Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Petroleum refineries; catalytic cracking units, catalytic reforming units, and sulfur recovery units,

[Federal Register: February 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 26)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 6929-6973]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr09fe05-11]

[[Page 6929]]

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

40 CFR Part 63

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units; Final Rule and Proposed Rule

[[Page 6930]]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2002-0033; AD-FRL-7969-9]

RIN 2060-AK51

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.

SUMMARY: On April 11, 2002, pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA issued national emission standards to control hazardous air pollutants emitted from catalytic cracking units, catalytic reforming units, and sulfur recovery units at petroleum refineries. This action promulgates amendments to several sections of the existing standards. The amendments will change the affected source designations and add new compliance options for catalytic reforming units that use different types of emission control systems, new monitoring alternatives for catalytic cracking units and catalytic reforming units, and a new procedure for determining the metal or total chloride concentration on catalyst particles. The amendments will also defer technical requirements for most continuous parameter monitoring systems, clarify testing and monitoring requirements, and make editorial corrections.

DATES: The final amendments will be effective on April 11, 2005, unless we receive significant adverse comments by March 11, 2005, or by March 28, 2005 if a public hearing is requested. If such comments are received, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which amendments, paragraph, or section will become effective and which amendments, paragraph, or section are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. Any distinct amendment, paragraph, or section of the direct final amendments for which we do not receive adverse comment will become effective on April 11, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0033, by one of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,

EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.

Fax: (202) 566-1741.

Mail: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.

Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0033. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket , including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e- mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other information, such as copyrighted materials, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy form in Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0033 (or A-97-36), EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert B. Lucas, Emission Standards Division (C439-03), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0884, fax number (919) 541-3470, e- mail address: lucas.bob@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action include:

Examples of Category

NAICS code\1\ regulated entities

Industry..........................

32411 Petroleum refineries that operate catalytic cracking units, catalytic reforming units, or sulfur recovery units. Federal government................ .............. Not affected. State/local/tribal government..... .............. Not affected.

\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

[[Page 6931]]

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 40 CFR 63.1561 of the NESHAP for petroleum refineries: Catalytic cracking units, catalytic reforming units, and sulfur recovery units. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the contact person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of today's direct final rule amendments will also be available on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of the direct final rule amendments will be placed on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. 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 direct final amendments is available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by April 11, 2005. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to the final amendments 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 amendments may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.

Comments. We are publishing the amendments as a direct final rule without prior proposal because we view the amendments as noncontroversial and do not anticipate adverse comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal for the amendments contained in this direct final rule in the event that significant adverse comments are filed. If we receive any significant adverse comments on one or more distinct amendments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public which provisions will become effective and which provisions are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this direct final rule. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:

1. Background II. Summary of the Direct Final Rule Amendments

   1. How are we changing the affected source designations?

   2. How are we changing the testing and monitoring requirements for catalytic cracking units?

   3. What new procedure is available for determining the metal or total chloride concentration on catalyst particles?

   4. What new alternative is available for calculating the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gases from catalytic cracking units?

   5. What new monitoring alternative is available for a catalytic cracking unit with a wet scrubber if the unit is subject to the new source performance standards for petroleum refineries?

   6. How are we clarifying the emission limitations for catalytic reforming units?

   7. How are we changing the monitoring requirements for catalytic reforming units?

   8. What new options are available for a catalytic reforming unit with an internal scrubbing system?

1. What new options are available for a catalytic reforming unit with a different type of control system?

   10. How are we changing the requirements for continuous parameter monitoring systems?

   11. What corrections are we making? III. Summary of Non-Air Health, Environmental, Energy, and Cost Impacts IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

   1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

   2. Paperwork Reduction Act

   3. Regulatory Flexibility Act

   4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

   5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

   6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

   7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health & Safety Risks

   8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

1. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

   10. Congressional Review Act

1. Background

   On April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17762), we issued the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for catalytic cracking units (CCU), catalytic reforming units (CRU), and sulfur recovery units (SRU) at petroleum refineries (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU). The NESHAP establish emissions limits for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from vents on the three types of process units, as well as work practice standards for by-pass lines. The NESHAP implement section 112(d) of the CAA by requiring all petroleum refineries that are major sources to meet standards reflecting the application of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT).

   After publication of the NESHAP, two industry trade associations and various individual refineries raised issues and questions regarding the applicability of the NESHAP and the technical requirements for installation, operation, and maintenance of continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS). The industry representatives and a control technology manufacturer also requested that we clarify the requirements for CRU depressurizing and purging, add more compliance provisions for CRU with internal scrubbing systems, and include new provisions for CRU that use emission control technologies other than scrubbers. The industry representatives also requested clarification of various performance testing and monitoring provisions. Other questions were raised at an implementation workshop held in January 2003. Today's direct final rule amendments respond to the issues raised since promulgation and will reduce compliance uncertainties, encourage the use of new control technologies, and improve understanding of the NESHAP requirements.

   In addition, since publication of the NESHAP, we have identified a number of minor technical and editorial errors requiring correction. Rather than publish a separate notice of corrections, we are including those changes along with the amendments.

2. Summary of the Direct Final Rule Amendments

   1. How Are We Changing the Affected Source Designations?

      One of the issues raised by the industry representatives concerns the language in 40 CFR 63.1562 where we identified the affected sources as each CCU that regenerates catalyst, each CRU that regenerates catalyst, and each SRU and the tail gas treatment unit serving it. In designating the affected source as the unit rather than the vent or group of vents on the unit (as originally proposed), we inadvertently made the NESHAP more stringent for some facilities, and these facilities did not have an opportunity to comment on the change. Therefore, we are revising the designation of affected sources to be

      [[Page 6932]]

      more consistent with the rule as proposed. The direct final rule amendments define the process unit affected sources as:

      The process vent or group of process vents on fluidized CCU units that is associated with regeneration of the catalyst used in the unit (i.e., the catalyst regeneration flue gas vent).

      The process vent or group of process vents on CRU (including but not limited to semi-regenerative, cyclic, or continuous processes), that is associated with regeneration of the catalyst used in the unit. This affected source includes vents that are used during the unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, and catalyst rejuvenation.

      The process vent or group of process vents on Claus or other types of sulfur recovery plant units or the tail gas treatment units serving sulfur recovery plants that is associated with sulfur recovery.

   2. How Are We Changing the Testing and Monitoring Requirements for Catalytic Cracking Units?

      The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(1) require the owner or operator to install, operate, and maintain a CPMS according to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.1572 and Table 3 to subpart UUU. Facilities that are not subject to the new source performance standards (NSPS) for petroleum refineries and that elect to meet the particulate matter (PM) or nickel (Ni) limit in the NESHAP are required to monitor the gas flow rate to a wet scrubber. After promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we revise the CCU monitoring requirements to allow gas flow rate measurements before or after the control device. The direct final rule amendments revise the requirements in Table 3 to subpart UUU to allow measurement of the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device. This change will improve implementation of the NESHAP and avoid unnecessary costs of changing current practices. The direct final rule amendments also revise the footnotes to Tables 3 and 7 to subpart UUU to change the citation for the alternative method for determining gas flow rate from 40 CFR 63.1573(a) to 40 CFR 63.1573(a)(1) to accommodate the new alternative for calculating the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gases when computing the PM emissions rate.

      The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(2) require the owner or operator to conduct a performance test for certain CCU according to the requirements in Table 4 to subpart UUU. After promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we delete the sampling rate requirements cited for EPA Method 29 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A). According to the commenters, the sampling rate requirement is unnecessary because the method already includes appropriate sampling requirements. We agree and have deleted the 0.028 dry standard cubic meters per minute (dscm/min)/0.74 dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscf/min) sampling rate requirement from Table 4 to subpart UUU.

   3. What New Procedure Is Available for Determining the Metal or Total Chloride Concentration on Catalyst Particles?

      The owner or operator of a CCU subject to a Ni limit for inorganic HAP emissions must determine the equilibrium catalyst (E-cat) Ni concentration value during the initial performance test and at frequent intervals afterward for monitoring requirements. Several methods are currently used within the industry for this purpose and are referenced in the NESHAP, as well as any alternative method satisfactory to the Administrator. Industry experts and vendors recommended that the NESHAP allow a new procedure that was not fully developed at the time the NESHAP were promulgated. The direct final rule amendments add the new procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)'' to appendix A of subpart UUU. This procedure can be used to analyze catalyst particles (Ni compounds and total chlorides) from CCU, CRU, and other processes specified within EPA regulations. The direct final rule amendments revise Table 4 to subpart UUU to reference the new procedure.

   4. What New Alternative is Available for Calculating the Volumetric Flow Rate of Exhaust Gases From Catalytic Cracking Units?

      The initial compliance provisions in 40 CFR 63.1564(b)(4) require the owner or operator of a CCU subject to the PM limit in the NSPS for petroleum refineries to compute the PM emission rate using Equation 1 of 40 CFR 63.1564. This calculation requires measurement of the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from the catalyst regenerator (``Qr''). The direct final rule amendments revise the definition of ``Qr'' to refer to a new alternative procedure in 40 CFR 63.1573(a)(2) that can be used to determine the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas. This procedure can be used by plants that have a gas analyzer installed in the catalytic cracking regenerator exhaust vent prior to the addition of air or other gas streams. The new alternative allows measurement of the flow rate after an electrostatic precipitator, but requires measurement of the flow rate before a carbon monoxide boiler.

   5. What New Monitoring Alternative is Available for a Catalytic Cracking Unit With a Wet Scrubber if the Unit Is Subject to the New Source Performance Standards for Petroleum Refineries?

      The NSPS for petroleum refineries (40 CFR part 60, subpart J) require a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) for a fluidized CCU to demonstrate continuous compliance with the opacity limit in 40 CFR 60.102(a)(2). Subpart UUU requires facilities that are already subject to the NSPS to meet the NSPS requirements, including the opacity limit and COMS requirements.

      Technical experience has shown that COMS are not feasible for wet scrubber PM control systems. We have already acknowledged the technical problems associated with the use of COMS on wet scrubbers by requiring other monitoring methods (CPMS for pressure drop and liquid-to-gas ratio). However, these requirements apply under other compliance options and not to CCU already subject to the NSPS.

      Some facilities with CCU subject to the NSPS use wet scrubbers to meet the PM limit and already have alternative monitoring requirements approved under the NSPS. For these reasons, one industry representative requested that the NESHAP accept alternative monitoring requirements that have already been approved under the NSPS. Therefore, we are adding a new paragraph (f) to 40 CFR 63.1573 to provide for use of the approved alternative under subpart UUU.

      Monitoring alternatives for CCU subject to the NSPS that have already been approved may not meet the criteria for MACT standards. For example, the alternative may not include provisions for demonstrating continuous compliance such as meeting an operating limit, collecting and reducing monitoring data, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements. While we cannot automatically approve an alternative that we have not seen, we see no reason to require a second formal approval process for the same control system and emission limit. To this end, we have added procedures for requesting alternative requirements specific to this situation.

      We are requiring that an owner or operator submit a copy of the approved alternative monitoring method in the notification of compliance status (or

      [[Page 6933]]

      before), along with a brief description of the continuous monitoring system, the applicable operating limit, and the continuous compliance requirements. We will contact you within 30 calendar days after receipt, to tell you if the alternative is approved. This alternative does not eliminate your responsibility to comply with the opacity limit, which would remain applicable for enforcement purposes. This option is not available to facilities that elect to comply with the NSPS requirements in subpart UUU. These facilities must request an alternative monitoring method under the procedures in 40 CFR 63.8(f).

   6. How Are we Clarifying the Emission Limitations for Catalytic Reforming Units?

      The requirements for organic HAP emissions in 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(3) state that the CRU emissions and operating limits in Tables 15 and 16 to subpart UUU apply to emissions from process vents that occur during depressuring and purging operations. The NESHAP specify in 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(4) that the limits do not apply to depressurizing and purging operations when the reactor vent pressure is 5 pounds per square inch (psig) or less. Applicable process vents include those used during unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, catalyst rejuvenation, and reduction or activation purge. Industry representatives noted the current language is unclear as to whether the limits apply only to the initial depressurization cycle or include subsequent depressuring and purging cycles when the reactor pressure is greater than 5 psig. In response, we are amending 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(3) to clarify our intent regarding the control of organic HAP emissions from CRU depressurizing and purging.

      Our intent in the NESHAP was that the organic HAP requirements apply to the initial depressuring and catalyst purging operations that occur prior to coke burn-off. Organic HAP emissions are expected during the initial depressurization and catalyst purge cycles. No additional organic HAP emission controls are used during coke burn-off, beyond the combustion process inherent during this process, and our data indicate there are minimal organic emissions from coke burn-off and subsequent CRU regeneration cycle purges.

      Industry representatives suggested that we limit the applicability of the emissions limit to only the initial depressuring and first nitrogen purge. We do expect that, after some number of purges, the HAP concentration in the purge may be less than the required outlet HAP concentration from a combustion control device. Under the NESHAP, all purges greater than 5 psig go to a combustion control device (or equivalent combustion device), regardless of the HAP concentration in the affected stream.

      Initially, we attempted to specify the number of purges to be controlled because the organic HAP emissions would generally be very low beyond the first or second purge. However, our information indicates that the purging processes vary widely (e.g., different systems use different purge gases, different purge temperatures, and different amounts of purge gas per unit of catalyst). Consequently, specifying the number of purges that must be controlled does not necessarily reflect a performance level. Additionally, recent data show that, for some CRU purge conditions, subsequent purges after the initial nitrogen purge may contain substantial amounts of benzene--on the order of 100 parts per million by volume (ppmv), which translates to emissions of about 1 ton per year (tpy). For other process purging conditions, however, subsequent purges have very low levels of HAP. We concluded that mandating specific purging conditions would reduce operator flexibility and would make compliance, for certain CRU processes, to be technically infeasible. We decided, therefore, to clarify that uncontrolled purging operations greater than 5 psig are acceptable if the total organic carbon (TOC) concentration is less than the currently required outlet concentration of a combustion control device (i.e., less than 20 ppmv), and to provide compliance options for these purges.

      Furthermore, the background information supporting the performance achievable by a combustion control device indicates that the 20 ppmv emissions limit was established ``by compound exit concentration'' rather than by a specified indicator of TOC, such as propane. As the primary HAP of concern from these CRU depressuring and purging vents is benzene, it is more appropriate to establish the 20 ppmv emission limit as hexane (i.e., a C6hydrocarbon) rather than as propane. We are, therefore, changing the CRU TOC concentration requirements (which are used as a surrogate for organic HAP) to 20 ppmv TOC or nonmethane TOC (dry basis as hexane), corrected to 3 percent oxygen. This applies to both the concentration limit for the control device and the concentration limit for emissions discharged directly to the atmosphere.

      This approach adds compliance options for ``uncontrolled'' purging cycles that are greater than 5 psig and less than 20 ppmv TOC (dry basis as hexane). First, the purging conditions used by the plant to remove organic HAP from the CRU catalyst during controlled purges prior to direct release to the atmosphere must be specified in the operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan. An initial performance test is conducted on the first directly released catalyst purge (following the purging conditions specified in the plan) to demonstrate that the purges specified in the plan effectively achieve the required emission limit. Subsequently, adherence to the purging procedures as specified in the plan is used to demonstrate continuous compliance.

      Industry representatives also requested that we clarify the emission limits for organic HAP emissions from CRU in 40 CFR 63.1567(a) to indicate which limits apply when different reactors in the CRU are regenerated in separate regeneration systems. The direct final rule amendments state that, in this case, the emission limits in Table 22 to subpart UUU apply to each separate regeneration system. The direct final rule amendments also clarify that the TOC outlet concentration limit is 20 ppmv dry basis as hexane.

      In response to industry comments, we expanded the number of test methods that can be use to measure organic HAP emissions. For the 98 percent mass emission reduction standard, you can use EPA Method 25 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to directly measure nonmethane TOC as carbon or the combination of EPA Methods 25A and 18 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to determine nonmethane TOC emissions. If the outlet TOC concentration is expected to be less than 50 ppmv (as carbon), you can use EPA Method 25A to measure the TOC concentration as hexane. For the 20 ppmv concentration limit, you can measure the TOC concentration using EPA Method 25A or determine the nonmethane TOC concentration using the combination of Methods 25A and 18. We made changes to the equations in 40 CFR 63.1564 and relevant tables to make these distinctions. We also added a definition of ``nonmethane TOC'' to 40 CFR 63.1579.

      The direct final rule amendments also clarify the inorganic HAP emission and operating limits to indicate that the requirements apply to each applicable CRU process vent during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation. In response to industry comments, we are also changing the compliance equations in

      [[Page 6934]]

      40 CFR 63.1567 to allow for hydrogen chloride (HCl) measurements below detectable limits of the method after correction for oxygen content.

   7. How Are we Changing the Monitoring Requirements for Catalytic Reforming Units?

      The NESHAP allow plants to measure and record the pH of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the scrubber at least once an hour as an alternative to a pH CPMS. After promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we allow alkalinity measurements as an alternative to pH. Alkalinity measurements are more reliable because they give the actual acid content of the water (or scrubbing liquid) while pH measurements indicate only how much (more or less) acid is needed. We agree and have changed 40 CFR 63.1573(b) to allow plants to measure and record the alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the wet scrubber at least once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using titration as an alternative to a CPMS. We have also changed Tables 23, 24, 25, and 28 to subpart UUU to include the alternative for alkalinity measurements. In response to industry comments, we have also allowed the pH alternative to apply to CRU meeting the HCl percent reduction standard.

      The NESHAP allow plants to measure the catalytic regenerator exhaust gas flow rate from a CCU as an approved alternative to a CPMS if the unit does not introduce any other gas streams into the catalyst regeneration vent (i.e., complete combustion units with no additional combustion devices). In response to industry comments, we have expanded the alternative in 40 CFR 63.1573(a) to apply to CRU that operate as a constant pressure system during the coke burn and rejuvenation cycles.

      After promulgation, industry representatives recommended that we also expand the CRU monitoring requirements to allow gas flow rate measurements before or after the control device. We agree and have changed Tables 24 and 25 of subpart UUU accordingly.

      In response to questions raised at implementation workshops for plant personnel, we have added provisions to the performance test requirements for CRU to reflect differences among semi-regenerative, cyclic, and continuous processes. The direct final rule amendments require plants to test semi-regenerative and cyclic units during the coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation cycle. However, the tests cannot be done during the first hour or the last 6 hours of the cycle for a semi-regenerative unit, or during the first hour or the last 2 hours of the cycle for a cyclic regeneration unit. Plants must conduct the performance test for a continuous regeneration unit no sooner than 3 days after the process unit or control system startup.

   8. What New Options Are Available For a Catalytic Reforming Unit With an Internal Scrubbing System?

      Industry representatives expressed concern that the NESHAP do not contain provisions allowing a CRU with an internal scrubbing system to meet the percent reduction standard instead of the concentration limit for HCl emissions.

      The direct final rule amendments change the rule language related to the HCl emissions limits (and other provisions) by removing the phrase ``using a control device.'' These changes allow CRU with an internal scrubbing system or alternative emissions reduction technique to meet either the percent reduction standard or concentration limit. To improve understanding of the NESHAP, we have added a definition for ``internal scrubbing system.'' The direct final rule amendments also add provisions to Tables 23 through 28 to subpart UUU for CRU with an internal scrubbing system meeting the HCl percent reduction standard and CRU with a fixed-bed or moving-bed gas-solid adsorption system.

      The direct final rule amendments establish operating limits and compliance provisions specific to CRU with an internal scrubbing system meeting the HCl percent reduction standard. The operating limits require plants to maintain the daily average pH or alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system and the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio at or above the limit established during the performance test. Plants must conduct performance tests to demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable HCl emission standard and to establish operating limits. Performance test procedures are given for each type of system. To demonstrate continuous compliance, plants must install, operate, and maintain CPMS to monitor during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation, the daily average pH or alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system, and the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio. Plants may use pH strips as an approved alternative to a pH CPMS, or discrete titration as an alternative to a CPMS for alkalinity.

1. What New Options Are Available For a Catalytic Reforming Unit With a Different Type of Control System?

   Industry representatives and technology vendors expressed concern that the NESHAP do not include compliance provisions for continuous CRU that may use process modifications, pollution prevention control techniques, or alternative control systems other than internal or external (add-on) wet scrubbers to comply with the emission limitations. A refinery process design firm provided data indicating that gas-solid adsorption systems can meet the HCl emission limitations for CRU. The system also acted as a pollution prevention technique by reducing the total amount of chloriding agent needed during catalyst regeneration. The direct final rule amendments add provisions to accommodate these control scenarios. The new provisions improve the NESHAP by encouraging the use of new technologies that meet the MACT level of control.

   Plants with a fixed-bed gas-adsorption system must meet two operating limits during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation:

   The daily average temperature of the gas entering or exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the limit established during the performance test; and

   The HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gas must not exceed the limit established during the performance test.

   Plants must conduct a performance test to demonstrate initial compliance and to establish operating limits. To demonstrate continuous compliance, plants must install, operate, and maintain CPMS to monitor the daily average temperature of the gas entering or exiting the adsorption system. In addition, plants must monitor HCl during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using a colormetric tube sampling system to measure the concentration in the adsorption system exhaust and at a point within the adsorbent bed not to exceed 90 percent of the total length of the bed. If the HCl concentration at the sampling location with the adsorption bed exceeds the operating limit, plants must follow the procedures in their operation and maintenance plan. These procedures must require, at a minimum, that plants remeasure the HCl concentration at both the adsorption system exhaust and at the sampling location within the adsorbent bed and replace the sorbent material in the bed before the next regeneration cycle if the HCl

   [[Page 6935]]

   concentration at either location is above the operating limit.

   The direct final rule amendments also establish operating limits and compliance provisions for CRU with moving-bed gas-solid adsorption systems. The operating limits are:

   The daily average temperature of the gas entering or exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the limit established during the performance test;

   The weekly average chloride level on the sorbent entering the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.35 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM system); and

   The weekly average chloride level on the sorbent exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.8 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM system).

   Plants must conduct a performance test to demonstrate initial compliance and to establish an operating limit for the daily average gas temperature. To demonstrate continuous compliance, plants must monitor the daily average gas temperature using a CPMS. To demonstrate continuous compliance with the operating limits for chloride level, plants must collect and analyze samples of the sorbent entering and exiting the system for total chloride concentration using the new procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrument Analyzer Procedure)'' in appendix A of these direct final amendments or the specified methods in EPA Publication No. SW-846, ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods'' (Revision 5, April 1998). Plants must determine and record the weekly chloride content and maintain the weekly average chloride content below the design operating limits.

   10. How Are We Changing The Requirements For Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems?

       The technical specifications for CPMS in Table 41 to subpart UUU were added to the NESHAP after proposal based on provisions we have included in other NESHAP. We included these provisions to ensure that CPMS are installed, calibrated, and operated in a manner that would yield accurate and reliable information on the performance of control devices. Industry representatives objected to the inclusion of such detailed requirements after proposal with no opportunity to comment on the provisions.

       We have decided not to include the performance specifications for CPMS in the rule at this time. As discussed in the preamble to the Generic MACT NESHAP amendments (67 FR 46260, July 12, 2002), we are currently developing Performance Specification (PS-17) for CPMS and quality assurance procedures that will apply to all sources subject to NESHAP under 40 CFR part 63. A proposed rule for these specifications is expected to be available in 2005. This approach will avoid the possibility that the specifications ultimately issued for all NESHAP differ significantly from those in the Petroleum Refineries NESHAP.

       The NESHAP state that each CPMS must be installed, operated, and maintained according to the requirements in Table 41 of subpart UUU and in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's or other written procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately. The amendments remove the reference to Table 41 from 40 CFR 63.1572(c) for those CPMS that will be covered by PS-17 and quality assurance procedures. Until PS-17 is available, facilities must install, operate, and maintain CPMS in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's or other written procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately.

       Table 41 to subpart UUU also contains requirements for pH strips and colormetric sampling systems. These requirements were added to the NESHAP in response to comments and are not expected to be covered by the new PS-17 and quality assurance procedures. Consequently, we have not removed these requirements from the table.

   11. What Corrections Are We Making?

       We are correcting numbering errors and citations in several sections of the NESHAP. We are also amending the rule to correct publication errors in various tables.

       We are correcting a unit conversion error in Tables 1 through 3 to subpart UUU. These tables cite the incremental PM emission rate for discharged gases that pass through an incinerator or waste heat boiler in which auxiliary or supplemental liquid or solid fossil fuel is burned as 43.0 grams per Megajoule of heat input attributable to the liquid or solid fossil fuel. The corrected value is 43.0 grams per Gigajoule; no change is being made to the English unit equivalent limit (0.10 pound per million British thermal units). We are making several minor corrections to these tables to ensure that both limits are cited consistently and accurately.

       We are correcting Table 5 to subpart UUU to list the proper test methods required for PM performance tests for metal HAP emissions. The amended table requires EPA Method 5B or 5F (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine PM emissions and associated moisture content for a unit without a wet scrubber; EPA Method 5B is required to determine PM emissions and associated moisture content for a unit with a wet scrubber.

       We are correcting Table 6 to subpart UUU to specify the use of Equation 1 (the proper equation for calculation of coke burn-off) rather than Equation 2.

       We are correcting Table 18 to subpart UUU to correct a typographical error in a cross reference to certain requirements for flares in the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).

       We are correcting Tables 31, 33, and 34 to subpart UUU to clarify the monitoring and compliance requirements for a sulfur recovery unit subject to the TRS limit. Under this option, the owner or operator may use a TRS continuous emission monitoring system or CPMS, and the continuous compliance requirements depend on the type of monitoring system. The direct final rule amendments separate the requirements according to the type of monitoring system and clarify that compliance is based on a 12-hour rolling average like the NSPS requirements.

       We also are clarifying our comment in the explanation column of Table 44 for the citation 40 CFR 63.6(i), which allows facilities to request a 1-year extension of compliance if necessary to install controls. We are revising the table to state that the extension of compliance under 40 CFR 63.6(i)(4) is not applicable to a facility that installs catalytic cracking feed hydrotreating and receives an extended compliance date under 40 CFR 63.1563(c). We are also revising Table 44 to subpart UUU to change the citation to 40 CFR 63.9(b)(3) to indicate its current reserved status under the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63).

3. Summary of Non-Air Health, Environmental, Energy, and Cost Impacts

   The NESHAP will reduce emissions of many HAP emitted from the affected sources at petroleum refineries, including particulate metals, organics, and reduced sulfur compounds. When fully implemented, we estimate that HAP emissions will be reduced by nearly 11,000 tpy. Emissions of other pollutants such as volatile organic

   [[Page 6936]]

   compounds, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide will be reduced by about 60,000 tpy.

   There will not be any adverse non-air health, environmental, energy, cost (or economic) impacts as a result of the direct final rule amendments because no new requirements are imposed on any facility. The new option for CRU will allow for the use of new control technology to meet the HCl emission limitations, which may reduce the costs and energy impacts of add-on controls.

4. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

   1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

      Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 5173, October 4, 1993), the EPA must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in standards 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 entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations 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.

      It has been determined that the direct final rule amendments are not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.

   2. Paperwork Reduction Act

      This action does not impose any new information collection burden. The direct final rule amendments consist primarily of new compliance options, clarifications, and corrections to the NESHAP that impose no new information collection requirements on industry or EPA. However, the OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements in the existing regulation (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0554, EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) number 1844.02. A copy of the OMB approved ICR may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566-1672.

      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 purpose 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 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 currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

   3. Regulatory Flexibility Act

      The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the direct final rule amendments.

      For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

      After considering the economic impact of today's direct final rule amendments on small entities, the EPA has concluded that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an agency may conclude that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.

      There will be a positive impact on small entities because the direct final rule amendments add new compliance provisions to increase flexibility, decrease unnecessary costs, and make clarifying changes to improve implementation of the NESHAP. These changes are voluntary and do not impose new costs. We have, therefore, concluded that today's direct final rule amendments will relieve regulatory burden for all small entities.

   4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

      Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 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, the 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 to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to 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 the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective 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 the 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 the 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

      [[Page 6937]]

      to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA 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 the direct final rule amendments do not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. No new costs are attributable to the direct final rule amendments. Thus, today's direct final rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The EPA has also determined that the direct final rule amendments contain no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments because they contain no requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus, the direct final rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

   5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

      Executive Order 13132 (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 direct final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They 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, because State and local governments do not own or operate any sources that would be subject to the direct final rule amendments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the direct final rule amendments.

   6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

      Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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 direct final rule amendments do not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175, because tribal governments do not own or operate any sources subject to the direct final rule amendments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the direct final rule amendments.

   7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health & 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, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives.

      We interpret 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. The direct final rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the NESHAP (and subsequent amendments) are based on technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

   8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy, Supply, Distribution, or Use

      The direct final rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

1. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

   Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, Sec. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in the regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA requires Federal agencies to provide Congress, through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when an agency does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

   The direct final rule amendments include a new procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).'' This procedure was developed in consultation with industry experts and equipment vendors for the purpose of determining the metal or total chloride concentration on catalyst particles. This new procedure was not fully developed at the time the NESHAP were issued and reflects current practices used by many plants within the industry. The new procedure is not mandatory; plants also may use one of several existing EPA methods in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods'' (EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5, April 1998) or an alternative method satisfactory to the Administrator.

   Consistent with the NTTAA, we conducted a search to identify voluntary consensus standards for use in determining the metal or total chloride concentration on catalyst particles. This search identified one voluntary consensus standard, ASTM D7085-04, ``Standard Guide for Determination of Chemical Elements in Fluid Catalytic Cracking Catalysts by X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (XRF).'' This method contains detailed sample preparation procedures that may be a useful supplement to the instrumental method included in the direct final rule amendments. However, we have not adopted ASTM D7085-04 as an alternative to the instrumental method because the method does not include equivalent procedures for determining zero and calibration drift, instrument energy calibration, and calibration accuracy, or specific quality assurance procedures for analyzing calibration standards or catalyst samples.

   10. 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 this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller

   [[Page 6938]]

   General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The direct final rule amendments will be effective on April 11, 2005.

   List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

   Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

   Dated: February 1, 2005. Stephen L. Johnson, Acting Administrator.

   0 For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

   PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

   Subpart UUU--[AMENDED]

   0 2. Section 63.1562 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) to read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1562 What parts of my plant are covered by this subpart?

   * * * * *

   (b) * * *

   (1) The process vent or group of process vents on fluidized catalytic cracking units that are associated with regeneration of the catalyst used in the unit (i.e., the catalyst regeneration flue gas vent).

   (2) The process vent or group of process vents on catalytic reforming units (including but not limited to semi-regenerative, cyclic, or continuous processes) that are associated with regeneration of the catalyst used in the unit. This affected source includes vents that are used during the unit depressurization, purging, coke burn, and catalyst rejuvenation.

   (3) The process vent or group of process vents on Claus or other types of sulfur recovery plant units or the tail gas treatment units serving sulfur recovery plants, that are associated with sulfur recovery. * * * * *

   0 3. Section 63.1564(b)(4) is amended by revising the definition of the symbol ``Qr'' for Equation 1 of to read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1564 What are my requirements for metal HAP emissions from catalytic cracking units?

   * * * * *

   Qr= Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from catalyst regenerator before adding air or gas streams. Example: You may measure upstream or downstream of an electrostatic precipitator, but you must measure upstream of a carbon monoxide boiler, dscm/min (dscf/min). You may use the alternative in either Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) or (a)(2), as applicable, to calculate Qr;

   * * * * *

   0 4. Section 63.1566 is amended by: 0 a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(3); 0 b. Revising paragraph (b)(4)(i) introductory text; 0 c. Revising the definitions of the symbols ``E'' and ``Mc'' in Equation 1 of paragraph (b)(4)(i); 0 d. Revising Equation 2 of paragraph (b)(4)(i); 0 e. Redesignating paragraph (b)(5) as (b)(4)(ii); 0 f. Revising Equation 4 in the newly designated paragraph (b)(4)(ii); and 0 g. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(9) as (b)(5) through (b)(8).

   The revisions and additions read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1566 What are my requirements for organic HAP emissions from catalytic reforming units?

   (a) * * *

   (1) * * *

   (ii) You can elect to meet a TOC or nonmethane TOC percent reduction standard or concentration limit, whichever is less stringent (Option 2). * * * * *

   (3) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(4) of this section, the emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart apply to emissions from catalytic reforming unit process vents associated with initial catalyst depressuring and catalyst purging operations that occur prior to the coke burn-off cycle. The emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart do not apply to the coke burn-off, catalyst rejuvenation, reduction or activation vents, or to the control systems used for these vents. * * * * *

   (b) * * *

   (4) * * *

   (i) If you elect the percent reduction standard under Option 2, calculate the emission rate of nonmethane TOC using Equation 1 of this section (if you use Method 25) or Equation 2 of this section (if you use Method 25A or Methods 25A and 18), then calculate the mass emission reduction using Equation 3 of this section as follows: * * * * *

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.000

   Where: E = Emission rate of nonmethane TOC in the vent stream, kilograms-C per hour; * * * * *

   Mc= Mass concentration of total gaseous nonmethane organic (as carbon) as measured and calculated using Method 25 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, mg/dscm; and * * * * *

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.001

   Where: K5= Constant, 1.8 x 10-\4\ (parts per million) -\1\ (gram-mole per standard cubic meter) (gram-C per gram- mole-hexane) (kilogram per gram) (minutes per hour), where the standard temperature (standard cubic meter) is at 20 degrees C (uses 72g-C/ g.mole hexane); C TOC= Concentration of TOC on a dry basis in ppmv as hexane as measured by Method 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter; C methane= Concentration of methane on a dry basis in ppmv as measured by Method 18 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter. If the concentration of methane is not determined, assume C methaneequals zero; and Q s= Vent stream flow rate, dry standard cubic meters per minute, at a temperature of 20 degrees C. * * *

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.002

   Where: CNMTOC, 3[percnt]O2 = Concentration of nonmethane TOC on a dry basis in ppmv as hexane corrected to 3 percent oxygen.

   [[Page 6939]]

   0 5. Section 63.1567 is amended by: 0 a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(1)(i); 0 b. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6) as paragraphs (b)(5) through (b)(7); and 0 c. Adding new paragraph (b)(4).

   The addition and revisions read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1567 What are my requirements for inorganic HAP emissions from catalytic reforming units?

   (a) * * *

   (1) Meet each emission limitation in Table 22 to this subpart that applies to you. If you operate a catalytic reforming unit in which different reactors in the catalytic reforming unit are regenerated in separate regeneration systems, then these emission limitations apply to each separate regeneration system. These emission limitations apply to emissions from catalytic reforming unit process vents associated with the coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation operations during coke burn-off and catalyst regeneration. You can choose from the two options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (ii) of this section:

   (i) You can elect to meet a percent reduction standard for hydrogen chloride (HCl) emissions (Option 1); or * * * * *

   (b) * * *

   (4) Use the equations in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section to determine initial compliance with the emission limitations.

   (i) Correct the measured HCl concentration for oxygen (O2) content in the gas stream using Equation 1 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.003

   Where: CHCl,3[percnt]O2= Concentration of HCl on a dry basis in ppmv corrected to 3 percent oxygen or 1 ppmv, whichever is greater; CHCl= Concentration of HCl on a dry basis in ppmv, as measured by Method 26A in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; and %O2= Oxygen concentration in percent by volume (dry basis).

   (ii) If you elect the percent reduction standard, calculate the emission rate of HCl using Equation 2 of this section; then calculate the mass emission reduction from the mass emission rates using Equation 3 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.004

   Where: E HCl,= Emission rate of HCl in the vent stream, grams per hour; K6= Constant, 0.091 (parts per million) -1 (grams HCl per standard cubic meter) (minutes per hour), where the standard temperature (standard cubic meter) is at 20 degrees Celsius (C); and Q s= Vent stream flow rate, dscm/min, at a temperature of 20 degrees C.

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.005

   Where: E HCl,i= Mass emission rate of HCl at control device inlet, g/hr; and E HCl,o= Mass emission rate of HCl at control device outlet, g/hr.

   (iii) If you are required to use a colormetric tube sampling system to demonstrate continuous compliance with the HCl concentration operating limit, calculate the HCl operating limit using Equation 4 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.006

   Where: CHCl,ppmvLimit= Maximum permissible HCl concentration for the HCl concentration operating limit, ppmv; CHCl,AveTube= Average HCl concentration from the colormetric tube sampling system, calculated as the arithmetic average of the average HCl concentration measured for each performance test run, ppmv or 1 ppmv, whichever is greater; and CHCl,RegLimit= Maximum permissible outlet HCl concentration for the applicable catalytic reforming unit as listed in Table 22 of this subpart, either 10 or 30 ppmv.

   (iv) If you are required to use a colormetric tube sampling system to demonstrate continuous compliance with the percent reduction operating limit, calculate the HCl operating limit using Equation 5 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.007

   [[Page 6940]]

   Where: CHCl,[percnt]Limit= Maximum permissible HCl concentration for the percent reduction operating limit, ppmv; %HCl ReductionLimit= Minimum permissible HCl reduction for the applicable catalytic reforming unit as listed in Table 22 of this subpart, either 97 or 92 percent; and %HCl ReductionTest= Average percent HCl reduction calculated as the arithmetic average HCl reduction calculated using Equation 3 of this section for each performance source test, percent. * * * * *

   0 6. Section 63.1572 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) introductory text and (c)(1) to read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1572 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and maintenance requirements?

   * * * * *

   (c) You must install, operate, and maintain each continuous parameter monitoring system according to the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section.

   (1) The owner or operator shall install, operate, and maintain each continuous parameter monitoring system in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's specifications or other written procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately. The owner or operator shall also meet the equipment specifications in Table 41 of this subpart if pH strips or colormetric tube sampling systems are used. * * * * *

   0 7. Section 63.1573 is amended by: 0 a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b); and 0 b. Adding new paragraph (f).

   The revisions and addition read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1573 What are my monitoring alternatives?

   (

   1. What are the approved alternatives for measuring gas flow rate? (1) You may use this alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system for the catalytic regenerator exhaust gas flow rate for your catalytic cracking unit if the unit does not introduce any other gas streams into the catalyst regeneration vent (i.e., complete combustion units with no additional combustion devices). You may also use this alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system for the catalytic regenerator atmospheric exhaust gas flow rate for your catalytic reforming unit during the coke burn and rejuvenation cycles if the unit operates as a constant pressure system during these cycles. If you use this alternative, you shall use the same procedure for the performance test and for monitoring after the performance test. You shall:

   (i) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the catalytic cracking unit or catalytic reforming unit regenerator. Or, you may determine and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the catalytic cracking unit or catalytic reforming unit regenerator using the appropriate control room instrumentation.

   (ii) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the temperature of the gases entering the control device (or exiting the catalyst regenerator if you do not use an add-on control device).

   (iii) Calculate and record the hourly average actual exhaust gas flow rate using Equation 1 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.008

   Where: Q gas= Hourly average actual gas flow rate, acfm; 1.12 = Default correction factor to convert gas flow from dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscfm) to standard cubic feet per minute (scfm); Q air= Volumetric flow rate of air to regenerator, as determined from the control room instrumentations, dscfm; Q other= Volumetric flow rate of other gases entering the regenerator as determined from the control room instrumentations, dscfm. (Examples of ``other'' gases include an oxygen-enriched air stream to catalytic cracking unit regenerators and a nitrogen stream to catalytic reforming unit regenerators.); Tempgas= Temperature of gas stream in vent measured as near as practical to the control device or opacity monitor, [deg]K. For wet scrubbers, temperature of gas prior to the wet scrubber; and Pvent= Absolute pressure in the vent measured as near as practical to the control device or opacity monitor, as applicable, atm. When used to assess the gas flow rate in the final atmospheric vent stack, you can assume Pvent= 1 atm.

   (2) You may use this alternative to calculating Q r, the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas for the catalytic cracking regenerator as required in Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1564, if you have a gas analyzer installed in the catalytic cracking regenerator exhaust vent prior to the addition of air or other gas streams. You may measure upstream or downstream of an electrostatic precipitator, but you shall measure upstream of a carbon monoxide boiler. You shall:

   (i) Install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the catalytic cracking unit regenerator. Or, you can determine and record the hourly average volumetric air flow rate to the catalytic cracking unit regenerator using the catalytic cracking unit control room instrumentation.

   (ii) Install and operate a continuous gas analyzer to measure and record the concentration of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and oxygen of the catalytic cracking regenerator exhaust.

   (iii) Calculate and record the hourly average flow rate using Equation 2 of this section as follows:

   [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.009

   [[Page 6941]]

   Where: Q r= Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from the catalyst regenerator before adding air or gas streams, dscm/min (dscf/min); 79 = Default concentration of nitrogen and argon in dry air, percent by volume (dry basis); %Oxy= Oxygen concentration in oxygen-enriched air stream, percent by volume (dry basis); Q oxy= Volumetric flow rate of oxygen-enriched air stream to regenerator as determined from the catalytic cracking unit control room instrumentations, dscm/min (dscf/min); %CO2= Carbon dioxide concentration in regenerator exhaust, percent by volume (dry basis); CO = Carbon monoxide concentration in regenerator exhaust, percent by volume (dry basis); and %O2= Oxygen concentration in regenerator exhaust, percent by volume (dry basis).

   (b) What is the approved alternative for monitoring pH or alkalinity levels? You may use the alternative in paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section for a catalytic reforming unit.

   (1) You shall measure and record the pH of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the wet scrubber or internal scrubbing system at least once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using pH strips as an alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system. The pH strips must meet the requirements in Table 41 of this subpart.

   (2) You shall measure and record the alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the wet scrubber or internal scrubbing system at least once an hour during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using titration as an alternative to a continuous parameter monitoring system. * * * * *

   (f) How do I apply for alternative monitoring requirements if my catalytic cracking unit is equipped with a wet scrubber and I have approved alternative monitoring requirements under the new source performance standards for petroleum refineries?

   (1) You may request alternative monitoring requirements according to the procedures in this paragraph if you meet each of the conditions in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section:

   (i) Your fluid catalytic cracking unit regenerator vent is subject to the PM limit in 40 CFR 60.102(a)(1) and uses a wet scrubber for PM emissions control;

   (ii) You have alternative monitoring requirements for the continuous opacity monitoring system requirement in 40 CFR 60.105(a)(1) approved by the Administrator; and

   (iii) You are required by this subpart to install, operate, and maintain a continuous opacity monitoring system for the same catalytic cracking unit regenerator vent for which you have approved alternative monitoring requirements.

   (2) You can request approval to use an alternative monitoring method prior to submitting your notification of compliance status, in your notification of compliance status, or at any time.

   (3) You must submit a copy of the approved alternative monitoring requirements along with a monitoring plan that includes a description of the continuous monitoring system or method, including appropriate operating parameters that will be monitored, test results demonstrating compliance with the opacity limit used to establish an enforceable operating limit(s), and the frequency of measuring and recording to establish continuous compliance. If applicable, you must also include operation and maintenance requirements for the continuous monitoring system.

   (4) We will contact you within 30 days of receipt of your application to inform you of approval or of our intent to disapprove your request.

   0 8. Section 63.1574 is amended by: 0 a. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii); 0 b. Revising paragraph (c); and 0 c. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (f) introductory text, revising paragraph (f)(2) introductory text, revising paragraphs (f)(2)(vi) and (f)(2)(x), and adding new paragraphs (f)(2)(xi) and (xii).

   The revisions read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1574 What notifications must I submit and when?

   (a) * * *

   (3) * * *

   (ii) For each initial compliance demonstration that includes a performance test, you must submit the notification of compliance status, including the performance test results, no later than 150 calendar days after the compliance date specified for your affected source in Sec. 63.1563. * * * * *

   (c) If you startup your new or reconstructed affected source on or after April 11, 2002, you must submit the initial notification no later than 120 days after you become subject to this subpart. * * * * *

   (f) As required by this subpart, you must prepare and implement an operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan for each control system and continuous monitoring system for each affected source. * * *

   (2) Each plan must include, at a minimum, the information specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (xii) of this section. * * * * *

   (vi) Procedures you will use to determine the HCl concentration of gases from a catalytic reforming unit when you use a colormetric tube sampling system, including procedures for correcting for pressure (if applicable to the sampling equipment) and the sampling locations that will be used for compliance monitoring purposes. * * * * *

   (x) Maintenance schedule for each monitoring system and control device for each affected source that is generally consistent with the manufacturer's instructions for routine and long-term maintenance.

   (xi) If you use a fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption system to control emissions from a catalytic reforming unit, you must implement corrective action procedures if the HCl concentration measured at the selected compliance monitoring sampling location within the bed exceeds the operating limit. These procedures must require, at minimum, repeat measurement and recording of the HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gases and at the selected compliance monitoring sampling location within the bed. If the HCl concentration at the selected compliance monitoring location within the bed is above the operating limit during the repeat measurement while the HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gases remains below the operating limit, the adsorption bed must be replaced as soon as practicable. Your procedures must specify the sampling frequency that will be used to monitor the HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gases subsequent to the repeat measurement and prior to replacement of the sorbent material (but not less frequent than once every 4 hours during coke burn-off). If the HCl concentration of the adsorption system exhaust gases is above the operating limit when measured at any time, the adsorption bed must be replaced within 24 hours or before the next regeneration cycle, whichever is longer.

   (xii) Procedures that will be used for purging the catalyst if you do not use a control device to comply with the organic HAP emission limits for catalytic reforming units. These procedures will include, but are not limited to, specification of the minimum

   [[Page 6942]]

   catalyst temperature and the minimum cumulative volume of gas per mass of catalyst used for purging prior to uncontrolled releases (i.e., during controlled purging events); the maximum purge gas temperature for uncontrolled purge events; and specification of the monitoring systems that will be used to monitor and record data during each purge event.

   0 9. Section 63.1576 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1576 What records must I keep, in what form, and for how long?

   (a) * * *

   (2) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. * * * * *

   0 10. Section 63.1579 is amended by: 0 a. Adding, in alphabetical order, new definitions for the terms ``Internal scrubbing system'' and ``Nonmethane TOC''; and 0 b. Revising the definition for the term ``TOC.''

   The additions and revision read as follows:

   Sec. 63.1579 What definitions apply to this subpart?

   * * * * *

   Internal scrubbing system means a wet scrubbing, wet injection, or caustic injection control device that treats (in-situ) the catalytic reforming unit recirculating coke burn exhaust gases for acid (HCl) control during reforming catalyst regeneration upstream of the atmospheric coke burn vent. * * * * *

   Nonmethane TOC means, for the purposes of this subpart, emissions of total organic compounds, excluding methane, that serve as a surrogate measure of the total emissions of organic HAP compounds including, but not limited to, acetaldehyde, benzene, hexane, phenol, toluene, and xylenes and nonHAP VOC as measured by Method 25 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, by the combination of Methods 18 and 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, or by an approved alternative method. * * * * *

   TOC means, for the purposes of this subpart, emissions of total organic compounds that serve as a surrogate measure of the total emissions of organic HAP compounds including, but not limited to, acetaldehyde, benzene, hexane, phenol, toluene, and xylenes and nonHAP VOC as measured by Method 25A in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter or by an approved alternative method. * * * * *

   0 11. Tables 1 through 44 to subpart UUU of part 63 are amended to remove the phrase, ``you must'' and add in its place the phrase ``you shall'' in the introductory text and in the last column heading, where applicable (i.e., Tables 1 through 3, 6 through 10, 13 through 17, 20 through 24, 27 through 31, 34 through 37, 39, and 41 through 43).

   0 12. Table 1 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended to revising entries 1 and 2 to read as follows:

   Table 1 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Metal HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units. * * * * *

   You shall meet the following For each new or existing catalytic

   emission limits for each cracking unit . . .

   catalyst regenerator vent . . .

   1. Subject to new source performance PM emissions must not the standard (NSPS) for PM in 40 CFR

      exceed 1.0 kilogram (kg) per 60.102.

      1,000 kg (1.0 lb/1,000 lb) of coke burn-off in the catalyst regenerator; if the discharged gases pass through an incinerator or waste heat boiler in which you burn auxiliary or in supplemental liquid or solid fossil fuel, the incremental rate of PM emissions must not exceed 43.0 grams per Gigajoule (g/GJ) or 0.10 pounds per million British thermal units (lb/ million Btu) of heat input attributable to the liquid or solid fossil fuel; and the opacity of emissions must not exceed 30 percent, except for one 6-minute average opacity reading in any 1-hour period. 2. Option 1: NSPS requirements not PM emissions must not exceed subject to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 1.0 kg/1,000 kg (1.0 lb/1,000 60.102.

      lb) of coke burn-off in the catalyst regenerator; if the discharged gases pass through an incinerator or waste heat boiler in which you burn auxiliary or supplemental liquid or solid fossil fuel, the incremental rate of PM must not exceed 43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/million Btu) of heat input attributable to the liquid or solid fossil fuel; and the opacity of emissions must not exceed 30 percent, except for one 6-minute average opacity reading in any 1-hour period.

      * * * * * *

      0 13. Table 3 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised to read as follows:

      Table 3 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic Cracking Units

      [As stated in Sec. 63.1564(b)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      And you use this type You shall install, For each new or existing catalytic If your catalytic of control device for operate, and maintain a cracking unit . . .

      cracking unit is . . . your vent . . .

      . . .

   1. Subject to the NSPS for PM in 40 Any size............... Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity CFR 60.102.

      precipitator or wet monitoring system to scrubber or no control measure and record the device.

      opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent.

      [[Page 6943]]

   2. Option 1: NSPS limits not subject Any size............... Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102.

      precipitator or wet monitoring system to scrubber or no control measure and record the device.

      opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent. 3. Option 2: PM limit not subject to a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent. b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent; or continuous parameter monitoring systems to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\ and the voltage and secondary current (or total power input) to the control device. c. Any size............ i. Wet scrubber........ (1) Continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the pressure drop across the scrubber, gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\, and total liquid (or scrubbing liquor) flow rate to the control device. (2) If you use a wet scrubber of the non- venturi jet-ejector design, you're not required to install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system for pressure drop. d. Any size............ No electrostatic

      Continuous opacity precipitator or wet monitoring system to scrubber.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regnerator vent. 4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr not subject to a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\. b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\; or continuous parameter monitoring systems to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\ and the voltage and secondary current (or total power input) to the control device.

      [[Page 6944]]

      c. Any size............ Wet scrubber........... (1) Continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the pressure drop across the scrubber, gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\, and total liquid (or scrubbing liquor) flow rate to the control device. (2) If you use a wet scrubber of the non- venturi jet-ejector design, you're not required to install and operate a continuous parameter monitoring system for pressure drop. d. Any size............ No electrostatic

      Continuous opacity precipitator or wet monitoring system to scrubber.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate \1\. 5. Option 4: Ni lb/1,000 lbs of coke a. Over 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity burn-off not subject to the NSPS for per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to PM in 40 CFR 60.102.

      capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\. b. Up to 20,000 barrels Electrostatic

      Continuous opacity per day fresh feed precipitator.

      monitoring system to capacity.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\; or continuous parameter monitoring systems to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\ and the voltage and secondary current (or total power input) to the control device. c. Any size............ Wet scrubber........... Continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the pressure drop across the scrubber, gas flow rate entering or exiting the control device \1\, and total liquid (or scrubbing liquor) flow rate to the control device. d. Any size............ No electrostatic

      Continuous opacity precipitator or wet monitoring system to scrubber.

      measure and record the opacity of emissions from each catalyst regenerator vent and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the gas flow rate \1\.

      \1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for gas flow rate.

      0 14. Table 4 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 2, 3, 4, and 5; revising footnote 1; and adding new footnote 2 to read as follows:

      [[Page 6945]]

      Table 4 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Requirements for Performance Tests for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic Cracking Units Not Subject to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Particulate Matter (PM) * * * * * * *

      For each new or existing catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerator You shall . . .

      Using . . .

      According to these vent . . .

      requirements . . .

      * * * * * * * 2. Option 1: Elect NSPS.............. a. Measure PM

      Method 5B or 5F (40 CFR You must maintain a emissions.

      part 60, appendix A) sampling rate of at to determine PM

      least 0.15 dry emissions and

      standard cubic meters associated moisture per minute (dscm/min) content for units

      (0.53 dry standard without wet scrubbers. cubic feet per minute Method 5B (40 CFR part (dscf/min). 60, appendix A) to determine PM emissions and associated moisture content for unit with wet scrubber. b. Compute PM emission Equations 1, 2, and 3 rate (lbs/1,000 lbs) of Sec. 63.1564 (if of coke burn-off.

      applicable). c. Measure opacity of Continuous opacity You must collect emissions.

      monitoring system. opacity monitoring data every 10 seconds during the entire period of the Method 5B or 5F performance test and reduce the data to 6-minute averages. 3. Option 2: PM limit................ a. Measure PM

      See item 2. of this See item 2. of this emissions.

      table.

      table. b. Compute coke burn- Equations 1 and 2 of off rate and PM

      Sec. 63.1564. emission rate. c. Establish your site- Data from the

      You must collect specific opacity

      continuous opacity opacity monitoring operating limit if you monitoring system. data every 10 seconds use a continuous

      during the entire opacity monitoring

      period of the Method system.

      5B or 5F performance test and reduce the data to 6-minute averages; determine and record the hourly average opacity from all the 6-minute averages; and compute the site-specific limit using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.1564. 4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr................ a. Measure

      Method 29 (40 CFR part concentration of Ni 60, appendix A). and total metal HAP. b. Compute Ni emission Equation 5 of Sec. rate (lb/hr).

      63.1564. c. Determine the

      XRF procedure in

      You must obtain 1 equilibrium catalyst appendix A to this sample for each of the Ni concentration.

      subpart\1\; or EPA 3 runs; determine and Method 6010B or 6020 record the equilibrium or EPA Method 7520 or catalyst Ni 7521 in SW-846\2\; or concentration for each an alternative to the of the 3 samples; and SW-846 method

      you may adjust the satisfactory to the laboratory results to Administrator.

      the maximum value using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.1571. d. If you use a

      i. Equations 6 and 7 of (1) You must collect continuous opacity Sec. 63.1564 using opacity monitoring monitoring system, data from continuous data every 10 seconds establish your site- opacity monitoring during the entire specific Ni operating system, gas flow rate, period of the initial limit.

      results of equilibrium Ni performance test; catalyst Ni

      reduce the data to 6- concentration

      minute averages; and analysis, and Ni

      determine and record emission rate from the hourly average Method 29 test.

      opacity from all the 6- minute averages. (2) You must collect gas flow rate monitoring data every 15 minutes during the entire period of the initial Ni performance test; measure the gas flow as near as practical to the continuous opacity monitoring system; and determine and record the hourly average actual gas flow rate from all the readings. 5. Option 4: Ni lbs/1,000 lbs of coke a. Measure

      Method 29 (40 CFR part burn-off.

      concentration of Ni 60, appendix A). and total HAP.

      [[Page 6946]]

      b. Compute Ni emission Equations 1 and 8 of ....................... rate (lb/1,000 lbs of Sec. 63.1564. coke burn-off). c. Determine the

      See item 4.c. of this You must obtain 1 equilibrium catalyst table.

      sample for each of the Ni concentration.

      3 runs; determine and record the equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration for each of the 3 samples; and you may adjust the laboratory results to the maximum value using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.1571. d. If you use a

      i. Equations 9 and 10 (1) You must collect continuous opacity of Sec. 63.1564 with opacity monitoring monitoring system, data from continuous data every 10 seconds establish your site- opacity monitoring during the entire specific Ni operating system, coke burn-off period of the initial limit.

      rate, results of

      Ni performance test; equilibrium catalyst reduce the data to 6- Ni concentration

      minute averages; and analysis, and Ni

      determine and record emission rate from the hourly average Method 29 test.

      opacity from all the 6- minute averages. (2) You must collect gas flow rate monitoring data every 15 minutes during the entire period of the initial Ni performance test; measure the gas flow rate as near as practical to the continuous opacity monitoring system; and determine and record the hourly average actual gas flow rate from all the readings. e. Record the catalyst addition rate for each test and schedule for the 10- day period prior to the test.

      * * * * * *

      \1\Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure). \2\ EPA Method 6010B, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, EPA Method 6020, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry, EPA Method 7520, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration, and EPA Method 7521, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.

      0 15. Table 5 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 1, 2, and 3 to read as follows:

      [[Page 6947]]

      Table 5 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial-Compliance With Metal HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units * * * * *

      For each new and existing catalytic cracking unit For the following

      You have catalyst regenerator vent . emission limit . . . demonstrated initial . .

      compliance if . . .

   1. Subject to the NSPS for PM emissions must You have already PM in 40 CFR 60.102.

      not exceed 1.0 kg/ conducted a 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ performance test to 1,000 lb) of coke demonstrate initial burn-off in the compliance with the catalyst

      NSPS and the regenerator; if the measured PM discharged gases emission rate is pass through an less than or equal incinerator or

      to 1.0 kg/1,000 kg waste heat boiler (1.0 lb/1,000 lb) in which you burn of coke burn-off in auxiliary or

      the catalyst supplemental liquid regenerator. As or solid fossil part of the fuel, the

      Notification of incremental rate of Compliance Status, PM must not exceed you must certify 43.0 grams per

      that your vent Gigajoule (g/GJ) or meets the PM limit. 0.10 pounds per You are not million British required to do thermal units (lb/ another performance million Btu) of test to demonstrate heat input

      initial compliance. attributable to the If applicable, you liquid or solid have already fossil fuel; and conducted a the opacity of

      performance test to emissions must not demonstrate initial exceed 30 percent, compliance with the except for one 6- NSPS and the minute average

      measured PM rate is opacity reading in less than or equal any 1-hour period. to 43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/million Btu) of heat input attributable to the liquid or solid fossil fuel. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your vent meets the PM emission limit. You are not required to do another performance test to demonstrate initial compliance. You have already conducted a performance test to demonstrate initial compliance with the NSPS and the average hourly opacity is no more than 30 percent. Except: One 6- minute average in any 1-hour period can exceed 30 percent. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your vent meets the opacity limit. You are not required to do another performance test to demonstrate initial compliance. You have already conducted a performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable performance specification. As part of your Notification of Compliance Status, you certify that your continuous opacity monitoring system meets the requirements in Sec. 63.1572. You are not required to do a performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance. 2. Option 1: Elect NSPS not PM emission must not The average PM subject to the NSPS for PM. exceed 1.0 kg/1,000 emission rate, kg (1.0 lb/1,000 measured using EPA lb) of coke burn- Method 5B or 5F off in the catalyst (for a unit without regenerator; if the a wet scrubber) or discharged gases 5B (for a unit with pass through an a wet scrubber), incinerator or

      over the period of waste heat boiler the initial in which you burn performance test, auxiliary or

      is no higher than supplemental liquid 1.0 kg/1,000 kg or solid fossil (1.0 lb/1,000 lb of fuel, the

      coke burn-off in incremental rate of the catalyst PM must not exceed regenerator. The PM 43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/ emission rate is million Btu) of calculated using heat input

      Equations 1 and 2 attributable to the of Sec. 63.1564. liquid or solid If applicable, the fossil fuel; and average PM emission the opacity of

      rate, measured emissions must not using EPA Method 5B exceed 30 percent, emission rate, except for one 6- measured using EPA minute average

      Method 5B or 5F opacity reading in (for a unit without any 1-hour period. a wet scrubber) or Method 5B (for a unit with a wet scrubber) over the period of the initial performance test, is no higher than 43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/million Btu) of heat input attributable to the liquid or solid fossil fuel. The PM emission rate is calculated using Equation 3 of Sec. 63.1564; no more than one 6-minute average measured by the continuous opacity monitoring system exceeds 30 percent opacity in any 1-hour period over the period of the performance test; and your performance evaluation shows the continuous opacity monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572. 3. Option 2: Not subject to PM emissions must The average PM the NSPS for PM.

      not exceed 1.0 kg/ emission rate, 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ measured using EPA 1,000 lb) of coke Method 5B or 5F burn-off in the (for a unit without catalyst

      a wet scrubber) or regenerator.

      Method 5B (for a unit with a wet scrubber), over the period of the initial performance test, is less than or equal to 1.0 kg/ 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ 1,000 lb) of coke burn-off in the catalyst regenerator. The PM emission rate is calculated using Equations 1 and 2 of Sec. 63.1564; and if you use a continuous opacity monitoring system, your performance evaluation shows the system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572.

      [[Page 6948]]

      * * * * * * *

      0 16. Table 6 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entries 1, 3, and 5 to read as follows:

      Table 6 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Continuous Compliance With Metal HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units * * * * *

      Subject to this For each new and existing emission limit for

      You shall catalytic cracking unit . . your catalyst

      demonstrate .

      regenerator vent . . continuous .

      compliance by . . .

   1. Subject to the NSPS for a. PM emissions must i. Determining and PM in 40 CFR 60.102.

      not exceed 1.0 kg/ recording each day 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ the average coke 1,000 lb) of coke burn-off rate burn-off in the (thousands of catalyst

      kilograms per hour) regenerator; if the using Equation 1 in discharged gases Sec. 63.1564 and pass through an the hours of incinerator or

      operation for each waste heat boiler catalyst in which you burn regenerator; auxiliary or

      maintaining PM supplemental liquid emission rate below or solid fossil 1.0 kg/1,000 kg fuel, the

      (1.0 lb/1,000 lbs) incremental rate of of coke burn-off; PM must not exceed if applicable, 43.0 g/GJ (0.10 lb/ determining and million Btu) of recording each day heat input

      the rate of attributable to the combustion of liquid or solid liquid or solid fossil fuel; and fossil fuels the opacity of

      (liters/hour or emissions must not kilograms/hour) and exceed 30 percent, the hours of except for one 6- operation during minute average

      which liquid or opacity reading in solid fossil-fuels any 1-hour period. are combusted in the incinerator- waste heat boiler; if applicable, maintaining the PM rate incinerator below 43 g/GJ (0.10 lb/million Btu) of heat input attributable to the solid or liquid fossil fuel; collecting the continuous opacity monitoring data for each catalyst regenerator vent according to Sec. 63.1572; and maintaining each 6- minute average at or below 30 percent except that one 6- minute average during a 1-hour period can exceed 30 percent.

      * * * * * * * 3. Option 2: PM limit not PM emissions must Determining and subject to the NSPS for PM. not exceed 1.0 kg/ recording each day 1,000 kg (1.0 lb/ the average coke 1,000 lb) of coke burn-off rate burn-off in the (thousands of catalyst

      kilograms per hour) regenerator.

      and the hours of operation for each catalyst regenerator by Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1564 (you can use process data to determine the volumetric flow rate); and maintaining the PM emission rate below 1.0 kg/1,000 kg (1.0 lb/1,000 lb) of coke burn-off.

      * * * * * * * 5. Option 4: Ni lb/1,000 lbs Ni emissions must Determining and of coke burn-off not

      not exceed 1.0 mg/ recording each day subject to the NSPS for PM. kg (0.001 lb/1,000 the average coke lbs) of coke burn- burn-off rate off in the catalyst (thousands of regenerator.

      kilograms per hour) and the hours of operation for each catalyst regenerator by Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1564 (you can use process data to determine the volumetric flow rate); and maintaining Ni emission rate below 1.0 mg/kg (0.001 lb/ 1,000 lbs) of coke burn-off in the catalyst regenerator.

      0 17. Table 7 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised to read as follows:

      [[Page 6949]]

      Table 7 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic Cracking Units

      [As stated in Sec. 63.1564(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall demonstrate For each new or existing catalytic If you use . . .

      For this operating continuous compliance cracking unit . . .

      limit . . .

      by . . .

   1. Subject to NSPS for PM in 40 CFR Continuous opacity Not applicable.

      Complying with Table 6 60.102.

      monitoring system.

      of this subpart. 2. Option 1: Elect NSPS not subject Continuous opacity Not applicable.

      Complying with Table 6 to the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system.

      of this subpart. 3. Option 2: PM limit not subject to a. Continuous opacity The opacity of

      Collecting the hourly the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system. emissions from your average continuous catalyst regenerator opacity monitoring vent must not exceed system data according the site-specific

      to Sec. 63.1572; and opacity operating

      maintaining the hourly limit established

      average opacity at or during the performance below the site- test.

      specific limit. b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average Collecting the hourly monitoring systems-- gas flow rate entering and daily average gas electrostatic

      or exiting the control flow rate monitoring precipitator.

      device must not exceed data according to Sec. the operating limit

      63.1572 1; and established during the maintaining the daily performance test.

      average gas flow rate at or below the limit established during the performance test. ii. The daily average Collecting the hourly voltage and secondary and daily average current (or total

      voltage and secondary power input) to the current (or total control device must power input) not fall below the monitoring data operating limit

      according to Sec. established during the 63.1572; and performance test.

      maintaining the daily average voltage and secondary current (or total power input) at or above the limit established during the performance test. c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average Collecting the hourly monitoring systems-- pressure drop across and daily average wet scrubber.

      the scrubber must not pressure drop fall below the

      monitoring data operating limit

      according to Sec. established during the 63.1572; and performance test.

      maintaining the daily average pressure drop above the limit established during the performance test. ii. The daily average Collecting the hourly liquid-to-gas ratio average gas flow rate must not fall below and water (or the operating limit scrubbing liquid) flow established during the rate monitoring data performance test.

      according to Sec. 63.1572 1; determining and recording the hourly average liquid- to-gas ratio; determining and recording the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio; and maintaining the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio above the limit established during the performance test. 4. Option 3: Ni lb/hr not subject to a. Continuous opacity The daily average Ni Collecting the hourly the NSPS for PM in 40 CFR 60.102. monitoring system. operating value must average continuous not exceed the site- opacity monitoring specific Ni operating system data according limit established

      to Sec. 63.1572; during the performance determining and test.

      recording equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration at least once a week 2; collecting the hourly average gas flow rate monitoring data according to Sec. 63.1572 1; determining and recording the hourly average Ni operating value using Equation 11 of Sec. 63.1564; determining and recording the daily average Ni operating value; and maintaining the daily average Ni operating value below the site- specific Ni operating limit established during the performance test.

      [[Page 6950]]

      b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.b.i. of this monitoring systems-- gas flow rate entering table. electrostatic

      or exiting the control precipitator.

      device must not exceed the operating limit established during the performance test. ii. The daily average See item 3.b.ii. of voltage and secondary this table. current (or total power input) must not fall below the level established in the performance test. iii. The monthly

      Determining and rolling average of the recording the equilibrium catalyst equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must Ni concentration at not exceed the level least once a week 2; established during the determining and performance test.

      recording the monthly rolling average of the equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration once each week using the weekly or most recent value; and maintaining the monthly rolling average below the limit established in the performance test. c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.c.i. of this monitoring systems-- pressure drop must not table. wetscrubber.

      fall below the operating limit established in the performance test. ii. The daily average See item 3.c.ii. of liquid-to-gas ratio this table. must not fall below the operating limit established during the performance test. iii. The monthly

      Determining and rolling average

      recording the equilibrium catalyst equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must Ni concentration at not exceed the level least once a week2; established during the determining and performance test.

      recording the monthly rolling average of equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration once each week using the weekly or most recent value; and maintaining the monthly rolling average below the limit established in the performance test. 5. Option 4: Ni lb/ton of coke burn- a. Continuous opacity The daily average Ni Collecting the hourly off not subject to the NSPS for PM monitoring system. operating value must average continuous in 40 CFR 60.102.

      not exceed the site- opacity monitoring specific Ni operating system data according limit established

      to Sec. 63.1572; during the performance collecting the hourly test.

      average gas flow rate monitoring data according to Sec. 63.1572 1; determining and recording equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration at least once a week 2; determining and recording the hourly average Ni operating value using Equation 12 of Sec. 63.1564; determining and recording the daily average Ni operating value; and maintaining the daily average Ni operating value below the site-specific Ni operating limit established during the performance test. b. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.b.i. of this monitoring systems-- gas flow rate to the table. electrostatic

      control device must precipitator.

      not exceed the level established in the performance test.

      [[Page 6951]]

      ii. The daily average See item 3.b.ii. of voltage and secondary this table. current (or total power input) must not fall below the level established in the performance test. iii. The monthly

      See item 4.b.iii. of rolling average

      this table. equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must not exceed the level established during the performance test. c. Continuous parameter i. The daily average See item 3.c.i. of this monitoring systems-- pressure drop must not table. wet scrubber.

      fall below the operating limit established in the performance test. ii. The daily average See item 3.c.ii. of liquid-to-gas ratio this table. must not fall below the operating limit established during the performance test. iii. The monthly

      See item 4.c.iii. of rolling average

      this table. equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must not exceed the level established during the performance test.

      \1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) for gas flow rate instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system if you used the alternative method in the initial performance test. \2\ The equilibrium catalyst Ni concentration must be measured by the procedure, Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure) in appendix A to this subpart; or by EPA Method 6010B, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, EPA Method 6020, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry, EPA Method 7520, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration, or EPA Method 7521, Nickel Atomic Absorption, Direct Aspiration; or by an alternative to EPA Method 6010B, 6020, 7520, or 7521 satisfactory to the Administrator. The EPA Methods 6010B, 6020, 7520, and 7521 are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. These methods are also available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.

      0 18. Table 15 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the heading in column 1 and 2 and by revising entry 2 as follows:

      Table 15 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Organic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units * * * * *

      You shall meet this emission For each applicable process vent for a limit during initial catalyst new or existing catalytic reforming depressuring and catalyst unit . . .

      purging operations . . .

      * * * * * * * 2. Option 2............................ Reduce uncontrolled emissions of total organic compounds (TOC) or nonmethane TOC from your process vent by 98 percent by weight using a control device or to a concentration of 20 ppmv (dry basis as hexane), corrected to 3 percent oxygen, whichever is less stringent. If you vent emissions to a boiler or process heater to comply with the percent reduction or concentration emission limitation, the vent stream must be introduced into the flame zone, or any other location that will achieve the percent reduction or concentration standard.

      0 19. Table 16 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the heading in column 3 and by revising entry 2 as follows:

      [[Page 6952]]

      Table 16 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Operating Limits for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units * * * * *

      You shall meet this operating limit For each new or existing

      during initial catalytic reforming unit . For this type of

      catalyst . .

      control device . . . depressuring and purging operations . . .

      * * * * * * * 2. Option 2: Percent

      a. Thermal

      The daily average reduction or concentration incinerator, boiler combustion zone limit.

      or process heater temperature must with a design heat not fall below the input capacity

      limit established under 44 MW, or during the boiler or process performance test. heater in which all vent streams are not introduced into the flame zone. b. No control device Operate at all times according to your operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan regarding minimum catalyst purging conditions that must be met prior to allowing uncontrolled purge releases.

      0 20. Table 17 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the heading in column 1 as follows:

      Table 17 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.-Continuous Monitoring Systems for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units * * * * * * *

      For each applicable process vent for

      You shall install and operate this a new or existing catalytic

      If you use this type of control type of continuous monitoring system reforming unit . . .

      device . . .

      . . .

      * * * * * * *

      0 21. Table 18 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entry 1 and 2 as follows:

      Table 18 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units * * * * * * *

      For each new or existing catalytic

      According to these reforming unit . . .

      You shall . . .

      Using . . .

      requirements . . .

   1. Option 1: Vent to a flare......... a. Conduct visible Method 22 (40 CFR part 2-hour observation emission observations. 60, appendix A).

      period. Record the presence of a flame at the pilot light over the full period of the test. b. Determine that the Not applicable.

      40 CFR 63.11(b)(6) flare meets the

      through (8). requirements for net heating value of the gas being combusted and exit velocity. 2. Option 2: Percent reduction or a. Select sampling site Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR Sampling sites must be concentration limit.

      part 60, appendix A). located at the inlet No traverse site

      (if you elect the selection method is emission reduction needed for vents

      standard) and outlet smaller than 0.10

      of the control device meter in diameter. and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. b. Measure gas

      Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, volumetric flow rate. 2F, or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), as applicable.

      [[Page 6953]]

      c. Measure TOC

      Method 25 (40 part 60, Take either an concentration (for appendix A) to measure integrated sample or percent reduction

      nonmethane TOC

      four grab samples standard).

      concentration (in

      during each run. If carbon equivalents) at you use a grab inlet and outlet of sampling technique, the control device. If take the samples at the nonmethane TOC approximately equal outlet concentration intervals in time, is expected to be less such as 15-minute than 50 ppm (as

      intervals during the carbon), you can use run. Method 25A to measure TOC concentration (as hexane) at the inlet and the outlet of the control device. If you use Method 25A, you may use Method 18 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to measure the methane concentration to determine the nonmethane TOC concentration. d. Calculate TOC or ....................... Calculate emission rate nonmethane TOC

      by Equation 1 of Sec. emission rate and mass

      63.1566 (if you use emission reduction.

      Method 25) or Equation 2 of Sec. 63.1566 (if you use Method 25A). Calculate mass emission reduction by Equation 3 of Sec. 63.1566. e. For concentration Method 25A (40 CFR part standard, measure TOC 60, appendix A) to concentration.

      measure TOC (Optional: Measure concentration (as methane

      hexane) at the outlet concentration.)

      of the control device. You may elect to use Method 18 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to measure the methane concentration. f. Determine oxygen Method 3A or 3B (40 CFR content in the gas part 60, appendix A), stream at the outlet as applicable. of the control device. g. Calculate the TOC or Equation 4 of Sec. nonmethane TOC

      63.1566. concentration corrected for oxygen content (for concentration standard). h. Establish each

      Data from the

      Collect the temperature operating limit in continuous parameter monitoring data every Table 16 of this

      monitoring systems. 15 minutes during the subpart that applies

      entire period of the to you for a thermal

      initial TOC incinerator, or

      performance test. process heater or

      Determine and record boiler with a design

      the minimum hourly heat input capacity

      average combustion under 44 MW, or

      zone temperature. process heater or boiler in which all vent streams are not introduced into flame zone. i. If you do not use a Data from monitoring Procedures in the control device,

      systems as identified operation, document the purging in the operation,

      maintenance, and conditions used prior maintenance, and

      monitoring plan. to testing following monitoring plan. the minimum requirements in the operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan.

      0 22. Table 19 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      [[Page 6954]]

      Table 19 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Organic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1566(b)(7), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      For each applicable process vent for a new or existing For the following

      You have catalytic reforming unit . . emission limit . . . demonstrated initial .

      compliance if . . .

      Option 1.................... Visible emissions Visible emissions, from a flare must measured using not exceed a total Method 22 over the of 5 minutes during 2-hour observation any 2 consecutive period of the hours.

      performance test, do not exceed a total of 5 minutes. Option 2.................... Reduce uncontrolled The mass emission emissions of total reduction of organic compounds nonmethane TOC (TOC) or nonmethane measured by Method TOC from your

      25 over the period process vent by 98 of the performance percent by weight test is at least 98 using a control percent by weight device or to a

      as calculated using concentration of 20 Equations 1 and 3 ppmv (dry basis as of Sec. 63.1566; hexane), corrected or the mass to 3 percent

      emission reduction oxygen, whichever of TOC measured by is less stringent. Method 25A (or nonmethane TOC measured by Methods 25A and 18) over the period of the performance test is at least 98 percent by weight as calculated using Equations 2 and 3 of Sec. 63.1566; or the TOC concentration measured by Method 25A (or the nonmethane TOC concentration measured by Methods 25A and 18) over the period of the performance test does not exceed 20 ppmv (dry basis as hexane) corrected to 3 percent oxygen as calculated using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.1566.

      0 23. Table 20 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 20 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Organic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1566(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall demonstrate For each applicable process

      continuous vent for a new or existing For this emission compliance during catalytic reforming unit . . limit . . .

      initial catalyst .

      depressuring and catalyst purging operations by . . .

   1. Option 1................. Vent emissions from Maintaining visible your process vent emissions from a to a flare that flare below a total meets the

      of 5 minutes during requirements in any 2 consecutive Sec. 63.11(b). hours. 2. Option 2................. Reduce uncontrolled Maintaining a 98 emissions of total percent by weight organic compounds emission reduction (TOC) or nonmethane of TOC or TOC from your

      nonmethane TOC; or process vent by 98 maintaining a TOC percent by weight or nonmethane TOC using a control concentration of device or to a

      not more than 20 concentration of 20 ppmv (dry basis as ppmv (dry basis as hexane), corrected hexane), corrected to 3 percent to 3 percent

      oxygen, whichever oxygen, whichever is less stringent. is less stringent.

      0 24. Table 21 to Subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 21 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits for Organic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units

      [As stated in Sec. 63.1566(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall demonstrate continuous compliance For each applicable process vent for

      For this operating during initial catalyst a new or existing catalytic reforming If you use . . .

      limit . . .

      depressuring and unit . . .

      purging operations by . . .

   1. Option 1.......................... Flare that meets the The flare pilot light Collecting flare requirements in Sec. must be present at all monitoring data 63.11(b).

      times and the flare according to Sec. must be operating at 63.1572; and recording all times that

      for each 1-hour period emissions may be

      whether the monitor vented to it.

      was continuously operating and the pilot light was continuously present during each 1-hour period.

      [[Page 6955]]

   2. Option 2.......................... a. Thermal incinerator Maintain the daily Collecting, the hourly boiler or process

      average combustion and daily temperature heater with a design zone temperature above monitoring data input capacity under the limit established according to Sec. 44 MW or boiler or during the performance 63.1572; and process heater in

      test.

      maintaining the daily which not all vent

      average combustion streams are not

      zone temperature above introduced into the

      the limit established flame zone.

      during the performance test. b. No control device... Operate at all times Recording information according to your

      to document compliance operation,

      with the procedures in maintenance, and

      your operation, monitoring plan

      maintenance, and regarding minimum

      monitoring plan. purging conditions that must be met prior to allowing uncontrolled purge releases.

      0 25. Table 22 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 22 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Inorganic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units

      [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(a)(1), you shall meet each emission limitation in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall meet this emission limit for each applicable catalytic reforming unit For . . .

      process vent during coke burn- off and catalyst rejuvenation . . .

   1. Each existing semi-regenerative Reduce uncontrolled emissions catalytic reforming unit.

      of hydrogen chloride (HCl) by 92 percent by weight or to a concentration of 30 ppmv (dry basis), corrected to 3 percent oxygen. 2. Each existing cyclic or continous Reduce uncontrolled emissions catalytic reforming unit.

      of HCl by 97 percent by weight or to a concentration of 10 ppmv (dry basis), corrected to 3 percent oxygen. 3. Each new semi-regenerative, cyclic, Reduce uncontrolled emissions or continous catalytic reforming unit. of HCl by 97 percent by weight or to a concentration of 10 ppmv (dry basis), corrected to 3 percent oxygen.

      0 26. Table 23 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 23 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Operating Limits for Inorganic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(a)(2), you shall meet each operating limit in the following table that applies to you.]

      For each applicable process vent for a new or existing catalytic You shall meet this operating limit reforming unit with this type of during coke burn-off and catalyst control device . . .

      rejuvenation . . .

   1. Wet scrubber................... The daily average pH or alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the scrubber must not fall below the limit established during the performance test; and the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio must not fall below the limit established during the performance test. 2. Internal scrubbing system or no The daily average HCl concentration control device (e.g., hot regen in the catalyst regenerator exhaust system) meeting outlet HCl

      gas must not exceed the limit concentration limit.

      established during the performance test. 3. Internal scrubbing system

      The daily average pH or alkalinity meeting HCl percent reduction of the water (or scrubbing liquid) standard.

      exiting the internal scrubbing system must not fall below the limit established during the performance test; and the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio must not fall below the limit established during the performance test. 4. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption The daily average temperature of the system.

      gas entering or exiting the adsorption system must not exceed the limit established during the performance test; and the HCl concentration in the adsorption system exhaust gas must not exceed the limit established during the performance test.

      [[Page 6956]]

   5. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption The daily average temperature of the system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM

      gas entering or exiting the System).

      adsorption system must not exceed the limit established during the performance test; and the weekly average chloride level on the sorbent entering the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.35 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM System); and the weekly average chloride level on the sorbent leaving the adsorption system must not exceed the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.8 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM System).

      0 27. Table 24 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 24 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for Inorganic HAP Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall install and operate If you use this type of control device this type of continuous for your vent . . .

      monitoring system . . .

   1. Wet scrubber........................ Continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate entering the scrubber during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation; and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record gas flow rate entering or exiting the scrubber during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation \1\; and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the pH or alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the scrubber during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation. \2\ 2. Internal scrubbing system or no Colormetric tube sampling control device (e.g., hot regen

      system to measure the HC1 system) to meet HC1 outlet

      concentration in the catalyst concentration limit.

      regenerator exhaust gas during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation. The colormetric tube sampling system must meet the requirements in Table 41 of this subpart. 3. Internal scrubbing system to meet Continuous parameter monitoring HC1 percent reduction standard.

      system to measure and record the gas flow rate entering or exiting the internal scrubbing system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation; and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate entering the internal scrubbing system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation; and continuous parameter monitoring system to measure and record the pH or alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation. \2\ 4. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption

      Continuous parameter monitoring system.

      system to measure and record the temperature of the gas entering or exiting the adsorption system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation; and colormetric tube sampling system to measure the gaseous HC1 concentration in the adsorption system exhaust and at a point within the absorbent bed not to exceed 90 percent of the total length of the absorbent bed during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation. The colormetric tube sampling system must meet the requirements in Table 41 of this subpart. 5. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption Continuous parameter monitoring system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM System).. system to measure and record the temperature of the gas entering or exiting the adsorption system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation.

      \1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573 (a)(1) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for gas flow rate or instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for the cumulative volume of gas. \2\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b)(1) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for pH of the water (or scrubbing liquid) or the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b)(2) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for alkalinity of the water (or scrubbing liquid).

      0 28. Table 25 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      [[Page 6957]]

      Table 25 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests for Inorganic HAP Emissions for Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(2) and (3), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      For each new and existing catalytic reforming unit using . . .

      You shall . . .

      Using . . .

      According to these requirements . . .

   1. Any or no control system........ a. Select sampling Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR (1) If you operate a port location(s) and part 60, appendix A), control device and you the number of

      as applicable.

      elect to meet an traverse points.

      applicable HCl percent reduction standard, sampling sites must be located at the inlet of the control device or internal scrubbing system and at the outlet of the control device or internal scrubber system prior to any release to the atmosphere. For a series of fixed-bed systems, the outlet sampling site should be located at the outlet of the first fixed- bed, prior to entering the second fixed-bed in the series. (2) If you elect to meet an applicable HCl outlet concentration limit, locate sampling sites at the outlet of the control device or internal scrubber system prior to any release to the atmosphere. For a series of fixed-bed systems, the outlet sampling site should be located at the outlet of the first fixed- bed, prior to entering the second fixed-bed in the series. If there is no control device, locate sampling sites at the outlet of the catalyst regenerator prior to any release to the atmosphere. b. Determine velocity Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, and volumetric flow 2F, or 2G (40 CFR rate.

      part 60, appendix A), as applicable.. c. Conduct gas

      Method 3, 3A, or 3B molecular weight

      (40 CFR part 60, analysis.

      appendix A), as applicable. d. Measure moisture Method 4 (40 CFR part content of the stack 60, appendix A). gas. e. Measure the HCl Method 26 or 26A (40 (1) For semi-regenerative concentration at the CFR part 60, appendix and cyclic regeneration selected sampling A). If your control units, conduct the test locations.

      device is a wet

      during the coke burn-off scrubber or internal and catalyst rejuvenation scrubbing system, you cycle, but collect no must use Method 26A. samples during the first hour or the last 6 hours of the cycle (for semi- regenerative units) or during the first hour or the last 2 hours of the cycle (for cyclic regeneration units). For continuous regeneration units, the test should be conducted no sooner than 3 days after process unit or control system start up. (2) Determine and record the HCl concentration corrected to 3 percent oxygen (using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1567) for each sampling location for each test run. (3) Determine and record the percent emission reduction, if applicable, using Equation 3 of Sec. 63.1567 for each test run. (4) Determine and record the average HCl concentration (corrected to 3 percent oxygen) and the average percent emission reduction, if applicable, for the overall source test from the recorded test run values. 2. Wet scrubber.................... a. Establish operating i. Data from

      Measure and record the pH limit for pH level or continuous parameter or alkalinity of the water alkalinity.

      monitoring systems. (or scrubbing liquid) exiting scrubber every 15 minutes during the entire period of the performance test. Determine and record the minimum hourly average pH or alkalinity level from the recorded values. ii. Alternative pH Measure and record the pH procedure in Sec. of the water (or scrubbing 63.1573 (b)(1).

      liquid) exiting the scrubber during coke burn- off and catalyst rejuvenation using pH strips at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average pH level for each test run. Determine and record the minimum test run average pH level.

      [[Page 6958]]

      iii. Alternative

      Measure and record the alkalinity method in alkalinity of the water Sec. 63.1573(b)(2). (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the scrubber during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using discrete titration at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average alkalinity level for each test run. Determine and record the minimum test run average alkalinity level. b. Establish operating i. Data from

      Measure and record the gas limit for liquid-to- continuous parameter flow rate entering or gas ratio.

      monitoring systems. exiting the scrubber and the total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate entering the scrubber every 15 minutes during the entire period of the performance test. Determine and record the hourly average gas flow rate and total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate. Determine and record the minimum liquid-to-gas ratio from the recorded, paired values. ii. Alternative

      Collect air flow rate procedure for gas monitoring data or flow rate in Sec. determine the air flow 63.1573(a)(1).

      rate using control room instruments every 15 minutes during the entire period of the initial performance test. Determine and record the hourly average rate of all the readings. Determine and record the maximum gas flow rate using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.1573. 3. Internal scrubbing system or no Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the HCl control device (e.g., hot regen limit for HCl

      parameter monitoring concentration in the system) meeting HCl outlet

      concentration.

      system.

      catalyst regenerator concentration limit.

      exhaust gas using the colormetric tube sampling system at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average HCl concentration for each test run. Determine and record the average HCl concentration for the overall source test from the recorded test run averages. Determine and record the operating limit for HCl concentration using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.1567. 4. Internal scrubbing system

      a. Establish operating i. Data from

      Measure and record the pH meeting HCl percent reduction

      limit for pH level or continuous parameter alkalinity of the water standard.

      alkalinity.

      monitoring system. (or scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system every 15 minutes during the entire period of the performance test. Determine and record the minimum hourly average pH or alkalinity level from the recorded values. ii. Alternative pH Measure and in record pH of method in Sec.

      the water (or scrubbing 63.1573(b)(1).

      liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system during coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation using pH strips at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average pH level for each test run. Determine and record the minimum test run average pH level. iii. Alternative

      Measure and record the alkalinity method in alkalinity water (or Sec. 63.1573(b)(2). scrubbing liquid) exiting the internal scrubbing system during coke burn- off and catalyst rejuvenation using discrete titration at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average alkalinity level for each test run. Determine and record the minimum test run average alkalinity level. b. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the gas limit for liquid-to- parameter monitoring entering or exiting the gas ratio.

      systems.

      internal scrubbing system and the total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate entering the internal scrubbing system every 15 minutes during the entire period of the performance test. Determine and record the hourly average gas flow rate and total water (or scrubbing liquid) flow rate. Determine and record the minimum liquid-to-gas ratio from the recorded, paired values. 5. Fixed-bed gas-solid adsorption a. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the system. Gas-solid.

      limit for temperature. parameter monitoring temperature of gas system.

      entering or exiting the adsorption system every 15 minutes. Determine and record the maximum hourly average temperature.

      [[Page 6959]]

      b. Establish operating i. Data from

      (1) Measure and record the limit for HCl

      continuous parameter HCl concentration in the concentration.

      monitoring systems. exhaust gas from the fixed- bed adsorption system using the colormetric tube sampling system at least three times during each test run. Determine and record the average HCl concentration for each test run. Determine and record the average HCl concentration for the overall source test from the recorded test run averages. (2) If you elect to comply with the HCl outlet concentration limit (Option 2), determine and record the operating limit for HCl concentration using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.1567. If you elect to comply with the HCl percent reduction standard (Option 1), determine and record the operating limit for HCl concentration using Equation 5 of Sec. 63.1567. 6. Moving-bed gas-solid adsorption a. Establish operating Data from continuous Measure and record the system (e.g., ChlorsorbTM System). limit for temperature. parameter monitoring temperature of gas systems.

      entering or exiting the adsorption system every 15 minutes. Determine and record the maximum hourly average temperature. b. Measure the

      Determination of Metal Measure and record the chloride level on the Concentration on

      chloride concentration of sorbent entering and Catalyst Particles the sorbent material exiting the

      (Instrumental

      entering and exiting the adsorption system. Analyzer Procedure) adsorption system at least in appendix A to

      three times during each subpart UUU; or EPA test run. Determine and Method 5050 combined record the average weight either with EPA

      percent chloride Method 9056, or with concentration of the EPA Method 9253; or sorbent entering the EPA Method 9212 with adsorption system for each the soil extraction test run. Determine and procedures listed record the average weight within the method.\1\ percent chloride concentration of the sorbent exiting the adsorption system for each test run.

      \1\ The EPA Methods 5050, 9056, 9212 and 9253 are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. These methods are also available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.

      0 29. Table 26 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 26 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance with Inorganic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(b)(4), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You have For the following demonstrated For . . .

      emission limit . . initial compliance .

      if . . .

   1. Each existing semi-

      Reduce

      Average emissions regenerative catalytic

      uncontrolled

      HCl measured reforming unit.

      emissions of HCl using Method 26 by 92 percent by or 26A, as weight or to a applicable, over concentration of the period of the 30 ppmv, (dry performance test, basis), corrected are reduced by 92 to 3 percent

      percent or to a oxygen.

      concentration less than or equal to 30 ppmv (dry basis) corrected to 3 percent oxygen. 2. Each existing cyclic or

      Reduce

      Average emissions continuous catalytic reforming uncontrolled

      of HCl measured unit and each new semi-

      emissions of HCl using Method 26 regenerative, cyclic, or

      by 97 percent by or 26A, as continuous catalytic reforming weight or to a applicable, over unit.

      concentration of the period of the 10 ppmv (dry

      performance test, basis), corrected are reduced by 97 to 3 percent

      percent or to a oxygen.

      concentration less than or equal to 10 ppmv (dry basis) corrected to 3 percent oxygen.

      [[Page 6960]]

      0 30. Table 27 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 27 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Inorganic HAP Emission Limits for Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall demonstrate continuous For this emission compliance during For . . .

      limit . . . coke burn-off and catalyst rejuvenation by . . .

   1. Each existing semi-

      Reduce

      Maintaining a 92 regenerative catalytic

      uncontrolled

      percent HCl reforming unit.

      emissions of HCl emission by 92 percent by reduction or an weight or to a HCl concentration concentration of no more than 30 30 ppmv (dry

      ppmv (dry basis), basis), corrected corrected to 3 to 3 percent

      percent oxygen. oxygen.. 2. Each existing cyclic or

      Reduce

      Maintaining a 97 continuous catalytic reforming uncontrolled

      percent HCl unit.

      emissions of HCl control by 97 percent by efficiency or an weight or to a HCl concentration concentration of no more than 10 10 ppmv (dry

      ppmv (dry basis), basis), corrected corrected to 3 to 3 percent

      percent oxygen. oxygen. 3. Each new semi-regenerative, Reduce

      Maintaining a 97 cyclic, or continuous catalytic uncontrolled

      percent HCl reforming unit.

      emissions of HCl control by 97 percent by efficiency or an weight or to a HCl concentration concentration of no more than 10 10 ppmv (dry

      ppmv (dry basis), basis), corrected corrected to 3 to 3 percent

      percent oxygen. oxygen.

      0 31. Table 28 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 28 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits for Inorganic Hap Emissions From Catalytic Reforming Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1567(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall demonstrate For each new and existing

      continuous catalytic reforming unit For this operating compliance during using this type of control

      limit . . .

      coke burn-off and device or system . . .

      catalyst rejuvenation by . . .

   1. Wet scrubber............. a. The daily average Collecting the pH or alkalinity of hourly and daily the water (or

      average pH or scrubbing liquid) alkalinity exiting the

      monitoring data scrubber must not according to Sec. fall below the

      63.1572 \1\; and level established maintaining the during the

      daily average pH or performance test. alkalinity above the operating limit established during the performance test. b. The daily average Collecting the liquid-to-gas ratio hourly average gas must not fall below flow rate \2\ and the level

      total water (or established during scrubbing liquid) the performance flow rate test.

      monitoring data according to Sec. 63.1572; and determining and recording the hourly average liquid-to-gas ratio; and determining and recording the daily average liquid-to- gas ratio; and maintaining the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio above the limit established during the performance test. 2. Internal scrubbing system The daily average Measuring and or no control device (e.g., HCl concentration recording the HCl hot regen system) meeting in the catalyst concentration at HCl concentration limit. regenerator exhaust least 4 times gas must not exceed during a the limit

      regeneration cycle established during (equally spaced in the performance time) or every 4 test.

      hours, whichever is more frequent, using a colormetric tube sampling system; calculating the daily average HCl concentration as an arithmetic average of all samples collected in each 24-hour period from the start of the coke burn-off cycle or for the entire duration of the coke burn-off cycle if the coke burn- off cycle is less than 24 hours; and maintaining the daily average HCl concentration below the applicable operating limit. 3. Internal scrubbing system a. The daily average Collecting the meeting percent HCl

      pH or alkalinity of hourly and daily reduction standard.

      the water (or

      average pH or scrubbing liquid) alkalinity exiting the

      monitoring data internal scrubbing according to Sec. system must not 63.1572 \1\ and fall below the

      maintaining the limit established daily average pH or during the

      alkalinity above performance test. the operating limit established during the performance test. b. The daily average Collecting the liquid-to-gas ratio hourly average gas must not fall below flow rate \2\ and the level

      total water (or established during scrubbing liquid) the performance flow rate test.

      monitoring data according to Sec. 63.1572; and determining and recording the hourly average liquid-to-gas ratio; and determining and recording the daily average liquid-to- gas ratio; and maintaining the daily average liquid-to-gas ratio above the limit established during the performance test.

      [[Page 6961]]

   4. Fixed-bed gas-solid

      a. The daily average Collecting the adsorption systems.

      temperature of the hourly and daily gas entering or average temperature exiting the

      monitoring data adsorption system according to Sec. must not exceed the 63.1572; and limit established maintaining the during the

      daily average performance test. temperature below the operating limit established during the performance test. b. The HCl

      Measuring and concentration in recording the the exhaust gas concentration of from the fixed-bed HCl weekly or gas-solid

      during each adsorption system regeneration cycle, must not exceed the whichever is less limit established frequent, using a during the

      colormetric tube performance test. sampling system at a point within the adsorbent bed not to exceed 90 percent of the total length of the adsorption bed during coke-burn- off and catalyst rejuvenation; implementing procedures in the operating and maintenance plan if the HCl concentration at the sampling location within the adsorption bed exceeds the operating limit; and maintaining the HCl concentration in the gas from the adsorption system below the applicable operating limit. 5. Moving-bed gas-solid a. The daily average Collecting the adsorption system (e.g., temperature of the hourly and daily ChlorsorbTM System.

      gas entering or average temperature exiting the

      monitoring data adsorption system according to Sec. must not exceed the 63.1572; and limit established maintaining the during the

      daily average performance test. temperature below the operating limit established during the performance test. b. The weekly

      Collecting samples average chloride of the sorbent level on the

      exiting the sorbent entering adsorption system the adsorption

      three times per system must not week (on non- exceed the design consecutive days); or manufacturer's and analyzing the recommended limit samples for total (1.35 weight

      chloride \3\; and percent for the determining and ClorsorbTM.

      recording the weekly average chloride concentration; and maintaining the chloride concentration below the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.35 weight percent for the ChlorsorbTM System). c. The weekly

      Collecting samples average chloride of the sorbent level on the

      exiting the sorbent exiting the adsorption system adsorption system three times per must not exceed the week (on non- design or

      consecutive days); manufacturer's

      and analyzing the recommended limit samples for total (1.8 weight percent chloride for the ClorsorbTM concentration; and System).

      determining and recording the weekly average chloride concentration; and maintaining the chloride concentration below the design or manufacturer's recommended limit (1.8 weight percent ChlorsorbTM System).

      \1\ If applicable, you can use either alternative in Sec. 63.1573(b) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for pH or alkalinity if you used the alternative method in the initial performance test. \2\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for the gas flow rate or cumulative volume of gas entering or exiting the system if you used the alternative method in the initial performance test. \3\ The total chloride concentration of the sorbent material must be measured by the procedure, ``Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)'' in appendix A to this subpart; or by using EPA Method 5050, Bomb Preparation Method for Solid Waste, combined either with EPA Method 9056, Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion Chromatography, or with EPA Method 9253, Chloride (Titrimetric, Silver Nitrate); or by using EPA Method 9212, Potentiometric Determination of Chloride in Aqueous Samples with Ion- Selective Electrode, and using the soil extraction procedures listed within the method. The EPA Methods 5050, 9056, 9212 and 9253 are included in ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). The SW-846 and Updates (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800; and from the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4650. Copies may be inspected at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. These methods are also available at http://www.epa.gov/ epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm.

      0 32. Table 31 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising entry 1 and 3 as follows:

      [[Page 6962]]

      Table 31 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Monitoring Systems for HAP Emissions From Sulfur Recovery Units * * * * *

      You shall install and operate this For . . .

      For this limit . . .

      continuous monitoring system . . .

   1. Each new or existing Claus sulfur a. 250 ppmv (dry basis) of SO2 at Continuous emission monitoring recovery unit part of a sulfur

      zero percent excess air if you use system to measure and record the recovery plant of 20 long tons per an oxidation or reduction control hourly average concentration of SO2 day or more and subject to the NSPS system followed by incineration. (dry basis) at zero percent excess for sulfur oxides in 40 CFR

      air for each exhaust stack. This 60.104(a)(2).

      system must include an oxygen monitor for correcting the data for excess air. b. 300 ppmv of reduced sulfur

      Continuous emission monitoring compounds calculated as ppmv SO2 system to measure and record the (dry basis) at zero percent excess hourly average concentration of air if you use a reduction control reduced sulfur and oxygen (O2) system without incineration.

      emissions. Calculate the reduced sulfur emissions as SO2 (dry basis) at zero percent excess air. Exception: You can use an instrument having an air or SO2 dilution and oxidation system to convert the reduced sulfur to SO2 for continuously monitoring and recording the concentration (dry basis) at zero percent excess air of the resultant SO2 instead of the reduced sulfur monitor. The monitor must include an oxygen monitor for correcting the data for excess oxygen.

      * * * * * * * 3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each new or 300 ppmv of total reduced sulfur i. Continuous emission monitoring existing sulfur recovery unit

      (TRS) compounds, expressed as an system to measure and record the (Claus or other type, regardless of equivalent SO2 concentration (dry hourly average concentration of TRS size) not subject to the NSPS for basis) at zero percent oxygen.

      for each exhaust stack; this sulfur oxides in 40 CFR

      monitor must include an oxygen 60.104(a)(2).

      monitor for correcting the data for excess oxygen; or ii. Continuous parameter monitoring systems to measure and record the combustion zone temperature of each thermal incinerator and the oxygen content (percent, dry basis) in the vent stream of the incinerator.

      0 33. Table 33 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 33 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With HAP Emission Limits for Sulfur Recovery Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1568(b)(5), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You have For . . .

      For the following demonstrated initial emission limit . . . compliance if . . .

   1. Each new or existing a. 250 ppmv (dry You have already Claus sulfur recovery unit basis) SO2 at zero conducted a part of a sulfur recovery percent excess air performance test to plant of 20 long tons per if you use an

      demonstrate initial day or more and subject to oxidation or

      compliance with the the NSPS for sulfur oxides reduction control NSPS and each 12- in 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by hour rolling incineration.

      average concentration of SO2 emissions measured by the continuous emission monitoring system is less than or equal to 250 ppmv (dry basis) at zero percent excess air. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your vent meets the SO2 limit. You are not required to do another performance test to demonstrate initial compliance. You have already conducted a performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable performance specification. As part of your Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your continuous emission monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572. You are not required to do another performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance.

      [[Page 6963]]

      b. 300 ppmv of

      You have already reduced sulfur

      conducted a compounds

      performance test to calculated as ppmv demonstrate initial SO2 (dry basis) at compliance with the zero percent excess NSPS and each 12- air if you use a hour rolling reduction control average system without

      concentration of incineration.

      reduced sulfur compounds measured by your continuous emission monitoring system is less than or equal to 300 ppmv, calculated as ppmv SO2 (dry basis) at zero percent excess air. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your vent meets the SO2 limit. You are not required to do another performance test to demonstrate initial compliance. You have already conducted a performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable performance specification. As part of your Notification of Compliance Status, you must certify that your continuous emission monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572. You are not required to do another performance evaluation to demonstrate initial compliance. 2. Option 1: Elect NSPS. a. 250 ppmv (dry Each 12-hour rolling Each new or existing sulfur basis) of SO2 at average recovery unit (Claus or zero percent excess concentration of other type, regardless of air if you use an SO2 emissions size) not subject to the oxidation or

      measured by the NSPS for sulfur oxides in reduction control continuous emission 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2).

      system followed by monitoring system incineration.

      during the initial performance test is less than or equal to 250 ppmv (dry basis) at zero percent excess air; and your performance evaluation shows the monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572. b. 300 ppmv of

      Each 12-hour rolling reduced sulfur

      average compounds

      concentration of calculated as ppmv reduced sulfur SO2 (dry basis) at compounds measured zero percent excess by the continuous air if you use a emission monitoring reduction control system during the system without

      initial performance incineration.

      test is less than or equal to 300 ppmv, calculated as ppmv SO2 (dry basis) at zero percent excess air; and your performance evaluation shows the continuous emission monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572. 3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each 300 ppmv of TRS If you use new or existing sulfur

      compounds expressed continuous recovery unit (Claus or as an equivalent parameter other type, regardless of SO2 concentration monitoring systems, size) not subject to the (dry basis) at zero the average NSPS for sulfur oxides in percent oxygen. concentration of 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2).

      TRS emissions measured using Method 15 during the initial performance test is less than or equal to 300 ppmv expressed as equivalent SO2 concentration (dry basis) at zero percent oxygen. If you use a continuous emission monitoring system, each 12-hour rolling average concentration of TRS emissions measured by the continuous emission monitoring system during the initial performance test is less than or equal to 300 ppmv expressed as an equivalent SO2 (dry basis) at zero percent oxygen; and your performance evaluation shows the continuous emission monitoring system meets the applicable requirements in Sec. 63.1572.

      0 34. Table 34 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      [[Page 6964]]

      Table 34 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With HAP Emission Limits for Sulfur Recovery Units [As stated in Sec. 63.1568(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      You shall For this emission

      demonstrate For . . .

      limit . . .

      continuous compliance by . . .

   1. Each new or existing a. 250 ppmv (dry Collecting the Claus sulfur recovery unit basis) of SO2 at hourly average SO2 part of a sulfur recovery zero percent excess monitoring data plant of 20 long tons per air if you use an (dry basis, percent day or more and subject to oxidation or

      excess air) the NSPS for sulfur oxides reduction control according to Sec. in 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2). system followed by 63.1572; incineration.

      determining and recording each 12- hour rolling average concentration of SO2; maintaining each 12-hour rolling average concentration of SO2 at or below the applicable emission limitation; and reporting any 12- hour rolling average concentration of SO2 greater than the applicable emission limitation in the compliance report required by Sec. 63.1575. b. 300 ppmv of

      Collecting the reduced sulfur

      hourly average compounds

      reduced sulfur (and calculated as ppmv air or O2 dilution SO2 (dry basis) at and oxidation) zero percent excess monitoring data air if you use a according to Sec. reduction control 63.1572; system without

      determining and incineration.

      recording each 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur; maintaining each 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur at or below the applicable emission limitation; and reporting any 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur greater than the applicable emission limitation in the compliance report required by Sec. 63.1575. 2. Option 1: Elect NSPS. a. 250 ppmv (dry Collecting the Each new or existing sulfur basis) of SO2 at hourly average SO2 recovery unit (Claus or zero percent excess data (dry basis, other type, regardless of air if you use an percent excess air) size) not subject to the oxidation or

      according to Sec. NSPS for sulfur oxides in reduction control 63.1572; 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2).

      system followed by determining and incineration.

      recording each 12- hour rolling average concentration of SO2; maintaining each 12-hour rolling average concentration of SO2 at or below the applicable emission limitation; and reporting any 12- hour rolling average concentration of SO2 greater than the applicable emission limitation in the compliance report required by Sec. 63.1575. b. 300 ppmv of

      Collecting the reduced sulfur

      hourly average compounds

      reduced sulfur (and calculated as ppmv air or O2 dilution SO2 (dry basis) at and oxidation) zero percent excess monitoring data air if you use a according to Sec. reduction control 63.1572; system without

      determining and incineration.

      recording each 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur; maintaining each 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur at or below the applicable emission limitation; and reporting any 12- hour rolling average concentration of reduced sulfur greater than the applicable emission limitation in the compliance report required by Sec. 63.1575. 3. Option 2: TRS limit. Each 300 ppmv of TRS i. If you use new or existing sulfur

      compounds,

      continuous recovery unit (Claus or expressed as an SO2 parameter other type, regardless of concentration (dry monitoring systems, size) not subject to the basis) at zero

      collecting the NSPS for sulfur oxides in percent oxygen or hourly average TRS 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2).

      reduced sulfur

      monitoring data compounds

      according to Sec. calculated as ppmv 63.1572 and SO2 (dry basis) at maintaining each 12- zero percent excess hour average air.

      concentration of TRS at or below the applicable emission limitation; or ii. If you use a continuous emission monitoring system, collecting the hourly average TRS monitoring data according to Sec. 63.1572, determining and recording each 12- hour rolling average concentration of TRS; maintaining each 12-hour rolling average concentration of TRS at or below the applicable emission limitation; and reporting any 12- hour rolling average TRS concentration greater than the applicable emission limitation in the compliance report required by Sec. 63.1575.

      0 35. Table 36 to subpart UUU is amended to revise entry 1 as follows:

      [[Page 6965]]

      Table 36 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Work Practice Standards for HAP Emissions From Bypass Lines

      You shall meet one of these Option

      equipment standards . . .

   1. Option 1............................ Install and operate a device (including a flow indicator, level recorder, or electronic valve position monitor) to demonstrate, either continuously or at least every hour, whether flow is present in the by bypass line. Install the device at or as near as practical to the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the vent stream away from the control device to the atmosphere.

      * * * * * * *

      0 36. Table 38 to subpart UUU is revised as follows:

      Table 38 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Work Practice Standards for HAP Emissions From Bypass Lines [As stated in Sec. 63.1569(b)(2), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      For this work

      You have Option . . .

      practice standard . demonstrated initial . .

      compliance if . . .

   1. Each new or existing a. Option 1: Install The installed bypass line associated with and operate a

      equipment operates a catalytic cracking unit, device (including a properly during catalytic reforming unit, flow indicator, each run of the or sulfur recovery unit. level recorder, or performance test electronic valve and no flow is position monitor) present in the line to demonstrate, during the test. either continuously or at least every hour, whether flow is present in bypass line. Install the device at or as near as practical to the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the vent stream away from the control device to the atmosphere. b. Option 2: Install As part of the a car-seal or lock- notification of and-key device

      compliance status, placed on the

      you certify that mechanism by which you installed the the bypass device equipment, the flow position is equipment was controlled (e.g., operational by your valve handle,

      compliance date, damper level) when and you identify the bypass device what equipment was is in the closed installed. position such that the bypass line valve cannot be opened without breaking the seal or removing the device. c. Option 3: Seal See item 1.b of this the bypass line by table. installing a solid blind between piping flanges. d. Option 4: Vent See item 1.b of this the bypass line to table. a control device that meets the appropriate requirements in this subpart.

      0 37. Table 39 to subpart UUU is amended by revising entry 1 as follows:

      Table 39 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Work Practice Standards for HAP Emissions From Bypass Lines * * * * *

      You shall demonstrate

      If you elect this standard . . . continuous compliance by . . .

   1. Option 1: Flow indicator, level Monitoring and recording on a recorder, or electronic valve position continuous basis or at least monitor.

      every hour whether flow is present in the bypass line; visually inspecting the device at least once every hour if the device is not equipped with a recording system that provides a continuous record; and recording whether the device is operating properly and whether flow is present in the bypass line.

      * * * * * * *

      0 38. Table 40 to subpart UUU is amended to revise entry 4, 5, 6, and 8 as follows:

      [[Page 6966]]

      Table 40 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems and Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems * * * * *

      This type of continuous opacity or Must meet these requirements .

      emission monitoring system . . .

      . .

      * * * * * * * 4. SO2 continuous emission monitoring Performance specification 2 (40 system for sulfur recovery unit with CFR part 60, appendix B); span oxidation control system or reduction value of 500 ppm SO2; use control system; this monitor must

      Methods 6 or 6C and 3A or 3B include an O2 monitor for correcting (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) the data for excess air.

      for certifying O2 monitor; and procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F) except relative accuracy test audits are required annually instead of quarterly. 5. Reduced sulfur and O2 continuous Performance specification 5 (40 emission monitoring system for sulfur CFR part 60, appendix B), recovery unit with reduction control except calibration drift system not followed by incineration; specification is 2.5 percent this monitor must include an O2

      of the span value instead of 5 monitor for correcting the data for percent; 450 ppm reduced excess air unless exempted.

      sulfur; use Methods 15 or 15A and 3A or 3B (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) for certifying O2monitor; if Method 3A or 3B yields O2 concentrations below 0.25 percent during the performance evaluation, the O2 concentration can be assumed to be zero and the O2 monitor is not required; and procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F), except relative accuracy test audits, are required annually instead of quarterly. 6. Instrument with an air or O2

      Performance specification 5 (40 dilution and oxidation system to

      CFR part 60, appendix B); span convert reduced sulfur to SO2 for

      value of 375 ppm SO2; use continuously monitoring the

      Methods 15 or 15A and 3A or 3B concentration of SO2 instead of

      for certifying O2 monitor; and reduced sulfur monitor and O2 monitor. procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F), except relative accuracy test audits, are required annually instead of quarterly.

      * * * * * * * 8. O2 monitor for oxygen concentration. If necessary due to interferences, locate the oxygen sensor prior to the introduction of any outside gas stream; performance specification 3 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B; and procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F), except relative accuracy test audits, are required annually instead of quarterly.

      0 39. Table 41 to Subpart UUU is revised as follows:

      Table 41 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Requirements for Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems

      [As stated in Sec. 63.1572(c)(1), you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      If you use . . .

      You shall . . .

   1. pH strips........................... Use pH strips with an accuracy of 10 percent. 2. Colormetric tube sampling system.... Use a colormetric tube sampling system with a printed numerical scale in ppmv, a standard measurement range of 1 to 10 ppmv (or 1 to 30 ppmv if applicable), and a standard deviation for measured values of no more than 15 percent. System must include a gas detection pump and hot air probe if needed for the measurement range.

      0 40. Table 44 to subpart UUU of part 63 is revised as follows:

      Table 44 to Subpart UUU of Part 63.--Applicability of NESHAP General Provisions to Subpart UUU [As stated in Sec. 63.1577, you shall meet each requirement in the following table that applies to you.]

      Citation

      Subject

      Applies to supbart UUU

      Explanation

      Sec. 63.1........................ Applicability......... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU specifies calendar or operating day. Sec. 63.2........................ Definitions........... Yes................... Sec. 63.3........................ Units and

      Yes................... Abbreviations. Sec. 63.4........................ Prohibited Activities. Yes................... Sec. 63.5(A)-(C)................. Construction and

      Yes................... In Sec. 63.5(b)(4), Reconstruction.

      replace the reference to Sec. 63.9 with Sec. 63.9(b)(4) and (5).

      [[Page 6967]]

      Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(i)............... Application for

      Yes................... Except, subpart UUU Approval of

      specifies the application Construction or

      is submitted as soon as Reconstruction--Gener

      practicable before startup al Application

      but not later than 90 days Requirements.

      (rather then 60) after the promulgation date where construction or reconstruction had commenced and initial startup had not occurred before promulgation. Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(ii).............. ...................... Yes................... Except that emission estimates specified in Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H) are not required. Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(iii)............. ...................... No.................... Subpart UUU specifies submission of notification of compliance status. Sec. 63.5(d)(2).................. ...................... No.................... Sec. 63.5(d)(3).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that Sec. 63.5(d)(3)(ii) does not apply. Sec. 63.5(d0(4).................. ...................... Yes................... Sec. 63.5(e)..................... Approval of

      Yes................... Construction or Reconstruction. Sec. 63.5(f)(1).................. Approval of Construction or Reconstruction Based on State Review. Sec. 63.5(f)(2).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that 60 days is changed to 90 days and cross-reference to 53.9(B)(2) does not apply. Sec. 63.6(a)..................... Compliance with

      Yes................... Standards and Maintenance--Applicab ility. Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4).............. Compliance Dates for Yes................... New and Reconstructed Sources. Sec. 63.6(b)(5).................. ...................... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU specifies different compliance dates for sources. Sec. 63.6(b)(6).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(b)(7).................. Compliance Dates for Yes................... New and Reconstructed Area Sources That Become Major. Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2).............. Compliance Dates for Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Existing Sources.

      specifies different compliance dates for sources subject to Tier II gasoline sulfur control requirements. Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4).............. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(c)(5).................. Compliance Dates for Yes................... Existing Area Sources That Become Major. Sec. 63.6(d)..................... [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2).............. Operation and

      Yes................... Maintenance Requirements. Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i)-(iii)......... Startup, Shutdown, and Yes................... Malfunction Plan. Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iv).............. ...................... Yes................... Except that reports of actions not consistent with plan are not required within 2 and 7 days of action but rather must be included in next periodic report. Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(v)-(viii)........ ...................... Yes................... The owner or operator is only required to keep the latest version of the plan. Sec. 63.6(f)(1)-(2)(iii)(C)...... Compliance with

      Yes................... Emission Standards. Sec. 63.6(f)(2)(iii)(D).......... ...................... No.................... Sec. 63.6(f)(2)(iv)-(v).......... ...................... Yes................... Sec. 63.6(f)(3).................. ...................... Yes................... Sec. 63.6(g)..................... Alternative Standard.. Yes................... Sec. 63.6(h)..................... Opacity/VE Standards.. Yes................... Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(i)............... Determining Compliance No.................... Subpart UUU specifies with Opacity/VE

      methods. Standards. Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(ii).............. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(iii)............. ...................... Yes................... Sec. 63.6(h)(3).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(h)(4).................. Notification of

      Yes................... Applies to Method 22 tests. Opacity/VE Observation Date. Sec. 63.6(h)(5).................. Conducting Opacity/VE No.................... Observations.

      [[Page 6968]]

      Sec. 63.6(h)(6).................. Records of Conditions Yes................... Applies to Method 22 During Opacity/VE

      observations. Observations. Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(i)............... Report COM Monitoring Yes................... Data from Performance Test. Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(ii).............. Using COM Instead of No.................... Method 9. Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iii)............. Averaging Time for COM Yes................... during Performance Test. Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iv).............. COM Requirements...... Yes................... Sec. 63.6(h)(8).................. Determining Compliance Yes................... with Opacity/VE Standards. Sec. 63.6(h)(9).................. Adjusted Opacity

      Yes................... Standard. Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)............. Extension of

      Yes................... Extension of compliance Compliance.

      under Sec. 63.6(i)(4) not applicable to a facility that installs catalytic cracking feed hydrotreating and receives an extended compliance date under Sec. 63.1563(c). Sec. 63.6(i)(15)................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.6(i)(16)................. ...................... Yes................... Sec. 63.6(j)..................... Presidential

      Yes................... Compliance Exemption. Sec. 63.7(a)(1).................. Performance Test

      Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Requirements

      specifies the applicable Applicability.

      test and demonstration procedures. Sec. 63.7(a)(2).................. Performance Test Dates No.................... Test results must be submitted in the Notification of Compliance Status report due 150 days after the compliance date. Sec. 63.7(a)(3).................. Section 114 Authority. Yes................... Sec. 63.7(b)..................... Notifications......... Yes................... Except that subpart UUU specifies notification at least 30 days prior to the scheduled test date rather than 60 days. Sec. 63.7(c)..................... Quality Assurance Yes................... Program/Site-Specific Test Plan. Sec. 63.7(d)..................... Performance Test

      Yes................... Facilities. Sec. 63.7(e)..................... Conduct of Tests...... Yes................... Sec. 63.7(f)..................... Alternative Test

      Yes................... Method. Sec. 63.7(g)..................... Data Analysis,

      Yes................... Except performance test Recordkeeping,

      reports must be submitted Reporting.

      with notification of compliance status due 150 days after the compliance date. Sec. 63.7(h)..................... Waiver of Tests

      Yes................... Sec. 63.8(a)(1).................. Monitoring

      Yes................... Requirements- Applicability. Sec. 63.8(a)(2).................. Performance

      Yes................... Specifications. Sec. 63.8(a)(3).................. [Reserved]............ Not applicable........ Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................. Monitoring with Flares Yes................... Sec. 63.8(b)(1).................. Conduct of Monitoring. Yes................... Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3).............. Multiple Effluents and Yes................... Subpart UUU specifies the Multiple Monitoring

      required monitoring Systems.

      locations. Sec. 63.8(c)(1).................. Monitoring System Yes................... Operation and Maintenance. Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i)-(ii).......... Startup, Shutdown, and Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Malfunctions.

      specifies that reports are not required if actions are consistent with the SSM plan, unless requested by the permitting authority. If actions are not consistent, actions must be described in next compliance report. Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii)............. Compliance with

      Yes................... Operation and Maintenance Requirements. Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3).............. Monitoring System Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Installation.

      specifies that for continuous parameter monitoring systems, operational status verification includes completion of manufacturer written specifications or installation, operation, and calibration of the system or other written procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment will monitor accurately. Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................. Continuous Monitoring No.................... Subpart UUU specifies System Requirements.

      operational requirements.

      [[Page 6969]]

      Sec. 63.8(c)(4)(i)-(ii).......... Continuous Monitoring Yes................... Except that these System Requirements.

      requirements apply only to a continuous opacity monitoring system or a continuous emission monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Sec. 63.8(c)(5).................. COM Minimum Procedures Yes................... Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................. CMS Requirements...... No.................... Except that these requirements apply only to a continuous opacity monitoring system or continuous emission monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8).............. CMS Requirements...... Yes................... Sec. 63.8(d)..................... Quality Control

      Yes................... Except that these Program.

      requirements apply only to a continuous opacity monitoring system or continuous emission monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Sec. 63.8(e)..................... CMS Performance

      Yes................... Except that these Evaluation.

      requirements apply only to a continuous opacity monitoring system or continuous emission monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Results are to be submitted as part of the Notification Compliance Status due 150 days after the compliance date. Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5).............. Alternative Monitoring Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Methods.

      specifies procedures for requesting alternative monitoring systems and alternative parameters. Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................. Alternative to

      Yes................... Applicable to continuous Relative Accuracy

      emission monitoring Test.

      systems if performance specification requires a relative accuracy test audit. Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(4).............. Reduction of

      Yes................... Applies to continuous Monitoring Data.

      opacity monitoring system or continuous emission monitoring system. Sec. 63.8(g)(5).................. Data Reduction........ No.................... Subpart UUU specifies requirements. Sec. 63.9(a)..................... Notification

      Yes................... Duplicate Notification of Requirements--Applica

      Compliance Status report bility.

      to the Regional Administrator may be required. Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(2), (4)-(5)..... Initial Notifications. Yes................... Except that notification of construction or reconstruction is to be submitted as soon as practicable before startup but no later than 30 days (rather than 60 days) after the effective date if construction or reconstruction had commenced but startup had not occurred before the effective date. Sec. 63.9(b)(3).................. [Reserved]............ Sec. 63.9(c)..................... Request for Extension Yes................... of Compliance. Sec. 63.9(d)..................... New Source

      Yes................... Notification for Special Compliance Requirements. Sec. 63.9(e)..................... Notification of

      Yes................... Except that notification is Performance Test.

      required at least 30 days before test. Sec. 63.9(f)..................... Notification of VE/ Yes................... Opacity Test. Sec. 63.9(g)..................... Additional

      Yes................... Except that these Notification

      requirements apply only to Requirements for

      a continuous opacity Sources with

      monitoring system or Continuous Monitoring

      continuous emission Systems.

      monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Sec. 63.9(h)..................... Notification of

      Yes................... Except that subpart UUU Compliance Status.

      specifies the notification is due no later than 150 days after compliance date. Sec. 63.9(i)..................... Adjustment of

      Yes................... Deadlines. Sec. 63.9(j)..................... Change in Previous Yes................... Information. 63. 10(a).......................... Recordkeeping and Yes................... Reporting Applicability. Sec. 63.10(b).................... Records............... Yes................... Except that Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) applies if you use a continuous emission monitoring system to meet the NSPS or you select to meet the NSPS, CO, or SO2 reduced sulfur limit and the performance evaluation requires a relative accuracy test audit.

      [[Page 6970]]

      Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6), (9)-(15)... Additional Records for Yes................... Except that these Continuous Monitoring

      requirements apply if you Systems.

      use a continuous opacity monitoring system or a continuous emission monitoring system to meet the NSPS or elect to meet the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............. Records of Excess No.................... Subpart UUU specifies Emissions and

      requirements. Exceedances. Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................. General Reporting Yes................... Requirements. Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................. Performance Test

      No.................... Subpart UUU requires Results.

      performance test results to be reported as part of the Notification of Compliance Status due 150 days after the compliance date. Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................. Opacity or VE

      Yes................... Observations. Sec. 63.10(d)(4)................. Progress Reports...... Yes................... Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).............. Startup, Shutdown, and Yes................... Except that reports are not Malfunction Reports.

      required if actions are consistent with the SSM plan, unless requested by permitting authority. Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii)............. ...................... Yes................... Except that actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are not consistent with the plan do not need to be reported within 2 and 7 days of commencing and completing the action, respectively, but must be included in the next periodic report. Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............. Additional CMS Reports Yes................... Except that these requirements apply only to a continuous opacity monitoring system or continuous emission monitoring system if you are subject to the NSPS or elect to comply with the NSPS opacity, CO, or SO2 limits. Reports of performance evaluations must be submitted in Notification of Compliance Status. Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................. Excess Emissions/CMS No.................... Subpart UUU specifies the Performance Reports.

      applicable requirements. Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................. COMS Data Reports..... Yes................... Sec. 63.10(f).................... Recordkeeping/

      Yes................... Reporting Waiver. Sec. 63.11....................... Control Device

      Yes................... Applicable to flares. Requirements. Sec. 63.13....................... Addresses............. Yes................... Sec. 63.14....................... Incorporation by

      Yes................... Reference. Sec. 63.15....................... Available of

      Yes................... Information.

      0 41. Subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by adding appendix A to read as follows:

      Appendix A To Subpart UUU of Part 63--Determination of Metal Concentration on Catalyst Particles (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

      1.0 Scope and Application.

      1.1 Analytes. The analytes for which this method is applicable include any elements with an atomic number between 11 (sodium) and 92 (uranium), inclusive. Specific analytes for which this method was developed include:

      Minimum detectable Analyte

      CAS No.

      limit

      Nickel compounds.................. 7440-02-0 0.0001 gram accuracy for weighing prepared samples (pellets).

      6.1.4 Analyzer. An XRF spectrometer to determine the analyte concentration in the prepared sample. The analyzer must meet the applicable performance specifications in section 13.

      6.1.5 Data Recorder. A digital recorder or personal computer for recording measurement data. The data recorder resolution (i.e., readability) must be 0.5 percent of span. Alternatively, a digital or analog meter having a resolution of 0.5 percent of span may be used to obtain the analyzer responses and the readings may be recorded manually.

      7.0 Reagents and Standards.

      7.1 Calibration Standards. The calibration standards for the analyzer must be prepared catalyst samples or other material of similar particle size and matrix as the catalyst samples to be tested that have known concentrations of the analytes of interest. Preparation (grinding/milling/fusion) of the calibration standards should follow the same processes used to prepare the catalyst samples to be tested. The calibration standards values must be established as the average of a minimum of three analyses using an approved EPA or ASTM method with instrument analyzer calibrations traceable to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), if available. The maximum percent deviation of the triplicate calibration standard analyses should agree within 10 percent of the average value for the triplicate analysis (see Figure 1). If the calibration analyses do not meet this criteria, the calibration standards must be re-analyzed. If unacceptable variability persists, new calibration standards must be prepared. Approved methods for the calibration standard analyses include, but are not limited to, EPA Methods 6010B, 6020, 7520, or 7521 of SW- 846.\1\ Use a minimum of four calibration standards as specified below (see Figure 1):

      7.1.1 High-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent to 80 to 100 percent of the span. The concentration of the high- range calibration standard should exceed the maximum concentration anticipated in the catalyst samples.

      7.1.2 Mid-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent to 40 to 60 percent of the span.

      7.1.3 Low-Range Calibration Standard. Concentration equivalent to 1 to 20 percent of the span. The concentration of the low-range calibration standard should be selected so that it is less than either one-forth of the applicable concentration limit or of the lowest concentration anticipated in the catalyst samples.

      7.1.4 Zero Calibration Standard. Concentration of less than 0.25 percent of the span.

      7.2 Accuracy Assessment Standard. Prepare an accuracy assessment standard and determine the ideal value for the accuracy assessment standard following the same procedures used to prepare and analyze the

      [[Page 6972]]

      calibration standards as described in section 7.1. The maximum percent deviation of the triplicate accuracy assessment standard analyses should agree within 10 percent of the average value for the triplicate analysis (see Figure 1). The concentration equivalent of the accuracy assessment standard must be between 20 and 80 percent of the span.

      7.3 Energy Calibration Standard. Generally, the energy calibration standard will be provided by the XRF instrument manufacturer for energy dispersive spectrometers. Energy calibration is performed using the manufacturer's recommended calibration standard and involves measurement of a specific energy line (based on the metal in the energy calibration standard). This is generally an automated procedure used to assure the accuracy of the energy scale. This calibration standard may not be applicable to all models of XRF spectrometers (particularly wavelength dispersive XRF spectrometers).

      8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Transport, and Storage.

      [Reserved]

      9.0 Quality Control.

      9.1 Energy Calibration. For energy dispersive spectrometers, conduct the energy calibration by analyzing the energy calibration standard provided by the manufacturer. The energy calibration involves measurement of a specific energy line (based on the metal in the energy calibration standard) and then determination of the difference between the measured peak energy value and the ideal value. This analysis, if applicable, should be performed daily prior to any sample analyses to check the instrument's energy scale. This is generally an automated procedure and assures the accuracy of the energy scale. If the energy scale calibration process is not automated, follow the manufacturer's procedures to manually adjust the instrument, as necessary.

      9.2 Zero Drift Test. Conduct the zero drift test by analyzing the analyte concentration output by the measurement system with the initial calibration value for the zero calibration standard (see Figure 2). This analysis should be performed with each set of samples analyzed.

      9.3 Calibration Drift Test. Conduct the calibration drift test by analyzing the analyte concentration output by the measurement system with the initial calibration value for the mid-range calibration standard (see Figure 2). This analysis should be performed with each set of samples analyzed.

      9.4 Analyzer Accuracy Test. Conduct the analyzer accuracy test by analyzing the accuracy assessment standard and comparing the value output by the measurement system with the ideal value for the accuracy assessment standard (see Figure 2). This analysis should be performed with each set of samples analyzed.

      10.0 Calibration and Standardization.

      10.1 Perform the initial calibration and set-up following the instrument manufacturer's instructions. These procedures should include, at a minimum, the major steps listed in sections 10.2 and 10.3. Subsequent calibrations are to be performed when either a quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) limit listed in section 13 is exceeded or when there is a change in the excitation conditions, such as a change in the tube, detector, X-ray filters, or signal processor. Calibrations are typically valid for 6 months to 1 year.

      10.2 Instrument Calibration. Calibration is performed initially with calibration standards of similar matrix and binders, if used, as the samples to be analyzed (see Figure 1).

      10.3 Reference Peak Spectra. Acquisition of reference spectra is required only during the initial calibration. As long as no processing methods have changed, these peak shape references remain valid. This procedure consists of placing the standards in the instrument and acquiring individual elemental spectra that are stored in the method file with each of the analytical conditions. These reference spectra are used in the standard deconvolution of the unknown spectra.

      11.0 Analytical Procedure.

      11.1 Sample Preparation. Prepare catalyst samples using the same procedure used to prepare the calibration standards. Measure and record the weight of sample used. Measure and record the amount of binder, if any, used. Pellets or films must be of sufficient size to cover the analyzer sample window.

      11.2 Sample Analyses. Place the prepared catalyst samples into the analyzer. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for analyzing the samples.

      11.3 Record and Store Data. Use a digital recorder or personal computer to record and store results for each sample. Record any mechanical or software problems encountered during the analysis.

      12.0 Data Analysis and Calculations.

      Carry out the following calculations, retaining at least one extra significant figure beyond that of the acquired data. Round off figures after final calculation.

      12.1 Drift. Calculate the zero and calibration drift for the tests described in sections 9.2 and 9.3 (see also Figure 2) as follows:

      [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.010

      Where: CurrentAnalyzerCal.Response = Instrument response for current QC sample analyses; InitialCal.Response = Initial instrument response for calibration standard; QC Value = QC metric (zero drift or calibration drift), percent of span; Span = Span of the monitoring system.

      12.2 Analyzer Accuracy. Calculate the analyzer accuracy error for the tests described in section 9.4 (see also Figure 2) as follows:

      [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09FE05.011

      Where:

      Accuracy Value = Percent difference of instrument response to the ideal response for the accuracy assessment standard; CurrentAnalyzerCal.Response = Instrument response for current QC sample analyses; IdealCal.Response = Ideal instrument response for the accuracy assessment standard.

      13.0 Method Performance.

      13.1 Analytical Range. The analytical range is determined by the instrument design. For this method, a portion of the analytical range is selected by choosing the span of the monitoring system. The span of the monitoring system must be selected such that it encompasses the range of concentrations anticipated to occur in the catalyst sample. If applicable, the span must be selected such that the analyte concentration equivalent to the emission standard is not less than 30 percent of the span. If the measured analyte concentration exceeds the concentration of the high-range calibration standard, the sample analysis is considered invalid. Additionally, if the measured analyte concentration is less than the concentration of the low-range calibration standard but above the detectable limit, the sample analysis results must be flagged with a footnote stating, in effect, that the analyte was detected but that the reported concentration is below the lower quantitation limit.

      13.2 Minimum Detectable Limit. The minimum detectable limit depends on the signal-to-noise ratio of the measurement system. For a well-designed system, the minimum detectable limit should be less than 2 percent of the span.

      [[Page 6973]]

      13.3 Zero Drift. Less than 2 percent of the span.

      13.4 Calibration Drift. Less than 5 percent of the span.

      13.5 Analyzer Accuracy Error. Less than 10 percent.

      14.0 Pollution Prevention. [Reserved]

      15.0 Waste Management. [Reserved]

      16.0 Alternative Procedures. [Reserved]

      17.0 References.

   1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods. EPA Publication No. SW-846, Revision 5 (April 1998). Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.

      18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data.

      Date:

      Analytic Method Used:

      Zero \a\

      Low-Range \b\

      Mid-Range \c\

      High-Range \d\

      Accuracy Std \e\

      Sample Run:........................

   3. Average............................ Maximum Percent Deviation .........

      \a\ Average must be less than 0.25 percent of span. \b\ Average must be 1 to 20 percent of span. \c\ Average must be 40 to 60 percent of span. \d\ Average must be 80 to 100 percent of span. \e\ Average must be 20 to 80 percent of span.

      Figure 1. Data Recording Sheet for Analysis of Calibration Samples.

      Source Identification:

      Run Number:

      Test Personnel:

      Span:

      Date:

      Current Initial

      analyzer Drift (percent calibration calibration of span) response

      response

      Zero Standard................................................... Mid-range Standard..............................................

      Current Ideal

      analyzer Accuracy error calibration calibration (percent of response

      response

      ideal)

      Accuracy Standard...............................................

      Figure 2. Data Recording Sheet for System Calibration Drift Data.

      [FR Doc. 05-2308 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 am]

      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P