# National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-17943 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Rule - **Published:** July 20, 1999 - **Citation:** 64 FR 38950 ## Text 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 requ [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-17943. Public record. Not legal advice.