Document 0JQeKKyy97YL2oR2D4g2aZw0d

ft LW 'fc ACTION ALERT Distribution: 3. Anderson R. Duggan M. W. Ferris F. W. Fisher B. Helms R. C. Lletzau H. 3. Ortega M. 3. Sauers U. Sllowka 3. K. Spata Please be reminded EPA promulgated revisions to the National Emissions Standard for Vinyl Chloride - Equipment Leaks Final Rule effective September 30, 1986. AJDipbr 1441c Attachment: Part IX EPA, 40 CFR Part 61 - National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Vinyl Chloride; Equipment Leaks of Volatile Hazardous Air Pollutants; Final Rule AP00025293 Tuesday September 30, 1986 Part IX Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 61 National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Vinyl Chloride; Equipment Leaks of Volatile Hazardous Air Pollutants; Final Rule AP00025294 34304 Federal Register / Vol. St. No. 139 / Tuesday, September 30. 1083 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 61 IAO-FRL-3044--5| National Emission Standards tor Hazardous Air Pollutants: Vinyl Chloride; Equipment Leaks of Volatile Hazardous Air Pollutants adency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). action: Final rule. summary: The EPA proposed administrative and clarifying revisions to the national emission standard for vinyl chloride (VC) on January 9.1983. (50 FR1162). Certain revisions to the standard are being promulgated in Subpart F through this action and, to a minor extent, in Subpart V of so CFR Part 81. Finally, through this action the Agency is denying the petition of the Natural Resources Defense Council (N'RDCJ and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) which sought reconsideration of the EPA's withdrawal of the amendments to the VC standard which were proposed in 1977. EFFECTIVE o ATE; September 30.1988. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act. judicial review of the actions taken by this notice is available only by filing of a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit within GO days of today's publication of this nite. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act. the requirements that are the subject for today's notice may not be challenged la tar In civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements. Incorporation by Reference The Incorporation by reference of certain publications in these standards is approved by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register ae of September 30.1988. addresses: Background Information Document. The background information document (BID) for the promulgated standards may be obtained from the U.S. EPA Library (MD-35). Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (910) 541-2777. Please refer to "Vinyl Chloride Standard: Responses to Comments on January 1985 Proposed Revisions." EPA-450/3-88004. Ths BID contains: (1) A summary of all public comments on the proposed revisions and the Administrator's response to the comments, and (2) a summary of the changes made to the revised standard since proposal. Dockets. A docket, number A-81-21, containing information considered by EPA in developing of the promulgated revisions to the standard for VC. is available for public inspeciion between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA's Central Docket Section (LE--131). West Tower Lobby. Gallery 1. 401 M Street. SW., Washington. DC 20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning the enforcement aspects of the promulgated revisions, contact Mr. Richard Biondi, Compliance Monitoring Branch. Stationary Source Compliance Division. (EN-341). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.. Washington. DC 20489. telephone number (202) 3822829. For further information concerning the background technical information supporting the promulgated revisions, contact Mr. Robert E. Rosensteel. Chemicals and Petroleum Branch. Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle Park. North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-5871. For other information on the regulation of VC and the promulgated revisions, contact Mr. Fred Dimmick, Standards Development Branch. Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. telephone number (919) 541-5578. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Summary of Revisions to the Standard The VC standard was promulgated on October 21. 1978 (41 FR 48860) and applies to plants producing ethylene dichloride (EDC) via oxychlorination. plant producing VC. and plants producing polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or other polymers containing VC. These plants are subject to a combination of performance, equipment and work practice requirements at numerous points in the manufacturing processes. Based an its review of the technological basis and administrative aspects of the original standard. EPA proposed several administrative and clarifying revisions to the standard on January 9.1085 (50 FR 1182). The comments received and actions taken on these proposed revisions are discussed below. Requirements for Leak Detection and Repair Programs As proposed in January 1985. VC is being added to the list of substances covered by 40 CFR Part 81 Subpart V. which contains regulations for leaks from certain equipment in volatile hazardous air pollutant (VHAPJ service. Previously, plant owners subject to the VC standard were required to prepare leak detection and repair plans for each VC and PVC manufacturing facility and lo subnul ihese plans to EPA for review An analysis of the plans submilted revealed that these plans varied widely from plant to plant. Further, some plans were considered to be inadequate and ineffective approaches to ths control of VC leaks. The incorporation of Subpart V by the standard for VC emissions establishes standardized procedures for identifying leaks of VC and for taking steps to minimize emissions and repair leaks. Further, the incorporation of Subpart V will also accomplish a standardization of the definition of what constitutes a leak for routine leak detection. However, to avoid unnecessary changes to existing plans which are effective in detecting and repairing VC leaks, the standard contains provisions whereby any facility may demonstrate through annual (or more frequent, if requested by the Administrator) performance tests that the percentage of leaking valves remains at 2 percent as an alternative to following the Subpart V procedures. An owner may continue to follow the existing leak detection and elimination program for that facility for the purpose of achieving the 2 percent performance limit. However, existing plans are no longer required, nor do they necessarily meet Lhe promulgated requirements. Compliance Test Procedure and Specific Opening Loss Limit for PVC Reactors Used as Strippers The Federal Register no dee that promulgated the current VC standard stated that VC escaping from PVC resin that has been stripped in the reactor is not intended to be included as part of the VC emissions measured under the reactor opening loss requirements. For nonbulk PVC reactors which are used as strippers, however, no method was specified to determine what part of the VC in the vapor space of the reactor had escaped after the stripping was completed. Consequently, a method was proposed for determining the reactor opening loss that accounts for stripping in the PVC reactor for use by all nonbulk resin producers. After considering the comments on this proposed revision. EPA decided to promulgate the revision. Another proposed change in the standard affecting PVC reactors used as strippers applied to the production of bulk PVC resins. Two separate vessels are used in bulk resin production, a "prepolyinerization" vessel and a "postpolymerization" vessel. Under the standard promulgated in 1978. both of these vessels were subject to the reactor I AP00025295 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1988 / Rules and Re,on! .'Ions 3-5905 opening loss requirements. However, an only allowed when the combined stream analysis of the operation of is ducted to a control device. prepolymerization vessels revealed that The inprocess wastewater these reactors are opened less requirement! for gasholder seals are frequently than other types of reactors, also being revised to exclude the and that the determination of gross exposed water seal of gasholders. product (required for the calculation of Experience with the VC standerd reactor opening loss] is impractical. In indicates that water contained in the January 1988. EPA proposed to apply the exposed water seal of a gasholder may equipment opening lose requirements, exceed the 10 ppmv limit during normal rather than the reactor opening lose operation and that compliance with the requirements, to these PVC reactors. atmospheric exposure limit is not The equipment opening loss practicable for this source. The requirements are more appropriate for inprocasa wastewater stripping the operating characteristics of the prepolymerization reactor vessels and requirements, however, will continue to apply to wastewater after removal from do not change the overall VC amission the gasholder seaL control stringancy applicable prepolymerization reactors. After considering the comments on this proposed revision. EPA decided to promulgate the revision. OtherAdministrative Revisions Other administrative revisions to tha standard include: (1) Tha elimination of the 30-day limit for existing sources to submit requests for tha use of equivalent Clarification of Definitions and controlmeasures; (2) a change horn Standards . . .. ,, semiannual to quarterly reporting of VC Based on the EPA's experience with administering the VC standard, several provisions of the standard ara being revised to reduce any ambiguity in their implementation. For example, specific emissions from resin stripping, reactor openings, and exhaust gases: and (3) allowance of reporting of periods of excess emissions instead of all emission measurements. definitions of "leak." "exhaust gas." and Summary of Impacts to the Standard "relief valve discharge" are being added to clarify the applicability of the provisiona of the standard to each of these types of emissions. Similarly, to eliminate misunderstandings about the application of tha standard to - purification equipment following EDC end VC formation, the definitions of "EDC purification" and "VC purification" are being revised to more clearly indicate which equipment is Revisions to the standard represent administrative and clarifying changes; no major revisions were proposed. Therefore, the environmental, energy and economic impacts of tha original standard remain generallyunchanged. A summary of the impacts of tha original standard can be found in tha preamble to tha proposed standard revisions (SO FR1182). subject to the standard....................... . Public Participation Another revision being Incorporated Prior to proposal of revisions to the into the standard makes it clear that tha standard, interested parties were 10 ppmv standard is a 3-hour average . advised by public notice in the Federal emission limit, rather than an Register (49 FR 28807. June 29.1984) of a instantaneous limit.The performance, meeting of the National Air Pollution test provision In ! 81.87(g)(1) has also - Control Techniques Advisory been clarified to specify that test results Committee (NAPCTAC) to discuss the should reflect as close to a 3-hour revisions to the VC standard averaga as practicable. Further, the 10 recommended for proposal This meeting ppmv standard regulation is being was held on August 30.1984. The revised to specify that all exhaust gas meeting was open to the public and each streams are covered by this '' attendee was given an opportunity to requirement, including control device comment on the revised standard bypass streams. In order to implement recommended for proposal. this clarification, provisions are also The revised standard was proposed in being incorporated into tha standard for the Federal Register on January 9,1985. calculating tha VC content in bypassed The public comment period was from emissions. A final revtsioirlo the 10 January 9.1985 to March 25.1935. A ppmv requirement is intended to total of 18 comment letters were prohibit plants from diluting a VC. received. Industry representatives exhaust gas stream with other exhaust submitted most of the comment letters. gases in order to meet the 10 ppmv limit Also commenting were representatives Under the revised standard, combining of the U.S. Congress, a State Legislature, an exhaust stream containing more than a State air pollution agency and an 10 ppmv VC with another gaa stream is environmental group. The comments have been considered carefully and. where determined to be appropriate by EPA. changes have been made to the proposed revisions to the sUndzrd. Significant Comments Sines Proposal Most of the comment letters contained multiple comments. In general. the comments supported the proposed administrative and clarifying revisions. A detailed discussion of the comments and responses can be found in the BID for the promulgated standard, which is referenced in the ADQRESSES section of this preamble. The comments and responses in the BID serve as the basis for tha changes that have been made to the revised standard between proposal and promulgation. Almost all commenters addressed the proposed revisions to the relief valve discharge standard. Although many of the commenters agreed with the action to reformat the standard, several commenters objected to various aspects of tha discharge limits. Based on consideration of these comments. FJ'A decided not to promuignte the proposed revision to the relief valve dischergo standard. The comments on this and other proposed revisions are addressed in detail in the BID for the promulgated standard and in summary in the next section of this preamble. One commenter mounted reconsideration of the withdrawal of the amendments to the VC Oandard which were proposed in 1977. This petition for reconsideration was based on objections to the Agency's use of data on costs and economic impacts In the decision to withdraw the proposed amendments, and to the Agency's determination of the technological basis of the standard. The commenters stated that the EPA's actions in withdrawing the proposed amendments were inconsistent with the requirements of section 112 of the Clean Air Act. As discussed further In this preamble, the Agency is denying the petition for reconsideration. Proposed Revisions to ivelief Valve Discharge Standard The EPA has decided not to promulgate revisions tn >he relief valve discharge standard pr:-posed in the January 9,1985, Federu Register notice. The revisions would h iv* established a different type oF numerical limit for relief valve discharges The decision to retain the original re!;.-, valve discharge standard was made a '-r considering the revisions in light re public comments and other findings. Ai-ough many public comments favrrej the proposed revisions, others opprm*d the change. In ! i i, Y "i AP00025296 34906 Fearal Register / Vol. 51, Mo. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1986 / Rules and Regulations i . particular, several commenlers minimizing the discharges. Because of the part of industry should be dearer, I expressed concern that preventable relief valve discharges would be allowed under ihe revised standard and these two developments. EPA concluded the necessity for revising the format vf that the original findings of the review the relief valve discharge standard is no study are no longer v.liJ and should not longer apparent. The existing standard that the performance allowed under the be the basis of a revisinn to the format also has the advantages of penalizing ail revised standard could be inconsistent of the relief valve discharge standard. preventable relief valve discharges, with that allowed under the original The decision to retain the existing providing better regulation of large standard. Other comments expressed relief valve discharge standard as a part volume relief valve discharges, and concern that the revised standard of the standard for VC emissions is promoting continuity in the ongoing included no mechanism for regulating further supported by two additional enforcement of the standard. very large relief valve discharges. The advantages that the existing standard In some instances, it may be possible basis for the statement that a large has over the proposed revisions. First, for a piant operator to contain a relief Agency resource commitment is the existing standard provides valve discharge and to vent it to a required for enforcing the relief valve that all preventable relief valve control device. Where this can be done discharge standard was also questioned. discharges are subject to enforcement without exceeding the exhaust gas As a resuit of these comments. CPA action. Under the proposed revisions, emission limit of 10 ppmv, EPA reviewed the basis for the which would have allowed a small concluded that this approach should be recommendations that led to the number of discharges per year whether encouraged and. therefore, the discharge decision to propose to reformat the preventable or not. it is possible that a should be exempt from the relief valve standard. First, as discussed in the plant could experience preventable discharge standard. Venting the Federal Register notice proposing discharges and still be in compliance discharge through a control device can revisions to the relief valve discharge with the standard. As pointed out in result in a 99.9 percent reduction in the standard (50 FR1187), the review' of the public comments, it is theoretically VC content of the relief valve discharge standard conducted between 1980 and 1982 found that the existing standard possible that discharges resulting from gross negligence could go unpenalized without interfering with the control of VC emissions In exhaust gases which resulted in a significant commitment of under the revisions to the standard. The are also vented through the control Agency resources to the review and EPA did not intend this effect in the device. Although compliance with the 10 evaluation of discharges of VC from proposed revisions. The retention of the ppmv standard would exempt the relief valves. Because the existing existing relief valve discharge standard discharge from the relief valve discharge standard allows only "emergency" allowa EPA to continue the current standard, exceeding the 10 ppmy discharges of VC from relief valves (i.e., enforcement approach. standard would be considered both a the relief valve discharge could not be Second, the existing relief valve violation of the 10 ppmv standard and of avoided by taking preventative discharge standard provides a better the relief valve discharge standard. measures), every discharge must be mechanism for regulating large relief Denial of Petition For Reconsideration evaluated individually to determine whether the owner or operator of the facility haa implemented the measures necessary to prevent that relief valve discharge. During the 4 to 5 years since the review study was conducted, the enforcement of the relief valve discharge standard has been made more efficient. This is due in large part to experience established in enforcing the standard. As a result. EPA enforcement personnel consider implementation of this standard to be much less resource and labor intensive. A second conclusion from the 1980 to 1982 study was that industry did not have a clear understanding of what the relief valve discharge standard required end what measures they needed to valve discharges. The proposed revision would have allowed a certain number of relief valve discharges per year, without regard to the size or duration of the discharge. Consequently, as long as the number of releases were within the numerical limits of the proposed revisions to the standard, there were no mechanisms in the standard to enforce control of the amount of VC discharged to the atmosphere. Under the existing relief valve discharge standard, however, the duration and size of the discharge are factors in determining the severity of a violation of the standard. As a result, a plant owner or operator has a greater incentive under the euirent standard for taking action to reduce the quantity of a discharge. The .VRDC and EDF petitioned EPA to reconsider the decision to withdraw the 1977 proposed revisions to Ihe VC standard. The criteria for granting such a petition are: (1) The petition must be based on information that waa not and .could not reaaonably have been presented during the original rulemaking: and (2) the petition must provide substantial support for the argument that the challenged action should be changed. See Denial of Petition to Revise NSPS for Stationary Gas Turbines. 45 FR 81853 (December 1. 1980). As described below, this petition fails to meet either criterion, and it is therefore, denied. Consideration of Petition implement in order to comply with the In summary, EPA is not promulgating The NRDC/EDF petition for standard. During the 4 to 5 years since the revisions to the relief valve reconsideration of the withdrawal was the review study, e number of enforcement actions have been taken discharge standard which were ' based on four main premises. First proposed in the January 9.1985. Federal NRDC/EDF objected to the EPA's (gainst individual plants for violation* Register notice. This decision was announcement of the withdrawal of the of the standards. Those actions have culminated in consent decrees which incorporate requirements for remedial reached after consideration of public proposed amendments as a final action, comments received on the proposal, and without being preceded by a notice which after a review of the basis for the proposed the withdrawal and allowed actions to prevent further relief valve decision to reformat the standard. for public comment on the action. discharges. The provisions of these consent decrees have not only reduced Because this review revealed that the burden on Agency resources has Second, NRDC/EDF objected to the influence of cost considerations in thu the number of relief valve discharges at diminished as experience with ihe decision to withdraw the proposed specific plants, but they have also served as guidelines in determining the implementation of the standard amendment, stating that the balancing increased, and that understanding of the of costs and benefits in the setting of the types of measures appropriate for provisions of the existing standard on VC standard is contrary to the AP00025297 Federal Register / Vol. SI. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 198G / Rules and Regulations 7 requirements of Section 113 of the Clean Air Ad. Third. NRDC/EDF took issue wit!) what it took to be the EPA's assumption that Section 112 of the Clean Air Act establishes a requirement that a level of control must have been "(.'insistently achieved" in the past in order to form the busts of the standard. Finally. NRDC/EDF staled that the ETA's decisions un specific portions of the proposed amendments were in conflict with (he evidence on those issues. In the first objection. NRDC/EDF state that the proposed amendments to the 1877 VC standard should not be withdrawn because no notice of such withdrawal had been published and there had been no opportunity for public comment on the withdrawal. During the 8 years which have elapsed since the proposal of those amendments, there has been ample opportunity afforded for public comment and input on the amendments and their withdrawal. The amendments, their protential consequences, and the decisions that the Agency might take with regard to them were all before the public. Specifically. N'RDC and EDF received draft documents relating to the rulemaking distributed prior to the NAPCTAC meeting. Finally. NRDC did not give any supporting rationale for believing that further opportunity for comment would yield any relevant now information or arguments. Therefore. ERA does not believe that additional time or provision for receiving further public comments could have been either necessary or helpful for the resolution of the issues involving the proposed amendments to the VC standard. The second issue raised by NRDC/ EDF involves the inclusion of cost consideration in the EPA's rulemaking deliberations under Section 112. The NRDC/EDF maintains that the language of Section 112 which requires the standard to be set at a level which provides an "ample margin of safety" to the public precludes consideration of the costs of control. In the EPA's judgment, the VC standard protects the public health with an ample margin of safety within the meaning of Section 112. and EPA may consider cost and feasiblily in setting the standard. The EPA views were explained in the 1975-76 VC rulemaking. The NRDC/EDF provided no new information on this issue. The NRDC/EDFs third objection was the EPA was incorrect in stating that a level of control must be "consistently achieved" in order to form the basis of the standard. Specifically. NRDC/EDF pointed to the language in the Federal Register notice that `TO ppmv represents the lowest level of control which has been consistently achieved" as indicating that EPA was applying such requirement in evaluating alternative cxhutisl gas requirements. However, the basis for EPA`s selection of 10 ppmv as the VC standard for exhaust gas emissions is that this level of control is the loss est achievable emission limit attainable on a never-to-be-exceeded basis. Although 5 ppmv may be achieved by some systems over a limited time period, the existing data indicate the this level of control cannot bo maintained over a long-term, neverlo-ba-exceeded basis, as required by the standards. In addition to being achievable on a consistent, long-term basis, the 10 ppmv standard was also determined by EPA to provide the public with the ample margin of safety required by section 112. Therefore. EPA beleives that the standard satisfies the requirements of section 112. The final points raised by NRDC/EDF in support of the petition for reconsideration addressed three specific provisions of the proposed amendments which were withdrawn. The NRDC/EDF stated that the withdrawal of these provisions was in conflict with the evidence before the Agency. The first specific portion of the standard addressed in the petition is the withdrawal of the proposed 5 ppmv emission limit for exhaust gas emission in favor of the existing 10 ppmv emission limit. The NRDC/EDF stated that the evidence in the record supports a finding that the 5 ppmv limit is achievable by new sourcea. and by existing sources within 3 years of promulgation. The petition also pointed to the more stringent emission limit not be foregone. The EPA decided to maintain the 10 ppmv emission limit for exhaust gas emission for three primary reasons. First, as stated above, the 10 ppmv emission limit has been determined to be consistently achievable by industry, whereas the S ppmv emission limit cannot be consistently achieved. Second, even though the limit on maximum emissions of VC is set's! 10 ppmv. the average and moat short-term emissions will be considerably lower than this level. Third, lowering the emission limit on maximum emission rates to 5 ppmv would not significantly reduce Ihe average emissions, and therefore, adopting the lower standard was determined by the Agency not to have a significant impact on emissions of VC or. accordingly, on public health risks. The petition for reconsideration presented no new evidence relevant to the Agency's decision lo withdraw thu proposed 5 ppmv emission limit. The second decision addressed by tile petition for reconsideration as conflicting with the considered evidence is the withdrawal of the 5 ppmv emission limit for oxychlorinatinn vents. The petition points to a statement in the 1977 proposal that this emission limit could be attained based on the use of oxygen as a feed material rather than air, and maintains tHal no discussicri or evidence were presented which would justify withdrawal of Ihis proposal. In Ihe Federal Register (50 FR 11H5). evidence was presented by the Agency supporting the conclusion that more stringent control of emissions from oxychlorination vents was unnecessary. First, no new technological controls have been developed which are applicable to these vents. Second, the costs of incinerating oxychlorination vent streams were reevaluated and determined, as before, to be unreasonable compared to the small reduction in VC emissions. And finally, with the possible exception of one plant, no new EDC/VC plants with oxychlorination reactors are expected to be constructed, and any that may be constructed will be adequately regulated by the requirements of new source review regulations. No new information was presented in the petition for reconsideration relevant to the decision to retain the existing oxychlorination vent standard. The third decision which was addressed in the petition for reconsideration as conflicting with the considered evidence is the withdrawal of the proposal to lower the residual VC limit for new dispersion resins from 2.000 ppmv to 500 ppmv, and the L-mit for other new resins from 400 ppmv to 100 ppmv. The petition states that existing facilities are currently meeting the lower limits, and lhat both new and existing facilities could be brought into compliance with the more stringent limits by using the equipment and procedures currently used by the leading facilities. The EPA withdrew the proposed more stringent stripping ievel requirements for two main reasons. The first is that the nature of PVC production makes it difficult to distinguish ''new'' from "o!d" resins. Resin compositions are adjusted routinely, and completely "new" roins are rarely, if ever. made. Second, ETA concluded that there is no improved technology which would provide the basis for more stringent stripping requirements for all resins. The technologies which are effective for specific resins may not be effective for AP00025298 %WAiO0aE ! &0f-) bq=X~0qT$Ni - - :~wgjE 34903 Federal Register / Vnl. SI, No. 109 / Tuesday. September 30. 1985 / Rules and Regulations other resins. The consequence of establishing a more stringent standard would be Inal certain hard-to-strip resins could no longer be produced. In the EFA's opinion, such a result would be an unwarranted economic impact which is unnecessary to provide an ample margin of safety for public health. No new relevant information was presented in the petition for reconsideration. Administrative The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information considered by EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file, since material is added throughout the rulemaking development. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the public end industries involved to identify and locale documents so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with the statement of basis and purpose of the proposed and promulgated slanderds and EPA responses to significant comments, the contents of the docket, except for interagency review materials, will serve s the record in case of judicial review (section 307(d)(7)(A)|. The effective date of these revisions is September 30.1980. Section 112 of the Clean Air Act provides that national emission -.iandards for hazardous ai: pollutants become effective upon promulgation and apply to all existing and new sources. As prescribed by section 112. promulgation of this standard was preceded by the Administrator's listing of VC under section 112 of the Act on December 24.1975 (40 FR 59477). In accordance with section 117 of the Act, publication of these promulgated revisions was preceded by consultation with appropriate advisory committees, independent experts, and Federal departments and agencies. Information collection requirements associated with this revised regulation (those included in 40 CFR Part Dl. Subpart A and Subpart F] have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C 3501 etseq.. and have been assigned OMB control number 01 BO. The revised standard is estimated to result in a paperwork burden of about 38 person-years which is roughly the same as the original standard. Under Executive Order 12291, EPA is required to judge whether a regulation is a "major rule" and therefore subject to certain requirements of the Order. The EPA has determined that the revised regulation would result in none of the .,i\orse economic effects set forth in Si clion 1 of the Order as grounds for finding a regulation to be a "major rule." Tl.r revised regulation is not major because: (1) Nationwide annual compliance costs, including capital charges resulting from the standard total less than S100 million; (2) the standard d es not cause a major increase in prices or production costs; and (3) the standards do not cause significant adverse effects on domestic competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation or competition in foreign markets. The EPA has submitted this rulemaking to OMB under Executive Order 12291. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires the identification of potentially adverse impacts of Federal regulations upon small business entities. The Act specifically requires the completion of a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those instances where small business impacts are possible. Because this revised standard imposes no adverse economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Anaiysia has not been conducted. Pursuant to the provisons of S U.S.C. 605(b), 1 hereby certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. list of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 81. Air pollution control. Asbestos. Benzene, Beryllium. Hazardous materials. Mercury, Vinyl chloride. Dated: September 24.1S86. Lm M. Thom**, Administrator. PART SI--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS For the reasons let forth in the preamble, 40 CFR Part 61 is amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for Part 81 contunues to read as follows: Authority: See*. 101.112.114.116.301. Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C 7401, 7412. 7414. 7416, 7601). 2. Section 61.61 is amended by revising paragraphs (j). (1). (o) and Cp)',. and by adding paragraphs (v), (w). (x)>(y), and (z) to read as follows: 55 61.61 Definitions. **** (j) "Inprocess wastewater" means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct contact with vinyl chloride or polyvinyl chloride or results from the production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, by-product, or waste product containing vinyl chloride or polyvinyl chloride but which has not been discharged to a wastewater treatment process or discharged , untreated as wastewater. Casholder seal water is not tnprocess wastewater until it is removed from the gasholder (1) "In vinyl chloride service" means that a piece of equipment either contains or contacts a liquid that is a least 10 percent vinyl chloride by weight or a gas that is at least 10 percent by volume vinyl chloride as determined according to the provisions of 5 61.67(h). The provisions of 61.67(h) also specify how to determine that a piece of equipment is riot in vinyl chloride service. For the purposes of this subpart, this definition must be used in place of the definition of "in VHAP service" in Subpart V of this part. * (o) "Ethylene dichloride purification" includes any part of the process of ethylene dichloride production which follows ethylene dichloride formation, excluding product storage following the final Finishing column. (p) "Vinyl chloride purification" incudes any part of the process of vinyl chloride production which follows vinyl chloride formation. t (v) "Relief valve" means each pressure relief device including pressure relief valves, rupture disks and other pressure relief systems used to protect. process components from overpressure conditions. "Relief valve" does not include polymerization shortstop systems, raferigerated water systems or control valves or other devices used to control flow to an incinerator or other air pollution control device. (w) "Leak" means any of several events that indicate interruption of confinement of vinyl chloride within process equipment. Leaks include events regulated under Subpart V of this part such as: (1) An instrument reading of 10,000 ppm or greater meaeure according to Method 21 (see Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 60); (2) indications of liquid dripping: (3) a sensor detection of failure of a seal system, failure of a barrier fluid system, or both: and (4) detectable emissions as indicated by an instrument reading of greater than 500 ppm above background for equipment designated for no detectable emissions measured according to Test Method 21 (see Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 60). Leaks also include events regulated under 61.65(b)(8)(i) for detection of ambient concentrations in excess of background AP00025299 Federal Register / Vol. SI. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1980 ) Rules and Regulations 3-!i70 concentration. A relief reive discharge is not a leak. ix) "Exhaust gas" means any offgas (the constituents of which may consist of any fluids, either as a liquid and/or gas) discharged directly or ultimately to the atmosphere that was initially contained in or was in direct contact with the equipment for which exhaust gas limits are prescribed in S 81.82 (a) and (b): 61.63(a): 61.64 (e)(1). (a)(2), (b). (c). and (d): 61.66(b) (l)(ii), (b)(2). (b)(5). (b)(6)(ii) and (b)(9)(ii). (y) "Relief valve discharge" means any nonleak discharge through a relief valve. "Relief valve discharge" does not include discharges ducted to a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm [average for 3-hour period), or equivalent as provided in f 81.66. (z) "3-hour period" means any three consecutive l-hour periods (each hour commencing on the hour). 3. Section 61.621s amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: { 61.62 Emission standard (or ethylene bichloride plants. (a) Ethylene dichloride purification. The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from any equipment used in ethylene dichloride purification is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in } 61.65(a). This requirement does not preclude combining of exhaust gas streams provided the combined steam is ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm. or equivalent as provided in } 61.66. This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in ( 8l.65(b)(6)(i) before being opened. (b) QxychJorination reactor. Except at provided in | 61.65(a). emissions of vinyl chloride to the atmosphere from each oxychlorination reactor are not to exceed 02 g/kg (0.0002 lb/lb) (average for 3-hour period) of the 100 percent ethylene dichloride product from the oxychlorination process. 4. Section 61.63 is revised to read as follows: {61.63 Emission standard lor vinyl eniorlde plants. An owner or operator of a vinyl chloride plant shell comply with the requirements of this section and $ 61.85. (a) Vinyl chloride formation and purification: The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from any equipment used in vinyl chloride formation and/or purification is nol to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in 161.85(a). Tills requirement does not preclude combining of exhaust gas streams provided the combined steam is ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm, or equivalent as provided in 61.66. This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in { 61.85(b)(6)[i) before being opened. 5. Section 61,64 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b). (c) and (d) to read aa follows: { 61.64 Emission standird for polyvinyl ehlorlda plants. t* (a) Reactor. The following requirements apply to reactors: (1) The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from each reactor is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section and 61.65(a). (2) The reactor opening loss from each reactor is not to exceed 0.02 g vinyl chloride/kg (0.00002 lb vinyl ehloride/lb) of polyvinyl chloride product, except as provided in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section, with the product determined on a dry solids basis. This requirement does not apply to prepolymerization reactors in the bulk process. This requirement dots apply to poslpolymarization reactors in the bulk process, where the product means the gross product of prepolymerization and postpolymerization. (3) Manual vent valve discharge. Except for an emergency manual vent valve discharge, there is to be no discharge to the atmosphere from any . manual vent valve on a polyvinyl chloride reactor in vinyl chloride service. An emergency manual vent valve discharge means a discharge to Jhe atmosphere which could not have been, avoided by taking measure* to prevent the discharge. Within 10 days of any discharge to the atmosphere'from any manual vent valve. th'owne'r or operator of the source from which the discharge occurs shall submit to the Administrator a report in writing containing Information on tha source, nature and cause of the discharge, the date and time of the discharge, the approximate total vinyl chloride loss during the discharge, the method used for determining the vinyl chloride loss (the calculation of the vinyl chloride loss), the action that was taken to prevent the discharge, and measures adopted to prevent future discharges. (b) Stripper. The concentration of vinly chloride in each exhaust gas stream from each stripper is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in | 6l.53(u). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and mot the requiremention 5 61.6S(b)(6)(t) before being opened. (c) Mixing, weighing, and holding containers. The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from each mixing, weighing, or holding conlainer in vinyl chloride service which precedes the stripper (or the reactcr if the plant has no stripper) in the plant process flow is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-houi period), except as provided in 5 61.65(e). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in 61.65(b)(6)(i] before being opened. (d) Monomer recovery system. The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from each monomer recovery system is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in 61.85(a). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in J 81.85(b](6)(i) before being opened. * 6. By revising paragraph (e) introductory text, and adding paragraph* (e)(3) and (0 to { SI.34 to read as follows: 161.64 Emission standard Ior polyvinyl chloride plants. (e) Sources following the*tripper(s). The following requirements apply to emissions of vinyl chloride to the atmosphere from the combination of all aources following the stripperfa) (or the reactors) if the plant has no stripper(s)] in the plant process flow including but not limited to, centrifuges, concentrators, blend tanks, filters, dryers, conveyor air discharges, baggers, storage containers, and lnprocess wastewater, except as provided in paragraph (0 of this section*. (1) ' (2) * * * (3) The provisions of this paragraph apply at all times including when offapecification or other types of resins are made. (f) Reactor used as stripper. When a nonbulk resin reactor is used ss a stripper this paragraph may be applied in lieu of i 61.64 (a)(2) and (e)(1): AP00025300 34910 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30, 1986 / Rules and Regulations tl) The weighted average emissions of vinyl chloride from reactor opening loss and all sources following the reactor used as sustripper from all grades of polyvinyl chloride resin stripped in the reactor on each calendar day may not exceed: 0] 2.02 glkg (0.00202lb/lb) of polyvinyl chlonde product for dispersion polyvinyl chloride resins, excluding latex resins, with the product determined on a dry solids basis. (ii) 0.42 g/kg (0.00042 Ib/lb) of polyvinyl chloride product for ell other polyvinyl chloride resins, including latex resins, with the product determined on a dry solids basis. 7. Section 61.65 is amended by revising paragraphs (a). (b)(l)(ii) and [bj(2] to read as follows: I41.CS Emission standard (or ethylene dichloride, vinyl cMoride, end polyvinyl chloride plants. (a) Relief valve discharge. Except for an emergency relief discharge, there is to be no discharge to the atmosphere - from any relief valve on any equipment in vinyl chloride service. An emergency relief discharge means a discharge which could not have baen avoided by taking measures to prevent the discharge. Within 10 days of any relief valve discharge, the owner or operator of the source from which the relief valve discharge occurs shall submit to the Administrator a report in writing containing information on the source, nature and cause of the discharge, the date and time of the discharge, the .' approximate total vinyl-chloride loss during the discharge, the method used for determining the vinyl chloride Joss - (the calculation of the vinyl chloride lots), the ection that was taken to prevent the discharge, and measures adopted to prevent future discharges. W* 0) * * * 7\ (ii) Any vinyl chloride removed from a loading or unloading line in accordance with parsgraph (b)(l)(i) of this section is to be ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), pr equivalentas provided in ! 61.68. - (2) Slip gauges. During loading or unloading operations, the vinyl chloride emissions from each slip gauge in vinyl chloride service ere to be minimized by ducting any vinyl chloride discharged from the slip gauge through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), or equivalent as provided in 61.66. aaa 8. Ey revising paragraphs (b)(3). (b)(4). (b) (5). (b)(8). (b)(7). (b)(8). (b)(B)(ii). and (c) Lo 61.65 as follows: . j6i.es Emission standard tor ethylene dlchloride, vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride plant*. An owner or operator of an ethylene dlchloride, vinyl ehlorido, and/or' polyvinyl chloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section. (2) * ` (3) Leakage from pump, compressor, and agitator seals: (i) Rotating pumps. Vinyl chloride emissions from seals on all rotating pumps in vinyl chloride service ere lo be minimized by metalling sealless pumps, pumps with double mechanical seals or equivalent as provided in f 61.68. If double mechanical seals are used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into the pump: by ducting any vinyl chloride between the two seals through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gsses does not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent as provided in S 81.68. Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 81 Subpart V demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. (ii) Reciprocating pumps. Vinyl chloride emissions from seels on ell reciprocating pumps in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing double outboard seals, or equivalent as provided in $61.66. If double outboard seals are used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals ere to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into the pump; by ducting any vinyl. chloride between the two seals through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided in 161.66. Compliance with the provisions of40 , CFR Part 61 Subpart V demonstrates * compliance with the provisions ofthis paragraph. (iii) Rotating compressor. Vinyl chloride emissions from seels on all rotating compressors in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing compressors with double mechanical aeala, or equivalent as provided in $61.60. If double mechanical seals are used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into the compressor: by ducting any vinyl chloride between the two seals through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided in 61.65. Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 81 Subpart V demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. (iv) Reciprocating compressors. Vinyl chloride emissions from seals on all reciprocating compressors in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing double outboard seals, or equivalent as provided in 61.63. If double outboard seals ere used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into the compressor by ducting any vinyl chloride between the two seals through a control system from which concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided in 61.66. Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 81 Subpart V demonstrales- complience with the provisions of this paragraph. (v) Agitator. Vinyl chloride emissions from seals on all agitators in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing agitators with double mechanical seals, or equivalent as provided in 61.66. If double mechanical seals are used, vinyl chiqride emissions from the seats ere to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into the agitated vessel: by ducting any vinyl chloride between the two seals through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided in $ 81.66. (4) Leaks from relief valves. Vinyl chloride emissions due to leaks from each relief valve on equipment in vinyl chloride service shall comply with { 81.242--4 of Subpart V of this part. (5) Manual venting ofgases. Except us provided in 61.64(a)(3), all gases which are manually vented from equipment in vinly chloride service are to be ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride In the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm (average for 3rhour period): or equivalent at provided in 61.66. (81 Opening ofequipment. Vinyl chloride emissions from opening of equipment (including prepolymerization reactors used in the manufacture of bulk AP00025301 t Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 185 I Tuesday. September 30. 1936 / Rules and Regulations 3on 1 resins and loading or unloading lines Approval of a program will be granted and for establishment and vurificaticn of that are not opened to the atmosphere by the Administrator provided he finds: calibration standards are to be followed, after each loading or unloading (A) The location and number of points (li) For each process unit subject to operation) are to be minimized as follows: to be monitored and the frequency of monitoring provided for in the program this tubpart a formal leek detection and repair program shall be implemented (t) Before opening any equipment for are acceptable when they are compared consistent with Subpart V of this part, any reason, the quantity of vinyl with the number of pieces of equipment except as provided in paragraph chloride which is contained (herein is to in vinyl chloride service and size and (b)(8)(ili) of this section. This program is be reduced to an amount which occupies physical layout of the plant. to be implemented within 90 days of the a volume of no more than 2.0 percent of IB) It contains a definition of leak effective date of these regulations, the equipment's containment volume or which is acceptable when compared unless a waiver of compliance it granted 0.0950 cubic meters (25 gallons), with the background concentrations of under 161.11. Except as provided in whichever is larger, at standard vinyl chloride in the area* of the plant to paragraph (b)(8)(ii)(E) of this section, an temperature and pressure. be monitored by the vinyl chloride owner or operator shall be exempt from (ii) Any vinyl chloride removed from monitoring system. Measurements of 5 61342--1(c), 61342-7 (a), (b). and fc). the equipment in accordance with background concentrations of vinyl S 61346, and $ 61.247 of Subpart V of paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this section is to be chloride in the areas of the plant to be this pari for any process unit in which ducted through a control system from monitored by the vinyl chloride the percentage of leaking valves is which the concentration of vinyl monitoring system are to be included demonstrated to be less than 2.0 chloride in the exhaust gasee does not with the description of the program. The percent, as determined in accordance exceed 10 ppm (average for 0-hour definition of leak, for a given plant may with the following: period): or equivalent as provided in vary among the different areas within (A) A performance test as specified in i 61.63. the plant and if also to change over time paragraph (b)(S)(ii)(B) of this section (7) Samples. Unused portions of s background concentrations in the shall be conducted initially within 90 samples containing at least 10 percent plant are reduced. days of the effective date of these by weight vinyl chloride are to be (C) It contains an acceptable plan of regulations, annually, and at times j returned to the process or destroyed in a action to be taken when a leak is requested by the Administrator. .fe control device from which concentration detected. (B) For each performance teat, a i of vinyl chloride m the exhaust gas does (D) It provides for an acceptable minimum of 200 or BO percent, not exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour calibration and maintenance schedule whichever it less, of the total valves in period) or equivalent as provided in for the vinyl chloride monitoring system VOC service (aa defined in f 60.481 of t 61.68. Sampling techniques are to be and portable hydrocarbon detector. For Subpart W of Part 80) within tha such that sample containers in vinyl the vinyl chloride monitoring system, a process unit shall be randomly selected chloride service are purged into a closed daily span check is to ba conducted with and monitored within 1 weak by the process system. Compliance with the a concentration of vinyl chloride equal methods specified in { 61.245(b) of this provisions of40 CFR Part 61 Subpart V to the concentration defined as a leak part If an instrument reading of 10,000 demonstrates compliance with the according to paragraph (b)(8)(i)(B) of ppm or greater is measured, a leak is provisions of this paragraph. this seetlon. The calibration is to be detected. The leak percentage shall be (8) Leak detection and elimination. done with either: determined by dividing the number of Vinyl chloride emissions due to leaks (2) A calibration gas mixture prepared valves in VOC service for which leaks from equipment in vinyl chloride service from the gases specified in sections ere detected by the number of tested 1 are lo be minimized as follows: 5.2.1. and 5.22. of Teat Method 108 end valves in VOC service. t (i) A reliable and accurate vinyl chloride monitoring system shall be operated for detection of major leaks in accordance with section 7.1 of Test Method 106. or (2) A calibration gee cylinder (C) If a Ink Is detected, it shall be repaired in accordance with f 61342-7 [d) and (e) of Subpart V of this part. and identification of the general area of the plant where a leak is located. A vinyl chloride monitoring eyitem means standard containing the eppropriate concentration of vinyl chloride. The gas composition of the calibration gas . (D) The remits of the performance test shall be submitted in writing to the Administrator ht the first quarterly a device which obtains air samples from cylinder standard is to have been report following the performance lest as one or more points on a continuous sequential basis and analyzes the certified by the manufacturer. The part of tha reporting requirements of manufacturer most have recommended e I 81.70. simples with gas chromatography or, if maximum ehelf life for each cylinder eo (E) Any process tmh in which the the owner or operator assumes that all that the concentration does not change percentage of lacking velvet is found to ' hydrocarbons measured are vinyl greater than 5 percent from the be greater thin 10 percent according to . chloride, with infrared certified value. The date of gas cylinder tha performance test prescribed in preparation, certified vinyl chloridg paragraph (b)(8)(U)(B) of this section concentration, and recommended , must comply with all provisions of maximum self life must have been ` Suhpart V of this part within 90 days. affixed to tiie cylinder before shipment (iiij Open-ended valves or lines from the manufacturer to the buyer. If a located on multiple service process lines or operator. The owner or operator shall gas chromatograph is used as the vinyl which operate in vinyl chloride service submit a description of the program to chloride monitoring system, these gat less than 10 percent of tha time are the Administrator within 4$ days of the mixtures may be directly used to exempt from the requirements of effective date of these regulations, prepare a chromatograph calibration I 61342-6 of Subpart V. provided the unless a waiver of compliance is granted curve as described in section 7.3 of Test open-ended valves or lines are under f 81.11, or the program has been Method 106. The requirements in section addressed in the monitoring system approved and the Administrator does 5.23.1. and 53J3. of Teat Mathod 106 required by paragraph (b)(8)(i) of this not request a review of the program. for certification of cylinder standards section. The Administrator may apply AP00025302 34912 Federal Register / Vol. SI. Mo. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 1983 / Rules and Regulations this exemption to other existing openended valves or lines that are demonstrated to require significant retrofit cost to comply with the requirements of i 81.242-6 of Subpart V. east* (9) * * * (if) Any vinyl chloride removed from the inprocess wastewater in accordance with paragraph (b)(9)(i) of this section is to be ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period); or equivalent as provided in { 61.68. (c) The requirements in paragraphs (b)(1). (b)(2). (b)(5). (b)(6). (b)(7) and (b)(8) of this section are to be incorporated into a standard operating procedure, and made available upon request for Inspection by the Administrator. The etandard operating procedure it to Include provisions for measuring the vinyl chloride in equipment 4.75 m* (1,250 gal) In volume for which an emission limit is prescribed in $ 01.05(b)(6)(f) after opening the equipment and ueing Test Method 106, a portable hydrocarbon detector, or an alternative method. The method of measurement is to meet the requirements in { 61.67(g)(5)(i)(A) or (i)(5)(i)(B). 9. Section 61.66 is revised to read as follows; 151.65 Equivalent equipment end procedure*. Upon written applicaUon from an owner or operator, the Administrator may approve use of equipment or procedure* which have been demonstrated to hie satisfaction to be equivalent in terme of reducing vinyl chloride emissions to the atmosphere to those prescribed for compliance with a specific paragraph-of this subpart. 10. By revising paragraphs (f). (g)(l)(i), (g)(2). (g)(3) introductory text. (g)(3)(i), (g)(3)(iii). (g)(5) Introductory text and by (g](5)(ii) adding paragraphs (g)(8) and (h) in f 61.67 aa follows: - 111.67 Emtnien lasts. (f) The owner or operator shall retain at the plant and make available, upon request for inspection by the Administrator, for a minimum of 3 years, records of emission test results and other data needed to determine emissions. (8) * * * (I)*** (i) For each run. one simple is to be collected. The sampling site is to be at least two stack or duet diameters downstream and one half diameter upstream from any flow disturbance such as a bend, expansion, contraction, or visible flame. For a rectangular cross section an equivalent diamater is to be determined from the following equation: equivalent dismeter-2 (length) (width)/ length -Hwidth The sampling point in the duct is to be at the centroid of the cross section. The sample is to bo extracted at a rata proportional to the gas velocity at the sampling point. The sample is to contain a minimum volume of 50 liters corrected to standard conditions and is to be taken over a period aa close to 1 hour as practicable. (Z) Test Method 107 or Method 601 (incorporated by reference as specified in { 61.18) is to be used to determine the concentration of vinyl chloride in each inprocess wastewater atream for which an emiasion limit it prescribed in * 61.65(b)(9)(i). (3) When a stripping operation is used to attain the emission limits in i 61.64 (e) and (f), emissions are to be determined using Test Method 107 as follows: (i) The number of stripper* [or reactors used as strippers) and samples and the types and grade* of resin to be sampled are to be determined by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the test baaed on the plant's operation. (11) (iii) The corresponding quantity of material processed by each stripper (or reactor used as a stripper) ia to be determined on a dry solids basis and by a method submitted to end approved by the Administrator. (tv) * * * (4) * * (5) The reactor opening loss for which an amission limit is prescribed In 161.64(a)(2) i* to be determined. The number of reactor* for which the determination is to be made is to be specified by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the determination based on the plant's operation. (i) * * * (ii) A calculation baaad on the number of evacuations, the vacuum.involved, and the volume of gee'in the reactor is hereby approved by the Administrator as an alternative method for determining reector opening loss for poitpolymerizalion reactor* in the manufacture of bulk resin*. Calculation malhods bated on techniques other than repeated evacuation of the reactor may be approved by the Administrator for determining reactor opening loss for postpolymerization reactors in the manufacture of bulk resins. (6) For a reactor that is used as a stripper, the emissions of vinyl chloride from reactor opening luss and all sources following the reactor used as a stripper for which an emission limit is prescribed in 61.64(f) are to be determined; The number of reactors for which the determination is to be made is to be specified by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the determination based on the plant's operation. (i) For each batch stripped in the reactor, the following measurements arc to be made: (A) The concentration (ppm) of vinyl chloride in resin after stripping, measured according to paragraph (g)(3) of this section; (B) The reactor vacuum (mm Hg) at end of strip from plant instrument: and (C) The reactor temperature (*CJ st end of strip from plant instrument. (ii) For each batch stripped in the reactor, the following information ia to be determined: (A) The vapor preasure (mm Hg) of water in the reactor at end of strip from the following table: (B) The partial pressure (mm Hg) of vinyl chloride In reactor at end of strip from the following equation: PPVC- 76Q--RV --VPW where: PPVC partial pressure of vinyl chloride, in mm Hg 760--ttmospheric pressure at o 'C in mm Hg RVwibtolute value of reactor vacuum, in nun Hg VPW--vapor pressure of water, in mm Hg (C) The reactor vapor space volume (m3) at end of strip from the following equation: AP00025303 Federal Register / Vol. SI. No. 109 / Tuesday, September 30. 1986 / Rules and Regulations 31913 PVCW RVSV-RC-WV-- 1.400 where: RVSV --reactor vapor space volume, in m* RC -reactor capacity, in m* UV volume of water in reactor from recipe, in nr* PVCW-dry weight of polyvinyl chloride in reactor from recipe, in kg 1.400 --typical density of polyvinyl chloride, Inkg/m* (iii) For each batch stripped in thereactor, the combined reactor opening loss and emissions from all sources following the reactor used as a stripper is to be determined using the following equation: (PPVC][Rysv](r.ooar C--l?PMVC)(10"^+ lPVCW)(ffl+RT) where: C-3 vinyl chloride/kg polyvinyl chloride product PPMVC--concentretton of vinyl chloride in resin after stripping, in ppm 13'*--conversion factor for ppm PPVC--partial pressure of vinyl cUortde determined according to paragraph f3)|6)(it)(B) ot this section, in eun Hg RVSV--reacloc vapor space volume determined according to paragraph (3)(B](U)IQ of this section, in m 1.302--ideal gaa conela nt ing--'K/mtn Hg-m' for vinyl chloride PVCW -dry weight of polyvinyl chloride in reector from recipe, in kg 273--conversion factor for "C to *K RT-reactor temperature. in 'C (h)(1) Each piece of equipment within a process unit that can reasonably contain equipment in vinyl chloride service is presumed to be in vinyl chloride service unless an owner or operator demonstrates that the piece of equipment is not in vinyl chloride service. For a piece of equipment to be considered not in vinyl chloride service, it must be determined that the percent vinyl chloride content can be reasonably expected not to exceed 10 percent by weight for liquid streams or contained liquid volumes and 10 percent by volume for gas streams or contained gas volumes, which also includes-gas volumes above liquid streams or contained liquid volumes. For purposes of determining the percent vinyl chloride content of the process fluid that is contained in or contacts equipment, procedures that conform to tha methods described in ASTM Method 0-2267 [incorporated by reference as specified in 5 61.18) shill be used. (Z|[i) An. owner or operator may use engineering Judgment rather than the procedure# in paragraph [h)(lJ,of this section to demonstrate that the percent vinyl chloride content does not exceed 10 percent by weight for liquid streams and 10 percent by volume for gas streams, provided that the engineering judgment demonstrates that the vinyl chloride content clearly does not exceed 10 percent. When an owner or operator and the Administrator do not agree on whether a piece of equipment it not in vinyl chloride service, however, the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) of this section shall be used to resolve tha disagreement. (ii) Lf an owner or operator determines that a pieca of equipment is in vinyl chloride service, the determination can be revised only after following the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) of this section. (3) Samples used in determining tha percent vinyl chloride content shall be representative of the process fluid that is contained in or contacts tha equipment. 11. By adding paragraphs (d). (e) and (f) to { 61.68 as follows: | (t.CS Emission monitoring. *** * (d)When exhaust gas(es), having emission limits that are subject to the requirement of paragraph (a) of thissection, are'emitted to the atmosphere without passing through the control system and required vinyl chloride monitoring system, the vinyl chloride contentoftheemissionshaU.be calculated (in units of each applicable emission limit) by best practical engineering judgment based on the discharge duration and known VC concentrations in the affected equipment as determined in accordance with { 81.87(h) or other acceptable method. () For each 3-hour period, the vinyl chloride content of emissions subject to the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (d) of this section shall be averaged (weighted according to the proportion of time that emissions were continuously monitored and that emissions bypassed the continuous monitor) for purposes of reporting excess emissions under S 6170(c)(1). (f) For each vinyl chloride emission lo the atmosphere determined in accordance with paragraph () of this section to be in excess of the applicable emission limits, the owner or operator shall record the identity of the sourcefs). the date, time, and duration of the excess emission, the cause of the excess emission, and- the approximate total vinyl chloride loss during the excess emission, and the method used for determining, the vinyl chloride loss. This information shall be retained and made available for inspection by the Administrator as required by 3 81.71(a). 12. In $ 61.70 by revising the section title from "Semiannual report" to "Reporting'', and by revising paragraphs (a) , (c)(1), (c)(2) introductory text. (c)(2)(iii). (c)(2)(iv), (c)(2)(v). (c)(2)(vi) introductory text, and (e)(3) and also by adding (c)(4) to read at follows; $ 61.70 Reporting. (a)(1) Tha owner or operator of any source to which this subpart applies shall submit to tha Administrator on March IS. June IS. September 15. and. December IS of each year a report in writing containing the information required by this section. Tbe first report is to be submitted following the first hill 3-month reporting period after the initial report is submitted. (2) In the case of an existing source, the approved reporting schedule shall be used, in addition, quarterly reports shall be submitted exactly 3 months following the current reporting dates. r (C) * (1) The owner or operator shall include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride content of emissions for each 3-hour period during which average emissions are in excess of the amission limits in $ 81.62 (a) or (b). { 61.63(a). or i 61.64- (a)(1). (b), (c). or (d). or during which average emissions are in excess of the emission limits specified for any control system to which reactor emissions are required to be ducted in i 61.84(a)(2) or to which fugitive emission# are required to be ducted in i 81.85(b)(i)(li). (b)(2). (b)(3). (b)(8)(ii). or (b) (9)[ii). The number of 3-hour periods for which average emissions were determined during the reporting period shall be reported, lf emissions in excess of the emission limits are not detected, the report shall contain a statement that no excess emissions have been detected. The emissions are to be determined in accordance with {61.68(e). (2) In polyvinyl chloride plants for which a stripping operation is used to attain the emission level prescribed tit 161.84(e), the owner or operator shall r ii' tiail- IT* r.-i h AP00025304 34.914 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 I Tuesday, September 30. 1986 / Rules and Regulations include in the report e record of the vinyl chloride content in the polyvinyl chloride resin. (i- * * (til' * * [iit) The vinyl chloride content in each lamtile is to be determined by Test Method 107 as prescribed in 61.67(g)(3). (iv) [Reserved] (v) The report to the Administrator by the owner or operator is to include a I Pci hie. i-i At- ----------- Or Pci Mci + Pox Ma+ qT where: A-24-hour sversge concentration of type T resin in ppm (dry weight basis) Q--Total production of type T resin over the 24-hour period, in kg. TType of resin. M-- Concentration of vinyl chloride In one sample of grade Gi resin in ppm. P-- Production of grade Gi resin represented by the sample, in kg. Gi--Grade ofresin: e.g.. Gl. G2. C3. n-Total number of grades of resin produced during the 24-hour period. The number of 24-hour average concentrations for each resin type determined during the reporting period shall be reported. If no 24-hour average rosin vinyl chloride concentrations in excess of the limits prescribed in 61.84(e) art measured, the report shall state that no excess resin vinyl chloride concentrations were measured. (vi) The owner or operator shall retain at the source end make available for inspection by the Administrator for a minimum of 3 years records of all data needed to furnish the information required by paragraph (c)(2)(v) of this section. The records are to contain the following information: (A)* * (B)* * * (3) The owner or operator shall include in the report a record of any emissions from each reactor opening in txesis of the emission limits prescribed in i 61.64(e)(2). Emissions are to be determined in eceordence with i 61.67(g)(5), except that emissions for each resetor are to be determined. The number of reactor openings during the reporting period shall be reported. If emissions in excess of the.emission limits are not detected, the report shall include a statement that excess emissions have not been detected. (4) In polyvinyl chloride plants for which stripping in the reactor is used to attain the emission level prescribed in record of any 24-hour average resin vinyl chloride concentration, as determined in this paragraph, in excess of the limits prescribed in 161.64(e). The vinyl chloride content found in each sample required by paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (c)(2)(ii) of this section shall ba averaged separately for each type of resin, over each calendar day end weighted according to the quantity of each grade of resin processed by the stripper(s) that calendar day, according to the following equation: . Pc* Mg* 61.64(f), the owner or operator shall include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride emissions from reactor opening loss and ail sources following the reactor used as a stripper. (i) One representative sample of polyvinyl chloride resin is to be taken from each batch of each grade of resin immediately following the completion of the stripping operation, and Identified by rasin type and grade and the date and time the batch is completed. The corresponding quantity of material processed in each stripper batch is to be recorded end identified by resin type and grade end the date and time the batch is completed. (ii) The vinyl chloride content in each sample is to be determined by Test Method 107 as prescribed in 61.67(g)(3). (iii) The combined emissions from reactor opening loss and all sources following the reactor used as a stripper are to be determined for each batch stripped in a reactor according to the procedure prescribed in 61.67(g)(6). (iv) The report to the Administrator by the owner or operator is to include a record of any 24-hour average combined reactor opening loss and emissions from all sources following the reactor used as a stripper as determined in this paragraph, in excess of the limits prescribed In 5 61.64(f). The combined reactor opening loss and emissions from all sources following the reactor used as a stripper associated with each batch are to be averaged separately for each type of resin, over each calendar day and weighted according to the quantity of each grade of resin stripped in reactors that calender day as follows: For each type of resin (suspension, dispersion, latex, bulk, other), the following calculation is to be performed: I Pc,Co, i-1 PcCo, +P,sCci 4- . . . +PoCe, -- where: A-24-hour everege combined resetor opening lota and emieeions from all oureee following the reactor used ee e stripper, in g vinyl chloride/kg product [dry weight baais), Q--Total production or reein in batehea for which stripping la completed during the 24-hour period, in kg. T-Type of resin. C--Average combined reactor opening lose and emisaione from ail sources following the reactor ueed as a stripper of ell batches of grads Gt resin for which stripping is completed during the 24-hour period, in g vinyl chloride/kg product [dry weight basis) (determined according to procedure prescribed in I 81162(g)(6)). P--Production of grade G, ratio in this batches far which C it determined, in kg. Ci-Crede of resin e.g.. Gi. Gi. end Gs. nTotel number of gredee of resin In batches for which stripping is completed during the 24-hour period. The number of 24-hour average emissions determined during the reporting period shall be reported. If no 24-hour average combined reactor opening loss and emissions from all sources following the reactor used a stripper in excess of the limits prescribed in i 61.64(f) ere determined, the report shall state that no excess vinyl chloride emissions were determined. 11. By revising paragraph (a) introductory text of i 61.71 as follows: f 61.71 Recordkeeping. (a) The owner or operator of any sourca to which this subpart applies shall retain the following information nt the source and make it available for inspection to the Administrator for a minimum of 3 years: I 14. By revising paragraph (a)(4) and adding paragraph (b)(1) to ( 61.18 as follows: { 61.18 Incorporation by Reference. (4) ASTM D2267-68 (reapproved 197B) Aromatics in Light Naphthas and AP00025305 3 CH Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1980 / Rules and Regulalions 3491 Aviation Gasoline by Cat Chromatography, IBR approved June 8. 1984. for-tj 61.245(d)(1) and IBR approved September 30.1986 for 81.67(h)(1). * (b) The following material is available from the U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory. Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. (1) Method 601. Test Method for Puigeable Halocarbons. July 1982. IBR approved September 30.1986 for S 61.67(g)(2). 15. By revising the definition "volatile hazardous air pollutants" in I 81.241 of Subpart V to read as follows: J 61.241 Oetlnitions. * "Volatile hazardous air pollutant" or "VHAP" means a substance regulated under this part for which a standard for equipment leaks of the substance has been proposed and promulgated. Benzene Is a VHAP. Vinyl chloride is a VHAP. 18. By revising the definition of "connector" in S 61.241 of Subpart V as follows: 1.241 Definitions. * t * "Connector" means flanged, screwed, welded, or other joined fittings used to connect two pipe lines or a pipe line and a piece of equipment. For the purpose of reporting and recordkeeping, connector means flanged fittings that are not covered by insulation or other materials that prevent location of the fittings. ** |FR Ooc. 66-22032 Filed 9-29-86:8:46 am) billino cooe iiK-uyu /. ' AP00025306