Document 6bGZY9X1496V5Z4997VGgYjVd

DownloadSearchable PDFRandom document
'k,'i 34904 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. iao Tucsd.iv, * and Reculations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 61 IAD-FR L-3044-51 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Vinyl Chloride; Equipment Leaks of Volatile Hazardous Air Pollutants agency: 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 9.1965. (50 FR 1182). Certain revisions to the standard are being promulgated in Subpart F through this action and. to a minor extent, in Subpart V of 40 CFR Part 61. Finally, through this action the Agency is denying the petition of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) 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 DATE: September 30.1986. 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 80 days of today's publication of this rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act, the requirements that are the subject for today's notice may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements. IncorporaHon by Reference The incorporation by reference of certain publications in these standards ia approved by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register as 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 (919) 541-2777. Please refer to "Vinyl Chloride Standard: Responses to Comments on January 1985 Proposed Revisions," EPA-450/3-88004. The 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 FPA in developing of the promulgated revisions to the standard for VC. is available for public inspection between 8:00 a m. and 4:00 pm.. 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 20469, telephone number (202) 3822826. 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) 541-5671. 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 tha Standard The VC standard was promulgated on October 21.1976 (41 FR 48560) 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 on its review of the technological basis and administrative aspects of the original standard. EPA proposed several administrative and clarifying revisiona to the standard on January 9,1985 (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 61 Subpart V. which contains regulations for leaks from certain equipment in volatile hazardous air pollutant (VHAP) service. Previously, plant owners subject to the VC standard were required to prepare leak detfClion and repair plans for each VC and PVC manufacturing facility and to submit these plans to EPA for review. An analysis of the plans submitted revealed that these plans varied widely from plant to plant. Further, some plans were considered to be inadequate and ineffective approaches to the 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. aviating p|pn8 arg no longer required, nor do they neceaganiy meet the promulgated requirements. Compliance Teat Procedure and Specific Opening Loss Limit for PVC Reactors Used as Strippers The Federal Register notice that promulgated the current VC standard stated that VC escaping from PVC resin that has been stripped in the reactor is not in tended 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 ere used in bulk resin production, e "prepolymerization" vessel and a "post polymerization" vessel. Under the standard promulgated in 1976, both of these vessels were subject to the reactor VAB.0001119945 Federal Register / Vol 51, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 1906 / Rules and Regulations 34905 opening loss requirements. However, an analysis of the operation of prepolymerization vessels revealed that these reactors are opened less frequently than other types of reactors, and that the determination of gross product (required for the calculation of reactor opening lots) it impractical. In January 1985. EPA proposed to apply die equipment opening Ion requirements, rather than the reactor opening loss requirements, to these PVC reactors. The equipment opening loss requirements ere man appropriate far the operating characteristics of the prepolymerizatian reactor vnadi and do not rhangt the overall VC awisainn control stringency applicable prepolymerization reactors. After considering the comments on fais proposed revision, EPA decided to promulgate the revision. Clarification of Definitions and Standards Based on the EPA'a experience with administering the VC standard, several provisions of the standard are being revised to reduce any ambiguity in their implementation. For example, specific definitions of "leak," "exhaust gas,** and "relief valve discharge* are being added to clarify dm applicability of dm provisions of the standsid to oach of these types of emissions. Similarly, to eliminate misunderstandings about the application of (he standard to ____ purification equipment following EDC and VC formation, the definitions of "EDC purification** and *VC purification* are being revised to man clearly indicate which equipment is subject to the standard. Another revision being incorporated into the standard makes it deer thet die 10 ppmv standard is a 3-hour average emission limit rather than an instantaneous liout The pcrforoancs test provision in 16UI?(g)(l) has also been clarified to specify that teat results should reflect as dose toa 3-hour average as practicable. Furthar, the 10 ppmv standard regulation la being revised to specify Hurt sB exhaust gat streams are covered by tide requirement tedsdsiunud device bypass streams. In older to implement Lfrlv wHililCTIlWU wBQ* WM being incorporated hrto the ^Oan^hod dor celesta(fag the VC content In bypassed emissions. A final revision to me 10 ppmv requirement ia intended to prohibit plants from dtintiag a VC exhaust gas stream with other erdurast gases in order to meet dm 10 ppmv Bmft Under the revised standard, combining on exhoost stream containing more than 10 ppmv VC with another gas stream is only allowed when the combined stream is ducted to e control device. The inprocess wastewater requirements for gasholder seals are also being revised to exclude the exposed water seal of gasholders. Experience with the VC standard indicates that water contained in the exposed water seal of a gasholder may exceed the 10 ppmv limit during normal operation and that compliance with dm atmospheric exposure limit ia amt practicable for this source. The inprocess wastewater stripping requirements, hswevar. will rsniaue to apply to --*-----*tr nfter rrmaril from the gasholder seal. Other administrative revisions to (ho standard include: (1) The efiminaiion of the 30-day Emit for **>*ng sources to submit requests for the use of equivalent control measures; (2) a change from semiannual to quarterly reporting of VC emissions from resin stripping, reactor openings, and exhaust gases; and (3j allowance of reporting of periods of excess emissions instead of ell ipn measurements. Summary of Impacta Is the Staadasd Revisions to the standard represent administrative and clarifying changes; no major revisions were proposed. Therefore, the environmental, energy and economic impacts of the original standard remain generally mwhyt a summary of the impacts of the original standard can be frond in the pioautido to the proposed standard revisions (90 FR1182). Public Perfidythm Mor to proposal of revisions to foe standard, interested parties advised by public notice hi dm Federal Register (49 FR 28007, June 29.2984) of a meeting of dm National Air PoRution Control Techniques Advisory Committee fNAPCTAC) to discuts dm revisions to (he VC standard recommended for proposal. This meeting was held on August JB, 1994. The meeting was open to the public end eeeh attendee comment on the revised stenderd \ #- have been considered carefully and. where determined to be appropriate by EPA, changes have been made to the proposed revisions to the standard. Significant Comments Sloes 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 dm BS> for the promulgated standard, which is referenced in the ADORNOS seefiea of this preamble. The osmamata and responses in tfae B&> aanm as tim basis for the changes (hnthaeo'haan made in the revised standard hetmans anoonai Almoolalt proposed revMoan in fanildvihe discharge standard. Alfaoogh many af the commonters agreed wtth dm action to reformat the standard, several comnrnnters objected to varioas of the discharge limits. Based on consideration of these comments. EPA decided not to promulgate the proposed revision to the relief value discharge standard. The cmnmmtit an this and in detail in the BP far fas promulgated standard and In summary in tim next section of tide preamble. One commenter requested reconsideration of the wdfadrawalof dm amendments to tim VC standard which wnrepropoimdiB 1979. Thfaj^Woe far objections to dm Agency's use ofdata uRCOWVM MRMK VpiCH Vt deriolonte wtifafrnwftapwposud amendmeuta, and to tm Agency's datemfrmtion of toe taehaofogfori hash of tim standard. The oenunenten stated that the EPA's actione in wfdadrawmg the proposed amendmen4s were inconsistent with the requirements of section 112 offae Cteon Mr Act As discussed farther in tide preamble, tim Agency ie denying tim putifiea far FnwfllMUTCRL the__ Hie pefcfic comment period was V M88 to March 28. submitted most of dm coanmenttedera. Also commenting were representatives of the U.S. Congress; a State Leuteluture, a State air poDsflew agency end da environmental gpoup. rat soafrah - -? January t.*, P The difforeid fypadfhumaifcnf relieTvalve ftindhmgaa. The retain timoifahufi lufisfVafye the revisions In fight of public oomnmnta and other findings. Altimudb pifofic comments ffrvaratitim revisions. VAB.0001119946 34906 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1980 / Rules and Regulations A particular, several commenters e\rrcsscd concern that preventable re. tf valve discharges would be allcwed under the revised standard and that the performance allowed under the re\ :sed standard could be inconsistent with that allowed under the original standard. Other comments expressed concern that the revised standard included no mechanism for regulating very large relief valve discharges. The basis for the statement that a large Agency resource commitment is required for enforcing the relief valve discharge standard was also questioned. Aa a result of these comments* EPA reviewed the besis for the recommendations that led to the decision .to propose to reformat the standard. First, aa discussed in the Federal Register notice proposing revisions to the relief valve discharge standard (SO FR1187], the review of the standard conducted between 1980 and 1962 found that the existing standard resulted in a significant commitment of Agency resources to the review and evaluation of discharges of VC from relief valves. Because the existing standard allows only "emergency" discharges of VC from relief valves (i.e., the relief valve discharge could not be avoided by taking preventative measures), every discharge must be evaluated individually to determine whether the owner or operator of the facility has 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. Aa e result EPA enforcement personnel consider implementation of this standard to be much leas resource and labor intensive. A second conclusion from the 1980 to 1982 study was that industry did not have e clear understanding of what the relief valve discharge standard required and what measures they needed to implement in order to comply with the standard. During the 4 to S years since the review study, a number of enforcement actions have been taken against individualplants for violations of the standards. Those actions have culminated in consent decrees which incorporate requirements for remedial actions to prevent further relief valve dischargee. The provisions of these consent decrees have not only reduced the number of relief valve dischargee at specific plants, but they have also served as guidelines fat determining the types of measures appropriate for minimizing the discharges. Because of these two developments. EPA concluded that the original findings of the review study are no longer valid and should not be the basis of a revision to the format of the relief valve discharge standard. The decision to retain the existing relief valve discharge standard aa a part of the standard for VC emissions is further supported by two additional advantages that the existing standard has over the proposed revisions. First the existing standard provides that all preventable relief valve discharges are subject to enforcement action. Under the proposed revisions, which would have allowed a small number of discharges per year whether preventable or not it is possible that a plant could experience preventable discharges and still be in compliance with the standard. As pointed out in public comments, it is theoretically possible that discharges resulting from gross negligence could go unpenalized under the revisions to the standard. The EPA did not intend this effect in the proposed revisions. The retention of the existing relief valve discharge standard allows EPA to continue the current enforcement approach. Second, the existing relief valve discharge standard provides a better mechanism for regulating large relief 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, aa long aa the number of releasee 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 currant standard for taking action to reduce the quantity of a discharge. In summary, EPA is not promulgating the revisions to the relief valve discharge standard which were proposed in the January 9,1985, Federal Register notice. This decision was reached after consideration of public comments received on the proposal, and after a review of the baaia for the decision to reformat the standard. Because this review revealed that the burden on Agency resources has diminished as experience with the implementation of the standard increased, and that understanding of the provisions of the existing standardon the part of industry should be clearer, the necessity for revising the format of the relief valve discharge standard is no longer apparent. The existing standard also has the advantages of penalizing all preventable relief valve discharges, providing better regulation of large volume relief valve dischargee, and promoting continuity in the ongoing enforcement of the standard. In soma instances, it may be possible for a plant operator to contain a relief valve discharge and to vent it to a control device. Where this can be done without exceeding the exhaust gas emission limit of 10 ppmv, EPA concluded that this approach should be encouraged and. therefore, the discharge should be exempt from the relief valve discharge standard. Venting the discharge through a control device can result in s 99.9 percent reduction in the VC content of the relief valve discharge without interfering with the control of VC emissions in exhaust gases which are also vented through the control device. Although compliance with the 10 ppmv standard would exempt the discharge from the relief valve discharge standard, exceeding the 10 ppmv standard would be considered both a violation of tha 10 ppmv standard and of the relief valve discharge standard. Dsnial of Patttlon Foe Reconsideration The NRDC and EDF petitioned EPA to reconsider the decision to withdrew the 1977 proposed revisions to the VC standard. The criteria for grentb% each a petition are: (l) The petition must he based on information that wee not and could not reasonably have been . presented during the original rulemaking; and (2) the petition mutt 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 81883 (December 1, 1980). Aa described below, this petition fails to meet either criterion, and it is therefore, denied. Consideration of Petition The NRDC/EDF petition felt-~ 1 reconsiderstion of the withdrawal was based on four main prmnlsai frit NRDC/EDF objected to tha BPAh" announcement of the withdrawn! .gflhe proposed amendments aa a final nation, without being preceded by a aottaa which proposed tha withdrawal and allowed for public comment on the action.. . Second. NRDC/EDF objected to the influence of cost considerations in the decision to withdraw tha nronoaad amendment stating that tha of costs and benefits in tha setting of tha VC standard is contrary la tha ; ,, . VAB.0Q01119947 :l! 1'?ri <rt!?V-" -mhr" V1` -T -ir : 5(MH I. 'J ' 'H4V U'Mijpi|Upr i|fi!7'> pi|> simmpftnM iin?tinf|tffm n1 n Kr j ^ n : it S<'( *:i hi 1 ! 2 )! the Cir.in \i I Third. \KlXh FDF look issue v. wh.it it took to he the FPA's a - -.irr.ptinn that Section 112 of the Clc.in A - Act establishes a requirement that a level of control must have been consistently achieved" in the past in order to form the basis of the standard. Finally. NRDC/EDF stated that the EPA's decisions on specific portions of the proposed amendments were in conflict with the evidence on those issues. In the first objection. NRDC/EDF state that the proposed amendments to the 1977 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. NRDC 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 new information or arguments. Therefore. EPA 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 Q*A may consider cost and feasiblity in setting the standard. The EPA views were explained in the 1979-76 VC rulemaking. The NRDC/EDF provided no new information on this ieeae. The NRDC/EDF 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 *10 ppmv represents I hr ImviM !i'A rI of I'ontri I whn h h.is hrrn rniisistcnlk arhirvrd' .is indicating that FI'A w.is appk mg such requirement in evaluating alternative exhaust 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 lowest 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 be maintained over a long-term, neverto-be-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 beleivea 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 wi thdrawal 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 sources, 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 5 ppmv emission limit cannot be consistently achieved. Second, even though the limit on maximum-emissions of VC is set at 40 ppmv. the average and moat short-term emissions will be considerably lower than this level. Third, lowering the emission Unit on maximum emission rates to 5 ppmv would not significantly reduce the 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 A 'ency's decision k- withdraw the proposed 5 ppmv emission limit. The second decision addressed by the pennon for reconsideration as conflicting with the considered evidence is the withdrawal of the 5 ppmv emission limit for oxychlorination 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 materia! rather than air. and maintains that no discussion or evidence were presented which would justify withdrawal of this proposal. In the Federal Register (90 FR IMS), 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 era 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 ere 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 die petition for ' reconsideration relevant to the decision to retain the existing oocychlorinaiion vent standard. The third decision which addressed in the petition fir reconsideration as confUettng oih the considered evidence is the withdrawal of the proposal to lower therertdnel VC limit for new dispersion 2.000 ppmv to 500 ppmv, end hi Umit for other new resine from 400 ppmv to 100 ppmv. The petition states that existing facilities ere currently meeting the lower limits, end that both new and existing facilities could bo brought into compliance with the more stringent limits by using the equipment and procedures currently aeedtgr die lead facilities. ; The EPA withdrew dm stringent stripping lovhlroqufroiastttaTor two main reason*. The fleet tsthatthe nature of PVC production makes K difficult* to distinguish "new** from "old" resins. Resin compositions are adjusted routinely, and completely "new** resins are rarely, if ever. made. Second, EPA concluded that there is no improved technology which would provide the basis for more stringent stripping requirements for all resins. The technologies which ere effectivfc for * specific resins may not be effective for P VAB.0001119948 34908 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1980 / Rules and Regulations oth*. r resins. The consequence of establishing a more stringent standard wv Jd be that certain hard-to-strip res: ns could no longer be produced. In the EPA'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 reconsiders tion. Administrative The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information considered by EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket la e dynamic file, since materiel 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 standards and EPA responses to significant comments, the contents of the docket, except for interagency review materials, will serve as the record in case of judicial review (section 307(d)(7)(AJ|. The effective date of these revisions is September 90,1908. Section 112 of the Cloon Air Act pravidee that national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants become effective upon promalgatkm and apply to all existing and new eourcse. 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 24.1075 (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 agendas. information collection requirements associated with this revised regulation (those included in 40 CFR Part 61. Subpart A and Subpart F) have bean approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. 44 U-SXL 3501 ei seq* and have been assigned OMB control number 0168.,The reviled mianA^rA is mmfrimnfmrt {a EMIftll in a paperwork burden of about 36 person-years which Is roughly the same as dw original standard. Under Executive Order 12291, EPA is . required to fudge whether e regulation is a "major rule" and therefore subject to certain requirements of the Order. The EPA hae determined that the revised regulation would result in none of the adverse economic effects set forth in Section 1 of the Order as grounds for finding a regulation to be a "major rule." The revised regulation is not major because: (1) Nationwide annual compliance costs, including capital charges resulting from the standard total less than $100 million: (2) the standard does 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 1900 requires the identification of potentially advene 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 advene economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been conducted. Pursuant to the proviaona of 5 U.S.C 605(b). 1 hereby certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of smell entities. List of Subjects In 48 CFR Part 61. Air pollution control. Asbestos, Benzene, Beryllium. Hazardous materials, Mercury, Vinyl chloride. Dated: September U, 1906. Lae ML Unite Adminiatrator. PART 91--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR Part 61 is amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for Part 61 contunues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 101.112,114.116.301. Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7412. 7414. 7416, TSOI). 2. Section 61S1 Is amended by revising paragraphs (JL (1), (o) and (p) and by adding paragraphs (vj, (w). (xj, ? (y), ami (x) to read at follows: | f 61.61 Definitions. 4 6 i t* t (j) "Inprocees wastewater" means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comae 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. Gasholder seal water is not inprocess wastewater until it is removed from the gasholder (1) "In vinyl chloride service" meins that a piece of equipment either contains or contacts a liquid that is s least 10 percent vinyl chloride by weight or e gas that is at least 10 percent by volume vinyl chloride as determined according to the provisions of f 61.67(h). The provisions of f 61.67(h) also specify how to determine that a piece of equipment is not 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 sny part of the proceaa of vinyl chloride production which follows vinyl chloride formation. (v) "Relief valve" means each pressure relief device including pressure relief valves, rupture disks and otjier pressure relief systems used to protect process components from overpressure conditions. "Relief valve* does not include ems or ufod to controlAow incinerator . Teak" 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 measure according to Method 21 (see Appendix A of $0 CFR Part 60); (2) indications of liquid dripping: (3) a sensor detection of fcfltBB of a seal system, failure of a barrier fluid system, or both; and (4) detectable . emissions as indicated by an instrument reeding of greeter then 590 ppm shove background for equipment designated for no detectable emissions measured according to Test Method 21 (see. Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 00). Leaks include events regulated under concen etioB ofambi VAB.0001119949 <** C\ * t yKrJLsAi *N&*M-<(U*^t*ll Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. I960 / Rules and Regulations 3-1903 concentration. A relief valve discharge t 7 not .1 leak. (\) "Exhaust gas" means any offgas :*h(? constituents of which may consist cf ary fluids, either as a liquid and/or cas) 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 61.62 (a) and (b): 61.63(a); 5 61.64 (a)(1). (a)(2). fb). (c). and (d): 5 61.65(b) (l)(ii), (b)(2), (b)(5). (b)(6)(ii) and (b)(9)(h). (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 61.86. (z) "3-hour period" means any three consecutive 1-hour periods (each hour commencing on the hour). 3. Section 61.62 it amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: 161.62 Emission standard for ethylene dteMorid* 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 fP (average for 3-hour period), except as provided in 161.65(a). This requirement does not preclude combining of exhaust gas streams provided the combined team is ducted through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gaaaa does not exceed 10 ppm. or equivalent aa provided in fi 61.66. This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in j 61.65(b)(6)(i) before being opened. (b) Oxychionnation reactor. Except aa provided in f 61.65(a), emissions of vinyl chloride to the atmosphere from each oxychlorination reactor are not to exceed 0.2 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 reed aa follows: An owner or operator of a vinyl chloride plant shell comply with the requirements of this section end 161.65. (e) Vinyl chloride formation and purification: The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust sat stream from any equipment used in vinyl chloride formation and/or 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 S 8l.85(b)(6)(i) before being opened. 5. Section 61.64 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) to read as follows: j) 61.64 Emission standard for potyvtnyt chloride plants. ***** (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 aa provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section end $ 61.65(e). (2) The reactor opening lots from each reactor is not to exceed 0.02 g vinyl chloride/kg (0.00002 lb vinyl chloride/lb) of polyvinyl chloride product, except ea provided in paragraphs (f)(1) end (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 does apply to postpolymerization reactors in the bulk process, where the product means die 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 the atmosphere which could not have been avoided by taking measures to prevent the discharge. Within 10 days of any discharge to the atmosphere from any manual vent valve, the owner or operator of the source from which die discharge occurs shell submit to the Administrator e report in uniting containing Information on the source, nature end cause of the discharge, the date and time of the discharge, the approximate total vinyl chloride lose during the discharge, die method used for determining the vinyl chloride lose (the calculation of the vinyl chloride lose), 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 } 61.65(a). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requiremention 181.65(b)(6)(i) 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 container in vinyl chloride service which precedes the stripper (or the reactor if the plant has no stripper) in the plant process flow is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period), except ea provided in f 61.65(a). 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 aa provided in 161.65(a). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has bean opened, is out of operation, and mat the requirement in f 6lJ05(bX6Xi) before being opened. * 6. By revising paragraphia? Introductory text ana adding paragraphs (eX3) and(f) to f 61.64 to read aa follows: CniMloffi fltMtfMd tar notovtawi cMoridt plftntft. (e) Sources following the stripperfs). The following requirements apply to emissions of vinyl chloride to die atmosphere from the combination of ell source* following the stripperfs) (or the reectorfs) if the plant has no stripperfs)] in the plant process flow Including but not limited to, centrifuges, concentrators, blend tanka filters. dryera, conveyor air discharges, baggers, storage container*, end lnptocess wastewater, except aa provided in paragraph (f) of this secdonr Cl) * * * (2) * * 1 -v - l - (3) The provisions of tide paragraph apply at all times indudlag whan off- pecificatioa or other type* of testae ere made. . ff) Reactor used ms stripper. When n nonbulk resin reactor it used as a stripper this paragraph may be applied in lieu of 161.64 (a)(2) end (*Xtp VAB.0001119950 34910 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1986 / Rules and Regulations A [1 T~ i* weighted average emissions of vm>! : -,!oride from reactor opening loss and a., sources following the reactor used a ? a stripper from all grades of . polyv.ryl chloride resin stripped in the reactcr on each calendar day may not exceed: (i) 222 g/kg (0.00202 Ib/lb) of polyvinyl chloride product for dispersion polyvinyl chloride resins, excluding latex resins, with the product determined on a dry solids basis. (ii) <142 g/kg (0.00042 lb/lb) of polyvinyl chloride product for all other polyvinyl chloride ratios* indudifig latex resins, with tha product determined on a dry solids basis. 7. Section 61.85 is amended by revising paragraphs (a). (b|(l|(il| and (b)(2) to read as follows: OlwIVQnVVi wwlyl wWflQly VIQ pQfjwPljl (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 been avoided by taking measures to prevent tha 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 end cause of the discharge, tha date and time of tha discharge, tha total vinyl chloride loss during tike discharge, the method used for determining the vinyl chloride loss (the celccAatSon of the vinyl loss), the action that was taken to prevent the discharge, and measures adopted to prevent nature discharges. (b) * * * W* (0 * * * (ii) Any vinyl chlorida removed from a loading or unloading tine in acnorrtanra with paragraph (b)(l)(i) of this section is to be ducted through a contra! system from which tha coneaniration of vinyl chlorida in tha exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm (average for 5*hoor period), or equivalent as provided in 161.66. (2) Slip gauges. During loading or unloading operations, the vinyl chloride emissions from each slip gauge in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by ducting any vinyl chlorida discharged from riw ahp gauge through a control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in tha exhaust gases dost not exceed 10 ppm (average far 9-hour period), or equivalent as provided in 61 .Go. 8. By revising paragraphs (b)(3). (b)(4). (b)(5). (b)(6). (b)(7). (b)(8). (b)(9)(ii). and (c) to 61.65 as follows: $ 61.6S Emission standard for ethylene dichloride, vinyl ehJortde and polyvinyl chloride plants. An owner or operator of an ethylene dichloride, vinyl chloride, and/or polyvinyl chloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section. (a) * (b) * * (1) * * * (2) * * * (3) Leakage from pump, compressor, and agitator seals: (i) Rotating pumpe. Vinyl chlorida emissions from seals on all rotating pumps in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing sealless pumps, pumps with double mechanical seals or equivalent as provided in f 61.66. 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 gases does not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided in f 61.66. Compliance with tha provisions of 40 CPU Past 61 Subpart V ^ demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. r (ii) Reciprocating pumpe. Vinyl chlorida emissions from seels on ell reciprocating pumpe in vinyl chloride service ere to be minimized by instailing double outboard stale, or equivalent as provided in 16106. If double outboard seals are used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals era 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 doss not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided fn 16106, Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Pert 01 Snbpart V demonstrates compliance with tha provisions of this paragraph. (iii) Rotating oompnemtr. Vinyl chlorida emissions from seals on all rotating compressors in vinyl chloride service are to be minimised by installing compressors with double mechanteel seals, or equivalent as provided in 161.86. If double mechanical seals era used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals ere to be minimized by maintaining the pressure between the two seals so that anv leak that occurs is w 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 $61.66. Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart V demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. (iv) Reciprocating compressors. Vinyl chlorida emissions from saeia on all reciprocating compressors in vinyl chlorida service are to be minimized by installing double outboard seels, or. equivalent as provided In f 6106. If double outboard seels era used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining tha pressure between the two seals so that any leak that occurs is into tha compressor by ducting any vinyl chloride between the two seals through a control system from which concentration of vinyl chloride in tha exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent as provided in | 61.66. Compliance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart V demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. (v) Agitator. Vinyl chloride emissions from seals on all agitators in vinyl chloride service era to be mmiarized by installing agitators with doable mechenicel seals. or equivalent ea provided in 16106. If double * mechanical seals era used, vinyl chloride enlssioas from the seals are 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 diiarlde between the two seels through e control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent provided in 161.66. (4) Leaks from relief valves. Vinyl chloride emissions due to leaks from each relief valve on equipment in vinyl chloride service shall comply with $ 61.242-4 of Subpart V of this part. (5) Mamtai venting ofgaem Except as provided in 161.64(a)(3), ell gases which are manually vented from equipment in vinly chloride service era to be ducted through e control system from which the concentration of vinyl chloride lathe exhaust gases does not exceed to ppm (average far 6-honr period); equivalent ea provided 1m f 6106; (6) Opening ofequipment. Vinyl ' chloride emissions from opening of equipment (including prapolynwrization reacton used in the manalecfure of hoik h VAB.000111995 ' . r-4-irp! Ml' Federal Register / Voh 51. No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 1986 / Rules and Regulations 9U resjr.5 and loading or unloading lines that a~e not opened to the atmosphere after each loading or unloading opm^on) are to be minimised as follow s: fi) Before opening any equipment foe any reason, the quantity of vinyl chlor.de which is contained Skevtin is to be reduced fo an amount which a volume of no more dm 0 percent a# the equipment's eentammeaS vateme or 0.09SB eubfc meters (39 gelteneh whichever is larger, temperature and pressure (ii) Any vmyi chRsride renseoed fro the equipment in paragraph fb|(A|fi) of thia ducted throagh a control system from which the coneentrotfan of vtnyff chloride- hr the exhaust ge exceed 10 ppm (everagt tor Sheet period); or equivalent es provided hi i m.m. (7) Sampfim Unused portions of samples containing at hast W percent by weight vmyl chloride ere to be returned to the process or dhatroyad in a control device from which ooocantreffoe of vtnpf chloride in the mdkante gas does not succeed 10 ppm (Overage ter Show period) or equivalent itdufti^M^ iv to bft such thstiamph containers to vinyl pmreas system. Chraplnra mite dm /provfitoana of 4fr CHI Pert 91 Stbgart V demonstrates nomplaact wto ten pswvmane oi nsopnmptepte - (B) Sank dimetftwondsdtadMtUtoa Vtoyl chloride smlisfons doe to leeks bom equipment to vtoyl rhlnlria arnica are to he minimised as fbtlowu: 9) A reliable and accurate etoy) chlorate monktaring system alkali bo operated for deSactioo of mafat leaks and identifiestion of the general area of the plant whase e leak is located. A vinyl chloride monitoring system means a device which obtains air samples from one or more points anacoattonoua sequential basils and analyses die samples with gas cksamstagnphy ar, if die owner or npnmtmr aaaamss that all hydrocarbons measured ace vinyl rtiLwtA with, infrared spectrophotometry* flans fan detection, or an equivalent or alternative method. The vtayfl echloridoes shall bs owopmw^t#wdii icttnlicwhw iwa i OMVlfcpMftlHptfett liflM or operator. submit a desutytfom tefte* program to io9 IWIBIIHIIIIIWJI WlWi mm W^m W wf mffmg&Sam date of IkHIfe unfeas a wafver ofcompnOnna Is yanted undtar fl 83.33. er ths^p|iPajgiiMa|ltafskiaaii not request a review of the propane. Approval of a program will be granted and for establishment and verification of by the Administrator provided he finds: calibration standards are to be followed. (A) The location and number of points (ii) For each process unit subject to to be monitored and the frequency of this subpart e formal leak detection and monitoring provided far to the program repair program shall be implemented are acceptable when they are consistent with Subpart V of this part, with the aamber of pieces of equipmaat except as provided in paragraph in vinyl chloride service and also and (b)(gKifl) of thia section. Thia program is physical layout of the plant to be implaraeartad within 90 daya of the (B) U enntjjM a definftioa of teak effective date af them teguhlinns, which is acceptable when compared onlaee a waivm af compUaace It granted with, the background conagirtalfooi of under fattJJL Bmapfc aa granddad to vinyl chloride to the areas of the plant to Paragrapbh (bfMettefUftiMPS)l ofthia oete hfl tmimiinrmA fry ^irfnyl flfctnrir% owner av monitodag ayttaa, UmmkshiwiiIb of Kafle|p^|^ rnnm*itonlfftAg flf vlt^yl f61JM(A iCLMM(aMbKMtatnodlcL 161.246. and 181.247 of Subpart V af chloride in the anas of the plant to bo this part for any pracasa aait hi which r monitored by the vtoyl chloride Ihi ngflesttlflii m ImUbi SlhM te monitodag system an to bo todudod demontiatad to ha fame than IS with the description of (he program. The percent as determined to accocdanca definition of Teak, far a gluon plant may with tho following: vary among (he dUbnat areas wflhta fA> A pagfarnanro teat ipidfiiditt the plant and is also to change over time paragraph (bMPIfttW af thia larSan as background concentratfans to the . . shall ho conducted tottiafly witata 96 plant are reduced. <dC daya of the effective dateofUHBB------ IQ U contains an acceptable pfaa of regulations aaousUy. and at actios to bo taken whan a leak fa detected. fB> Fee aaah part (D) It provides far aa acceptable minimian of 30ft as 90 panant calibration and maintenance sehodhle for the vioyl dilaridt tcj/ttotn voc and portable hydrocarbon detector. Floe Subpate W of Bate 90) wShte tike the vinyl efdoefite monitoring system, a process unit shail ha daily and amoitorad wfehto 1 weak bp An a methods spadfiad in f 81Jilfhh to the GflKIOttifllkdifiMdll A part g am toatmmato raadtogaf according to paragraph (blBKOOfl of ppm or greater is measured, a leak to this section. The calibration is to be detected. The leak parrumtaji shall be dona udte eilhan W valves fa VOC service far which from the af valvrotoWC to (C) If faafc fa detected 13 Method 108. or (3) A calibration gas cylinder (d) and (af ofSubpartV af standard containing the appropriate of vinyl chterido. Ihn gM #shall be submitted to writing to (be compotes cylinder atemtord fa to have certified by tea man a I SMB that th greater certified value. The date of gas cytiadas preparation, carttflad vtoyl chloride percentage effectingvain* fc be greater than 10 percent aen the perfocmance tote pnomteod paragraph jbKBHiipd Ateesc mate comply edit all g--eItecna of Subpatf V afIbft pate wfllto m dhy* (tiiJOpoiti sndarf vabma or ha* wklA np--fta fa lfteyf *6%f(dr less thanlO panant of(ha Hanaro exempt from the raqiifrsinaiifs of 161.242-6 of Subpart V. provfiteid A* open-ended valves or State itnMiilariHMiH paragraph Aims} oftela section. The AdmtotetsataK amp apply VAB.0001119952 V JS k immhi;:-'- Li31kFI!13F1 p_jjfnrn + 34912 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 109 / Tuesday. September f' *. * *i R: ' dN1 g j ' 11 i o n: A this exemption to other existing openended valves or lines that are demonstrated to require significant retrofit cost to comply with the requirements of i 01.242-6 of Subpart V. t 4** (9) * * * (ii) 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 (avenge for 3-hour period); or equivalent as provided in S01.0& *t (c) The requirements in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2). (b)(5). (b)(0). (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 standard operating procedure is 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 i 01.05(b)(6)(i) equipment and usirigTett Method 100, a portable hydrocarbon detector, or an alternative method. The method of measurement is to meet the requirements In f 01.07(g)(5)(i){A) or (8N5)(i)(B). % Section 01.00 la revised to reed as follows: |01jM Upon written application from an owner or operator, the Administrator may approve use of equipment or procedures which have been demonstrated to his satisfaction to be equivalent in terms of reducing vinyl chloride emissions to the atmosphere to thoee prescribed for compliance with a specific paragraph of this subpart. ia 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 (sHOMii) adding paragraphs (g)(0) and (h) in 181.07 aa follows: |01jS7 Omission O (f) Tha owner or operator shall retain at the plant and maka available, upon request, for inspection by the Administrator, for a minimum of 3 years, records of emission tost results end other date needed to determine emissions. W* *(i) (i) For each run, ona sample ia to be collected. Hie sampling site is to be st least two stack or duct 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 diameter is to be determined from the following equation: equivalent diameter*2 (length) (width)/ length + width The sampling point in the duct is to be at the centroid of the cross section. The sample is to be extracted at a rate proportional to the gas velocity at the sampling point. The sample ia to contain a minimum volume of 50 liters corrected to standard conditions and is to bo taken over a period as close to 1 hour as practicable. ....................................... tgf (2) Test Method 107 or Method 001 (incorporated by reference es specified in 01.18) is to be used to determine the concentration of vinyl chloride in each inprocess wastewater stream for which an emission limit is prescribed in S 61.65(b)(9)(i). (3) When e stripping operation is used to attain the emission limits in 101.64 (e) and (1), emissions are to be determined using Test Method 107 is follows: (i) The number of strippers (or reactors used as strippers) and samples and the types and grades of resin to be sampled an to be determined by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the test based on the plant's operation. (ii)* * (iii>The corresponding quantity of material processed by each stripper (or reactor used as a strippar) is to be determined on s dry solids basis and by a method submitted to and approved by the Administrator. (iv)* * (4) * * * (5) The reactor opening losa for which an emission limit is prescribed in S 61.04(e)(2) is to be determined. The number of reactors for which the determination ia to be made ia to be specified by the Administrator for each individual plant at tha time of tha determination based on tha plant's operation, t .. (iJ. * . - (ii) A calculation baaed on the number of evacuations, die vacuum involved, and the volume of gas In the reactor ia hereby approved by tha Administrator as an alternative method for determining reactor opening loss for postpolymerisation reactors in the manufacture of bulk retina. Calculation methods based on techniques other than repeated evacuation of the reactor may be approved by the Administrator for determining reactor opening loss for pcstpoJymerizanon readers in the manufacture of bulk resins. (6) For a reactor that is used as a stripper, the emissions of vinyl chloride from reactor opening loss 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 tha time of the determination based on the plant's operation. (i) For each batch stripped in the reactor, the following measurements ere 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 (*C) at end of strip from plant instrument. (ii) For each batch stripped in the reactor, tha following information is to be determined: (A) The vapor pressure (mm Hg) of water in the reactor at end of strip from the following table: Bwctar W 40 , 41 4t 43 44 40 40 47 40 40 90 91 92 93 94 96 99 97 90 SO 00 91 Hrf> (DM H* *E5m* nST WsQ _ ri rST 9*3 M.3 114 44 003 71* 79.9 79.9 09.7 900 Ki 97* 109.1 107* 11*9 11*0 123* 129* 139.1 1420 14*4 199*4 92 me 99 -171* 94 17*J 99 197* 99 19*1 97 SOS.O 99 214* 99 233.7 70 23*7 71 243* 72 2S4.I 73 29*7 74 277* *5 2991 79 301.4 77 S14.1 79 327* 79 341.0 90 39*1 91 39*7 92 394* 93 400* >04 99 99 97 99 99 to 1 92 99 94 99 96 97 99 99 100 q* *0 (Ml tel 41SJ 433* 4S0J 49*7 407.1 90*1 S9S.S 94*0 997* 9999 9109 933.9 657 6 mr.i 7073 733.2 790 0 (B) The partial pressure (nun Hg) of vinyl chloride in reactor at end ofstrip from die following equation: PPVC- 740--RV--VPW where: m f. PFVC partial pressure of vinyl chloride, in mm Hg TOO*atmospheric preseure at 0 'C, in mm H RV ebeolute vara* of reactor vacuum, in mm Hg VFW-vapor pressure of water. In mm Hg (C) Tha reactor vapor space volume (m^ at and efatrip front the following aquation:: -: VAB.0001119953 .j A Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30. 1986 / Rules and Regulations 3-1013 pvcw R VSV * RC--WV ----------1.400 R VSV * reactor vapor space volume, in m1 RC s reactor capacity, in m* WV--volume of water in reactor from recipe, iam*' PVCW--dry weight of polyvinyl chloride in reactor from nape, in kg 1.400 -- typical density of polyvinyl chloride, in kg/m* (iii) For each batch stripped in the reactor, 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)(Rvsv)(i.aotf c-pPMvcxw~'y+ --II -- --! .... -- [PVCW)(273+RT) (f) For each vir.yl chloride emission to the atmosphere determined in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section to be in excess of the applicable emission limits, the owner or operator shall record the identity of the sourcc(s). the date, time, and duration of the excess emission, the cause of tht excess emission, and the approximate total vinyl chloride loss during the excess emission, and the method used far determinmg the vinyl chlevide lees. This informstare shall be retained and reds available for inspection by the Administrator as required by ft 61.71(a). 12. In 161.70 by revising the section title lire "Semiannual report'* to C--g viqyr chloride/kg palyviayt chloride product PWdVC--concentretlna of vtnyf chfortdefa rests after nttpptag tn pps feHCHtttHH} d this --rtkm to ws tig RVSV--reactor vapor apoco volwao datoBBiaod according to paragraph (gj(UiiKCl of ftia section, to m* 1.002--idaaT gaa eoaafaat lag-- TC/mm Hg--m*fbr vinyl chforfdt PV factor for Xto *K. RT--reactor temperature, to 'C (h)(1) Each piece of equipment within a process unit thnt can reasonably contain equipment in vinyl chloride service is presumed la be in vihyf chloride service unless on owner or operator demonstrataa that the piece of equipment to not in vinyl chloride servicet. Por considered not in vinyl dierfcti it moaf he determined that vinyl cMoride content can expected net to exceed 10 peasant by weight for liquid streams or liquid volamee atari M percent by far gat atreama or contained get volumes, which alao includes gas volumes above liqefcf streams or chloride content clearly does not exceed 10 percent When an owner or operator and thn Admfafaferalcr do oak agree on whether a pfaea of equipreaufl is not in procodoses tn paeagraph (h)(1) af ihia section shall be need to resolve the disagreement (ii) If an ewnar os operator detacmfaaa that a place of aqaipantnt to ia vinyl chloride service, the determination can be revised only after following thn procadareo in paragraph (h)(1) of this section, (31 Sainpl-- --41-- iwiniw| tli^ percent vinyr chloride content shall be representative of the process fluid that is contained in or contacts the .equipment 11 (If to S 01.06 as follows: y II1SI Emission ymmHoriftj- (d) When exhaust gesfea). having I emisaton hoSs that sea subtost to the section, are emitted Is die shnosphere without passing through the control system and required vinyl chloride monitoring system, the vinyl chloride content of the emission shall be calculated (to --utt of each applicable tension harit) by best practical engineering judgment based an the discharge deration end known VC equipment ee determined fa accordance described in ASTM Method D4W with 16UB7(h) or other acceptable (incorporated by reference as specified method. in 161JJ) shall be used. jt () (ZKRAkownw to sfreafre morns chloride engineering ^dpMBttiiher than the procedures in paiugtoph (h)(1) ofthis Oa Vmww VmRR1H> I (weighted according to the proportfen of vinyl chloride content does not exceed time thiri 10 percent by weight for liquid streams monitored and 10 percent by volume forges stolen) forpurposes at reporting am $6Ut(cgU. o (*h (c)(1), (cK2) introductory text (c)(2)(iii), (cM2Mlv), (cM2)(v), (cK2)(vi) introductory text and (e)(3) and also by adding (e)(4) to read as Mfawr lotto (a)(1) The owner or operator of any source to which this subpart applies shall submit to the Administrator on March IS, June IS, September lh and December 15 of each year a repeat to writing infawsium reqtored by this autoton, Tbs tout report is to be submitted Mowing toBret fall 3-month repnrtiag period after the MBs! report to snhmttl ail (c) * (l)The ores ar eparatas shah include in the report a record af the vinyl chloride contoat of rerirefeas far each g>hour pastod duafaqg which evangt emissions era to wrare af thn seifirinn limits to ft: 9L82 (a) or (bh ft 6L63(ah or ft .4 lohih fbj, (cj. os (d). or during which average smlreians are to axcare of the emission limits specified for any control system to which reactor emissions are reqtossd to bo chirked to ft 9\JMM&kw to which fugptivo raiitioiiAVtfigtiinrf I# bn tfuctod in I ttjeMfifhb. tom, Miv MW* re The aarisetoso ars to be datomfaad to acrnrftsmre with ftll 66ftsf - (2) In polpstoyft chlerido plauto lor which a stripping operation is used to attain the aariaeton ftsvol pmecribatf in ft ttL64(rik the ewnav or aparator shalft J VAB.00011954 34914 Federal Register / Vol. 51No. 189 / Tuesday. September 30, 1986 / Rules and Regulations 4 include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride content in the polyvinyl chloride resin. (ii) * # * (iii) The vinyl chloride content in each sample is to be determined by Test Method 107 as prescribed in S 81.67(g)(3). (iv) (Reserved) (v) The report to the Administrator by the owner or operator is to include a Z Pq, Mq| i-1 At* ------ . Qr Poi Mqi+Pc* + where: A--24-hour avenge concentration of type T resin in ppm (dry weight baeis) QaTotil production of type T resin over the 24-hour period, in kg. T--Type of resin. M Concentration of vinyl chloride in one sempie of grade Gi resin in ppm. P--Production of grade GI resin represented by the sample, in kg. Gi-- Grade of resin: e.g~ Gl G2. C& n--Total number of grades of resin produced during the 24-hour period. The number of 24-hour average concentration! for each resin type determined during the reporting period shall be reported, lino 24-hour average resin vinyl chloride fr'MMTVflrf******"* in exccae of the limitt prescribed in 61.64(e) are area--put tta report ahall state that no exceaa main vinyl chloride concentretiona ware maasared (vi) The owner or operator shall retain at the source and make available for inspection by the Administrator for a minimum of 3 year* 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 ahall include in the report a record of any emissions from each reactor opening in exceaa of the emission limits prescribed in 161.64(a)(2). Kiniaaiona are lobe determined in accordance with f 61.67(g)(5). except that emissions for each reactor are to be determined. The number of reactor openings during the reporting period shall bn reported, if emissions in exceaa of dm emission limits are not detected, the report shall include a statement that exceaa emissions have not bean detected. (4) In polyvinyl chloride plants far which stripping in the reactor la 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 be averaged separately for each type of resin, over each calendar day and weighted according to the quantity of each grade of resin processed by the strippers) that calendar day. according to the following equation: ri 161.64(f). the owner or operator shall include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride emissions from reactor opening loss and all 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 resin type and grade and the data and time the batch ia completed. The corresponding quantity of material processed in each stripper batch is to be recorded and identified by resin type and grade and 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 S 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 hatch tripped in a reactor according to the procedure prescribed in 161.67(g)(6). (iv) The report to the Administrator by the owner or operator ia 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 at determined in this paragraph, in exceaa of the limits prescribed in 161.64(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 calendar day as follows: For each type of resin (suspension, dispersion, latex, bulk, other), the following calculation is to be performed: n SPoiGoi At* 1,1 Or PoiCei+P<G(+ . . . iPogCoi Or where: A--24-hour avenge combined reactor opening low and emissions from ell sources fallowing the reector used ee a tripper, ia g vinyl chloride/kg product (dry weight basis). Q--Total production of rutin in batches for which stripping is completed during the 24-hour period, in kg. T-- Type of main. C --Average combined reactor opening loea and emissions from all sources following the reactor used ea e stripper of ell betehee of puds G| resin far which tripping is completed during the 24-hour period,.in g vinyl chloride/kg product (dry woight bad*) (determined according to procedure proscribed in | IU7(|)(6]). P--Production of pads Gi resin in the batches far which C fa determined, la kg. Gi-Grade of resin e.g*Gi. G, and G. n--Total number of pedes of resin la batches for which stripping la completed during the 24-hour period. V. The number of 24-hour average emissions determined during the reporting period shall be reported. U no 24-hour average combined reactor opening loss and emissions from all sources following the reactor used a tripper in exeats of the limits prescribed in 161.64(f) are determined, the report ahall state that no excess vinyl chloride amissions were determined. 11. By revising paragraph (a) introductory text of 161.71 as follows: 161.71 Recordkeeping. (a) The owner or operator of any source to which this subpart applies hall retain the following information at the aourca and make it available for inspection to the Administrator for a minimum of 3 years: ft * * 14. By revising paragraph (a)(4) and adding paragraph (bXl) to 161.16 as follows; 161.16 Incorporation kf Reference. * ft (4) ASTM 02267-66 (reapproved 1878) Aromatics in Light Naphthas and + VAB.0001119955 Register 34915 ft Aviation Gasoline by Gas Chromatography. IBR approved June 6. 1984. for 61.245(d)(1) and IBR approved September 30,1986 for 61.67(h)(1). ** I- (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 Purgeable Halocarbons. July 1962. IBR approved September 30.1986 for i 61.87(g)(2). 15. By revising the definition "volatile hazardous air pollutants" in 61.241 of Subpart V to read as follows: 61.241 Definitions. **t "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. 16. By revising the definition of "connector" in f 61.241 of Subpart V as follows: 61.241 Definitions. "Connector" means flanged, screwed. welded, or other joined fittings used to connect two pipe lines or a pipe tine 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 Doc. 86-22032 Filed 9-29-66: 8:45 am| mujm COM M04M 1 tr rf * i VAB.0001119956