose of

correcting a malfunction of the closed-vent system or control device.

The owner or operator shall perform the adjustments or repairs

necessary to correct the malfunction as soon as practicable after the

malfunction is detected.

(4) The owner or operator must inspect and monitor each closed-vent

system in accordance with the requirements specified in either

paragraph (b)(4)(i) or (b)(4)(ii) of this section.

(i) The owner or operator inspects and monitors the closed-vent

system in accordance with the requirements specified in Sec. 63.695(c)

of this subpart, and complies with the applicable recordkeeping

requirements in Sec. 63.696 of this subpart and the applicable

reporting requirements in Sec. 63.697 of this subpart.

[[Page 38971]]

(ii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements specified in

paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section, the owner or operator may choose

to inspect and monitor the closed-vent system in accordance with the

requirements under 40 CFR part 63, subpart H--National Emission

Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks as

specified in 40 CFR 63.172(f) through (h), and complies with the

applicable recordkeeping requirements in 40 CFR 63.181 and the

applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR 63.182.

(5) The owner or operator must monitor the operation of each

control device in accordance with the requirements specified in

paragraphs (d) through (h) of this section as applicable to the type

and design of the control device selected by the owner or operator to

comply with the provisions of this section.

(6) The owner or operator shall maintain records for each control

device in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.696 of this

subpart.

(7) The owner or operator shall prepare and submit reports for each

control device in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.697 of

this subpart.

(8) In the case when an owner or operator chooses to use a design

analysis to demonstrate compliance of a control device with the

applicable performance requirements specified in this section as

provided for in paragraphs (d) through (g) of this section, the

Administrator may request that the design analysis be revised or

amended by the owner or operator to correct any deficiencies identified

by the Administrator. If the owner or operator and the Administrator do

not agree on the acceptability of using the design analysis (including

any changes requested by the Administrator) to demonstrate that the

control device achieves the applicable performance requirements, then

the disagreement must be resolved using the results of a performance

test conducted by the owner or operator in accordance with the

requirements of Sec. 63.694(l) of this subpart. The Administrator may

choose to have an authorized representative observe the performance

test conducted by the owner or operator. Should the results of this

performance test not agree with the determination of control device

performance based on the design analysis, then the results of the

performance test will be used to establish compliance with this

subpart.

(c) Closed-vent system requirements.

(1) The vent stream required to be controlled shall be conveyed to

the control device by either of the following closed-vent systems:

(i) A closed-vent system that is designed to operate with no

detectable organic emissions using the procedure specified in

Sec. 63.694(k) of this subpart; or

(ii) A closed-vent system that is designed to operate at a pressure

below atmospheric pressure. The system shall be equipped with at least

one pressure gage or other pressure measurement device that can be read

from a readily accessible location to verify that negative pressure is

being maintained in the closed-vent system when the control device is

operating.

(2) In situations when the closed-vent system includes bypass

devices that could be used to divert a vent stream from the closed-vent

system to the atmosphere at a point upstream of the control device

inlet, each bypass device must be equipped with either a flow indicator

as specified in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section or a seal or

locking device as specified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section.

For the purpose of complying with this paragraph (c)(2), low leg

drains, high point bleeds, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines,

or pressure relief valves needed for safety reasons are not subject to

the requirements of this paragraph (c)(2).

(i) If a flow indicator is used, the indicator must be installed at

the entrance to the bypass line used to divert the vent stream from the

closed-vent system to the atmosphere. The flow indicator must indicate

a reading at least once every 15 minutes. The owner or operator must

maintain records of the following information: hourly records of

whether the flow indicator was operating and whether flow was detected

at any time during the hour; and records of all periods when flow is

detected or the flow indicator is not operating.

(ii) If a seal or locking device is used, the bypass line valve

must be secured in the non-diverting position with a car-seal or a

lock-and-key type configuration. The seal or locking device must be

placed on the mechanism by which the bypass device position is

controlled (e.g., valve handle, damper lever) when the bypass device is

in the non-diverting position such that the bypass device cannot be

moved to the diverting position without breaking the seal or removing

the lock. The owner or operator must visually inspect the seal or

closure mechanism at least once every month to determine that the

bypass line valve is maintained in the non-diverting position and the

vent stream is not diverted through the bypass line.

(d) Carbon adsorption control device requirements.

(1) The carbon adsorption system must achieve the performance

specifications in either paragraph (d)(1)(i) or (d)(1)(ii) of this

section.

(i) Recover 95 percent or more, on a weight-basis, of the total

organic compounds (TOC), less methane and ethane, contained in the vent

stream entering the carbon adsorption system; or

(ii) Recover 95 percent or more, on a weight-basis, of the total

HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart contained in the vent stream

entering the carbon adsorption system.

(2) The owner or operator must demonstrate that the carbon

adsorption system achieves the performance requirements in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section by either performing a performance test as

specified in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section or a design analysis

as specified in paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section.

(i) An owner or operator choosing to use a performance test to

demonstrate compliance must conduct the test in accordance with the

requirements of Sec. 63.694(l) of this subpart.

(ii) An owner or operator choosing to use a design analysis to

demonstrate compliance must include as part of this design analysis the

information specified in either paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A) or

(d)(2)(ii)(B) of this section as applicable to the carbon adsorption

system design.

(A) For a regenerable carbon adsorption system, the design analysis

shall address the vent stream composition, constituent concentrations,

flow rate, relative humidity, and temperature and shall establish the

design exhaust vent stream organic compound concentration, adsorption

cycle time, number and capacity of carbon beds, type and working

capacity of activated carbon used for carbon beds, design total

regeneration steam flow over the period of each complete carbon bed

regeneration cycle, design carbon bed temperature after regeneration,

design carbon bed regeneration time, and design service life of the

carbon.

(B) For a nonregenerable carbon adsorption system (e.g., a carbon

canister), the design analysis shall address the vent stream

composition, constituent concentrations, flow rate, relative humidity,

and

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.