Wednesday,

April
16,
2003
Part
II
Environmental
Protection
Agency
40
CFR
Part
63
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
for
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing;
Final
Rule
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00001
Fmt
4717
Sfmt
4717
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18730
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
63
[
OAR
 
2002
 
0088,
FRL
 
7462
 
6]

RIN
2060
 
AG68
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
for
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
action
promulgates
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
NESHAP)
for
new
and
existing
refractory
products
manufacturing
facilities
and
implements
section
112(
d)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
by
requiring
all
major
sources
to
meet
HAP
emission
standards
reflecting
the
application
of
maximum
achievable
control
technology
(
MACT).
The
final
rule
will
protect
air
quality
and
promote
the
public
health
by
reducing
emissions
of
several
of
the
HAP
listed
in
section
112(
b)(
1)
of
the
CAA,
including
ethylene
glycol,
formaldehyde,
hydrogen
fluoride
(
HF),
hydrochloric
acid
(
HCl),
methanol,
phenol,
and
polycyclic
organic
matter
(
POM).
Exposure
to
these
substances
has
been
demonstrated
to
cause
adverse
health
effects
such
as
irritation
of
the
lung,
skin,
and
mucous
membranes,
effects
on
the
central
nervous
system,
and
damage
to
the
liver,
kidneys,
and
skeleton.
The
EPA
has
classified
the
HAP
formaldehyde
and
POM
as
probable
human
carcinogens.
The
final
rule
will
reduce
nationwide
emissions
of
HAP
from
these
facilities
by
an
estimated
124
megagrams
per
year
(
Mg/
yr)
(
137
tons
per
year
(
tpy)).

EFFECTIVE
DATE:
April
16,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Docket
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088
contains
supporting
information
used
in
developing
the
final
rule.
The
docket
is
located
at
the
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20460,
telephone
(
202)
566
 
1744.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Ms.
Susan
Fairchild,
U.
S.
EPA,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Emission
Standards
Division,
Minerals
and
Inorganic
Chemicals
Group,
(
C504
 
05),
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711,
telephone
number
(
919)
541
 
5167,
electronic
mail
address
fairchild.
susan@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Regulated
Entities.
Categories
and
entities
potentially
regulated
by
this
action
include
those
listed
in
the
following
table:

Category
NAICS
Examples
of
regulated
entities
Industrial
.....................................................
327124
Clay
refractories
manufacturing
plants.
Industrial
.....................................................
327125
Nonclay
refractories
manufacturing
plants.

This
table
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
regulated
by
this
action.
To
determine
whether
your
facility
is
regulated
by
this
action,
you
should
examine
the
applicability
criteria
in
§
63.9782
of
today's
final
rule.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
in
the
preceding
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.
Electronic
Docket
(
E­
Docket).
The
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
in
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP
Docket
at
the
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460.
The
Docket
Center
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
5:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566
 
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Air
Docket
is
(
202)
566
 
1742.
Electronic
Access.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search''
and
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.
Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EPA
Dockets.
Information
claimed
as
confidential
business
information
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
are
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
official
public
docket.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
this
document.
Worldwide
Web
(
WWW).
In
addition
to
being
available
in
the
docket,
an
electronic
copy
of
today's
document
also
will
be
available
on
the
WWW.
Following
the
Administrator's
signature,
a
copy
of
this
action
will
be
posted
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
oarpg
on
EPA's
Technology
Transfer
Network
(
TTN)
policy
and
guidance
page
for
newly
proposed
or
promulgated
rules.
The
TTN
provides
information
and
technology
exchange
in
various
areas
of
air
pollution
control.
If
more
information
regarding
the
TTN
is
needed,
call
the
TTN
HELP
line
at
(
919)
541
 
5384.
Judicial
Review.
Under
section
307(
b)(
1)
of
the
CAA,
judicial
review
of
the
final
rule
is
available
only
by
filing
a
petition
for
review
in
the
U.
S.
Court
of
Appeals
for
the
District
of
Columbia
Circuit
by
June
16,
2003.
Under
section
307(
d)(
7)(
B)
of
the
CAA,
only
an
objection
to
the
final
rule
that
was
raised
with
reasonable
specificity
during
the
period
for
public
comment
can
be
raised
during
judicial
review.
Moreover,
under
section
307(
b)(
2)
of
the
CAA,
the
requirements
established
by
the
final
rule
may
not
be
challenged
separately
in
any
civil
or
criminal
proceedings
brought
by
EPA
to
enforce
these
requirements.
Outline.
The
information
presented
in
this
preamble
is
organized
as
follows:

I.
Background
and
Public
Participation
A.
What
Is
the
Source
of
Authority
for
Development
of
NESHAP?
B.
What
Criteria
Are
Used
in
the
Development
of
NESHAP?
C.
How
Was
the
Rule
Developed?
II.
Summary
of
the
Final
Rule
A.
What
Source
Category
Is
Affected
by
the
Final
Rule?
B.
What
Are
the
Affected
Sources?
C.
What
Are
the
Emission
Limits?
D.
What
Are
the
Operating
Limits?
E.
What
Are
the
Work
Practice
Standards?
F.
What
Are
the
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
Emission
Limits?

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00002
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18731
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
G.
What
Are
the
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
a
Work
Practice
Standard?
H.
What
Are
the
Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
Emission
Limits?
I.
What
Are
the
Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
a
Work
Practice
Standard?
J.
What
Are
the
Notification,
Recordkeeping,
and
Reporting
Requirements?
K.
What
Are
the
Compliance
Deadlines?
III.
Summary
of
Major
Changes
Since
Proposal
A.
Emission
Limits
and
Work
Practice
Standards
B.
Compliance
Testing
C.
Control
Device
Monitoring
and
Operation
D.
Definitions
IV.
Summary
of
Responses
to
Major
Comments
A.
MACT
Floors
B.
Emission
Limits
C.
Compliance
Testing
and
Monitoring
D.
Economic
and
Environmental
Impacts
E.
Definitions
V.
Summary
of
Impacts
A.
What
Are
the
Health
Impacts?
B.
What
Are
the
Air
Emission
Reduction
Impacts?
C.
What
Are
the
Cost
Impacts?
D.
What
Are
the
Economic
Impacts?
E.
What
Are
the
Non­
Air
Quality
Environmental
and
Energy
Impacts?
VI.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
E.
Executive
Order
13132:
Federalism
F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
Tribal
Governments
G.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
From
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
I.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
J.
Congressional
Review
Act
I.
Background
and
Public
Participation
A.
What
is
the
Source
of
Authority
for
Development
of
NESHAP?
Section
112
of
the
CAA
requires
us
to
list
categories
and
subcategories
of
major
sources
and
area
sources
of
HAP
and
to
establish
NESHAP
for
the
listed
source
categories
and
subcategories.
Major
sources
of
HAP
are
those
that
have
the
potential
to
emit
greater
than
10
tpy
of
any
one
HAP
or
25
tpy
of
any
combination
of
HAP.
The
category
of
major
sources
covered
by
the
final
rule
was
listed
as
Chromium
Refractories
Production
on
July
16,
1992
(
57
FR
31576).
Section
112(
c)
of
the
CAA
allows
EPA
to
revise
the
source
category
list
at
any
time.
After
obtaining
information
from
chromium
refractories
manufacturing
plants
that
indicated
that
some
facilities
were
major
sources
due
to
HAP
emissions
from
the
manufacturing
of
nonchromium
refractories,
we
decided
to
expand
the
scope
of
the
source
category
to
include
most
manufacturers
of
refractory
products.
On
November
18,
1999,
we
revised
the
source
category
name
from
Chromium
Refractories
Production
to
Refractories
Manufacturing
(
64
FR
63025)
to
reflect
the
broadened
scope
of
the
source
category.
At
proposal
(
67
FR
42108,
June
20,
2002),
we
changed
the
source
category
name
from
Refractories
Manufacturing
to
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
to
further
clarify
the
source
category.

B.
What
Criteria
Are
Used
in
the
Development
of
NESHAP?
Section
112
of
the
CAA
requires
that
we
establish
NESHAP
for
the
control
of
HAP
from
both
new
and
existing
major
sources.
The
CAA
requires
the
NESHAP
to
reflect
the
maximum
degree
of
reduction
in
emissions
of
HAP
that
is
achievable.
This
level
of
control
is
commonly
referred
to
as
MACT.
The
MACT
floor
is
the
minimum
control
level
allowed
for
NESHAP
and
is
defined
under
section
112(
d)(
3)
of
the
CAA.
In
essence,
the
MACT
floor
ensures
that
the
standards
are
set
at
a
level
that
assures
that
all
major
sources
achieve
the
level
of
control
at
least
as
stringent
as
that
already
achieved
by
the
better­
controlled
and
lower­
emitting
sources
in
each
source
category
or
subcategory.
For
new
sources,
the
MACT
floor
cannot
be
less
stringent
than
the
emission
control
that
is
achieved
in
practice
by
the
bestcontrolled
similar
source.
The
MACT
standards
for
existing
sources
can
be
less
stringent
than
standards
for
new
sources,
but
they
cannot
be
less
stringent
than
the
average
emission
limitation
achieved
by
the
bestperforming
12
percent
of
existing
sources
in
the
category
or
subcategory
(
or
the
best­
performing
five
sources
for
categories
or
subcategories
with
fewer
than
30
sources).
In
developing
MACT,
we
also
consider
control
options
that
are
more
stringent
than
the
floor.
We
may
establish
standards
more
stringent
than
the
floor
based
on
the
consideration
of
the
cost
of
achieving
the
emissions
reductions,
any
non­
air
quality
health
and
environmental
impacts,
and
energy
requirements.

C.
How
Was
the
Rule
Developed?
We
proposed
the
standards
for
refractory
products
manufacturing
on
June
20,
2002
(
67
FR
42108).
The
public
comment
period
lasted
from
June
20,
2002
to
August
19,
2002.
Industry
representatives,
regulatory
agencies,
environmental
groups,
and
the
general
public
were
given
the
opportunity
to
comment
on
the
proposed
rule
and
to
provide
additional
information
during
the
public
comment
period.
We
offered
at
proposal
the
opportunity
for
oral
presentation
of
data,
views,
or
arguments
concerning
the
proposed
rule
at
a
public
hearing.
One
organization
requested
a
public
hearing,
but
it
later
withdrew
the
request,
and
a
hearing
was
not
held.
We
received
a
total
of
eight
public
comments
on
the
proposed
rule.
Comments
were
submitted
by
three
industry
trade
associations,
two
refractory
products
manufacturing
companies,
and
two
other
companies.
One
trade
association
submitted
two
sets
of
comments.
The
final
rule
reflects
our
full
consideration
of
all
of
the
comments
received.
Major
public
comments
on
the
proposed
rule,
along
with
our
responses
to
those
comments,
are
summarized
in
this
preamble.

II.
Summary
of
the
Final
Rule
A.
What
Source
Category
Is
Affected
by
the
Final
Rule?
Today's
final
rule
applies
to
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
source
category.
This
source
category
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
any
facility
that
manufactures
refractory
bricks
and
shapes
that
are
produced
using
an
organic
HAP
compound,
pitchimpregnated
refractory
products,
fired
chromium
refractory
products,
and
fired
clay
refractory
products.
Fired
refractory
products
are
those
that
have
undergone
thermal
processing
in
a
kiln.

B.
What
Are
the
Affected
Sources?

Today's
final
rule
establishes
emission
limitations
(
emission
limits
and
operating
limits)
and
work
practice
standards
for
several
types
of
refractory
products
manufacturing
sources.
Table
1
of
this
preamble
lists
the
affected
sources
that
will
be
subject
to
today's
final
rule.

TABLE
1.
 
AFFECTED
SOURCES
FOR
THE
REFRACTORY
PRODUCTS
MANUFACTURING
RULE
Refractory
product
type
Affected
sources
Sources
subject
to
emission
limits:

Resin­
bonded
Existing
and
new
curing
ovens
and
kilns.
Pitch­
bonded
..
Existing
and
new
curing
ovens
and
kilns.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00003
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18732
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
1.
 
AFFECTED
SOURCES
FOR
THE
REFRACTORY
PRODUCTS
MANUFACTURING
RULE
 
Continued
Refractory
product
type
Affected
sources
Pitch­
impregnated
Existing
and
new
defumers
and
coking
ovens,
and
new
shape
preheaters.
Other
formed
products
that
use
organic
additives.
Existing
and
new
shape
dryers
and
kilns
used
to
process
refractory
shapes
that
are
made
using
an
organic
HAP
compound.
Clay
................
New
kilns.

Sources
subject
to
work
practice
standards:

Pitch­
impregnated
Existing
shape
preheaters
and
existing
and
new
pitch
working
tanks.
Chromium
......
Existing
and
new
kilns.
Clay
................
Existing
kilns.

C.
What
Are
the
Emission
Limits?

Today's
final
rule
specifies
separate
emission
limits
for
existing
and
new
thermal
process
sources
that
emit
organic
HAP
and
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
Facilities
that
operate
thermal
process
sources
that
emit
organic
HAP
have
the
option
of
meeting
a
total
hydrocarbon
(
THC)
concentration
limit
of
20
parts
per
million
by
volume,
dry
basis
(
ppmvd),
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
or
reducing
THC
mass
emissions
by
at
least
95
percent.
The
sources
that
will
be
subject
to
these
organic
HAP
emission
limits
include
new
and
existing
shape
dryers,
curing
ovens,
kilns,
coking
ovens,
and
defumers.
In
addition,
new
shape
preheaters
will
be
subject
to
these
same
emission
limits.
For
continuous
process
sources
of
organic
HAP,
the
format
of
the
emission
limits
is
a
3­
hour
block
average.
For
batch
process
sources,
the
format
of
the
standard
is
the
average
of
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
periods
for
two
test
runs.
For
affected
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns,
the
final
rule
includes
separate
emission
limits
for
HF
and
HCl.
For
affected
continuous
kilns,
you
will
have
to
meet
an
HF
emission
limit
of
0.019
kilograms
per
megagram
(
kg/
Mg)
(
0.038
pounds
per
ton
(
lb/
ton))
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
or
reduce
HF
mass
emissions
by
at
least
90
percent.
You
will
also
be
required
to
meet
an
HCl
emission
limit
of
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
product
or
reduce
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
by
at
least
30
percent.
If
you
own
or
operate
a
new
affected
periodic
(
batch
process)
clay
refractory
products
kiln,
you
will
be
required
to
reduce
HF
emissions
by
at
least
90
percent
and
HCl
emissions
by
at
least
30
percent.

D.
What
Are
the
Operating
Limits?
Operating
limits
are
limits
on
operating
parameters
of
process
equipment
or
control
devices.
Today's
final
rule
specifies
process
and
control
device
operating
limits
for
thermal
process
sources
that
emit
organic
HAP
and
for
clay
refractory
kilns.
For
each
of
these
operating
limits,
you
will
be
required
to
measure
the
appropriate
operating
parameters
during
the
performance
test
and
establish
limits
on
the
operating
parameters
based
on
those
measurements.
Following
the
performance
test,
you
will
be
required
to
monitor
those
parameters
and
ensure
that
the
established
limits
are
not
exceeded.
For
affected
thermal
process
sources
that
emit
organic
HAP,
we
are
requiring
operating
limits
on
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
and
the
operating
temperatures
of
your
control
devices.
The
operating
limit
on
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
requires
you
to
maintain
the
rate
at
which
organic
HAP
are
processed
in
an
affected
process
unit
at
or
below
the
rate
measured
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
For
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
thermal
oxidizer,
you
will
be
required
to
establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
combustion
chamber
temperature.
For
affected
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
will
be
required
to
establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed.
Also,
you
must
check
the
activity
level
of
the
catalyst
at
least
every
12
months.
If
you
have
a
new
clay
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
controlled
with
a
dry
limestone
adsorber
(
DLA),
you
will
be
required
to
monitor
continuously
the
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
and
check
the
limestone
feed
hopper
and
feeder
setting
at
least
daily
to
ensure
that
the
limestone
is
free
flowing.
You
will
also
be
required
to
document
the
source
of
the
limestone
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
maintain
records
that
demonstrate
that
the
source
of
limestone
has
not
changed.
If
you
own
or
operate
a
new
clay
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
controlled
with
dry
lime
injection
fabric
filters
(
DIFF)
or
dry
lime
scrubber/
fabric
filters
(
DLS/
FF),
you
will
be
required
to
install
a
bag
leak
detection
system,
initiate
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm,
and
complete
corrective
actions
according
to
your
operation,
maintenance,
and
monitoring
(
OM&
M)
plan.
You
will
also
be
required
to
verify
at
least
once
every
8
hours
that
lime
is
free
flowing
and
record
the
lime
feeder
setting
daily
to
confirm
that
the
feeder
setting
is
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
If
you
use
a
wet
scrubber,
you
will
be
required
to
establish
operating
limits
for
the
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber,
liquid
pH,
liquid
flow
rate,
and
chemical
feed
rate
(
if
applicable).
If
you
use
a
control
device
or
technique
listed
in
today's
final
rule,
you
may
establish
operating
limits
for
alternative
operating
parameters
subject
to
prior
written
approval
by
the
Administrator
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
You
will
be
required
to
submit
the
application
for
approval
of
alternative
operating
parameters
no
later
than
the
notification
of
the
performance
test.
You
will
have
to
install,
operate,
and
maintain
the
alternative
parameter
monitoring
systems
in
accordance
with
the
application
approved
by
the
Administrator.

E.
What
Are
the
Work
Practice
Standards?
Today's
final
rule
establishes
work
practice
standards
for
existing
shape
preheaters
that
are
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products,
existing
and
new
pitch
working
tanks
that
are
used
to
produce
pitchimpregnated
refractory
products,
existing
and
new
chromium
refractory
products
kilns,
and
existing
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
If
you
operate
an
affected
existing
shape
preheater,
you
will
be
required
to
control
emissions
of
POM
from
the
shape
preheater
by
cleaning
the
residual
pitch
from
the
surfaces
of
the
baskets
or
containers
that
are
used
for
holding
refractory
shapes
in
a
shape
preheater
and
autoclave
at
least
every
ten
impregnation
cycles,
or
by
ducting
the
exhaust
from
the
shape
preheater
to
a
control
device
that
meets
the
applicable
emission
limits
for
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP.
If
you
choose
to
clean
the
basket
surfaces,
you
may
remove
residual
pitch
by
abrasive
blasting
or
subject
the
baskets
to
a
thermal
process
cycle
that
matches
or
exceeds
the
temperature
and
cycle
time
of
the
affected
shape
preheater
and
is
ducted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
is
comparable
to
the
control
device
for
your
defumer
or
coking
oven.
If
you
choose
to
duct
shape
preheater
emissions
to
a
control
device,
you
may
duct
the
emissions
to
the
coking
oven
control
device,
defumer
control
device,
or
to
another
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
is
comparable
to
the
coking
oven
or
defumer
controls
and
meets
the
applicable
emission
limits
for
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00004
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18733
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
If
you
have
an
affected
existing
or
new
pitch
working
tank,
you
must
duct
the
exhaust
from
the
tank
to
either
the
coking
oven
control
device,
the
defumer
control
device,
or
an
equivalent
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
If
you
have
an
affected
existing
or
new
chromium
refractory
products
kiln
or
an
affected
existing
clay
refractory
products
kiln,
you
must
use
natural
gas,
or
an
equivalent
fuel,
as
the
kiln
fuel
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
other
periods
when
natural
gas
is
not
available.

F.
What
Are
the
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
Emission
Limits?
Under
today's
final
rule,
you
must
conduct
an
initial
performance
test
on
each
affected
source
to
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limits.
In
accordance
with
40
CFR
63.7(
a)(
2),
you
are
required
to
conduct
the
test
within
180
days
after
the
compliance
date
using
specified
test
methods.
If
you
have
an
affected
existing
or
new
shape
dryer,
curing
oven,
kiln,
coking
oven,
or
defumer,
or
a
new
shape
preheater,
and
you
choose
to
comply
with
the
THC
concentration
limit
of
20
ppmvd
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
you
must
measure
emissions
of
THC
in
stack
gases
exhausted
to
the
atmosphere
using
EPA
Method
25A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
Determination
of
Total
Gaseous
Organic
Concentration
Using
a
Flame
Ionization
Analyzer.
You
must
also
measure
the
oxygen
concentration
of
the
stack
gas
using
EPA
Method
3A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
Determination
of
Oxygen
and
Carbon
Dioxide
Concentrations
in
Emissions
From
Stationary
Sources
(
Instrumental
Analyzer
Procedure).
If
you
decide
to
comply
with
the
95
percent
THC
reduction
limit,
you
must
measure
THC
mass
emissions
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device
using
EPA
Method
25A.
For
continuous
process
sources,
you
must
conduct
a
minimum
of
three
1­
hour
test
runs.
For
batch
process
sources,
you
must
conduct
at
least
two
test
runs.
Each
batch
process
test
run
must
be
conducted
over
a
separate
batch
cycle,
unless
you
manufacture
the
product
associated
with
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
infrequently
and
it
will
disrupt
production
to
perform
the
compliance
test
over
multiple
process
cycles.
In
such
cases,
you
may
conduct
both
runs
of
the
performance
test
simultaneously
over
a
single
batch
process
cycle
using
paired
sampling
trains.
Today's
final
rule
requires
affected
batch
process
sources
to
be
tested
throughout
two
complete
batch
cycles
unless
you
develop
an
emissions
profile
or
meet
certain
conditions
for
terminating
a
performance
test
run
before
the
completion
of
the
batch
cycle.
If
you
choose
to
develop
an
emissions
profile,
you
must
sample
THC
emissions
throughout
a
complete
batch
cycle,
determine
the
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
for
each
hour
of
the
batch
cycle,
and
identify
the
3­
hour
period
of
peak
THC
emissions.
During
any
subsequent
test
runs,
you
are
not
required
to
sample
emissions
outside
that
3­
hour
period
of
peak
THC
emissions.
During
subsequent
performance
tests,
you
will
have
to
complete
at
least
two
test
runs,
but
you
will
only
have
to
test
during
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
for
each
run.
If
you
choose
not
to
develop
an
emissions
profile,
you
may
terminate
testing
before
the
completion
of
a
batch
cycle
if
you
meet
certain
conditions.
For
each
of
two
test
runs,
you
will
have
to
begin
testing
at
the
start
of
the
batch
cycle
and
continue
testing
for
at
least
3
hours
beyond
the
precise
time
when
the
process
reaches
peak
operating
temperature.
You
may
stop
the
test
run
at
that
time
if
you
can
show
that
the
following
conditions
are
met:
(
1)
THC
concentrations
are
not
increasing
over
the
3­
hour
period
since
the
process
peak
temperature
was
reached;
(
2)
at
least
1
hour
has
passed
since
any
reduction
in
the
operating
temperature
of
the
control
device
(
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer);
and
(
3)
either
the
average
THC
concentration
at
the
inlet
to
the
control
device
for
the
previous
hour
has
not
exceeded
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
or
your
source
met
the
applicable
emission
limit
at
the
control
device
outlet
during
each
of
the
previous
3
hours
after
the
process
reached
peak
temperature.
For
both
continuous
process
and
batch
process
performance
tests,
you
must
conduct
performance
tests
on
affected
thermal
process
sources
under
the
conditions
that
will
result
in
the
highest
levels
of
organic
HAP
emissions
expected
to
occur
for
that
affected
source.
You
determine
these
``
worstcase
conditions
by
taking
into
account
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate,
the
process
operating
temperatures,
and
the
processing
times.
The
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
the
rate
at
which
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
materials
contained
in
refractory
shapes
are
processed
in
an
affected
thermal
process
source.
If
you
decide
to
start
production
of
a
refractory
product
that
is
likely
to
have
an
organic
HAP
processing
rate
that
is
more
than
10
percent
greater
than
the
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
you
will
be
required
to
conduct
a
new
performance
test
for
that
product
and
establish
a
new
operating
limit
for
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
You
will
also
have
to
conduct
a
new
performance
test
on
an
affected
uncontrolled
kiln
following
any
process
changes
that
are
likely
to
increase
kiln
emissions
of
organic
HAP.
If
the
source
is
a
batch
process
source
and
is
controlled
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
may
reduce
the
operating
temperature
of
the
control
device
or
shut
the
control
device
off
if
you
satisfy
all
of
the
following
conditions:
(
1)
You
do
not
use
an
emissions
profile
and
limit
testing
to
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period;
(
2)
at
least
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
unit
reached
its
maximum
temperature;
(
3)
the
applicable
emission
limit
(
THC
concentration
or
THC
percentage
reduction)
has
been
met
during
each
of
the
three
1­
hour
periods
since
the
process
reached
peak
temperature;
(
4)
mass
emissions
of
THC
have
not
increased
during
the
3­
hour
period
since
maximum
process
temperature
was
reached;
and
(
5)
either
the
average
THC
concentration
at
the
inlet
to
the
oxidizer
has
not
exceeded
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
at
least
1
hour,
or
the
applicable
emission
limit
has
been
met
during
each
of
the
four
15­
minute
periods
immediately
following
the
oxidizer
temperature
reduction.
If
you
elect
to
shut
off
or
reduce
the
temperature
of
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
by
satisfying
these
conditions,
you
may
use
the
results
from
the
performance
test
to
establish
the
time
at
which
the
oxidizer
for
that
specific
source
can
be
shut
off
(
or
temperature
reduced)
during
the
production
of
other
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP.
For
any
such
product,
you
must
operate
the
oxidizer
at
a
temperature
at
least
as
high
as
that
established
during
the
performance
test,
minus
16
°
C
(
25
°
F),
from
the
start
of
the
batch
cycle
until
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
reached
its
peak
temperature.
You
will
have
to
maintain
that
oxidizer
temperature
for
the
same
length
of
time
beyond
the
process
peak
temperature
as
during
the
performance
test.
For
each
new
kiln
that
manufactures
clay
refractory
products,
you
must
measure
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl
using
one
of
three
methods:
(
1)
EPA
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
Determination
of
Hydrogen
Halide
and
Halogen
Emissions
from
Stationary
Sources
 
Isokinetic
Method;
(
2)
EPA
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
Determination
of
Hydrogen
Halide
and
Halogen
Emissions
from
Stationary
Sources
 
Non­
isokinetic
Method;
or
(
3)

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00005
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18734
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
EPA
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
Measurement
of
Vapor
Phase
Organic
and
Inorganic
Emissions
by
Extractive
Fourier
Transfer
Infrared
(
FTIR)
Spectroscopy.
You
can
use
Method
26
only
if
the
gas
stream
does
not
contain
HF
or
HCl
in
the
solid
phase
(
e.
g.,
HF
as
PM
or
HCl
as
PM).
You
must
conduct
the
tests
for
HF
and
HCl
while
the
affected
kiln
is
operating
at
the
maximum
production
level
likely
to
occur.
Each
test
run
must
last
at
least
1
hour
in
duration.
If
you
have
an
affected
continuous
clay
refractory
products
kiln,
you
must
determine
initial
compliance
with
the
production­
based
mass
emission
limits
for
HF
and
HCl
by
calculating
the
mass
emissions
per
unit
of
production
for
each
test
run
using
the
mass
emission
rates
of
HF
and
HCl
and
the
rate
at
which
uncalcined
clay
is
processed
(
on
a
fired­
product
basis),
as
measured
during
your
performance
test.
To
determine
initial
compliance
with
any
of
the
percentage
reduction
emission
limits,
you
must
measure
mass
emissions
of
the
specific
HAP
(
HF
or
HCl)
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device
for
each
test
run.
If
you
have
an
affected
batch
process
clay
refractory
kiln,
you
must
comply
with
the
percentage
reduction
limit.
You
will
be
required
to
test
throughout
two
complete
batch
cycles
unless
you
develop
an
emissions
profile.
If
you
choose
to
develop
an
emissions
profile,
you
must
sample
HF
and
HCl
emissions
throughout
one
complete
batch
cycle.
For
both
continuous
and
batch
process
kilns,
you
must
measure
and
record
the
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate
for
each
test
run.
If
you
own
or
operate
an
affected
new
clay
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
controlled
with
a
DLA,
and
you
decide
to
change
the
source
of
limestone,
you
must
repeat
the
performance
test
on
the
kiln
within
60
days
of
the
date
when
you
begin
using
limestone
from
the
new
limestone
source.
In
addition
to
the
procedures
previously
described,
you
will
be
required
to
follow
the
procedures
specified
in
EPA
Methods
1
to
4
of
appendix
A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
where
applicable.
You
must
perform
EPA
Method
1,
Sample
and
Velocity
Traverses
for
Stationary
Sources,
(
or
Method
1A)
to
select
the
locations
of
sampling
points
and
the
number
of
traverse
points.
You
must
perform
EPA
Method
2,
Determination
of
Stack
Gas
Velocity
and
Volumetric
Flow
Rate
(
Type
S
Pitot
Tube),
(
or
Method
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
or
2G)
to
determine
gas
velocity
and
volumetric
flow
rate.
You
must
perform
EPA
Method
3,
Gas
Analysis
for
the
Determination
of
Dry
Molecular
Weight,
(
or
Method
3A
or
3B)
to
determine
the
exhaust
gas
molecular
weight.
You
must
perform
EPA
Method
4,
Determination
of
Moisture
Content
in
Stack
Gases,
to
measure
the
moisture
content
of
the
exhaust
gas.
Prior
to
the
initial
performance
test,
you
must
install
any
continuous
parameter
monitoring
systems
(
CPMS)
that
are
required
for
demonstrating
continuous
compliance.
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
use
those
CPMS
to
establish
the
applicable
operating
limits
(
e.
g.,
minimum
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature).

G.
What
Are
the
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
a
Work
Practice
Standard?
If
you
own
or
operate
an
affected
existing
shape
preheater,
an
existing
pitch
working
tank,
or
a
new
pitch
working
tank,
you
must
select
a
method
for
complying
with
the
applicable
work
practice
standard
and
provide
a
description
of
that
method
as
part
of
your
initial
notification,
as
required
by
40
CFR
63.9(
b)(
2).
For
affected
shape
preheaters,
if
you
choose
to
comply
with
the
work
practice
standard
by
cleaning
pitch
from
basket
or
container
surfaces,
you
must
describe
in
your
initial
notification
the
cleaning
method.
If
you
choose
to
comply
by
capturing
and
ducting
emissions
from
the
shape
preheater
to
a
control
device,
you
must
describe
the
design
(
e.
g.,
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
and
residence
time)
and
operation
of
that
control
device.
For
affected
existing
or
new
pitch
working
tanks,
you
must
describe,
in
your
initial
notification,
the
design
and
operation
of
the
control
device
to
which
the
emissions
from
the
working
tank
are
exhausted.
You
also
must
verify
that
the
performance
of
the
control
device
is
the
same
as,
or
is
equivalent
to,
the
control
device
that
is
used
to
control
organic
HAP
emissions
from
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven.
For
affected
new
or
existing
chromium
refractory
products
kilns
and
for
existing
clay
refractory
products
kilns,
you
must
indicate,
in
your
initial
notification,
the
type
of
fuel
used
in
those
kilns.

H.
What
Are
the
Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
Emission
Limits?
Today's
final
rule
requires
owners
and
operators
of
affected
sources
to
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
emission
limitation.
You
must
follow
the
requirements
in
your
OM&
M
plan
and
in
your
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
(
SSMP)
and
document
conformance
with
both
plans.
For
each
affected
source
equipped
with
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
(
APCD),
you
must
inspect
each
system
at
least
once
each
calendar
year
and
record
the
results
of
each
inspection.
You
must
install,
operate,
and
maintain
each
required
CPMS
to
monitor
the
operating
parameters
established
during
your
initial
performance
test.
You
must
collect
all
data
while
the
process
is
operational.
You
will
have
to
operate
the
CPMS
at
all
times
when
the
process
is
operating.
You
must
also
conduct
proper
maintenance
of
the
CPMS,
including
inspections,
calibrations,
and
validation
checks.
You
must
repeat
any
required
performance
tests
at
least
every
5
years.
For
each
affected
source,
you
must
monitor
and
maintain
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
below
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
You
must
also
record
the
process
operating
temperature
hourly.
For
batch
process
sources,
you
must
record
the
cycle
time
for
each
batch
cycle.
If
you
decide
to
start
production
of
a
refractory
product
that
is
likely
to
have
an
organic
HAP
processing
rate
that
is
more
than
10
percent
greater
than
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
you
will
have
to
conduct
a
new
performance
test
for
that
product
and
establish
a
new
operating
limit
for
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
For
affected
continuous
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
thermal
oxidizer,
you
must
maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
combustion
chamber
temperature
at
or
above
the
combustion
chamber
temperature
operating
limit
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
For
affected
continuous
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
must
maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
corresponding
temperature
operating
limit
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
For
affected
batch
process
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
thermal
oxidizer,
you
must
maintain
the
average
hourly
combustion
chamber
temperature
at
or
above
the
combustion
chamber
temperature
operating
limit
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
To
document
compliance
with
these
operating
limits
for
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizers,
you
must
measure
and
record
the
specified
average
hourly
temperatures.
You
must
also
report
any
average
hourly
control
device
operating
temperature
below
the
operating
limit
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00006
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18735
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
If
you
control
emissions
from
an
affected
source
using
process
modifications
or
an
add­
on
control
device
other
than
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
operating
a
THC
continuous
emission
monitoring
system
(
CEMS)
in
accordance
with
Procedure
1
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
For
new
clay
refractory
kilns
that
are
controlled
with
a
DLA,
you
must
monitor
continuously
the
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA.
You
also
must
check
the
limestone
feed
hopper
and
limestone
feeder
setting
daily
to
ensure
that
there
is
limestone
in
the
hopper,
the
limestone
is
free
flowing,
and
the
feed
rate
has
not
changed.
In
addition,
you
must
continue
using
the
same
source
of
limestone
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
maintain
records
that
demonstrate
that
the
source
of
limestone
has
not
changed.
For
new
clay
refractory
kilns
that
are
controlled
with
a
DIFF
or
DLS/
FF,
you
must
maintain
free­
flowing
lime
in
the
feed
hopper
or
silo
at
all
times.
You
also
must
maintain
the
lime
feeder
setting
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
record
the
feeder
setting
once
each
day.
You
must
initiate
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm
and
complete
corrective
actions
according
to
your
OM&
M
plan.
For
kilns
that
are
controlled
with
a
wet
scrubber,
you
must
continuously
maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
scrubber
pressure
drop,
scrubber
liquid
pH,
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate,
and
chemical
addition
rate
(
if
applicable)
at
or
above
the
corresponding
operating
limits
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
Finally,
you
must
record
the
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate
for
all
affected
kilns.
If
you
operate
an
affected
continuous
kiln,
you
may
bypass
the
control
device
and
continue
operating
the
kiln
during
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
on
the
kiln
control
device,
upon
approval
of
the
permitting
authority.
However,
you
must
request
prior
approval
from
the
permitting
authority
before
taking
the
control
device
offline.
You
must
minimize
HAP
emissions
during
the
period
when
the
control
device
is
offline.
You
must
also
minimize
the
time
period
when
the
control
device
is
offline.
Unlike
scheduled
maintenance,
a
malfunction
of
a
control
device
must
be
addressed
in
your
SSMP.
As
specified
in
40
CFR
63.6(
f)(
1)
and
(
h)(
1),
emission
standards
do
not
apply
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction.
I.
What
Are
the
Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
for
Sources
Subject
to
a
Work
Practice
Standard?

If
you
have
an
affected
existing
shape
preheater,
an
existing
pitch
working
tank,
or
a
new
pitch
working
tank,
you
must
perform
the
appropriate
work
practice,
and
you
must
document
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
that
you
have
complied
with
the
work
practice
standard,
as
required
by
40
CFR
63.9.
For
affected
new
or
existing
chromium
refractory
products
kilns
and
for
existing
clay
refractory
products
kilns,
you
must
use
natural
gas,
or
its
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel,
and
document
the
type
of
fuel
used.
During
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
other
periods
when
natural
gas
is
unavailable,
you
are
allowed
to
use
an
alternative
fuel.
However,
you
must
meet
the
notification
requirements
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9812(
f)
and
the
reporting
requirements
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9814(
g).
You
must
also
incorporate
procedures
for
using
alternative
fuels
in
your
OM&
M
Plan.

J.
What
Are
the
Notification,
Recordkeeping,
and
Reporting
Requirements?

If
you
have
an
affected
refractory
products
manufacturing
source,
you
must
submit
initial
notifications,
notifications
of
performance
tests,
and
notifications
of
compliance
status
by
the
specified
dates
in
the
final
rule,
which
may
vary
depending
on
whether
the
affected
source
is
new
or
existing.
In
addition
to
the
information
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9(
h)(
2)(
i),
you
must
also
include
the
following
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status:
(
1)
The
operating
limit
parameter
values
established
for
each
affected
source
and
a
description
of
the
procedures
used
to
establish
the
values;
(
2)
design
information
and
analysis
demonstrating
conformance
with
requirements
for
capture
and
collection
systems;
(
3)
your
OM&
M
plan,
as
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9794;
(
4)
your
SSMP;
and
(
5)
descriptions
of
the
methods
you
use
to
comply
with
any
applicable
work
practice
standards.
You
must
submit
semiannual
compliance
reports
containing
statements
and
information
concerning
emission
limitation
deviations,
out
of
control
CPMS,
and
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
when
actions
consistent
with
the
approved
SSMP
were
taken
in
accordance
with
40
CFR
63.6(
e)(
3).
If
you
operate
an
affected
clay
or
chromium
refractory
products
kiln
and
you
must
use
an
alternative
fuel
due
to
a
natural
gas
curtailment
or
other
interruption
of
natural
gas
supply,
you
must
submit
a
notification
of
alternative
fuel
use
that
includes
the
information
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9812(
f).
You
must
submit
a
report
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
10
working
days
after
terminating
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel.
The
report
must
include
the
information
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9814(
g).
If
you
operate
a
continuous
kiln
that
is
an
affected
thermal
process
source
of
organic
HAP
or
is
a
new
clay
refractory
products
kiln,
and
you
must
take
the
control
device
offline
for
scheduled
maintenance,
you
must
request
prior
approval
from
the
permitting
authority,
as
specified
in
40
CFR
63.9792(
e).
In
addition,
you
must
maintain
records
of
all
maintenance
activities
and
the
time
intervals
when
the
control
device
is
offline.
Finally,
you
must
incorporate
into
your
OM&
M
plan
the
procedures
for
minimizing
HAP
emissions
when
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
For
all
affected
sources,
you
must
maintain
records
for
at
least
5
years
from
the
date
on
which
the
data
are
recorded.
You
must
keep
the
records
onsite
for
at
least
the
first
2
years,
but
you
can
store
the
records
offsite
for
the
remaining
3
years.

K.
What
Are
the
Compliance
Deadlines?

Existing
sources
must
comply
within
3
years
of
the
date
of
publication
of
today's
final
rule.
New
or
reconstructed
sources
must
comply
at
startup
or
upon
the
date
of
publication
of
today's
final
rule,
depending
on
their
startup
date.

III.
Summary
of
Major
Changes
Since
Proposal
A.
Emission
Limits
and
Work
Practice
Standards
For
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP,
we
replaced
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit
with
a
95
percent
THC
reduction
limit.
We
believe
that
the
95
percent
THC
reduction
limit
will
result
in
organic
HAP
emissions
reductions
that
are
comparable
to
the
reductions
that
would
have
been
achieved
through
the
proposed
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency
limit.
Furthermore,
percentage
reduction
provides
a
better
measure
of
the
performance
of
a
control
device
in
reducing
organic
emissions
than
does
combustion
efficiency,
because
percentage
reduction
is
a
direct
measure
of
reductions
in
THC
emissions
across
the
control
device.
In
addition,
the
combination
of
the
proposed
THC
concentration
and
the
percentage
reduction
limits
allows
considerable
flexibility
in
how
owners
and
operators
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00007
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18736
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
choose
to
comply
with
today's
final
rule.
The
available
emission
data
for
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
indicate
that
sources
that
are
controlled
to
levels
above
the
MACT
floor
(
i.
e.,
more
stringent
than
the
MACT
floor
control
level)
achieve
THC
emissions
reductions
of
at
least
95
percent,
and
sources
that
are
controlled
to
levels
below
the
MACT
floor
achieve
THC
emissions
reductions
that
are
less
than
95
percent.
Based
on
our
analysis
of
the
data,
we
concluded
that
a
95
percent
THC
reduction
represents
the
level
of
emissions
control
that
is
achieved
by
a
thermal
process
source
of
organic
HAP
that
is
controlled
to
the
MACT
floor
level.
Additional
information
on
our
analysis
of
the
available
THC
emission
reduction
data
is
provided
in
Docket
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088.
We
did
not
propose
a
percentage
THC
reduction
because
we
believed
that
testing
the
inlets
of
the
control
devices
used
on
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP
was
not
feasible
for
most
sources.
However,
based
on
the
public
comments
received
on
the
proposed
rule,
we
believe
that
refractory
products
manufacturers
can
measure
THC
at
the
inlets
and
outlets
of
most
affected
sources.
Furthermore,
those
facilities
that
cannot
obtain
inlet
and
outlet
measurements
still
have
the
option
of
complying
with
the
20
ppmvd
THC
emission
limit.
For
the
proposed
rule,
we
developed
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
based
on
the
emission
levels
that
could
be
achieved
by
the
best­
controlled
kiln
in
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry.
Since
proposal,
we
have
obtained
additional
information
on
the
types
of
emission
controls
used
in
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry
to
reduce
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl
from
kilns.
Based
on
that
information,
we
have
concluded
that
the
best­
controlled
similar
source
for
clay
refractory
products
kilns
is
a
small
brick
kiln
that
is
controlled
with
a
DLA.
A
small
brick
kiln
is
a
kiln
with
a
production
capacity
of
less
than
9.1
Mg
per
hour
(
Mg/
hr)
(
10
tons
per
hour
(
tons/
hr)).
The
data
indicate
that
a
DLA
can
achieve
HF
emissions
reductions
of
90
percent
and
HCl
emissions
reductions
of
30
percent.
We
used
those
emissions
reductions
to
develop
the
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
specified
in
the
final
rule.
The
revised
emission
limits
for
HF
are
a
90
percent
reduction
or
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed.
For
HCl,
the
revised
emission
limits
are
a
30
percent
reduction
or
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed.
For
proposal,
we
based
the
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns
on
emission
data
for
a
brick
kiln
that
was
controlled
with
a
DLS/
FF.
When
we
developed
those
proposed
emission
limits,
we
made
no
distinction
between
kiln
size
and
control
options.
However,
a
review
of
the
emission
data
for
controlled
brick
kilns
indicates
that
kiln
size
must
be
considered
when
determining
feasible
control
options
for
reducing
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl.
For
brick
kilns
with
production
capacities
of
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr)
or
greater
(
i.
e.,
large
kilns),
several
control
devices
have
been
demonstrated
to
be
highly
effective
in
reducing
HF
and
HCl
emissions.
Those
controls
include
DLS/
FF,
DIFF,
and
wet
scrubbers.
However,
for
brick
kilns
that
are
designed
with
production
capacities
below
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr),
only
the
DLA
has
been
demonstrated
to
be
a
feasible
control
option
for
HF
and
HCl.
With
DLS/
FF,
DIFF,
and
wet
scrubbers,
it
is
necessary
to
maintain
minimum
exhaust
gas
flow
rates
for
effective
HF
and
HCl
removal,
and
those
minimum
exhaust
flow
rates
are
significantly
greater
than
the
flow
rates
characteristic
of
small
brick
kilns.
On
the
other
hand,
the
performance
of
the
DLA
is
unaffected
by
exhaust
gas
flow
rates
through
the
system,
and
DLA
have
been
used
on
small
brick
kilns.
Consequently,
we
have
concluded
that
the
bestcontrolled
small
brick
kiln
is
equipped
with
a
DLA.
We
have
also
concluded
that
clay
refractory
products
kilns
are
similar
to
small
brick
kilns
because
90
percent
of
the
clay
refractory
products
tunnel
kilns
currently
in
use
were
designed
to
operate
at
4.5
Mg/
hr
(
5
tons/
hr)
or
less,
and
there
are
no
clay
refractory
products
kilns
that
operate
with
production
rates
greater
than
8.2
Mg/
hr
(
9
tons/
hr).
For
existing
clay
and
chromium
refractory
products
kilns,
we
are
still
requiring
limits
on
the
types
of
fuels
that
can
be
used
in
affected
kilns.
However,
we
have
also
included
a
provision
for
the
affected
facilities
to
use
alternative
fuels
during
specified
times
of
natural
gas
curtailment
and
during
other
times
when
natural
gas
is
unavailable.
To
comply
with
this
provision,
owners
or
operators
of
affected
kilns
must
notify
the
permitting
authority
within
48
hours
following
the
declaration
of
such
an
emergency
or
the
interruption
of
the
natural
gas
supply.
In
addition,
within
10
working
days
after
the
facility
terminates
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel,
the
final
rule
requires
submittal
of
a
report
that
details
the
dates
of
alternative
fuel
usage
and
the
amount
of
alternative
fuel
used.
B.
Compliance
Testing
For
batch
process
sources,
we
have
reduced
the
minimum
number
of
compliance
test
runs
from
three
to
two.
We
believe
that
two
test
runs
are
adequate
for
characterizing
emissions
from
batch
process
sources.
Although
we
are
still
requiring
a
minimum
of
three
1­
hour
test
runs
for
continuous
sources,
we
believe
that
it
is
unnecessary
to
test
batch
process
sources
for
three
runs.
Under
the
final
rule,
each
test
run
on
a
batch
process
source
will
last
at
least
3
hours,
and
in
most
cases
a
test
run
will
last
considerably
longer
(
i.
e.,
in
excess
of
10
hours).
Thus,
even
with
the
reduced
number
of
test
runs,
an
emission
test
on
a
batch
process
source
will
still
require
a
much
longer
test
period
than
a
test
on
a
continuous
process
source.
Because
of
the
extensive
duration
of
each
test
run,
we
believe
that
a
second
test
run
is
adequate
for
corroborating
the
results
of
the
initial
test
run,
and
a
third
test
run
is
unnecessary.
Many
batch
process
refractory
products
are
specialty
items
that
are
produced
infrequently.
Because
we
are
requiring
each
test
run
to
be
conducted
over
a
separate
batch
process
cycle,
it
may
not
be
practical,
and
it
may
disrupt
production
of
other
products,
to
require
testing
over
separate
cycles.
In
some
cases,
conducting
the
compliance
test
over
multiple
process
cycles
could
require
a
testing
period
of
weeks
or
months,
thereby
preventing
the
use
of
the
batch
process
source
for
manufacturing
other
refractory
products.
For
this
same
reason,
we
have
included
in
today's
final
rule
a
provision
for
allowing
owners
and
operators
to
conduct
both
test
runs
simultaneously
over
a
single
batch
process
cycle
using
paired
sampling
trains,
under
certain
conditions.
Rather
than
basing
compliance
on
a
rolling
3­
hour
average,
today's
final
rule
requires
compliance
for
batch
process
sources
to
be
based
on
emissions
over
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period.
For
situations
in
which
a
facility
begins
production
of
a
new
product
that
constitutes
a
slight
increase
in
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate,
we
are
no
longer
requiring
a
repeat
performance
test.
Specifically,
if
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
for
the
new
product
is
no
more
than
10
percent
greater
than
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
compliance
test,
a
repeat
performance
test
is
not
required.
We
believe
this
change
is
appropriate
for
several
reasons.
The
HAP
content
of
some
raw
materials
used
in
refractory
products
manufacturing
can
vary
slightly
from
shipment
to
shipment,
and
those
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00008
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18737
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
variations
may
be
beyond
the
control
of
the
user.
The
net
increase
in
controlled
emissions
from
a
source
that
uses
a
material
with
a
slightly
higher
HAP
content
would
most
likely
be
within
the
measurement
error
of
the
test
method.
On
the
other
hand,
if
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
for
the
new
product
is
more
than
10
percent
greater
than
the
operating
limit
for
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate,
a
new
compliance
test
must
be
performed.

C.
Control
Device
Monitoring
and
Operation
In
the
final
rule,
we
have
added
the
requirement
that
owners
or
operators
of
affected
sources
that
are
controlled
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer
must
have
the
catalyst
activity
level
checked
at
least
every
12
months
and
take
any
necessary
corrective
action,
such
as
replacing
the
catalyst,
to
ensure
that
the
catalyst
is
performing
as
designed.
We
continue
to
require
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
monitoring.
However,
we
believe
this
additional
requirement
is
needed
because,
unlike
thermal
oxidizers,
catalytic
oxidizer
performance
cannot
be
ensured
simply
by
monitoring
the
operating
temperature.
Catalyst
beds
can
become
poisoned
and
rendered
ineffective
without
any
apparent
change
in
operation.
Requiring
an
annual
check
of
catalyst
activity
will
help
to
identify
catalyst
poisoning
and
other
potential
performance
problems
before
they
become
serious.
An
activity
level
check
can
consist
of
passing
an
organic
compound
of
known
concentration
through
a
sample
of
the
catalyst,
measuring
the
percentage
reduction
of
the
compound
across
the
catalyst
sample,
and
comparing
that
percentage
reduction
to
the
percentage
reduction
for
a
fresh
sample
of
the
same
type
of
catalyst.
We
have
made
several
changes
to
the
monitoring
requirements
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
We
have
added
monitoring
requirements
for
kilns
controlled
with
a
DLA.
Specifically,
owners
or
operators
of
affected
kilns
are
required
to
monitor
continuously
the
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA,
check
the
limestone
feed
hopper
daily
to
ensure
that
limestone
is
free
flowing,
check
the
limestone
feeder
setting
daily,
use
the
same
source
of
limestone
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
and
maintain
records
that
demonstrate
that
the
source
of
limestone
has
not
changed.
We
have
eliminated
the
requirement
to
monitor
the
fabric
filter
inlet
temperature
for
affected
clay
refractory
kilns
that
are
controlled
with
a
DIFF
or
a
DLS/
FF.
Finally,
we
have
eliminated
the
requirement
to
monitor
the
water
injection
rate
for
kilns
that
are
controlled
with
a
DLS/
FF.
We
have
also
included
in
the
final
rule
a
provision
to
allow
owners
and
operators
of
affected
continuous
process
kilns
to
bypass
the
control
device
and
continue
operating
the
kilns
during
periods
when
the
control
device
is
offline
for
scheduled
maintenance.
However,
the
owner
or
operator
must
request
approval
from
the
permitting
authority
before
taking
the
control
device
out
of
service.
The
owner
or
operator
must
minimize
the
time
periods
during
which
the
control
device
is
offline
and
must
also
minimize
HAP
emissions
from
the
affected
sources
during
these
periods.
The
owner
or
operator
must
also
maintain
records
of
all
maintenance
activities
and
the
time
when
the
control
device
was
offline.
In
addition,
procedures
for
minimizing
HAP
emissions
during
periods
when
the
control
device
is
offline
must
be
incorporated
into
the
OM&
M
plan
for
the
kiln.

D.
Definitions
We
have
modified
the
definitions
of
refractory
product
and
research
and
development
process
unit,
and
have
added
definitions
for
dry
limestone
adsorber,
period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
resin­
bonded
refractory
products,
pitchbonded
refractory
products,
and
redundant
sensor.
We
also
deleted
the
incorporation
by
reference
of
the
publication
``
Industrial
Ventilation:
A
Manual
of
Recommended
Practice.''

IV.
Summary
of
Responses
to
Major
Comments
A.
MACT
Floors
Comment:
One
commenter
pointed
out
that
more
than
30
refractory
products
manufacturing
plants
have
closed
permanently
over
the
past
3
years.
The
commenter
stated
that
the
MACT
floors
used
to
develop
the
proposed
rule
are
based
on
data
that
no
longer
reflect
the
current
status
of
the
industry.
The
commenter
believes
that
it
is
improper
for
us
to
use
the
old
data
while
the
industry
is
in
the
process
of
realignment.
In
response
to
a
request
by
us,
the
same
commenter
provided
a
list
of
35
plants
that
have
closed
recently.
Response:
We
have
reviewed
the
list
of
35
recently
closed
plants
provided
by
the
commenter
and
among
those
plants,
we
considered
only
one,
the
North
American
Refractories
plant
in
Womelsdorf,
PA,
to
be
a
major
or
synthetic
area
source
of
organic
HAP.
However,
we
were
aware
of
the
impending
closure
of
that
particular
facility
before
we
determined
the
MACT
floors
for
the
proposed
rule,
and
we
did
not
include
affected
sources
at
that
plant
in
our
MACT
floor
analyses.
Because
we
based
our
determination
of
the
MACT
floors
for
sources
of
organic
HAP
emissions
only
on
major
and
synthetic
area
sources
and
none
of
those
plants
has
closed,
the
closing
of
the
35
plants
has
no
impact
on
the
MACT
floor
analyses
used
to
develop
the
proposed
or
final
NESHAP.

B.
Emission
Limits
Comment:
One
commenter
stated
that
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit
has
no
relationship
to
the
MACT
floors
for
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP.
He
believes
that
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit
is
an
arbitrary
limit
based
on
theoretical
calculations
and
is
not
supported
by
the
data.
The
commenter
also
stated
that
we
cannot
identify
any
plants
that
have
met
a
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency.
He
believes
that
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit
cannot
be
met
by
existing
sources;
consequently,
the
stringency
of
the
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency
limit
will
force
all
affected
facilities
to
meet
the
alternative
proposed
limit
on
THC.
The
same
commenter
stated
that
he
has
been
informed
by
control
device
vendors
that
sources
would
have
to
operate
well
above
the
MACT
floor
level
of
control
to
meet
a
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency
limit.
Another
commenter
agreed
that
the
combustion
efficiency
limit
will
force
the
industry
to
meet
the
alternative
THC
limit.
Both
commenters
also
stated
that
most
of
the
thermal
oxidizers
currently
used
in
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
would
not
be
able
to
meet
the
outlet
exhaust
gas
limitation
of
3
percent
carbon
dioxide
that
is
a
prerequisite
for
choosing
the
combustion
efficiency
limit
compliance
option.
One
commenter
added
that
sources
controlled
with
catalytic
oxidizers
would
be
unable
to
meet
the
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency
limit.
The
same
two
commenters
also
commented
on
the
appropriateness
of
a
combustion
efficiency
limit.
One
of
the
commenters
stated
that
he
contacted
thermal
oxidizer
vendors
and
a
trade
association
that
represents
control
device
manufacturers
and
vendors,
all
of
whom
stated
that
they
were
unfamiliar
with
combustion
efficiency.
They
indicated
that
thermal
oxidizer
performance
guarantees
invariably
are
written
in
terms
of
destruction
and
removal
efficiency
(
DRE).
The
other
commenter
concurred
that
vendors
offer
performance
guarantees
in
terms
of
DRE
and
not
in
terms
of
combustion
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00009
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18738
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
efficiency.
The
commenter
stated
that
he
believes
that
there
is
no
known
correlation
between
combustion
efficiency
and
DRE,
and
he
noted
that
we
also
have
made
that
point
on
several
occasions.
Finally,
the
same
commenter
stated
that
the
Pennsylvania
Department
of
Environmental
Resources
informed
him
that
they
do
not
incorporate
emission
limits
for
combustion
efficiency
in
their
operating
permits.
Response:
After
reviewing
these
comments,
we
have
decided
not
to
include
the
combustion
efficiency
limit
in
the
final
rule.
Although
we
still
maintain
that
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit
could
be
achieved
by
refractory
products
manufacturing
sources
that
are
controlled
to
the
MACT
floor
level,
we
acknowledge
that
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
personnel,
vendors,
emission
testing
contractors,
and
permitting
agency
personnel
may
not
be
familiar
with
the
concept
of
using
combustion
efficiency
as
a
measure
of
the
control
of
organic
pollutants.
In
addition,
combustion
efficiency
is
essentially
an
indicator
of
control
device
performance
rather
than
a
direct
measure
of
emissions
reductions
or
control.
There
are
alternatives
to
a
combustion
efficiency
limit
that
provide
reliable
measures
of
control
device
performance
and
emissions
reductions,
and
we
have
included
one
such
alternative,
a
percentage
THC
reduction,
in
the
final
rule.
We
believe
that
a
THC
percentage
reduction
is
a
more
appropriate
format
for
an
emission
limit
than
is
combustion
efficiency
because
percentage
reduction
is
a
measure
of
emissions
reductions
and
can
be
related
directly
to
the
MACT
floor
for
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP.
Comment:
Two
commenters
recommended
that
we
consider
a
limit
on
DRE
instead
of
a
combustion
efficiency
limit.
One
of
the
commenters
stated
that
control
device
vendors
typically
offer
performance
guarantees
in
terms
of
a
DRE
limit,
coupled
with
an
outlet
concentration
limit
for
lowemitting
sources.
The
other
commenter
stated
that
an
alternative
limit
of
95
percent
DRE
for
THC
would
be
appropriate
for
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.
One
of
the
commenters
evaluated
two
catalytic
oxidizers
used
at
his
facility.
He
concluded
that
the
oxidizers
would
be
unable
to
meet
a
99.8
percent
combustion
efficiency
limit
or
the
proposed
THC
limit
of
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
However,
he
believes
that
both
of
the
catalytic
oxidizers
he
evaluated
could
achieve
a
DRE
of
approximately
95
percent.
The
same
commenter
also
disagreed
with
our
statement
that
a
DRE
limit
would
be
problematic
due
to
the
lack
of
access
to
control
device
inlets
for
emission
testing
on
most
affected
sources.
He
stated
that
facilities
can
retrofit
existing
sources
to
allow
for
control
device
inlet
testing.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenters
that
a
DRE
limit,
which
generally
is
referred
to
as
a
percentage
reduction
limit
in
NESHAP,
would
be
appropriate
for
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.
Consequently,
we
have
decided
to
incorporate
an
emission
limit
of
95
percent
THC
reduction
in
today's
final
rule
as
an
alternative
to
the
THC
emission
concentration
limit.
We
believe
that
percentage
reduction
provides
the
best
measure
of
the
performance
of
a
control
device
in
reducing
organic
emissions.
Because
percentage
reduction
is
a
direct
measure
of
emissions
reductions,
we
also
believe
it
is
more
consistent
with
the
MACT
floor
concept
than
is
the
proposed
combustion
efficiency
limit.
Unlike
combustion
efficiency,
we
have
THC
percentage
reduction
data
for
several
refractory
products
manufacturing
sources.
By
comparing
those
data
to
the
MACT
floor
levels
established
by
today's
rule
(
see
Docket
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088),
we
were
able
to
conclude
that
the
95
percent
THC
reduction
limit
that
we
have
incorporated
into
the
final
rule
is
representative
of
the
emissions
reductions
that
sources
controlled
to
the
MACT
floor
level
should
be
able
to
achieve
on
a
consistent
basis.
Comment:
One
commenter
commented
on
the
fact
that
the
same
combustion
efficiency
limit
was
proposed
for
several
different
types
of
thermal
process
sources,
such
as
periodic
kilns,
tunnel
kilns,
dryers,
and
coking
ovens.
He
believes
that
differences
in
the
operation
of
these
various
types
of
sources
warrant
different
emission
limits.
Response:
We
considered
establishing
separate
emission
limits
for
each
type
of
thermal
process
source
of
organic
HAP.
However,
the
MACT
floors
for
both
existing
and
new
sources
are
based
on
thermal
oxidizer
control,
and
the
MACT
floor
level
thermal
oxidizer
operating
temperatures
and
residence
times
are
similar
for
the
various
types
of
thermal
process
sources.
These
thermal
oxidizers
represent
relatively
high
levels
of
control,
and
based
on
their
design
and
operating
parameters,
we
would
not
expect
there
to
be
significant
differences
in
performance
levels
among
them.
Furthermore,
when
the
theoretical
performance
levels
of
these
thermal
oxidizers
are
compared,
the
Arrhenius
equation
predicts
that
all
of
them
would
achieve
essentially
complete
control
of
organic
emissions.
The
available
valid
emission
test
data
on
organic
emissions
from
controlled
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP
also
do
not
support
making
such
distinctions
in
emission
limits.
Consequently,
we
decided
to
establish
the
same
emission
limits
for
all
types
of
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP
subject
to
today's
final
rule.
Comment:
Two
commenters
stated
that
the
available
emission
data
do
not
support
the
proposed
THC
limit
of
20
ppmvd.
The
commenters
believe
that
the
data
support
an
emission
limit
of
30
ppmvd
THC,
based
on
the
average
THC
emission
concentration
for
the
available
test
data
on
controlled
kilns.
Response:
To
determine
the
MACT
floors
and
the
corresponding
emission
limits
for
existing
sources,
we
first
must
consider
the
number
of
sources
in
operation
at
major
and
synthetic
area
source
facilities.
In
the
case
of
kilns
that
are
used
to
fire
refractory
products
that
contain
organic
HAP,
there
are
fewer
than
30
kilns
that
can
be
considered
in
establishing
the
MACT
floor.
Under
section
112(
d)(
3)
of
the
CAA,
we
must
select
the
average
or
median
of
the
bestperforming
five
sources.
In
this
case,
the
MACT
floor
for
kilns
corresponds
to
the
third­
best
performing
kiln.
To
rank
kilns
in
terms
of
their
performance
in
controlling
organic
HAP
emissions,
we
needed
emissions
data
for
each
of
the
best­
performing
kilns.
However,
we
did
not
have
data
on
emissions
of
organic
HAP
(
or
THC
as
a
surrogate
for
organic
HAP)
for
any
of
the
best­
controlled
kilns.
The
specific
kilns
referenced
by
the
commenters
are
not
among
the
best­
performing
kilns
in
operation
at
major
or
synthetic
area
source
facilities,
so
it
would
be
contrary
to
the
requirements
of
the
CAA
to
average
emission
data
for
those
kilns,
as
the
commenters
suggest,
because
such
an
average
would
include
data
from
sources
that
are
clearly
not
among
the
top
five
best­
performing
kilns
located
at
major
or
synthetic
area
source
facilities.
An
alternative
approach
to
determining
MACT
floors
by
ranking
sources
according
to
demonstrated
emissions
reductions
is
to
rank
the
sources
based
on
the
likely
performance
level
of
the
control
devices
in
place.
We
used
this
alternative
approach
to
determine
the
MACT
floors
for
organic
HAP
emissions
from
thermal
process
sources.
Using
the
Arrhenius
equation,
we
ranked
all
of
the
controlled
kilns
located
at
major
or
synthetic
area
source
facilities
and
selected
the
third­
best
kiln
as
the
MACT
floor.
However,
to
develop
the
20
ppmvd
THC
emission
limit,
we
did
consider
all
of
the
available
data,

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00010
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18739
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
including
the
kiln
emission
data
referenced
by
the
commenters.
After
considering
the
design
of
the
control
devices
for
those
kilns
and
the
likely
variations
in
emission
data,
we
concluded
that
the
available
data
support
a
20
ppmvd
THC
emission
limit.
Comment:
One
commenter
stated
that
Congress
intended
MACT
standards
to
be
industry­
specific,
and
he
objected
to
the
use
of
data
for
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry
to
establish
emission
limits
for
HF
and
HCl
from
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
The
commenter
stated
that
it
is
inappropriate
to
use
data
from
another
industry
to
develop
emission
limits
for
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.
Response:
Section
112(
d)
of
the
CAA
requires
us
to
establish
emission
limits
for
new
sources
based
on
the
performance
of
the
best­
controlled
similar
source.
The
CAA
does
not
specify
that
the
similar
source
must
be
within
the
same
source
category.
To
the
contrary,
our
interpretation
of
section
112(
d)
is
that
we
are
obligated
to
consider
similar
sources
from
other
source
categories
in
determining
the
best­
controlled
similar
source
for
establishing
MACT
for
new
sources.
For
clay
refractory
products
kilns,
we
concluded
that
the
best­
controlled
similar
sources
are
found
in
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry.
We
believe
that
brick
kilns
are
similar
to
clay
refractory
products
kilns
for
several
reasons:
(
1)
Most
clay
refractory
products
are
fired
in
tunnel
kilns,
as
is
the
case
for
brick
manufacturing;
(
2)
in
both
industries,
tunnel
kilns
are
designed
to
have
three
temperature
zones,
a
preheating
or
drying
zone,
a
firing
zone,
and
a
cooling
zone;
(
3)
in
both
industries,
unfired
shapes
(
bricks
or
refractories)
are
loaded
onto
rail
cars
and
transported
through
each
successive
temperature
zone
through
a
series
of
timed
pushes;
(
4)
both
clay
refractory
kilns
and
brick
kilns
typically
operate
at
peak
temperatures
of
approximately
2000
°
F;
(
5)
firing
times
in
clay
refractory
and
brick
kilns
are
similar;
(
6)
the
raw
materials
used
in
producing
bricks
(
primarily
common
clay
and
shale,
but
also
fire
clay)
and
clay
refractories
(
primarily
fire
clay)
are
similar;
and
(
7)
at
least
one
refractory
products
manufacturer
fires
both
clay
refractory
products
and
brick
and
structural
clay
products
in
the
same
kilns.
The
HF
and
HCl
controls
currently
used
in
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry
are
a
function
of
kiln
size
(
i.
e.,
production
rate).
Kilns
with
production
capacities
of
less
than
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr)
are
classified
as
small
kilns,
and
those
with
production
capacities
of
at
least
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr)
are
classified
as
large
kilns.
For
small
brick
kilns,
the
best­
performing
source
is
a
kiln
controlled
with
a
DLA.
For
large
kilns,
the
best­
performing
sources
are
those
controlled
with
either
a
DIFF,
DLS/
FF,
or
wet
scrubber.
Although
DIFF,
DLS/
FF,
and
wet
scrubbers
generally
are
more
effective
than
DLA
in
reducing
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl,
large
kiln
controls
require
minimum
exhaust
gas
flow
rates
that
are
significantly
higher
than
the
flow
rates
characteristic
of
small
kilns.
Consequently,
the
DLA
is
the
only
device
that
has
been
demonstrated
to
be
feasible
for
controlling
HF
and
HCl
emissions
from
small
brick
kilns.
Using
the
same
size
classification
system,
the
clay
refractory
products
kilns
currently
in
operation
would
all
be
classified
as
small
kilns.
All
operate
at
less
than
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr),
and
90
percent
operate
at
no
more
than
4.5
Mg/
hr
(
5
tons/
hr).
Because
of
the
similarities
in
design
and
operation
discussed
in
the
previous
paragraph,
and
taking
into
account
kiln
size,
we
have
concluded
that
small
brick
kilns
and
clay
refractory
products
kilns
are
similar
sources.
In
the
final
rule,
we
are
incorporating
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
based
on
the
performance
of
DLA­
controlled
brick
kilns.
Comment:
One
commenter
expressed
concern
with
how
we
used
data
for
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry
to
develop
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
He
stated
that
we
used
the
same
data
to
propose
more
stringent
HF
and
HCl
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns
than
were
proposed
for
new
brick
and
structural
clay
products
kilns
under
the
proposed
Brick
and
Structural
Clay
Products
NESHAP
(
67
FR
47894,
July
22,
2002).
The
proposed
HF
emission
limit
for
new
brick
and
structural
clay
products
kilns
is
0.014
kg/
Mg
(
0.027
lb/
ton),
whereas
the
proposed
HF
limit
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns
is
0.001
kg/
Mg
(
0.002
lb/
ton).
In
addition,
the
proposed
HCl
emission
limit
for
new
brick
and
structural
clay
products
kilns
is
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.037
lb/
ton),
whereas
the
proposed
HCl
limit
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns
is
0.0025
kg/
Mg
(
0.005
lb/
ton).
Response:
In
selecting
the
proposed
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns,
we
reviewed
the
available
emission
data
from
the
brick
and
structural
clay
products
industry
and
selected
the
single
best­
performing
similar
source,
which
was
an
individual
brick
kiln
controlled
with
a
DLS/
FF.
To
select
the
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
for
brick
kilns
in
the
proposed
Brick
and
Structural
Clay
Products
NESHAP,
we
used
a
different
approach
based
on
the
overall
performance
of
the
available
control
technologies.
We
reviewed
the
available
data
and
concluded
that
the
three
best­
performing
control
technologies
(
DLS/
FF,
DIFF,
and
wet
scrubbers)
are
essentially
comparable
in
terms
of
reducing
HF
and
HCl
emissions.
We
also
considered
the
variability
in
the
data
and
selected
the
percentage
reductions
that
we
believe
all
three
technologies
can
achieve
on
a
continuous
basis
according
to
the
available
test
data.
We
used
those
percentage
reductions,
which
were
95
percent
for
HF
and
90
percent
for
HCl,
to
derive
the
proposed
production­
based
emission
limits
from
the
emission
factors
for
uncontrolled
HF
and
HCl
from
brick
kilns.
Those
productionbased
emission
limits
were
0.014
kg/
Mg
(
0.027
lb/
ton)
for
HF
and
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.037
lb/
ton)
for
HCl.
After
reconsidering
both
approaches
for
selecting
emission
limits,
we
have
concluded
that
the
technology­
based
approach
that
we
used
to
develop
the
emission
limits
for
the
proposed
Brick
and
Structural
Clay
Products
NESHAP
is
the
appropriate
method
for
establishing
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
In
the
proposed
Brick
and
Structural
Clay
Products
NESHAP,
we
also
subcategorized
according
to
kiln
size
by
differentiating
between
large
kilns
(
i.
e.,
those
with
production
capacities
of
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr)
or
greater)
and
small
kilns
(
i.
e.,
those
with
production
capacities
that
are
less
than
9.1
Mg/
hr
(
10
tons/
hr)).
For
today's
final
rule,
we
have
incorporated
this
same
size
classification
system
into
our
determination
of
the
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
We
have
concluded
that
small
brick
kilns
are
similar
to
clay
refractory
products
kilns
and
that
the
best­
controlled
similar
source
for
clay
refractory
products
kilns
is
a
small
brick
kiln
controlled
with
a
DLA.
Although
there
are
other
technologies
that
perform
well
in
controlling
HF
and
HCl
emissions
from
brick
kilns
(
i.
e.,
DLS/
FF,
DIFF,
and
wet
scrubbers),
those
control
devices
have
been
used
only
on
large
brick
kilns.
On
the
other
hand,
DLA
are
currently
in
use
on
both
large
and
small
brick
kilns.
The
available
data
indicates
that
a
DLA
can
achieve
emissions
reductions
of
90
percent
HF
and
30
percent
HCl
on
a
consistent
basis.
We
have
applied
these
emissions
reductions
to
HF
and
HCl
data
from
uncontrolled
clay
refractory
products
kilns
and
are
incorporating
into
today's
final
rule
the
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00011
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18740
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
revised
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns.
The
resulting
emission
limits
for
HF
are
a
90
percent
reduction
or
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed.
For
HCl,
the
limits
are
a
30
percent
reduction
or
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed.
Comment:
One
commenter
questioned
the
need
to
establish
emission
limits
for
chromium
refractory
products
kilns.
He
stated
that
chromium
compounds
should
be
treated
no
differently
than
any
of
the
other
listed
HAP.
He
noted
that
the
use
of
chromium
for
refractory
products
manufacturing
has
decreased
significantly
in
recent
years,
and
that
our
own
estimates
indicate
that
total
chromium
compound
emissions
in
1996
were
less
than
10
tpy
for
the
entire
industry.
He
also
pointed
out
that
the
large
chromium
refractory
products
facility
referenced
in
the
proposal
has
been
shut
down.
Response:
As
noted
by
the
commenter,
chromium
compounds
are
one
of
the
listed
HAP
in
section
112(
b)
of
the
CAA.
Chromium,
in
the
form
of
chromite
or
chromium
oxide,
is
a
principal
ingredient
in
the
formulation
of
many
refractory
products
and
is
emitted
from
kilns
that
fire
chromium
refractory
products.
Some
of
the
chromium
is
emitted
in
the
hexavalent
form,
which
is
a
known
human
carcinogen.
Under
section
112(
d)
of
the
CAA,
we
are
required
to
establish
emission
standards
that
are
at
least
as
stringent
as
the
MACT
floor
for
all
listed
HAP
that
are
emitted
from
major
sources.
Consequently,
regardless
of
the
trend
in
chromium
refractory
production,
we
are
required
to
establish
emission
limits
based
on
the
MACT
floor
level
of
control,
which
for
chromium
refractory
products
kilns
is
the
work
practice
of
firing
kilns
with
natural
gas
or
the
equivalent.
Comment:
One
commenter
opposed
the
provision
in
the
proposed
rule
that
limits
the
types
of
fuels
used
to
fire
clay
and
chromium
refractory
products
kilns.
He
stated
that
many
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
kilns
are
designed
to
use
fuels
other
than
natural
gas,
such
as
fuel
oil,
propane,
and
pulverized
coal.
The
need
to
use
these
alternative
fuels
is
of
particular
importance
during
natural
gas
shortages
or
price
increases.
He
pointed
out
that
during
natural
gas
shortages,
residential
users
receive
priority
over
industrial
users
of
natural
gas.
He
believes
that
prohibiting
the
use
of
these
alternative
fuels
could
adversely
impact
the
viability
of
some
refractory
products
manufacturing
operations.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenter
that
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP
should
include
appropriate
provisions
for
the
use
of
alternative
fuels
during
specified
times
of
natural
gas
curtailment
and
other
situations
when
natural
gas
is
unavailable.
We
consider
such
situations
analogous
to
malfunctions,
which
are
addressed
in
40
CFR
63.6.
Just
as
an
exceedance
of
emission
limits
during
a
malfunction
is
not
considered
a
violation,
as
indicated
in
40
CFR
63.6(
f)(
1)
and
(
h)(
1),
we
believe
that
using
other
fuels
during
periods
when
natural
gas
is
unavailable
should
also
not
be
considered
a
violation
of
the
work
practice
standard
for
clay
and
chromium
refractory
products
kilns.
We
also
note
that
operating
permits
for
existing
refractory
products
manufacturing
facilities
generally
allow
the
use
of
fuel
oil
and
other
substitutes
for
natural
gas
in
some
situations.
Thus,
the
MACT
floor
for
existing
clay
and
chromium
refractory
products
kilns
is
the
use
of
natural
gas
or
equivalent
fuel
except
during
periods
when
natural
gas
is
unavailable.
In
the
final
rule,
we
are
allowing
owners
and
operators
of
affected
chromium
and
clay
refractory
products
kilns
to
use
alternative
fuels
during
periods
when
natural
gas
in
unavailable
due
to
a
supply
curtailment
or
other
factors.
However,
we
do
not
believe
that
natural
gas
price
increases
constitute
such
a
situation,
and
the
final
rule
makes
it
clear
that
natural
gas
prices
cannot
be
considered
the
basis
for
a
MACT
floor
that
requires
using
an
alternative
fuel.
The
final
rule
also
requires
owners
or
operators
to
notify
the
regulatory
authority
within
48
hours
after
the
declaration
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
the
interruption
of
natural
gas
supply.
In
addition,
the
owner
or
operator
must
submit
a
report
that
details
the
dates
of
alternative
fuel
usage
and
the
amount
of
alternative
fuel
used
within
10
working
days
after
the
facility
terminates
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel.

C.
Compliance
Testing
and
Monitoring
Comment:
One
commenter
stated
that
the
requirement
to
test
batch
process
sources
during
three
separate
process
cycles
is
redundant,
unnecessary,
and
burdensome.
He
believes
that
it
would
be
adequate
to
test
one
process
cycle.
He
pointed
out
that
there
are
significant
variations
in
product
mixes
and
raw
materials
from
cycle
to
cycle,
and
that
while
it
could
be
argued
that
testing
one
cycle
is
adequate,
it
could
also
be
argued
that
testing
ten
cycles
is
inadequate
for
characterizing
emissions.
He
noted
that
testing
during
cool­
down
periods,
in
particular,
is
unnecessary.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenter
that
testing
batch
process
sources
for
three
cycles
of
a
``
worstcase
batch
may
be
unnecessary
to
characterize
emissions
and
control
device
performance.
Under
the
final
rule,
we
are
requiring
owners
and
operators
of
affected
batch
process
sources
to
perform
at
least
two
test
runs
on
each
of
two
separate
process
cycles.
We
believe
that
a
second
test
run
is
necessary
to
corroborate
the
results
of
the
initial
test
run.
However,
we
also
note
that
each
test
run
on
a
batch
process
source
must
be
a
minimum
of
3
hours
in
duration,
and
for
many
batch
process
sources,
the
minimum
test
run
duration
is
likely
to
be
in
excess
of
10
hours.
Thus,
even
requiring
only
two
test
runs
will
necessitate
at
least
20
hours
of
testing
for
such
sources,
and
we
consider
a
test
of
that
duration
to
be
adequate
for
demonstrating
compliance
with
emission
limits.
We
also
note
that
other
NESHAP,
such
as
subparts
U,
JJJ,
OOO,
and
UUUU
to
40
CFR
part
63,
do
not
require
batch
process
sources
to
be
tested
for
three
test
runs.
We
are
also
including
in
the
final
rule
a
separate
batch
process
testing
provision
for
refractory
products
that
are
produced
infrequently.
In
such
cases,
we
are
allowing
owners
and
operators
of
affected
batch
process
sources
to
test
a
single
batch
process
cycle
using
two
separate
sampling
trains
simultaneously,
rather
than
requiring
them
to
conduct
test
runs
over
two
separate
batch
cycles.
Many
refractory
products
that
are
produced
in
batch
process
sources
are
specialty
items
that
may
only
be
manufactured
a
few
times
per
year.
When
such
products
represent
the
``
worst­
case''
in
terms
of
organic
HAP
emissions,
requiring
multiple
test
runs
over
separate
process
cycles
could
extend
the
test
period
over
several
weeks
or
months.
Production
of
other
refractory
products
could
inadvertently
be
disrupted
while
the
facility
attempts
to
complete
its
compliance
demonstration.
We
also
point
out
that
requiring
performance
tests
on
batch
process
sources
to
be
conducted
over
no
more
than
a
single
process
cycle
is
not
without
precedent;
at
least
four
other
NESHAP
(
subparts
U,
JJJ,
OOO,
and
UUUU
to
40
CFR
part
63)
require
batch
process
sources
to
be
tested
over
only
a
single
process
cycle.
To
satisfy
this
provision
of
today's
final
rule,
owners
or
operators
will
be
required
to
include
in
the
Notification
of
Performance
Test
an
explanation
for
why
testing
two
separate
batch
cycles
is
impractical.
Comment:
Two
commenters
expressed
concern
with
the
requirement
that
the
compliance
test
on
an
affected
source
would
have
to
be
repeated
before
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00012
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18741
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
the
facility
began
manufacturing
a
new
product
that
represents
the
``
worst­
case''
in
terms
of
organic
HAP
emissions
(
i.
e.,
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
for
the
new
product
would
exceed
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test).
One
commenter
stated
that
this
requirement
would
be
costly,
time­
consuming,
and
could
result
in
disruptions
in
production.
Another
commenter
further
elaborated
that
production
delays
could
result
while
the
facility
tries
to
schedule
a
performance
test.
Both
commenters
requested
that
we
specify
a
level
for
the
allowable
changes
in
the
HAP
content
of
raw
materials
and
not
require
a
new
compliance
test
when
the
changes
in
HAP
content
are
below
that
level.
One
of
the
commenters
stated
that
a
level
of
10
percent
would
be
appropriate.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenters
that
a
new
compliance
test
should
not
be
required
when
a
facility
begins
producing
a
new
product
that
constitutes
a
slight
increase
in
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
We
have
written
this
provision
in
the
final
rule
to
allow
increases
in
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
up
to
10
percent
without
triggering
a
new
performance
test.
We
believe
this
is
appropriate
for
two
reasons.
The
HAP
content
of
some
raw
materials
(
e.
g.,
resins
or
binders)
used
in
refractory
products
manufacturing
can
vary
slightly
from
shipment
to
shipment,
and
those
variations
may
be
beyond
the
control
of
the
user.
Even
if
the
HAP
content
of
the
resin
or
binder
is
10
percent
more
than
the
HAP
content
of
the
same
material
that
was
processed
during
the
compliance
test,
the
net
increase
in
controlled
emissions
would
most
likely
be
within
the
measurement
error
of
the
test
method.
Therefore,
we
believe
it
is
reasonable
to
allow
increases
of
up
to
10
percent
in
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
without
requiring
a
new
compliance
test.
Comment:
Two
commenters
questioned
the
requirement
for
monitoring
catalytic
oxidizer
temperatures
at
the
inlet
to
the
catalyst
bed.
Both
commenters
stated
that
monitoring
the
catalyst
bed
outlet
temperatures
would
be
a
much
better
indicator
of
performance.
Response:
We
disagree
with
the
commenters
that
monitoring
catalyst
bed
outlet
temperatures
would
provide
a
better
indication
of
catalyst
oxidizer
performance
than
monitoring
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperatures.
Monitoring
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperatures
ensures
that
the
inlet
gas
stream
is
heated
to
the
minimum
temperature
at
which
catalytic
oxidation
will
occur.
Above
this
minimum
temperature,
as
temperature
increases
through
catalytic
oxidization,
control
(
destruction)
efficiency
increases.
We
also
note
that
the
monitoring
of
inlet
temperature
must
be
performed
at
the
inlet
to
the
catalyst
bed
and
not
at
the
inlet
to
the
oxidizer
itself.
After
passing
through
the
inlet
to
the
oxidizer,
the
waste
gases
pass
through
a
preheat
zone,
which
raises
the
temperature
to
the
minimum
required
for
catalytic
oxidization.
Monitoring
must
take
place
between
this
preheat
zone
and
the
inlet
to
the
catalyst
bed.
We
do
not
believe
that
monitoring
catalyst
bed
outlet
temperatures
would
be
appropriate
for
two
reasons:
(
1)
Catalyst
bed
outlet
temperature
is
more
of
an
indicator
of
the
concentration
of
organics
in
the
inlet
gas
stream;
the
higher
the
organic
concentration
at
the
inlet,
the
higher
the
bed
outlet
temperature;
and
(
2)
some
catalytic
oxidizers
are
equipped
with
heat
recovery
units
that
are
located
at
the
outlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
and
can
interfere
with
bed
outlet
temperature
monitoring.
Consequently,
we
have
concluded
that
monitoring
the
bed
inlet
temperature
is
a
better
indicator
of
the
performance
of
catalytic
oxidizers
than
bed
outlet
temperature
monitoring.
We
continue
to
require
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
monitoring
in
the
final
rule.
In
addition,
we
are
requiring
owners
or
operators
of
affected
sources
that
are
controlled
with
catalytic
oxidizers
to
measure
the
activity
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
least
every
12
months
and
take
whatever
corrective
action
is
needed,
such
as
replacing
the
catalyst,
to
ensure
that
the
catalyst
is
performing
as
designed.

D.
Economic
and
Environmental
Impacts
Comment:
Two
commenters
disagreed
with
our
estimates
of
the
annual
increase
in
energy
costs
that
would
be
associated
with
the
proposed
NESHAP.
One
of
the
commenters
stated
that,
based
on
our
estimated
annual
energy
costs
of
$
569,800
and
estimated
annual
natural
gas
consumption
of
644
million
cubic
feet
(
644
×
106
ft3),
the
unit
price
for
natural
gas
would
be
$
0.89
per
thousand
standard
cubic
feet
(
scf)
($/
1,000
scf)
without
accounting
for
electricity
costs.
If
the
cost
of
electricity
is
considered,
the
resulting
unit
price
for
natural
gas
would
be
even
lower.
He
pointed
out
that
current
unit
prices
for
natural
gas
are
considerably
higher.
The
average
natural
gas
unit
prices
in
four
States
(
Kentucky,
Missouri,
Indiana,
and
Pennsylvania)
for
the
years
2000
to
2002
ranged
from
$
6.34
to
$
6.97/
1,000
scf
and
averaged
$
6.37/
1,000
scf
for
the
four
States.
Based
on
data
from
the
Department
of
Energy's
Energy
Information
Administration
(
DOE­
EIA),
one
of
the
commenters
stated
that
the
average
unit
price
for
natural
gas
in
2001
was
$
4.56/
1,000
scf.
The
commenter
believes
that,
regardless
of
which
of
these
current
unit
prices
are
used,
the
estimated
annual
energy
costs
should
have
been
several
times
greater.
Response:
After
reviewing
our
estimated
annual
energy
costs,
we
discovered
an
error
in
our
estimate
that
an
additional
644
×
106
ft3
of
natural
gas
would
be
consumed
annually
under
the
proposed
NESHAP.
That
estimate
was
based
on
the
inclusion
of
several
sources
that
would
not
have
been
subject
to
the
final
rule.
However,
we
did
not
use
that
figure
(
644
×
106
ft3)
to
estimate
annual
energy
costs.
Our
estimated
annual
energy
costs
were
based
on
the
assumption
that
annual
natural
gas
consumption
would
increase
by
158
×
106
ft3.
That
figure
was
derived
from
the
models
used
to
estimate
annual
control
costs,
and
we
believe
that
figure
is
accurate.
Using
a
consumption
of
158
×
106
ft3
of
natural
gas
per
year
and
a
natural
gas
unit
price
of
$
3.30/
1,000
scf,
we
estimated
the
cost
of
natural
gas
to
be
$
520,200/
yr.
The
difference
between
this
cost
and
the
total
energy
costs
presented
in
the
preamble
to
the
proposed
rule
($
569,800)
is
the
cost
of
electricity,
which
we
estimated
to
be
approximately
$
49,600/
yr.
We
agree
with
the
commenters
that
current
natural
gas
unit
prices
are
considerably
higher
than
the
unit
price
($
3.30/
1,000
scf)
that
we
used
to
estimate
energy
costs
for
the
proposed
rule.
However,
according
to
DOE
 
EIA,
natural
gas
prices
are
projected
to
drop
back
to
their
pre­
1999
levels
within
a
year
and
remain
below
$
4.00/
1,000
scf
until
the
year
2020.
Natural
gas
unit
prices
are
projected
to
average
$
3.45/
1,000
scf
for
the
years
2006
to
2009,
which
represent
the
first
3
years
in
which
facilities
will
be
required
to
comply
with
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP.
This
average
unit
price
is
only
slightly
higher
than
the
unit
price
of
$
3.30/
1,000
scf
that
we
used
to
estimate
energy
costs
for
the
proposed
rule.
Furthermore,
electricity
prices
are
projected
by
DOE­
EIA
to
average
$
0.043
per
kilowatt­
hour
(
kwhr
for
the
same
3­
year
period,
whereas
our
estimated
energy
costs
were
based
on
electricity
unit
prices
of
$
0.059/
kwhr
Using
those
projected
unit
prices
for
natural
gas
and
electricity,
our
energy
costs
for
the
proposed
rule
would
have
been
$
580,000,
as
compared
to
the
figure
of
$
569,800
reported
in
the
preamble
to
the
proposed
rule.
(
See
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00013
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18742
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
Docket
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088
for
additional
information).
Comment:
Two
commenters
stated
that
the
proposed
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP
does
not
account
for
the
current
economic
status
of
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.
One
of
the
commenters
noted
that
approximately
40
percent
of
the
domestic
steel
industry
is
in
bankruptcy,
and
the
steel
industry
accounts
for
about
60
percent
of
the
domestic
refractory
products
market.
He
also
pointed
out
that
three
major
refractory
products
manufacturing
companies
are
in
bankruptcy,
more
than
30
plants
have
permanently
closed
in
recent
years,
and
pressure
from
foreign
competition
in
the
refractory
products
market
is
increasing.
The
other
commenter
reiterated
the
statements
of
the
first
commenter
regarding
bankruptcies
among
major
domestic
refractory
producers
and
the
increase
in
foreign
competition.
Response:
During
the
early
stages
of
regulatory
development,
we
issued
an
information
collection
request
(
ICR)
to
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.
Our
economic
impact
analysis
(
EIA)
makes
use
of
detailed
facility­
level
data
on
production
for
the
year
1997
obtained
from
the
industry's
responses
to
the
ICR.
This
information,
along
with
publically
available
data
(
i.
e.,
U.
S.
Census
Bureau),
was
used
at
proposal
to
construct
a
model
of
the
markets
for
refractory
products
that
is
consistent
with
market,
facility,
and
company
conditions
in
1997.
Because
the
ICR
provided
data
only
for
1997,
we
are
limited
in
our
ability
to
update
the
model
completely
to
reflect
conditions
in
later
years.
However,
for
the
final
rule
we
have,
to
the
extent
practicable,
updated
the
economic
model
to
reflect
current
market
conditions,
including:
(
1)
The
exclusion
of
refractory
manufacturing
facilities
known
to
have
closed
since
the
base
year
of
1997;
(
2)
the
assumption
that
producers
will
absorb
the
full
cost
of
the
rule;
with
only
six
out
of
147
producers
affected
by
the
rule
and
the
financial
stress
on
the
industry,
we
assume
producers
will
be
unable
to
increase
market
prices
to
recover
some
of
their
increase
in
production
costs;
and
(
3)
the
incorporation
of
parameters
from
a
recent
update
of
an
iron
and
steel
model
to
inform
the
estimated
demand
for
refractories
(
i.
e.,
the
demand
elasticity,
or
the
sensitivity
of
demand
from
the
steel
market
based
on
market
conditions
in
the
iron
and
steel
industry).
The
iron
and
steel
model
was
specifically
revised
to
address
current
conditions
in
the
steel
industry.
We
also
acknowledged
in
the
EIA
at
proposal
that
both
steel
and
refractory
manufacturing
companies
are
currently
under
financial
stress.
In
the
EIA,
we
discussed
several
trends
that
have
placed
considerable
pressure
on
refractory
manufacturers,
including
reduced
production
by
integrated
domestic
steelmakers,
improved
quality
of
refractories
(
thus
requiring
less
frequent
replacement),
and
increased
imports
of
refractory
products.
We
note
that
the
vast
majority
of
facilities
in
the
industry
(
both
foreign
and
domestic
producers)
are
unaffected
by
the
rule.
The
regulatory
costs
of
the
rule
are
approximately
$
2
million
per
year,
which
represents
a
small
share
of
total
industry
production
costs
of
approximately
$
2,300
million
per
year.
In
the
model
for
the
final
rule,
prices
are
not
predicted
to
change,
and
the
quantities
of
refractories
produced
are
projected
to
decrease
by
3,792
tons.
It
is
assumed
that
the
loss
in
domestic
production
will
be
absorbed
by
foreign
imports.
Our
analysis
concludes
these
six
facilities
incurring
regulatory
costs
will
absorb
the
majority
of
the
costs
and
burden
of
the
rule,
with
one
facility
projected
to
close
as
a
result
of
the
rule.
At
the
parent
company
level,
the
costs
uniformly
are
less
than
1
percent
of
baseline
corporate
sales.
Overall,
we
have
adjusted
the
economic
model
to
address
the
issues
raised
by
the
commenters,
and
we
believe
that
the
final
rule
will
have
a
limited
impact
on
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry.

E.
Definitions
Comment:
Two
commenters
commented
on
how
the
term
refractory
product
is
defined
in
the
proposed
rule.
Both
commenters
stated
that,
based
on
this
definition,
some
graphite
manufacturing
sources
could
be
confused
with
certain
refractory
products
manufacturing
sources
that
would
be
affected
by
the
final
rule.
It
is
their
understanding
that
we
intend
to
develop
a
separate
NESHAP
for
the
graphite
manufacturing
industry,
and
graphite
manufacturing
sources,
although
similar
to
some
refractory
products
manufacturing
sources,
would
not
be
subject
to
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP.
The
commenters
suggested
adding
the
phrase,
``.
.
.
containing
less
than
50
percent
carbon''
to
the
definition
of
refractory
product.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenters
that
the
definition
of
refractory
product
in
the
proposed
rule
could
inadvertently
affect
certain
graphite
manufacturing
sources.
Consequently,
we
have
written
the
definition
as
requested
by
the
commenters.
In
addition,
we
are
including
a
definition
for
pitch­
bonded
refractory
products
in
the
final
rule.
We
believe
that
definition
will
help
to
preclude
graphite
baking
ovens,
which
are
not
subject
to
today's
final
rule,
from
being
classified
as
pitch­
bonded
curing
ovens,
which
are
regulated
under
today's
final
rule.
Comment:
One
commenter
commented
on
how
the
term
research
and
development
process
unit
is
defined
in
the
proposed
rule.
The
commenter
stated
that
the
proposed
definition
is
inconsistent
with
the
definition
of
research
and
development
facilities
specified
in
section
112(
c)(
7)
of
the
CAA,
40
CFR
63.41,
and
several
other
NESHAP
published
in
40
CFR
part
63.
The
difference
between
those
definitions
and
the
proposed
definition
specified
in
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP
is
the
exclusion
of
the
phrase
``
in
a
de
minimis
manner''
from
the
proposed
rule.
Response:
We
agree
with
the
commenter
that
the
definition
of
research
and
development
process
unit
in
the
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
NESHAP
should
be
consistent
with
the
definition
of
research
facilities
in
the
CAA
and
in
other
rules.
We
have
written
the
definition
of
research
and
development
process
unit
as
suggested
by
the
commenter.

V.
Summary
of
Impacts
A.
What
Are
the
Health
Impacts?

The
HAP
that
will
be
controlled
by
today's
final
rule
are
associated
with
a
variety
of
adverse
health
effects.
These
adverse
health
effects
include
chronic
health
disorders
(
e.
g.,
irritation
of
the
lung,
skin,
and
mucous
membranes,
gastrointestinal
effects,
and
damage
to
the
kidneys
and
liver)
and
acute
health
disorders
(
e.
g.,
respiratory
irritation
and
central
nervous
system
effects
such
as
drowsiness,
headache,
and
nausea).
The
EPA
has
classified
two
of
the
HAP
(
formaldehyde
and
POM)
as
probable
human
carcinogens.
The
EPA
does
not
have
the
type
of
current
detailed
data
on
each
of
the
facilities
and
the
people
living
around
the
facilities
covered
by
today's
final
rule
for
this
source
category
that
would
be
necessary
to
conduct
an
analysis
to
determine
the
actual
population
exposures
to
the
HAP
emitted
from
these
facilities
and
the
potential
for
resultant
health
effects.
Therefore,
EPA
does
not
know
the
extent
to
which
the
adverse
health
effects
described
above
occur
in
the
populations
surrounding
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00014
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18743
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
these
facilities.
However,
to
the
extent
the
adverse
effects
do
occur,
and
today's
final
rule
reduces
emissions,
subsequent
exposures
will
be
reduced.
Following
is
a
discussion
of
the
health
effects
of
seven
HAP:
ethylene
glycol,
formaldehyde,
HF,
HCl,
methanol,
phenol,
and
POM.
Although
today's
rule
will
reduce
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl
from
any
new
clay
refractory
product
kilns
that
emit
these
HAP,
it
will
not
reduce
emissions
of
these
HAP
from
existing
kilns.
We
estimate
that
emissions
of
methanol
from
affected
existing
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP
(
i.
e.,
shape
dryers,
curing
ovens,
and
kilns)
also
will
not
be
reduced
by
today's
final
rule.
However,
methanol
is
a
constituent
of
some
resins
used
in
resin­
bonded
refractory
production,
and
today's
final
rule
will
regulate
methanol
emissions
from
any
affected
source
that
produces
refractory
products
made
with
resins
that
contain
methanol.

Ethylene
Glycol
Acute
(
short­
term)
exposure
of
humans
to
ethylene
glycol
by
ingesting
large
quantities
causes
central
nervous
system
depression
(
including
drowsiness
and
respiratory
failure),
gastrointestinal
upset,
cardiopulmonary
effects,
and
renal
damage.
The
only
effects
noted
in
the
one
available
study
of
humans
acutely
exposed
to
low
levels
of
ethylene
glycol
by
inhalation
were
throat
and
upper
respiratory
tract
irritation.
Rats
and
mice
exposed
chronically
(
long­
term)
to
ethylene
glycol
in
their
diet
exhibited
signs
of
kidney
toxicity
and
liver
effects.
No
information
is
available
on
the
reproductive
or
developmental
effects
of
ethylene
glycol
in
humans,
but
several
studies
of
rodents
have
shown
ethylene
glycol
to
be
fetotoxic.
The
EPA
has
not
classified
ethylene
glycol
for
carcinogenicity.

Formaldehyde
Both
acute
and
chronic
exposure
to
formaldehyde
irritates
the
eyes,
nose,
and
throat,
and
may
cause
coughing,
chest
pains,
and
bronchitis.
Reproductive
effects,
such
as
menstrual
disorders
and
pregnancy
problems,
have
been
reported
in
female
workers
exposed
to
formaldehyde.
Limited
human
studies
have
reported
an
association
between
formaldehyde
exposure
and
lung
and
nasopharyngeal
cancer.
Animal
inhalation
studies
have
reported
an
increased
incidence
of
nasal
squamous
cell
cancer.
The
EPA
considers
formaldehyde
a
probable
human
carcinogen
(
Group
B2).
Hydrogen
Fluoride
Acute
inhalation
exposure
to
gaseous
HF
can
cause
severe
respiratory
damage
in
humans,
including
severe
irritation
and
pulmonary
edema.
Chronic
exposure
to
fluoride
at
low
levels
has
a
beneficial
effect
of
dental
cavity
prevention
and
may
also
be
useful
for
the
treatment
of
osteoporosis.
Exposure
to
higher
levels
of
fluoride
may
cause
dental
fluorosis
or
mottling,
while
very
high
exposures
through
drinking
water
or
air
can
result
in
crippling
skeletal
fluorosis.
One
study
reported
menstrual
irregularities
in
women
occupationally
exposed
to
fluoride.
The
EPA
has
not
classified
HF
for
carcinogenicity.

Hydrogen
Chloride
Hydrogen
chloride,
also
called
hydrochloric
acid,
is
corrosive
to
the
eyes,
skin,
and
mucous
membranes.
Acute
inhalation
exposure
may
cause
eye,
nose,
and
respiratory
tract
irritation
and
inflammation
and
pulmonary
edema
in
humans.
Chronic
occupational
exposure
to
HCl
has
been
reported
to
cause
gastritis,
bronchitis,
and
dermatitis
in
workers.
Prolonged
exposure
to
low
concentrations
may
also
cause
dental
discoloration
and
erosion.
No
information
is
available
on
the
reproductive
or
developmental
effects
of
HCl
in
humans.
In
rats
exposed
to
HCl
by
inhalation,
altered
estrus
cycles
have
been
reported
in
females,
and
increased
fetal
mortality
and
decreased
fetal
weight
have
been
reported
in
offspring.
The
EPA
has
not
classified
HCl
for
carcinogenicity.

Methanol
Acute
or
chronic
exposure
of
humans
to
methanol
by
inhalation
or
ingestion
may
result
in
blurred
vision,
headache,
dizziness,
and
nausea.
No
information
is
available
on
the
reproductive,
developmental,
or
carcinogenic
effects
of
methanol
in
humans.
Birth
defects
have
been
observed
in
the
offspring
of
rats
and
mice
exposed
to
methanol
by
inhalation.
A
methanol
inhalation
study
using
rhesus
monkeys
reported
a
decrease
in
the
length
of
pregnancy
and
limited
evidence
of
impaired
learning
ability
in
offspring.
The
EPA
has
not
classified
methanol
with
respect
to
carcinogenicity.

Phenol
Acute
inhalation
and
dermal
exposure
to
phenol
is
highly
irritating
to
the
skin,
eyes,
and
mucous
membranes
in
humans.
Oral
exposure
to
small
amounts
of
phenol
may
cause
irregular
breathing,
muscular
weakness
and
tremors,
coma,
and
respiratory
arrest
at
lethal
concentrations.
Anorexia,
progressive
weight
loss,
diarrhea,
vertigo,
salivation,
and
a
dark
coloration
of
the
urine
have
been
reported
in
chronically
exposed
humans.
Gastrointestinal
irritation
and
blood
and
liver
effects
have
also
been
reported.
No
studies
of
developmental
or
reproductive
effects
of
phenol
in
humans
are
available,
but
animal
studies
have
reported
reduced
fetal
body
weights,
growth
retardation,
and
abnormal
development
in
the
offspring
of
animals
exposed
to
phenol
by
the
oral
route.
The
EPA
has
classified
phenol
in
Group
D,
not
classifiable
as
to
human
carcinogenicity.

Polycyclic
Organic
Matter
The
term
polycyclic
organic
matter
defines
a
broad
class
of
compounds
that
includes
the
polycyclic
aromatic
hydrocarbon
(
PAH)
compounds,
of
which
benzo[
a]
pyrene
is
a
member.
Dermal
exposures
to
mixtures
of
PAH
cause
skin
disorders
in
humans
and
animals.
No
information
is
available
on
the
reproductive
or
developmental
effects
of
POM
in
humans,
but
animal
studies
have
reported
that
oral
exposure
to
benzo[
a]
pyrene
causes
reproductive
and
developmental
effects.
Human
studies
have
reported
an
increase
in
lung
cancer
in
humans
exposed
to
POMbearing
mixtures
including
coke
oven
emissions,
roofing
tar
emissions,
and
cigarette
smoke.
Animal
studies
have
reported
respiratory
tract
tumors
from
inhalation
exposure
to
benzo[
a]
pyrene
and
forestomach
tumors,
leukemia,
and
lung
tumors
from
oral
exposure
to
benzo[
a]
pyrene.
The
EPA
has
classified
seven
PAH
compounds
(
benzo[
a]
pyrene,
benz[
a]
anthracene,
chrysene,
benzo[
b]
fluoranthene,
benzo[
k]
fluoranthene,
dibenz[
a,
h]
anthracene,
and
indeno[
1,2,3­
cd]
pyrene)
as
Group
B2,
probable
human
carcinogens.

B.
What
Are
the
Air
Emission
Reduction
Impacts?
At
the
current
level
of
control
and
1996
production
levels,
we
estimate
nationwide
emissions
of
HAP
from
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
to
be
about
246
Mg/
yr
(
271
tpy).
For
the
eight
refractory
products
facilities
that
we
estimate
to
be
major
sources,
baseline
annual
HAP
emissions
are
about
153
Mg/
yr
(
169
tpy).
We
estimate
that
today's
final
rule
will
reduce
nationwide
HAP
emissions
by
about
124
Mg/
yr
(
137
tpy).
Among
the
major
sources,
POM
emissions
account
for
approximately
60
percent
of
the
total
annual
HAP
emissions.
Phenol,
HF,
HCl,
and
ethylene
glycol
account
for
13
percent,
10
percent,
7
percent,
and
7
percent
of
total
annual
HAP
emissions,

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00015
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18744
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
respectively.
Formaldehyde
and
chromium
compounds
each
account
for
less
than
1
percent
of
total
baseline
annual
HAP
emissions.
Today's
final
rule
will
reduce
annual
POM
emissions
by
as
much
as
90
Mg/
yr
(
99
tpy).
Emissions
of
phenol
and
ethylene
glycol
will
be
reduced
by
approximately
19
Mg/
yr
(
21
tons/
year)
and
11
Mg/
yr
(
12
tpy),
respectively.
Implementing
today's
rule
will
also
reduce
volatile
organic
compound
(
VOC)
and
carbon
monoxide
(
CO)
emissions
by
166
Mg/
yr
(
182
tpy)
and
71
Mg/
yr
(
78
tpy),
respectively.
The
final
rule
will
result
in
an
increase
in
annual
nitrogen
oxides
(
NOX)
emissions
of
about
79
Mg/
yr
(
87
tpy)
due
to
the
operation
of
additional
thermal
oxidizers
to
control
organic
HAP
emissions.
Indirect
or
secondary
air
impacts
of
today's
final
rule
result
from
increased
electricity
usage
associated
with
operation
of
control
devices
required
by
the
rule.
Assuming
that
affected
plants
will
purchase
electricity
from
a
power
plant,
we
estimate
that
the
final
rule
will
result
in
increases
of
secondary
emissions
of
criteria
pollutants,
including
particulate
matter
less
than
10
micrometers
in
aerodynamic
diameter
(
PM
 
10),
sulfur
dioxide
(
SO2),
NOX,
and
CO
from
power
plants.
Under
today's
final
rule,
secondary
PM
 
10
emissions
will
increase
by
0.22
Mg/
yr
(
0.24
tpy);
secondary
SO2
emissions
will
increase
by
about
8.9
Mg/
yr
(
9.8
tpy);
secondary
NOX
emissions
will
increase
about
4.5
Mg/
yr
(
4.9
tpy);
and
secondary
CO
emissions
will
increase
by
about
0.15
Mg/
yr
(
0.16
tpy).
We
estimate
that
there
will
be
no
new
sources
within
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
within
the
next
3
years.
Therefore,
we
are
not
projecting
air
impacts
for
new
sources
under
today's
final
rule.

C.
What
Are
the
Cost
Impacts?
The
estimated
total
capital
costs
of
today's
final
rule
are
$
4.6
million.
These
capital
costs
apply
to
existing
sources
and
include
the
costs
to
purchase
and
install
thermal
oxidizers
on
affected
sources
that
are
not
currently
controlled.
The
estimated
annualized
cost
of
today's
final
rule
is
$
2.3
million.
The
annualized
costs
account
for
the
annualized
capital
costs
of
the
control
and
monitoring
equipment,
operation
and
maintenance
expenses,
performance
testing,
and
recordkeeping
and
reporting
costs.

D.
What
Are
the
Economic
Impacts?
Given
the
estimated
costs
to
comply
with
the
regulation,
we
prepared
an
economic
analysis
to
evaluate
how
these
costs
would
impact
producers
and
consumers
of
refractories,
and
society
as
a
whole.
The
refractory
products
manufacturing
industry
currently
consists
of
147
establishments.
There
are
eight
major
sources
in
the
industry
affected
by
the
rule,
six
of
which
will
incur
costs
to
reduce
emissions
and
report
compliance,
and
two
of
which
only
incur
minor
recordkeeping
and
reporting
costs.
In
recent
years,
the
industry
has
experienced
substantial
financial
stress
that
coincides
with
the
decline
in
the
steel
industry,
which
is
a
major
consumer
of
refractory
products.
Since
our
analysis
at
proposal,
the
number
of
facilities
in
operation
has
decreased
by
14
due
to
bankruptcies
or
closures.
The
industry
consists
of
three
market
sectors,
including:
bricks
and
shapes,
monolithics,
and
RCF.
In
1997,
the
industry
produced
about
two
million
tons
of
bricks
and
shapes,
870,000
tons
of
monolithics,
and
about
34,000
tons
of
RCF
for
a
total
market
value
of
approximately
two
billion
dollars.
The
total
annualized
regulatory
compliance
cost
of
the
rule
is
$
2.3
million
(
in
1998
dollars),
which
represents
0.001
percent
of
total
market
value.
Because
foreign
competition
currently
has
a
strong
influence
on
this
industry,
and
only
six
out
of
147
producers
are
affected
by
the
rule,
our
analysis
of
the
final
rule
assumes
that
producers
of
bricks
and
shapes
will
not
be
able
to
increase
prices
to
recover
a
portion
of
the
compliance
costs.
Thus,
these
producers
are
assumed
to
absorb
the
full
cost
of
the
regulation,
which
represents
the
maximum
potential
impact
on
producers.
If
prices
happen
to
rise
as
a
result
of
the
regulation,
impacts
on
producers
will
be
lower
than
reported
here.
Our
analysis
predicts
that
domestic
production
of
bricks
and
shapes
will
decrease
by
approximately
4,000
tons
(
or
2/
10ths
of
one
percent).
Foreign
imports
are
assumed
to
absorb
this
loss
in
domestic
production,
which
represents
approximately
two
percent
of
total
foreign
imports.
The
monolithics
and
RCF
sectors
of
the
market
are
not
subject
to
the
rule
and
thus
no
price
or
production
level
changes
are
predicted.
After
accounting
for
the
changes
in
the
market
for
refractories
and
the
increase
in
foreign
imports,
the
total
cost
of
the
regulation
on
society
as
a
whole
is
approximately
$
2
million.
Of
the
eight
plants
affected
by
the
rule,
one
facility
may
close
due
to
regulatory
costs.
The
estimated
regulatory
cost
to
this
facility
assumes
the
use
of
add­
on
controls,
which
would
exceed
the
total
revenues
of
this
facility,
hence
our
model
estimates
that
it
would
close.
However,
we
recognize
that
this
facility,
as
well
as
the
other
affected
facilities,
have
several
options
to
change
input
materials,
or
attributes
of
their
production
process
such
that
they
could
substantially
reduce
the
cost
associated
with
add­
on
control
technology.
Without
explicit
knowledge
of
decisions
to
be
made
by
this
and
other
facilities
in
response
to
the
regulation,
our
analysis
assumes
that
only
add­
on
control
technology
will
be
installed.

E.
What
Are
the
Non­
Air
Quality
Environmental
and
Energy
Impacts?

To
comply
with
today's
final
rule,
we
expect
that
affected
facilities
will
control
organic
HAP
emissions
by
installing
and
operating
thermal
oxidizers.
Therefore,
we
project
that
today's
rule
will
have
no
water
or
solid
waste
impacts.
Energy
impacts
consist
of
the
electricity
and
fuel
needed
to
operate
control
devices
and
other
equipment
that
are
required
under
the
final
rule.
Assuming
that
affected
facilities
comply
with
the
final
rule
by
installing
and
operating
thermal
oxidizers,
we
project
that
today's
final
rule
will
increase
overall
energy
demand
(
i.
e.,
electricity
and
natural
gas)
by
about
280
thousand
gigajoules
per
year
(
265
billion
British
thermal
units
per
year).
Electricity
requirements
are
expected
to
increase
by
about
1,570
megawatt­
hours
per
year
under
today's
rule.
Natural
gas
requirements
are
expected
to
increase
by
about
7
million
cubic
meters
per
year
(
250
million
cubic
feet
per
year)
under
today's
final
rule.

VI.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
(
58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993),
EPA
must
determine
whether
the
regulatory
action
is
``
significant''
and,
therefore,
subject
to
review
by
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
and
the
requirements
of
the
Executive
Order.
The
Executive
Order
defines
``
significant
regulatory
action''
as
one
that
is
likely
to
result
in
a
rule
that
may:
(
1)
Have
an
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
$
100
million
or
more
or
adversely
affect
in
a
material
way
the
economy,
a
sector
of
the
economy,
productivity,
competition,
jobs,
the
environment,
public
health
or
safety,
or
State,
local,
or
tribal
governments
or
communities;
(
2)
Create
a
serious
inconsistency
or
otherwise
interfere
with
an
action
taken
or
planned
by
another
agency;
(
3)
Materially
alter
the
budgetary
impact
of
entitlements,
grants,
user
fees,

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00016
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18745
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
or
loan
programs,
or
the
rights
and
obligation
of
recipients
thereof;
or
(
4)
Raise
novel
legal
or
policy
issues
arising
out
of
legal
mandates,
the
President's
priorities,
or
the
principles
set
forth
in
the
Executive
Order.
Pursuant
to
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12866,
it
has
been
determined
that
this
rule
is
not
a
``
significant
regulatory
action''
because
none
of
the
listed
criteria
applies
to
this
action.
Consequently,
this
action
was
not
submitted
to
OMB
for
review
under
Executive
Order
12866.

B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
The
information
collection
requirements
in
the
final
rule
will
be
submitted
for
approval
to
OMB
under
the
requirements
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.
The
EPA
has
prepared
an
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
document
(
ICR
No.
2040.01),
and
a
copy
may
be
obtained
from
Susan
Auby
by
mail
at
U.
S.
EPA,
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
Collection
Strategies
Division
(
MD
 
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460;
by
e­
mail
at
auby.
susan@
epa.
gov;
or
by
calling
(
202)
566
 
1672.
You
may
also
download
a
copy
off
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
icr.
The
information
requirements
are
not
enforceable
until
OMB
approves
them.
The
information
requirements
are
based
on
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements
in
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions
(
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
A),
which
are
mandatory
for
all
operators
subject
to
national
emission
standards.
These
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
are
specifically
authorized
by
section
114
of
the
CAA
(
42
U.
S.
C.
7414).
All
information
submitted
to
EPA
pursuant
to
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
for
which
a
claim
of
confidentiality
is
made
is
safeguarded
according
to
EPA's
policies
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2,
subpart
B.
With
two
exceptions,
the
final
rule
will
not
require
any
notifications,
reports,
or
recordkeeping
beyond
those
required
by
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions.
The
first
exception
applies
to
facilities
that
operate
sources
that
are
subject
to
limits
on
the
type
of
fuel
used.
In
such
cases,
the
owner
or
operator
may
use
an
alternative
fuel
under
certain
conditions
but
must
submit
a
notification
before
using
the
alternative
fuel,
must
report
on
alternative
fuel
use
after
terminating
use
of
the
alternative
fuel,
and
must
maintain
records
of
alternative
fuel
use.
The
second
exception
pertains
to
continuous
kilns;
the
final
rule
requires
reporting
and
recordkeeping
whenever
the
control
device
used
on
a
continuous
kiln
is
taken
offline
for
scheduled
maintenance.
The
annual
monitoring,
reporting,
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
(
averaged
over
the
first
3
years
after
the
effective
date
of
the
rule)
is
estimated
to
be
726
labor
hours
per
year
at
a
total
annual
cost
of
$
31,460.
This
burden
estimate
includes
time
for
acquisition,
installation,
and
use
of
monitoring
technology
and
systems;
preparation
and
a
one­
time
submission
of
an
SSMP,
with
immediate
reports
for
any
event
when
the
procedures
in
the
plan
were
not
followed;
preparation
of
an
OM&
M
plan;
one­
time
notifications;
semiannual
compliance
reports;
and
recordkeeping.
Total
annualized
capital/
startup
costs
associated
with
the
monitoring
requirements
(
e.
g.,
costs
for
hiring
performance
test
contractors
and
purchase
of
monitoring
and
file
storage
equipment)
over
the
3­
year
period
of
the
ICR
are
estimated
at
$
45,390,
with
operation
and
maintenance
costs
of
$
910/
yr.
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
Agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
current
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.

C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
The
EPA
has
determined
that
it
is
not
necessary
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
in
connection
with
the
final
rule.
The
EPA
has
also
determined
that
the
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impact
of
today's
rule
on
small
entities,
small
entities
are
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business
whose
parent
company
has
fewer
than
500
employees,
according
to
Small
Business
Administration
size
standards
established
under
the
NAICS
for
the
industries
affected
by
today's
rule;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
or
a
city,
county,
town,
school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
or
(
3)
a
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
that
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.
After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
today's
final
rule
on
small
entities,
EPA
has
concluded
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
We
have
determined
that
of
the
six
facilities
affected
by
the
rule,
there
is
one
facility
owned
by
a
small
company
that
will
experience
an
impact
of
less
than
onehalf
of
one
percent
(<
0.50
percent)
of
company
sales.
Although
the
final
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
EPA
nonetheless
has
tried
to
reduce
the
impact
of
the
rule
on
small
entities.
However,
we
were
unable
to
identify
any
specific
requirements
of
the
final
rule
that
we
could
relax
to
reduce
the
burden
of
today's
rule
on
small
entities.
If
the
final
rule
had
established
emission
limits
more
stringent
than
the
MACT
floor,
we
could
have
reduced
the
stringency
of
the
emission
limits
for
small
entities.
However,
the
emission
limits
established
by
today's
rule
are
based
on
the
MACT
floor,
which
is
the
minimum
level
of
stringency
allowed
under
section
112
of
the
CAA.
Today's
rule
does
provide
two
options
for
owners
and
operators
of
affected
thermal
process
sources
of
organic
HAP.
Thus,
the
one
small
entity
that
is
affected
by
today's
rule
can
choose
to
comply
with
either
of
two
organic
HAP
emission
limits.
Having
the
choice
between
compliance
options
will
provide
small
business
with
some
measure
of
flexibility
in
how
it
chooses
to
comply
with
the
final
rule.
Today's
rule
requires
continuous
parameter
monitoring
rather
than
continuous
emission
monitoring.
We
believe
that
the
parameter
monitoring
requirements
we
have
incorporated
in
the
final
rule
satisfy
the
requirements
of
section
114(
a)(
3)
of
the
CAA
for
enhanced
monitoring
without
the
additional
expense
that
would
have
been
associated
with
continuous
emission
monitoring.
Finally,
the
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements
of
today's
rule
are
consistent
with
the
requirements
of
the
General
Provisions
to
40
CFR
part
63.
For
these
reasons,
we
believe
that
today's
rule
satisfies
the
requirements
of
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00017
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18746
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
the
CAA
without
imposing
any
unnecessary
burden
on
small
businesses
or
any
other
affected
entity.

D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA),
Public
Law
No.
104
 
4,
establishes
requirements
for
Federal
agencies
to
assess
the
effects
of
their
regulatory
actions
on
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments
and
the
private
sector.
Under
section
202
of
the
UMRA,
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
cost­
benefit
analysis,
for
proposed
and
final
rules
with
``
Federal
mandates''
that
may
result
in
expenditures
by
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
by
the
private
sector,
of
$
100
million
or
more
in
any
1
year.
Before
promulgating
an
EPA
rule
for
which
a
written
statement
is
needed,
section
205
of
the
UMRA
generally
requires
EPA
to
identify
and
consider
a
reasonable
number
of
regulatory
alternatives
and
adopt
the
least
costly,
most
costeffective
or
least
burdensome
alternative
that
achieves
the
objectives
of
the
rule.
The
provisions
of
section
205
do
not
apply
when
they
are
inconsistent
with
applicable
law.
Moreover,
section
205
allows
EPA
to
adopt
an
alternative
other
than
the
least
costly,
most
cost­
effective,
or
least
burdensome
alternative
if
the
Administrator
publishes
with
the
final
rule
an
explanation
why
that
alternative
was
not
adopted.
Before
EPA
establishes
any
regulatory
requirements
that
may
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments,
including
tribal
governments,
it
must
have
developed
under
section
203
of
the
UMRA
a
small
government
agency
plan.
The
plan
must
provide
for
notifying
potentially
affected
small
governments,
enabling
officials
of
affected
small
governments
to
have
meaningful
and
timely
input
in
the
development
of
EPA's
regulatory
proposals
with
significant
Federal
intergovernmental
mandates,
and
informing,
educating,
and
advising
small
governments
on
compliance
with
the
regulatory
requirements.
The
EPA
has
determined
that
today's
final
rule
does
not
contain
a
Federal
mandate
that
may
result
in
expenditures
of
$
100
million
or
more
for
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
the
private
sector
in
any
1
year.
The
maximum
total
annual
cost
of
today's
final
rule
for
any
year
has
been
estimated
to
be
approximately
$
2.3
million.
Thus,
this
final
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
sections
202
and
205
of
the
UMRA.
In
addition,
EPA
has
determined
that
this
final
rule
contains
no
regulatory
requirements
that
might
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments
because
it
contains
no
requirements
that
apply
to
such
governments
or
impose
obligations
upon
them.
Therefore,
today's
final
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
section
203
of
the
UMRA.

E.
Executive
Order
13132:
Federalism
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
``
Federalism''
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
The
final
rule
does
not
have
federalism
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132.
None
of
the
affected
facilities
is
owned
or
operated
by
State
governments,
and
the
rule
requirements
will
not
supercede
State
regulations
that
are
more
stringent.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13132
does
not
apply
to
the
rule.

F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
Tribal
Governments
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
``
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments''
(
65
FR
67249,
November
9,
2000),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications.''
The
final
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
No
tribal
governments
own
or
operate
refractory
products
manufacturing
facilities.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
the
final
rule.
G.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
From
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997)
applies
to
any
rule
that:
(
1)
Is
determined
to
be
``
economically
significant''
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866,
and
(
2)
concerns
an
environmental
health
or
safety
risk
that
EPA
has
reason
to
believe
may
have
a
disproportionate
effect
on
children.
If
the
regulatory
action
meets
both
criteria,
EPA
must
evaluate
the
environmental
health
or
safety
effects
of
the
planned
rule
on
children,
and
explain
why
the
planned
rule
is
preferable
to
other
potentially
effective
and
reasonably
feasible
alternatives
that
EPA
considered.
The
EPA
interprets
Executive
Order
13045
as
applying
only
to
those
regulatory
actions
that
are
based
on
health
or
safety
risks,
such
that
the
analysis
required
under
section
5
 
501
of
the
Executive
Order
has
the
potential
to
influence
the
regulation.
Today's
final
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13045
because
it
is
based
on
technology
performance
and
not
on
health
or
safety
risks.
No
children's
risk
analysis
was
performed
because
no
alternative
technologies
exist
that
would
provide
greater
stringency
at
a
reasonable
cost.
Furthermore,
the
final
rule
has
been
determined
not
to
be
``
economically
significant''
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866.

H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
Today's
final
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001)
because
it
is
not
a
significant
regulatory
action
under
Executive
Order
12866.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
Section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
(
NTTAA)
of
1995
(
Pub.
L.
104
 
113;
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note)
directs
the
EPA
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
in
their
regulatory
and
procurement
activities
unless
to
do
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
Voluntary
consensus
standards
are
technical
standards
(
e.
g.,
materials
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
business
practices)
developed
or
adopted
by
one
or
more
voluntary
consensus
bodies.
The
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
annual
reports
to
the
OMB,
with
explanations
when
an
agency
does
not
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00018
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18747
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
use
available
and
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards.
Today's
final
rule
involves
technical
standards.
The
EPA
cites
the
following
standards:
EPA
Methods
1,
1A,
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
2G,
3,
3A,
3B,
4,
25A,
26,
26A,
311,
and
320.
Consistent
with
the
NTTAA,
EPA
conducted
searches
to
identify
voluntary
consensus
standards
in
addition
to
these
EPA
method/
performance
specifications.
No
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards
were
identified
for
EPA
Methods
1A,
2A,
2D,
2F,
2G,
and
311.
The
search
and
review
results
have
been
documented
and
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR
 
2002
 
0088.
The
voluntary
consensus
standard
ASME
PTC
19
 
10
 
1981
 
Part
10,
``
Flue
and
Exhaust
Gas
Analyses,''
is
cited
in
the
rule
for
its
manual
methods
for
measuring
the
oxygen,
carbon
dioxide,
and
carbon
monoxide
content
of
exhaust
gas.
This
part
of
ASME
PTC
19
 
10
 
1981
 
Part
10
is
an
acceptable
alternative
to
Method
3B.
Also,
five
voluntary
consensus
standards:
ASTM
D1979
 
91,
ASTM
D3432
 
89,
ASTM
D4747
 
87,
ASTM
D4827
 
93,
and
ASTM
PS9
 
94
are
incorporated
by
reference
in
EPA
Method
311.
In
addition
to
the
voluntary
consensus
standards
EPA
cites
in
the
rule,
the
search
for
emissions
measurement
procedures
identified
13
other
voluntary
consensus
standards.
The
EPA
determined
that
ten
of
the
13
standards
identified
for
measuring
emissions
of
the
HAP
or
surrogates
subject
to
emission
standards
in
the
rule
were
impractical
alternatives
to
EPA
test
methods
for
the
purposes
of
the
rule.
Therefore,
EPA
does
not
intend
to
adopt
these
standards
for
this
purpose.
The
reasons
for
this
determination
for
the
ten
methods
are
discussed
in
the
docket.
Two
of
the
12
voluntary
consensus
standards
identified
in
this
search
were
not
available
at
the
time
the
review
was
conducted
for
the
purposes
of
the
rule
because
they
are
under
development
by
a
voluntary
consensus
body:
ASME/
BSR
MFC
13M,
``
Flow
Measurement
by
Velocity
Traverse,''
for
EPA
Method
2
(
and
possibly
1);
and
ASME/
BSR
MFC
12M,
``
Flow
in
Closed
Conduits
Using
Multiport
Averaging
Pitot
Primary
Flowmeters,''
for
EPA
Method
2.
The
voluntary
consensus
standard
ASTM
D6348
 
98,
``
Determination
of
Gaseous
Compounds
by
Extractive
Direct
Interface
Fourier
Transform
(
FTIR)
Spectroscopy,''
has
been
reviewed
by
the
EPA
as
a
potential
alternative
to
EPA
Method
320.
Suggested
revisions
to
ASTM
D6348
 
98
were
sent
to
ASTM
by
the
EPA
that
would
allow
the
EPA
to
accept
ASTM
D6348
 
98
as
an
acceptable
alternative.
The
ASTM
Subcommittee
D22
 
03
is
currently
undertaking
a
revision
of
ASTM
D6348
 
98.
Because
of
this,
we
are
not
citing
this
standard
as
a
acceptable
alternative
for
EPA
Method
320
in
the
rule
today.
However,
upon
successful
ASTM
balloting
and
demonstration
of
technical
equivalency
with
the
EPA
FTIR
methods,
the
revised
ASTM
standard
could
be
incorporated
by
reference
for
EPA
regulatory
applicability.
In
the
interim,
facilities
have
the
option
to
request
ASTM
D6348
 
98
as
an
alternative
test
method
under
40
CFR
63.7(
f)
and
63.8(
f)
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.

J.
Congressional
Review
Act
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
to
each
House
of
the
Congress
and
to
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States.
The
EPA
will
submit
a
report
containing
the
rule
and
other
required
information
to
the
U.
S.
Senate,
the
U.
S.
House
of
Representatives,
and
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States
prior
to
publication
of
the
rule
in
the
Federal
Register.
A
major
rule
cannot
take
effect
until
June
16,
2003.
This
action
is
not
a
``
major
rule''
as
defined
by
5
U.
S.
C.
804(
2).

List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
63
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Hazardous
substances,
Intergovernmental
relations,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

Dated:
February
28,
2003.
Christine
Todd
Whitman,
Administrator.


For
the
reasons
stated
in
the
preamble,
title
40,
chapter
I,
part
63
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
is
amended
as
follows

PART
63
 
[
AMENDED]


1.
The
authority
citation
for
part
63
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
7401,
et
seq.


2.
Part
63
is
amended
by
adding
subpart
SSSSS
to
read
as
follows:

Subpart
SSSSS
 
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
for
Refractory
Products
Manufacturing
What
This
Subpart
Covers
Sec.
63.9780
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?
63.9782
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
63.9784
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
63.9786
When
do
I
have
to
comply
with
this
subpart?

Emission
Limitations
and
Work
Practice
Standards
63.9788
What
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards
must
I
meet?
63.9790
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?

General
Compliance
Requirements
63.9792
What
are
my
general
requirements
for
complying
with
this
subpart?
63.9794
What
do
I
need
to
know
about
operation,
maintenance,
and
monitoring
plans?

Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
63.9796
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
performance
tests?
63.9798
When
must
I
conduct
subsequent
performance
tests?
63.9800
How
do
I
conduct
performance
tests
and
establish
operating
limits?
63.9802
How
do
I
develop
an
emissions
profile?
63.9804
What
are
my
monitoring
system
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance
requirements?
63.9806
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards?

Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
63.9808
How
do
I
monitor
and
collect
data
to
demonstrate
continuous
compliance?
63.9810
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards?

Notifications,
Reports,
and
Records
63.9812
What
notifications
must
I
submit
and
when?
63.9814
What
reports
must
I
submit
and
when?
63.9816
What
records
must
I
keep?
63.9818
In
what
form
and
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?

Other
Requirements
and
Information
63.9820
What
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
apply
to
me?
63.9822
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?
63.9824
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Tables
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
Table
1
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Emission
Limits
Table
2
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Operating
Limits
Table
3
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Work
Practice
Standards
Table
4
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Requirements
for
Performance
Tests
Table
5
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Initial
Compliance
with
Emission
Limits
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00019
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18748
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
Table
6
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Initial
Compliance
with
Work
Practice
Standards
Table
7
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Continuous
Compliance
with
Emission
Limits
Table
8
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Continuous
Compliance
with
Operating
Limits
Table
9
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Continuous
Compliance
with
Work
Practice
Standards
Table
10
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Requirements
for
Reports
Table
11
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
 
Applicability
of
General
Provisions
to
Subpart
SSSSS
What
This
Subpart
Covers
§
63.9780
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?
This
subpart
establishes
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
NESHAP)
for
refractory
products
manufacturing
facilities.
This
subpart
also
establishes
requirements
to
demonstrate
initial
and
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations.

§
63.9782
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
You
are
subject
to
this
subpart
if
you
own
or
operate
a
refractory
products
manufacturing
facility
that
is,
is
located
at,
or
is
part
of,
a
major
source
of
hazardous
air
pollutant
(
HAP)
emissions
according
to
the
criteria
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
a)
A
refractory
products
manufacturing
facility
is
a
plant
site
that
manufactures
refractory
products
(
refractory
bricks,
refractory
shapes,
monolithics,
kiln
furniture,
crucibles,
and
other
materials
used
for
lining
furnaces
and
other
high
temperature
process
units),
as
defined
in
§
63.9824.
Refractory
products
manufacturing
facilities
typically
process
raw
material
by
crushing,
grinding,
and
screening;
mixing
the
processed
raw
materials
with
binders
and
other
additives;
forming
the
refractory
mix
into
shapes;
and
drying
and
firing
the
shapes.
(
b)
A
major
source
of
HAP
is
a
plant
site
that
emits
or
has
the
potential
to
emit
any
single
HAP
at
a
rate
of
9.07
megagrams
(
10
tons)
or
more
per
year
or
any
combination
of
HAP
at
a
rate
of
22.68
megagrams
(
25
tons)
or
more
per
year.

§
63.9784
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
(
a)
This
subpart
applies
to
each
new,
reconstructed,
or
existing
affected
source
at
a
refractory
products
manufacturing
facility.
(
b)
The
existing
affected
sources
are
shape
dryers,
curing
ovens,
and
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
shape
preheaters,
pitch
working
tanks,
defumers,
and
coking
ovens
that
are
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
chromium
refractory
products;
and
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
clay
refractory
products.
(
c)
The
new
or
reconstructed
affected
sources
are
shape
dryers,
curing
ovens,
and
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
shape
preheaters,
pitch
working
tanks,
defumers,
and
coking
ovens
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
chromium
refractory
products;
and
kilns
that
are
used
to
manufacture
clay
refractory
products.
(
d)
Shape
dryers,
curing
ovens,
kilns,
coking
ovens,
defumers,
shape
preheaters,
and
pitch
working
tanks
that
are
research
and
development
(
R&
D)
process
units
are
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
this
subpart.
(
See
definition
of
research
and
development
process
unit
in
§
63.9824).
(
e)
A
source
is
a
new
affected
source
if
you
began
construction
of
the
affected
source
after
June
20,
2002,
and
you
met
the
applicability
criteria
at
the
time
you
began
construction.
(
f)
An
affected
source
is
reconstructed
if
you
meet
the
criteria
as
defined
in
§
63.2.
(
g)
An
affected
source
is
existing
if
it
is
not
new
or
reconstructed.

§
63.9786
When
do
I
have
to
comply
with
this
subpart?

(
a)
If
you
have
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
you
must
comply
with
this
subpart
according
to
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
If
the
initial
startup
of
your
affected
source
is
before
April
16,
2003,
then
you
must
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
for
new
and
reconstructed
sources
in
this
subpart
no
later
than
April
16,
2003.
(
2)
If
the
initial
startup
of
your
affected
source
is
after
April
16,
2003,
then
you
must
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
for
new
and
reconstructed
sources
in
this
subpart
upon
initial
startup
of
your
affected
source.
(
b)
If
you
have
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
for
existing
sources
no
later
than
April
17,
2006.
(
c)
You
must
be
in
compliance
with
this
subpart
when
you
conduct
a
performance
test
on
an
affected
source.
(
d)
If
you
have
an
existing
area
source
that
increases
its
emissions
or
its
potential
to
emit
such
that
it
becomes
a
major
source
of
HAP,
you
must
be
in
compliance
with
this
subpart
according
to
paragraphs
(
d)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Any
portion
of
the
existing
facility
that
is
a
new
affected
source
or
a
new
reconstructed
source
must
be
in
compliance
with
this
subpart
upon
startup.
(
2)
All
other
parts
of
the
existing
facility
must
be
in
compliance
with
this
subpart
by
3
years
after
the
date
the
area
source
becomes
a
major
source.
(
e)
If
you
have
a
new
area
source
(
i.
e.,
an
area
source
for
which
construction
or
reconstruction
was
commenced
after
June
20,
2002)
that
increases
its
emissions
or
its
potential
to
emit
such
that
it
becomes
a
major
source
of
HAP,
you
must
be
in
compliance
with
this
subpart
upon
initial
startup
of
your
affected
source
as
a
major
source.
(
f)
You
must
meet
the
notification
requirements
in
§
63.9812
according
to
the
schedule
in
§
63.9812
and
in
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
A.
Some
of
the
notifications
must
be
submitted
before
you
are
required
to
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
in
this
subpart.

Emission
Limitations
and
Work
Practice
Standards
§
63.9788
What
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards
must
I
meet?

(
a)
You
must
meet
each
emission
limit
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
(
b)
You
must
meet
each
operating
limit
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
(
c)
You
must
meet
each
work
practice
standard
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.

§
63.9790
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?

To
meet
the
emission
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
use
one
or
both
of
the
options
listed
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
a)
Emissions
control
system.
Use
an
emissions
capture
and
collection
system
and
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
(
APCD)
and
demonstrate
that
the
resulting
emissions
or
emissions
reductions
meet
the
applicable
emission
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
and
demonstrate
that
the
capture
and
collection
system
and
APCD
meet
the
applicable
operating
limits
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
(
b)
Process
changes.
Use
raw
materials
that
have
little
or
no
potential
to
emit
HAP
during
the
refractory
products
manufacturing
process
or
implement
manufacturing
process
changes
and
demonstrate
that
the
resulting
emissions
or
emissions
reductions
meet
the
applicable
emission
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00020
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18749
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart
without
an
add­
on
APCD.

General
Compliance
Requirements
§
63.9792
What
are
my
general
requirements
for
complying
with
this
subpart?

(
a)
You
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
(
including
operating
limits
and
work
practice
standards)
in
this
subpart
at
all
times,
except
during
periods
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
2)
Periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
on
a
control
device
that
is
used
on
an
affected
continuous
kiln,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)
of
this
section.
(
b)
Except
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)
of
this
section,
you
must
always
operate
and
maintain
your
affected
source,
including
air
pollution
control
and
monitoring
equipment,
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e)(
1)(
i).
During
the
period
between
the
compliance
date
specified
for
your
affected
source
in
§
63.9786
and
the
date
upon
which
continuous
monitoring
systems
have
been
installed
and
validated
and
any
applicable
operating
limits
have
been
established,
you
must
maintain
a
log
detailing
the
operation
and
maintenance
of
the
process
and
emissions
control
equipment.
(
c)
You
must
develop
and
implement
a
written
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
(
SSMP)
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e)(
3).
(
d)
You
must
prepare
and
implement
a
written
operation,
maintenance,
and
monitoring
(
OM&
M)
plan
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.9794.
(
e)
If
you
own
or
operate
an
affected
continuous
kiln
and
must
perform
scheduled
maintenance
on
the
control
device
for
that
kiln,
you
may
bypass
the
kiln
control
device
and
continue
operating
the
kiln
upon
approval
by
the
Administrator,
provided
you
satisfy
the
conditions
listed
in
paragraphs
(
e)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
must
request
approval
from
the
Administrator
to
bypass
the
control
device
while
the
scheduled
maintenance
is
performed.
You
must
submit
a
separate
request
each
time
you
plan
to
bypass
the
control
device,
and
your
request
must
include
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
e)(
1)(
i)
through
(
vi)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Reason
for
the
scheduled
maintenance.
(
ii)
Explanation
for
why
the
maintenance
cannot
be
performed
when
the
kiln
is
shut
down.
(
iii)
Detailed
description
of
the
maintenance
activities.
(
iv)
Time
required
to
complete
the
maintenance.
(
v)
How
you
will
minimize
HAP
emissions
from
the
kiln
during
the
period
when
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
(
vi)
How
you
will
minimize
the
time
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service
for
scheduled
maintenance.
(
2)
You
must
minimize
HAP
emissions
during
the
period
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
(
3)
You
must
minimize
the
time
period
during
which
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
(
f)
You
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
provisions
of
subpart
A
of
this
part,
except
as
noted
in
Table
11
to
this
subpart.

§
63.9794
What
do
I
need
to
know
about
operation,
maintenance,
and
monitoring
plans?

(
a)
For
each
continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
(
CPMS)
required
by
this
subpart,
you
must
develop,
implement,
make
available
for
inspection,
and
revise,
as
necessary,
an
OM&
M
plan
that
includes
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
13)
of
this
section.
(
1)
A
list
and
identification
of
each
process
and
add­
on
APCD
that
is
required
by
this
subpart
to
be
monitored,
the
type
of
monitoring
device
that
will
be
used,
and
the
operating
parameters
that
will
be
monitored.
(
2)
Specifications
for
the
sensor,
signal
analyzer,
and
data
collection
system.
(
3)
A
monitoring
schedule
that
specifies
the
frequency
that
the
parameter
values
will
be
determined
and
recorded.
(
4)
The
operating
limits
for
each
parameter
that
represent
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
in
§
63.9788,
based
on
values
of
the
monitored
parameters
recorded
during
performance
tests.
(
5)
Procedures
for
installing
the
CPMS
at
a
measurement
location
relative
to
each
process
unit
or
APCD
such
that
measurement
is
representative
of
control
of
emissions.
(
6)
Procedures
for
the
proper
operation
and
routine
and
long­
term
maintenance
of
each
process
unit
and
APCD,
including
a
maintenance
and
inspection
schedule
that
is
consistent
with
the
manufacturer's
recommendations.
(
7)
Procedures
for
the
proper
operation
and
maintenance
of
monitoring
equipment
consistent
with
the
requirements
in
§
§
63.8(
c)(
1),
(
3),
(
4)(
ii),
(
7),
and
(
8),
and
63.9804.
(
8)
Ongoing
data
quality
assurance
procedures
in
accordance
with
the
general
requirements
of
§
63.8(
d).
(
9)
Procedures
for
evaluating
the
performance
of
each
CPMS.
(
10)
Procedures
for
responding
to
operating
parameter
deviations,
including
the
procedures
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
10)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section:
(
i)
Procedures
for
determining
the
cause
of
the
operating
parameter
deviation.
(
ii)
Actions
for
correcting
the
deviation
and
returning
the
operating
parameters
to
the
allowable
limits.
(
iii)
Procedures
for
recording
the
times
that
the
deviation
began
and
ended,
and
when
corrective
actions
were
initiated
and
completed.
(
11)
Procedures
for
keeping
records
to
document
compliance
and
reporting
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
§
63.10(
c),
(
e)(
1),
and
(
e)(
2)(
i).
(
12)
If
you
operate
a
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
limits
on
the
type
of
fuel
used,
as
specified
in
items
3
and
4
of
Table
3
to
subpart
SSSSS,
procedures
for
using
alternative
fuels.
(
13)
If
you
operate
an
affected
continuous
kiln
and
you
plan
to
take
the
kiln
control
device
out
of
service
for
scheduled
maintenance,
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e),
the
procedures
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
13)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Procedures
for
minimizing
HAP
emissions
from
the
kiln
during
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
of
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
(
ii)
Procedures
for
minimizing
any
period
of
scheduled
maintenance
on
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
(
b)
Changes
to
the
operating
limits
in
your
OM&
M
plan
require
a
new
performance
test.
If
you
are
revising
an
operating
limit
parameter
value,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Submit
a
Notification
of
Performance
Test
to
the
Administrator
as
specified
in
§
63.7(
b).
(
2)
After
completing
the
performance
tests
to
demonstrate
that
compliance
with
the
emission
limits
can
be
achieved
at
the
revised
operating
limit
parameter
value,
you
must
submit
the
performance
test
results
and
the
revised
operating
limits
as
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
under
§
63.9(
h).
(
c)
If
you
are
revising
the
inspection
and
maintenance
procedures
in
your
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00021
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18750
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
OM&
M
plan,
you
do
not
need
to
conduct
a
new
performance
test.

Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements
§
63.9796
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
performance
tests?

You
must
conduct
performance
tests
within
180
calendar
days
after
the
compliance
date
that
is
specified
for
your
source
in
§
63.9786
and
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.7(
a)(
2).

§
63.9798
When
must
I
conduct
subsequent
performance
tests?

(
a)
You
must
conduct
a
performance
test
every
5
years
following
the
initial
performance
test,
as
part
of
renewing
your
40
CFR
part
70
or
40
CFR
part
71
operating
permit.
(
b)
You
must
conduct
a
performance
test
when
you
want
to
change
the
parameter
value
for
any
operating
limit
specified
in
your
OM&
M
plan.
(
c)
If
you
own
or
operate
a
source
that
is
subject
to
the
emission
limits
specified
in
items
2
through
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
on
the
source(
s)
listed
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section
before
you
start
production
of
any
refractory
product
for
which
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
likely
to
exceed
by
more
than
10
percent
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
on
that
same
source.
(
1)
Each
affected
shape
dryer
or
curing
oven
that
is
used
to
process
the
refractory
product
with
the
higher
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
(
2)
Each
affected
kiln
that
follows
an
affected
shape
dryer
or
curing
oven
and
is
used
to
process
the
refractory
product
with
the
higher
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
(
d)
If
you
own
or
operate
a
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
emission
limits
specified
in
item
5
or
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
on
the
affected
kiln
following
any
process
changes
that
are
likely
to
increase
organic
HAP
emissions
from
the
kiln
(
e.
g.,
a
decrease
in
the
curing
cycle
time
for
a
curing
oven
that
precedes
the
affected
kiln
in
the
process
line).
(
e)
If
you
own
or
operate
a
clay
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
emission
limits
specified
in
item
10
or
11
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
and
is
controlled
with
a
dry
limestone
adsorber
(
DLA),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
on
the
affected
kiln
following
any
change
in
the
source
of
limestone
used
in
the
DLA.
§
63.9800
How
do
I
conduct
performance
tests
and
establish
operating
limits?
(
a)
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
(
b)
Before
conducting
the
performance
test,
you
must
install
and
validate
all
monitoring
equipment.
(
c)
Each
performance
test
must
be
conducted
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.7
and
under
the
specific
conditions
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
d)
You
may
not
conduct
performance
tests
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction,
as
specified
in
§
63.7(
e)(
1).
(
e)
You
must
conduct
separate
test
runs
for
at
least
the
duration
specified
for
each
performance
test
required
in
this
section,
as
specified
in
§
63.7(
e)(
3)
and
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
f)
For
batch
process
sources,
you
must
satisfy
the
requirements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
must
conduct
at
least
two
test
runs.
(
2)
Each
test
run
must
last
an
entire
batch
cycle
unless
you
develop
an
emissions
profile,
as
specified
in
items
8(
a)(
i)(
4)
and
17(
b)(
i)(
4)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart,
or
you
satisfy
the
conditions
for
terminating
a
test
run
prior
to
the
completion
of
a
batch
cycle
as
specified
in
item
8(
a)(
i)(
5)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
3)
Each
test
run
must
be
performed
over
a
separate
batch
cycle
unless
you
satisfy
the
conditions
for
conducting
both
test
runs
over
a
single
batch
cycle,
as
described
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
3)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
You
do
not
produce
the
product
that
corresponds
to
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
for
that
batch
process
source
in
consecutive
batch
cycles.
(
ii)
To
produce
that
product
in
two
consecutive
batch
cycles
would
disrupt
production
of
other
refractory
products.
(
4)
If
you
want
to
conduct
a
performance
test
over
a
single
batch
cycle,
you
must
include
in
your
Notification
of
Performance
Test
the
rationale
for
testing
over
a
single
batch
cycle.
(
5)
If
you
are
granted
approval
to
conduct
a
performance
test
over
a
single
batch
cycle,
you
must
use
paired
sampling
trains
and
collect
two
sets
of
emissions
data.
Each
set
of
data
can
be
considered
a
separate
test
run.
(
g)
You
must
use
the
data
gathered
during
the
performance
test
and
the
equations
in
paragraphs
(
g)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section
to
determine
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations.
(
1)
To
determine
compliance
with
the
total
hydrocarbon
(
THC)
emission
concentration
limit
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
calculate
your
emission
concentration
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
1
of
this
section:

C
C
20.9
C
(
Eq.
1)
THC
THC
O2
 
=
×
 
(
)
C
2
9
.

Where:
C
THC
 
C=
THC
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
parts
per
million
by
volume,
dry
basis
(
ppmvd)
C
THC=
THC
concentration
(
uncorrected),
ppmvd
CO2=
oxygen
concentration,
percent.
(
2)
To
determine
compliance
with
any
of
the
emission
limits
based
on
percentage
reduction
across
an
emissions
control
system
specified
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
calculate
the
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

PR
=
ER
ER
(
Eq.
2)
i
o
 
×
ERi
100
Where:
PR=
percentage
reduction,
percent
ERi=
mass
emissions
rate
of
specific
HAP
or
pollutant
(
THC,
HF,
or
HCl)
entering
the
control
device,
kilograms
(
pounds)
per
hour
ERo=
mass
emissions
rate
of
specific
HAP
or
pollutant
(
THC,
HF,
or
HCl)
exiting
the
control
device,
kilograms
(
pounds)
per
hour.
(
3)
To
determine
compliance
with
production­
based
hydrogen
fluoride
(
HF)
and
hydrogen
chloride
(
HCl)
emission
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
calculate
your
mass
emissions
per
unit
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
3
of
this
section:

MP
=
(
Eq.
3)
ER
P
Where:
MP=
mass
per
unit
of
production,
kilograms
of
pollutant
per
megagram
(
pounds
per
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
ER=
mass
emissions
rate
of
specific
HAP
(
HF
or
HCl)
during
each
performance
test
run,
kilograms
(
pounds)
per
hour
P=
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate
for
the
performance
test,
megagrams
(
tons)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
per
hour.
(
h)
You
must
establish
each
sitespecific
operating
limit
in
Table
2
to
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00022
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
ER16AP03.000</
MATH>
ER16AP03.001</
MATH>
ER16AP03.002</
MATH>
18751
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you,
as
specified
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
i)
For
each
affected
source
that
is
equipped
with
an
add­
on
APCD
that
is
not
addressed
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
or
that
is
using
process
changes
as
a
means
of
meeting
the
emission
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
§
63.8(
f)
and
paragraphs
(
i)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
sources
subject
to
the
THC
concentration
limit
specified
in
item
3
or
7
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
satisfy
the
requirements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
i)(
1)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
You
must
install
a
THC
continuous
emissions
monitoring
system
(
CEMS)
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source.
(
ii)
You
must
meet
the
requirements
specified
in
Performance
Specification
(
PS)
8
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
iii)
You
must
meet
the
requirements
specified
in
Procedure
1
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
2)
For
sources
subject
to
the
emission
limits
specified
in
item
3,
4,
7,
or
8
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
submit
a
request
for
approval
of
alternative
monitoring
methods
to
the
Administrator
no
later
than
the
submittal
date
for
the
Notification
of
Performance
Test,
as
specified
in
§
63.9812(
d).
The
request
must
contain
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
i)(
2)(
i)
through
(
v)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Description
of
the
alternative
addon
APCD
or
process
changes.
(
ii)
Type
of
monitoring
device
or
method
that
will
be
used,
including
the
sensor
type,
location,
inspection
procedures,
quality
assurance
and
quality
control
measures,
and
data
recording
device.
(
iii)
Operating
parameters
that
will
be
monitored.
(
iv)
Frequency
that
the
operating
parameter
values
will
be
determined
and
recorded
to
establish
continuous
compliance
with
the
operating
limits.
(
v)
Averaging
time.
(
3)
You
must
establish
site­
specific
operating
limits
during
the
performance
test
based
on
the
information
included
in
the
approved
alternative
monitoring
methods
request
and,
as
applicable,
as
specified
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart.

§
63.9802
How
do
I
develop
an
emissions
profile?

If
you
decide
to
develop
an
emissions
profile
for
an
affected
batch
process
source;
as
indicated
in
item
8(
a)(
i)(
4)
or
17(
b)(
i)(
4)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart,
you
must
measure
and
record
mass
emissions
of
the
applicable
pollutant
throughout
a
complete
batch
cycle
of
the
affected
batch
process
source
according
to
the
procedures
described
in
paragraph
(
a)
or
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
a)
If
your
affected
batch
process
source
is
subject
to
the
THC
concentration
limit
specified
in
item
6(
a),
7(
a),
8,
or
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
or
the
THC
percentage
reduction
limit
specified
in
item
6(
b)
or
7(
b)
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
measure
and
record
the
THC
mass
emissions
rate
at
the
inlet
to
the
control
device
using
the
test
methods,
averaging
periods,
and
procedures
specified
in
items
10(
a)
and
(
b)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart
for
each
complete
hour
of
the
batch
process
cycle.
(
b)
If
your
affected
batch
process
source
is
subject
to
the
HF
and
HCl
percentage
reduction
emission
limits
in
item
11
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
measure
and
record
the
HF
mass
emissions
rate
at
the
inlet
to
the
control
device
through
a
series
of
1­
hour
test
runs
according
to
the
test
method
specified
in
item
14(
a)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart
for
each
complete
hour
of
the
batch
process
cycle.

§
63.9804
What
are
my
monitoring
system
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance
requirements?

(
a)
You
must
install,
operate,
and
maintain
each
CPMS
required
by
this
subpart
according
to
your
OM&
M
plan
and
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
15)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
must
satisfy
all
applicable
requirements
of
performance
specifications
for
CPMS
specified
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B,
upon
promulgation
of
such
performance
specifications.
(
2)
You
must
satisfy
all
applicable
requirements
of
quality
assurance
(
QA)
procedures
for
CPMS
specified
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F,
upon
promulgation
of
such
QA
procedures.
(
3)
You
must
install
each
sensor
of
your
CPMS
in
a
location
that
provides
representative
measurement
of
the
appropriate
parameter
over
all
operating
conditions,
taking
into
account
the
manufacturer's
guidelines.
(
4)
You
must
use
a
CPMS
that
is
capable
of
measuring
the
appropriate
parameter
over
a
range
that
extends
from
a
value
of
at
least
20
percent
less
than
the
lowest
value
that
you
expect
your
CPMS
to
measure,
to
a
value
of
at
least
20
percent
greater
than
the
highest
value
that
you
expect
your
CPMS
to
measure.
(
5)
You
must
use
a
data
acquisition
and
recording
system
that
is
capable
of
recording
values
over
the
entire
range
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
4)
of
this
section.
(
6)
You
must
use
a
signal
conditioner,
wiring,
power
supply,
and
data
acquisition
and
recording
system
that
are
compatible
with
the
output
signal
of
the
sensors
used
in
your
CPMS.
(
7)
You
must
perform
an
initial
calibration
of
your
CPMS
based
on
the
procedures
specified
in
the
manufacturer's
owner's
manual.
(
8)
You
must
use
a
CPMS
that
is
designed
to
complete
a
minimum
of
one
cycle
of
operation
for
each
successive
15­
minute
period.
To
have
a
valid
hour
of
data,
you
must
have
at
least
three
of
four
equally­
spaced
data
values
(
or
at
least
75
percent
of
the
total
number
of
values
if
you
collect
more
than
four
data
values
per
hour)
for
that
hour
(
not
including
startup,
shutdown,
malfunction,
or
out­
of­
control
periods).
(
9)
You
must
record
valid
data
from
at
least
90
percent
of
the
hours
during
which
the
affected
source
or
process
operates.
(
10)
You
must
determine
and
record
the
15­
minute
block
averages
of
all
measurements,
calculated
after
every
15
minutes
of
operation
as
the
average
of
the
previous
15
operating
minutes
(
not
including
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction).
(
11)
You
must
determine
and
record
the
3­
hour
block
averages
of
all
15­
minute
recorded
measurements,
calculated
after
every
3
hours
of
operation
as
the
average
of
the
previous
3
operating
hours
(
not
including
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction).
(
12)
You
must
record
the
results
of
each
inspection,
calibration,
initial
validation,
and
accuracy
audit.
(
13)
At
all
times,
you
must
maintain
your
CPMS
including,
but
not
limited
to,
maintaining
necessary
parts
for
routine
repairs
of
the
CPMS.
(
14)
You
must
perform
an
initial
validation
of
your
CPMS
under
the
conditions
specified
in
paragraphs
(
14)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Prior
to
the
initial
performance
test
on
the
affected
source
for
which
the
CPMS
is
required.
(
ii)
Within
180
days
of
your
replacing
or
relocating
one
or
more
of
the
sensors
of
your
CPMS.
(
15)
Except
for
redundant
sensors,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824,
any
device
that
you
use
to
conduct
an
initial
validation
or
accuracy
audit
of
your
CPMS
must
meet
the
accuracy
requirements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
15)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
The
device
must
have
an
accuracy
that
is
traceable
to
National
Institute
of
Standards
and
Technology
(
NIST)
standards.
(
ii)
The
device
must
be
at
least
three
times
as
accurate
as
the
required
accuracy
for
the
CPMS.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00023
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18752
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
(
b)
For
each
temperature
CPMS
that
is
used
to
monitor
the
combustion
chamber
temperature
of
a
thermal
oxidizer
or
the
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
of
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Use
a
temperature
CPMS
with
a
minimum
accuracy
of
±
1.0
percent
of
the
temperature
value
or
2.8
degrees
Celsius
(
°
C)
(
5
degrees
Fahrenheit
(
°
F)),
whichever
is
greater.
(
2)
Use
a
data
recording
system
with
a
minimum
resolution
of
one­
half
or
better
of
the
required
CPMS
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
3)
Perform
an
initial
validation
of
your
CPMS
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
3)(
i)
or
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Place
the
sensor
of
a
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
adjacent
to
the
sensor
of
your
temperature
CPMS
in
a
location
that
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
the
sensor
of
your
temperature
CPMS.
The
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
temperatures
measured
by
your
temperature
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
temperature
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
Perform
any
of
the
initial
validation
methods
for
temperature
CPMS
specified
in
performance
specifications
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
4)
Perform
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
temperature
CPMS
at
least
quarterly,
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
b)(
4)(
i),
(
ii),
or
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
If
your
temperature
CPMS
includes
a
redundant
temperature
sensor,
record
three
pairs
of
concurrent
temperature
measurements
within
a
24­
hour
period.
Each
pair
of
concurrent
measurements
must
consist
of
a
temperature
measurement
by
each
of
the
two
temperature
sensors.
The
minimum
time
interval
between
any
two
such
pairs
of
consecutive
temperature
measurements
is
1
hour.
The
measurements
must
be
taken
during
periods
when
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
temperature
CPMS
are
operating
normally.
Calculate
the
mean
of
the
three
values
for
each
temperature
sensor.
The
mean
values
must
agree
within
the
required
overall
accuracy
of
the
CPMS,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
If
your
temperature
CPMS
does
not
include
a
redundant
temperature
sensor,
place
the
sensor
of
a
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
adjacent
to
the
sensor
of
your
temperature
CPMS
in
a
location
that
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
the
sensor
of
your
temperature
CPMS.
The
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
temperature
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
temperatures
measured
by
your
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
temperature
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
temperature
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
iii)
Perform
any
of
the
accuracy
audit
methods
for
temperature
CPMS
specified
in
QA
procedures
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
5)
Conduct
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
CPMS
following
any
24­
hour
period
throughout
which
the
temperature
measured
by
your
CPMS
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
temperature
range,
or
install
a
new
temperature
sensor.
(
6)
If
your
CPMS
is
not
equipped
with
a
redundant
temperature
sensor,
perform
at
least
quarterly
a
visual
inspection
of
all
components
of
the
CPMS
for
integrity,
oxidation,
and
galvanic
corrosion.
(
c)
For
each
pressure
CPMS
that
is
used
to
monitor
the
pressure
drop
across
a
DLA
or
wet
scrubber,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
c)(
1)
through
(
7)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Use
a
pressure
CPMS
with
a
minimum
accuracy
of
±
5.0
percent
or
0.12
kilopascals
(
kPa)
(
0.5
inches
of
water
column
(
in.
w.
c.)),
whichever
is
greater.
(
2)
Use
a
data
recording
system
with
a
minimum
resolution
of
one­
half
the
required
CPMS
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section,
or
better.
(
3)
Perform
an
initial
validation
of
your
pressure
CPMS
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
c)(
3)(
i)
or
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Place
the
sensor
of
a
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
adjacent
to
the
sensor
of
your
pressure
CPMS
in
a
location
that
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
the
sensor
of
your
pressure
CPMS.
The
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
pressure
measured
by
your
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
pressure
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
Perform
any
of
the
initial
validation
methods
for
pressure
CPMS
specified
in
performance
specifications
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
4)
Perform
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
pressure
CPMS
at
least
quarterly,
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
c)(
4)(
i),
(
ii),
or
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
If
your
pressure
CPMS
includes
a
redundant
pressure
sensor,
record
three
pairs
of
concurrent
pressure
measurements
within
a
24­
hour
period.
Each
pair
of
concurrent
measurements
must
consist
of
a
pressure
measurement
by
each
of
the
two
pressure
sensors.
The
minimum
time
interval
between
any
two
such
pairs
of
consecutive
pressure
measurements
is
1
hour.
The
measurements
must
be
taken
during
periods
when
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
CPMS
are
operating
normally.
Calculate
the
mean
of
the
three
pressure
measurement
values
for
each
pressure
sensor.
The
mean
values
must
agree
within
the
required
overall
accuracy
of
the
CPMS,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
If
your
pressure
CPMS
does
not
include
a
redundant
pressure
sensor,
place
the
sensor
of
a
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
adjacent
to
the
sensor
of
your
pressure
CPMS
in
a
location
that
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
the
sensor
of
your
pressure
CPMS.
The
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
pressure
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
pressure
measured
by
your
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
pressure
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
pressure
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
iii)
Perform
any
of
the
accuracy
audit
methods
for
pressure
CPMS
specified
in
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00024
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18753
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
QA
procedures
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
5)
Conduct
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
CPMS
following
any
24­
hour
period
throughout
which
the
pressure
measured
by
your
CPMS
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
pressure
range,
or
install
a
new
pressure
sensor.
(
6)
At
least
monthly,
check
all
mechanical
connections
on
your
CPMS
for
leakage.
(
7)
If
your
CPMS
is
not
equipped
with
a
redundant
pressure
sensor,
perform
at
least
quarterly
a
visual
inspection
of
all
components
of
the
CPMS
for
integrity,
oxidation,
and
galvanic
corrosion.
(
d)
For
each
liquid
flow
rate
CPMS
that
is
used
to
monitor
the
liquid
flow
rate
in
a
wet
scrubber,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
d)(
1)
through
(
7)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Use
a
flow
rate
CPMS
with
a
minimum
accuracy
of
±
5.0
percent
or
1.9
liters
per
minute
(
L/
min)
(
0.5
gallons
per
minute
(
gal/
min)),
whichever
is
greater.
(
2)
Use
a
data
recording
system
with
a
minimum
resolution
of
one­
half
the
required
CPMS
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section,
or
better.
(
3)
Perform
an
initial
validation
of
your
CPMS
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
3)(
i)
or
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Use
a
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
system
to
measure
the
liquid
flow
rate
in
a
location
that
is
adjacent
to
the
measurement
location
for
your
flow
rate
CPMS
and
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
your
flow
rate
CPMS.
The
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
flow
rate
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
flow
rates
measured
by
your
flow
rate
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
flow
rate
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
Perform
any
of
the
initial
validation
methods
for
liquid
flow
rate
CPMS
specified
in
performance
specifications
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
4)
Perform
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
flow
rate
CPMS
at
least
quarterly,
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
d)(
4)(
i),
(
ii),
or
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
If
your
flow
rate
CPMS
includes
a
redundant
sensor,
record
three
pairs
of
concurrent
flow
rate
measurements
within
a
24­
hour
period.
Each
pair
of
concurrent
measurements
must
consist
of
a
flow
rate
measurement
by
each
of
the
two
flow
rate
sensors.
The
minimum
time
interval
between
any
two
such
pairs
of
consecutive
flow
rate
measurements
is
1
hour.
The
measurements
must
be
taken
during
periods
when
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
flow
rate
CPMS
are
operating
normally.
Calculate
the
mean
of
the
three
flow
rate
measurement
values
for
each
flow
rate
sensor.
The
mean
values
must
agree
within
the
required
overall
accuracy
of
the
CPMS,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
If
your
flow
rate
CPMS
does
not
include
a
redundant
flow
rate
sensor,
place
the
sensor
of
a
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device
adjacent
to
the
sensor
of
your
flow
rate
CPMS
in
a
location
that
is
subject
to
the
same
environment
as
the
sensor
of
your
flow
rate
CPMS.
The
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device
must
satisfy
the
accuracy
requirements
of
paragraph
(
a)(
15)
of
this
section.
While
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
flow
rate
CPMS
are
operating
normally,
record
concurrently
and
compare
the
flow
rate
measured
by
your
pressure
CPMS
and
the
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device.
Using
the
calibrated
flow
rate
measurement
device
as
the
reference,
the
flow
rate
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
iii)
Perform
any
of
the
accuracy
audit
methods
for
liquid
flow
rate
CPMS
specified
in
QA
procedures
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
5)
Conduct
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
flow
rate
CPMS
following
any
24­
hour
period
throughout
which
the
flow
rate
measured
by
your
CPMS
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
range,
or
install
a
new
flow
rate
sensor.
(
6)
At
least
monthly,
check
all
mechanical
connections
on
your
CPMS
for
leakage.
(
7)
If
your
CPMS
is
not
equipped
with
a
redundant
flow
rate
sensor,
perform
at
least
quarterly
a
visual
inspection
of
all
components
of
the
CPMS
for
integrity,
oxidation,
and
galvanic
corrosion.
(
e)
For
each
pH
CPMS
that
is
used
to
monitor
the
pH
of
a
wet
scrubber
liquid,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
e)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Use
a
pH
CPMS
with
a
minium
accuracy
of
±
0.2
pH
units.
(
2)
Use
a
data
recording
system
with
a
minimum
resolution
of
0.1
pH
units,
or
better.
(
3)
Perform
an
initial
validation
of
your
pH
CPMS
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
e)(
3)(
i)
or
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Perform
a
single­
point
calibration
using
an
NIST­
certified
buffer
solution
that
is
accurate
to
within
±
0.02
pH
units
at
25
°
C
(
77
°
F).
If
the
expected
pH
of
the
liquid
that
is
monitored
lies
in
the
acidic
range
(
less
than
7
pH),
use
a
buffer
solution
with
a
pH
value
of
4.00.
If
the
expected
pH
of
the
liquid
that
is
monitored
is
neutral
or
lies
in
the
basic
range
(
equal
to
or
greater
than
7
pH),
use
a
buffer
solution
with
a
pH
value
of
10.00.
Place
the
electrode
of
your
pH
CPMS
in
the
container
of
buffer
solution.
Record
the
pH
measured
by
your
CPMS.
Using
the
certified
buffer
solution
as
the
reference,
the
pH
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
Perform
any
of
the
initial
validation
methods
for
pH
CPMS
specified
in
performance
specifications
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
4)
Perform
an
accuracy
audit
of
your
pH
CPMS
at
least
weekly,
according
to
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
e)(
4)(
i),
(
ii),
or
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
If
your
pH
CPMS
includes
a
redundant
pH
sensor,
record
the
pH
measured
by
each
of
the
two
pH
sensors.
The
measurements
must
be
taken
during
periods
when
the
process
and
control
device
that
is
monitored
by
your
pH
CPMS
are
operating
normally.
The
two
pH
values
must
agree
within
the
required
overall
accuracy
of
the
CPMS,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
ii)
If
your
pH
CPMS
does
not
include
a
redundant
pH
sensor,
perform
a
single
point
calibration
using
an
NIST­
certified
buffer
solution
that
is
accurate
to
within
±
0.02
pH
units
at
25
°
C
(
77
°
F).
If
the
expected
pH
of
the
liquid
that
is
monitored
lies
in
the
acidic
range
(
less
than
7
pH),
use
a
buffer
solution
with
a
pH
value
of
4.00.
If
the
expected
pH
of
the
liquid
that
is
monitored
is
neutral
or
lies
in
the
basic
range
(
equal
to
or
greater
than
7
pH),
use
a
buffer
solution
with
a
pH
value
of
10.00.
Place
the
electrode
of
the
pH
CPMS
in
the
container
of
buffer
solution.
Record
the
pH
measured
by
your
CPMS.
Using
the
certified
buffer
solution
as
the
reference,
the
pH
measured
by
your
CPMS
must
be
within
the
accuracy
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
iii)
Perform
any
of
the
accuracy
audit
methods
for
pH
CPMS
specified
in
QA
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00025
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18754
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
procedures
for
CPMS
established
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
5)
If
your
CPMS
is
not
equipped
with
a
redundant
pH
sensor,
perform
at
least
monthly
a
visual
inspection
of
all
components
of
the
CPMS
for
integrity,
oxidation,
and
galvanic
corrosion.
(
f)
For
each
bag
leak
detection
system,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
1)
through
(
11)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Each
triboelectric
bag
leak
detection
system
must
be
installed,
calibrated,
operated,
and
maintained
according
to
the
``
Fabric
Filter
Bag
Leak
Detection
Guidance''
(
EPA
 
454/
R
 
98
 
015,
September
1997).
That
document
is
available
from
the
U.
S.
EPA;
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards;
Emissions,
Monitoring
and
Analysis
Division;
Emission
Measurement
Center
(
D205
 
02),
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711.
It
is
also
available
on
the
Technology
Transfer
Network
(
TTN)
at
the
following
address:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
emc/
cem.
html.
Other
types
of
bag
leak
detection
systems
must
be
installed,
operated,
calibrated,
and
maintained
in
a
manner
consistent
with
the
manufacturer's
written
specifications
and
recommendations.
(
2)
The
bag
leak
detection
system
must
be
certified
by
the
manufacturer
to
be
capable
of
detecting
particulate
matter
(
PM)
emissions
at
concentrations
of
10
milligrams
per
actual
cubic
meter
(
0.0044
grains
per
actual
cubic
foot)
or
less.
(
3)
The
bag
leak
detection
system
sensor
must
provide
an
output
of
relative
PM
loadings.
(
4)
The
bag
leak
detection
system
must
be
equipped
with
a
device
to
continuously
record
the
output
signal
from
the
sensor.
(
5)
The
bag
leak
detection
system
must
be
equipped
with
an
alarm
system
that
will
be
engaged
automatically
when
an
increase
in
relative
PM
emissions
over
a
preset
level
is
detected.
The
alarm
must
be
located
where
it
is
easily
recognized
by
plant
operating
personnel.
(
6)
For
positive
pressure
fabric
filter
systems,
a
bag
leak
detector
must
be
installed
in
each
baghouse
compartment
or
cell.
(
7)
For
negative
pressure
or
induced
air
fabric
filters,
the
bag
leak
detector
must
be
installed
downstream
of
the
fabric
filter.
(
8)
Where
multiple
detectors
are
required,
the
system's
instrumentation
and
alarm
may
be
shared
among
detectors.
(
9)
The
baseline
output
must
be
established
by
adjusting
the
range
and
the
averaging
period
of
the
device
and
establishing
the
alarm
set
points
and
the
alarm
delay
time
according
to
section
5.0
of
the
``
Fabric
Filter
Bag
Leak
Detection
Guidance.''
(
10)
Following
initial
adjustment
of
the
system,
the
owner
or
operator
must
not
adjust
the
sensitivity
or
range,
averaging
period,
alarm
set
points,
or
alarm
delay
time
except
as
detailed
in
the
OM&
M
plan.
In
no
case
may
the
sensitivity
be
increased
by
more
than
100
percent
or
decreased
by
more
than
50
percent
over
a
365­
day
period
unless
such
adjustment
follows
a
complete
fabric
filter
inspection
that
demonstrates
that
the
fabric
filter
is
in
good
operating
condition.
You
must
record
each
adjustment
of
your
bag
leak
detection
system.
(
11)
Record
the
results
of
each
inspection,
calibration,
and
validation
check.
(
g)
For
each
lime
feed
rate
measurement
device
that
is
used
to
monitor
the
lime
feed
rate
of
a
dry
injection
fabric
filter
(
DIFF)
or
dry
lime
scrubber/
fabric
filter
(
DLS/
FF),
or
the
chemical
feed
rate
of
a
wet
scrubber,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section.
(
h)
For
each
affected
source
that
is
subject
to
the
emission
limit
specified
in
item
3,
4,
7,
or
8
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
satisfy
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
h)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Install
a
THC
CEMS
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source.
(
2)
Meet
the
requirements
of
PS
 
8
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
(
3)
Meet
the
requirements
of
Procedure
1
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
(
i)
Requests
for
approval
of
alternate
monitoring
methods
must
meet
the
requirements
in
§
§
63.9800(
i)(
2)
and
63.8(
f).

§
63.9806
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards?

(
a)
You
must
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
each
emission
limit
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
Table
5
to
this
subpart.
(
b)
You
must
establish
each
sitespecific
operating
limit
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
§
63.9800
and
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
c)
You
must
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
each
work
practice
standard
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
Table
6
to
this
subpart.
(
d)
You
must
submit
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
containing
the
results
of
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.9812(
e).

Continuous
Compliance
Requirements
§
63.9808
How
do
I
monitor
and
collect
data
to
demonstrate
continuous
compliance?
(
a)
You
must
monitor
and
collect
data
according
to
this
section.
(
b)
At
all
times,
you
must
maintain
your
monitoring
systems
including,
but
not
limited
to,
maintaining
necessary
parts
for
routine
repairs
of
the
monitoring
equipment.
(
c)
Except
for,
as
applicable,
monitoring
system
malfunctions,
associated
repairs,
and
required
quality
assurance
or
quality
control
activities,
you
must
monitor
continuously
whenever
your
affected
process
unit
is
operating.
For
purposes
of
calculating
data
averages,
you
must
not
use
data
recorded
during
monitoring
system
malfunctions,
associated
repairs,
and
required
quality
assurance
or
quality
control
activities.
You
must
use
all
the
data
collected
during
all
other
periods
in
assessing
compliance.
A
monitoring
system
malfunction
is
any
sudden,
infrequent,
not
reasonably
preventable
failure
of
the
monitoring
system
to
provide
valid
data.
Monitoring
system
malfunctions
include
out
of
control
continuous
monitoring
systems
(
CMS),
such
as
a
CPMS.
Any
averaging
period
for
which
you
do
not
have
valid
monitoring
data
as
a
result
of
a
monitoring
system
malfunction
and
for
which
such
data
are
required
constitutes
a
deviation,
and
you
must
notify
the
Administrator
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e).
Monitoring
system
failures
are
different
from
monitoring
system
malfunctions
in
that
they
are
caused
in
part
by
poor
maintenance
or
careless
operation.
Any
period
for
which
there
is
a
monitoring
system
failure
and
data
are
not
available
for
required
calculations
constitutes
a
deviation
and
you
must
notify
the
Administrator
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e).

§
63.9810
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards?
(
a)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
emission
limit
specified
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
Table
7
to
this
subpart.
(
b)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
operating
limit
specified
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
Table
8
to
this
subpart.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00026
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18755
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
(
c)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
work
practice
standard
specified
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
Table
9
to
this
subpart.
(
d)
For
each
affected
source
that
is
equipped
with
an
add­
on
APCD
that
is
not
addressed
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
or
that
is
using
process
changes
as
a
means
of
meeting
the
emission
limits
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
you
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
emission
limit
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart
and
each
operating
limit
established
as
required
in
§
63.9800(
i)(
3)
according
to
the
methods
specified
in
your
approved
alternative
monitoring
methods
request
as
described
in
§
63.9800(
i)(
2).
(
e)
You
must
report
each
instance
in
which
you
did
not
meet
each
emission
limit
and
each
operating
limit
in
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
This
includes
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
These
instances
are
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
in
this
subpart.
These
deviations
must
be
reported
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.9814.
(
1)
During
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction,
you
must
operate
according
to
your
SSMP.
(
2)
Consistent
with
§
§
63.6(
e)
and
63.7(
e)(
1),
deviations
that
occur
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
are
not
violations
if
you
demonstrate
to
the
Administrator's
satisfaction
that
you
were
operating
according
to
your
SSMP
and
your
OM&
M
plan.
The
Administrator
will
determine
whether
deviations
that
occur
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
are
violations,
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e).

Notifications,
Reports,
and
Records
§
63.9812
What
notifications
must
I
submit
and
when?

(
a)
You
must
submit
all
of
the
notifications
in
§
§
63.7(
b)
and
(
c),
63.8(
f)(
4),
and
63.9
(
b)
through
(
e)
and
(
h)
that
apply
to
you
by
the
dates
specified.
(
b)
As
specified
in
§
63.9(
b)(
2)
and
(
3),
if
you
start
up
your
affected
source
before
April
16,
2003,
you
must
submit
an
Initial
Notification
not
later
than
120
calendar
days
after
April
16,
2003.
(
c)
As
specified
in
§
63.9(
b)(
3),
if
you
start
up
your
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source
on
or
after
April
16,
2003,
you
must
submit
an
Initial
Notification
not
later
than
120
calendar
days
after
you
become
subject
to
this
subpart.
(
d)
If
you
are
required
to
conduct
a
performance
test,
you
must
submit
a
Notification
of
Performance
Test
at
least
60
calendar
days
before
the
performance
test
is
scheduled
to
begin,
as
required
in
§
63.7(
b)(
1).
(
e)
If
you
are
required
to
conduct
a
performance
test,
you
must
submit
a
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
as
specified
in
§
63.9(
h)
and
paragraphs
(
e)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
each
compliance
demonstration
that
includes
a
performance
test
conducted
according
to
the
requirements
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart,
you
must
submit
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status,
including
the
performance
test
results,
before
the
close
of
business
on
the
60th
calendar
day
following
the
completion
of
the
performance
test,
according
to
§
63.10(
d)(
2).
(
2)
In
addition
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.9(
h)(
2)(
i),
you
must
include
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
e)(
2)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
(
i)
The
operating
limit
parameter
values
established
for
each
affected
source
with
supporting
documentation
and
a
description
of
the
procedure
used
to
establish
the
values.
(
ii)
Design
information
and
analysis
with
supporting
documentation
demonstrating
conformance
with
requirements
for
capture/
collection
systems
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
(
iii)
A
description
of
the
methods
used
to
comply
with
any
applicable
work
practice
standard.
(
iv)
For
each
APCD
that
includes
a
fabric
filter,
analysis
and
supporting
documentation
demonstrating
conformance
with
EPA
guidance
and
specifications
for
bag
leak
detection
systems
in
§
63.9804(
f).
(
f)
If
you
operate
a
clay
refractory
products
kiln
or
a
chromium
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
work
practice
standard
specified
in
item
3
or
4
of
Table
3
to
this
subpart,
and
you
intend
to
use
a
fuel
other
than
natural
gas
or
equivalent
to
fire
the
affected
kiln,
you
must
submit
a
notification
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
48
hours
of
the
declaration
of
a
period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824.
The
notification
must
include
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Company
name
and
address.
(
2)
Identification
of
the
affected
kiln.
(
3)
Reason
you
are
unable
to
use
natural
gas
or
equivalent
fuel,
including
the
date
when
the
natural
gas
curtailment
was
declared
or
the
natural
gas
supply
interruption
began.
(
4)
Type
of
alternative
fuel
that
you
intend
to
use.
(
5)
Dates
when
the
alternative
fuel
use
is
expected
to
begin
and
end.
(
g)
If
you
own
or
operate
an
affected
continuous
kiln
and
must
perform
scheduled
maintenance
on
the
control
device
for
that
kiln,
you
must
request
approval
from
the
Administrator
before
bypassing
the
control
device,
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e).
You
must
submit
a
separate
request
for
approval
each
time
you
plan
to
bypass
the
kiln
control
device.

§
63.9814
What
reports
must
I
submit
and
when?

(
a)
You
must
submit
each
report
in
Table
10
to
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
(
b)
Unless
the
Administrator
has
approved
a
different
schedule
for
submission
of
reports
under
§
63.10(
a),
you
must
submit
each
report
by
the
date
in
Table
10
to
this
subpart
and
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
first
compliance
report
must
cover
the
period
beginning
on
the
compliance
date
that
is
specified
for
your
affected
source
in
§
63.9786
and
ending
on
June
30
or
December
31
and
lasting
at
least
6
months
but
less
than
12
months.
For
example,
if
your
compliance
date
is
March
1,
then
the
first
semiannual
reporting
period
would
begin
on
March
1
and
end
on
December
31.
(
2)
The
first
compliance
report
must
be
postmarked
or
delivered
no
later
than
July
31
or
January
31
for
compliance
periods
ending
on
June
30
and
December
31,
respectively.
(
3)
Each
subsequent
compliance
report
must
cover
the
semiannual
reporting
period
from
January
1
through
June
30
or
the
semiannual
reporting
period
from
July
1
through
December
31.
(
4)
Each
subsequent
compliance
report
must
be
postmarked
or
delivered
no
later
than
July
31
or
January
31
for
compliance
periods
ending
on
June
30
and
December
31,
respectively.
(
5)
For
each
affected
source
that
is
subject
to
permitting
regulations
pursuant
to
40
CFR
part
70
or
40
CFR
part
71
and,
if
the
permitting
authority
has
established
dates
for
submitting
semiannual
reports
pursuant
to
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A),
you
may
submit
the
first
and
subsequent
compliance
reports
according
to
the
dates
the
permitting
authority
has
established
instead
of
according
to
the
dates
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section.
In
such
cases,
you
must
notify
the
Administrator
of
this
change.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00027
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18756
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
(
c)
The
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Company
name
and
address.
(
2)
Statement
by
a
responsible
official
with
that
official's
name,
title,
and
signature,
certifying
that,
based
on
information
and
belief
formed
after
reasonable
inquiry,
the
statements
and
information
in
the
report
are
true,
accurate,
and
complete.
(
3)
Date
of
report
and
beginning
and
ending
dates
of
the
reporting
period.
(
4)
If
you
had
a
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
during
the
reporting
period,
and
you
took
actions
consistent
with
your
SSMP
and
OM&
M
plan,
the
compliance
report
must
include
the
information
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
i).
(
5)
If
there
are
no
deviations
from
any
emission
limitations
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard)
that
apply
to
you,
the
compliance
report
must
include
a
statement
that
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period.
(
6)
If
there
were
no
periods
during
which
any
affected
CPMS
was
out
of
control
as
specified
in
§
63.8(
c)(
7),
the
compliance
report
must
include
a
statement
that
there
were
no
periods
during
which
the
CPMS
was
out
of
control
during
the
reporting
period.
(
d)
For
each
deviation
from
an
emission
limitation
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard)
that
occurs
at
an
affected
source
where
you
are
not
using
a
CPMS
to
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
in
this
subpart,
the
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
4)
and
(
d)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
This
includes
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
1)
The
compliance
report
must
include
the
total
operating
time
of
each
affected
source
during
the
reporting
period.
(
2)
The
compliance
report
must
include
information
on
the
number,
duration,
and
cause
of
deviations
(
including
unknown
cause,
if
applicable)
and
the
corrective
action
taken.
(
e)
For
each
deviation
from
an
emission
limitation
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard)
occurring
at
an
affected
source
where
you
are
using
a
CPMS
to
comply
with
the
emission
limitation
in
this
subpart,
the
compliance
report
must
include
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
4)
and
(
e)(
1)
through
(
13)
of
this
section.
This
includes
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
1)
The
total
operating
time
of
each
affected
source
during
the
reporting
period.
(
2)
The
date
and
time
that
each
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
started
and
stopped.
(
3)
The
date,
time,
and
duration
that
each
CPMS
was
inoperative.
(
4)
The
date,
time
and
duration
that
each
CPMS
was
out
of
control,
including
the
information
in
§
63.8(
c)(
8),
as
required
by
your
OM&
M
plan.
(
5)
The
date
and
time
that
each
deviation
from
an
emission
limitation
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard)
started
and
stopped,
and
whether
each
deviation
occurred
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction.
(
6)
A
description
of
corrective
action
taken
in
response
to
a
deviation.
(
7)
A
summary
of
the
total
duration
of
the
deviations
during
the
reporting
period
and
the
total
duration
as
a
percentage
of
the
total
source
operating
time
during
that
reporting
period.
(
8)
A
breakdown
of
the
total
duration
of
the
deviations
during
the
reporting
period
into
those
that
are
due
to
startup,
shutdown,
control
equipment
problems,
process
problems,
other
known
causes,
and
other
unknown
causes.
(
9)
A
summary
of
the
total
duration
of
CPMS
downtime
during
the
reporting
period
and
the
total
duration
of
CPMS
downtime
as
a
percentage
of
the
total
source
operating
time
during
that
reporting
period.
(
10)
A
brief
description
of
the
process
units.
(
11)
A
brief
description
of
the
CPMS.
(
12)
The
date
of
the
latest
CPMS
initial
validation
or
accuracy
audit.
(
13)
A
description
of
any
changes
in
CPMS,
processes,
or
controls
since
the
last
reporting
period.
(
f)
If
you
have
obtained
a
title
V
operating
permit
pursuant
to
40
CFR
part
70
or
40
CFR
part
71,
you
must
report
all
deviations
as
defined
in
this
subpart
in
the
semiannual
monitoring
report
required
by
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A).
If
you
submit
a
compliance
report
according
to
Table
10
to
this
subpart
along
with,
or
as
part
of,
the
semiannual
monitoring
report
required
by
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A),
and
the
compliance
report
includes
all
required
information
concerning
deviations
from
any
emission
limitation
(
including
any
operating
limit),
then
submitting
the
compliance
report
will
satisfy
any
obligation
to
report
the
same
deviations
in
the
semiannual
monitoring
report.
However,
submitting
a
compliance
report
will
not
otherwise
affect
any
obligation
you
may
have
to
report
deviations
from
permit
requirements
to
the
permit
authority.
(
g)
If
you
operate
a
clay
refractory
products
kiln
or
a
chromium
refractory
products
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
work
practice
standard
specified
in
item
3
or
4
of
Table
3
to
this
subpart,
and
you
use
a
fuel
other
than
natural
gas
or
equivalent
to
fire
the
affected
kiln,
you
must
submit
a
report
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
10
working
days
after
terminating
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel.
The
report
must
include
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
g)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Company
name
and
address.
(
2)
Identification
of
the
affected
kiln.
(
3)
Reason
for
using
the
alternative
fuel.
(
4)
Type
of
alternative
fuel
used
to
fire
the
affected
kiln.
(
5)
Dates
that
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel
started
and
ended.
(
6)
Amount
of
alternative
fuel
used.

§
63.9816
What
records
must
I
keep?

(
a)
You
must
keep
the
records
listed
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
A
copy
of
each
notification
and
report
that
you
submitted
to
comply
with
this
subpart,
including
all
documentation
supporting
any
Initial
Notification
or
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
that
you
submitted,
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xiv).
(
2)
The
records
in
§
63.6(
e)(
3)(
iii)
through
(
v)
related
to
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
3)
Records
of
performance
tests
as
required
in
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
viii).
(
b)
You
must
keep
the
records
required
in
Tables
7
through
9
to
this
subpart
to
show
continuous
compliance
with
each
emission
limitation
that
applies
to
you.
(
c)
You
must
also
maintain
the
records
listed
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
10)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Records
of
emission
data
used
to
develop
an
emissions
profile,
as
indicated
in
items
8(
a)(
i)(
4)
and
17(
b)(
i)(
4)
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
(
2)
Records
that
document
how
you
comply
with
any
applicable
work
practice
standard.
(
3)
For
each
bag
leak
detection
system,
records
of
each
alarm,
the
time
of
the
alarm,
the
time
corrective
action
was
initiated
and
completed,
and
a
brief
description
of
the
cause
of
the
alarm
and
the
corrective
action
taken.
(
4)
For
each
kiln
controlled
with
a
DLA,
records
that
document
the
source
of
limestone
used.
(
5)
For
each
deviation
of
an
operating
limit
parameter
value,
the
date,
time,

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00028
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18757
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
and
duration
of
the
deviation,
a
brief
explanation
of
the
cause
of
the
deviation
and
the
corrective
action
taken,
and
whether
the
deviation
occurred
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction.
(
6)
For
each
affected
source,
records
of
production
rate
on
a
process
throughput
basis
(
either
feed
rate
to
the
process
unit
or
discharge
rate
from
the
process
unit).
(
7)
Records
of
any
approved
alternative
monitoring
method(
s)
or
test
procedure(
s).
(
8)
Records
of
maintenance
activities
and
inspections
performed
on
control
devices,
including
all
records
associated
with
the
scheduled
maintenance
of
continuous
kiln
control
devices,
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e).
(
9)
If
you
operate
a
source
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
emission
limits
specified
in
item
2,
3,
6,
or
7
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
and
is
controlled
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
records
of
annual
checks
of
catalyst
activity
levels
and
subsequent
corrective
actions.
(
10)
Current
copies
of
the
SSMP
and
the
OM&
M
plan,
including
any
revisions
and
records
documenting
conformance
with
those
revisions.

§
63.9818
In
what
form
and
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?

(
a)
Your
records
must
be
in
a
form
suitable
and
readily
available
for
expeditious
review,
according
to
§
63.10(
b)(
1).
(
b)
As
specified
in
§
63.10(
b)(
1),
you
must
keep
each
record
for
5
years
following
the
date
of
each
occurrence,
measurement,
maintenance,
corrective
action,
report,
or
record.
(
c)
You
must
keep
each
record
onsite
for
at
least
2
years
after
the
date
of
each
occurrence,
measurement,
maintenance,
corrective
action,
report,
or
record,
according
to
§
63.10(
b)(
1).
You
may
keep
the
records
offsite
for
the
remaining
3
years.

Other
Requirements
and
Information
§
63.9820
What
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
apply
to
me?

Table
11
to
this
subpart
shows
which
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
specified
in
§
§
63.1
through
63.15
apply
to
you.

§
63.9822
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?

(
a)
This
subpart
can
be
implemented
and
enforced
by
us,
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
U.
S.
EPA),
or
a
delegated
authority
such
as
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
If
the
U.
S.
EPA
Administrator
has
delegated
authority
to
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency,
then
that
agency,
in
addition
to
the
U.
S.
EPA,
has
the
authority
to
implement
and
enforce
this
subpart.
You
should
contact
your
U.
S.
EPA
Regional
Office
to
find
out
if
implementation
and
enforcement
to
this
subpart
is
delegated
to
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
(
b)
In
delegating
implementation
and
enforcement
authority
to
this
subpart
to
a
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency
under
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
E,
the
authorities
contained
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section
are
retained
by
the
Administrator
of
the
U.
S.
EPA
and
are
not
transferred
to
the
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
(
c)
The
authorities
that
cannot
be
delegated
to
State,
local,
or
tribal
agencies
are
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Approval
of
alternatives
to
the
applicability
requirements
in
§
§
63.9782
and
63.9784,
the
compliance
date
requirements
in
§
63.9786,
and
the
emission
limitations
in
§
63.9788.
(
2)
Approval
of
major
changes
to
test
methods
under
§
63.7(
e)(
2)(
ii)
and
(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.
(
3)
Approval
of
major
changes
to
monitoring
under
§
63.8(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.
(
4)
Approval
of
major
changes
to
recordkeeping
and
reporting
under
§
63.10(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.

§
63.9824
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Terms
used
in
this
subpart
are
defined
in
the
Clean
Air
Act,
in
40
CFR
63.2,
the
General
Provisions
of
this
part,
and
in
this
section
as
follows:
Additive
means
a
minor
addition
of
a
chemical,
mineral,
or
metallic
substance
that
is
added
to
a
refractory
mixture
to
facilitate
processing
or
impart
specific
properties
to
the
final
refractory
product.
Add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
(
APCD)
means
equipment
installed
on
a
process
vent
that
reduces
the
quantity
of
a
pollutant
that
is
emitted
to
the
air.
Autoclave
means
a
vessel
that
is
used
to
impregnate
fired
and/
or
unfired
refractory
shapes
with
pitch
to
form
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products.
Autoclaves
also
can
be
used
as
defumers
following
the
impregnation
process.
Bag
leak
detection
system
means
an
instrument
that
is
capable
of
monitoring
particulate
matter
loadings
in
the
exhaust
of
a
fabric
filter
in
order
to
detect
bag
failures.
A
bag
leak
detection
system
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
an
instrument
that
operates
on
triboelectric,
light­
scattering,
lighttransmittance
or
other
effects
to
monitor
relative
PM
loadings.
Basket
means
the
metal
container
used
to
hold
refractory
shapes
for
pitch
impregnation
during
the
shape
preheating,
impregnation,
defuming,
and,
if
applicable,
coking
processes.
Batch
process
means
a
process
in
which
a
set
of
refractory
shapes
is
acted
upon
as
a
single
unit
according
to
a
predetermined
schedule,
during
which
none
of
the
refractory
shapes
being
processed
are
added
or
removed.
A
batch
process
does
not
operate
continuously.
Binder
means
a
substance
added
to
a
granular
material
to
give
it
workability
and
green
or
dry
strength.
Catalytic
oxidizer
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
that
is
designed
specifically
to
destroy
organic
compounds
in
a
process
exhaust
gas
stream
by
catalytic
incineration.
A
catalytic
oxidizer
includes
a
bed
of
catalyst
media
through
which
the
process
exhaust
stream
passes
to
promote
combustion
and
incineration
at
a
lower
temperature
than
would
be
possible
without
the
catalyst.
Chromium
refractory
product
means
a
refractory
product
that
contains
at
least
1
percent
chromium
by
weight.
Clay
refractory
product
means
a
refractory
product
that
contains
at
least
10
percent
uncalcined
clay
by
weight
prior
to
firing
in
a
kiln.
In
this
definition,
the
term
``
clay''
means
any
of
the
following
six
classifications
of
clay
defined
by
the
U.
S.
Geologic
Survey:
ball
clay,
bentonite,
common
clay
and
shale,
fire
clay,
fuller's
earth,
and
kaolin.
Coking
oven
means
a
thermal
process
unit
that
operates
at
a
peak
temperature
typically
between
540
°
and
870
°
C
(
1000
°
and
1600
°
F)
and
is
used
to
drive
off
the
volatile
constituents
of
pitchimpregnated
refractory
shapes
under
a
reducing
or
oxygen­
deprived
atmosphere.
Continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
(
CPMS)
means
the
total
equipment
that
is
used
to
measure
and
record
temperature,
pressure,
liquid
flow
rate,
gas
flow
rate,
or
pH
on
a
continuous
basis
in
one
or
more
locations.
``
Total
equipment''
includes
the
sensor,
mechanical
components,
electronic
components,
data
acquisition
system,
data
recording
system,
electrical
wiring,
and
other
components
of
a
CPMS.
Continuous
process
means
a
process
that
operates
continuously.
In
a
continuous
process
unit,
the
materials
or
shapes
that
are
processed
are
either
continuously
charged
(
fed)
to
and
discharged
from
the
process
unit,
or
are
charged
and
discharged
at
regular
time
intervals
without
the
process
unit
being
shut
down.
Continuous
thermal
process
units,
such
as
tunnel
kilns,
generally
include
temperature
zones
that
are
maintained
at
relatively
constant
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00029
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18758
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
temperature
and
through
which
the
materials
or
shapes
being
processed
are
conveyed
continuously
or
at
regular
time
intervals.
Curing
oven
means
a
thermal
process
unit
that
operates
at
a
peak
temperature
typically
between
90
°
and
340
°
C
(
200
°
and
650
°
F)
and
is
used
to
activate
a
thermosetting
resin,
pitch,
or
other
binder
in
refractory
shapes.
Curing
ovens
also
perform
the
same
function
as
shape
dryers
in
removing
the
free
moisture
from
refractory
shapes.
Defumer
means
a
process
unit
that
is
used
for
holding
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
shapes
as
the
shapes
defume
or
cool
immediately
following
the
impregnation
process.
This
definition
includes
autoclaves
that
are
opened
and
exhausted
to
the
atmosphere
following
an
impregnation
cycle
and
used
for
holding
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
shapes
while
the
shapes
defume
or
cool.
Deviation
means
any
instance
in
which
an
affected
source
subject
to
this
subpart,
or
an
owner
or
operator
of
such
a
source:
(
1)
Fails
to
meet
any
requirement
or
obligation
established
by
this
subpart
including,
but
not
limited
to,
any
emission
limitation
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard);
(
2)
Fails
to
meet
any
term
or
condition
that
is
adopted
to
implement
an
applicable
requirement
in
this
subpart
for
any
affected
source
required
to
obtain
such
a
permit;
or
(
3)
Fails
to
meet
any
emission
limitation
(
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard)
in
this
subpart
during
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
such
failure
is
permitted
by
this
subpart.
Dry
injection
fabric
filter
(
DIFF)
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
that
includes
continuous
injection
of
hydrated
lime
or
other
sorbent
into
a
duct
or
reaction
chamber
followed
by
a
fabric
filter.
Dry
lime
scrubber/
fabric
filter
(
DLS/
FF)
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
that
includes
continuous
injection
of
humidified
hydrated
lime
or
other
sorbent
into
a
reaction
chamber
followed
by
a
fabric
filter.
These
systems
may
include
recirculation
of
some
of
the
sorbent.
Dry
limestone
adsorber
(
DLA)
means
an
air
pollution
control
device
that
includes
a
limestone
storage
bin,
a
reaction
chamber
that
is
essentially
a
packed­
tower
filled
with
limestone,
and
may
or
may
not
include
a
peeling
drum
that
mechanically
scrapes
reacted
limestone
to
regenerate
the
stone
for
reuse.
Emission
limitation
means
any
restriction
on
the
emissions
a
process
unit
may
discharge.
Fabric
filter
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
used
to
capture
particulate
matter
by
filtering
a
process
exhaust
stream
through
a
filter
or
filter
media;
a
fabric
filter
is
also
known
as
a
baghouse.
Fired
refractory
shape
means
a
refractory
shape
that
has
been
fired
in
a
kiln.
HAP
means
any
hazardous
air
pollutant
that
appears
in
section
112(
b)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
Kiln
means
a
thermal
process
unit
that
operates
at
a
peak
temperature
greater
than
820
°
C
(
1500
°
F)
and
is
used
for
firing
or
sintering
refractory,
ceramic,
or
other
shapes.
Kiln
furniture
means
any
refractory
shape
that
is
used
to
hold,
support,
or
position
ceramic
or
refractory
products
in
a
kiln
during
the
firing
process.
Maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
means
the
combination
of
process
and
refractory
product
formulation
that
has
the
greatest
potential
to
emit
organic
HAP.
The
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
a
function
of
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate,
process
operating
temperature,
and
other
process
operating
parameters
that
affect
emissions
of
organic
HAP.
(
See
also
the
definition
of
organic
HAP
processing
rate.)
Organic
HAP
processing
rate
means
the
rate
at
which
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
materials
contained
in
refractory
shapes
are
processed
in
an
affected
thermal
process
unit.
The
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
a
function
of
the
amount
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
resins,
binders,
and
additives
used
in
a
refractory
mix;
the
amounts
of
those
resins,
binders,
and
additives
in
the
refractory
mix;
and
the
rate
at
which
the
refractory
shapes
formed
from
the
refractory
mix
are
processed
in
an
affected
thermal
process
unit.
For
continuous
process
units,
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
expressed
in
units
of
mass
of
organic
HAP
per
unit
of
time
(
e.
g.,
pounds
per
hour).
For
batch
process
units,
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
expressed
in
units
of
mass
of
organic
HAP
per
unit
mass
of
refractory
shapes
processed
during
the
batch
process
cycle
(
e.
g.,
pounds
per
ton).
Particulate
matter
(
PM)
means,
for
the
purposes
of
this
subpart,
emissions
of
particulate
matter
that
serve
as
a
measure
of
total
particulate
emissions
as
measured
by
EPA
Method
5
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
Peak
emissions
period
means
the
period
of
consecutive
hourly
mass
emissions
of
the
applicable
pollutant
that
is
greater
than
any
other
period
of
consecutive
hourly
mass
emissions
for
the
same
pollutant
over
the
course
of
a
specified
batch
process
cycle,
as
defined
in
paragraphs
(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
definition.
The
peak
emissions
period
is
a
function
of
the
rate
at
which
the
temperature
of
the
refractory
shapes
is
increased,
the
mass
and
loading
configuration
of
the
shapes
in
the
process
unit,
the
constituents
of
the
refractory
mix,
and
the
type
of
pollutants
emitted.
(
1)
The
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period
is
the
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
over
which
the
sum
of
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
for
any
other
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
during
the
same
batch
process
cycle.
(
2)
The
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period
is
the
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
over
which
the
sum
of
the
hourly
HF
mass
emissions
rates
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
the
hourly
HF
mass
emissions
rates
for
any
other
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
during
the
same
batch
process
cycle.
Period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption
means
a
period
of
time
during
which
the
supply
of
natural
gas
to
an
affected
facility
is
halted
for
reasons
beyond
the
control
of
the
facility.
An
increase
in
the
cost
or
unit
price
of
natural
gas
does
not
constitute
a
period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption.
Pitch
means
the
residue
from
the
distillation
of
petroleum
or
coal
tar.
Pitch­
bonded
refractory
product
means
a
formed
refractory
product
that
is
manufactured
using
pitch
as
a
bonding
agent.
Pitch­
bonded
refractory
products
are
manufactured
by
mixing
pitch
with
magnesium
oxide,
graphite,
alumina,
silicon
carbide,
silica,
or
other
refractory
raw
materials,
and
forming
the
mix
into
shapes.
After
forming,
pitch­
bonded
refractory
products
are
cured
in
a
curing
oven
and
may
be
subsequently
fired
in
a
kiln.
Pitch­
impregnated
refractory
product
means
a
refractory
shape
that
has
been
fired
in
a
kiln,
then
impregnated
with
heated
coal
tar
or
petroleum
pitch
under
pressure.
After
impregnation,
pitchimpregnated
refractory
shapes
may
undergo
the
coking
process
in
a
coking
oven.
The
total
carbon
content
of
a
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
product
is
less
than
50
percent.
Pitch
working
tank
means
a
tank
that
is
used
for
heating
pitch
to
the
impregnation
temperature,
typically
between
150
°
and
260
°
C
(
300
°
and
500
°
F);
temporarily
storing
heated
pitch
between
impregnation
cycles;
and
transferring
pitch
to
and
from
the
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00030
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18759
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
autoclave
during
the
impregnation
step
in
manufacturing
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products.
Plant
site
means
all
contiguous
or
adjoining
property
that
is
under
common
control,
including
properties
that
are
separated
only
by
a
road
or
other
public
right­
of­
way.
Common
control
includes
properties
that
are
owned,
leased,
or
operated
by
the
same
entity,
parent
entity,
subsidiary,
or
any
combination
thereof.
Redundant
sensor
means
a
second
sensor
or
a
back­
up
sensor
that
is
integrated
into
a
CPMS
and
is
used
to
check
the
parameter
value
(
e.
g.,
temperature,
pressure)
measured
by
the
primary
sensor
of
the
CPMS.
Refractory
product
means
nonmetallic
materials
containing
less
than
50
percent
carbon
by
weight
and
having
those
chemical
and
physical
properties
that
make
them
applicable
for
structures,
or
as
components
of
systems,
that
are
exposed
to
environments
above
538
°
C
(
1000
°
F).
This
definition
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to:
refractory
bricks,
kiln
furniture,
crucibles,
refractory
ceramic
fiber,
and
other
materials
used
as
linings
for
boilers,
kilns,
and
other
processing
units
and
equipment
where
extremes
of
temperature,
corrosion,
and
abrasion
would
destroy
other
materials.
Refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP
means
resin­
bonded
refractory
products,
pitch­
bonded
refractory
products,
and
other
refractory
products
that
are
produced
using
a
substance
that
is
an
organic
HAP,
that
releases
an
organic
HAP
during
production
of
the
refractory
product,
or
that
contains
an
organic
HAP,
such
as
methanol
or
ethylene
glycol.
Refractory
shape
means
any
refractory
piece
forming
a
stable
mass
with
specific
dimensions.
Research
and
development
process
unit
means
any
process
unit
whose
purpose
is
to
conduct
research
and
development
for
new
processes
and
products
and
is
not
engaged
in
the
manufacture
of
products
for
commercial
sale,
except
in
a
de
minimis
manner.
Resin­
bonded
refractory
product
means
a
formed
refractory
product
that
is
manufactured
using
a
phenolic
resin
or
other
type
of
thermosetting
resin
as
a
bonding
agent.
Resin­
bonded
refractory
products
are
manufactured
by
mixing
resin
with
alumina,
magnesium
oxide,
graphite,
silica,
zirconia,
or
other
refractory
raw
materials,
and
forming
the
mix
into
shapes.
After
forming,
resin­
bonded
refractory
products
are
cured
in
a
curing
oven
and
may
be
subsequently
fired
in
a
kiln.
Responsible
official
means
one
of
the
following:
(
1)
For
a
corporation:
a
president,
secretary,
treasurer,
or
vice­
president
of
the
corporation
in
charge
of
a
principal
business
function,
or
any
other
person
who
performs
similar
policy
or
decisionmaking
functions
for
the
corporation,
or
a
duly
authorized
representative
of
such
person
if
the
representative
is
responsible
for
the
overall
operation
of
one
or
more
manufacturing,
production,
or
operating
facilities
applying
for
or
subject
to
a
permit
and
either:
(
i)
The
facilities
employ
more
than
250
persons
or
have
gross
annual
sales
or
expenditures
exceeding
$
25
million
(
in
second
quarter
1980
dollars);
or
(
ii)
The
delegation
of
authority
to
such
representatives
is
approved
in
advance
by
the
Administrator;
(
2)
For
a
partnership
or
sole
proprietorship:
a
general
partner
or
the
proprietor,
respectively;
(
3)
For
a
municipality,
State,
Federal,
or
other
public
agency:
either
a
principal
executive
officer
or
ranking
elected
official.
For
the
purposes
of
this
part,
a
principal
executive
officer
of
a
Federal
agency
includes
the
chief
executive
officer
having
responsibility
for
the
overall
operations
of
a
principal
geographic
unit
of
the
agency
(
e.
g.,
a
Regional
Administrator
of
EPA);
or
(
4)
For
affected
sources
(
as
defined
in
this
subpart)
applying
for
or
subject
to
a
title
V
permit:
``
responsible
official''
shall
have
the
same
meaning
as
defined
in
part
70
or
Federal
title
V
regulations
in
this
chapter
(
42
U.
S.
C.
7661),
whichever
is
applicable.
Shape
dryer
means
a
thermal
process
unit
that
operates
at
a
peak
temperature
typically
between
40
°
and
700
°
C
(
100
°
and
1300
°
F)
and
is
used
exclusively
to
reduce
the
free
moisture
content
of
a
refractory
shape.
Shape
dryers
generally
are
the
initial
thermal
process
step
following
the
forming
step
in
refractory
products
manufacturing.
(
See
also
the
definition
of
a
curing
oven.)
Shape
preheater
means
a
thermal
process
unit
that
operates
at
a
peak
temperature
typically
between
180
°
and
320
°
C
(
350
°
and
600
°
F)
and
is
used
to
heat
fired
refractory
shapes
prior
to
the
impregnation
step
in
manufacturing
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products.
Thermal
oxidizer
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
that
includes
one
or
more
combustion
chambers
and
is
designed
specifically
to
destroy
organic
compounds
in
a
process
exhaust
gas
stream
by
incineration.
Uncalcined
clay
means
clay
that
has
not
undergone
thermal
processing
in
a
calciner.
Wet
scrubber
means
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device
that
removes
pollutants
from
a
gas
stream
by
bringing
them
into
contact
with
a
liquid,
typically
water.
Work
practice
standard
means
any
design,
equipment,
work
practice,
or
operational
standard,
or
combination
thereof,
that
is
promulgated
pursuant
to
section
112(
h)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00031
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18760
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
Tables
to
Subpart
SSSSS
of
Part
63
As
stated
in
§
63.9788,
you
must
comply
with
the
emission
limits
for
affected
sources
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
1
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
EMISSION
LIMITS
For
.
.
.
You
must
meet
the
following
emission
limits
.
.
.

1.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
As
specified
in
items
2
through
9
of
this
table.

2.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
controlled
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
parts
per
million
by
volume,
dry
basis
(
ppmvd),
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device;
or
b.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
95
percent.
3.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
control
device
other
than
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device;
or
b.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
95
percent.
4.
Continuous
process
units
that
use
process
changes
to
reduce
organic
HAP
emissions.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
process
gas
stream.
5.
Continuous
kilns
that
are
not
equipped
with
a
control
device
.............
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
process
gas
stream.
6.
Batch
process
units
that
are
controlled
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
a.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
concentration
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device;
or
b.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
95
percent.
7.
Batch
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
control
device
other
than
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
concentration
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device;
or
b.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
95
percent.
8.
Batch
process
units
that
use
process
changes
to
reduce
organic
HAP
emissions.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
concentration
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
at
the
outlet
of
the
process
gas
stream.
9.
Batch
process
kilns
that
are
not
equipped
with
a
control
device
........
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
concentration
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
at
the
outlet
of
the
process
gas
stream.
10.
Each
new
continuous
kiln
that
is
used
to
produce
clay
refractory
products.
a.
The
3­
hour
block
average
HF
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.019
kilograms
per
megagram
(
kg/
Mg)
(
0.038
pounds
per
ton
(
lb/
ton))
of
uncalcined
clay
processed,
OR
the
3­
hour
block
average
HF
mass
emissions
rate
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent;
and
b.
The
3­
hour
block
average
HCl
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed,
OR
the
3­
hour
block
average
HCl
mass
emissions
rate
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
11.
Each
new
batch
process
kiln
that
is
used
to
produce
clay
refractory
products.
a.
The
2­
run
block
average
HF
mass
emissions
rate
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent;
and
b.
The
2­
run
block
average
HCl
mass
emissions
rate
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.

As
stated
in
§
63.9788,
you
must
comply
with
the
operating
limits
for
affected
sources
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
OPERATING
LIMITS
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart
........................
a.
Operate
all
affected
sources
according
to
the
requirements
to
this
subpart
on
and
after
the
date
on
which
the
initial
performance
test
is
conducted
or
required
to
be
conducted,
whichever
date
is
earlier;
and
b.
Capture
emissions
and
vent
them
through
a
closed
system;
and
c.
Operate
each
control
device
that
is
required
to
comply
with
this
subpart
on
each
affected
source
during
all
periods
that
the
source
is
operating
except
where
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e),
item
2
of
this
table,
and
item
13
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00032
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18761
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.

d.
Record
all
operating
parameters
specified
in
Table
8
to
this
subpart
for
the
affected
source;
and
e.
Prepare
and
implement
a
written
OM&
M
plan
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
d).
2.
Each
affected
continuous
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
an
emission
control
device.
a.
Receive
approval
from
the
Administrator
before
taking
the
control
device
on
the
affected
kiln
out
of
service
for
scheduled
maintenance,
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e);
and
b.
Minimize
HAP
emissions
from
the
affected
kiln
during
all
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
of
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service;
and
c.
Minimize
the
duration
of
all
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
of
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
3.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
Satisfy
the
applicable
operating
limits
specified
in
items
4
through
9
of
this
table.

4.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit
................................................
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
hour)
at
or
below
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
5.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer
..
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
for
the
oxidizer
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
6.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer
a.
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
operating
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
of
the
oxidizer
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
for
the
oxidizer
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
b.
Check
the
activity
level
of
the
catalyst
at
least
every
12
months.
7.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit
.........................................................
For
each
batch
cycle,
maintain
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
batch)
at
or
below
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
8.
Batch
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer
...........
a.
From
the
start
of
each
batch
cycle
until
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature,
maintain
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
period
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
determined
according
to
item
11
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
b.
For
each
subsequent
hour
of
the
batch
cycle,
maintain
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
hour
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
specified
in
item
13
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
9.
Batch
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer
..........
a.
From
the
start
of
each
batch
cycle
until
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature,
maintain
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
period
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
determined
according
to
item
12
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
b.
For
each
subsequent
hour
of
the
batch
cycle,
maintain
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
hour
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
specified
in
item
13
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
c.
Check
the
activity
level
of
the
catalyst
at
least
every
12
months.
10.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products
........
Satisfy
the
applicable
operating
limits
specified
in
items
11
through
13
of
this
table.
11.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
DLA
.................................
a.
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
at
or
above
the
minimum
levels
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
b.
Maintain
free­
flowing
limestone
in
the
feed
hopper,
silo,
and
DLA
at
all
times;
and
c.
Maintain
the
limestone
feeder
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00033
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18762
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.

d.
Use
the
same
grade
of
limestone
from
the
same
source
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
maintain
records
of
the
source
and
type
of
limestone
used.
12.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
DIFF
or
DLS/
FF
..............
a.
Initiate
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm
and
complete
corrective
actions
in
accordance
with
the
OM&
M
plan;
and
b.
Verify
at
least
once
each
8­
hour
shift
that
lime
is
free­
flowing
by
means
of
a
visual
check,
checking
the
output
of
a
load
cell,
carrier
gas/
lime
flow
indicator,
or
carrier
gas
pressure
drop
measurement
system;
and
c.
Record
the
lime
feeder
setting
daily
to
verify
that
the
feeder
setting
is
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
13.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
wet
scrubber
...................
a.
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber
liquid
pH,
and
liquid
flow
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
levels
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
b.
If
chemicals
are
added
to
the
scrubber
liquid,
maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
chemical
feed
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
chemical
feed
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.

As
stated
in
§
63.9788,
you
must
comply
with
the
work
practice
standards
for
affected
sources
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
3
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
WORK
PRACTICE
STANDARDS
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
According
to
one
of
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

1.
Each
basket
or
container
that
is
used
for
holding
fired
refractory
shapes
in
an
existing
shape
preheater
and
autoclave
during
the
pitch
impregnation
process.
a.
Control
POM
emissions
from
any
affected
shape
preheater.
i.
At
least
every
10
preheating
cycles,
clean
the
residual
pitch
from
the
surfaces
of
the
basket
or
container
by
abrasive
blasting
prior
to
placing
the
basket
or
container
in
the
affected
shape
preheater;
or
ii.
At
least
every
10
preheating
cycles,
subject
the
basket
or
container
to
a
thermal
process
cycle
that
meets
or
exceeds
the
operating
temperature
and
cycle
time
of
the
affected
preheater,
AND
is
conducted
in
a
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
is
comparable
to
the
control
device
used
on
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven;
or
iii.
Capture
emissions
from
the
affected
shape
preheater
and
vent
them
to
the
control
device
that
is
used
to
control
emissions
from
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven,
or
to
a
comparable
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
2.
Each
new
or
existing
pitch
working
tank
.......
Control
POM
emissions
...................................
Capture
emissions
from
the
affected
pitch
working
tank
and
vent
them
to
the
control
device
that
is
used
to
control
emissions
from
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven,
OR
to
a
comparable
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
3.
Each
new
or
existing
chromium
refractory
products
kiln.
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
Use
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel,
except
during
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824.
4.
Each
existing
clay
refractory
products
kiln
....
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
Use
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel,
except
during
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824.

As
stated
in
§
63.9800,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
for
performance
tests
for
affected
sources
in
the
following
table:

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00034
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4755
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18763
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Conduct
performance
tests
..............
i.
The
requirements
of
the
general
provisions
in
subpart
A
of
this
part
and
the
requirements
to
this
subpart.
(
1)
Record
the
date
of
the
test;
and
(
2)
Identify
the
emission
source
that
is
tested;
and
(
3)
Collect
and
record
the
corresponding
operating
parameter
and
emission
test
data
listed
in
this
table
for
each
run
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Repeat
the
performance
test
at
least
every
5
years;
and
(
5)
Repeat
the
performance
test
before
changing
the
parameter
value
for
any
operating
limit
specified
in
your
OM&
M
plan;
and
(
6)
If
complying
with
the
THC
concentration
or
THC
percentage
reduction
limits
specified
in
items
2
through
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
repeat
the
performance
test
under
the
conditions
specified
in
items
2.
a.
2.
and
2.
a.
3.
of
this
table;
and
(
7)
If
complying
with
the
emission
limits
for
new
clay
refractory
products
kilns
specified
in
items
10
and
11
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
repeat
the
performance
test
under
the
conditions
specified
in
items
14.
a.
i.
4.
and
17.
a.
i.
4.
of
this
table.
b.
Select
the
locations
of
sampling
ports
and
the
number
of
traverse
points.
i.
Method
1
or
1A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
To
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
percentage
reduction
limits
specified
in
items
2.
b.,
3.
b.,
6.
b.,
7.
b.,
10,
and
11
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
locate
sampling
sites
at
the
inlet
of
the
control
device
and
at
either
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
at
the
stack
prior
to
any
releases
to
the
atmosphere
and
(
2)
To
demonstrate
compliance
with
any
other
emission
limit
specified
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart,
locate
all
sampling
sites
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
at
the
stack
prior
to
any
releases
to
the
atmosphere.
c.
Determine
gas
velocity
and
volumetric
flow
rate.
Method
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
or
2G
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
Measure
gas
velocities
and
volumetric
flow
rates
at
1­
hour
intervals
throughout
each
test
run.
d.
Conduct
gas
molecular
weight
analysis.
(
i)
Method
3,
3A,
or
3B
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
As
specified
in
the
applicable
test
method.
(
ii)
ASME
PTC
19.10
 
1981
 
Part
10
....
You
may
use
ASME
PTC
19.10
 
1981
 
Part
10
(
available
for
purchase
from
Three
Park
Avenue,
New
York,
NY
10016
 
5990)
as
an
alternative
to
EPA
Method
3B.
e.
Measure
gas
moisture
content
........
Method
4
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
As
specified
in
the
applicable
test
method.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00035
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18764
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

2.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
a.
Conduct
performance
tests
..............
...............................................................
(
1)
Conduct
the
performance
test
while
the
source
is
operating
at
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824,
reasonably
expected
to
occur;
and
(
2)
Repeat
the
performance
test
before
starting
production
of
any
product
for
which
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
is
likely
to
exceed
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
by
more
than
10
percent
as
specified
in
§
63.9798(
c);
and
(
3)
Repeat
the
performance
test
on
any
affected
uncontrolled
kiln
following
process
changes
(
e.
g.,
shorter
curing
oven
cycle
time)
that
could
increase
organic
HAP
emissions
from
the
affected
kiln,
as
specified
in
§
63.9798(
d).

b.
Satisfy
the
applicable
requirements
listed
in
items
3
through
13
of
this
table.
3.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit.
a.
Perform
a
minimum
of
3
test
runs
...
The
appropriate
test
methods
specified
in
items
1,
4,
and
5
of
this
table.
Each
test
run
must
be
at
least
1
hour
in
duration.

b.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
i.
Method
311
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
OR
material
safety
data
sheets
(
MSDS),
OR
product
labels
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
each
resin,
binder,
or
additive;
and
(
1)
Calculate
and
record
the
organic
HAP
content
of
all
refractory
shapes
that
are
processed
during
the
performance
test,
based
on
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
the
resins,
binders,
or
additives;
the
mass
fraction
of
each
resin,
binder,
or
additive
in
the
product;
and
the
process
feed
rate;
and
ii.
Product
formulation
data
that
specify
the
mass
fraction
of
each
resin,
binder,
and
additive
in
the
products
that
are
processed
during
the
performance
test;
and
(
2)
Calculate
and
record
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
hour)
for
each
test
run;
and
iii.
Process
feed
rate
data
(
tons
per
hour).
(
3)
Calculate
and
record
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
as
the
average
of
the
organic
HAP
processing
rates
for
the
three
test
runs.
c.
Record
the
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source.
Process
data
........................................
During
each
test
run
and
at
least
once
per
hour,
record
the
operating
temperature
in
the
highest
temperature
zone
of
the
affected
source.
4.
Each
continuous
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
emission
limit
listed
in
item
2.
a.,
3.
a.,
4,
or
5
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Measure
THC
concentrations
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
25A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
THC
in
the
exhaust
stream;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
THC
concentration.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00036
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18765
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

b.
Measure
oxygen
concentrations
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
3A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
oxygen
in
the
exhaust
stream;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
THC
concentration.
c.
Determine
the
hourly
average
THC
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
i.
Equation
1
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
1);
and
...
ii.
The
1­
minute
THC
and
oxygen
concentration
data.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
THC
concentration
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
as
the
average
of
the
1­
minute
THC
measurements;
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
oxygen
concentration
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
as
the
average
of
the
1­
minute
oxygen
measurements
and
(
3)
Correct
the
hourly
average
THC
concentrations
to
18
percent
oxygen
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
1).
d.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
THC
emission
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
The
hourly
average
concentration
of
THC,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
for
each
test
run.
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
THC
emission
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
THC
emission
concentrations,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
5.
Each
continuous
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
percentage
reduction
limit
listed
in
item
2.
b.
or
3.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Measure
THC
concentrations
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
Method
25A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
THC
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
THC
concentration
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet.
b.
Determine
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
The
1­
minute
THC
concentration
data
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet;
and
ii.
The
volumetric
flow
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet.
Calculate
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test.

c.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
THC
percentage
reduction.
i.
The
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
THC
percentage
reduction
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
1);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
THC
percentage
reduction.
6.
Each
continous
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer.
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
allowable
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature.
i.
Continuous
recording
of
the
output
of
the
combustion
chamber
temperature
measurement
device.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
and
record
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
the
minimum
allowable
combustion
chamber
temperature
as
the
average
of
the
combustion
chamber
temperatures
for
the
three
test
runs,
minus
14
°
C
(
25
°
F).
7.
Each
continuous
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
allowable
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed.
i.
Continuous
recording
of
the
output
of
the
temperature
measurement
device
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
and
record
the
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00037
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18766
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

(
4)
Calculate
the
minimum
allowable
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
as
the
average
of
the
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperatures
for
the
three
test
runs,
minus
14
°
C
(
25
°
F).
8.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit.
a.
Perform
a
minimum
of
two
test
runs
i.
The
appropriate
test
methods
specified
in
items
1,
9,
and
10
of
this
table.
(
1)
Each
test
run
must
be
conducted
over
a
separate
batch
cycle
unless
you
satisfy
the
requirements
of
§
63.9800(
f)(
3)
and
(
4);
and
(
2)
Each
test
run
must
begin
with
the
start
of
a
batch
cycle,
except
as
specified
in
item
8.
a.
i.
4.
of
this
table;
and
(
3)
Each
test
run
must
continue
until
the
end
of
the
batch
cycle,
except
as
specified
in
items
8.
a.
i.
4.
and
8.
a.
i.
5.
of
this
table;
and
(
4)
If
you
develop
an
emissions
profile,
as
described
in
§
63.9802(
a),
AND
for
sources
equipped
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
do
not
reduce
the
oxidizer
operating
temperature
as
specified
in
item
13
of
this
table,
you
can
limit
each
test
run
to
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period
and
(
5)
If
you
do
not
develop
an
emissions
profile,
a
test
run
can
be
stopped,
and
the
results
of
that
run
considered
complete,
if
you
measure
emissions
continuously
until
at
least
3
hours
after
the
affected
process
unit
has
reached
maximum
temperature,
AND
the
hourly
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
has
not
increased
during
the
3­
hour
period
since
maximum
process
temperature
was
reached,
and
the
hourly
average
concentrations
of
THC
at
the
inlet
of
the
control
device
have
not
exceeded
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
during
the
3­
hour
period
since
maximum
process
temperature
was
reached
or
the
hourly
average
THC
percentage
reduction
has
been
at
least
95
percent
during
the
3­
hour
period
since
maximum
process
temperature
was
reached,
AND,
for
sources
equipped
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
at
least
1
hour
has
passed
since
any
reduction
in
the
operating
temperature
of
the
oxidizer,
as
specified
in
item
13
of
this
table.
b.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate.
i.
Method
311
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
OR
MSDS,
OR
product
labels
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
each
resin,
binder
or
additive;
and
(
1)
Calculate
and
record
the
organic
HAP
content
of
all
refractory
shapes
that
are
processed
during
the
performance
test,
based
on
the
mass
fraction
of
HAP
in
the
resins,
binders
or
additives;
the
mass
fraction
of
each
resin,
binder,
or
additive,
in
the
product,
and
the
batch
weight
prior
to
processing;
and
ii.
Product
formulation
data
that
specify
the
mass
fraction
of
each
resin,
binder,
and
additive
in
the
products
that
are
processed
during
the
performance
test;
and
iii.
Batch
weight
(
tons)
..........................
(
2)
Calculate
and
record
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
batch)
for
each
test
run;
and
(
3)
Calculate
and
record
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
as
the
average
of
the
organic
HAP
processing
rates
for
the
two
test
runs.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00038
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18767
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

c.
Record
the
batch
cycle
time
............
Process
data
........................................
Record
the
total
elapsed
time
from
the
start
to
the
completion
of
the
batch
cycle.
d.
Record
the
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source.
Process
data
........................................
Record
the
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source
at
least
once
every
hour
from
the
start
to
the
completion
of
the
batch
cycle.
9.
Each
batch
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
emission
limit
listed
in
item
6.
a.,
7.
a.,
8,
or
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Measure
THC
concentrations
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
25A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
THC
in
the
exhaust
stream;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
THC
concentration.

b.
Measure
oxygen
concentrations
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
3A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
oxygen
in
the
exhaust
stream;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
oxygen
concentration.
c.
Determine
the
hourly
average
THC
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
i.
Equation
1
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
1);
and
...
ii.
The
1­
minute
THC
and
oxygen
concentration
data.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
THC
concentration
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
as
the
average
of
the
1­
minute
THC
measurements;
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
oxygen
concentration
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
as
the
average
of
the
1­
minute
oxygen
measurements
and
(
3)
Correct
the
hourly
average
THC
concentrations
to
18
percent
oxygen
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
1).
d.
Determine
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period
for
each
test
run.
The
hourly
average
THC
concentrations
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
Select
the
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
over
which
the
sum
of
the
hourly
average
THC
concentrations,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
the
hourly
average
THC
emission
concentrations
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
for
any
other
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
during
the
test
run.
e.
Determine
the
average
THC
concentration
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
each
test
run.
The
hourly
average
THC
emission
concentrations,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period.
Calculate
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
THC
concentrations,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
the
3
hours
of
the
peak
emissions
period
for
each
test
run.
f.
Determine
the
2­
run
block
average
THC
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
the
emission
test.
The
average
THC
concentration,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
each
test
run.
Calculate
the
average
of
the
average
THC
concentrations,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen,
for
each
run.

10.
Each
batch
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
percentage
reduction
limit
listed
in
item
6.
b.
or
7.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Measure
THC
concentrations
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
Method
25A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Each
minute,
measure
and
record
the
concentrations
of
THC
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
50
1­
minute
measurements
for
each
valid
hourly
average
THC
concentration
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet.

b.
Determine
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet.
i.
The
1­
minute
THC
concentration
data
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet;
and
ii.
The
volumetric
flow
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00039
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18768
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

c.
Determine
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period
for
each
test
run.
The
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet.
Select
the
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
over
which
the
sum
of
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
the
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
for
any
other
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
during
the
test
run.
d.
Determine
the
average
THC
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run.
i.
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
2);
and
...
ii.
The
hourly
THC
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet
for
the
3­
hour
peak
THC
emissions
period.
Calculate
the
average
THC
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
2).

e.
Determine
the
2­
run
block
average
THC
percentage
reduction
for
the
emission
test.
The
average
THC
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run.
Calculate
the
average
of
the
average
THC
percentage
reductions
for
each
test
run.
11.
Each
batch
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer.
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature.
i.
Continuous
recording
of
the
output
of
the
combustion
chamber
temperature
measurement
device.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
and
record
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
temperature
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
combustion
chamber
temperature
for
each
hour
of
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period,
as
defined
in
item
9.
d.
or
10.
c.
of
this
table,
whichever
applies
and
(
4)
Calculate
the
minimum
allowable
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
operating
temperature
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
combustion
chamber
temperatures
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period,
minus
14
°
C
(
25
°
F).
12.
Each
batch
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed.
i.
Continuous
recording
of
the
output
of
the
temperature
measurement
device
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
and
record
the
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
for
each
hour
of
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period,
as
defined
in
item
9.
d.
or
10.
c.
of
this
table,
whichever
applies
and
(
4)
Calculate
the
minimum
allowable
catalytic
oxidizer
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperatures
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period,
minus
14
°
C
(
25
°
F).
13.
Each
batch
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
During
each
test
run,
maintain
the
applicable
operating
temperature
of
the
oxidizer
until
emission
levels
allow
the
oxidizer
to
be
shut
off
or
the
operating
temperature
of
the
oxidizer
to
be
reduced.
(
1)
The
oxidizer
can
be
shut
off
or
the
oxidizer
operating
temperature
can
be
reduced
if
you
do
not
use
an
emission
profile
to
limit
testing
to
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period,
as
specified
in
item
8.
a.
i.
4.
of
this
table;
and
(
2)
At
least
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
affected
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00040
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18769
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

(
3)
The
applicable
emission
limit
specified
in
item
6.
a.
or
6.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
was
met
during
each
of
the
previous
three
1­
hour
periods;
and
(
4)
The
hourly
average
THC
mass
emissions
rate
did
not
increase
during
the
3­
hour
period
since
maximum
process
temperature
was
reached;
and
(
5)
The
applicable
emission
limit
specified
in
item
6.
a.
and
6.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
was
met
during
each
of
the
four
15­
minute
periods
immediately
following
the
oxidizer
temperature
reduction;
and
(
6)
If
the
applicable
emission
limit
specified
in
item
6.
a.
or
6.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
was
not
met
during
any
of
the
four
15­
minute
periods
immediately
following
the
oxidizer
temperature
reduction,
you
must
return
the
oxidizer
to
its
normal
operating
temperature
as
soon
as
possible
and
maintain
that
temperature
for
at
least
1
hour;
and
(
7)
Continue
the
test
run
until
the
applicable
emission
limit
specified
in
items
6.
a.
and
6.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart
is
met
for
at
least
four
consecutive
15­
minute
periods
that
immediately
follow
the
temperature
reduction
and
(
8)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
oxidizer
operating
temperature
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test
since
the
affected
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature.
14.
Each
new
continuous
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
a.
Measure
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl
..
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Conduct
the
test
while
the
kiln
is
operating
at
the
maximum
production
level;
and
(
2)
You
may
use
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
only
if
no
acid
PM
(
e.
g.,
HF
or
HCl
dissolved
in
water
droplets
emitted
by
sources
controlled
by
a
wet
scrubber)
is
present;
and
(
3)
If
you
use
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
you
must
follow
the
analyte
spiking
procedures
of
Section
13
of
Method
320
unless
you
can
demonstrate
that
the
complete
spiking
procedure
has
been
conducted
at
a
similar
source;
and
(
4)
Repeat
the
performance
test
if
the
affected
source
is
controlled
with
a
DLA
and
you
change
the
source
of
the
limestone
used
in
the
DLA.
b.
Perform
a
minimum
of
3
test
runs
...
The
appropriate
test
methods
specified
in
items
1
and
14.
a.
of
this
table.
Each
test
run
must
be
at
least
1
hour
in
duration.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00041
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18770
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

15.
Each
new
continuous
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
production
based
HF
and
HCl
emission
limits
specified
in
items
10.
a.
and
10.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Record
the
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate.
i.
Production
data;
and
.........................
ii.
Product
formulation
data
that
specify
the
mass
fraction
of
uncalcined
clay
in
the
products
that
are
processed
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
Record
the
production
rate
(
tons
per
hour
of
fired
product);
and
(
2)
Calculate
and
record
the
average
rate
at
which
uncalcined
clay
is
processed
(
tons
per
hour)
for
each
test
run;
and
(
3)
Calculate
and
record
the
3­
run
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate
as
the
average
of
the
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rates
for
each
test
run.
b.
Determine
the
HF
mass
emissions
rate
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
Calculate
the
HF
mass
emissions
rate
for
each
test.

c.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HF
emissions
rate.
i.
The
HF
mass
emissions
rate
for
each
test
run;
and
ii.
The
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
productionbased
HF
emissions
rate
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
3
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
3);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HF
emissions
rate
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
production
based
HF
emissions
rates
for
each
test
run.
d.
Determine
the
HCl
mass
emissions
rate
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack.
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
Calculate
the
HCl
mass
emissions
rate
for
each
test
run.

e.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HCl
emissions
rate.
i.
The
HCl
mass
emissions
rate
for
each
test
run;
and
ii.
The
average
uncalcined
clay
processing
rate.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
productionbased
HCl
emissions
rate
for
each
test
run
using
Equation
3
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
3);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HCl
emissions
rate
as
the
average
of
the
productionbased
HCl
emissions
rates
for
each
test
run.
16.
Each
new
continuous
kiln
that
is
subject
to
the
HF
and
HCl
percentage
reduction
limits
specified
in
items
10.
a.
and
10.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Measure
the
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
Calculate
the
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet
for
each
test
run.

b.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
HF
percentage
reduction.
i.
The
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device
for
each
test
run
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
HF
percentage
reduction
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
2);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
HF
percentage
reduction
as
the
average
of
the
HF
percentage
reductions
for
each
test
run.
c.
Measure
the
HCl
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
Calculate
the
HCl
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
and
outlet
for
each
test
run.

d.
Determine
the
3­
hour
block
average
HCl
percentage
reduction.
i.
The
HCl
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device
for
each
test
run.
(
1)
Calculate
the
hourly
HCl
percentage
reduction
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
2);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
3­
hour
block
average
HCl
percentage
reduction
as
the
average
of
HCl
percentage
reductions
for
each
test
run.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00042
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18771
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

17.
Each
new
batch
process
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
a.
Measure
emissions
of
HF
and
HCl
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
Method
26A
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
ii.
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
or
iii.
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
(
1)
Conduct
the
test
while
the
kiln
is
operating
at
the
maximum
production
level;
and
(
2)
You
may
use
Method
26
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
only
if
no
acid
PM
(
e.
g.,
HF
or
HCl
dissolved
in
water
droplets
emitted
by
sources
controlled
by
a
wet
scrubber)
is
present;
and
(
3)
If
you
use
Method
320
of
40
CFR
part
63,
you
must
follow
the
analyte
spiking
procedures
of
Section
13
of
Method
320
unless
you
can
demonstrate
that
the
complete
spiking
procedure
has
been
conducted
at
a
similar
source;
and
(
4)
Repeat
the
performance
test
if
the
affected
source
is
controlled
with
a
DLA
and
you
change
the
source
of
the
limestone
used
in
the
DLA.
b.
Perform
a
minimum
of
2
test
runs
...
i.
The
appropriate
test
methods
specified
in
items
1
and
17.
a.
of
this
table.
(
1)
Each
test
run
must
be
conducted
over
a
separate
batch
cycle
unless
you
satisfy
the
requirements
of
§
63.9800(
f)(
3)
and
(
4);
and
(
2)
Each
test
run
must
consist
of
a
series
of
1­
hour
runs
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device,
beginning
with
the
start
of
a
batch
cycle,
except
as
specified
in
item
17.
b.
i.
4.
of
this
table;
and
(
3)
Each
test
run
must
continue
until
the
end
of
the
batch
cycle,
except
as
specified
in
item
17.
b.
i.
4.
of
this
table;
and
(
4)
If
you
develop
an
emissions
profile,
as
described
in
§
63.9802(
b),
you
can
limit
each
test
run
to
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period.
c.
Determine
the
hourly
HF
and
HCl
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
i.
The
appropriate
test
methods
specified
in
items
1
and
17.
a.
of
this
table.
Determine
the
hourly
mass
HF
and
HCl
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device
for
each
hour
of
each
test
run.
d.
Determine
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period.
The
hourly
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
of
the
control
device.
Select
the
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
over
which
the
sum
of
the
hourly
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
the
hourly
HF
mass
emissions
rates
at
the
control
device
inlet
for
any
other
period
of
3
consecutive
hours
during
the
test
run.
e.
Determine
the
2­
run
block
average
HF
percentage
reduction
for
the
emissions
test.
i.
The
hourly
average
HF
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
(
1)
Calculate
the
HF
percentage
reduction
for
each
hour
of
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.9800(
g)(
2);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
average
HF
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
HF
percentage
reductions
for
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period
for
that
run;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
2­
run
block
average
HF
percentage
reduction
for
the
emission
test
as
the
average
of
the
average
HF
percentage
reductions
for
the
two
test
runs.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00043
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18772
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

f.
Determine
the
2­
run
block
average
HCl
percentage
reduction
for
the
emission
test.
i.
The
hourly
average
HCl
emissions
rates
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
control
device.
(
1)
Calculate
the
HCl
percentage
reduction
for
each
hour
of
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period
using
Equation
2
§
63.9800(
g)(
2);
and
(
2)
Calculate
the
average
HCl
percentage
reduction
for
each
test
run
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
HCl
percentage
reductions
for
the
3­
hour
peak
HF
emissions
period
for
that
run;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
2­
run
block
average
HCl
percentage
reduction
for
the
emission
test
as
the
average
of
the
average
HCl
percentage
reductions
for
the
two
test
runs.
18.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products
and
is
equipped
with
a
DLA.
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA.
Data
from
the
pressure
drop
measurement
device
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
the
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
pressure
drop
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
and
record
the
minimum
pressure
drop
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
pressure
drops
across
the
DLA
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies.
b.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
limestone
feeder
setting.
Data
from
the
limestone
feeder
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
Ensure
that
limestone
in
the
feed
hopper,
silo,
and
DLA
is
free­
flowing
at
all
times
during
the
performance
test;
and
(
2)
Establish
the
limestone
feeder
setting
1
week
prior
to
the
performance
test;
and
(
3)
Record
and
maintain
the
feeder
setting
for
the
1­
week
period
that
precedes
the
performance
test
and
during
the
performance
test.
19.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products
and
is
equipped
with
a
DIFF
or
DLS/
FF.
a.
Document
conformance
with
specifications
and
requirements
of
the
bag
leak
detection
system.
Data
from
the
installation
and
calibration
of
the
bag
leak
detection
system.
Submit
analyses
and
supporting
documentation
demonstrating
conformance
with
EPA
guidance
and
specifications
for
bag
leak
detection
systems
as
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.

b.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
lime
feeder
setting.
i.
Data
from
the
lime
feeder
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
For
continuous
lime
injection
systems
ensure
that
lime
in
the
feed
hopper
or
silo
is
free­
flowing
at
all
times
during
the
performance
test;
and
(
2)
Record
the
feeder
setting
for
the
three
test
runs;
and
(
3)
If
the
feed
rate
setting
varies
during
the
three
test
runs,
calculate
and
record
the
average
feed
rate
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies
20.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products
and
is
equipped
with
a
wet
scrubber
a.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
scrubber
pressure
drop.
i.
Data
from
the
pressure
drop
measurement
device
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
the
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
pressure
drop
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00044
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18773
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PERFORMANCE
TESTS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
You
must
.
.
.
Using
.
.
.
According
to
the
following
requirements
.
.
.

(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
and
record
the
minimum
pressure
drop
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
pressure
drops
across
the
scrubber
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies.
b.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
pH.
i.
Data
from
the
pH
measurement
device
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
scrubber
liquid
pH;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
pH
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
pH
values
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
and
record
the
minimum
liquid
pH
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
pH
measurements
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies
c.
Establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate.
i.
Data
from
the
flow
rate
measurement
device
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
the
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
flow
rate
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
liquid
flow
rate
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
and
record
the
minimum
liquid
flow
rate
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
liquid
flow
rates
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies.
d.
If
chemicals
are
added
to
the
scrubber
liquid,
establish
the
operating
limit
for
the
minimum
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate.
i.
Data
from
the
chemical
feed
rate
measurement
device
during
the
performance
test.
(
1)
At
least
every
15
minutes,
measure
the
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate;
and
(
2)
Provide
at
least
one
chemical
feed
rate
measurement
during
at
least
three
15­
minute
periods
per
hour
of
testing;
and
(
3)
Calculate
the
hourly
average
chemical
feed
rate
for
each
hour
of
the
performance
test;
and
(
4)
Calculate
and
record
the
minimum
chemical
feed
rate
as
the
average
of
the
hourly
average
chemical
feed
rates
for
the
two
or
three
test
runs,
whichever
applies.

As
stated
in
§
63.9806,
you
must
show
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limits
for
affected
sources
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
5
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
INITIAL
COMPLIANCE
WITH
EMISSION
LIMITS
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
emission
limit
.
.
.
You
have
demonstrated
compliance
if
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Each
applicable
emission
limit
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
i.
Emissions
measured
using
the
test
methods
specified
in
Table
4
to
this
subpart
satisfy
the
applicable
emission
limits
specified
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
You
establish
and
have
a
record
of
the
operating
limits
listed
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart
over
the
performance
test
period;
and
iii.
You
report
the
results
of
the
performance
test
in
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
as
specified
by
§
63.9812(
e)(
1)
and
(
2).

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00045
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18774
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
5
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
INITIAL
COMPLIANCE
WITH
EMISSION
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
emission
limit
.
.
.
You
have
demonstrated
compliance
if
.
.
.

2.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
As
specified
in
items
3
through
8
of
this
table
You
have
satisfied
the
applicable
requirements
specified
in
items
3
through
8
of
this
table.

3.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
emission
concentration
limit
listed
in
item
2.
a.,
3.
a.,
4,
or
5
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
emission
concentration
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
Methods
25A
and
3A
is
equal
to
or
less
than
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
4.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
percentage
reduction
limit
listed
in
item
2.
b.
or
3.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
The
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
The
3­
hour
block
average
THC
percentage
reduction
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
Method
25A
is
equal
to
or
greater
than
95
percent.
5.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
emission
concentration
limit
listed
in
item
6.
a.,
7.
a.,
8,
or
9
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
emission
concentration
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
Methods
25A
and
3A
is
equal
to
or
less
than
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen.
6.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit
that
is
subject
to
the
THC
percentage
reduction
limit
listed
in
item
6.
b.
or
7.
b.
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
The
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
The
2­
run
block
average
THC
percentage
reduction
for
the
3­
hour
peak
emissions
period
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
Method
25A
is
equal
to
or
exceeds
95
percent.
7.
Each
affected
continuous
or
batch
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
control
device
other
than
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
and
is
subject
to
the
emission
limit
listed
in
item
3
or
7
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen;
or
i.
You
have
installed
a
THC
CEMS
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source;
and
b.
The
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
ii.
You
have
satisfied
the
requirements
of
PS
 
8
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
8.
Each
affected
continuous
or
batch
process
unit
that
uses
process
changes
to
reduce
organic
HAP
emissions
and
is
subject
to
the
emission
limit
listed
in
item
4
or
8
of
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
i.
You
have
installed
a
THC
CEMS
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source;
and
ii.
You
have
satisfied
the
requirements
of
PS
 
8
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
B.
9.
Each
new
continuous
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
a.
The
average
HF
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HF
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent.
i.
The
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HF
emissions
rate
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
one
of
the
methods
specified
in
item
14.
a.
i.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart
is
equal
to
or
less
than
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
or
ii.
The
3­
hour
block
average
HF
emissions
reduction
measured
during
the
performance
test
is
equal
to
or
greater
than
90
percent.
b.
The
average
HCl
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
i.
The
3­
hour
block
average
production­
based
HCl
emissions
rate
measured
during
the
performance
test
using
one
of
the
methods
specified
in
item
14.
a.
i.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart
is
equal
to
or
less
than
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed
or
ii.
The
3­
hour
block
average
HCl
emissions
reduction
measured
during
the
performance
test
is
equal
to
or
greater
than
30
percent.
10.
Each
new
batch
process
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
a.
The
average
uncontrolled
HF
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent.
The
2­
run
block
average
HF
emission
reduction
measured
during
the
performance
test
is
equal
to
or
greater
than
90
percent.
b.
The
average
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
The
2­
run
block
average
HCl
emissions
reduction
measured
during
the
performance
test
is
equal
to
or
greater
than
30
percent.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00046
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4755
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18775
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
As
stated
in
§
63.9806,
you
must
show
initial
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
for
affected
sources
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
6
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
INITIAL
COMPLIANCE
WITH
WORK
PRACTICE
STANDARDS
For
each
.
.
.
For
the
following
standard
.
.
.
You
have
demonstrated
initial
compliance
if
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart.
a.
Each
applicable
work
practice
standard
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart.
i.
You
have
selected
a
method
for
performing
each
of
the
applicable
work
practice
standards
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
You
have
included
in
your
Initial
Notification
a
description
of
the
method
selected
for
complying
with
each
applicable
work
practice
standard,
as
required
by
§
63.9(
b);
and
iii.
You
submit
a
signed
statement
with
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
that
you
have
implemented
the
applicable
work
practice
standard
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart;
and
iv.
You
have
described
in
your
OM&
M
plan
the
method
for
complying
with
each
applicable
work
practice
standard
specified
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart.
2.
Each
basket
or
container
that
is
used
for
holding
fired
refractory
shapes
in
an
existing
shape
preheater
and
autoclave
during
the
pitch
impregnation
process.
a.
Control
POM
emissions
from
any
affected
shape
preheater.
i.
You
have
implemented
at
least
one
of
the
work
practice
standards
listed
in
item
1
of
Table
3
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
You
have
established
a
system
for
recording
the
date
and
cleaning
method
for
each
time
you
clean
an
affected
basket
or
container
3.
Each
affected
new
or
existing
pitch
working
tank.
Control
POM
emissions
...................................
You
have
captured
and
vented
emissions
from
the
affected
pitch
working
tank
to
the
device
that
is
used
to
control
emissions
from
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven,
or
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
is
comparable
to
the
control
device
used
on
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven.
4.
Each
new
or
existing
chromium
refractory
products
kiln.
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
You
use
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel.
5.
Each
existing
clay
refractory
products
kiln
....
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
You
use
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel.

As
stated
in
§
63.9810,
you
must
show
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limits
for
affected
sources
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
7
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
EMISSION
LIMITS
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
emission
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
a.
Each
applicable
emission
limit
listed
in
Table
1
to
this
subpart.
i.
Collecting
and
recording
the
monitoring
and
process
data
listed
in
Table
2
(
operating
limits)
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
monitoring
and
process
data
associated
with
the
operating
limits
specified
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart;
and
iii.
Recording
the
results
of
any
control
device
inspections;
and
iv.
Reporting,
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e),
any
deviation
from
the
applicable
operating
limits
specified
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
2.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
As
specified
in
items
3
though
7
of
this
table
Satisfying
the
applicable
requirements
specified
in
items
3
through
7
of
this
table.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00047
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18776
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
7
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
EMISSION
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
emission
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

3.
Each
affected
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen;
OR
the
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
i.
Collecting
the
applicable
data
measured
by
the
control
device
temperature
monitoring
system,
as
specified
in
items
5,
6,
8,
and
9
of
Table
8
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
applicable
data
measured
by
the
control
device
temperature
monitoring
system,
as
specified
in
items
5,
6,
8,
and
9
of
Table
8
to
this
subpart;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
average
control
device
operating
temperature
for
the
applicable
averaging
period
specified
in
items
5,
6,
8,
and
9
of
Table
2
to
this
subpart
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
4.
Each
affected
process
unit
that
is
equipped
with
a
control
device
other
than
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
OR
the
average
THC
performance
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
Operating
and
maintaining
a
THC
CEMS
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source,
according
to
the
requirements
of
Procedure
1
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
5.
Each
affected
process
unit
that
uses
process
changes
to
meet
the
applicable
emission
limit.
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
Operating
and
maintaining
a
THC
CEMS
at
the
outlet
of
the
control
device
or
in
the
stack
of
the
affected
source,
according
to
the
requirements
of
Procedure
1
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
F.
6.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit
..........
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
OR
the
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
Recording
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
hour)
and
the
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source,
as
specified
in
items
3.
b.
and
3.
c.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart
7.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit
..................
The
average
THC
concentration
must
not
exceed
20
ppmvd,
corrected
to
18
percent
oxygen
OR
the
average
THC
percentage
reduction
must
equal
or
exceed
95
percent.
Recording
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
batch);
and
process
cycle
time
for
each
batch
cycle;
and
hourly
average
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source,
as
specified
in
items
8.
b.
through
8.
d.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart.
8.
Each
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
As
specified
in
items
9
through
11
of
this
table.
Satisfying
the
applicable
requirements
specified
in
items
9
through
11
of
this
table.
9.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
DLA.
a.
The
average
HF
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed,
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HF
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent;
and
b.
The
average
HCl
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed,
or
the
average
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
i.
Maintaining
the
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
at
or
above
the
minimum
levels
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
ii.
Verifying
that
the
limestone
hopper
contains
an
adequate
amount
of
free­
flowing
limestone
by
performing
a
daily
visual
check
of
the
limestone
in
the
feed
hopper;
and
iii.
Recording
the
limestone
feeder
setting
daily
to
verify
that
the
feeder
setting
is
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
iv.
Using
the
same
grade
of
limestone
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
maintaining
records
of
the
source
and
grade
of
limestone.
10.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
DIFF
or
DLS/
FF.
a.
The
average
HF
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HF
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent;
and
i.
Verifying
at
least
once
each
8­
hour
shift
that
lime
is
free­
flowing
by
means
of
a
visual
check,
checking
the
output
of
a
load
cell,
carrier
gas/
lime
flow
indicator,
or
carrier
gas
pressure
drop
measurement
system;
and
b.
The
average
HCl
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
ii.
Recording
feeder
setting
daily
to
verify
that
the
feeder
setting
is
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00048
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18777
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
7
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
TO
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
EMISSION
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
emission
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

iii.
Initiating
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm
AND
completing
corrective
actions
in
accordance
with
the
OM&
M
plan,
AND
operating
and
maintaining
the
fabric
filter
such
that
the
alarm
does
not
engage
for
more
than
5
percent
of
the
total
operating
time
in
a
6­
month
block
reporting
period.
11.
Each
affected
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
wet
scrubber.
a.
The
average
HF
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.019
kg/
Mg
(
0.038
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HF
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
90
percent;
and
i.
Maintaining
the
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber,
liquid
pH,
and
liquid
flow
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
levels
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
b.
The
average
HCl
emissions
must
not
exceed
0.091
kg/
Mg
(
0.18
lb/
ton)
of
uncalcined
clay
processed;
OR
the
average
uncontrolled
HCl
emissions
must
be
reduced
by
at
least
30
percent.
ii.
If
chemicals
are
added
to
the
scrubber
liquid
maintaining
the
average
chemical
feed
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
chemical
feed
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.

As
stated
in
§
63.9810,
you
must
show
continuous
compliance
with
the
operating
limits
for
affected
sources
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
8
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
OPERATING
LIMITS
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
a.
Each
applicable
operating
limit
listed
in
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
i.
Maintaining
all
applicable
process
and
control
device
operating
parameters
within
the
limits
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
ii.
Conducting
annually
an
inspection
of
all
duct
work,
vents,
and
capture
devices
to
verify
that
no
leaks
exist
and
that
the
capture
device
is
operating
such
that
all
emissions
are
properly
vented
to
the
control
device
in
accordance
with
the
OM&
M
plan.
2.
Each
affected
continuous
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
control
device.
a.
The
operating
limits
specified
in
items
2.
a.
through
2.
c.
of
Table
2
to
this
subpart.
i.
Operating
the
control
device
on
the
affected
kiln
during
all
times
except
during
periods
of
approved
scheduled
maintenance,
as
specified
in
§
63.9792(
e);
and
ii.
Minimizing
HAP
emissions
from
the
affected
kiln
during
all
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
of
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service;
and
iii.
Minimizing
the
duration
of
all
periods
of
scheduled
maintenance
of
the
kiln
control
device
when
the
kiln
is
operating
and
the
control
device
is
out
of
service.
3.
Each
new
or
existing
curing
oven,
shape
dryer,
and
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
refractory
products
that
use
organic
HAP;
each
new
or
existing
coking
oven
and
defumer
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
each
new
shape
preheater
that
is
used
to
produce
pitch­
impregnated
refractory
products;
AND
each
new
or
existing
process
unit
that
is
exhausted
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
also
controls
emissions
from
an
affected
shape
preheater
or
pitch
working
tank.
As
specified
in
items
4
through
9
of
this
table.
Satisfying
the
applicable
requirements
specified
in
items
4
through
9
of
this
table.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00049
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18778
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
8
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

4.
Each
affected
continuous
process
unit
..........
Maintain
process
operating
parameters
within
the
limits
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Recording
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
hour);
and
ii.
Recording
the
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source
at
least
hourly;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
organic
HAP
processing
rate
at
or
below
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
5.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer.
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Measuring
and
recording
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
at
least
every
15
minutes;
and
ii.
Calculating
the
hourly
average
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
iv.
Reporting,
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e),
any
3­
hour
block
average
operating
temperature
measurements
below
the
minimum
allowable
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
operating
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
6.
Continuous
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer.
a.
Maintain
the
3­
hour
block
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Measuring
and
recording
the
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
least
every
15
minutes;
and
ii.
Calculating
the
hourly
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
iv.
Reporting,
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e),
any
3­
hour
block
average
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
measurements
below
the
minimum
allowable
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
established
during
the
most
recent
performance;
and
v.
Checking
the
activity
level
of
the
catalyst
at
least
every
12
months
and
taking
any
necessary
corrective
action,
such
as
replacing
the
catalyst,
to
ensure
that
the
catalyst
is
performing
as
designed.
7.
Each
affected
batch
process
unit
..................
Maintain
process
operating
parameters
within
the
limits
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Recording
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
(
pounds
per
batch);
and
ii.
Recording
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
of
the
affected
source;
and
iii.
Recording
the
process
cycle
time
for
each
batch
cycle;
and
iv.
Maintaining
the
organic
HAP
processing
rate
at
or
below
the
maximum
organic
HAP
processing
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00050
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18779
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
8
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

8.
Batch
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
thermal
oxidizer.
Maintain
the
hourly
average
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
hourly
average
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
1­
hour
period
of
the
cycle
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Measuring
and
recording
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
at
least
every
15
minutes;
and
ii.
Calculating
the
hourly
average
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature;
and
iii.
From
the
start
of
each
batch
cycle
until
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature,
maintaining
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
period
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
determined
according
to
item
11
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
iv.
For
each
subsequent
hour
of
the
batch
cycle,
maintaining
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
in
the
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
operating
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
hour
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
specified
in
item
13
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
v.
Reporting,
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e),
any
temperature
measurements
below
the
minimum
allowable
thermal
oxidizer
combustion
chamber
temperature
measured
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
9.
Batch
process
units
that
are
equipped
with
a
catalytic
oxidizer.
Maintain
the
hourly
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
corresponding
hourly
average
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
1­
hour
period
of
the
cycle
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Measuring
and
recording
temperatures
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
least
every
15
minutes;
and
ii.
Calculating
the
hourly
average
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed;
and
iii.
From
the
start
of
each
batch
cycle
until
3
hours
have
passed
since
the
process
unit
reached
maximum
temperature,
maintaining
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
bed
inlet
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
period
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
determined
according
to
item
12
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
iv.
For
each
subsequent
hour
of
the
batch
cycle,
maintaining
the
hourly
average
operating
temperature
at
the
inlet
of
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
minimum
allowable
bed
inlet
temperature
established
for
the
corresponding
hour
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
as
specified
in
item
13
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
v.
Reporting,
in
accordance
with
§
63.9814(
e),
any
catalyst
bed
inlet
temperature
measurements
below
the
minimum
allowable
bed
inlet
temperature
measured
during
the
most
recent
performance
test;
and
vi.
Checking
the
activity
level
of
the
catalyst
at
least
every
12
months
and
taking
any
necessary
corrective
action,
such
as
replacing
the
catalyst,
to
ensure
that
the
catalyst
is
performing
as
designed.
10.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products.
As
specified
in
items
11
through
13
of
this
table.
Satisfying
the
applicable
requirements
specified
in
items
11
through
13
of
this
table.
11.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
equipped
a
DLA
.........
a.
Maintain
the
average
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
for
each
3­
hour
block
period
at
or
above
the
minimum
pressure
drop
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Collecting
the
DLA
pressure
drop
data,
as
specified
in
item
18.
a.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
DLA
pressure
drop
data
to
1­
hour
and
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00051
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18780
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
8
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
pressure
drop
across
the
DLA
at
or
above
the
minimum
pressure
drop
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
b.
Maintain
free­
flowing
limestone
in
the
feed
hopper,
silo,
and
DLA.
Verifying
that
the
limestone
hopper
has
an
adequate
amount
of
free­
flowing
limestone
by
performing
a
daily
visual
check
of
the
limestone
hopper.
c.
Maintain
the
limestone
feeder
setting
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
Recording
the
limestone
feeder
setting
at
least
daily
to
verify
that
the
feeder
setting
is
being
maintained
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
d.
Use
the
same
grade
of
limestone
from
the
same
source
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
Using
the
same
grade
of
limestone
as
was
used
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
and
maintaining
records
of
the
source
and
grade
of
limestone.
12.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
equipped
with
a
DIFF
or
DLS/
FF.
a.
Initiate
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm
and
complete
corrective
actions
in
accordance
with
the
OM&
M
plan;
AND
operate
and
maintain
the
fabric
filter
such
that
the
alarm
does
not
engage
for
more
than
5
percent
of
the
total
operating
time
in
a
6­
month
block
reporting
period.
i.
Initiating
corrective
action
within
1
hour
of
a
bag
leak
detection
system
alarm
and
completing
corrective
actions
in
accordance
with
the
OM&
M
plan;
and
ii.
Operating
and
maintaining
the
fabric
filter
such
that
the
alarm
does
not
engage
for
more
than
5
percent
of
the
total
operating
time
in
a
6­
month
block
reporting
period;
in
calculating
this
operating
time
fraction,
if
inspection
of
the
fabric
filter
demonstrates
that
no
corrective
action
is
required,
no
alarm
time
is
counted;
if
corrective
action
is
required,
each
alarm
shall
be
counted
as
a
minimum
of
1
hour;
if
you
take
longer
than
1
hour
to
initiate
corrective
action,
the
alarm
time
shall
be
counted
as
the
actual
amount
of
time
taken
by
you
to
initiate
corrective
action.
b.
Maintain
free­
flowing
lime
in
the
feed
hopper
or
silo
at
all
times
for
continuous
injection
systems;
AND
maintain
feeder
setting
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
for
continuous
injection
systems.
i.
Verifying
at
least
once
each
8­
hour
shift
that
lime
is
free­
flowing
via
a
load
cell,
carrier
gas/
lime
flow
indicator,
carrier
gas
pressure
drop
measurement
system,
or
other
system
recording
all
monitor
or
sensor
output,
and
if
lime
is
found
not
to
be
free
flowing,
promptly
initiating
and
completing
corrective
actions;
and
ii.
Recording
the
feeder
setting
once
each
day
of
operation
to
verify
that
the
feeder
setting
is
being
maintained
at
or
above
the
level
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
13.
Each
new
kiln
that
is
used
to
process
clay
refractory
products
and
is
equipped
with
a
wet
scrubber.
a.
Maintain
the
average
pressure
drop
across
the
scrubber
for
each
3­
hour
block
period
at
or
above
the
minimum
pressure
drop
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Collecting
the
scrubber
pressure
drop
data,
as
specified
in
item
20.
a.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
scrubber
pressure
drop
data
to
1­
hour
and
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
scrubber
pressure
drop
at
or
above
the
minimum
pressure
drop
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
b.
Maintain
the
average
scrubber
liquid
pH
for
each
3­
hour
block
period
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
pH
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Collecting
the
scrubber
liquid
pH
data,
as
specified
in
item
20.
b.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
scrubber
liquid
pH
data
to
1­
hour
and
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
scrubber
liquid
pH
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
pH
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00052
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18781
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
8
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
OPERATING
LIMITS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

c.
Maintain
the
average
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
for
each
3­
hour
block
period
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Collecting
the
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
data,
as
specified
in
item
20.
c.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
data
to
1­
hour
and
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
liquid
flow
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
d.
If
chemicals
are
added
to
the
scrubber
liquid
maintain
the
average
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
for
each
3­
hour
block
period
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.
i.
Collecting
the
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
data,
as
specified
in
item
20.
d.
of
Table
4
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Reducing
the
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
data
to
1­
hour
and
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
Maintaining
the
3­
hour
block
average
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
at
or
above
the
minimum
scrubber
chemical
feed
rate
established
during
the
most
recent
performance
test.

As
stated
in
§
63.9810,
you
must
show
continuous
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
for
affected
sources
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
9
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
WORK
PRACTICE
STANDARDS
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
work
practice
standard
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

1.
Each
affected
source
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart.
Each
applicable
work
practice
requirement
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart.
i.
Performing
each
applicable
work
practice
standard
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Maintaining
records
that
document
the
method
and
frequency
for
complying
with
each
applicable
work
practice
standard
listed
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart,
as
required
by
§
§
63.10(
b)
and
63.9816(
c)(
2).
2.
Each
basket
or
container
that
is
used
for
holding
fired
refractory
shapes
in
an
existing
shape
preheater
and
autoclave
during
the
pitch
impregnation
process.
Control
POM
emissions
from
any
affected
shape
preheater.
i.
Controlling
emissions
from
the
volatilization
of
residual
pitch
by
implementing
one
of
the
work
practice
standards
listed
in
item
1
of
Table
3
to
this
subpart;
and
ii.
Recording
the
date
and
cleaning
method
each
time
you
clean
an
affected
basket
or
container.
3.
Each
new
or
existing
pitch
working
tank
.......
Control
POM
emissions
...................................
Capturing
and
venting
emissions
from
the
affected
pitch
working
tank
to
the
control
device
that
is
used
to
control
emissions
from
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven,
or
to
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer
that
is
comparable
to
the
control
device
used
on
an
affected
defumer
or
coking
oven.
4.
Each
new
or
existing
chromium
refractory
products
kiln.
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
i.
Using
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption
and
ii.
If
you
intend
to
use
an
alternative
fuel,
submitting
a
notification
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
48
hours
of
the
declaration
of
a
period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824;
and
iii.
Submitting
a
report
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
10
working
days
after
terminating
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel,
as
specified
in
§
63.9814(
g).
5.
Each
existing
clay
refractory
products
kiln
....
Minimize
fuel­
based
HAP
emissions
...............
i.
Using
natural
gas,
or
equivalent,
as
the
kiln
fuel
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption
and
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00053
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18782
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
9
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
CONTINUOUS
COMPLIANCE
WITH
WORK
PRACTICE
STANDARDS
 
Continued
For
.
.
.
For
the
following
work
practice
standard
.
.
.
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
by
.
.
.

ii.
If
you
intend
to
use
an
alternative
fuel,
submitting
a
notification
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
48
hours
of
the
declaration
of
a
period
of
natural
gas
curtailment
or
supply
interruption,
as
defined
in
§
63.9824;
and
iii.
Submitting
a
report
of
alternative
fuel
use
within
10
working
days
after
terminating
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel,
as
specified
in
§
63.9814(
g).

As
stated
in
§
63.9814,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
for
reports
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
10
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
REPORTS
You
must
submit
a(
n)
.
.
.
The
report
must
contain
.
.
.
You
must
submit
the
report
.
.
.

1.
Compliance
report
..........................................
The
information
in
§
63.9814(
c)
through
(
f)
.....
Semiannually
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.9814(
a)
through
(
f).
2.
Immediate
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
report
if
you
had
a
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
during
the
reporting
period
that
is
not
consistent
with
your
SSMP.
a.
Actions
taken
for
the
event
..........................
By
fax
or
telephone
within
2
working
days
after
starting
actions
inconsistent
with
the
plan.

b.
The
information
in
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii)
..............
By
letter
within
7
working
days
after
the
end
of
the
event
unless
you
have
made
alternative
arrangements
with
the
permitting
authority
3.
Report
of
alternative
fuel
use
.........................
The
information
in
§
63.9814(
g)
and
items
4
and
5
of
Table
9
to
this
subpart.
If
you
are
subject
to
the
work
practice
standard
specified
in
item
3
or
4
of
Table
3
to
this
subpart,
and
you
use
an
alternative
fuel
in
the
affected
kiln,
by
letter
within
10
working
days
after
terminating
the
use
of
the
alternative
fuel.

As
stated
in
§
63.9820,
you
must
comply
with
the
applicable
General
Provisions
requirements
according
to
the
following
table:

TABLE
11
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
Citation
Subject
Brief
description
Applies
to
subpart
SSSSS
§
63.1
....................
Applicability
........................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.2
....................
Definitions
..........................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.3
....................
Units
and
Abbreviations
.....................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.4
....................
Prohibited
Activities
...........................................
Compliance
date;
circumvention,
severability
...
Yes.
§
63.5
....................
Construction/
Reconstruction
..............................
Applicability;
applications;
approvals
.................
Yes.
§
63.6(
a)
................
Applicability
........................................................
General
Provisions
(
GP)
apply
unless
compliance
extension;
GP
apply
to
area
sources
that
become
major.
Yes.

§
63.6(
b)(
1)
 
(
4)
.....
Compliance
Dates
for
New
and
Reconstructed
Sources.
Standards
apply
at
effective
date;
3
years
after
effective
date;
upon
startup;
10
years
after
construction
or
reconstruction
commences
for
section
112(
f).
Yes.

§
63.6(
b)(
5)
............
Notification
.........................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.6(
b)(
6)
............
[
Reserved]
§
63.6(
b)(
7)
............
Compliance
Dates
for
New
and
Reconstructed
Area
Sources
That
Become
Major.
Area
sources
that
become
major
must
comply
with
major
source
standards
immediately
upon
becoming
major,
regardless
of
whether
required
to
comply
when
they
were
area
sources.
Yes.

§
63.6(
c)(
1)
 
(
2)
.....
Compliance
Dates
for
Existing
Sources
............
Comply
according
to
date
in
subpart,
which
must
be
no
later
than
3
years
after
effective
date;
for
section
112(
f)
standards,
comply
within
90
days
of
effective
date
unless
compliance
extension.
Yes.

§
63.6(
c)(
3)
 
(
4)
.....
[
Reserved]
§
63.6(
c)(
5)
............
Compliance
Dates
for
Existing
Area
Sources
That
Become
Major.
Area
sources
that
become
major
must
comply
with
major
source
standards
by
date
indicated
in
subpart
or
by
equivalent
time
period
(
for
example,
3
years).
Yes.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00054
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18783
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
11
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
 
Continued
Citation
Subject
Brief
description
Applies
to
subpart
SSSSS
§
63.6(
d)
................
[
Reserved]
§
63.6(
e)(
1)
 
(
2)
.....
Operation
&
Maintenance
..................................
Operate
to
minimize
emissions
at
all
times;
correct
malfunctions
as
soon
as
practicable;
requirements
independently
enforceable;
information
Administrator
will
use
to
determine
if
operation
and
maintenance
requirements
were
met.
Yes.

§
63.6(
e)(
3)
............
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
Plan
(
SSMP).
............................................................................
Yes.

§
63.6(
f)(
1)
.............
Compliance
Except
During
SSM
.......................
You
must
comply
with
emission
standards
at
all
times
except
during
SSM.
Yes.

§
63.6(
f)(
2)
 
(
3)
......
Methods
for
Determining
Compliance
...............
Compliance
based
on
performance
test,
operation
and
maintenance
plans,
records,
inspection
Yes.

§
63.6(
g)(
1)
 
(
3)
.....
Alternative
Standard
..........................................
Procedures
for
getting
an
alternative
standard.
Yes.
§
63.6(
h)(
1)
 
(
9)
.....
Opacity/
Visible
Emission
(
VE)
Standards
.........
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.6(
i)(
1)
 
(
14)
....
Compliance
Extension
.......................................
Procedures
and
criteria
for
Administrator
to
grant
compliance
extension.
Yes.

§
63.6(
j)
.................
Presidential
Compliance
Exemption
..................
President
may
exempt
source
category
............
Yes.
§
63.7(
a)(
1)
 
(
2)
.....
Performance
Test
Dates
....................................
Dates
for
conducting
initial
performance
testing
and
other
compliance
demonstrations;
must
conduct
180
days
after
first
subject
to
rule.
Yes.

§
63.7(
a)(
3)
............
Section
114
Authority
........................................
Administrator
may
require
a
performance
test
under
CAA
section
114
at
any
time.
Yes.

§
63.7(
b)(
1)
............
Notification
of
Performance
Test
.......................
Must
notify
Administrator
60
days
before
the
test.
Yes.

§
63.7(
b)(
2)
............
Notification
of
Rescheduling
..............................
Must
notify
Administrator
5
days
before
scheduled
date
and
provide
rescheduled
date.
Yes.

§
63.7(
c)
................
Quality
Assurance/
Test
Plan
.............................
Requirements;
test
plan
approval
procedures;
performance
audit
requirements;
internal
and
external
QA
procedures
for
testing.
Yes.

§
63.7(
d)
................
Testing
Facilities
................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.7(
e)(
1)
............
Conditions
for
Conducting
Performance
Tests
Performance
tests
must
be
conducted
under
representative
conditions;
cannot
conduct
performance
tests
during
SSM;
not
a
violation
to
exceed
standard
during
SSM.
No,
§
63.9800
specifies
requirements;
Yes;
Yes.

§
63.7(
e)(
2)
............
Conditions
for
Conducting
Performance
Tests
Must
conduct
according
to
subpart
and
EPA
test
methods
unless
Administrator
approves
alternative.
Yes.

§
63.7(
e)(
3)
............
Test
Run
Duration
.............................................
Must
have
three
test
runs
of
at
least
1
hour
each;
compliance
is
based
on
arithmetic
mean
of
three
runs;
conditions
when
data
from
an
additional
test
run
can
be
used.
Yes;
Yes,
except
where
specified
in
§
63.9800
for
batch
process
sources;
Yes.
§
63.7(
f)
.................
Alternative
Test
Method
.....................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.7(
g)
................
Performance
Test
Data
Analysis
.......................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.7(
h)
................
Waiver
of
Test
...................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
a)(
1)
............
Applicability
of
Monitoring
Requirements
..........
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
a)(
2)
............
Performance
Specifications
...............................
Performance
Specifications
in
appendix
B
of
40
CFR
part
60
apply.
Yes.

§
63.8(
a)(
3)
............
[
Reserved]
§
63.8(
a)(
4)
............
Monitoring
with
Flares
.......................................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.8(
b)(
1)
............
Monitoring
..........................................................
Must
conduct
monitoring
according
to
standard
unless
Administrator
approves
alternative.
Yes.

§
63.8(
b)(
2)
 
(
3)
.....
Multiple
Effluents
and
Multiple
Monitoring
Systems
Specific
requirements
for
installing
and
reporting
on
monitoring
systems.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
1)
............
Monitoring
System
Operation
and
Maintenance
Maintenance
consistent
with
good
air
pollution
control
practices.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
1)(
i)
.........
Routine
and
Predictable
SSM
...........................
Reporting
requirements
for
SSM
when
action
is
described
in
SSMP.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
1)(
ii)
........
SSM
not
in
SSMP
..............................................
Reporting
requirements
for
SSM
when
action
is
not
described
in
SSMP.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
1)(
iii)
.......
Compliance
with
Operation
and
Maintenance
Requirements.
How
Administrator
determines
if
source
is
complying
with
operation
and
maintenance
requirements
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
2)
 
(
3)
.....
Monitoring
System
Installation
...........................
Must
install
to
get
representative
emission
and
parameter
measurements.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
4)
............
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
No,
§
63.9808
specifies
requirements.
§
63.8(
c)(
5)
............
COMS
Minimum
Procedures
.............................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00055
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18784
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
11
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
 
Continued
Citation
Subject
Brief
description
Applies
to
subpart
SSSSS
§
63.8(
c)(
6)
............
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.8(
c)(
7)(
i)(
A)
....
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.8(
c)(
7)(
i)(
B)
....
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.8(
c)(
7)(
i)(
C)
....
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.8(
c)(
7)(
ii)
........
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
Corrective
action
required
when
CMS
is
out
of
control.
Yes.

§
63.8(
c)(
8)
............
CMS
Requirements
...........................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
d)
................
CMS
Quality
Control
..........................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.8(
e)
................
CMS
Performance
Evaluation
...........................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.8(
f)(
1)
 
(
5)
......
Alternative
Monitoring
Method
...........................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
f)(
6)
.............
Alternative
to
Relative
Accuracy
Test
...............
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
g)
................
Data
Reduction
..................................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.9(
a)
................
Notification
Requirements
..................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.9(
b)(
1)
 
(
5)
.....
Initial
Notifications
..............................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.9(
c)
................
Request
for
Compliance
Extension
...................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.9(
d)
................
Notification
of
Special
Compliance
Requirements
for
New
Source.
............................................................................
Yes.

§
63.9(
e)
................
Notification
of
Performance
Test
.......................
Notify
Administrator
60
days
prior
.....................
Yes.
§
63.9(
f)
.................
Notification
of
VE/
Opacity
Test
..........................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.9(
g)
................
Additional
Notifications
When
Using
CMS
........
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.9(
h)
................
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
.....................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.9(
i)
.................
Adjustment
of
Submittal
Deadlines
...................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.9(
j)
.................
Change
in
Previous
Information
........................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
a)
..............
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
..................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
1)
..........
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
..................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
i)
 
(
v)
Records
Related
to
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction.
............................................................................
Yes.

§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
vi)
and
(
x
 
xi).
CMS
Records
....................................................
............................................................................
Yes.

§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
vii)
 
(
ix).
Records
..............................................................
Measurements
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
emission
limitations;
performance
test,
performance
evaluation,
and
visible
emission
observation
results;
measurements
to
determine
conditions
of
performance
tests
and
performance
evaluations.
Yes.

§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xii)
....
Records
..............................................................
Records
when
under
waiver
..............................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xiii)
...
Records
..............................................................
Records
when
using
alternative
to
relative
accuracy
test.
Not
applicable.

§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xiv)
...
Records
..............................................................
All
documentation
supporting
Initial
Notification
and
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
Yes.

§
63.10(
b)(
3)
..........
Records
..............................................................
Applicability
Determinations
...............................
Yes.
§
63.10(
c)(
1)
 
(
6),
(
9)
 
(
15).
Records
..............................................................
Additional
Records
for
CMS
..............................
Not
applicable.

§
63.10(
c)(
7)
 
(
8)
...
Records
..............................................................
Records
of
excess
emissions
and
parameter
monitoring
exceedances
for
CMS.
No,
§
63.9816
specifies
requirements.
§
63.10(
d)(
1)
..........
General
Reporting
Requirements
......................
Requirements
for
reporting
................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
d)(
2)
..........
Report
of
Performance
Test
Results
.................
When
to
submit
to
Federal
or
State
authority
...
Yes.
§
63.10(
d)(
3)
..........
Reporting
Opacity
or
VE
Observations
.............
............................................................................
Not
applicable.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00056
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
18785
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
73
/
Wednesday,
April
16,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
11
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
SSSSS
 
Continued
Citation
Subject
Brief
description
Applies
to
subpart
SSSSS
§
63.10(
d)(
4)
..........
Progress
Reports
...............................................
Must
submit
progress
reports
on
schedule
if
under
compliance
extension.
Yes.

§
63.10(
d)(
5)
..........
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
Reports
....
Contents
and
submission
..................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
e)(
1)
 
(
2)
...
Additional
CMS
Reports
....................................
............................................................................
Applies
only
to
sources
required
to
install
and
operate
a
THC
CEMS.
§
63.10(
e)(
3)
..........
Reports
..............................................................
............................................................................
No,
§
63.9814
specifies
requirements.
§
63.10(
e)(
4)
..........
Reporting
COMS
data
.......................................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.10(
f)
...............
Waiver
for
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.11
..................
Flares
.................................................................
............................................................................
Not
applicable.
§
63.12
..................
Delegation
..........................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.13
..................
Addresses
..........................................................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.14
..................
Incorporation
by
Reference
...............................
............................................................................
Yes.
§
63.15
..................
Availability
of
Information
...................................
............................................................................
Yes.

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
5622
Filed
4
 
15
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
42
Apr
15,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00057
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
16APR2.
SGM
16APR2
