Document M4544ppraJLe3VxDyBqgKd2Q7

J 4/28154 raorosco rules ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [40CFR Part 61] additional actions. These Include a re be achievable only by banning vinyl chlo statement of EPA's policy for regulating ride emissions completely. That, in turn, carcinogens under section 112 of the would require closing the entire industry* Clean Air Aet; As explained In the eaiher rulemaking it irRL 736-6] Is not clear that Congress would have VINYL CHLORIDE National Emission standards for Hazardous Mr Pollutants **. K AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. Intended this result, so instead EPA re quired the lowest level achievable using technological means. (See 40 PR 50634 and 41 FR 46503). In order to Insure that the standard continues to approach the only level of action: Pnmoaadnute. emissions which Is known.to be abso lutely protective of health, namely zero SUMMARY: The proposed amendments are being made to the vinyl chloride Zero Emission Goal standard which has promulgated Octo The vinyl chloride standard has been ber 81, 39781 and would apply to new criticised for allegedly placing unwar and existing ethylene dichlorlde, vinyl ranted emphasis on technological rather chloride, and polyvinyl chloride plants. than health considerations. Although The standard and the proposed amend EPA disagrees with this criticism. It ments implement the Clean Air Act and are based on the Administrator's deter mination that vinyl chloride is a hazard seems appropriate to restate EPA's ap proach to the regulation of carcinogens injgencrnl and under Section 112 of the Moss Strxnunx Standards roa Existing Sourcbs ilal;1 ous air pollutant Tit* Rstertded effect of Clean Air Act, and to explain how the EPA Is proposing amandments which the propose^ piiipdlttaits is to require vinyl chloride standard and the pro would require sources presently subject improved ^MNMiMMlMf oontrol tech posed amendments are consistent with to a : 1" '1T nology at RNMNMjm}il8> hnpo6e more this approach and with the protection sMEwmt emhWlwrlttnrtlion new sources, of public health. The :h ili'- .1; and iwelkibKMN*ttldl Inerease within the -MtllRNIIlMdHHIlMNNIl*1 ettMUtsw due to the (xmVtruictiMlilMiaiasw sewrce. DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 1,1977. On May 25, 1976, EPA published In terim procedures and guidelines for health risk and economic Impact assess ments of suspected carcinogens (41 FR 21402), which define EPA's approach to regulatory action for suspect carcino 'dichlo rlde purification; vinyl chloride forma tion and purification; reactors, strippers; mixing, weighing, and holding contain ers; monomer recovery systems; and fugitive emissions which have been cap ADDRESSES: Comments should be sub gens. As Indicated in that publication, tured In accordance with the existing mittal (preferably in triplicate) to the there are two steps Involved In the deci regulation.* If the owner or operator of Emission Standards and Engineering sion-making process with regard to the a source believed that a control system Division, Environmental Protection regulation of a potential carcinogen. Al would not be capable of meeting the 5 Agency, Research Triangle Park, North though different EPA statutory author ppm limit, he would be able to request Carolina, Attention: Mr. Don R. Good ities Impose different requirements. In that the Administrator approve an In t win. All public comments received may be inspected and copied at the Public In formation Reference Unit (EPA Li brary), Room 2032, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, D.C. general two decisions must be made with regard to each potential carcinogen. The first decision is whether a particular sub stance constitutes a cancer risk. The second decision is what regulatory ac tion, if any, should be taken to reduce that risk. terim emission limit for that source. Such requests would have to be made one year before the campUence date. In re questing an Interim emission limit, the owner or operator would have to submit supportive data and meet with EPA to discuss his particular problems In attain FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CON TACT: Don R. Goodwin, Emission Standards and Engineering Division, Environ mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Telephone No. 010-680-8146, ext. 271. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 21,1076, EPA promulgated a standard for vinyl chloride under the authority of section 112(b) (l) (B) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (41 FR 46561). The standard applies to ethyl ene dichloride, vinyl chloride, and poly In deciding whether a cancer risk exists, EPA will consider a substance a presumptive cancer risk when It causes a statistically significant excess incidence of benign or malignant tumors in hu mans or animals. In the case of vinyl chloride, EPA evaluated all available data and'Concluded that a cancer risk exists. In deciding how and whether to regulate, EPA examined section 112 of the dean Air Act. Section 112 of the Act requires that emission standards be set "at the level which In the judgment of the Administrator provides an ample margin of safety to protect the public health from such hazardous air pollut ants." This requirement appears to as ing compliance. The meeting would be announced In the Fxbkrai. Register and any Interested party would be allowed to attend and submit written or oral com ments. If an interim emission limit were granted to the source, the required emis sion level would be specified to a written notification from EPA and to the Fed eral Register. Each source granted an Interim emission limit would be reviewed every three yean to determine whether emissions could be reduced to 5 ppm, or at least to a lower Interim emission limit. In proposing the ;nduetian from 10 to 6 ppm, it is not EPA's intent that a con trol system which has been Installed to vinyl chloride plants. On November 19, 1976. the Environ mental Defense Fund (EDF) petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the standard. Motions to intervene were subsequently filed on behalf of the So ciety of the Plastics Industry, Inc., the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company and Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and were granted by order of the Court on January 18, 1977. On March 24, 1977, sume that each pollutant regulated will have a threshold level of effects below which no health effects will occur. As explained in the documentation for the current standard (40 FR 59532, Decem ber 24, 1975; 41 FR 46560. October 21, 1976), It has not been possible to deter mine If there is a threshold level of effects for vinyl chloride and it is not certain that such a threshold may be determined in the near future. In the absence of strong evidence to the con As an explanatory note, paragraph (b) of I 61 .SB contains nine fugitive emission regu lations. For several of these, the fugitive emissions are required to be captured and ducted to a control destee mdMpW PS*1 Aocordtng to the proposed amendments, the emissions from this control device would have to be reduced to B ppm la the same way any other source currently required to meet 10 ppm would have to do. Bather than in corporating both the 6 and 10 ppm emission limits in each paragraph to 161.68(b), a separata paragraph (e) containing these EDF and EPA moved to dismiss the trary, then, the only level of vinyl chlo emission limits la being added to 161.66. AU proceedings In view ol a settlement ride which would appear to be absolutely the other paragraphs In (b) art crossagreement requiring EPA to take certain protective of health is' aero, which may referencsd in paragraph (). FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL...42,, NO-Jp^-THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1077 DTH 000115631 1 PROPOSED RULES 28155 meet the 10 ppm emission limit be re* cycling and oxygen feed methodolgy is moved and- replaced with another more considered feasible for new axychlorina- efficient control system or that a second Uon reactors because It can be Incorpo control system be added behind the first rated at the time of construction. Since control system, lira purpose of the pro* the use of this technology would elimin posed amendment is to force owners and ate the supplemental fuel problem re operators to maximize the effectiveness ferred to above. It Is EPA'* Judgment that of existing control systems. new oxychlorination reacton should be Moat Stringent Standards rpa New Sources controlled to the same extent that is proposed for other emission sources. The proposed amendment also Includes The proposed amendments would also a more stringent emission limit for new require more new polyvinyl chloride resins being processed sources; l.cu in equipment following te stripping operation. lording to General provisions, "commenced' means that an owner or operator has undertaken a continuous. program of construction or modification R.| or that an owner or operator has entered into a contractual obligation to under take and complete, within a reasonable use limits for new products time, a continuous program of construc e one-fourth of the limits con tion or modification. tained in the standard for existing prod New sources of types which would be ucts. Consistent with the current stand subject to the 10 ppm emission limit ard. the amendment would permit the under the current standard would be use of control devices rather than strip required under the amendments to meet ping technology to meet the emission a 5 ppm emission limit at the time of limit. In this case equipment being used star to process all new resins except new dis persion resins would have to be con trolled to 0.01 kg/kg product and the New sources would be required to meet equipment used for new dispersion resins the more stringent emission limit at the would have to be controlled to 0.0S kg/kg time of startup, because they have an product. opportunity to design their equipment to meet the 5 ppm emission limit at the time construction is commenced. Existing sources, on the other hafad, require time to maximise the effectiveness of their A "new source" Is defined In 40 CFR 01.02 as a stationary source, the con struction or modification of which is commenced after proposal of a standard. There was some question based on this control systems. definition as to whether the amendment I also to the stripping standard for new sources should apply to new polyvinyl chloride Mimi new resins or the Installation of new equip IMMItaMltu VMMMg. This ment following the stripper. If the ap requirement based on installation of plicability of the amendment for new a recycling and oxygen feed system with sources were based on the installation of an incinerator or equivalent control de new equipment following the stripper, it vice. The current standard limits emis would be difficult to determine what con sions from the oxychlorination reactor stitutes a new source at an existing plant to 0.2 g/kg (0.0002 lb/lb) of the 100 per This Is based on the reasoning that the cent ethylene dichtoride product from stripping standard requires that all the oxychlorination reactor. This emis equipment following the stripper in the sion limit can be met by changing proc process be controlled as a unit. The series ess parameters, rather than installing a of equipment following the stripper in control device. During the development cludes pumps and conveying equipment of the current standard EPA considered which might be expected to be replaced requiring existing sources to control on a frequent and routine basis. Replac emissions with an Incinerator or equiva ing one of these pieces of equipment lent technology, but rejected this ap would In effect cause the whole series of proach because a large quantity of fuel equipment following the strfpper to have would be required to reduce emissions to meet the standard for new sources, in from a relatively small source. An exist other words, all resins processed In the ing oxychlorination reactor typically has series of the equipment would have to a large volume, low hydrocarbon effluent meet the lower standard even though gas stream, and large quantities of sup only a minor part of the equipment had plemental fuels would be required for been replaced. combustion of its emissions. EPA decided that a more reasonable A new plant can reduce the volume of and direct approach was to make the Its effluent gas stream and make It more proposed amendment apply to the pro concentrated by recycling the gas stream duction of new polyvinyl chloride resins. and using oxygen instead of air to feed This Is based on the reasoning that emis Into the process. (J, 4) the current sions from the equipment following the standard was not based on this technol stripper are a function of the amount of ogy because It was not considered feasi vinyl chloride left tn the resin after the ble to retrofit existing plants so that they stripping operation Is completed; l.e,, could use oxygen Instead of air. The re the resin Is the source of the emissions rather than the equipment Hie same equipment can be used to process differ ent resin grades. Variations in the emis sions from the equipment are a function of the resin being processed rather than the characteristics of the equipment The control technology which Is used for the equipment following the stripper is like wise more directly linked to the resin than the equipment. Stripping is used to control the emissions due to the vinyl chloride in the resin before the resin is processed in the equipment Before the hazards of vinyl chloride became known, stripping technology was employed by polyvinyl chloride manu facturers to recover raw materials for economic purposes. As a result of a standard promulgated by the Occupa tional Safety and Health Administration (39 FR 35890), some companies Investi gated Improvements In stripping meth odology for emission control purposes. (1) Optimum stripping consists of a set of operating conditions which must be de veloped experimentally on an Individual basis for the many resins. In developing the current standard. EPA recognized that stripping technology for dispersion resins had not been refined to the same extent as it had been for other resins and that there was more difficulty In strip ping dispersion resins than other resins. For this reason a less stringent emission limit was established for dispersion res ins. Dispersion resins are permitted a higher emission limit under the proposed amendment for the same reason. (hit fat *ome ' resins, eewanfrt have, already; de^p^strtp- resins, the proposed standard would re quire additional improvement In strip ping technology. If stripping technology has not been developed to the extent necessary to meet the proposed amend ment for a particular resin, the manu facturer would have the option of de veloping the technology or not producing the resin. Hie current standard, unlike the proposed amendment, was not based on the premise that an owner or operator would have the option of not producing a particular resin. It Is EPA's judgment that the owner or operator making a new product has more freedom of choice than the owner or operator already making a particular product in selecting those resins which are to be produced. EPA's standard would be Included In the variables under consideration when decisions are being made as to which resins are to be produced. The proposed amendment would apply to any new source, whether It constituted replacement of an existing source in an existing plant, the expansion of an exist ing plant, or part of an entirely new plant. That Is. If a new oxychlorination reactor or a new polyvinyl chloride re actor were Installed at an existing plant. It would be subject to the emission limits for new sources. Hits means that as existing sources are gradually replaced with new sources In an existing plant, FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 41, NO. 106--THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1177 DTH 000115632 / 28156 PROPOSED RULES the overall emission level Xrom that had been attained by each existing existing plant would be reduced. source. The allowable emission rate for Emission OrrsiT each source would be based on the maxi mum production rate at which that Because the present vinyl chloride source would be operated in the future. standard focuses on reducing emissions Also, If the emissions from an existing rather than attaining a particular am source were already below the omission bient air quality concentration, there is limit applicable to it, the proposed no provision for limiting the size of amendment would give the source credit plants or the clustering of plants In a for the difference between the emission geographical area. The doubling of the limit and the actual emission level. size of an existing plant or the construc tion of a new plant beside an existing plant would considerably increase the emtortnurtestTt is EPA's Judgment that ambient air concentrations of vinyl this is a more equitable approach than chloride in the vicinity of the plant(s) penalizing a source which has already even if the vinyl chloride standard was taken measures to reduce emissions below met. EPA determined at the time of. the standard. Such a source would have promulgation of the current standard less room for further reducing emissions. that the costs of prohibiting the produc The emission limits applicable to both tion of vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride were too high and the continued operation of existing plants should be allowed. EPA believes, however, that the standard should include a mechanism for prohibiting an increase in ambient concentrations of vinyl chloride due to new construction in areas where existing sources are already located. Accordingly, EPA is proposing an amendment which would prohibit an in crease in emissions within 8 kilometers (km) Hirfe' Uttlts) of an existing source due to the construction the existing and new sources involved in the offset arrangement would be con tained in the approval of new construc tion granted by the Administrator under 40 CPR 81.08. EPA believes that a policy of no net increase in emissions due to new con struction Is Justified because of the haz ardous nature of vinyl chloride. How ever, EPA recognizes the potential diffi culties in implementing such a policy and interested persons are urged to sub mit comments and factual information relating to this policy. of a new emission source. TMHb means Review of Standard Uwt if an EPA plans to undertake a full-scale review of Subpart F of 40 CPR Part 61 beginning three years from the promul gation of any amendments. In the study EPA will review information concerning technological advances in the control of vinyl chloride emissions to determine structed within 8 km of an existing plant(a) iUnlpia,it|ei '*SnlSal<Wi, Increase what further changes might then be ap propriate to move toward the goal of zero vinyl chloride emissions. EPA will also consider recent health data to de or ptentsj This provision may result in few existing plants being expanded and termine whether the approach for regu lating vinyl chloride should be altered. few new plants being constructed in the Environmental Impact vicinity of existing plants. However, the proposed amendment docs not preclude this possibility. The proposed amendment, in contrast to the current standard, would encourage toe development of new technology and The offset provision would apply only improvements in existing technology and to new construction which results in an would have the following three positive increase in production rate. Replacing or environmental impacts: (1) further re adding equipment such as pumps, com duction of emissions at existing plants, pressors, agitators, sampling equipment (2) no increase in emissions within 8 km and unloading hoses is a routine practice of an existing source, and (3) lower at existing plants. Additions of equip emissions from new sources than would ment of this nature would, in and of it be accomplished through the current self, be expected to result in little, if any. standard regardless of the construction increase in emissions. In EPA's judg site. These environmental impacts would ment, a plant should not be required to provide progress toward the ultimate prove this fact each time one of these goal of zero emissions without banning pieces of equipment is added. The addi vinyl chloride, and in the process would tion of this type of equipment in con provide additional protection of public junction with major process equipment, health by further minimizing tire health however, is likely to result in both an in risks to the people living in the vicinity crease in emissions as well as an in of existing plants and to any additional crease in production rate, and is there people who are exposed as a result of new fore covered by the offset provision. construction. If the offset provision were adopted, Specifically, for those existing sources the reduction in emissions could be which are currently subject to a 10 ppm achieved in the production rate of an emission limit, emissions would be re existing source or sources. Hie baseline duced by half within three years after emission *tt* *WuHd beidetermined based the promulgation date of these amend on the mfjciiiftwiiin prpdiuqtlpn ite which ments. At both an existing average-sized ethylene dichloride-vinyl chloride plant and an existing average-sized polyvinyl chloride plant, which contain other sources than the ones required to meet a 8 ppm emission limit, it is estimated this wffl have the effect of reducing total emissions by less than one percent. Emis sions at existing plants would be farther reduced as existing oxychlorination re actors are replaced with new oxychlorination reactors and aa new polyvinyl chloride resins are produced to replace existing ones. Under the proposed amendment, emis sions from new plants would be consider ably lower than they would be undo: the current standard. For a typical new average-sized ethylene dichlorlde-vlnyl chloride plant (318x18* kg/yr or 700 X10* lb/yr produced), Die hourly emis sions would be 8.1 kg (11.8 lb) instead of 10.3 kg (23.1 lb). For a typical new average-sized dispersion polyvinyl chlo ride plant (46x10* kg/yr or 100X10" lb/yr production), the emissions would be about 9 kg/hr (20 lb/hr) instead of 17.5 kg/hr (39 lb/hr) and for a typical new average-sized suspension polyvinyl chloride (90x10* kg/yr or 150x10" lb/yr production) the emissions would be 13.5 kg/hr) (30 lb/hr) instead of 16 kg/hr (30 Ib/hr). These emissions axe calcu lated based on the emission factors pub lished to the documentation for the ex isting standard. (1) Ambient air concen trations are expected to be reduced proportionately. The only negative environmental im pact would be an increase in hydrogen chloride emissions at ethylene dlchloride-vinyl chloride plants if incineration were used to control emissions from new oxychlortoation reactors. However, due to the corrosion problems which would otherwise occur on plant property and in toe community, plants are expected to use scrubbers to control the hydrogen chloride emissions. Hie proposed amend ment is not expected to have a signifi cant impact on energy consumption. Economic Impact The potential economic impacts of the proposed standard are: (1) Costs for research and develop ment of improved methodology for oper ation of existing control technology so that It can be used to meet the 5 ppm emission limit. (2) Costs for research and develop ment of improved stripping techniques to meet toe standard for new polyvinyl chloride resins. (3) Cost of research and development or licensing for converting over to the oxygen system for a new oxychlortoation reactor. (4) Possibly incraiMd'transportation costs or raw materials to the case that the offset SLJ * ould hawebeen (5) Costs of building a new plant more than 8 km from an existing plant in the event that toe offset requirement pre cluded toe expansion of an existing plant. ' ' >TH 000115633 FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 106--THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1977 PROPOSED RUKS 28157 (6) Delay in the production of a par* tlcular resin due to time spent develop* ing stripping technology for that resin. <7> No growth in the production of a (2) "Goodrich Reports Impressive Progress in Solving Vinyl Chloride Problem," Ameri can Paint and Coatings Journal, Vol. 00, No. 31, January 13,1978, p- 34. (3) E. W. Wlmer and R. E. Feathers, "Ox particular resin due to the inability to ygen Gives Low Oort VCM," Hydrocarbon strip that resin to required levels. The- types of costs which have been named would be difficult to quantify. The costs would be expected to vary consider Processing, March 1078, pp. 81-84. (4) Peter Reich, "Air or Oxygen For VCM f," Hydrocarbon Processing, March, 1976, pp. 85-89. ably from one plant to another depend It is proposed that Subpart F of 40 ing on the amount of research and de CFR Part 61 be amended as follows: velopment than had already been done, 1. In 161.08. paragraph (b) is revised the extent to which technology could be to read as follows: transferred from other plants and proc esses, and the plans for new construction. <>1.011 Approval by llic Ariiiiinislrulor, *' * One area in which cost estimates can be generated is the use of an oxygenrecycle oxychlorination process as op posed to an air-based system. The pro posed amendment does not require the use of the oxygen-recycle system, but many plants would be expected to em ploy this system to avoid the high costs of incinerating the high volume gas stream from a typical air-based system. <b> If the Administrator determines that a. stationary source for which an application pursuant to 9 61.07 was sub mitted will not, if properly operated, cause emissions in violation of the standard or violation of 9 61.73. he will approve the construction or modification of such source. ***** Tho primary cost of using the oxygen- 2. Section 61.62 is revised to read as (a) Vinyl chloride formation and pu rification: Except as provided in 9 61.65(a), the concentration of vinyl chloride in all exhaust gases discharged to the atmosphere from any equipment used in vinyl chloride formation and/or purification is not to exceed the appro priate emission limit as follows: (1) Each source, for which construc tion had commenced on or before June 2, 1977. 10 ppm until (date three years af ter promulgation of these amendments) and S ppm after (date three years after promulgation of these amendments). (2) Each source for which construc tion commenced after June 2, 1977, 5 ppm. (b> The requirements of this section do not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in 9 61.65(b) (6) (1) before being opened. 4.Section 61.64 is amended by revis ing paragraphs (a)(1), (b), (c), (d) and (e)and by adding paragraph (f) as fol lows: recycle system is the cost of the oxygen follows: 61.61 F.ntiioii.standard for polyvinyl itself. The cost of the oxygen for a par chloride plants. ticular plant would depend on whether the plant was located where there is a considerable demand for both the oxygen and nitrogen products of air separation. According to one recent article, if it is assumed that such a demand exists, the cost of the oxygen ($I4.34/ton) would be approximately equivalent to the cost of compressing air for use in the airbased system. (1) Another report in which this assumption was not made and the economics of the air and oxygen sys tems were being compared, it was con cluded that overall production economics "favor the oxygen process even if vent gas incineration would not be required for an air-based plant since the sum of all remaining advantages offered by oxygen-based plant operation more than outweighs the incremental cost for the oxygen feed." <2) Miscellaneous: The Administrator in vites comments on all aspects of the pro posed amendments. 61.62 Emission slaiulnrct fur ethylene iliclilorulc plnitls. An owner or operator of a polyvinyl An owner or operator of an ethylene dichloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section and 61.65. (a) Ethylene dichlorlde purification: Except as provided in 9 61.65(a), the concentration of Vinyl chloride in all exhaust gases discharged to the atmos phere from any equipment used in ethylene dichloride purification is not to exceed the appropriate emission limit as follows: (1) Each source for which construc tion had commenced on or before (date of proposal of these amendments), 10 ppm until (date three years after pro mulgation of these amendments) and 5 ppm after (date three years after the promulgation of these amendments). (2) Each source for which construc tion commenced after June 2, 1977, 5 ppm. chloride plant shall comply with the re quirements of this section and 9 61.65. (a) Reactor: The following require ments apply to reactors: (1) Except as provided in paragraph (a> (2) of this section and 9 61.65(a), the concentration of vinyl chloride in all ex haust gases discharged to the atmos phere from each reactor is not to exceed the appropriate emission limit as fol lows:. (i) Each source for which construction had commenced on or before June 2,1977 10 ppm until (date three years after pro mulgation of these amendments) and 5 ppm after (date three years after pro mulgation of these amendments). . (ii) Each source for which construc tion commenced after June 2, 1977, 5 ppm. *** (b) Oxychlorination reactor: Except as provided in {61.65(a), emissions of (b) Stripper: Except as provided iri 9 61.65(a). the concentration of vinyl (Section 113 of the Cleon Air Act, sec. 4(a) of Pub. L. 91-004, 84 Stilt. 1688 (43 U.S.C. 1857c7) and section 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, sec. 2 of Pub. L. No. 00-148, 84 Stat. 504 as amended by sec. (16) (c) (2) of Pub. L. 01-604, 84 Stat. 1713 (43 U.S.C. 1857 g(a)). Secs. 61.67 and 61.68 also proposed under the au thority of section 114 of the Clean Air Act, as added by sec. 4(a) of Pub. L. 91-604, 84 Stat. 1687 and amended by Pub. L. 93-319, sec. 6(a)(4). 88 Stat. 360 (42 U.S.C. vinyl chloride to tjje atmosphere are not 16 exceed the appropriate emission limit as follows: (1) Each source for which construc tion had commenced on or before (date of proposal of these amendments), 0.2 g/kg (0.0002 Ib/lb of the 100 percent ethylene dichlorlde product from the oxychlorination reactor. chloride in all exhaust gases discharged to the atmosphere from each stripper is not to exceed the appropriate emission limit as follows: (1) Each source for which construc tion had commenced on or before June 2, 1977 10 ppm uptil (date; Dane pears after . jwomuteation of trap''' amend ments) end 5 ppm after (date three years after final promulgation of these 1857C-9).) (2) Each source for which construc amendments). Note.--The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that this document tion commenced after June -2, 1977, 5 ppm. com(2m> eEnaecehds^offtuorcreJfuonr ewh2.lc1h9d17o,nsstprupcmtl.on does not contain a major proposal requiring preparation of an Economic Impact Analysis under Executive Orders 11831 and 11940 and OMB Circular A-107. N (c) The requirements of this section do not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation and met the requirement in 9 61.65(b) (6) (1) before (c) Mixing, weighting, and holding containers: Except as provided in 9 61.65(a), the concentration of vinyl chlo ride in all exhaust gases discharged to Dated: May 27,1977. being opened. the atmosphere from each mixing, weigh Douglas M. Costle, Administrator. Refebincxs (1) Standard Support and Environmental 3. Section 61.63 is revised to read as follows: 61.63 Emission ulnndurd for vinyl chloride plants. ing, or holding container in vinyl chlo ride service which precedes the stripper (or the reactor If the plant has no strip per) in the plant process flow is not to exceed the appropriate emission limit as Impact Statement: Emission Standard for An owner or operator of a vinyl chlo follows: Vinyl Chloride. EPA-450 13-76-009, October, 1976. ride plant shall comply with the require ments of this section and 9 61.65. (1) Each source, for which construc tion had commenced on or before (date FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 43, ko. 106--THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1977 DTH 000115634 28158 PROPOSED RULES of proposal of these amendments), tf0 ppm until (dale three years after pro mulgation of these amendments) 4HB#S ppm after (date three years after pro mulgation of these, amendments). resin all of which had been produced by the plant on or before June 2,1977: (A) 2 g/fcg (0.003 lb/lb) product from the strlpper(s) for reactor(s) if tho plant has no stripper(s) 1 for dispersion od of measurement is to meet the re quirements In I 61.67(g) (5) (1) (A) or (g)(5) (1) (B). 6. In 161.67, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows: ifitoff Hun, polyvinyl chloride resins, excluding latex resins, with the product determined on 6 61,67 Emission lesls. a dry solids basis: (a) Unless a waiver of emission test (d) Monomer recovery system. Except (B) 0.4 g/kg (0,004 lb/lb) product ing is obtained under ] 61.13, the owner as provided In i 61.65(a), the concentra from the stripper(s) (or rcactor(s) if or operator of a source to which this tion of vinyl chloride in all exhaust gases the plant has no stripper(s)) for all subpart applies shall test emissions Hk discharged to tho atmosphere from each other polyvinyl chloride mins, including from the source as follows: monomer recovery system is not to ex latex resins, with the product deter (1) For an existing source or a new 11 , ceed the appropriate concentration as mined on a dry solids basis. source which has an initial startup date it,; follows: (ii> For sources being used to process preceding October 21,1976: (1) Each source for which construc any grade of polyvinyl chloride resin not (1) Within 90 days fallowing October tion had commenced on or before (date produced by the plant on or before June 21, 1976, and of proposal of these amendments), 10 2, 1977: (ii) For those sources subject to ppm until (date three years after pro (A) 0.5 g/kg (0.0005 Ib/lb) product' SS 61.62(a); 61.63(a); 61.64 (a)(1), (b), mulgation of these amendments) and 5 from the stripper(s) (or reactor(s) if the (c). and (d); and/or 61.65(b)(1), (b) ppm after (date three years after pro plant has no stripper(s)) for dispersion (2). (b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(6), and/or (b) mulgation of these amendments). polyvinyl chloride resins, excluding la (9), within 90 days following (date three (2) Each source for which construc tex resins, with the product determined years after the promulgation date of tion commenced after June 2, 1977, 5 on a dry solids basis; these amendments). ppm. (B) 0.1 g/kg. (0.0001 lb/lb) product (2) For a new source for which initial (c) Sources following the stripper(s): from the strippers (or reactor (s) if the startup occurs after October 21, 1976, i The following requirements apply to plant has no strlpper(s)) for all other within 90 days of startup. emissions of vinyl chloride to the atmos polyvinyl chloride resins, Including phere from the combination of all sources following the stripper(s) for the reactor(s) if the plant has no stripper! latex resins, with the product deter mined on a dry solids basis. (f) Hie requirements of paragraphs 7. In 161.68, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows: in the plant process flow including, but (b), (c), and (d) of this section do not 61.68 Emission monitoring. not limited, to centrifuges, concentra apply to equipment that has been * *; i 1 tors, blend tanks, Alters, dryers, conveyor air discharges, baggers, storage con tainers, and Inprocess wastewater. (1) In polyvinyl chloride plants using opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement in { 61.65(b) (6) (i) before being opened. 5. Section 61.65 is amended as follows: (c) A dally span check is to be con ducted for each vinyl chloride monitor ing system used. For all of the sources listed in paragraph (a) of this section, stripping technology to control vinyl chlorid A. By replacing the phrase `TO ppm" with the phrase "the appropriate emis except for the one for which an emission limit is prescribed in S 61.62(b) (1), the chi by the viiNiUiLtftA ]f- vinyl chloride cencenTratlon In all the grades processed through the stripping opera tion on each calendar day, measured Im mediately after the stripping operation sion limit specified In J 61.65(c)" in paragraphs (b) (1) (ii), (b) (2), (b) (3) (1), (b) (3) (11), (b) (3) (ill) , (b) (3) (iv), (b)(3>(v>, (b)(5), <b)(6)(ii), and (b) (9) (ii); B. By revising paragraph (c) and add ing paragraph (d) as set forth below. dally span check is to be conducted with a concentration of vinyl chloride equal to the concentration emission Ittnit appli cable to It. For a source subject to the emission limit prescribed in J 61.62(b) (1). the daily span check is to be con ducted with a concentration of vinyl chloride which is determined to be is completed, may not exceed the appro-. g 61.(iS Emission standard for clliylcno equivalent to the emission limit for that priate emission limit as follows: dichloride, vinyl chloride, and poly source based on the emission test re (A) 2,000 ppm for polyvinyl chloride vinyl chloride plants. quired by } 61.67. Hie calibration is to be (. i dispersion resins, excluding latex resins; /(tBa)t iililm...f.i.m. . m for ail other polyvinyl chloride resins, including latex resins, averaged separately for each type of resin; * (c) The emission limit which is not to be exceeded is as follows: (1) Each source, for ijhlch construction had com menced on or before June 2, 1977, 10 done with either: 8. A new ! 61.72 is added to read as follows: i i (11) For a grade < chloride resin whfi ppm until (date three years after pro 61.72 Request for interim rniiMion mulgation1 of these amendments) and limit. 5 ppm after (date three years after pro (a) If in the opinion of the owner or i i vinyl chloride concent grades processed through the stripping operation on each calendar day, meas ured immediately after the stripping op eration Is completed, may not exceed the appropriate emission limit as follows: mulgation of these amendments). (2) Each source for which construc tion commenced after June 2, 1977, 5 ppm. (d) The requirements in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7) and (b) (8) of this section are to be in operator of an existing source, that source will be unable to comply with the 5 ppm emission limit in }S 61.62(a) (1); 61.63(a)(1); 61.64 fa) (1X1), (b>(l>. (c)(1), (d)(1); and/or 61.65(c)(1) on or before (date three years after pro mulgation of these amendments), the i (A) 500 ppm for polyvinyl chloride dispersion resins, .excluding latex resins; mi' PPit it *11 *U*r polyvinyl corporated into a standard operating procedure, and made available upon re quest for inspection by the Administra owner or operator of that source may re quest that the Adminstrator approve an interim emission limit for that source. chloride resins, including latex resins, tor. The standard operating procedure Hie request is to be in writing and is to averaged separately for each type of is to include provisions for measuring be submitted to the Administrator within resin; or the vinyl chloride in equipment &4.75 six months prior to (date two years after (2) In polyvinyl chloride plants con m* (1250 gal) In volume for which an promulgation of these amendments). trolling vinyl chloride emissions with technology other than stripping or in addition to stripping: (i) For sources being used to process a grade or grades of polyvinyl chloride emission limit is prescribed in 5 61.65 (b) (6) (i) prior to opening the equip ment and using Test Method 106, a port able hydrocarbon detector, or an equiv alent or alternative methol. The meth The request is to include: (1) The reasons the source is in capable of being in compliance with the 5 ppm emission limit and data to support those reasons, and FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 106--THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1977 DTH 000115635 PROPOSED RULES 28159 (2) A suggested interim emission limit (f) The emission limits applicable to November 6, 1973). Part 163a (section and description of the methodology for both the new source(s) and the source (s) 336 of Pub. L. 94-482) contains those attaining that limit. at which emissions are being reduced to provisions applicable to the program of (b> Any owner or operator of a source balance the increase in emissions due to collection, analysis, and dissemination who has submitted to the Administrator the new construction are to be estab by the Commissioner of career Informa a written request for an interim emis lished by the Administrator in the ap tion and exemplary materials. To the ex sion limit in accordance with 8 61.72(a), proval for construction required by shall within 60 days of the date of the 161.08. written request meet with the Admin (Secs. 112 and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, istrator concerning the Information con sec. 4(a) of Pub. I,. No. 91-604. 84 Stat. 1683; tained in the request. The meeting is to sec. 2 of Pub. L. No. 90-148, 81 8tat. 604 (42 be open to interested persons, who are to be allowed to submit oral or written testimony relevant to compliance of the TJ.8.C. 1866c-?, 1867g(a>). Secs. 61.67 and 61.68 also Issued under nee. 114 of the Clean Air Act, sec 4(a) of Pub. L. No. 91-604, 84 Stat. 1687 (42 t7.S.C. 1B87C-9).) source. ^ (c) The Administrator will within ; |FR Doc.77-16572 Filed 6-l-77;8:46 am] tant the Commissioner proceeds by con tract, as authorized by section 335 of Pub. L. 94-482, the program will also be gov erned by the applicable provisions of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 41 CFR Chapters 1 and 3. TO the extent the Commissioner proceeds by grant, the ap plicable provisions of 45 CFR Part 100a (38 FR 30662, November 6, 1973) will apply. days of receipt of the written request required by paragraph (a) of this sec tion, notify the owner or operator in writing of approval or denial of approval of an interim emission limit. (d) If an interim emission limit is ap proved the notification is to include the level of the Interim emission limit, which may be the level requested or a more stringent one. (e) A determination to deny approval of an interim emission limit Is to set forth this specific grounds on which such denial is based. (f) Approval for any interim emission limit granted for any source under 61.72(c) shall expire three years from the date of Issuance. The owner or op erator may request an extension of ap proval for an interim emission limit or a lower interim emission limit. The re quest is to be in writing, is to be sub mitted within six months prior to a year DEPARTMS Sep HEALTH, EDUCATIION, AND WELFARE Office of Education [ 45 CFR Parts 163 and 163a ] CAREER EDUCAT ON AND CAREER DEVELl IPMENT Addition c 1 Programs AGENCY; Office of ducation, HEW. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The C immissioner of Edu cation, with the ap >rovol of the Secre tory of Health, Edu nation, and Welfare, proposes to add tw > new career educatlon programs as er acted by the Educa tion Amendments o; 1976. Part 163 contains provisions for & new one-year program of financial as; istance to States and other allottees for Fiscal Year 1978 to plan for the improi ement and develop (b) Comments and responses. In the Notice of Intent to Issue Regulations (published in 41 FR 51550 on November 22, 1978) the Commissioner requested public comment on a number Of specific issues In addition to Inviting expressions of public sentiment on any issue consid ered worthy of comment In the thirty days afforded interested persons in which to make their views known, 64 State and national organizations, associations, and agencies and 3 Individuals submitted comments. The comments on the specific issues listed In the Notice of Intent are summarized below: (l) Given the apparent overlap be tween the planning authorities contained In section 408(f) (2) of Pub. L. 93-380 and sections 331-34 of Pub. L. 94-482, how can the latter program be designed to avoid duplication of the former pro gram? (a) Should planning under sec tions 331-34 focus on career education before the expiration, date and Is to in ment of career educ ition and career de for Individuals beyond the secondary clude the information listed in | 61.72 velopment program i and activities for school level? (b) Should States bo re (b). (c), (d), and (e) are to apply. individuals of all ares. Part 163a con- quired to explain the relationship be 9. A new 161.73 is added to read as tains provisions for he Commissioner of tween activities carried out and proposed follows: Education to conduc a number of career tinder the two authorities? 61.73 OiFsel of emissions due lo new construction. information activitie 5 during Fiscal Year 1978, Including' the collection, analysis, and dissemination f Information per The commenters were overwhelmingly supportive of the view that duplication of activities conducted under both au (a) No owner or operator Is to con taining to career trends and options in thorities (Pub. L. 93-380 and Pub. L. 94- struct a new source which alone or In the United States ah well as exemplary 482) should be as limited as possible. combination with other sources being materials from the career education They clearly thought the regulation constructed at the same time results in field. Both these programs are new au should require a careful explanation of an Increased production rate unless he thorizations for which no funding has the relationship between these two plan demonstrates to the Administrator's sat been requested by tne Administration. ning efforts. It was suggested that plan isfaction that such construction will not cause an increase In vinyl chloride emis sions WMMn.f.kniiot any other source --DATES: Comments must or before July S, 1977. be received on ning activities conducted pursuant to Pub. L. 94-482 might properly extend and augment the planning already begun T which lillt to.thlf ADDRESSES: Comifrents should be ad- under Pub. L. 93-380. It was also noted (b) ReSldden tn prddnctlon rate is dressed to Sidney Ijtlgh, U.S. Office of by several commenters that State plan -t te i: > i, >n an allowable mechanism for attaining an offset in emissions <C> dei Is tbbe of emls- steil... Education. 7th anc D Streets, S.W., Room 3108-A, Wash;ihgton, D.C. 20202. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CON TACT: ning already being conducted under Title I add Title X of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 etseq.) should also be coordinated with planning efforts conducted pursuant to Pub. L. 94-482 be n- <d> Reducing emissions from an In Sidney High. 202- 145-2331. cause those titles deal with the continu hc r- >n 0. lo \n *c>r. terim emission limit to the standard for a source is not an acceptable means of achieving an emission offset. (e) In the application for approval of construction required by 8 61.07, owners or operators of sources subject to this subpart shall include, in addition to the Information required by 8 61.07. the fol SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (a) Organisation. Part 163 (sections 331-334 of Pub. L. ! 4-482), as set forth in this proposed rule, contains those pro visions which are applicable to the pro gram of Federal assi stance to States and other allottees to enable them to plan for the development of career education and ing education of adults and, therefore, are closely related ttf the concept of career education for Individuals of all ages. The proposed 8 163.6(b) attempts to avoid duplication by requiring the allottee to explain the relationship be tween planning activities carried out un der Pub. L, 93-389 and proposed under >nlie n't lowing Information: (1) The name, address, and location of any plant subject to this subpart which is located within 8 km of the pro career development (programs. The as sistance provided under this Part is also subject to the applicable provisions con tained in the Office of Education General Pub. L. 94-482 in the event that the plan ning Is addressed to the same age groups. On the related question of priorities between K-12 and postsecondary plan- .---v posed location of the source to be con Provisions Regulations published in 45 nlng, while the majority of commenters structed. CFR Parts 100 and 100b (38 FR 30654, Identified the need for'cooperation be- j / DTH 000115636 FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 41, NO. IO--THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1977