Document QNkY6L1V67931jm4kX8a8Npo

CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION January 17, 1984 To: From: Re: Vinyl Chloride Program Panel C. Stack NESHAP Federal ^Register Notice I enclose a recent Federal Register notice announcing EPA's conclusions following review of the current vinyl chloride emission standard. The announcement proposes administration changes and contains EPA's decisions regarding certain aspects of the standard. No major revisions are proposed. CMA 007804 Formerly Manufacturing Chemists Association--Serving the Chemical Industry Since 1872 2501 M Street. NW Washington. DC 20037 Telephone 202/887-1100 Telex 89617 (CMA WSH) 1182 Psderal Register / Vol. 50, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 9. 1985 / Proposed Rule* ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40CFR PsrtQI (AD-FW.-Z707-4) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant*; Vinyl Chloride AOSNCV: Envoronmental Protection Agency (EPAJ. actkmc Proposed rule and notice of public hearing. _________________ SMMiAftv: The current emission standard for vinyl chloride (VC) was promulgated under Section HZ of the Clean Air Act in 1976. A review of the technological basis and administrative aspects of the standard has been completed, and the conclusions of the review are presented in this notice The conclusions are the basis for this action which (l) proposes administrative and clarifying revisions to the standard and (2) announces decisions pertaining to other aspects of the current standard. '. This notice also withdraws proposed revisions to the current standard which were published in the Federal Register on June 2.1977 (42 FR 28154). If requested, a public hearing will be held to provide interested persons an opportunity-for oral presentations of data, views, or arguments oonoendng the proposed revisions to the current standard. DATtS: Comments. Comments must be received on or before March 25,1966. Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak *t a public hearing by Jamary 30 ltn. a pafclic hearing will be held an February 26, 1985 beginning at 9:00 a.m. Persons interested in attending the hearing should call Ms. Shelby Joumigan at (919) 541-5578 to verify that a hearing will occur. Request to Speak at Hearing. Persons wishing to present oral testimony must contact EPA by January 30.1965. Incorporation by Reference. The incorporation by reference of certain publications in these standards will be approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of the date of the final rule. ADoaiasaa: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate if possible) to: Central Docket Section (A130), Attention Docket Number A^-81-21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 401M Street. S.W., Washington. D.G 20460. Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing by January 30.1965. the public hearing will be held at EPA'Auditorium, comer of Highway 54 and Alexmder bit for relief valve discharges. (2) Drive, Research Triangle Park. North providing a compliance test procedure Caseliea. Persons interested in attending Md a specific emission limit for the hearing should call Ms. Sha&y operators who perform stripping Joumigan at (919) 541-5578 to verify that operations in reactors, and (3) specifying a hearing will occur. Persons wishing to requirements for leak detection and present oral testimony should notify Ms. repair programs for certain equipment in Shelby Joumigan. Standards VC service. Additional minor Development Branch (MD-13). US. ' administrative changes to the standard Enviromental Protection Agency. are being proposed and are explained Research Triangle Park, North Carolina later in this preamble. 27711, telephone number (919) 541-6576. Summary ofHealth, Environmental BackgroundInformation Document &ergy, and Economic Impacts. Since no The general findings of the review study major revisions to the standard are are documented in "Vinyl Chloride--A being proposed, the impacts resulting Review of National Emission from the current standard remain Standards". EPA-450/3-62-002 (NTO- generally unchanged. In 1975. it was PB 84-114354), available from Urn estimated that emissions of VC from National Technical Information fierrtca, plante producing ethylene dichloride 5285 Port Royal Road. Springfield, (EDC), VC monomer and polyvinyl Virginia 22161. The major tachtdol triloride (PVC) would be reduced from analysis for the review study is 91000 Mg/yr to 4,910 Mg/yr under the contained in a separate document which current standard, representing an may be obtained from the U.S.EPA emission reduction of 91.000 Mg/yT of Library (MD-35), Research Triangle VC (or 95 percent of VC emissions). Park, North Carolina 27711. telephone Emissions of volatile organic compounds number (919) 541-2777. Please refer to , (VOC) and EDC are also reduced under "Vinyl Chloride: Relief Valve Discharge the standard. Standard." EPA-450/3-85-002. for the technical document Docket Docket No. A-81-2L containing supporting information used in develop^ the proposed standard, is available for public inspection and The estimated risks attributed to exposure to VC from EDC/VC and PVC plants in operation prior to the current standard were 5.5 cases per year for liver angiosarcoma and 11 cases per year for all cancers. The risks attributed aopying betwaro 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.. to exposure to VC from sources under Monday threngh Friday, at EPA's the current standard have been Central Docket Section West Tower estimated to be 0.28 cases per year for Lobby, Gallery i. Waterside Mafl. 481M liver angiosarcoma and 0.55 cases per Street SW, Washington. D.G 20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for year for all cancers. In 1975, the estimated capital cost for copying. existing plants to meet the VC standard NSPUTMUWOSMAIMI COWTaCT. was $198 million, of which $15 million Mr. Robert E. Rosensteel or Mr. Leslie B. was for EDC and VC monomer plants Evaaa, (919) 50-5671, concerning and $183 million was for PVC plants. technical aspects of the industry end The EPA estimated that the annualized control technologies, end Mr. Fred cost (including capital amortization, etc.) Dimnddt or rite. Gilbert H. Wood, (919) to these plants to maintain the required 541-5578, concerning regulatory amission levels would be $70 million per decisions. The eddrese for theee year. contacts is Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13). US. Background Environmental Protection Agency, The VC standard was proposed on Research Triangle Perk. North Cambria December 24,1975 (40 Fr 59532). and 22711. promulgated on October 21.1976 (41 Fr tumoiKiriAirr wwoeeunowi. Summary of Revisions to Cuiarii Standard 4B569Mt ig applicable to plants profotebig EDC by the reaction of ' exygan and hydrogen chloride with ethylene, plants producing VC by any Revisions. Several administetef process, and plants producting one or changes are being proposed as asaoA more polymers containing any fraction of a review of the national emtarian of VC These plants are subject to standard for VC No major revisions am different requirements at numerous VC being proposed to the atandaad. As uAh amission points in the manufacturing the current standard for VC rim process. These requirements include revisions are being establisheddOr uaaMcal emission limits, equipment Section 112 of the Clean Air Ad-TW npedMntions, end work practices. significant administrative revtriaaa . Tte standard wit designed to include: (1) Reformatting the jmhmmlze the health risks associated 007S0-* CM* Fadaral Rfbtw / Vol. 50. No. 8 / Wednesday. January 9. 1985 / Propocd Rule* 1183 with VC by requiring reasonable control Regulating Airborne Substances Posing measures. As stated in the preamble te the proposed standard (40 Fr 50632, a Risk of Cancer.1* This proposal addressed several issues which were December 24.1975), there is no known central to the proposed VC threshold level of effects fee VC. amendments. It also articulated the Therefore, the only approach that would EPA's conclusion that Section 112 dose eliminate health risks associated with not express an intent to eliminate totally VC would ban its production and uaa. all risks from emissions of airborne This approach was not selected. Rather, an approach was selected to minimi carcinogens. The EPA's selection of the level of control for a hazardous air the health risks associated with VC by . pollutant emission standard would not use of reasonable control measure. be based on a policy that requires zero On November 19.1978, the '____ ..emissions of carcinogens. This policy is Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) consistant with the basis for other petitioned the United States Court of recent actions undsr Section 112. For Appeals for the District of Columbia example, standards for benzene from Circuit to review the standard. On March 24,1977. the EDF and the EPA coke ovsns and leaks from equipment components in benzene service are not moved to dismiss the proceedings on the baaed on a zero emissions policy but basis of a settlement agreement rather on a reasonable level of control requiring the EPA to propose which considers emissions and health amendments which would requite risks. increased efficiency of existing control The EPA'behaves it is not appropriate equipment require more stringent to leave the proposed amendments to control of new sources, and prohibit the VC standard in effect or to increases in emissions within the promulgate amendments baaed on the vicinity of an existing source doe to new proposed amendment!. Therefore, the construction. The preamble to the June 2,1977, proposal is withdrawn. As proposed amendments was to state that described in the following section of this the EPA's policy for regulating nodes, the EPA began a review study to carcinogens under Section 112 of the ' obtain additional technical data and Clean Air Act would include a general cost information and to detennie goal of eliminating emissions of whether otter amendments to the carcinogens end that the EPA would standard ere needed. New amendments initiate a review of the VC standard 3 developed at a result of the review _ yean after the promulgation of the amendments. study are propoead in this notice. On June 2,1977. the amendments were Review of VC Standard ' proposed (42 FR 29154). Many comments pertaining to policy, technological feasibility, and procedural aspects of the proposed amendments wen received Review of these comments indicated that additional technical data and coat information were required before the proposed amendments, or revisions of the proposed amendments, could be promulgated Early in 1990 the EPA began review of the VC standard. The primary purpoae of the review wea to investigate the adequacy and appropriateness of the standard in light of policy decisions, health studies, control technology developments, and enforcement and compliance experience which have occurred since the standard was first promulgated. The review consisted of a Meanwhile. the EDF filed a petition - screening study o (l) and new with the H>A requesting the control technologies. (2) sources not establishment of a comprehensive regulated by the standard, and (3) program for regulating airborne enforcement and compliance experience carcinogens under Section 1120# An since promulgation ofthe standard. Clean Air Act The espects of the RDF's Information and data evaluated during petition concerning the development cl this study were obtained through standards under Section 112 weea literature searches, plant visits, and similar to tboee proposed in the fima 3. > interviews with industrial 1977, amandmwrta to the VC steniwd. - papwentullvea andEPA regional - Bated on the afanttarityof thrprapeeed personnel involved in enforcement and amendmentaond the EDF*s roquettnd * survafflwine ofthe VC-emltting compnh--ise psogram for i agateNaff - industries. Theiafompatiaai and data ar* airborne oascinogene. tt# BPAbehevad presented ha a document thatmay be that it i Aa proposed VC amendments until after it section of this preamble. Decisions had acted car thsEDPs petition., baaed on this review are senmarizad in On October la 1979 (44 FR 59942). the. the next two sections of this preamble. EPA proposed "Policy end Prorsdoess Aa another aspect of the review of the for IdenUfrie* Amassing. and. - - , . VC standard, the RPA'sCarcinogvn Assessment Group reviewed new health studies that have become available since the standard was promulgated. This review included e study of the estimated carcinogenic strength of VC (the VC unit risk number) and focused on whether this number should be changed to reflect new informaton. Since the current standard was promulgated, new occupational studies have confirmed qualitatively that liver and brain cancer incidence are asociated with population exposure to atmospheric VC. However, none of these new studies have sufficient exposure information to warrant a refinement of the quantitative cancer risk estimate. Findings and Conclusions of the Review Study The findings end conclusions of the VC review study are presented in the following subsections. The first subsection discusses the need and basis for the current standard. The second subsection addresses the level of control required by the current standard The third subsection identifies source categories not covered by the current standard and evaluates the appropriateness of ngulsting these sources. (1) Need and Batit for Current Standard The current VC standard was established based on judgments concerning the coats and benefits of the standard to society. The standard is not designed to eliminate VC exposure risk entirely. Rather, it strike* a balance between public health protection and the cost of that protection. Date (evaluated before the cunent standard was established) strongly indicate that VC causes or contributes to the development of angiosarcoma, other cancers, and various nonearcinogenic disorders in people with occupational exposure and in with experimental exposure te VC Although no deee-tesponss data ire available at the concentrations of VC found in the ambient air. the EPA concluded when the standard was established that any atmospheric concentration of VC poses some public heath risk. To eliminate the risk of VC exposure entirely, a complete prohibition of all VC amiaeianrwauld be necessary. This wouldeequira the closure of the entire tadusfry end result in serious, adverse economic Impacts. Furthermore, the EPA coaduded at the time the current standard was established that a complete prohibition of all VC amissions would not ba desirable or necessary. The EPA CMA 007806 tIM / Vai. sa -No. / ebnciuded tkw is etcweffl) the beneficial uaee of VC protects ier wbitte desirable nriwritiias iae not lamtily available; (2) Ifie pOtoatial advarse health and aaMnatil impacts associated WHh ^ edbatitutee that have not been ItuUsflilj ttedfed (3) (he number of umtluywia. particularly infabrication industries. who would become at least temporarily unemployed: and t<3 the availability of control technology that la capable of substantially reducing emisaions of VC into the atmosphere. Although all EDC. VC and PVC plants have now incorporated VC --;-- controls, the maintenance of a Federal standard for VC ia still considered necessary, ^te VC standard contains requirements for the proper operation and maintenance of content devices and the proper implementation of work practices. These requiiemwda rtolect an appropriate balance between the need to minimtoa health risks and the and community impacts which would result from standards designed to redace risks to sero. Relative ta the initial control costs, the additional cost of maintaining and implementing the Federal VC standard is small. Nevertheless. if the Pedate! standard ia discontinued, these small coats may be sufficient to provide the industry with ah economic incentive for discontinuing the uee of proper control measures. Thus, the continued maintenance of Federal standards far the control of VC is necessary to enema a continuation of the current level of control. Additionally, the standard ia important for the onatenl of VC amissions from plants built in the hiIura.The Federal standard would be to i the cardnogenic risk to larger of the population, (ia 1971 whan the standard was origteally proposed approximately 4J million people fivad within aD-mile nda af EDC. VC and PVC plants.) Auooniinrfy. thB>Ahe* oondudad that the matoteaanne to-too rwislee of the standard, ta appropriate. (2) ofCaotiat ^. This aiibaertioa describes the atahm of thslsrhnnlngy baaed level afoantiol for sources covered by the uanmd standard, the promnt atatna at current VC standard to proosatud to Table 1. of the 10 1 I Ij.i. paowisn, wneaeeeaUBDrmwrw wav OOffltt. Comms epu___ ; eaMrnosvee/we - am its * 1.4 B MVMfa ****------ ~U inn 1 i us US STiJtSUS .. ffofi mm MCjaiMC toppm* Standard. Enrissitm sources covered by tUs standard include TOC purification and VC monomerformation and purification equipment monomer recovery eystems end Other equipment at PVC plants, and vents from ftq^tive emission capture systems. The standard lsfrased primarily on lhaobntrol of these endarionsby inckwaation or otter primary canted devtom and gparifim an amission limit OfIDperis permllBcn by volume {ppmv} ofVC averagedover ayhour period. 13m IDppmv standard applies to conteal devicebypass One of tiw 1977 would have requited the emiaetea limit from to to* The goal afthe proposed6 wee to enema that the atoa continued to approach a goal" fay (uqairing hnth tn aianMra the effarittraas to i of wasmit technology different from that analysed on the proposed that in order to aktedtaftipparr. a wutiui device ofamfindata toOflsel fluctuations. Cuiuruenters also a change froth 10to 0 ppmv woaUrsartt tetittie reduction in mass amtoatonteaf TC Firmly. commenters questionedIhe-rationale of the ~raro amission gnaT poficy. Because the proposed 5 ppmv emission tail was not baaed on data from a tinted technology different from thatnaafysedforths currant standard aad becanae 19 ppmvrepresents the lowest ladd of ctmtrol which has been oonsisteiitiy achieved, dm EPA withdrews tlai pnijaiaeil ITjjaii limit aad affinal the erfeiiial lO ppmv limit. If imA a wAimJngy liad Im. iA.nlitWi 0 could have'been the hasis of a revised standard. Ihswavar. during the roview study ao moteadvanced technology was identified, even though -- WehwtTM data mil solvent absorption control systems on existing pleats wenobtainsd. Although these date that inoioeratoro are Capable ( TM***i"g 10 ppmv, 10ppmv represents the lowest level of canted which has base aonaiatmtly achieved Based on this information, the EPA has concluded that thaw ia ao haprovad or nr* control tetdainlnpr that has bean demonstrated tn signlfifsally and ranriatmtly rmturr amteateaa to a level below that required by <w narrate steadarri Therafere no farther tochaoiagioal lavaatipatieu of the lOppaiv standard iapiaonad .CkftiUtriaSm Vdot Stmkad--OJ g/kg EDC The ownmt oxychhntoatioa vent standard afdtgaf VC par kg of EDC dees not require an add-on control devtee.instead, the limit caa be achieved at moat plants by continuing operating cenditiens aad at the rameinisg pleats thneagh proosaa modifications. At the time tits original standard wee written, incineration of ogpohiefiiMtina vent * investigated.! The prop oead ` an iaatafietioe dn<__ __________ ^ r____ control device. Hw me ofnaypn feed hi tea BDC oxycfalorinaton process decreases the CMA 007807 volame of inert wtidawi to (be vent stream and. corosqvsntly. the ooet for supplemental fuel requited fer incineration. Comment* received en (his proposed emendamat focused primarily on the high expensesmti large eaaigy requirements eaeoefotod srilh the production ef eauri. The review study ttiwilrfied no sjuntref technology for axycktoriaatfon vents at EDC/VC plants (bet had Ml t--i considered during the daveiopasent of the original standard. Additionally. the EPA reevaluated the east of retrofit incinerator controls and reached the seme conclusion drawn in the development ef the original standard. As before, the high cost eseocieted frith incinerating oxychlortaattan vents et extating EDC/VC plants makes thta level of control unreasonable. Than, the oanant standard of A2 g/kg EDC ia oonskforad still to be the meat reasonable level of control far existing oxychloriaation vents, in addition, the review study coacluded that aignifirant new construction or modification of EDC/VC plants is not expected. At this time, only one new EDC/VC fodlily is reportedly planned. (BF Goodrich has plana to construct aa EDC/VC facility in Convent Louisiana.) Oxycfalorination vents at new EDC/VC plants will be regulated by the proposed standards of performance for air oxidation processes (40 CFR Part 00 Subpart ill) or by the BAC^y LAER requirements of new source review regulations applicable in specific locations to a level comparable to that achievable through the use of incineration. Because the technologically achievable level of control is assured through the current requirements, the EPA concluded that investigation of additional control (i.a* incineration) was not required for oxychlorination vents. Reactor Opening--0.02g/kg PVC Product The current VC standard restricts emissions during polymerization reactor openings. The standard was baaed on reactor purging and on a reduction in the'frequency of reactor openings. An increased level of control was notproposed in the 1977 amendments. (The level of control provided by the current standard, 002 g/kg of PVC product reduces VC emissions to about IAS Mg per year for a modelPVC plant.) During the review of the standard, no techxaiogy was identified that would provide additional VC reductions beyond (be level of the current standard. Therefore, the EPA Is not investigating fiathei the control of reactor openings. Combined Sourcee AfterReam ' Stripping. The sources ef VC emissions covered mider the current standard include Mmf tasks, hjm centrifuges, storage silos, begging operations, and any sources foBuwtng tire shiupei. Control oftoese emissions is easedOn either stripping the PVC resin to e specified (bread mTrefo typefirefdual VC fore) (la* --ppm for saepsnrion, bulk, aahrtion; red latex roofer and i)or coni *11 sourew frihaxl^ the stripperwith mains" to be shipped to tower levels (La* 100 ppm for suspension. bulk. stdathm. red Imax reams; and HO ppm for dispersion reams). When the amemteents were proposed, the VA believed that some mSu could meet foe proposed limits; nhsires, lerether tripping tmteofogy oraat m produce the Main. adjustments to roam so--oritiana are made routinely, and aempiefety new rerins are rarely, if ever. made. As a result sf there uommmris, the EPA concluded that it is hapoasibla in many cases to ',i**iiyiitr,t bitwnre new and existing ririni red still have any wrote Purthar. the proposed smsndmsnts did not address whatJeveie of cretral aonld ba achieved by imprarad stripping technology. Per foaan raaaant, theEPA chose to avsluato whathar higher levels of control are achievable for ail resino, or only for ream --nmiyl classes of resins. The review study found foot min tripping technology haa imprawd afoot tho currant atandard teas promulgated, awl that soma precasaars can achieve lower resin residual VC lavsfo than those required in the original standard. In certain cases, some rasias can meet the more stringent levels specified in the previously proposed aareadmanla. However, other processors manufacturing resins of dflfarhig grades and characteristics can only marginally comply with the original atandaid. Because ofthe wide variation fo resin grades and characteristics, it cannot ba concluded that even (hough a particular resin made by one company can meat a particular level, any other resin or similar resins produced by another company could also meet that level Furthermore, in some caaea these processors maatfrfe the more stringent omits proposed previously are stripping foeae resins to this fow fcirel to offset emissions from thost resins which are more dffflcub to atrip. Without this ability to average tho amissions and reduction* among retina, these processors might not achieve the currant standard. Xkamptfng main grades known to be difficult to atrip ia not feasible because foeae ratios cannot readily be defined. Far the foregoing reasons. foaXPA ho concluded that there ia so demonstimted level of control which could significantly and consistently VC levels to resins to foeela below font required by the cannot standard. Therefore, the EPA is not Investigating further the control of An combined sources after stripping. Equipment Leake. Because little was known about leek detection end elWaation propains for control of qaipmastt leeks from components in VC imvirs tpvrifir reqnirimroU for thrar programs amen not fodudad in the current standard. Instead, each plant was required So fostifom and implement a fomtalinad leek detection and elimination program incorporating both a fixed-paint monitor end e portable monitor, riant spnrtfir programs were subject to approval by the AdmHabatar. Consequently, due to site-specific dfiEmrocro among plants, as well as vmiaifooa to leak definitions and mariteehfo practices, differences in control of sqmptnefo leaks among the plantshero tmuffed Since foe standard wan perorofoeted. the EPA has obtained control of equipment leaksfrom components to VC service. With the information obtained form the development of other standards, an effective leak detection and repair program baaed on nee of portable monitor can now be specified for eqfopuiunt careted by this program. The specific leek detection and repair reqoiremmrts me discussed in foe fUtotifosliallis KsvWoro section of this Relief Ytdre Dhdtarge Standard. *miV OfVC emissions covered by this standardhdnmdidiiiinfrom relief valves on pressure vessels, tnnsfer ini--, and other equipment in EDC/VC and PVC plants. The standard is based on emission control bjra combination of equipment and process modifications, and operational procedures, found in plants timing development of foe standard. An exact combination of modifleeflana and operational procedures was not specified. Instead, a performanea standard (La* an emission CMA 007808 1188 standard) was establiahad because it to sources covered by the YCftandard, unnecessary and that the current level was believed that different the EPA that none oftha of oontroi resulting from the EPA's combinations could be'equally effective _ additional sources identified in the standard and OSHA's standard is still in controlling relief valve discharges. review study warrant a Federal The current format of the standard prohibits all relief valve discharges , except emergent!? discharges. Emergency discharges are described as those which ooold not have been avoided by taking measures to prevent the discharge (Le,, those that are "nonpreventable"). Since the standard was promulgated, all planta have experienced tome releases. Many of these releases are considered preventable by the EP/L Baaed on visits to plants with good compliance histories, the EPA concluded drat a level of performance reflecting compliance with the current format of the standard through the combined effects of equipment process modifications and operational procedure* remains reasonable, during the review, no technological level of control was found that would provide for a more stringent standard. Therefore, the standard is still considered to reflect the appropriate towel bf control far these sources. However, as discussed in the Administrative Revisions section of the preamble, the EPA is proposing to revise the standard by setting limits for relief valve discharges in a different format Administrative Aspects of the Standard. Even though the EPA decided not to revise the level of control associated with the current VC standard, the EPA identified revisions to several administrative aspects of the standard. These revisions as well as those identified above, are discussed in the Administrative Revision* section of the preamble. (3) Review ofSources Not Previously ' Covered standard. taadfilh. Off-apedfication resins Miscellaneous SoueomofVC VC has been taken to Emissions. Miscellaneous sources an kndfiHa where the gaseous VC can be plants other than PVC end KDC/VC released. However, the current EPA plants that me VC as a mw material or standard intends that all resins. produce VC as an intermediate or by- - nffepadficatton resins, be product The EPA has identified tom etripped to reduce the VC emissions such plants, two of these plans* produce from sources downstream from the 1,1,1-trichioroethane, cm produces tripper, in order to clarify that stripping perchloroethyiene and trichloroethylene requirements also apply to the off- and the fourth plant produces pesticides. specification resin* before removal of (An additional 1,1,1-tridiieroethane unit landfills, tees* requirements are being was constructedat a fourth location but restated to exphdty address off- has reportedly never operated. Them specification resins. The EPA believes are no plans to operate in the fintnn.) that the level of control resulting from Review of VC emission sources at the the stripping requirements is reasonable; identified plants showed them to be well thus. VC emission requirements for controlled. Emissions of VC from these landfills are not being proposed today. plants are primarily from fugitive However, the EPA recognize* that VC sources and range from leas than 1 Mg/ may be emitted from hazardous waste yr to 14 Mg/yr per plant far general the landfills and to evaluating and may VC NE8HAP requirements for process regulate under die Resource vents and equipment in VC service an Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) being met at the miscellaneous sources volatile missions (including VC) from due to company policy oanaiderations landfills at hazardous waste disposal and State and local regulatory facilities. The EPA also recognizes that requirements. In addition, many of the ' VC has bean-detected in municipal equipment components in VC service landfills. Therefore, in addition to would be covered by standards of assessing VC emissions from hazardous performance for new souroea and waste disposal facilities, a (RCRA) standards for sources in nonattainment Subtitle D TASK FORCE has been ana*. Based on the investigation of formed which will eeeess all these sources, tha EPA concluded that environmental releases including air they are already relatively well- emissions from Subtide D facilities (a controlled end do not contribute category which includes municipal significantly to VC exposure. Far these landfills). reasons, additional requirements for miscellaneous sources of VC ere not Administrative Revisions being proposed at this time. As discussed in the Findings and PVCFobriootion Phnts. There are Conclusions of the Review Study section about 8.000 fabrication plants which of this preamble, the EPA identified take the resin produced by PVC plants several administrative revisions that are This subsection discusses the status of VC sources not covered by the current standard that were identified in the review study. For these sources, the EPA assessed whether a Federal standard was warranted. The EPA's and fashion it into intermediate or final products. Emissions from these plants are estimated to be about 0.0035 Mg/yr per plant in comparison to VC production plants (which typioally emit about 93 Mg/yr). PVC fabrication planta appropriate as e result of the review tody. Tha rationale for the proposed administrative revisions is presented in this section of th* preamble. These mistook indude: (1) Reformatting the j--i--iiai limit far relief valve assessment of these sources was based primarily on a quantitative analysis of VC emissions from these sources combined with a qualitative analysis of risk* associated with exposure to VC from theta sources. The Q*A considers these analytes to be adequate in place are small emitters of VC. If standards were developed for this category they would not result in reduced emissions because tha best control far thee* plants is to reduce tha VC level* in th* mains being processed by the fabricator*. Resin stripping beyond the level that discharges, (3) providing a compliance teat procedure and a specific emission Emit foroperators who strip to the reactors. (3) specifying requirements for leek detedton end repair program for equipment components to VC service, end (4) miscellaneous revisions. of a thorough quantitative risk process economics would dictate is assessment for purposes of determining already being done as a result of the Relief Valve Dischargee whether a Federal standard is EPA's current standard and OSHA's VC Background. Hie current format of the warranted for these sources. Because standard, baaed on the EPA's standard for relief valve discharges these sources are already relatively assessment of these sources, th* EPA allows only "emergency" discharges well-controlled and tha quantity of VC concluded that they do not contribute (La, discharges that could not be emission, and consequently, the risks significantly to VC exposure. Therefore, avoided by taking preventive measures). associated with exposure to VC from the EPA believes that the evaluation of Tha standard applies to all pressure these sources, are smalt in comparison control* for PVC fabrication plants is relief devices on pressure vessels. CMA 007809 / VoL 5*. No. S / ly, lanuary g, MB } Rules 1387 transfer lines, and ether equipment in EDC/VC and PVC plan*. The amtrri techniques considered as Ike of the standard involve a combination of equipment Modifiestines, process modification, rad s^seliiiiwi procedures. An enact combination of modifications and npantiinnl procedures wee net aparifiad in the current standard; rather. a performance standard (La, an "*"" standard) was established became different combinations of the and procedures were expected to be squally effective in corUmfiing relief valve discharges. Based on 6 years of enforcement end compliance experience, the EPA has concluded that the relief discharge standard has resulted im (1) Significant reductions in the frequency and quantity of VC discharges from relief valves. (2) significant nee of agency resources to evaluate individual discharges for prevenubility. and (3) uncertainty on the part of producers regarding whether they comply with the standard. Additionally, the EPA leaned tome of VC and WC believe that this part af the current standard applies only to discharges through safety relief valves and that discharges through other pressure relief devices, such as rupture disks or manual or automatic vent valves, are not covered. This interpretation is not compatible with the intent behind the current standard. To provide more efficient enforcement by decreasing the burden of individual preventability assessments on thn EPA. and to provide a better understanding to plant operators of the goal of the standard, the EPA ia proposing to reformat the standard for relief valve discharge* and to define the emission points covered by this standard to include appropriately all pressure relief devices. As discussed mete completely in the following sections, the EPA is proposing to change the format ofthe numerical limits in die standard to reflect the number of discharges that occur from those plants complying with the format of the current standard. The EPA found in the review study that efforts by all EDC/VC and PVC producers to comply with the standard are reflected in their prefunnancs tin terms of size and frequency of discharges) since the standard want into effect In general, a reduction in the reported frequency and size of relief valve discharges by PVC producers has occurred since MTt. A bathe* decrease . in relief valve dkchmgm by the PVC 1981. Performance by ton EDC/VC industry axhibitod a laaa mislead trend of decreased lisJiaijae ms* the Ci iiUsUam^lll^^Wtn b DUV drop in i standard *rout bio affcat t and quanffty of raflef vnhre dachatges slighdy er rwmfrmffnlatively constant OuiaiiffBeahforNaamriealLtmftr. In ididbg fts proposed named limits, EPA first evaluated in detail the recent performance ftfdl teliBS) offive PVC plants rad nan H)C/VC plant These(daHta woodmen famed an discussions wHb SPA Regional Office personnel and Industiy end ware intended to represent plants with good relief valve discharge records. In general tin ffA'r evahmtfcm of those plants todiestoa tfrafrack baa adopted the combination of equipment, operational pruceduiea and attitude toward pievention of relief discharges intended by the caiiem standard, and that their rasutting performance is consistent with compliance with (he entrant standard. The EPA's evaluation found that a few discharges may continue to occur from soma plants that comply with the standard. This observation is consistent with the expectation held by the EPA whan the standard was written. fit order to revise the standard in terms of numerical limits representing compliance with thn current format of the standard, this evaluation separated PVC and EDC/VC plants. For plants, relief valve discharge performance data were further separated by source (reactor vs. noamactor) mid by resin type The EPA than reviewed the performance of 2fi additional PVC plants and 13 additional EDC/VCplants. The EPA reviewed this large set af plants to ensure that the level of perfesmance demonstrated by tbs evaluated plants could bo achieved by all PVC and EDC/ VC plants. The numerical limits piaasated hi the Findiags section of this preamble ere based an an evaluation ef the number of demonstrated performance lore! associated with cempKancs with tfaa Format fovAlumwicaf IJmMs. The EPA vhritad the fvo PVC plan* evaluated in detail. Aa expected, tha EPA found dWwannas in thn operational piomdama associated with control of relief valve discharges ef each of the plants. Furthermore, no exact relationship was faand between Aw effectiveness of specific hardware Heme and speratiesial piecedarea md prevention of dtochaigao. la As VA'i fudgnmt tha mrione tambbietinna of hardware and operaBanal procedures implemented by each of the plants along with the attitude* adopted toward piaseiiBng relief valve discharges represent the typos at control measures that (ha standard intended, h particalar. the EPA concluded that (he tow freqtkncy.sf dfadmige* by the visited plant* was indicative of their degree of effort to preventrvitrf valve discharges. Consistentwith the goal of this pieposad revMoa. the EPA decided that an aitamatta nnmerical emission limit based on performance resulting under the entrant standard could be revised in a format (hat would be easier to understand by enforcement and industry personnel Tha EPA investigated two basic ways of expressing relief uaWe discharge performance hr PVC One format is based on maae emissions, for example, the pounds at VC discharged per million pounds of PVC produced (lb VC/MM lb PVC). Baaed on e review of methada need by industry to detaimine tha amount of VC discharged from relief valves, tha EPA was anahia to identify a sufficiently accurate method for measuring discharge quantities from relief valves. At present producers are required only to estimate discharge quantities for reporting purposes. Demonstsntion ef rmapliaare with a lb VC/MM lb PVC limit would require producses In measure the emount of VC rllsrhatgari during an incident Because a suitable wifturamnnt method was not identified, the EPA decided aot to redefine safief valve discharge performance by PVC pleats in a lb VC/ MM lb PVC format. Another format k baaed an the frequency its. number per unit time) of discharge from occurrences. No method for measuring the amount of VC discharged fremretief vulvas k needed beoanae only the oocunenoe of a release is requkad for this format The occmrmme of a dkdwrge can be determined by anmitortsg process paramnton m wkl as inspecting relief valve performance reports. Hum, of the two bask ways ef expressing relief valve performance (hat were considered. AiffA aalected a format based on dm frequency ef Aaehaiges. Baaed on this decision, the EPA then considered hew die format would be applied tePVC end EDC/VC plents. At PVC plants, the frequency of discharges from polymerization reactors and associated proceaa equipment may be related to die foci that a batch process k used to produce mast typer of PVC. For batch PVC production processes, the opportunity far disdisiges k related to the nambereftimes a new CMA 007810 1188 Fudaral Register / Vol. 50. No. 6 / Wednesday, January 0.IMS / Holes polymerization batch is initiated. Expressing relief valve discharge performance For these plants with a discharge-per-batch format accounts for variations among plants in the number of batches produped. The EPA selected 100 polymerizettonbetchas as a convenient basisfor expressing relief valve discharge performance by PVC plants with batch production proceases in a discharge frequency formal. Further, the EPA noted that the ability of batch PVC producers to limit the discharge frequency may be different for reactor and aonreactor discharges and that reactor discharges may vary by resin type at any plant Consequently, relief valve discharges by individual PVC plants (except for continuous solution process plants) were classified according to type.of discharge (i-ereactor vs. nonreactor) end the reactor discharges were separated by resin type. Nonreactor discharge sources at PVC plants include blowdown tunke, transfer lines, and storage vessels. Because usage of this equipment is also related to some extent to the frequency of batch polymerization operations, the relief valve discharge performance by nonreactor sources in PVC plants with batch production processeswas also examined on the basis of number of discharges/100 batches. Unlike the batch process used to produce other PVC resin types, the solution PVC process is continuous. Thus relief valve discharge performance for the solution PVC process cannot be expressed on a frequency per batch basis. Instead, the relief valve discharge performance associated with the solution production process can only be expressed In terms of the total number of discharges (reactor and nonreactor) per year. Similarly, the EDC/VC production process is not a batch process, but is continuous. Thus, relief valve discharge performance by EDC/VC plant! also cannot be expressed on a frequency per batch basis. Moreover, the EPA was unable to detect e direct relationship between discharge frequency and VC production at EDC/VC planta. Thus, the EPA decided to define reietf valve discharge performance for EDC/VC plants on the basis of a total number of annual dischargee. Findings. PVC Reactor Discharges. Suspension resins account for the highest percentage of total PVC production. The remaining PVC production is in the form of bulk, dispersion and solution resins. (A small amount of latex resin is produced by a process closely related to the dispersion process.) Examination of relief valve discharge performance associated with production of suspension apd bulk . .. period. Recant performance suggest* resins sndioaies that reactordischarge . (bet peeentaMs discharge* have been frequency generally is either ime than j riimtaatad-et this plant. With the 0035 disrhargre/MO batches oris much ccepttataof a potential emergency greeter. (Recant reenter dhmherge " at this plant ere not anticipated. with poorer psrftamance heels reared L EDC/WDischarges. During the between 0058 and OlOllherbefuss/lOO rvview stady.fbe EPA evaluated batches.) Further examinetlnn olrelief perfonnance by one EDC/VC plant in valve discharge performance by ' detail. This piwit experienced about four suspmsionresin prodnoere iaqiaates ~ dischargee that could be considered that only obs plant experienced more than 4 discharges per year during the , emergence. Recent (1961 to 1963) relief valve diadiaige performance data for period from 1081 to 1M3. tefoimance by this plant also exceeded0035 . etherEDC/VC producers indicates an ' industry range of 0 to 7 discharges/yr. discharges/100 hatches. . The reactor discharge frequency - associated with dispersion and latex production la typically aero. However, for a typical dispersion or latex resin process with a low production rate (Le~ number of polymerization batches per year), a single emergency reactor discharge in a given year would be equivalent to a discharge frequency of about 0035 discharges/10D batches. information obtained from planta during the reviewIndicated that where applicable, similar types of equipment process modifications and operational procedures used to control relief valve dtedtaigea from PVC planta also are aaed at BBC/VC pants. The EPA examined discharge* by the EDC/VC producers who exceeded four dischargee inone or more years since Nonreactor Discharges. Nonreactor discharge frequencies by PVC plants typically were either less than 0025 discharges/100 batches or were much er. (Recent nonreactordischarge 1961 and found that one or more of the discharge at each plant were preventable.Elimination of the preventable discharge* would allow each of these plants to reduce their gendet reflecting poorer rmance than the 0025 levelTanged annual discharge frequency to four or fewer. sen OOM utd-0225 dischsrges/100 Summary afNumerical Limits- Based batches.) Furthermore, with the on the study of current relief valve exception of two producers.no more ' discharge performance by PVC and than three discharges per year were EDC/VC planta. the EPA la proposing reported from nonreactor eomces In that the following numerical limits for PVC plants during the period from 1961 relief vafoe discharges be edded to the to 1963. ' stendardrEach discharge causing an Bach of the five PVC plants that the exceedence of any numerical limit EPA evaluated in detail wua among presented below would be considered a thoee achieving 0036 discharges/lOO batches or leas in each of the reactor violation without regard to whether any individual discharge wea preventable. discharge categoriesend 0.025 discharges/100 batches or loss in the nonreactor discharge category. Tbs EPA examined individual discharge incidents for the PVC producers whdee recent performance has exceeded 009 disehargee/100 batches te one or more of the reactor discharge categories or who exceeded 0025 discharges/100 batches and 3 dlsAsrgesper year from nonreactor sources, hi every eaee. the EPA identified one or mote dischargee that were preventable. KHnrination af these preventable dischaigestodioatos that these producers should have achieved discharge frequanctae -r- comparable to (be five PVC pkntsthat. the EPA evaluated in detail - ,, Solution PVC Process. Discharge frequency from both reactor and Campliance Provisions. The EPA nonreactor sourcesby the single.plant recognizee that ell plants may producing PVC by the solution process experience an unavoidable relief valve was aero daring the period HU to 29B. discharge Incident at some time. Previously, this plant experienced as Examination af relief valve discharge many as two discharges kj-M month . 1 performance by PVC plants with low CMA 007811 Federal Register / Vol. 8ft No. 6 / `Wednesday, frnoary 9, MBS /Jftpbggfl Rules 1189 discharge frequencies indicated that planta with the lowest polymerization batch frequencies typically experience about one discharge in a 12-month period. The EPA conaiuded that for most plants a 12-month reporting period (rolling every 6-monthe) was both suitable and appropriate for determining compliance with the proposed numerical limits. For plants producing only a small amount of a particular resin (La., low number of polymerization batches), an apparent violation of the standard may result from a single discharge occurrence during a 12-month compliance period as described below. For a PVC plant producing a single resin type to meet die numerical limit for reactor discharges (i.e.. 04138 discharges/100 batches), it must experience and average of no more than one discharge per 2358 polymerization batches over the preceding 12-month period. An average reactor discharge frequency exceeding one discharge per 2,858 batches would be a violation of the standard. However, if the plant made less than 2.858 polymerization batches over the 12-month compliance period, a single discharge occurrence would be an apparent violation of the standard (Le the discharge frequency per 100 batches would exceed 0.035). Because insufficient batches were made, the reported discharge frequency per 100 batches would not correctly reflect the performance by that plant in comparison to other plants complying with die standard. In rectifying the undue compliance burden posed on plants with small numbers of batches by the discharge/100 batch format and the selected 12-month compliance period, the EPA is proposing to add additional provisions affecting the number of batches used to calculate the discharge frequency. For PVC planta producing less than 2,858 batches of a particular resin, the minimum number of 2358 batches will be used when determining compliance with the numerical limits. PVC plants producing more than one resin type must demonstrate compliance separately for reactor discharges occurring from different resin production processes. Only the relief valve discharges and polymerization batches specific to each resin type are considered for determining compliance. However, for determining compliance with the standard for nonreactor discharges, the total number of polymerization batches (regardless of resin type) are counted. To determine the number of polymerization batches produced for purposes of assessing compliance, the following guidelines apply. A "polymerization batch" consists of each operating history, relief valve discharge sequence of chmging VC and other performance by certain plants is materials to the reactor, heating reactor, expected to be much better than the contents, polymerization of reactor respective limits. For example, some contents, and removal (Le- blowdown) new suspension resin PVC plants of reactor contents. Any batch that is product about 5, 000 batches during a aborted following charging of VC to the 12-month compliance period. One end reector is nonetheless counted as a two discharges at one of these plants polymerization batch in assessing during a compliance period would result compliance. For PVC planta producing 1m discharge performance of 04)2 and bulk resin, a stogie "polymerization MB discharges per 100 batches, batch" includes both prepoiymerixation respectively. The second discharge end postpolymerization reactor daring the compliance period would be operations. a violation of the proposed 0.035 Discharge frequency can be recorded disdiatges par 100 batches limit despite in two ways. Discharge frequency can the fact that the Bret discharge would be recorded on the basis of diachiuge result in performance well below the events (involving discharges from one or limit These type* of plants were more relief valves) or on individual considered in selecting the proposed relief valve discharges. In most cases, limits and reporting procedures for relief plants currently report discharges valve discharges. The result that plants individually when they occur from relief of tiiia type moat perform well below the valvee on separate equipment However, limits in the standard in order to be in certain equipment such as . oampliance is consistent with die polymerization reactors that are proposed limits, which were selected to quipped with multiple relief valves may represent an upper boundary on the experience discharges simultaneously number of allowable discharges from mote than one relief valve. Most intended by the standard. The EPA plants currently report such multiple expects that plants using the best discharges from a single place of technology and procedures should be equipment as a single discharge. Thus, able to perform better than the proposed the performance levels serving as the limits. basis for the numerical limits represent Reporting Requirements. The current individual discharges and not multiple standard for relief valve discharges discharge events except when they requires producers to report discharges occur from a single piece of equipment within 10 day* of the incident. The EPA For determining compliance with the is proposing to eliminate the 10 day numerical limits, discharge frequency is reporting requirements end to require to be recorded on the basis of individual . reporting of all discharges on quarterly discharges except when simultaneous basis. Although compliance is to be discharges occur from relief valves on determined on a semiannual basis, the same piece of equipment. quarterly reporting of discharge* is A relief valve discharge in considered appropriate because violations of the to be any venting through.a pressure relief device to prevent or relieve an standard may occur well before the end of tire 6-month period. Quarterly overpressure condition from equipment reporting notifies enforcement personnel in VC service that results tn emissions of VC directly or indirectly to the of potential violations and violations that have already occurred prior to the atmosphere. In determining whether or not a relief valve discharge results in missions to the atmosphere, the controlling factor is the ultimate disposition of tits gases. Venting to end of the compliance period so that corrective actions can taka place sooner following the end of the compliance period. Information to be included in the semiannual report for individual relief manifold or header system that valve dischargee is to be reduced to ultimately discharges to the atomaphsra include only the date, time, source, constitutes a relief valve discharge. IT cause and estimated amount of each the manifold or header dischargee gases discharge occurrence. Tha semiannual through a control device meeting the 10 report will also inlcude information on ppmv VC emission limit the venting complianca status. does not constitute a relief valve In addition, plants will now be discharge. required to maintain relief valve Por purposes of reporting compliance discharge records for 3 years, because of status with the limits, plants will be the potentially significant increase in the required to calculate their discharge per time period between s discharge batch frequencies with sufficient occurrence end reporting of the precision to demonstrate that discharge. performance is either equal to. below of Effective Datn ofRevi$ion. The in excess of the limits. Based on currant standard as written will remain 11 CMA 007812 Foder*l / Vnl.fiQ.No-A J in effect for relief valye *- 1 j i nwl 'flie proposed revisions am promulgated. The proposed revisions do not change ihaatandanfsoripaal intent and are intended nfy to sot limits to facilitate compfiepoe enforcement *Hnw-^ni-- fh* standard will oacfinne to be enforced until the reviaioas am promulgated. Regional offieem T ' ' " mw- aonbtuk roain pmrinnemwith rpetoer resin stripping npaTetintw ami ta Sirippimg-w-toaotorCmtfdiamnt felt - Procedure main rreidnalandreectorapantogtow Hie teat awfhod formsaaariagreactor opening loaaes was developed tor resin stripping operations that taka place in vessels separate from the reactor. Serna PVC plants, including allbulk ream manufacturers, however, do not aae are added Ingafliar to givenm^al allowableVC content from thaw two sources. The measured mainresidual VC and the cdhadated reactor opening loss would then be addedtogether, and averaged over a"M4ourperiod separate strippers to remove -- VC from the resin produced, inetemt, these (Hants strip VC from die product resin in the reactor (postpolymerieatiea reactor in the cate of bulk resin according toreetn type.IfthaMrour average meets the combined standard, the plant would ba considered tohe In compliance withboth the stripping and the reactor opening lost reqtAmenis. producers]. For plants with reactor main Leak Detectiom mmdA+mr stripping operations, the concentration of VC in the reactor vapor space, as measured in accordance with the current standard, exceeds the BJDOgJkg Background. The cutrent standard acquires taptomestifttonofa formalized puigime far detection dtleeksfrom of PVC requirement. The high concentrations result lorn VC """f' diffusing from the resin into the vapor space during the period following completion of the stripping operation (normally occurring under a vacuum that must be broken before (he reactor can be emptied] and before the reactor is completely emptied of PVC rosin. equipment to VC service mid allmbrntiroi-Oftoewtoshs-Tbe . formalised piuyaat indudes e mriltipeintSrcdetector end s portdHe volatile srgaidccompoundfOC] If wi Thu Used indai wsnaillminj . ijrrlm continuously uniters VC conceutosttons in the work ares ereend equipment to VC eervice mu) soaads an According to the Federal notice of promulgation of the current VC standard (M FR 46SB3. October*11078), any VC escaping from the resin after it has been stripped to acceptable levels is not intended to be Musut as part of the reactor opening loss. However, the current standard did not indude in the measurement method an acceptable pwwaibedlevtLTW poriOhls monitor is reed independently to screen todtoiduri equipment components far toafca. Uatiier th-- aperifyfeg the numberofpotato to be monitored, too aenMvMwpf toe meitipetot dWmSm, the VC conoentratiimriurt-rietiootss a trek. and the retiosn to be taken to repairtasks. method for determining what part of tiw VC in the vapor space has escaped from the resin after stripping la r-nmpUwA The current standard allows bulk tosutmtUfaapian to toelFAlur resin producers to caicidate reactor' opening low emissions from the postpolymerization reactor baswi oa the number of reactor evacuations, tile vacuum ioviovad and the enlne ofgas in theroacton. Feriamhulhroda producers with reactormain stripping operation!, cafcuiatioa ofaaactor opening losa emissionsferooro complicated due to the presence ot required to retookdata on baehpnMri concentrations of VC tadtffennt ana of tha giant to aae to detoratoh*toe VC concentration that afroaid ha deagantod as indicating a leak.Mans, timrefreb were tailored byeach piant and roviawad fry dm tha EPA Begireai ' Offices. The EPA fmod to the review rtadr that diflarrooee to leak detection and water vapor in the reactor vaporapace. elimination programs exist among PVC Currently, waivers of testing for and EDC/VC production planfa and producers with nonhutk rosin stripping miaceUanoouB aoercaa anil that eke- operations in the reactor have bean specific differences iociada varitotorefe granted one caw-by-caw basis fiy toe leak definitions end mooitoring EPA Regions, typically with the practices. Thedffinjtirei sad monitoiiag provision that residue) VC an practices, aleag withrepairproBtioax anlayzed on etch hatch. A variety of are primary hifluancw antheooe^l - [Standard we* pum^toidaWftta obtained mWaDiyUHiP TO ulg utotiel dtemUaluufrom equipment letox.tfcsed onthis information end the review of the leak detection and elimination(dans being implemented to cotitud pntisaions ofVC, the EPA decided specify leak detection and tepah isqetromamsforcertain equipment component* in VC wrvice. Although Ufimnstion obtained from development of other standards indicates that a routine leak detection and repairprogram with a portable monitor can be an effective emission reduction technique without the requirement of a fixed point monitoring system, the EPA concluded that fixed, point monitoring systems already in placehave uses dial justify their retention to the current standard. In particular, fixed-point monitors allow for quick detection of TMtnn large VC leaks that aught otherwise go undetected until the next routine portable monitor screening. The EPA recognizee that existing fixed-point monitoring plans wifi need to be reviewed in fight of Iks leak detection and repairreqiarnnmnts being specified at this time. Tha complexity of existing fixed-point monitoring plana, to tanas of number and distribution of monitoring points, varies greatly among plants. Consequently, some plant owners or operators may went to alter the number of points thatam monitarod and the distribution ofmonitoring locations to better ooatpfemret tha specified portahia momtaring raquiwmwuta ftoch changes to aviating fixed-point monitoring plana will ha allowed providtog they da notaker the plants ability to datart large VC Uak*. The propeeed revisions are primarily liilsnilinl la atoiiilaiiliieiM^nl of VT doing this, the ERA is concerned that eviattog affiwtiwa pleas apt be Inappr^riotefydunged. The proposed revisions toctoda provisions tiiat allow plants with existing effective plans to effectivenew of thoirpiana without additional mnreniiiimti Acooedtoaty. tha OA roquas* naatoi from induShy sapro--tuttvsa rsuscuntieg tot specific effeds of qpwrffytog leak CMA 007813 Federal Register / Vol. 60. No. 6 / Wednesday, January 8. mbs / ftapueed Rules 1191 detection and repair requirements on effective existing plans. Leak Detection and Repair Requirements. The EPA established leak detection and repair requirements (40 . CFR Part 61 Subpart V) for certain equipment in volatile hazardous air pollutant (VHAP) amice on June 6, 1984. These requirements were established in conjunction with the final standard for benzene equipment leaks. The requirements of Subpart V generally apply to pumps, compressors, pressure relief devices, sampling connection systems, open-ended valves or lines, valves, flanges and other connectors, and product accumulator vessels. These requirements reflect the level of control that the EPA considers reasonable for equipment covered by developing standards for VHAP. The EPA is thereford proposing to add VC to the list of substances covered by Subpart V. Subpart V would substantively affect only valves and flanges in VC service within this industry. All other equipment in VC service are already required by the VC standard to comply with equipment and work practice standards consistent with those in Subpart V. For example, pumps and compressors meeting the dual mechanical seal requirements of the current VC standard will be in compliance with the Subpart V requirements. In addition, the sampling connection systems requirements of Subpart V are essentially the same as the current standard. The use of rupture discs for controlling leaks from pressure relief devices, as required by the VC standard, is consistent with the "no detectable emissions" requirement included in Subpart V. Requirements for controlling leaks from pressure relief devices are described in more detail later in this section. Thus. Subpart V will affect primarily valves and flanges in VC service by requiring a specific monitoring schedule, leak definition and repair provisions. Compliance with the provisions of Subpart V will be used to determine compliance with the portable monitor leak detection and elimination requirements in the current VC standard (40 CFR Oi.6S(bX>X10). end therefore, the current standard is being revised to reflect this change. However, process units within VC and WC plants in which the percentage of leaking valves is equal to or less then 28 percent ere considered by the EPA to be effectively controlling VC emissions from leaking valves. For these process units, the existing leak detection and elimination program will continue to be allowed while the percentage of leaking valves is 2J) percent or less. Any process unit in that achieves that standard may be which the percentage of leaking valves applied. Section 112(eX2) defines the is found to exceed 28 percent will be following conditions under which it is required to comply with the provisions not feedible to prescribe or enforce sn of Subpart V. emission standard: (1) If the pollutants The Subpart V requirements for cannot be emitted through a conveyance valves are based on a leak detection designed and constructed to emit or and repair program that requires (1) capture thqpollutant or (2) if the monthly monitoring for valves in gas/ application ofmeasurement vapor and light liquid service, (2) an .methodology is not practicable due to initial attempt at repairing these valves technological or economic limitations. within 8 days after detection ofa leak. Section ll2(eXl) allows that ifan (3) repair of leaking valves within 15 emission standard is not feasible to days after detection of the leak unless presetIbe or endorce, then the EPA may repair would require a procsss unit istsad promulgate a design, equipment shutdown, and (4) repair of valves work practice, or operational standard, during the next process unit shutdown or combination thereof. after repair is delayed until a process The EPA has reviewed the design, unit shutdown. Valves found not to leak equipment work practice and far 2 successive months can be operational requirements contained in monitored quarterly until leaks are the current VC standard. The only detected. Monitoring of equipment to sources covered by the current standard detect leaks is conducted in accordance with one of the requirements for which a with Method 21 and a leak is defined as performance standard (i.e~, an emission a measured organic concentration equal standard) is feasible are pressure relief to or greater than 10000 parts per devices. As discussed below, the EPA is million by volume (ppvm). For a setting a "no detectable emissions" limit complete description of the leak for these sources. For the other sources, detection and repair requirements, see the EPA is reinstating those Subpart V (46 FR 23406, June 6.1964). requirements as set forth in the current In addition. Subpart V contains standard. standards for other types of equipment The EPA selected the use of rupture (e.g-, flanges, and open ended valves or disks as the basis for the current lines). Standards for flanges include standard for pressure relief devices. monitoring with a portable instrument Whan the integrity of ruptures disks is under prescribed procedures within 5 maintained, equipment leaks through the days of observing evidence of a relief device are eliminated. Rupture potential leak by visual, audible or other disks normally maintain their integrity maans.'Open^iided valves or lines are unless an overpressure occurs. After the required to be capped, blinded or fitted occurrence of an overpressure, with a second valve. These provisions replacement of the rupture disk once are not expected to significantly affect again eliminates equipment leaks of VC producers with these types of equipment through the pressure relief device. in VC service. The equipment and Foremission control techniques that procedures employed as normal practice . eliminate equipment leaks, such as the by these producers or as e result of die use of rupture disks, a "no detectable current VC standard are expected emissions" limit is feesible. An generally to ensure compliance,with instrument reading of less than 500 parts Subpart V. per million by volume (ppmv) above a Pressure ReliefDevices. The EPA background concentration based on proposed end promulgated the work practices, equipment design and operational standards in the current Reference Method 21 can be used to indicate whether equipment leaks have been eliminated; that is, that the standard before explicit legsl authority existed in Section 112. These equipment has "no detectable emissions." requirements are found in 161.85(b). In The "no detectable emission" limit August of 1977, Congress amended - would not apply to discharges through Section 112 to allow the use of these the pressure relief device during requirements. Section 112 of the Clean overpressure relief. (These releases are Air Act requires that an emission covered under || 0184(a) and 61.65(a).) standard (Le,, a performance standard) The standard would specify, however, be established for control of a that the relief device be returned to a hazardous air pollutant unless, in the state of "no detectable emissions" Judgment of the EPA, it is not feasible to within 5 days after such a discharge. prescribe or enforce such a standard. An The standard would further require an emission standard allows for some inMl test to verify the "no detectable flexibility in complying with the emissions" status of the pressure relief standard, since any control technique - devices and a test after each over 007814 / 1M. X Mm / pressM chaag* standard Bud on dienmiCns hath tha-EPA regional pnrunnnl mgnsdiqg experience th VC standard. fhe]3!Alt.pKpasiqg MYBtll jddiBoill agnnilrntivo revisions bat would frcibtate compliance loisnfoneoeit efforts associated with be current tmAini Ihrse revisions represent minor to the standard. A brier description ef these administraflve revisions and be bssis for making them follows. Definition ofloak. Exhaust Cos tad Relief Vain DhUliuige. Functional drfinitions of "tert"1..'"gxhansl ga~ ant "reliefvalve tfischary'*' are being added to the -standard to dartfy the apphcabOftyriffte standard to esdiof these types of VC emlisiuus.Poring their review ofenforcement and wsglimcfi experience since the 1 standard was promulgated, the BA discovered eevenrt ceses df enulusimi over the intended meaning sf W", "exhenet gee* and 'YdHef valve discharge." These three distinct categories ofVC eaiieriens sue Wing defined in the revised Stmtbail te provide oompKence and Meshy petasnaal with a clear asrtentfUmdteg dl odui part ef the standard applies to any given dischmge of VCvmisriene *s theotaamspbere. Dsfakiai offflJCW VC Purification, tin the post, acmealarm have miiiBtepaNd ariuite i purification 4 processes with ths resah that ammmsas cowered if theataadaeri may sot imva been conttallad.Hte drfiusfensof "BiC poriiicatiaa" aad 'VCparificstiMTaas being revised -to clarify that ait purifteatiaa atpafet hdiasviag me and WC ianaatteo 4a rqpdatioa trader rim camteeMriml 10ppmrjiumdard. Tomolmifywg revisions i regulations to improve "-l*Tr`u'Tg ef the applicabilityof thte past nfthe standard. First, although the teat method for nmiyUMw wnib the 10 flpmir stsndnrd speriBas thel tin average saanlls fiaai frees l-bowr suppling raaa bejuedL AteAJuur avaragipg period3a ant qperifiad in the 10 ppmv -requirements. .Verifying that i--`-irfnnr ~sy net arnsad ifljqimii wiiai a 3-hour avacagiqgperiod darifiaa that instantanaaua compliance wadi the U ppmv standard is ant cn Jntendad requirement. Moreover, specificationoJ applies te gaeateeM requirements, tndudiag anymatesai devioadfpaaeateaMM. ^oteaasaaii fornaksdaSiiy; Sha VC aaatete te 10 ppmv< tha requirement nteaesteisatenot intendad<ajndiihit Ihs naaimaa practice ofcoateteing taia ormom headerisadiqgSDamteald*tece. According to tha reused 10 ppasv steftm uDteiBii|gsoitflin.lOj|{Wiv VC adfh another ewhaasijas Stream containingleas than IDppmv VC!* allowedonly tAenlhs amabhcd.stream ia ducted la fha cootnd Andes. btetevlitegnsafi ArisrinMaanf Tmltef revisedataadawl taolacfiy that Ihs vents i process equipment from unsafe is not intended to Infinite prasswsa contaol iteteassued tooosttbl flow toon However, tha cawantcaltef valve nviwi* standard did covari from pressure control vdvaa.A3aojmt included la fhe da&idfion ofidUef itahm are pressum cnatnd apatemaouchae polymerization reactina shortstop systems nr refrigerated waterqpetems which art toreducepressure by msans otherthan vesting. for MultJPVCMmin Andboaa*. Balk PVC aasin peadnrtiaa differs lanm productiaaofnthartypes cf FVCsaaie in that tha pofrrmariratinn raarttoa te raaideai VCinkmSxt tnllotaiqfihajatepafr Arrordingly. C etersaioas boa all wrillbe sdhtect to fra eqaipraaat epeniog toclarify.and impaovs theoanateteaqy of fbe atmicanwntsofthe asvised standard asIhqy amply te bulk PVC smte pmdaoetsin lightofactual industrypcaottae. No saduetteaia VC emisslorwcantrai etriqgmiqy will saseit fromtha changeinraqairmnaotsior prepolymeriaatina matters. Inpteamt tttesteamnr/teguinwnatei forGmekwUtr ftmls. Uadar rim rwimwl stardmte tha VC Mint afInpraoees than nggMBOscpaaimtsdthe t to theoteMgpharm 4a She oaae W iraaala. tha VC i riteroeal may aaoaad ID standard i that compliMW asiih tte ak 1 watercaalnf gasholders. Jha hgrooMa appiyteJ the gaahsldarcaaL atfrom CMA 007815 Federal Rngiator / Vol 80. Mo. ft 7 llfsdnwrisy. )eoamy a M6 /Ampoanifitoks -1393 Other. iaadditian to tfaemviaiaae described abavn a review rf the requirements of the riant itsadand was performed to Hr**^ *"*y* to aaae recordkeeping aad raportiiig burden an plant* ana to identity any additional wwofiftiMijilnf aiitfie nginitlm iiimili Hie EPA Mennneftwo area* where file reporting burden ea plant* coidd be reduced. The cwrent reporting requirements for residual VC monomer specifications and reactor opening meeiuieiueula require that results of all compliance tests be reported ta semiannual iwwrtt. Ibe BPA is proposing to Aow plants to reportraily test results tint show rowedenoes of exceedences occur, plants nril be required to indtoete-thet fact in Ih* semiannual report. Ibis type of exception reporting is cunsntly allowed for demonstration ofonmpiiano* with the 10 ppmv standard for process easts. The second area is the rsquirameai to report relief valve diidaqa within ID days of their occurrence. The SPA ie proposing to allow plants to report relief valve discharge occurrences one quarterly basis rather fine adthia 10 days of their occurrence. Ftirtfaenaore, the reporting requieenents for toltof valve discharges have been sfteaaltoed by dropping the need to report actions taken and Implneenteri preveative measures for each discharge Information on fin date. time, soars*, reuse and estimated amount of individual relief valve discharge uriM be included with the semiannual reports along with information on compliance status. Additional semiannualsaparttog requirements being added tor PVC producers are the number of i each resin type. This raqatoamant will provids general information t* fsotiitoto review ofindustry-wide oomphanae practiced] The RPAcooriuded that tin mutant gpadlladtofoCXUtt^k asMtiU qgnfdaialioasMatlaVAii proposing to extend the maront xheoat impactrffhasaviaad paperworkhudanaf ^boulUpersonyears. It shorid be noted that all Cmnptidiaiiiivs Environmental i. Compensation, end llahdlty Act tCBtCLA]8adtoa un{14 hazardous substances each as vinyl chloride are subject to reporting requirements underSection 101(a) of iaimudlalnlj nstity thaWhtianal Weapons Omter fURC) ofthe ideate. tfietMtito l section ss will .Any 7 We e written statement before, during, or within 30 dev* MWrfae hearing. Written > AeuM bs addressed to the i given in l section ef fills preamble. Aveitotlin lisnsriTfil of the hearing and wilttou rtatemeut* will be available forpubhcInspection and copying during 'morn wtnfctagboun at the fPA'i Cmti el Podcet Section to Washington. `ttJC. (see MWWl section of this > of the NRC is tiOO-UMtiU and to Washington. D.C. metropolitan area it is (202)4m-aB7S.{9Be QBtCLA Section ' '' ) unitorSection Ml(14 rapilafioa,mdia pending the the Officef Rasi miiwty 'The docket is an organised and complete fils ofaflthe information submitted to or otherwise considered by the EPA in the development of this proposed md--king The principal purposes ofthe docket ere: (1) To allow interested partite to identity and locate documents so that they can effectively, participate in the rulemaking process, and (2) toserve as the rvuurri in esse of judicial review (except for interagency review materials (| S0P(dH7{A)]). ^toaocerdance with section 117 of the Ad publication of (his proposal was preceded hr rnnultirinn rilh qppropriata advisory ooimnittees. ttdependarit experts, and Federal departments and agenda*. The Admtoiefcator will wricoms comments im dll roquiiwnanls ere Inrlndad am partef the eavietona to the leak demotion and repair i initial log to reooed aqnipmant tagging of equipmentoempoMnntvhkb equipment I Tnrliirinrl in ths ispmling fnpdisrasnts ar# the numberaf eqatynant tanks end the repair states of leaking! Depending on the parttonlar lank detection end repair programto place, these raquiramaiito may represent an VC affected by the standswl i to be earail by this definition, Since i of the companies meets the 8IA ' definition ol rapilstory flexibility irmlyto to required, fives ifaa < ibquifaments to this proposed rale have been submitted for approval to the 1 (OMB) wider the Paperwork Reduction Act of MOP. 44 UAC. MW rt seg. be submitted to the oSSce^011 InheHiia rol Biqalslit Affaire df QMR marked "Attention: Seek Officer farBPA". m wall as to ths BPA docket riessribed above. The final nils will mopead ta any OMB or pnbUc iW on tho hrionaatton collection CMA 007816 1194 1 Register / Vol. 50. No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, MBS / Proposed Rules Under Executive Order 12281. the EPA must judge whether e regulation U "major'* and therefore subject to the requirement of a Regfaatpry Impact Analytic This tagnfaftonla not major because: (1) The natiaiaal annualized compliance costs, tncindiag capital charge* resulting frarttbe standards total lets than $100 million; (2) the standards do not cause a major increase in prices or production coats; and (3) the standards do not cause significant advene effects on domestic competition, employment investment productivity, innovation or competition in foreign markets. This regulation was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review a* required by Executive Order ' 12281. Any Comments from OMB to EPA and any EPA response to those comments are included in Docket Number A-81-21. The docket is available for public inspection at EPA's Central Docket Section, West Tower Lobby, Gallery l, Waterside Malt 401M Street SW,, Washington. D.C. 20460. Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 005(b). I hereby certify that this rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because no small entities are affected. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part SI Air pollution control Asbestos, Beryllium, Hazardous materials, Mercury, Vinyl chloride. Dated: Dated December 31.1884. Alvin t_ Aim. Acting Adminittrator. PART 61--(AMENDED) It is proposed to amend 40 CFR Part SI as follows: 1. The proposed changes to 40 CFR Part 01 proposed at 42 FR 28154, June 2, 1977 are withdrawn. 2. By revising the definitions in existing 101.6l(j), (1). (o) and (p) for "fa process wastewater". "In vinyl chloride service", "ethylene dichloride purification" and "vinyl chloride ' purification" and by adding definitions for the terms "relief value", "leak", "exhaust gas", "relief valve discharge and "3-hour period" in new paragraphs (vt (w). (x), (y) and (xj. |141 Detmwona. V * . e-ft Q) "Inprocess wasterwater" means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct contact with vinyl chloride or polyvinyl chloride or results from the production or use of any raw material intermediate product finished product by-product or waste product containing vinyl chloride or polyvinyl chloride bat which has not been discharged to a wastewater treatment process or discharged untreated as wastewater. Gas-holder seal water is not tnprocess wastewater until H is removed from the gasholder. (1) "In vinyl chloride service" means that a piece of equipment either contains or contacts a liquid that la at least ID percent Vinyl chloride byweight or a gas that is at least 10 percent by volume vinyl chloride as determined according to the provisions of 10147(h). The provisions of 161.67(h) also specify how to determine that a piece of equipment is not in vinyl chloride service. This definition must be used in piece of the definition of "VHAP service" In Subpart V of this part (e) "Ethylene dichloride purification" includes any part of the process of ethylene dichloride production which follows ethylene dichloride formation. (p) "Vinyl chloride purification" includes any part of the process of vinyl chloride production which follows vinyl chloride formation. 999* (v) "Relief valve" means each pressure relief device including pressure relief valves, rupture disks, manual vents and other pressure relief systems used to protect process components from overpressure conditions. "Relief valve" does not indude control valves used to control flow to an incinerator or other air pollution oontrol device. (w) "Leak" means any of several vents that indicate interraption of confinement of vinyl chloride within process equipment LeaksInclude events regulated under Subpart V ef this part such as: (1) An Instrument reading of . 10,000 ppm or greater; (2) Indications of liquid dripping; (3) a sensor detection of failure of a seal system, failure of e barrier fluid system, or both: and (4) detectable emissions as indicated by an -instrument reading of greater than 500 ppm above background. Leaks also include events regulated under 101A5(b)(8)(i) of detection of ambient concentrations in excess of background concentration. Emissions of vinyl chloride not regulated under 16141 (a) and (bk 16143(a); 16144 (a), (b), (c). (d). (e) and (I): and 16145 (a) and (b)(1). (b)(2). (b)(3), (b)(4). (bK5).tbK6l (b)(7) and (b)(9) shall be considered a leak. A relief vatoe discharge it not a teak. (x) "Exhaust gaa" means any offyas discharged directly or ultimately to the atmosphere that was initially contained In or was in direct contact with the equipment for which 10 ppm emission limits are prescribed In 181.82 (a) and (b>. 161.83(a); 161.64 (a)(1), (a)(2). (b). (c) and (dk 161.08 (b)(i)(ii). (b)(2), (b)(5), (bH8p) mad (b)(9Kii). A leak aa defined In paragraph {w) of this section is not an exhaust gas. ty) "Reitafvalve discharge" means liny nonleu discharge through a relief valve. (x)"3-hour period" means any three ooosecutive I-bour periods (each hour commencing on the hour). 8. By changing " all exhaust gases" to "each exhaust gas stream" and making other minor clarifying revisions in 16142(a). S 8143(a), and 16144 (a)(1). (b). (c) and (d) aa follows: 16142 BaSaatoo standard for aBiyWoe (a) Ethylene dichloride purification: The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exhaust gas stream from any equipment used hi ethylene dichloride purification is not to exceed 10 ppm (average far 3-hour period or as determined in accordance with 18147(g)(1)), except as provided in 18145(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 fa 18146. This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement fa 161.65(b)(6](i) before being opened. * 16143 Emleelow standard tor vtnyt An owner or operator of e vinyl chloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section and 161.65 (a) Vinyl chloride formation and purification: The concentration of vinyl chloride fa each exhaust gaa stream from any equipment wed in vinyl chloride formation and/or purification is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period ores determined in accordance with 16147(g)(1)), except as provided in 16146(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 fa the exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm. or equivalent as provided fa f 6146. Ibis requirement doe* not apply to equipment that has besn opened, is out of operation, and met the requirement fa 16146(b)(6)(i) before being opened. CMA 007817 im w i w " prat '1'iuwr w wm;? / Vo*. a No.* / 1*144 An owner or operator of * polyvinyl chloride plat tinii annpiy with the raquirnaents of tfati aaadon and | 81.66. () Reactor. The foliowtag (1) The conoenMUmef vinyl chloride in each exhanat gas stream freai each reactor ia not to exceed 10 ppm (avenge for 3-hour period or aa determined In accordance with I 6147(g)(1)), craapt m* provided in parapnph (*X2) of Ifos taction and 16145(a). (b) Stripper. The concentration of vinyl chloride in eadi exheuat gaa atreara from each ahlppei ia not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-bour period or aa determined in accordance with 161.67(g)(1)), except aa provided In 161.65(a). Thia requirement doee not apply to equipment diet haa been opened, ia out of operation, and met the requirement in 161AS(b)(6Xi) before being opened. (c) Mixing, weighing, and holding containera. 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 die reactor if the plant has no stripper) in the plant process flow ia not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period or as determined in accordance with f 61.67(g)(1)), except as provided in 16145(a). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has been opened, is out of operation, and met die requirement in 161A5(b)(6)(i) before being opened. (d) Monomer recovery system. The concentration of vinyl chloride in each exahust gas stream from each monomer recovery system is not to exceed 10 ppm (average for 3-hour period or as determined in accordance with 16147(g)(1)), except as provided in . 16145(a). This requirement does not apply to equipment that has bean opened, is out of operation, and met tbs requirement in 16145(bX6Xi) before being opened. a ** 4. By revising existing pareffaphs 16144(aX2) and by removing (a)(3) as follows: An owner or operator afa polyvinyl chloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section and 16145b (a) Reactor. The following requirements apply to I M The reactor i MflhviiDotiiMnilJtifkvi ddartda/fcg (64--g > vinyl rtiiwiW/lh) nf jinlj liaiil iMmirti predate insipl as ofthis i determined on res-Thto MP*yto in lbs balk 5. By revising introductoty tea (e)(3) to 16144 as .W adding paragraph (a) Sourcm following the etipporfei. The following requirements qiyi; to endsaioas of vinyl chloride to the atmosphere from the combination of ail sources following the strippers) (or the raaotorfa) is the plant has no stripperf*)] in the plant process flow tnrindfog bat not limited to. oratrifnge*. concentretors, blend tanka, filters, dryers, conveyor air dischargee, baggers, storage containers, and iaprooaaa wastewater, except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section: 6*t (3) The provisions of this parapaph apply at ail times Including whan offspecification or other types of resins are made. 4 By addiqg paragraph (Q to 16144 aa follows: (6144 (!) Reactor need as stripper. TVhen a nonbulk resin reactor is usedha a stripper this paragraph maybe applied in lira of 16144 (a)(2) and (a)(1): (1| The waighted overage omiatiana of vinyl chloride from reactor opening foes and all sources following the reactor used as a stripper from all pedes of polyvinyl chloride main stripped te the reactor on sadi calendar day may nte (i) an g/kf (040302 tb/lb) afpolyvinyl chloride product for dispersion polyvtnyl chloride Vasina, excluding latex naira, with the product determined an a foy wHdt basis. (ii) 042 g/kg (040042 Ib/fo) f polyvinyl chloride product for al other polyvinyl chloride resins, indudfog latex testes, with the product determinedon* dry solids basis. as follows: (a) to 1*146 r nf an athfiara dichlorifouafopl dinride. and/or PBlyvte/idtiasida piste ^all cemply . (a) RoRefetdve *mdwgee. (1) Polyvinyl chloride plants (saspension. tMapstslon. latex, and bulk processes). (1) Reactor. The number of discharges to the atmosphere from relief valves on polyvinyl diloride reactors is vinyl chloride service is not to exceed the following Hmitrcxaeptaa provided in paragraph (aglKHi) of dlls section. For all reactors producing auapanaica resins within a PVC planl. the number of relief valve diarhaigea is not to exceed 0435 discharges par 100 polymerization batches nor 4 discharges par year. For all reactors prodsdug dispersion and latex trains within a PVC plant, the number of relief valve discharges is not to exceed 0435 discharges per too polymerisation batrims. For all reactors including prepolymerization and postpolymerization reactors, producing bulk rasters within a PVC plant the number of relief valve discharges ia not to exceed 0435 dischargee per too polymerisation batches. ffi) The number of dischargee to the atmosphere from relief voives on equipment (excluding polyvinyl chloridi reactors) in vinyl chloride service is not to exceed 0425 discharges per 100 pdlymerization belches nor 3 discharges par year except at provided in paragaiph (eXIKHij of thia section. (hi) The limits specified in paragraphs (aKIXI) and (aKIXii) of this section may be exceeded arhra only one relief valve discharge to the atmosphere occurs during me 12-month period preceding the clow of die 6-month reporting period. (2) Polyviayl chloride plants (solution end othar muHmuwi PVC production processes). The aumher of discharges to foe atmosphere'from relief valves on all equipment in vinyl chloride service is not to exceed l discharge par year. (3) Bthyleeo dichloride and rinyi chloridepiaate. The nambar of discharges to the atmosphere from relief valve* an equipment in vinyl chloride smvioo is net to exceed 4 discharges per year. (4) EaA nilkd valve discharge that contributes to a relief valve discharge frequency in excess ofany limit prescribed fo paragarphs (a)(1). (a)(2) and fofll) of ti^parejpmph constitute* CMA 007818 3396 IWard Kegbter / Vol. 50. No. 6 / WbHmiuMj), jenutoy 4. MW / an individual violation of tW respective limit. (5) For evTy relief valve foschaige to the atmosphere, the oritaeror operator shall record the hleiltfljl Offoe source, the date and time of tl$ discharge, the cause of the dischaigerthe approximate total vinyl chloride los during the discharge, and the method used for. determining the vinyl ohloride loss. This information shall be submitted in writing to the Administrator as part of the reporting requirements of paragraph i 91-70. This information shall be retained and made available for inspection by the Administrator for a minimum of 3 years. a. By revising paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(8)(i). (b)(8)(iii), (b)(8)(iv) and (h)(8)(vi) to 181.65 as follows: 1*1-85 twiiaalnn aturtard tor attrytane dteMortda, vinyl cWnrtda and eotyvlnyt uwuvnm pants. An owner or operator of an ethylene dichloride, vinyl chloride, end/or polyvinyl chloride plant shall comply with the requirements of this section. (a)*** (b) Fugitive emission sources (1) * * * m*** (3) Leakage from pump, compressor, and agitator seals: (i) Rotating pumps. Vinyl chloride 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 161.66. 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 die exhaust gasea does not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent aa provided in 161.66. (ii) Reciprocatingpumps. Vinyl chloride emissions from seels on all reciprocating pumps in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by installing double outboard seals, or equivalent as provided in 161-66. If double outboard stall are used, vinyl chloride emissions from the seals are to be minimized by maintaining the prestige between the two seals so that any bak 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 far the exhaust gases doss not exceed 10 ppm: or equivalent as provided hi f 61.66. (iii) Rotating compressor- Vinyl chloride emissions from seals oe all . (to) Itprovides-for eh acceptable service are to he minfcnteed by t--totllng calibration and maintenance schedule compressors with doubla marhanii si for foe vfosi chloride mentoring system seals, or aqetrelent as provided in and prttaob hydrocarbon driecter.-For j 61.66. if double mechaaioal seek ere foe vinyl chloride monitoring system, e used, vinyl chloride amissions from foe daily span check b to be conducted with seals ra tn hr cntnlmfoad by - a concentradeo of vinyl (blonds equal maintaining the preaauia between the to tha cenotrntsstion defined as a leak two seals so that any leak that aeons 1 accenting to.paragraph (bK8)(vi) of this into tha compressor by dncfofo any atotiau The cabinstion is to be done vinyl chloride between be twe mis with either through a control system from which the (A) A cdlbndcn yu mixture concentration of vinyl-chloride hi the prepared from tha gases specified in exhaust gases does not owned 10 ppm; or equivalent as provided in 16L66. sections 6X1 and 5X3 of Teet Method 106 and in accordance with section 7.1 (iv) Reciprocating oompnsean. Vinyl of test Method 106, or chloride ambshms from aaab en all reciprocating compressors in vinyl chloride servica are taJm mtntmtewl by installing double outboard seals, or equivalent as provided in 16L66. If double outboard seals are used, vinyl chloride emissions from die aaab are to be mtnhntgwt hj Tn.fnt.infng the pressure between the two seels ao-that any leak that occurs is into the compressor by ducting any vinyl chloride between die two seals through 9) A calibration gas cylinder standard tha appropriate concentration of vinyl chloride. The gas composition of the calibration gas oyUnder standard b to have been certified by the manufacturer. The manufacturer must have recommended a maximum shelf life for each cylinder so that tha concentration doea not change greater than 5 percent from the certified value. The date of gas cylinder preparation, certified vinyl chloride a control system from which die concentration and recommended concentration of vinyl chloride in the maximum shelf life must have been exhaust gases does not exceed 10 ppm; fllxad to the cylinder before ahipment at equivalent as provided in 161.66 from the manufacturer to the buyer. If a (v) Agitatin'. Vinyl chloride emissions gaa chromatograph b used as the vinyl from aaab on all agitator* in vinyl _ ahlaride monitoring system, these gas chloride service art to be minimized by mixtures bay be directly used to installing agitators with double prepare a chromatograph calibration mechanical seals, or equivalent as curve ea described in section 7.3 of Test provided in 16106. If double . Method 106. The requirements in section mechanical stab are used, vinyl 5X3.1 ana 5.2X2 of Teat Method 106 for chloride emissions from die aaab are to certification of cylinder standards and be minimized by maintaining the for establishment and verification of pressure between the two aeeb so that calibration standards are to be followed. any leak that occur* b info the agitated (iv) The location and number of points vessel; by ducting any vinyl chloride to be monitored end tha frequency of between the two aeeb through a control monitoring provided for in the program system from which tha concentration of are aoceptebb whan they are compared vinyl chloride in the exhaust gates does with th* number of pieces of equipment not exceed 10 ppm; or equivalent aa in vinyl chloride sendee and tha size provided in 16106. * V * .* " * end physical layout of the plant * '% * (8) look detection andelimination. . (i) It Includes a reliable and accents vinyl chloride monitoring system for detection ef major leaks and identification of the general area of the plant where e leak b located. A vinyl chloride monitoring system means a . device which obtains Sir samples from one or more points on a continuous sequential basis end analyses the samples with gaa chromatography or. if the owner or operator ar""-ft diet all hydrocarbons measured are vinyl chloride, with infrared spectrophotometry, flame bn detection, or en equivalent or alternative method. (vi) It contains definition of leak which b acceptable when compered with the background concentrations of vinyl chloride in ths areas of the plant to be monitored by tha vinyl chloride monitoring system. Measurements of lisoIfground concentrations of vinyl chloride in the areas of ths plant to be monitored by the vinyl chloride monltoriim system are to be included with foe description of the program. The definition of leak for a given plant may vary among the different anas within the plantnod b also to change over time as background concentrations in foe plant anmduced. ##*# -.rfntft * - CMA 007819 Federal Register / Vol. SO. No. 6 / Wednesday. January 9. 1985 / Proposed Rules 1197 9. By revising paragraph (b)(4) to I 61.65 as follows: I 61.6$ Emission standard tar ethytone dleMorWs, Wnyi chloride and polyvinyl ehlorMs plants * * t (b) Fugitive emission sources. * (4) Leaks from relief valves. Vinyl chloride emissions due to leaks from each relief valve on equipment in vinyl chloride service shall comply with I 61.242-4 of Subpart V of this part t |* 10. By revising paragraph (b)(7) of $ 61.65 as follows: f 61.66 Emission standard tar ethyisne dicMorido. vinyl chloride and polyvinyl URUMQV pWiwi (b) Fugitive emission sources. * (7) Samples. Unused portions of samples containing at least 10 percent by weight vinyl chloride are to be returned.to the process or destroyed in a control device from which the concentration of vinyl chloride in the exhaust gas does not exceed 10 ppm. Sampling techniques are to be such that sample containers in vinyl chloride are purged into a closed process system. 11. By revising paragraphs (b)(6) introductory text, (b)(8)(ii), and (b)(8)(v) to { 61.65 as follows: 161.66 Emission standard tar ethylene vwyi wnonov woo povyvinyi omorao pwnit * (b) Fugitive emission sources. 6 * * (8) Leak detection and elimination. Vinyl chloride emissions due to leaks from equipment in vinyl chloride service are to be minimized by instituting and implementing a lead detection and repair program consistent with the provisions of Subpart V of this part. The program is to be implemented within 90 days of the effective date of these regulations, unless a waiver of compliance is granted under 161.11. Approval of a program will be granted by the Administrator provided he finds; (i) * * * (ii) It includes a reliable and accurate portable hydrocarbon detector to be used consistent with the provisions of Subpart V of this part An owner or operator is exempt from | 61.242-1(d). SI 61.242-7 (a), (b) and (c). 161.246 and 161.247 of Subpart V of this part for any process unit in which the percentage of leaking valves is demonstrated to be equal to or less than 2.0 percent, as determined in accordance with the following: (A) A performance test as specified in paragraph (b)(B)(ii)(C) of this section shall be conducted initially within 90 days of the effective date of these regulations, annuity and at times requested by the Administrator. (B) For each performance test, a minimum of 200 or 90 percent of the total valves in VOC service (as defined in S 60.481 of Subpart W of Part 60) within the process unit shall be randomly selected and monitored within l week by the methods specified in 161.245(d) of Subpart V of this part If an instrument reading of 10.000 ppm or greater is measured, a leak is detected. The leak percentage shall be determined by dividing the number of valves in VOC service for which leaks are detected by the number of tested valves in VOC service. (C) If a leak is detected, it shall be repaired in accordance with f 61.242-7 (d) and (e) of Subpart V of this part (D) The results of the performance test shall be submitted in writing to the Administrator in the first semiannual report following the performance test as part of the reporting requirements of S 61.70. (E) Any process unit in which the percentage of leaking valves is found to be greater than 2.0 percent must comply with all provisions of Subpart V of this part within 90 days. ta6* (v) It contains a plan of action to be taken when a leak is detected consistent with Subpart V of this part 12. By revising | 61.66 as follows: (61.66 Equivalent equipment and 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 those prescribed for compliance with a specific paragraph of this subpart 13. By revising paragraph (f) of 161.67 as follows: 161.67 Emission teat*. <6 6 6 (f) The owner or operator shall retain at the plant and make available, upon request for inspection by the Administrator, for a minimum of 3 years, records of emission test results and other data needed to determine emissions. 14. By revising paragraphs (g)(3) introductory text. (g)(3)(i), and (g)(3)(m) of | 61.67 as follows: 161.67 Emission testa. *e (g) * * * (3) Whpn a stripping operation is used to attain the emission limits in { 61.64 (e) and (f), emissions are to be determined using Test Method 107 as follows: (i) The number of strippers (or reactors using as strippers) and samples and the types and grades of resin to be sampled are 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 stripper) is to be determined on a dry solids basis and by a method submitted to and approved by the Administrator. I * 15. By revising paragraph (g)(5) introductory text and adding paragraph (g)(6) to { 61.67 as follows: $ 61.67 Emission testa. * * (g) * * * (5) The reactor opening loss for which an emission limit is prescribed in { 61.64(a)(2) is to be determined. The number of reactors for which the determination is to be specified by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the determination based on the plant's operation. (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 161.64(f) are to be determined. The number of reactors for which the determination is to be made is to be specified by the Administrator for each individual plant at the time of the determination based on the plant's operation. (i) For each batch stripped in the reactor, the following measurements are 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. CMA 007820 1198 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 8 / Wednesday. jacuaey <L IMS / (ii) For each batch stripped in the reactor, the following information is to be determined: [A] The vapor pressure (mm Hg) of water in the reactor ttandef step from the following table: HO wo HO vap MfVWMte ufQ 8n C 2Era s wirci tm m 40 664 41 99.9 4* 914 49 Mi 44 flu 49 71,9 49 79* 47 19-9 41 3.7 49 89.0 60 994 61 972 S2 109,1 $3 1074 4 1126 56 1184 69 1239 57 129.8 99 139.1 99 ^42.6 90 149.4 91 199.4 97 1999 99 17U 4 1704 96 197.9 91 199.1 m M3LM 99 MU2 m a3.7 70 2397 71 2434 72 264.8 It 97 74 2774 79 299.1 n 3014 77 914.1 79 74 70 9*1.9 90 9891 1 2997 44 4998 19 9199 99 4S9 4699 or 4N.7 407.1 * 6M.1 0 8264 ti MU 99 9974 B8 910.9 99 394 09 9974 t.t 99 7074 7334 too 790.0 (B) The partial pressure (am Hg) of vinyl chloride in reactor at end of strip from the following equation: PPVA-780--RV--VPW Where: PPVC--partial premine of vinyl chloride, in nun Hg 700v atmospheric preaewe at fC in mm Hg RV- absolute value of factor vacuum, in mmHg VPWvapor pi amine ef water. In mm Hg (C) The reactor vapor space volume (m1) at end of atrip from die following equation: where: RVSV ibreactor vaporapace volume, to m* RCviaactcr capacity. In w* In m* PVCW --dry wfght af palyvinyt chlorida in factor from mdpe.Se kg 833> typical density ef polyvinyl chloride. la kg/m (Hi) For each batch stripped in the . reactor, the combined reactor f*-`ng loss end emissions from ell sources following the reactor need as a stripper is to be determined using the iofiowing equation: PTVCXRVSVH1.002) C-pPUVCXitrV fPVOWXJjm^RT) Cg vinyl chtodtefhgedyvto Item product mdVC~anoentn8oncf vinyl chloride is resinaftertfrtpksg inppts KT'--emveretoe meterfwppm tnC*peSal pressure ofvinyl chloride detemtsad accasdist te pmapnph (MSgHgB) sf this aactkm in m Hg r"TY risrtns Tspin lysm nl^ datarminad aocacdina to Bnraarsnh (g)(6)[ii)(CT ef this sectiom in m* lj002-tdeal gas constant m g--TC/aua Hg-- *lbr vinyl ddoride PVCWvWy watghtafpoipvinj)liMaihletn 273-coovwWw toetarfavTa* *K 18. By adding paragraph pi) to |8L8? as follows: Ml) Badt pises of oqidpmarit within s process unit Ifast can reasonably contain equipment in vhvjd chloride service ia ptisnmad to be to vinyl chlorida aarvtca mdasa an earner or operator demonstrates that the piece of equipment ia net in vinyl thtoririe service. For a pines of stmipmant to be considered not in vinyl ditnriria service, it must be determined that An percent vinyl chloride content cm bo iiwoiiiishtj expected not to exceed 10 percent by weight for liquid streams and 10 percent by volume for gas streams. For purposes of determining the percent vinyl chloride content of the process fluid that is contained ta or contactsequipment procedures that conform to the methods described bt A8TM Method D-2287 (incorporated by reference as specified in 161.18) shell be seed. - (3X1) An owner or operator may use engineering judgment rather than the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) of this section to demonstrate that the percent vinyl chloride content does not exceed 10 percent by wvigbt for Horrid streams ana 10 percent by volume far gas streams, presided that the engineering judgment demnastratas that tbs viayi chloride content dearly doss not exceed 10 percent When an owner or operator and tha Administrates do asl apse os whether a piece of equipment is not in vinyl chloride service, however, the procedures U> paragraph Ml) ri this section shall be used to rasrius tbs (IQ If an owner or operator determines that a piece of equipment is ia via^l chloride service, the determinatiea osa . be revisadjaly after following the procedures in parapaph (h)(l>of this section. - percem ring) dderite content shell be rwpiesemsttve ef the procam fluid diet is mntsAart in or contorts the equipment L 17. By adding paragraphs (d^ (a) and (f)to 16108 as follows: o I81J8 Ntortsti mattering. <*8*8 (d) When sxhmot gae(ee). having emission limits that are subject to the requirement ef paragraph fa) of this section, me emitted to the atmosphere around the oeetrol system aod required vinyl chlerida monitoring system, the vinyl chlorite cantont of the emission hell be orientated (in units of each applicable iiiUaiimi limit) by best practical engineering judgment based on the tbscharge dumtion and known VC concanhutione in tbs affected equipments* determined ia accordance with 18107(h) oc other acosptable method. () For egch 3-hour period, the vinyl chlorite egntent of niebTM subject to therequirements of paragraphs (a) end (d) of this section shall bt averaged (weighted according to the proportion of dm* that emissions were continuously monitored and that emissions bypassed the conUnnons monitor) for purposes of reporting excess emissions under i 8170(c)(1). (f) Mr eaob vinyl chloride emission to the atmosphere telwuiined in accordance with paragraph (e) of this sstrion to be iu excess of the applicable emission limits, the owner er operator shall record the identity of the aourcs(a). the date, time, and dmutton ofthe wmlsahm. the approximate Mel vinyi chlorida loss during As excess emission. vinyi telorite ksm.This information shall be ressiasd and swde available for inspection by the Administrator as required by 18Ul(a). 18, By rbanging the Mile from "Bamlsnnnsl saporIf to "Reporting" end by revising psispsph M of 18170 as follows: 007321 1 Bitotor / Vol 50, No. f Wadnasifoy. |nwy,, 19BS / ftopooed Rules 1199 $1.70 (a)(1) The owner or operator of any lource to which thie subpart appliee shall submit to the Administrator on September 1$ and Maidi 15 of each year a report in writing "--fining the information reqafcifo paragraphs, (c). (d) and (e) of this eaatton and on December is and fane 15 of each year a report in writing containing the information required in paragraph (e) of this section, except as provided in paragraph (a)(2). (2) In the case of an existing source that submits semiannual reports on an approved fixed schedule other than September 15 and March 15, the approved aetniannual reporting schedule shall be used to report the information required in paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) of this section. In addition, the information required in paragraph (e) of this section will be reported exactly 3 months following the semiannual reporting dates. (3) The first report is to be submitted following the first full 3 month reporting period after the initial report is submitted. 19. By revising paragraph (c)(1) of 161.70 as follows: i *1.70 Reporting. fc) * * * (1) The owner or operator shall include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride content of emissions for each 3-hour period during which average emissions are in excess of the emission limits in 161.62 (a) or (b). 161.63(a), or f 61.64 (a)(1), (b). (c). or (d), or during which average emissions are in-excess of the emission limits specified for any control system to which reactor emissions are required to be ducted in f 61.64(a)(2) or to which fugitive emissions are required to be ducted in $ 61.65 (b)(i)(ii), (b)(2), (b)(5). (b)(6)(ii). or (b) (9)(ii). If emissions in excess of the emission limits are not detected, the report shall contain a statement that no excess emissions have been detected. The emissions are to be determined in accordance with J 6151(e). 20. By revising paragraph (c)(2) introductory text removing paragraphs (c) (2)(iv), revising paragraph (cH2)(iii) and revising (c)(2j(v) and (c)(2)(td) introductory text to 161.70 as follows: $61.70 Reporting. *0*00 (C) * * * (2) In polyvinyl chloride plants for which a stripping operation is used to attain the emission level prescribed in 161.64(e). the owner or operator shall include in the report a record of the vinyl chloride content in the polyvinyl chloride resin. (i) * * (ii) * * * (iii) The vinyl chloride content in each sample is to be determined by Test Method 107 as prescribed in 161.67(g)(3). (hr) (Reserved) (v) The report to the Administrator by the owner or operator is to include a record of any 24-hour avenge resin yfityl chloride concentration, as . determined in this paragraph, in excess of the limits prescribed in 16144(e). Th vinyl chloride content found in each sample reqrirad by paragraphs (cH2)(i) and (c)(2)(ii) of this section shall'be averaged separately for each type of resin, ovsvsach calendar day and weighted according to the quantity of each grade bf resin processed by the strippetfs) that calendar day. according to the following equation: -------- 3K-------------------------- ---------------------------- where: 4>M4mr average ooncantrathm of type. 7i resin in ppm (dry weight besis). Q-Total production of type Ti rosin over the 24-bour period, in kg. r.Type of reriii: /--1.2... m wbare m is total number of resin types produced during the 24-how period. At--Concentration of vinyl chloride in one sample of grado G realm in ppm. Production of pads G resin represented by the staple, in kg. Ci>Gndr of resin: 14.. G,. C and G+ n--Total numbst of grades of resin prodocsd daring tbs 24-hoar period. If no 24-hour average resin vinyl - chloride concentrations in excess of the limits prescribed ha 16144(e) are measured, the report shall state that no excess resin vinyl chloride concentrations were measured. (vi) The owner or operator shall retain at the source and make available for inspection by the Administrator for a minimum of 3 yean records of all data needed to furnish the information required by paragraph (c)(2)(v) of this section. The records are to contain ths. following information: (A)* * * (B) * 4 * * 21. By revising paragraph fcH3) of f 61.70 as follows: $61.70 Wagoning. (CJ* * * (3) The owner or operator shall include in tha report a record of any amissions from sach reactor opening in excess of tha emission limits prescribed in 161.64(a)(2). Emissions an to be determined In accordance with| 6147(g)(5), except that emissions for each reactor are to be determined. If missions in excess of tha emission limits are not detected, tha report shall indude a statement that excess emissions have not bean detected. *6$6 22. By adding paragraph (c)(4) to 161.70 as follows: $61.76 Wspartlwg *69 (c) * * * (4) In polyvinyl chloride plants for which stripping in the reactor is used to attain tha emission level prescribed in 161.64(f). the owner or operator shall Include In file 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 ,,rl' batch of each grade of resin immediately following the completion of the stripping operation, and identified by resin type and grade and tha date and time the batch is 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 16147(g)(3). (Ui) The combined emission from reactor opening loss and all sources following the reactor used as a stripper an to be determined for each batch stripped is a reactor according to the procedure prescribed in 161-67(g)(6). (tv) Tha report to the Administrator by the owner or operator is to include a record of any 24-hour average combined reactor opening lots and emissions from II sources following the reactor used as a stripper as determined in this paragraph, in excess of the limits prescribed in $ 6144(f)- The combined reactor opening loss and emissions from CMA 007822 twin Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 6 f Wednesday, fliiraary f, 186$ / ftqpioted itulfii all sources following the reactor used as a stripper associated with eadi batch are to be averagod-saparateiy for each type of resin, overaach calendar day and weighted accnefoagto the quantity of each grade of teem shipped in reactors that calendar day es fellows: For each type of resin (suspension, dispersion, latex, bulk, other), the following calculation is to be performed: where N F. ** -- ' and Ft **N Y F.--reliefpphre diarharps freqesney pw M0 polymariiatm botches from sD 11 *1 b1 --5----------- Vpc1ce1 + pg2 cg2 + . . . equipment (excluding readers) ce_ .Fi --relisf valve diechatge freqaeacy per 12- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5------- :---------:-------- month period from all equipment (exduenng metort) N--total number of relief valve dischetget during the 12-month period preceding tbe Where: A24-hour average combined reector opening loss and emiseione horn all sources following the reactor used is a N Mere of toe e-manth reporting period from all equipment (exdeding reactors) Y--total tfenbsrof polymerization batches of all resto types combined divided by 100 stripper, in g vinyl chloride/kg product (dry weight basis). Q--Total production of resin in batches for which stripping is cnaiplatad feting the 24-hour period. kg. C--Average combined reactor opening toss Where F,relief valve discharge frequency per 100 polymerization batches from all reactor* producing racing type t N--total number of rehaf valve dbekegro (4) For polyvinyl chloride plants using the solution process or any other continuous production process, the relief valve discharge frequency is the elimination of each relief valve discharge from all equipment types and emissions from all sources following the reactor used as a stripper af all batches of grade Gt resin for which stripping is completed daring the 24-bow period In g vinyl chloride/kg product (dry weight basis) (determined according to procedure prescribed in 16147(g)(6)). P-Production of grade Gi resin in the batches for which C is determined, in kg. Gi-Grade of rosin: eg. G,. C.and G>. n--Total number of grades of resin in batches for which stripping is completed during the 24-hour period. clnro of the S-month ropevfeg parted horn afl Procters produefrmresin type t Y-total nmiihir af polymerisation batch** of min type utnring tha 12-month period preceding the doee af the S-roonth reporting period divided by 100 t--retin type: dispersion (latfediag latex) er bulk reain type (Z) For polyvinyl chloride plant* producing suspension resins, the relief valve discharge frequency from polyvinyl chloride reactors is to be during foe 12-month period preceding foe doee of foe 6-month reporting period. . (5) For ethylene dichioride/vinyl chloride plants, foe relief valve discharge frequency is the summation of aach relief valve discharge from all equipment types during foe 12-month period preceding the close of the 6month reporting.period. (6) A polymerization batch consists of aach sequence of charging VC and other materials to the reactor, heating reactor If no 24-hour average combined reactor determined in two ways eatog the contests, polymerization of reactor opening lots and amissions from all following equations: rymts and removal of reactor sources following die reactor used a contests including any incomplete stripper in excess of the limits sequence font is aborted after charging prescribed in f 81.64(f) are determined, VC to foa reactor. For bulk resin the report shell state that no exceaa production plants, e single vinyl chloride emissions were determined. 23. By adding paragraphs (d). (e) and (0 to | 01.70 as follows: (1.70 neporttoQ. *** (d) The owner or operator shall include in the report a record of rehaf valve dischargee as prescribed in i 61.65(a)(4). and tha owner or oporotor shall report exceedences of the relief valve discharge frequency limits prescribed to i 6140(e) to be determined as follows: (1) For polyvinyl chloride plants producing dispersion, latex or bulk resins, the relief valve discharge frequency from poiyvialy chloride reactors is to be determined using the following equation. Separate calculations are to be made for each resin type (t) es defined: F,,-relief valv* dlsdwrge frequency per MO polymerization batches from all reactor* producing suspension resin Fj--relief valvediechatga frequency per 12month period from ell reactors producing suspension min N-totalntuaherri relief valve discharge* during the 12-month parted premriiag the doee of tha 6-oonth reposting period from all reactor* produrteg reepenstee min Y--total number of polymerization batches of suspension resin during the 12-monik period preceding (be does of Ike g-monib reporting period divided by 100 (3) Far polyvinyl chloride plants producing suspension, dtopowien. latex or bulk resins, the relief valve dlschswge frequency from all other equipment (excluding polyvinyl chloride reactor*) it to be determined to two way* Bring "polymerisation batch" mcksdea both prepolymerizatkm and postpedymerization reactor operations. (o) Tha owner or operator shall include to the report the number of relief valve discharges to foe atmosphere during the 2-nmnth period preceding the report fcomnoch of foe following sources: suspension resto production reactor*: dispersion and latex resin production reactors: balk resin production reactors: ell nonreactor equipment in WC plants: all equipment need in eohitfon process and other continuous process PVC plants; sad all equipment in EDC/VC plants; any other source: (f) The owner or operator shall include in the report the number of reactor openings and the design capacity of tha number of polymerisation belches for each type of resin in each plant during the 6-month period preceding foe report. The design capacity of the number of the following equation*: - .polymerization batches may be defined CMA 007823 Federal Register / Voi. 50, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 9. 1985 / Propoaed Rules initially and remain unchanged unless significant changes to the design capacity occur. 24. By revising paragraph (a) introductory text of 191.71 as follows; Si.7i wstuidasspaifr (a) The owner or operator of any source to which this subpart applies shall retain the following information at the source and make it available for inspection by the Administrator for a minimum of 3 years; * * * 22. By adding the words "vinyl chloride" to the definition of the term "volatile hazardous air pollutants" in 101241 of Subpart V as follows; 101241 DeflnMone. * s "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. Benzenq is a VHAP. Vinyl chloride is a VHAP. (Sec. 112 Clean Air Act of 1978) [FR Doc. 8S-SO0 Filed 1-8-88: MS am) 1201 A in L *it*m i' - CMA 007824