[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82414-82451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22380]
[[Page 82413]]
Vol. 89
Thursday,
No. 197
October 10, 2024
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 82
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Updates Related to the Use of Ozone-
Depleting Substances as Process Agents; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 197 / Thursday, October 10, 2024 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 82414]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0707; FRL-9603-02-OAR]
RIN 2060-AV65
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Updates Related to the Use of
Ozone-Depleting Substances as Process Agents
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action establishes recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for uses of ozone-depleting substances as process agents
and updates related definitions. Codified recordkeeping and reporting
requirements will provide clear notice of information the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency collects, aggregates, and reports each
year on behalf of the United States as a party to the Montreal Protocol
on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; effectively monitor these
narrow uses in a more routine and consistent manner under the Clean Air
Act; and enhance understanding of emissions of substances harmful to
the stratospheric ozone layer.
DATES: This final rule is effective on November 12, 2024. The
incorporation by reference (IBR) of certain publications listed in the
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November
12, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2022-0707. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly available, e.g., confidential
information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard-copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Feather, Stratospheric Protection
Division, Office of Atmospheric Protection (Mail Code 6205A),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-1230; or email address:
[email protected]. You may also visit EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/ozone-layer-protection for further information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' ``the Agency,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Acronyms
that are used in this rulemaking that may be helpful include:
ASME--American Society of Mechanical Engineers
CAA--Clean Air Act
CEMS--continuous emissions monitoring system
CFC--chlorofluorocarbon
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CRA--Congressional Review Act
EPA--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FOIA--Freedom of Information Act
FTIR--Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
GHGRP--Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
HCFC--hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC--hydrofluorocarbon
IBR--incorporation by reference
ICR--Information Collection Request
NAICS--North American Industry Classification System
NARA--National Archives and Records Administration
ODP--ozone depletion potential
ODS--ozone-depleting substances
PRA--Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
SISNOSE--Significant Economic Impact on a Substantial Number of
Small Entities
TEAP--Technology and Economic Assessment Panel
TRI--Toxics Release Inventory
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. What action is the Agency taking?
C. What is EPA's authority for this action?
II. Background
A. EPA's Phaseout of ODS
B. ODS Used as Process Agents
C. EPA's Treatment of ODS Process Agents
III. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
A. One-Time Report
B. Annual Report
C. Advance Notice of Changes Report
D. Emissions Reporting Methodology
E. Recordkeeping
IV. How will EPA treat ODS process agent data collected under this
action?
A. Background on Determinations of Whether Information Is
Entitled to Treatment as Confidential Information
B. Data Elements To Be Reported to EPA Under This Action
V. Definitions
VI. Costs and Benefits
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and
Incorporation by Reference
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations and Executive Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation's
Commitment to Environmental Justice for All
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you use ozone-
depleting substances \1\ (ODS) as process agents. Potentially affected
categories, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes, and examples of potentially affected entities include Industrial
Gas Manufacturing (NAICS code 325120), Other Basic Inorganic Chemical
Manufacturing (NAICS code 325180), and All Other Basic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing (NAICS code 325199).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purposes of this preamble, EPA uses ``ozone-
depleting substance'' and ``controlled substance'' interchangeably.
Both terms are intended to have the same meaning as ``controlled
substance'' as defined in 40 CFR 82.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this section could also
be affected. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity,\2\ consult the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In certain instances EPA may use the terms ``entity,''
``person,'' and ``company'' interchangeably. Because EPA anticipates
that the parties that use process agents are companies or other
entities, the Agency uses these terms to refer to regulated parties
in the rule. Using this shorthand, however, does not alter the
applicability of the Clean Air Act (CAA)'s or regulation's
requirements and prohibitions. Similarly, in certain instances EPA
may use these terms interchangeably in this rule preamble, but such
differences in terminology should not be viewed to carry a material
distinction in how EPA interprets or is planning to apply the
requirements discussed herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What action is the Agency taking?
This action is narrow in scope and primarily codifies reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for a limited number of chemical
manufacturing facilities. EPA annually
[[Page 82415]]
collects process agent consumption and emissions information. In this
action, the Agency is codifying reporting requirements to collect this
information, including a methodology to calculate emissions. EPA is
also defining the term ``process agent,'' revising definitions of
``plant'' and ``facility'' to better reflect current practice, and
establishing definitions associated with the emission reporting
requirements.
C. What is EPA's authority for this action?
Several sections of the CAA provide authority for this action. In
particular, section 603 provides authority to establish monitoring and
reporting requirements for controlled substances. EPA also relies on
its authority under section 114 of the CAA, which authorizes the EPA
Administrator to establish recordkeeping and reporting requirements in
carrying out any provision of the CAA (with certain exceptions that do
not apply here). Sections 604 and 605 of the CAA provide the authority
to phase out the production and consumption of class I and class II
controlled substances, to restrict the use of class I and class II
controlled substances, and to promulgate regulations associated with
the production of class I and class II controlled substances. EPA's
regulations implementing the production and consumption controls for
class I and class II controlled substances, including provisions
implementing exceptions to those controls, can be found at 40 CFR part
82, subpart A. Additional authority for electronic reporting, as
required under provisions in 40 CFR 82.13(c) and 82.24(a)(1) comes from
the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (44 U.S.C. 3504), which
provides ``(1) for the option of the electronic maintenance,
submission, or disclosure of information, when practicable as a
substitute for paper; and (2) for the use and acceptance of electronic
signatures, when practicable.''
II. Background
A. EPA's Phaseout of ODS
In 1987, the United States joined 23 other countries and the
European Union to sign the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete
the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol) and the United States ratified the
Montreal Protocol on April 21, 1988. This international treaty protects
and restores the stratospheric ozone layer by phasing out the
production and consumption of certain ODS including chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs), halons, methyl bromide, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs).
The Montreal Protocol and its parent treaty, the Vienna Convention for
the Protection of the Ozone Layer, are the first international treaties
to achieve the distinction of having been joined by all countries of
the United Nations. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 added title VI
on Stratospheric Ozone Protection. Under the CAA and EPA's regulations
at 40 CFR part 82, controls are in place that restrict the production
and consumption of ODS to implement the phaseout of these substances.
Title VI establishes two classes of controlled ODS: class I and class
II controlled substances. Class I controlled substances, i.e., CFCs,
halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and
hydrobromofluorocarbons, have higher ozone depletion potentials (ODPs)
and were phased out ahead of class II controlled substances. Class II
controlled substances consist only of HCFCs--which have lower ODPs than
class I controlled substances--and in many cases acted as transitional
substitutes for many class I controlled substances. While existing
regulations allow for limited production and consumption of two HCFCs
(HCFC-123 and HCFC-124) until 2030, all others have been phased out in
the United States. For both class I and class II controlled substances,
there are limited exceptions, such as the exclusion from the definition
of ``production'' in 40 CFR 84.3 for controlled substances that are
either manufactured and subsequently transformed, i.e., for feedstock
uses,\3\ or destroyed by approved destruction technologies.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA considers terms related to ``transformation'' and
``feedstock uses'' to be interchangeable for the purposes of this
preamble.
\4\ Approved destruction technologies are listed at 40 CFR 82.3
``Destruction.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. ODS Used as Process Agents
Process agents are generally understood to be used to create an
environment for another process to occur, without themselves being
transformed or destroyed during that process. The process agent is not
consumed in the reaction, though trace quantities of the process agent
may remain in the final product. Certain quantities may also be
emitted. For the purposes of this rulemaking, EPA uses the terms
``controlled substance used as a process agent'', ``ODS process
agent'', and ``process agent'' interchangeably. The Agency also uses
the term ``consumed'' in this context to mean ``used up'' or
transformed.
After initial use, process agents may be reused (with or without
recycling), used in transformation reactions, or destroyed. While
process agents are generally reused, additional process agents may need
to be introduced to replenish losses due to transformation,
destruction, emission, or being present in trace quantities in the
chemical substance being manufactured. Emissions can be reduced through
limiting process agent losses (e.g., mitigate fugitive emissions or
capture process agents for further use or destruction) and by directly
abating process agent emissions. Technology resulting in zero-emission
uses of process agents have increasingly been adopted over time.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ United Nations Environment Programme, Medical and Chemicals
Technical Options Committee, 2022 Assessment Report. https://ozone.unep.org/system/files/documents/MCTOC-Assessment-Report-2022.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. EPA's Treatment of ODS Process Agents
Some legacy uses of ODS as process agents continue, in particular
where substitutes or alternative processes may not be currently viable,
and the Agency annually requests, collects, and reviews information on
these uses. This is in line with decisions under the Montreal Protocol
to allow the continued use of ODS as process agents under specified
situations. The parties to the Montreal Protocol agreed in decision X/
14 to except quantities of ODS produced or imported for use as process
agents from the general requirements to phase out production and
consumption of controlled ODS.\6\ EPA annually prepares information
derived from submissions to the Agency on process agent uses in the
United States and submits this information to the Montreal Protocol's
Ozone Secretariat on behalf of the United States, consistent with
decisions taken by the parties to the Montreal Protocol. On October 19,
2023, EPA proposed to establish recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for uses of ODS as process agents and to update
definitions to reflect current practice (88 FR 72027). These codified
requirements were proposed to monitor process agent uses in a more
routine and consistent manner under the Clean Air Act; and enhance
understanding of emissions of substances harmful to the stratospheric
ozone layer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://ozone.unep.org/treaties/montreal-protocol/meetings/tenth-meeting-parties/decisions/decision-x14-process-agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
EPA is establishing one-time, annual, and situational reporting for
entities that use ODS as process agents, a
[[Page 82416]]
methodology to estimate emissions, and associated recordkeeping
requirements. These requirements will improve the Agency's
understanding of process agent uses, efforts to monitor changes that
occur over time, and anticipate future changes. Codified recordkeeping
and reporting requirements will provide clear and consistent notice of
the information EPA will collect each year in order to report
consistent with decisions taken by the parties to the Montreal
Protocol. These requirements will also further clarify how companies
treat and report ODS process agent uses. The Agency is establishing
these reporting and recordkeeping requirements for both class I and
class II controlled substances that may be used as process agents.
These requirements apply to all controlled substances used as process
agents, regardless of whether the process agent uses are listed in
decisions under the Montreal Protocol.\7\ These reports must be
submitted electronically through the Central Data Exchange or another
format specified by EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA encourages entities to contact the Agency for an
applicability determination if it is unclear whether a given use of
a controlled substance meets EPA's criteria of a process agent use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA understands that uses in the United States of ODS as process
agents are primarily in legacy processes at existing facilities. Based
on the information reported and reviewed by the Ozone Secretariat, as
well as the discussions held at Montreal Protocol meetings, the United
States is one of a few countries that continue to use controlled
substances as process agents. The additional recordkeeping and
reporting requirements established in this action will support EPA's
efforts to assess use of controlled substances as process agents,
prepare and report associated information supporting continued need for
excepted uses where appropriate, and ensure there is clarity and
consistency in reporting on emissions of ODS used as process agents.
This reporting will allow EPA to effectively monitor these narrow
process agent uses in a more routine and consistent manner under CAA
section 603, and ensure the Agency is accurately documenting production
and consumption of class I and class II controlled substances
consistent with the limits established under CAA sections 604 and 605.
A. One-Time Report
To establish a baseline set of information from which EPA can
monitor potential changes over time, EPA is generally finalizing as
proposed the one-time reporting requirements, with the additional
reported data element of the percentage of process agent consumed in
the process agent application. The Agency proposed that any facility
that uses a controlled substance as a process agent must submit a one-
time report. This report must be submitted within 120 days of October
10, 2024, or within 120 days of the date that a facility first uses a
controlled substance as a process agent, whichever is later, and is
required regardless of whether an entity has provided this information
to EPA previously.
EPA proposed that this one-time report include information
concerning the controlled substance being used as a process agent; a
mass balance describing where, how, and how much of the controlled
substance is used and emitted; if relevant, where, how, and how much of
the controlled substance is transformed, destroyed, or otherwise
captured; data on how much controlled substance was used in the last
year and what it was used to produce (e.g., another chemical or
product); air emissions from stack point sources, fugitive sources, and
total air emissions; actions taken or under evaluation to phase out use
of ODS as a process agent (e.g., by transitioning to a non-ozone
depleting alternative); actions taken or under evaluation to minimize
process agent use or emissions; and the location of the facility using
the process agent.
One commenter requested that EPA remove from the reporting
requirements the data elements relating to the percentages of class I
controlled substances used as a process agent and retained within the
process agent application, recovered after the process agent
application, and emitted or entrained in the final product. The
commenter stated that this baseline information on process agent use is
unnecessary because the information would already be provided in the
use, volume, and emission data in the annual reports. The commenter
further stated that it produces controlled substances for other uses in
addition to use as a process agent, and that reporting this baseline
information would require a facility to include information associated
with all controlled substance production. The commenter stated that
process agent use could be a small percentage of overall production,
market conditions that drive overall production do not provide a
reliable baseline, and reporting on overall production could compromise
confidential information associated with manufacturing processes.
Alternatively, the commenter requested that EPA consider this reporting
to be confidential and that process knowledge be allowed to serve as
the basis for the information requested.
In response, EPA does not agree that reporting elements concerning
the percentages of process agent used are unnecessary and would
disclose confidential information. Details of the percentages of
process agents used will provide EPA information on how other reported
information relate to typical chemical manufacturing pathways and may
be relevant to future Agency considerations. It is not evident how EPA
may identify these values from the aggregated quantities of use,
volume, and emission data that entities will report. Considering the
variety of internal processes, process cycles, and potential pathways,
it is not feasible for EPA to reliably derive the information the
Agency is seeking from the data otherwise provided in annual reports.
EPA is also not requiring that facilities include in their annual
reporting the amounts retained within the process or entrained in the
product. The Agency is requiring that this information be included in
the one-time reporting to ensure that this process information may be
understood within the context of other reported data. Furthermore,
these data elements provide useful information that will help address a
recommendation from another commenter, discussed in section V of this
preamble, concerning what quantities typically remain in a final
product. As also discussed in section V of this preamble, EPA is
further adding a requirement that the percentage of process agent
consumed in the process agent application be included in this one-time
report. Information on these data elements from the one-time reports
will be relevant to Agency considerations of what may be appropriate
thresholds for determining if a use meets the definition of ``process
agent'' codified in this action at 40 CFR 82.3. EPA further understands
that the commenter misunderstood this information as being intended to
apply across overall production of the given controlled substances
instead of the proportion used as process agents. The relevant data
elements were, of the amount of controlled substance used as a process
agent, what percentages were respectively retained, recovered, emitted,
or entrained. These representative percentages of process agent use
through a cycle of the process agent application are not relevant to
the commenter's concerns that reporting on the overall production may
not provide
[[Page 82417]]
a reliable baseline for this one-time report. EPA clarifies that the
reported information is intended to represent a typical cycle through a
process agent application and entities may, to the best of their
ability, apply process knowledge to obtain this information. EPA
addresses comments concerning the confidentiality determinations in
section IV.B of this preamble.
B. Annual Report
As part of a continuing effort to monitor potential changes over
time, EPA is generally finalizing as proposed the requirement that any
facility that uses a controlled substance as a process agent must
submit an annual report each year by February 14, with the addition of
a process for entities to request extensions of reporting due dates. If
there are facilities that employ more than one process agent use, any
such facilities will need to report data individually for each process
that uses an ODS process agent. This information will help enable the
Agency to develop annual reports regarding uses of process agents in
the United States and to effectively monitor production and consumption
of ODS used for process agents consistent with domestic requirements.
EPA proposed to require that each entity with a facility that uses
a controlled substance as a process agent must submit for each
applicable facility an annual report by February 14 of each year
concerning process agent uses for the previous calendar year (i.e.,
January 1 through December 31). This date coincides with the fourth
quarter and certain annual deadlines for related existing ODS reporting
requirements, including all quarterly importer and producer reports and
the annual reports under 40 CFR 82.13(m) for second party
transformation and destruction of class I controlled substances. EPA
proposed that these annual reports include information concerning
process agent sourcing; amounts recycled, reused, transformed, and
destroyed over the previous calendar year; air emissions from stack
point sources, fugitive sources, and total air emissions; and a
description of emission reduction actions currently in use, planned, or
currently under evaluation since the last one-time or annual report.
One commenter supported the proposed reporting on process agent
sourcing and on actions taken or under evaluation to phase out use of
ODS as a process agent, stating that this information will allow EPA to
assess the progress of developing alternatives and possibly end the
need for the U.S. exemption for ODS process agents. EPA acknowledges
the commenter's support for the proposed reporting requirements. The
Agency notes that this action is limited to establishing reporting
requirements, so the commenter's asserted support for actions to phase
out use of ODS as process agents are beyond the scope of this action.
Another commenter requested that EPA revise the annual reporting
timeline to provide consistency with prior practice, allow time for
necessary information to become available, and avoid conflicting with
other EPA deadlines. Specifically, the commenter requested that EPA
revise the date by which annual reports must be submitted each year,
from February 14 to July 31, or April 30 at the earliest. The commenter
stated that previous requests for information from EPA on these process
agent uses have been received in July and responses were due within 20
working days and that the proposal did not indicate a need or reason to
vary this timeline. The commenter stated that information EPA proposed
to require in the annual reports would not be available by February 14
and that this accelerated timeline would place an undue burden on the
commenter. The commenter stated that manufacturing facilities that will
be subject to the requirements being established in this rule will not
have finalized emission calculations for the prior calendar year by
February 14, and provided as examples that reporting under the Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) program is not due until July 1 and emission
inventory reporting obligations for the commenter's facilities under
State programs ranged from April 1 to April 30. The commenter stated
that aligning the timing with other existing and established
requirements would reduce burden associated with the proposed reporting
obligations. The commenter cited identical rationales for asserting
that data elements are confidential as it had for the proposed one-time
reporting requirements.
EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertions that a February 14
deadline for annual reporting would be infeasible, unduly burdensome,
or unjustified. The commenter did not explain why the information
required to be included in the annual report would not be available by
February 14. The commenter provided examples of later deadlines under
different programs, but did not provide a reason that it would be
infeasible for facilities to submit the required information for this
program by February 14 of each year. Emissions of controlled substances
from process agent uses are one component of overall emission
inventories for subject facilities and EPA is unaware of any impact the
requirements being finalized in this action may have on these
facilities under other programs. As EPA stated at proposal, February 14
aligns with the fourth quarter and annual deadlines for existing ODS
reporting requirements under 40 CFR part 82. February 14 also aligns
with existing deadlines for regulated substances, including reporting
requirements under 40 CFR part 84 for hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)
production (which includes emissions), HFC-23 emissions, and HFC
process agent emissions. The commenter noted that it was subject to
existing reporting deadlines that ranged from April 1 to July 1, and it
is unclear why the commenter requested the requirements being finalized
in this action should be no later than July 31, or, at the earliest,
April 30. Furthermore, in line with U.S. commitments through the
Montreal Protocol, the earlier reporting deadline being finalized
supports EPA efforts to thoroughly review submitted information for
completeness, accuracy, and consistency prior to a timely submission of
this information to the Montreal Protocol's Ozone Secretariat on behalf
of the United States. However, EPA is finalizing that the Agency may
grant a short extension in the unlikely event that an entity cannot
comply with this reporting timeline. Entities may submit a request for
an extension with supporting documentation and explanation of the
reasons needed for an extension. The Agency will consider the
circumstances of any such requests and act accordingly. EPA addresses
comments concerning the confidentiality determinations in section IV.B
of this preamble.
C. Advance Notice of Changes Report
EPA is largely finalizing as proposed a requirement that entities
provide advance notice of changes, with revisions to the conditions
under which reporting would be necessary. This advance notice of
changes is required at least 180 days before an entity expects to
increase, as compared to the previous year and the average of the three
previous years, the amount of process agent introduced into the
application by more than 20 percent or emissions by at least one metric
ton and 20 percent. EPA understands that facility operations change
over time, and the Agency can monitor such changes through the annual
reporting mechanism. However, large changes in facility operations over
a short period of time can impact the environment, conformance with
domestic regulatory requirements, and our commitment to international
[[Page 82418]]
agreements. Annual reports represent a delayed view into past actions
and may not provide sufficient lead time for an appropriate response.
This notification requirement will provide EPA the opportunity to
assess potential implications in advance of a change at the facility.
EPA proposed to require that each facility with a significant
process change, including an increase in the quantity of the final
output manufactured using an ODS process agent, submit a report
specifying changes at least 180 days prior to implementing the change.
EPA proposed that this prior notification requirement apply to any
process changes anticipated to result in increases by the next annual
report of greater than 20 percent of the amount of controlled substance
initially introduced for or emitted during use as a process agent by a
facility, as compared to the corresponding data in the previous
calendar year.
One commenter supported EPA's proposal to require reporting to
specify changes at least 180 days before implementing a significant
process change, including any increase in the quantity of manufacturing
output using an ODS process agent. EPA acknowledges the commenter's
support.
Another commenter requested that EPA not require the significant
change report or, alternatively, that the reporting requirement exclude
changes due to production variability and unexpected circumstances. The
commenter offered examples of potential changes that may be difficult
to predict with at least 180-day notice or where further revisions may
occur after a notification is submitted, including plant outage(s),
natural disasters, and market conditions. The commenter further stated
that uses of process agents can be quite small and that a 20 percent
change could be difficult to predict. The commenter suggested that,
particularly for facilities that emit greater than one ton, EPA could
require reporting of these changes in the annual report through which
process agent use and emissions would already be reported.
EPA acknowledges the commenter's concerns about situations where
the proposed requirements may be difficult to implement, but disagrees
with the commenter's suggestion that the Agency not finalize the
requirement to report significant changes in advance. It is unclear how
the examples the commenter provided, namely plant outage(s), downtime
due to natural disasters, other pauses in production, and drops in
demand and production due to the covid epidemic, would result in
unanticipated large increases in process agent use or emissions. These
are cases where process agent use and emissions may decrease by large
quantities, but these decreases would not necessitate an advance notice
of changes. Subsequent increases in use or emissions in a year
following such unexpected cases might necessitate reporting, but after
such incidents it would be reasonable to anticipate a return to
previous production levels.
EPA could also imagine that unexpected changes at one of a
company's facilities might result in increased utilization of one or
more of its other facilities. Shifting production between facilities to
account for such cases might result in an individual facility
increasing its process use or emissions by large amounts, but not
result in an overall increase across the company or the United States.
This scenario would be unlikely to result in large impacts on total use
and emissions, conformance with domestic regulatory requirements, or
U.S. commitments under the Montreal Protocol. Therefore, EPA is
revising the advance notice of changes reporting requirement so that it
applies to each entity rather than to an individual facility.
Additionally, the Agency is revising the basis of the percentage change
to apply only if the increase is greater than a 20 percent increase
relative to values from both the immediately previous year and the
average of the past three years. This accounts for situations where
production may drop in a single year and then return to typical levels
in the following year, which would result in an apparent year-on-year
increase. In this case it would be reasonable to expect that production
may return to previous levels after a disruption. This also addresses
cases where production may moderately increase annually, which would
result in a relatively large increase over several years. EPA would
receive relevant information each year and there would not be a large
increase in any given year. In both cases advance notice would not be
necessary for EPA to understand the potential for large increases and
impacts by the submission of the next annual report. Furthermore, the
Agency would have had opportunities to assess the circumstances and
request additional information as relevant. Advance notice reporting
will only be required for anticipated changes that represent a large
overall increase for the entity, as calculated across all the entity's
applicable facilities. EPA expects that this mitigates the commenter's
concern about production variability at the facility level or other
unanticipated changes raised by the commenter. At the same time, the
reports will provide EPA the information it needs to monitor uses and
emissions of process agents. The Agency also recognizes that there may
be instances where it is not feasible to provide EPA with the requisite
180 days of notice, but the possibility of those instances is not, in
the Agency's view, a reason not to require the notice period. If that
situation were to occur, EPA encourages the entity to contact the
Agency as soon as practicable so that EPA can work with the entity.
EPA acknowledges the commenter's statement that a 20 percent change
from a facility with relatively small emissions may be difficult to
assess, but the Agency disagrees with the commenter's alternative
recommendation that these changes instead be included in the annual
report. Smaller changes at that level would pose lesser contributions
to overall emissions in the United States, and advance notice would be
less necessary. The annual report is submitted by February 14 of the
year following actions taken, and is inherently retrospective. Only
including this information in the annual report would defeat the
purpose of providing advance notice. However, EPA recognizes that
changes in emissions from process agents from facilities that have, on
the whole, relatively small emissions, pose lesser contributions to
overall emissions in the United States, and advance notice of these
changes is therefore less critical.
Accordingly, EPA is revising the qualifying criteria to require
that this advance notice be provided only where changes that would
result in annual increases greater than 20 percent of the amount
initially introduced or, for emissions, increases of at least 20
percent and one metric ton. This will ensure the Agency has advance
notice of changes that may have a large impact on overall use or
emissions of process agents in the United States, while exempting from
the advance notice requirements changes from smaller contributors. EPA
addresses comments concerning the confidentiality determinations in
section IV.B of this preamble.
D. Emissions Reporting Methodology and Incorporation by Reference
In alignment with the one-time and annual reporting requirements
being finalized in this action, EPA is establishing requirements that
entities using controlled substances as process agents report emissions
as specified in
[[Page 82419]]
40 CFR 84.25. These requirements are being finalized largely as
proposed, with the addition of a mass balance compliance option and a
revision of the retesting frequency to be at least every five years
rather than every 10 years. The units of measure for determining
emissions and the method to calculate emissions will be in kilograms of
controlled substance emitted. Emission reporting requirements align as
appropriate with timelines for one-time and annual reporting
requirements being established in this action.
These requirements prescribe emission estimation methodologies
through vent-specific and mass balance compliance options. Associated
reporting and recordkeeping requirements will support EPA's efforts to
validate the reported information. For example, for facilities using an
emission factor-based method, each process vent in the top quartile of
its respective facility's emissions generally must use the process-
vent-specific emission factor method, which requires emission tests
with process activity parameters measured for either each operating
scenario or the operating scenario with the largest overall emissions.
All emissions test data and procedures used in developing emission
factors must be documented. Process vents with less emissions may use
the process-vent-specific emission calculation factor method, which
prescribes certain procedures to calculate emissions for each operating
scenario, but does not require testing. All data, assumptions, and
procedures used in the calculations or engineering assessment must be
documented. Each process using the mass balance method must demonstrate
adherence to accuracy and precision requirements. In these cases, the
reported information follow specified methodologies and EPA may request
and assess detailed records to better understand the reported data. EPA
is also listing and incorporating by reference certain American Society
of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), ASTM International (ASTM), and EPA
standards as acceptable options to calculate, measure, analyze, or
measure parameters associated with emissions. Due to similarities in
requirements, emitted chemicals, and regulated industries, these
standards are the same standards listed in 40 CFR part 98, subpart L,
and the same versions incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 98.7, except
for ASTM D6348-03,\8\ incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 60.17, and
ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed 2016).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The citation for the version of ASTM D6348-03 incorporated
by reference in this action is different from the citation listed in
40 CFR 98.7 but the standard is the same standard listed in 40 CFR
part 98, subpart L.
\9\ The version of ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed 2016)
incorporated by reference in this action is different from the
version listed in 40 CFR 98.7 but the standard is the same standard
listed in 40 CFR part 98, subpart L.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA proposed to require that entities using controlled substances
as process agents report emissions using a methodology similar to the
emissions reporting requirements for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program (GHGRP) codified at 40 CFR part 98, subpart L (40 CFR 98.120
through 98.128). EPA also sought comment on a description of procedures
to implement the proposed emission reporting requirements (available in
a memorandum to the docket for this action at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2022-0707-0002).
Specifically, EPA proposed that acceptable testing methods for
measuring process vent emissions of controlled substances would include
EPA Method 18 in appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60, EPA Method 320 in
appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, EPA 430-R-10-003, ASTM D6348-03, or other
analytical methods validated using EPA Method 301 in appendix A to 40
CFR part 63. EPA Method 301 provides a process to validate and approve
other analytical methods as appropriate. In the memorandum to the
docket, EPA included as compliance options these and other methods
listed for existing requirements in 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, and
incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 98.7.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As discussed in footnotes 8 and 9, in this action EPA is
incorporating by reference different versions of standards than were
listed in the memorandum. The Agency is also not incorporating by
reference the ASTM D-2879 standard that was listed in the memorandum
because it is unnecessary for the note's guidance to incorporate
that standard by reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the proposal, EPA discussed advantages and disadvantages of
potential approaches, requested comment on these assessments, and
highlighted particular areas of consideration. The Agency noted the
approach used by the TRI program at 40 CFR part 372, and explained its
concerns with applying the general TRI reporting requirements to this
limited set of ODS process agent pollutants, industry sectors, and
types of operations for the purposes of this action.
Two commenters expressed their support for an emissions reporting
approach similar to the GHGRP instead of TRI reporting requirements.
There were no responses to EPA's request for comment on whether
adjustments from the proposed methodology were necessary to account for
distinctions between controlled substance emissions, process agent
applications, or industry sectors. The Agency understands that the
emission reporting methodology established in this rule is applicable
to these process agent applications and their associated industry
sectors.
The Agency requested comment on whether there are potential gaps in
the proposed approaches to determining emissions from process agent
applications and whether alternative approaches, such as a mass balance
method as described in appendix A to 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, may be
suitable in those particular cases. EPA also requested comment on the
advantages and disadvantages of specifying one testing method instead
of several options (e.g., EPA Method 18 as the analytical method and
EPA Method 21 monitoring procedures for leak detection). EPA sought
comment on whether finalizing the use of one method, instead of
multiple methods, would improve the consistency of emission data
reported across the facilities using ODS as process agents.
Two commenters supported EPA's proposal to use a methodology
similar to the emissions reporting requirements at 40 CFR part 98,
subpart L. These commenters stated that it would be reasonable to allow
only one testing method for this small set of affected entities instead
of several options and that this would ensure more consistency when
evaluating emissions. One of these commenters recommended that EPA
finalize the rule as proposed. The commenter stated that the GHGRP
approach is more reasonable than the TRI approach because it would
require entities to use a specific methodology and report more detailed
information, which would result in data that are more consistent and
manageable for EPA to validate. The commenter further stated that the
approach EPA proposed is more likely to produce more reliable emission
data than the mass balance approach the Agency took comment on. The
other commenter stated that more frequent and involved testing was
necessary to ensure accurate accounting of emissions. Further, the
commenter referenced a report that it had previously issued and stated
that the report had demonstrated that the GHGRP reporting requirements,
which rely on emission factor estimates and/or limited and infrequent
testing to support calculation methods, may be insufficient to
accurately estimate and account for the controlled substances
[[Page 82420]]
being emitted. Specifically, the commenter pointed to the report's
assertion that its investigators detected controlled substances that
the facilities did not report under existing GHGRP requirements. The
commenter recommended incorporating some form of mandatory continuous
emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) technology for the top emission
sources of ODS process agents to gauge the accuracy of emission factor-
based calculations and to identify emissions that may not have
otherwise been detected. The commenter cited examples of technologies
to continuously monitor emissions from process vents and leaks,
including a portable Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) gas
analyzer and continuous infrared monitoring. The commenter stated that
the frequency of retesting should be increased from every 10 years as
proposed to every year to more quickly identify potential discrepancies
between reported and actual emissions. The commenter stated that it is
reasonable to expect monitoring and testing on all processes, given the
restrictions on these ODS due to their outsized damage to the
atmosphere. The commenter asked for clarification if TRI emission data
would continue to be submitted in addition to these newly established
requirements for ODS process agents. The commenter stated its belief in
the value of a central data-sharing repository to view all fluorinated
gas emission data and account for potential overlaps between reporting
requirements. The commenter further stated that previous years' data on
process agent raw volumes of emissions specific to each use and
substance by facility reported to the Montreal Protocol should be
available. The commenter suggested that the decline in the number of
ODS process agent uses and emissions over the years indicates that
these uses are not essential and will cease in the future with the rise
of alternatives. The commenter urged EPA to use information gathered to
advance the understanding of alternatives to ongoing ODS process agent
uses, and available options to further limit emissions from those
sources still requiring their use.
EPA acknowledges the commenters' support for the proposed
methodology and one commenter's support for the proposal as a whole.
The Agency acknowledges the commenters' general support for specifying
one testing method instead of allowing any of the several methods that
were proposed. No commenters indicated potential disadvantages with
specifying EPA Method 18 as the analytical method and EPA Method 21
monitoring procedures for leak detection. However, EPA remains unaware
of whether these methods may be applicable in all situations for these
operations and process agent emissions. At this time, EPA will allow
entities to use any of the several methods being finalized in this
action, as applicable. EPA will further assess available information
and may consider in a future rulemaking whether it would be practicable
and advisable to specify a more limited set of testing methods and
monitoring procedures. To align with existing EPA emission reporting
requirements for similar chemicals and processes, the Agency is
incorporating by reference in 40 CFR part 82, subpart A, the same
versions of the relevant methods listed at 40 CFR part 98, subpart L.
With respect to the commenter's request to require CEMS or some
other form of continuous monitoring in order to verify the emission
factor-based calculations underlying the proposed reporting
requirements, EPA does not agree that these additional monitoring
requirements and associated compliance burden are warranted for these
circumstances. The Agency disagrees with the commenter's
characterization of the report's findings as undermining the emission
factor-based method or structure of the GHGRP reporting requirements in
general as applied in this context for estimating emissions of
controlled substances used as process agents. EPA's understanding is
that the facility where the commenter detected CFCs does not use
controlled substances as process agents and would not be subject to the
requirements being established in this action. The commenter did not
justify why the emissions it detected from that facility would indicate
that the proposed methodology would be insufficient for the process
agent uses addressed in this action. The fact that controlled
substances were detected from the specific facility but not reported
through the GHGRP does not indicate any inadequacies of the emission
calculation, monitoring, or reporting requirements being established
for process agent uses in this action. EPA explicitly excepted ODS
controlled substances from the definition of ``fluorinated greenhouse
gas'' under 40 CFR 98.6, and accordingly from the GHGRP emission
reporting requirements under 40 CFR 98.122, because EPA already
regulated controlled substances under 40 CFR part 82.\11\ This
exclusion of controlled substances from the GHGRP reporting
requirements was not due to any technical limitations of the
requirements under 40 CFR part 98. EPA also understands that these
facilities may produce or transform controlled substances, and other
facilities within the vicinity may contribute to emissions of
controlled substances as well, so it is unclear how effectively the
detected emissions and recommended monitoring techniques may be
attributable to any particular process. The emissions reporting
requirements in this rule are specifically focused on obtaining
accurate and consistent information on process agent uses. Because
these process agent uses typically involve legacy operations, EPA does
not anticipate that operations will change frequently enough in kind or
scale to necessitate intensive monitoring or annual testing of process
vents to revise emission factors. EPA is finalizing as proposed a
requirement that entities conduct an emissions test of process vents to
update emission factors if changes to operating scenarios result in
increases of 15 percent or more. It is the Agency's view that this is
adequate to ensure that emissions factors are accurate and reasonably
reflect current conditions. Furthermore, while the Agency does not
agree that annual retesting should be required, because, as noted, most
of the process agent uses involve legacy operations where EPA does not
anticipate much variability in operations, the Agency recognizes that
retesting at a greater frequency than every 10 years would provide more
assurance of the validity of these factors. Accordingly, in this final
rule, EPA is requiring process vent testing, as applicable, no less
often than every five years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 74 FR 16579.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another commenter stated that there are instances where a mass
balance approach may be more accurate to estimate fugitive emissions
than the proposed approach. The commenter provided information about
its operations at one facility as an example, and requested EPA include
a mass balance approach as an acceptable method for calculating
fugitive ODS emissions. The commenter stated that, while the proposed
emission factor-based methods have historically been used to quantify
equipment leak emissions from various industrial processes, these
approaches include factors that are based on general industry-wide data
and do not necessarily reflect individual facility, site-specific
process and equipment characteristics. The commenter explained that ODS
enter into the
[[Page 82421]]
process at its facility from a single source, the facility does not
produce or transform the ODS, stack emissions are monitored with an
EPA-certified CEMS, and the ODS content of all generated waste stream
quantities are monitored and documented. For these circumstances, the
commenter stated that the fugitive emissions would be underestimated
using an emissions factor method and are more accurately calculated
using a mass balance approach than Method 21 and screening level
emission factors.
EPA understands that the proposed emission methodology requirements
would be applicable to the commenter's operations and does not agree
that these requirements lack adaptability to site-specific
circumstances. The requirements being established in this action
include a process to create site-specific process-vent-specific
emission calculation factors and site-specific leak monitoring
approaches. However, EPA acknowledges that a mass balance approach may
also be an appropriate option for the situation described, which EPA
understands to involve batch operations with no on-site production or
transformation. Accordingly, EPA is adding a mass balance approach as a
compliance option for batch operations with no on-site production or
transformation of controlled substances, based on the GHGRP provisions
listed in appendix A to subpart L of 40 CFR part 98. The GHGRP
requirements were designed for situations where fluorine enters a
process as part of a reactant and leaves as part of a product or
byproduct. Controlled substances are not produced or transformed in
these process agent applications. Accordingly, the mass balance
approach established in this action for controlled substances used as
process agents addresses the quantities of controlled substances
entering and leaving the process agent application. Any entity that
uses this compliance option must demonstrate that it can meet the error
limits or measurement and operating criteria specified in the
requirements. Each facility should use the methodology that most
accurately estimates emissions from its processes.
More information on the standards being incorporated by reference
in 40 CFR 82.27 is available in section VII.I of this preamble.
Available ASME methods are ASME MFC-3M-2004, Measurement of Fluid Flow
in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi; ASME MFC-4M-1986
(Reaffirmed 2016), Measurement of Gas Flow by Turbine Meters; ASME MFC-
5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 1994), Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed
Conduits Using Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters; ASME MFC-6M-1998,
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Vortex Flowmeters; ASME MFC-
7M-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992), Measurement of Gas Flow by Means of Critical
Flow Venturi Nozzles; ASME MFC-9M-1988 (Reaffirmed 2001), Measurement
of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits by Weighing Method; ASME MFC-11M-
2006), Measurement of Fluid Flow by Means of Coriolis Mass Flowmeters;
and ASME MFC-14M-2003, Measurement of Fluid Flow Using Small Bore
Precision Orifice Meters.
The ASTM method is ASTM D6348-03, Standard Test Method for
Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface
Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy. ASTM D2879-97
(Reapproved 2007), Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature
Relationship and Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by
Isoteniscope may also be used to determine vapor pressures for purposes
of the definition ``in light liquid service.'' ASTM D2879-97 is
available for inspection at U.S. EPA's Air and Radiation Docket; EPA
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
202-566-1742 and may be obtained at ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor
Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428; phone: 610.832.9500;
email: [email protected]; website: www.astm.org/.
EPA methods are Approved Alternative Method 012: An Alternate
Procedure for Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Determination; Methods for
Estimating Air Emissions from Chemical Manufacturing Facilities,
Emissions Inventory Improvement Program, Volume II: Chapter 16, August
2007; EPA-453/R-95-017, November 1995; EPA-430-R-10-003, March 2010,
Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates; and Other Test Method
24, September 2006, Tracer Gas Protocol for the Determination of
Volumetric Flow Rate Through the Ring Pipe of the Xact Multi-Metals
Monitoring System.
E. Recordkeeping
Entities are obligated under existing requirements to record
information in accordance with 40 CFR 82.13 and 82.24, including
information concerning ODS used as process agents. In this action EPA
is finalizing as proposed recordkeeping requirements specifically for
uses of ODS as process agents. Under 40 CFR 82.13(d), entities must
retain the records and copies of reports required for at least three
years. Under previously established requirements in 40 CFR 82.13 and
82.24, entities, including producers and importers, must record
information that applies to controlled substances in general, including
those used as process agents. In this action EPA is establishing
specific requirements that differentiate controlled substances intended
for process agent use from the wider uses. This additional information
will provide further distinctions of information already required to be
recorded.
EPA proposed to also require that entities using process agents
record information that documents what would be reported to the Agency,
which includes information concerning sourcing, production, recycling,
reuse, transformation, and destruction for ODS intended to be used for
process agent applications.
Specifically, the Agency proposed to add requirements that
companies that use process agents maintain: dated records of the
quantity of each process agent produced at each facility; records
identifying the producer or importer of process agents received; copies
of invoices or receipts documenting the sale or other transfer of
ownership of process agents; dated records identifying the quantity of
each product manufactured within each facility by using process agents;
dated records of the quantity of process agent spills or releases
greater than or equal to 100 pounds; dated records of information used
to calculate emissions; dated records of the quantity of process agents
which are subsequently transformed or destroyed; and a copy of the
transformation or destruction verification in the case that a process
agent is subsequently sold or distributed to another entity for
transformation or destruction.
One commenter requested that EPA revise the proposed reference to
recordkeeping responsibility in 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(3) from applying to a
``person'' to instead apply to an ``entity,'' in alignment with EPA's
terminology for proposed reporting requirements under 40 CFR
82.13(ee)(1) and (2). The same commenter requested that EPA revise the
recordkeeping requirements proposed in 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(3)(i) to
reflect the amount of controlled substance used as process agent at
each facility instead of the amount of controlled substance produced at
each facility, as the commenter also produces the same controlled
substance for other uses. The commenter stated that it would be
difficult to predict or keep accurate numbers prospectively recording
the amount of controlled substance that was produced and may be used as
a process agent, and that
[[Page 82422]]
dated records of the amount used at each facility as a process agent
would be most relevant for the purposes of these requirements.
As EPA states in footnote 2 of this preamble, ``person'' and
``entity'' may be used interchangeably in certain circumstances. The
instances referenced were not intended to carry a material distinction
in interpretation or application. For clarity, EPA is finalizing
terminology in 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(3) that refers to the recordkeeping
obligations as applying to an ``entity.'' To be clear, each entity,
including all commonly owned companies, is responsible for the
regulatory obligations as applicable of all commonly owned facilities
and plants subject to the requirements being finalized in this action.
EPA acknowledges the commenter's explanation of its process agent
production operations and understands that the same chemical may be
used for multiple purposes and, after use as a process agent, may
subsequently be transformed or destroyed. The Agency agrees that the
amount of process agent used is a relevant recordkeeping element to
track the use of controlled substances and is finalizing that
additional data element for the recordkeeping requirements. However,
under existing requirements in 40 CFR 82.13(f)(2)(ii) and
82.24(b)(1)(i) and (ii), entities must differentiate production records
by whether the quantities of controlled substances were intended for
use in processes resulting in their transformation or destruction. EPA
understands that some quantities of controlled substances are produced
solely for use by the same entity as a process agent and ultimately are
not transformed or destroyed. The Agency understands that complete
information on future use and disposition may not be known at the time
of production, but sees value in documentation of the expected use.
Therefore, in addition to requiring that entities maintain records of
the quantities of each controlled substance initially introduced into
the process agent application for use as a process agent, EPA is
clarifying records of the quantity that was produced for use as a
process agent refers to the expectation at the time of production. This
requirement for entities that use process agents is separate from
existing requirements for producers in 40 CFR 82.13(f)(2)(ii) and
82.24(b)(1)(i) and (ii) and may not necessarily correspond directly
with the quantities actually used as a process agent.
IV. How will EPA treat ODS process agent data collected under this
action?
Consistent with EPA's commitment to transparency in program
implementation, as well as to proactively encourage compliance with
EPA's general ODS phaseout and to meet the United States' reporting
commitments under the Montreal Protocol, EPA is finalizing
determinations for the treatment and release of data that will be
collected.
EPA is finalizing certain categorical emission data and
confidentiality determinations for individual reported data elements
that EPA will be collecting through this rulemaking. This action
identifies certain information categories that must be submitted to the
Agency that will be subject to disclosure to the public without further
notice because the information has been determined to be either
``emission data'' under 40 CFR 2.301(a), or EPA has found that the
information does not meet the standard for confidential treatment under
Exemption 4 of the FOIA. The Agency has also identified certain other
categories of information that may be entitled to confidential
treatment. The emission data and confidentiality determinations in this
action are intended to encourage consistency among reported data,
compliance with EPA's ODS phaseout, and to meet the United States'
reporting commitments under the Montreal Protocol. Establishing these
determinations through this rulemaking will provide predictability for
both information requesters and submitters. Separately, for information
reported on process agents that is not addressed in this rulemaking,
i.e., data elements being finalized in this rule for which EPA is not
in this action issuing a determination, the Agency will apply the 40
CFR part 2 process for establishing case-by-case confidentiality
determinations.
A. Background on Determinations of Whether Information Is Entitled to
Treatment as Confidential Information
1. Confidential Treatment of Reported Information
Regulated entities that must submit information to EPA frequently
claim that some or all of that information is entitled to confidential
treatment and therefore exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the
FOIA.\12\ Exemption 4 exempts from disclosure ``trade secrets and
commercial or financial information obtained from a person [that is]
privileged or confidential.'' \13\ In order for information to meet the
requirements of Exemption 4, EPA must find that the information is
either: (1) A trade secret, or (2) commercial or financial information
that is: (a) obtained from a person, and (b) privileged or
confidential.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4).
\13\ 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally, when EPA has information that the Agency intends to
disclose publicly that is covered by a claim of confidentiality under
FOIA Exemption 4, EPA has a process to make case-by-case or class
determinations under 40 CFR part 2 to evaluate whether such information
qualifies for confidential treatment under the
exemption.14 15 In this action, EPA is making categorical
emission data and confidentiality determinations in advance through
this notice and comment rulemaking for some information that will be
submitted to EPA under the requirements established in this action.
This information will be subject to disclosure to the public without
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 40 CFR 2.205.
\15\ This approach of making categorical determinations for a
class of information is a well-established Agency practice. Prior
examples of rules where EPA has made such categorical determinations
include Confidentiality Determinations for Data Required Under the
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Amendments to Special
Rules Governing Certain Information Obtained Under the Clean Air Act
(76 FR 30817, May 26, 2011); Control of Air Pollution From New Motor
Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (88 FR 4296,
January 24, 2023); and Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: RFS
Annual Rules (87 FR 39600, July 1, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Food Marketing Institute v.
Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) (Argus Leader) addresses the
meaning of ``confidential'' within the context of FOIA Exemption 4. The
Court held that ``[a]t least where commercial or financial information
is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and
provided to the government under an assurance of privacy, the
information is `confidential' within the meaning of Exemption 4.'' \16\
The Court identified two conditions ``that might be required for
information communicated to another to be considered confidential.''
\17\ Under the first condition, ``information communicated to another
remains confidential whenever it is customarily kept private, or at
least closely held, by the person imparting it.'' \18\ The second
condition provides that ``information might be considered confidential
only if the party receiving it provides some
[[Page 82423]]
assurance that it will remain secret.'' \19\ The Court found the first
condition necessary for information to be considered confidential
within the meaning of Exemption 4, but did not address whether the
second condition must also be met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Argus Leader, 139 S. Ct. at 2366.
\17\ Id. at 2363.
\18\ Id. (internal citations omitted).
\19\ Id. (internal citations omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the issuance of the Court's opinion in Argus Leader, the
U.S. Department of Justice issued guidance concerning the
confidentiality prong of Exemption 4, articulating ``the newly defined
contours of Exemption 4'' post-Argus Leader.\20\ Where the Government
provides an express or implied indication to the submitter prior to or
at the time the information is submitted to the Government that the
Government would publicly disclose the information, then the submitter
generally cannot reasonably expect confidentiality of the information
upon submission, and the information is not entitled to confidential
treatment under Exemption 4.\21\ In this rule, EPA is clearly asserting
the Agency's determination that certain information is not
confidential, not entitled to confidential treatment, and may be
disclosed publicly. This is aligned with the Supreme Court's decision
and the subsequent Department of Justice guidance that the government's
assurances that a submission will be treated as not confidential should
dictate the expectations of submitters. Based on the finalized
determinations, submitters are on notice before they submit any
information that EPA has determined that the identified data elements
discussed below, as well as in the addendum provided in the docket for
this action titled Confidentiality Determinations and Emission Data
Designations for Data Elements in the ODS Process Agents Reporting
Final Rule, will not be entitled to confidential treatment upon
submission and may be released by the Agency without further notice. As
a result, submitters will not have a reasonable expectation that the
information will be treated as confidential; rather, they have the
reasonable expectation that the information will be disclosed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ ``Exemption 4 After the Supreme Court's Ruling in Food
Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media and Accompanying Step-by-
Step Guide,'' Office of Information Policy, U.S. Department of
Justice, (October 4, 2019). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/oip/exemption-4-after-supreme-courts-ruling-food-marketing-institute-v-argus-leader-media.
\21\ See id; see also ``Step-by-Step Guide for Determining if
Commercial or Financial Information Obtained from a Person is
Confidential under Exemption 4 of the FOIA,'' Office of Information
Policy, U.S. Department of Justice, (updated October 7, 2019).
Available at: https://www.justice.gov/oip/step-step-guide-determining-if-commercial-or-financial-information-obtained-person-confidential.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described further below, EPA is making categorical
determinations that some of the data elements that will be submitted to
EPA are not entitled to confidential treatment because either: it is
not the type of information that submitters customarily keep private or
closely held; it is already publicly available; or it is discernible
information that is self-evident or readily observable through reverse
engineering by a third party.
2. Emission Data Under Section 114 of the CAA
The CAA states that ``[a]ny records, reports or information
obtained under [section 114] shall be available to the public.'' \22\
Thus, the CAA begins with a presumption that the information submitted
to EPA will be available to be disclosed to the public. It then
provides a narrow exception to that presumption for information that
``would divulge methods or processes entitled to protection as trade
secrets.'' The CAA then narrows this exception further by excluding
``emission data'' from the category of information eligible for
confidential treatment. While the CAA does not define ``emission
data,'' EPA has done so by regulation at 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). On
occasion EPA releases some of the information submitted under CAA
section 114, such as emission data, to parties outside of the Agency of
its own volition, through responses to requests submitted under the
FOIA,\23\ or through civil litigation. As noted in the prior section,
generally, when EPA has information that the Agency intends to disclose
publicly that is covered by a claim of confidentiality under FOIA
Exemption 4, EPA has a process to make case-by-case or class
determinations under 40 CFR part 2. This process includes an evaluation
of whether such information is or is not emission data, and whether it
otherwise qualifies for confidential treatment under FOIA Exemption
4.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ CAA section 114(c); 42 U.S.C. 7414(c).
\23\ 5 U.S.C. 552.
\24\ 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulations at 40 CFR 2.301 define emission data to include the
following:
Information necessary to determine the identity, amount,
frequency, concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent
related to air quality) of any emission which has been emitted by the
source (or of any pollutant resulting from any emission by the source),
or any combination of the foregoing;
Information necessary to determine the identity, amount,
frequency, concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent
related to air quality) of the emissions which, under an applicable
standard or limitation, the source was authorized to emit (including,
to the extent necessary for such purposes, a description of the manner
or rate of operation of the source); and
A general description of the location and/or nature of the
source to the extent necessary to identify the source and to
distinguish it from other sources (including, to the extent necessary
for such purposes, a description of the device, installation, or
operation constituting the source).
In this action, EPA is applying the regulatory definition of
``emission data'' in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i) to determine that certain
categories of source certification and compliance information are not
entitled to confidential treatment because they qualify as emission
data. That information is subject to disclosure to the public without
further notice. As relevant to this action, a ``source'' for purposes
of the definition in 40 CFR 2.301 is generally the equipment covered by
a regulatory requirement, such as process equipment in a plant or
facility and any related emission units. EPA's definition of emission
data also excludes certain information related to products still in the
research and development phase or products not yet on the market except
for limited purposes. Thus, for example, 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(ii)
excludes information related to ``any product, method, device, or
installation (or any component thereof) designed and intended to be
marketed or used commercially but not yet so marketed or used.'' This
specific exclusion from the definition of emission data is limited in
time. EPA has concluded that no data related to this exclusion are
implicated in this rulemaking because data required to be reported
under this rule generally relate to equipment that EPA understands are
primarily for purposes of maintaining legacy production processes at
existing facilities.
B. Data Elements To Be Reported to EPA Under This Action
Consistent with EPA's commitment to transparency in program
implementation, EPA has reviewed the data reporting elements being
finalized in this action to see if information under the umbrella of
those data elements could be considered entitled to confidential
treatment. EPA is finalizing as proposed its determinations to treat
[[Page 82424]]
certain data elements as not entitled to confidential treatment. Later
in this section, EPA outlines individual data elements and the Agency's
determinations of whether they will be handled as confidential, not
confidential or undetermined. The Agency also lists its determinations
of whether the data elements are emission data, which are not
confidential, and are therefore releasable. There may be additional
reasons not to release individual data elements determined to not be
entitled to confidential treatment, for example if it is personally
identifiable information. EPA is making confidentiality determinations
and treating data concerning process agent uses similarly to the
process under the HFC Phasedown Program as codified in 40 CFR 84.31(k).
Some data may be released in different contexts, including to the
general public to encourage transparency, to ensure compliance with
EPA's general ODS phaseout, and to meet the United States' reporting
commitments under the Montreal Protocol. Emission data, including data
used as inputs to emissions equations, is generally releasable under
CAA section 114(c), which provides that emission data shall be
available to the public. ``Inputs to emission equations'' refers to
data necessary to determine the identity, amount, frequency, or
concentration of the emission emitted by the reporting facilities.
Inputs to emission equations include equipment parameters, measured
data, supporting calculations, and other rationale used to calculate
reported emission quantities. Some aggregated data would also be
released to the Ozone Secretariat in line with past practices and
existing commitments, which could include a list of the process agent
applications and the specific ODS used as process agents in those
applications, the levels of emissions from those process agent
applications in metric tons and ODP-weighted metric tons, and the
specific containment technologies used to minimize emissions of
controlled substances. EPA also stated the Agency's intention to
release the aggregate consumption of ODS used as process agents in
metric tons and ODP-weighted tons. Finally, EPA stated that the Agency
would include production, import, export, and destruction of ODS used
as process agents by chemical in data reported to the Montreal
Protocol's Ozone Secretariat as part of the United States' annual
report submitted under Article 7 of the treaty. At this time, this
aggregated data would generally comprise data from three or more
entities. Release of this information documents U.S. conformance with
commitments under an international agreement, so even if the number of
entities with process agent uses decreases in the future, EPA is
determining that process agent data reported by the United States in
accordance with commitments under the Montreal Protocol are not
confidential.
Some of the data elements EPA is collecting may be similar to or
the same as those required to be reported under the existing
requirements associated with the GHGRP, particularly for entities
subject to 40 CFR part 98, subpart L. Those reporting requirements are
separate and the Agency is not making any changes to 40 CFR part 98 in
this rulemaking. To the extent relevant, data elements submitted in
accordance with requirements established through this rulemaking and
determined to not be confidential under 40 CFR part 82, subpart A, will
not be provided confidential treatment regardless of whether they have
previously been determined to be confidential under the GHGRP.
Specifically, EPA proposed that the identity of byproducts
manufactured in the process agent application; contact information for
facilities that use controlled substances as process agents; emission
data, including reported emission factors and the proposed ODS process
agent monitoring plan; and technologies currently being used and
actions taken to minimize use or emissions of controlled substances
used as process agents would not be considered confidential. The Agency
proposed in general, as described in more detail in a memorandum to the
docket for this rulemaking, to determine the following information
concerning ODS process agents as confidential: process agent sourcing;
internal facility processes such as the quantity of process agent use,
process agent recycling, process agent reuse, end products from the
process agent application (e.g., chlorine from a chlor-alkali process),
and byproducts (e.g., hydrogen from a chlor-alkali process); and
emission reduction technologies and actions planned or currently under
evaluation. As noted previously, the Agency expects to release
aggregated data to the Ozone Secretariat, including ODS process agent
information concerning process agent applications currently used in the
United States, consumption, emissions, and emission reduction
technologies and actions undertaken. Further, EPA would begin reporting
emission data in metric tons instead of ODP-weighted metric tons.
One commenter supported EPA's proposal that data reported by the
United States in accordance with commitments under the Montreal
Protocol would not be confidential and stated that publishing this data
is a requirement to assess the success of current emissions abatement
technologies. The same commenter urged EPA to transparently share data
on process agent emissions by specific use.
EPA acknowledges the commenter's support for the Agency's
determination of the confidentiality of information submitted under the
Montreal Protocol on behalf of the United States. The Agency reiterates
that EPA may release and publish both data that has been determined to
not be confidential and aggregated data derived from information that
has been determined to be confidential. The Agency will further
consider how such data may be shared.
Another commenter stated that certain data reporting elements
established in this action, as addressed in sections III.A, III.B, and
III.C of this preamble, meet the criteria to be considered confidential
and requested that other elements that also meet those criteria may
also be treated as confidential. The commenter requested that EPA
confirm that the Agency will extend confidential treatment to all
information submitted in the one-time and annual reports that meet FOIA
exemptions. The commenter further stated that EPA should not preclude
entities from claiming information as confidential in the reports if
the item or process is not on EPA's list of items that should be
identified as confidential information, but that does meet a FOIA
statutory exemption. The commenter statements generally aligned with
EPA's proposed confidentiality determinations.
In accordance with the process established in this action at 40 CFR
82.26, EPA is making determinations by rulemaking on data elements
discussed in this section, as well as in the addendum provided in the
docket for this action titled Confidentiality Determinations and
Emission Data Designations for Data Elements in the ODS Process Agents
Reporting Final Rule, about whether certain information is entitled to
be treated confidentially. For information that must be reported as a
result of this final rule for which EPA has not made a confidentiality
determination, entities may claim the information as confidential and
EPA will apply the 40 CFR part 2 process for case-by-case
confidentiality determinations.
[[Page 82425]]
The commenter more specifically stated that percentages of class I
controlled substances used as a process agent and retained, recovered,
or entrained in the final product should be identified as confidential.
The commenter noted that EPA had proposed to determine that information
relating to internal process agent use, recycling, reuse, products, and
byproducts would be confidential and requested that EPA clearly
delineate that this information would be considered confidential. In
support of its assertions, the commenter claimed that percentages and
volumes, despite the few domestic manufacturers for some of the
controlled substances, could reveal insights into a variety of
sensitive considerations, including business decisions, production
approaches, operational changes, and confidential manufacturing
processes. The commenter specifically stated that percentages used as a
process agent and then retained, recovered, or recycled, and the
amounts of each product and byproduct manufactured during the prior
control period, including the amounts destroyed or used as feedstock,
are confidential. The commenter stated that there may be technologies
or processes in place that reduce information (EPA understands the
commenter as intending to refer to emissions) but are trade secrets or
otherwise related to commercial information that qualify for exemptions
as confidential under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
As discussed in section III.A of the preamble, EPA disagrees that
reported information on percentages of process agent used would
disclose confidential information concerning overall production of the
given controlled substances. The relevant data elements are, of the
amount of controlled substance used as a process agent, what
percentages in the process agent application were respectively
retained, consumed, recovered, emitted, or entrained. These
representative percentages of process agent use through a cycle of the
process agent application would not compromise its manufacturing
processes. With regard to the particular data elements, EPA
acknowledges the commenter's support for its confidentiality
determinations and determines, as proposed, that specific information
related to internal processes, i.e., the percentages retained within
and recovered after the process agent application, and the amounts of
each product and byproduct manufactured during the prior control period
are confidential. The Agency also determines, as proposed, that
specific information related to emissions, i.e., the percentages
emitted from the facility or entrained in the final product, are not
confidential. Additionally, EPA determines that the percentage consumed
in the process agent application is not confidential. These
determinations are listed in a memorandum to the docket for this
rulemaking.
The commenter referenced EPA's proposed determinations of data
elements for annual reports, including examples for internal facility
processes. The commenter stated that this confidential information
includes, but may not be limited to, information proposed to be
submitted under 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(2)(iv) for the amount used as a
process agent that was ultimately transformed, recycled, or destroyed,
and under 40 CFR 82.13(ee)(2)(vi) for the amount of product and
byproduct manufactured in the process agent application. The commenter
further stated that production variability due to market variability is
confidential, supported the Agency's proposed confidentiality
determination concerning the proposed advance notice of change, and, if
the requirements were to be finalized, encouraged EPA to confirm that
the determination applies to information submitted in advance of a
change.
EPA discusses comments concerning the annual report and advance
notice of changes in sections III.B and C. of this preamble. As
specified above in this section of the preamble, the Agency will treat
the confidentiality of submitted information in accordance with its
determinations by rulemaking. Entities may claim other information as
confidential, and EPA will follow the process described in this section
of the preamble. EPA acknowledges the commenter's support in general on
the proposed confidentiality determinations and notes that the Agency
is finalizing in this action a determination that the fact that an
advance notice of changes was submitted is not confidential, but the
changes themselves are confidential.
V. Definitions
EPA is finalizing a definition of ``process agent'' largely the
same as the definition proposed, with the addition of a list explicitly
including currently approved process agent uses, and is finalizing as
proposed two definitions to better reflect current Agency and
international practices. EPA is also adding definitions as part of the
emission reporting requirements this action is establishing in 40 CFR
82.25.
EPA proposed to define the term ``process agent'' for the purposes
of 40 CFR part 82 as ``the use of a controlled substance to form the
environment for a chemical reaction or inhibiting an unintended
chemical reaction (e.g., use as a solvent, catalyst, or stabilizer)
where the controlled substance is not consumed in the reaction, but is
removed or recycled back into the process and where no more than trace
quantities remain in the final product. A feedstock, in contrast, is
entirely consumed during the reaction.'' The Agency also proposed to
switch the definitions of ``facility'' and ``plant'' in 40 CFR 82.3 to
better align with how they would typically be understood and applied.
One commenter supported EPA's proposed definition of ``process
agent.'' EPA acknowledges the first commenter's support for the
proposed definition of ``process agent.''
Another commenter suggested that specific measurable numerical
thresholds for quantities retained in the final product or consumed
during the reaction would provide regulatory clarity. The commenter
recommended EPA define a residual concentration of process agent in a
product as 0.01 percent by weight and to set a consumption rate of
below one percent to distinguish a controlled substance used as a
process agent from one use as a feedstock.
The Agency acknowledges the commenter's statement that including
thresholds may provide additional clarity, but disagrees with the
commenter's suggested changes. EPA did not propose numerical
thresholds, the commenter did not provide supporting evidence to
justify the particular suggested values, and it is not readily apparent
what the appropriate thresholds for these process agent uses would be.
In this action EPA is establishing reporting requirements for these
process agent uses, including for information that would be relevant
for further consideration of this issue. Specifically, as discussed in
section III.A of this preamble, EPA is establishing requirements in the
one-time report for companies to provide details of the amount of
process agent used and of what percentages are subsequently retained
within the process agent application, consumed during the process agent
application, recovered after the process agent application, emitted, or
entrained in the final product. EPA is not establishing numerical
thresholds at this time, but will consider this information, as well as
potential interactions with related
[[Page 82426]]
program areas, as relevant in any future determination the Agency may
make.
A commenter who uses a controlled substance in a manufacturing
process expressed concern that the definition EPA proposed could
unintentionally exclude certain existing uses, including the
commenter's use. The commenter noted that EPA had previously
acknowledged that its use of a controlled substance constituted a
process agent use, the same process agent use is listed in table A to
decision XXXI/6, and the commenter has annually submitted information
to EPA on this process agent use. For clarity and to include existing
approved uses, this commenter recommended that the Agency revise the
definition to reference, in addition to chemical changes, uses that
result in forming the environment for or inhibiting an unintended
physical change, and to specify a physical spinning/extruding process
as an example. Alternatively, the commenter recommended to expand the
definition to include any uses identified in the Technology and
Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP)'s list of process agent usages, and
included in Table A from a TEAP report.
EPA acknowledges the commenter's concerns that the text of the
proposed definition of ``process agent'' could be interpreted to
exclude existing process agent uses. The Agency understands, based on
another TEAP report included in the comments, that the controlled
substance in question is used as an extraction solvent associated with
a chemical reaction process. EPA sought clarification from the
commenter and confirmed that it does not use the process agent for
other purposes. EPA did not intend in this definition to exclude
existing process agent uses that EPA has previously recognized, as
listed in footnote 6 to the proposed rule (88 FR 72030). However, EPA
disagrees that it is appropriate or necessary to include physical
changes in the definition. As EPA discussed in a similar context for
HFC process agents (86 FR 55135), EPA does not have sufficient
information to support a change. It is unclear what other processes
might be included within that wider scope or what the potential
implications may be of including physical changes in the definition.
Furthermore, EPA does not agree that any uses listed by the TEAP should
be incorporated into the definition. Table A, first established in
decision X/14 and most recently updated in decision XXXI/6, includes
all uses that have been permitted among the Parties to the Montreal
Protocol, including those that have not been approved for the United
States. Table A may be subject to further updates by the Parties in the
future, and EPA is aware that five of these uses continue in the United
States. In this action EPA clarifies that the definition of ``process
agent'' includes, but is not limited to, the use of the following
controlled substances in the following process agent applications and
therefore the existing use referenced by the commenter: the use of
carbon tetrachloride in the elimination of nitrogen trichloride in
chlor-alkali production, the use of carbon tetrachloride in the
recovery of chlorine by tail gas absorption from chlor-alkali
production, the use of CFC-11 in the production of synthetic fiber
sheet, the use of bromochloromethane in bromination of a styrenic
polymer, and the use of CFC-113 in the production of high modulus
polyethylene fiber. This definition also includes any other uses of
controlled substances that meet the functional criteria.
One commenter supported EPA's proposed definitions of ``plant'' and
``facility.'' Another commenter stated that the Agency should change
the term ``plant'' to ``unit'' or ``process unit'' because ``plant''
may be used synonymously as EPA's proposed definition of ``facility.''
The commenter also stated that, in addition to process equipment, this
definition should include a collection of process equipment.
EPA acknowledges the first commenter's support for the proposed
definitions. In response to the second commenter, EPA recognizes that
terminologies may vary between particular situations, the term
``plant'' may be used in similar contexts as ``facility,'' the
reference to process equipment could be applied more narrowly to a
process unit, and that a plant would typically contain a collection or
group of process equipment. However, multiple plants may be collocated
within what is commonly considered a facility. These terms have
particular relevance within EPA's domestic requirements and the
Montreal Protocol. For example, in decision X/14 the Parties agreed,
with certain conditions, that no new plants using the listed process
agents would be installed or commissioned. This context more closely
aligns with equipment associated with a process agent application than
an overall industrial site. Similarly, a plant contains any process
equipment associated with the relevant industrial operations. The
definition of ``plant'' is intended to broadly encompass any individual
piece or collection of equipment. EPA further clarifies that this term
includes any equipment that use controlled substances, such as process
agents, related to industrial operations that convert raw materials,
convert feedstock chemicals, or produce other chemicals. EPA is
therefore not adopting the commenter's suggested changes to the
definitions. Moreover, EPA expects the terminology, that is being
finalized as proposed, will be clear for the limited set of entities
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR part 82.
EPA is finalizing the definitions listed in the description of
procedures to implement the proposed emission reporting requirements in
40 CFR part 82, subpart A. These definitions align with existing
practice in 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, and the Agency did not receive
comment on these definitions. The defined terms are: ``batch emission
episode,'' ``batch process or batch operation,'' ``byproduct,''
``continuous process or operation,'' ``difficult-to-monitor,'' ``dual
mechanical seal pump and dual mechanical seal agitator,''
``equipment,'' ``in controlled substance service,'' ``in gas and vapor
service,'' ``in heavy liquid service,'' ``in light liquid service,''
``in vacuum service,'' ``isolated intermediate,'' ``no external shaft
pump and no external shaft agitator,'' ``operating scenario,''
``process,'' ``process condenser,'' ``process vent,'' ``typical
batch,'' ``uncontrolled emissions of controlled substances,'' and
``unsafe-to-monitor.''
VI. Costs and Benefits
The recordkeeping and reporting requirements EPA is establishing in
this rule for uses of ODS as process agents in general codify existing
practices and do not represent substantive additional effort on the
part of affected entities. EPA is aware of six potentially affected
entities, and expects that these entities are already able to meet most
of the requirements based on current practice. These requirements will
support U.S. efforts to report information consistent with Montreal
Protocol decisions and to better understand potential implications of
uses of ODS as process agents under the CAA.
EPA expects that entities that will be affected by this action are
already subject to recordkeeping and reporting requirements under 40
CFR part 82 and that the requirements established in this action will
not result in significant increased burden. In 40 CFR 82.13 and 82.24
the Agency had already required producers of controlled substance to
record and report related information, including requirements in 40 CFR
82.13(f)(2)(vii) and 82.24(b)(2)(vi) to maintain records of any
controlled
[[Page 82427]]
substance used as a feedstock, destroyed in the manufacture of another
substance, used in the manufacture of any other substance, or
introduced into the production process of the same controlled
substance. EPA also requires documentation and reporting for uses of
ODS in processes that result in their transformation or destruction.
Subject entities have already reported similar information to EPA
concerning uses of ODS as a process agent in the past on a voluntary
basis, report similar information concerning production of ODS and
feedstock uses, and already have available process knowledge and
experience necessary to meet the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements established in this action. The codified requirements will
also reduce potential uncertainty about EPA's recordkeeping and
reporting expectations.
This action will result in costs for each subject entity to prepare
an initial one-time report, submit annual reports and notifications of
significant changes as warranted, and recordkeeping. However, with
regards to the annual reports, the Agency has historically solicited
information from the affected entities via annual requests. Therefore,
EPA expects any associated change in burden will be limited relative to
past practice. The Agency conservatively estimates these requirements
to result in costs of approximately $13,000 per facility for the first
year, with the higher costs due to initial preparation of the one-time
report, and $1,000 per facility in following years for continued
compliance with the other recordkeeping and reporting requirements. As
noted in section II.B. of this preamble, EPA does not anticipate the
establishment of new processes or facilities using ODS as process
agents. The Agency did not receive additional information on this
assumption in response to a request for comment at proposal.
The Agency estimates that the annual emissions reporting
requirements being finalized in this action, without accounting for
past practice, will result in additional costs of approximately
$190,000 per facility in the first year due to initial planning and
additional sampling, analysis, monitoring, and calculations. EPA
estimates compliance costs of approximately $17,000 in subsequent years
for continued sampling, analysis, monitoring, and calculations. The
total estimated costs for all requirements are approximately $1.8
million in the first year and $210,000 annually in subsequent years.
The costs are discussed in the supporting statement for the information
collection request (ICR).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094, and was
therefore not subject to a requirement for Executive Order 12866
review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in this rule will be
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that
EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1432.40. You can find a
copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly
summarized here.
This ICR covers provisions under the Montreal Protocol and title VI
of the CAA that establish limits on total U.S. production, import, and
export of class I and class II ozone-depleting substances (or
controlled substances). Production and import of class I controlled
substances was phased out in the United States. The phaseout includes
exceptions for essential uses, critical uses of methyl bromide,
quarantine and pre-shipment uses of methyl bromide, previously used
material, and material that will be transformed or destroyed. There are
also regulations that restrict the use of class II controlled
substances and require a gradual reduction in the production and
consumption of these chemicals leading to their eventual phaseout. The
class II controlled substance phaseout regulations include exceptions
for previously used material and material that will be transformed or
destroyed.
In this action, EPA is establishing requirements for one-time,
annual, and situational reporting and for recordkeeping to provide
relevant information to EPA concerning implications of process agent
uses and emissions and support international agreements concerning the
use of controlled substances as process agents. One-time reporting,
annual reporting, and recordkeeping requirements are consistent with
the existing requirements for importers and producers in 40 CFR 82.13
for class I controlled substances and 40 CFR 82.24 for class II
controlled substances. These requirements are also consistent with
existing practice of facilities subject to this rule who have provided
similar information to EPA concerning these uses of controlled
substances as process agents. The ICR includes these incremental
changes in addition to the existing reporting and recordkeeping
programs that are approved under OMB control number 2060-0170.
Respondents/affected entities: Producers, importers, exporters, and
certain users of ozone-depleting substances, including as process
agents; methyl bromide applicators, distributors, and end users
including commodity storage and quarantine users.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory--sections 603(b),
604(d)(6), and 114 of the CAA.
Estimated number of respondents: 1,175.
Frequency of response: One-time, quarterly, annually, and as
needed.
Total estimated burden: 8,905 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $1,122,911 (per year), including $36,495
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities because none
of the identified affected entities are small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million
(in 1995 dollars, adjusted annually for inflation) or more or more as
described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. While this action creates an
enforceable duty on the private sector, the cost is less than $100
million.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
[[Page 82428]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. EPA is not aware of Tribal businesses engaged in
activities that would be directly affected by this action. Based on the
Agency's assessments, as discussed in section VI of this preamble, EPA
also does not believe that potential effects, even if direct, would be
substantial. Accordingly, this action will not have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action. The Agency has updated Tribal officials on
this air regulation through a monthly meeting of the National Tribal
Air Association.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children,
per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of
the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety risks. Since this action does not
concern human health, EPA's Policy on Children's Health also does not
apply.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and Incorporation
by Reference
This action involves technical standards. EPA has decided to allow
the use of the following ASME, ASTM, and EPA standards as compliance
options under the emission reporting requirements established in this
action. These existing voluntary consensus standards were previously
incorporated under the GHGRP in 40 CFR 98.7 to help facilities monitor,
report, and keep records of GHG emissions. This version of ASTM D6348-
03 was previously incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 60.17 and the
remaining standard versions, except for ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed
2016), were previously incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 98.7. ASME
MFC-3M-2004 specifies the geometry and method of use for pressure
difference devices which give necessary information for calculating
flow rates and associated uncertainties. ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed
2016) specifies procedures to evaluate flow rates using turbine meters.
ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 1994) specifies procedures to evaluate
flow rates using ultrasonic flowmeters that base their operation on the
measurement of transit times of acoustic signals. ASME MFC-6M-1998
describes the use of vortex flowmeters to measure volumetric flow rate
and total flow. ASME MFC-7M-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992) specifies the
geometry and method of use for critical flow venturi nozzles. ASME MFC-
9M-1988 (Reaffirmed 2001) specifies a method to calculate liquid flow
rate and uncertainties by measuring the mass of liquid delivered into a
weighing tank in a known time interval. ASME MFC-11M-2006 gives
guidelines for the selection, installation, calibration, and operation
of Coriolis flow meters for the determination of mass flow, density,
volume flow, and other related parameters of flowing fluids. ASME MFC-
14M-2003 specifies the geometry and method of use for orifice meters.
The ASME standards are available for purchase from Two Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10016, phone: 800.843.2763, email: [email protected];
website: www.asme.org. In this action EPA is incorporating by reference
versions of these standards that are not available through the ASME
website. These versions are available for purchase from private
resellers, including Nimonik Document Center, 401 Roland Way, Suite
224, Oakland, CA 94624; phone (650)591-7600; email: center.com">info@document-center.com; website: www.document-center.com. The cost of an electronic
copy is $100 for ASME MFC-3M-2004, $33 for ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed
2016), $29 for ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 1994), $35 for ASME MFC-6M-
1998, $65 for ASME MFC-7M-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992), $32 for ASME MFC-9M-
1988 (Reaffirmed 2001), $46 for ASME MFC-11M-2006, and $40 for ASME
MFC-14M-2003.
ASTM D6348-03 specifies a test method to quantify gas phase
concentrations of target analytes by using extractive direct interface
FTIR spectroscopy. The ASTM International standard is available for
purchase from ASTM International at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428; tel.: 610.832.9500;
[email protected]; website: https://www.astm.org/. The cost of an
electronic copy is $83 for ASTM D6348-03. The cost of obtaining the
applicable ASME and ASTM standards is not a significant financial
burden.
EPA's Approved Alternative Method 012 specifies procedures to use a
tracer gas to determine the stack gas volumetric flow rate when low
velocities and temporal variations complicate measurement. The
Emissions Inventory Improvement Program, Volume II: Chapter 16 provides
methods for estimating air emissions from chemical manufacturing
facilities. EPA-453/R-95-017 provides a protocol to generic process
unit-specific estimates for equipment leak emissions. EPA-430-R-10-003
provides a protocol for two specific methods for measuring abatement
system inlet and outlet flows, and hence destruction or removal
efficiencies, for process equipment. EPA's Other Test Method 24
specifies a tracer gas procedure with a gas chromatograph and flame
ionizer detector to measure the volumetric flow rate. The EPA standards
are freely available from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency at 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, 202.272.0167, https://www.epa.gov. Electronic copies are available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-08/documents/alt-012.pdf for Approved
Alternative Method 012; https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-08/documents/ii16_aug2007final.pdf for Emissions Inventory Improvement
Program, Volume II: Chapter 16, Methods for Estimating Air Emissions
from Chemical Manufacturing Facilities, August 2007; https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/documents/protocol_for_equipment_leak_emission_estimates.pdf, November 1995 for
EPA-453/R-95-017; https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-02/documents/dre_protocol.pdf, March 2010 for EPA 430-R-10-003; and
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-08/documents/otm24.pdf for
Other Test Method 24. Therefore, EPA concludes that the ASME, ASTM, and
EPA standards being incorporated by reference are reasonably available.
[[Page 82429]]
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and
Executive Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All
EPA believes that this type of action does not concern human health
or environmental conditions and therefore cannot be evaluated with
respect to potentially disproportionate and adverse effects on
communities with environmental justice concerns because it does not
impact emissions from subject facilities. This regulatory action
establishes reporting and recordkeeping requirements that do not impact
human health or the environment, but provide additional insight into
the uses and emissions of ODS used as process agents.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Emissions, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended
as follows:
PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE
0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.
0
2. Amend Sec. 82.3 by:
0
a. Adding the definitions of ``Batch emission episode'', ``Batch
process or batch operation'', ``Byproduct'', ``Continuous process or
operation'', ``Difficult-to-monitor'', ``Dual mechanical seal pump and
dual mechanical seal agitator'', and ``Equipment'' in alphabetical
order;
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Facility'';
0
c. Adding the definitions of ``In controlled substance service'', ``In
gas and vapor service'', ``In heavy liquid service'', ``In light liquid
service'', ``In vacuum service'', ``Isolated intermediate'', ``No
external shaft pump and no external shaft agitator'', and ``Operating
scenario'' in alphabetical order;
0
d. Revising the definition of ``Plant''; and
0
e. Adding the definitions of ``Process'', ``Process agent'', ``Process
condenser'', ``Process vent'', ``Typical batch'', ``Uncontrolled
emissions of controlled substances'', and ``Unsafe-to-monitor'' in
alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 82.3 Definitions for class I and class II controlled substances.
* * * * *
Batch emission episode means a discrete venting episode associated
with a vessel in a process; a vessel may have more than one batch
emission episode. For example, a displacement of vapor resulting from
the charging of a vessel with a feed material will result in a discrete
emission episode that will last through the duration of the charge and
will have an average flow rate equal to the rate of the charge. If the
vessel is then heated, there will also be another discrete emission
episode resulting from the expulsion of expanded vapor. Other emission
episodes also may occur from the same vessel and other vessels in the
process, depending on process operations.
Batch process or batch operation means a noncontinuous operation
involving intermittent or discontinuous feed into equipment, and, in
general, involves the emptying of the equipment after the batch
operation ceases and prior to beginning a new operation. Addition of
raw material and withdrawal of product do not occur simultaneously in a
batch operation.
* * * * *
Byproduct (for the purpose of this subpart only) means a chemical
that is produced coincidentally during the production of another
chemical.
* * * * *
Continuous process or operation means a process where the inputs
and outputs flow continuously throughout the duration of the process.
Continuous processes are typically steady state.
* * * * *
Difficult-to-monitor means the equipment piece may not be monitored
without elevating the monitoring personnel more than 2 meters (7 feet)
above a support surface or it is not accessible in a safe manner when
it is in controlled substance service.
* * * * *
Dual mechanical seal pump and dual mechanical seal agitator means a
pump or agitator equipped with a dual mechanical seal system that
includes a barrier fluid system where the barrier fluid is not in light
liquid service; each barrier fluid system is equipped with a sensor
that will detect failure of the seal system, the barrier fluid system,
or both; and meets the following requirements:
(1) Each dual mechanical seal system is operated with the
barrier fluid at a pressure that is at all times (except periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction) greater than the pump or agitator
stuffing box pressure; or
(2) Equipped with a barrier fluid degassing reservoir that is
routed to a process or fuel gas system or connected by a closed-vent
system to a control device; or
(3) Equipped with a closed-loop system that purges the barrier
fluid into a process stream.
* * * * *
Equipment (for the purposes of Sec. 82.25 only) means each pump,
compressor, agitator, pressure relief device, sampling connection
system, open-ended valve or line, valve, connector, and instrumentation
system in controlled substance service for a process listed in Sec.
82.25(b)(2); and any destruction units or closed-vent systems to which
corresponding processes are vented.
* * * * *
Facility means one or more plants at the same location owned by or
under common control of the same person.
* * * * *
In controlled substance service means that a piece of equipment
that engages in an activity listed in Sec. 82.25(b)(2), either
contains or contacts a controlled substance that is a liquid or gas,
and contains at least 5 percent by weight of a controlled substance.
In gas and vapor service means that a piece of equipment in
regulated material service contains a gas or vapor at operating
conditions.
In heavy liquid service means that a piece of equipment in
regulated material service is not in gas and vapor service or in light
liquid service.
In light liquid service means that a piece of equipment in
regulated material service contains a liquid that meets the following
conditions:
(1) The vapor pressure of one or more of the compounds is greater
than 0.3 kilopascals at 20 [deg]C;
(2) The total concentration of the pure compounds constituents
having a vapor pressure greater than 0.3 kilopascals at 20 [deg]C is
equal to or greater than 20 percent by weight of the total process
stream; and
(3) The fluid is a liquid at operating conditions.
Note 1 to definition of ``in light liquid service'': Vapor
pressures may be determined by standard reference texts or ASTM D-2879.
[[Page 82430]]
In vacuum service means that equipment is operating at an internal
pressure which is at least 5 kilopascals below ambient pressure.
* * * * *
Isolated intermediate means a product of a process that is stored
before subsequent processing. An isolated intermediate is usually a
product of chemical synthesis. Storage of an isolated intermediate
marks the end of a process. Storage occurs at any time the intermediate
is placed in equipment used solely for storage.
* * * * *
No external shaft pump and no external shaft agitator means any
pump or agitator that is designed with no externally actuated shaft
penetrating the pump or agitator housing.
* * * * *
Operating scenario means any specific operation of a process and
includes the information specified in paragraphs (1) through (5) of
this definition for each process. A change or series of changes to any
of these elements, except for paragraph (4) of this definition,
constitutes a different operating scenario.
(1) A description of the process, the specific process equipment
used, and the range of operating conditions for the process.
(2) An identification of related process vents, their associated
emissions episodes and durations, and calculations and engineering
analyses to show the annual uncontrolled emissions of controlled
substances from the process vent.
(3) The control or destruction units used, as applicable, including
a description of operating and/or testing conditions for any associated
destruction unit.
(4) The process vents (including those from other processes) that
are simultaneously routed to the control or destruction unit(s).
(5) The applicable monitoring requirements and any parametric level
that assures destruction or removal for all emissions routed to the
control or destruction unit.
* * * * *
Plant means any process equipment (e.g., reactor, distillation
column) used to convert raw materials or feedstock chemicals into
controlled substances or use controlled substances in the production of
other chemicals.
* * * * *
Process (for the purposes of Sec. 82.25 only) means all equipment
that collectively functions to engage in an activity listed in Sec.
82.25(b)(2). A process may consist of one or more unit operations. For
the purposes of Sec. 82.25, process includes any, all, or a
combination of reaction, recovery, separation, purification, or other
activity, operation, manufacture, or treatment which are used to engage
in an activity listed in Sec. 82.25(b)(2). For a continuous process,
cleaning operations may be considered part of the process at the
discretion of the facility. For a batch process, cleaning operations
are part of the process. Ancillary activities are not considered a
process or part of any process under Sec. 82.25. Ancillary activities
include boilers and incinerators, chillers and refrigeration systems,
and other equipment and activities that are not directly involved
(i.e., they operate within a closed system and materials are not
combined with process fluids) in an activity listed in Sec.
82.25(b)(2).
Process agent means a controlled substance used to form the
environment for a chemical reaction or inhibit an unintended chemical
reaction (e.g., use as a solvent, catalyst, or stabilizer) where the
controlled substance is not consumed in the reaction, but is removed or
recycled back into the process and where no more than trace quantities
remain in the final product. A feedstock, in contrast, is consumed
during the reaction. The term process agent includes, but is not
limited to: carbon tetrachloride used in the elimination of nitrogen
trichloride in chlor-alkali production, carbon tetrachloride used in
the recovery of chlorine by tail gas absorption from chlor-alkali
production, CFC-11 used in the production of synthetic fiber sheet,
bromochloromethane used in the bromination of a styrenic polymer, and
CFC-113 used in the production of high modulus polyethylene fiber.
Process condenser means a condenser whose primary purpose is to
recover material as an integral part of a process. All condensers
recovering condensate from a process vent at or above the boiling point
or all condensers in line prior to a vacuum source are considered
process condensers. Typically, a primary condenser or condensers in
series are considered to be integral to the process if they are capable
of and normally used for the purpose of recovering chemicals for fuel
value (i.e., net positive heating value), use, reuse or for sale for
fuel value, use, or reuse.
Process vent means a vent from a process vessel or vents from
multiple process vessels within a process that are manifolded together
into a common header, through which a controlled substance-containing
gas stream is, or has the potential to be, released to the atmosphere
(or the point of entry into a control device, if any). Examples of
process vents include, but are not limited to, vents on condensers used
for product recovery, bottoms receivers, surge control vessels,
reactors, filters, centrifuges, and process tanks. Process vents do not
include vents on storage tanks, wastewater emission sources, or pieces
of equipment.
* * * * *
Typical batch means a batch process operated within a range of
operating conditions that are documented in an operating scenario.
Emissions from a typical batch are based on the operating conditions
that result in representative emissions. The typical batch defines the
uncontrolled emissions for each emission episode defined under the
operating scenario.
Uncontrolled emissions of controlled substance means a gas stream
containing a controlled substance which has exited the process (or
process condenser or control condenser, where applicable), but which
has not yet been introduced into a destruction unit to reduce the mass
of controlled substance in the stream. If the emissions from the
process are not routed to a destruction unit, uncontrolled emissions
are those controlled substance emissions released to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
Unsafe-to-monitor means that monitoring personnel would be exposed
to an immediate danger as a consequence of monitoring the piece of
equipment. Examples of unsafe-to-monitor equipment include, but are not
limited to, equipment under extreme pressure or heat.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 82.13 by:
0
a. In paragraph (c), adding the words ``or another format specified by
EPA'' after the words ``Central Data Exchange''; and
0
b. Adding paragraph (ee).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 82.13 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements for class I
controlled substances.
* * * * *
(ee) Process agents. Any entity that uses a class I controlled
substance as a process agent must comply, in addition to the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements in Sec. 82.25, with the
following recordkeeping and reporting requirements for each facility
that uses a class I controlled substance as a process agent:
(1) Reporting--one-time report. By February 7, 2025, or within 120
days of the date that an entity first uses a class I controlled
substance as a process
[[Page 82431]]
agent, whichever is later, any entity that uses a class I controlled
substance as a process agent must submit to the Administrator a report
containing the following information for each use of a class I
controlled substance as a process agent:
(i) The name and address of each facility and plant, and each
responsible person's name, email address, and phone number;
(ii) The name, purpose, and final product manufactured of each
process agent application that uses a class I controlled substance;
(iii) The start-up date of each facility and the start-up date of
each plant that uses a class I controlled substance as a process agent;
(iv) For each facility, the names and amounts of each product and
byproduct manufactured in the process agent application during the
previous control period, including amounts destroyed or used as a
feedstock;
(v) For each facility, the total air, fugitive air, and stack point
air emissions of class I controlled substances used as a process agent
during the previous control period;
(vi) For each facility, a description of technologies currently
being used and actions taken or currently under evaluation to minimize
use or emissions of class I controlled substances used as process
agents (including estimated emissions reductions associated with each);
and
(vii) For each facility, a description that includes details of the
percentages of class I controlled substances used as a process agent
and:
(A) Retained within the process agent application;
(B) Consumed in the process agent application;
(C) Recovered after the process agent application;
(D) Emitted; and
(E) Entrained in the final product.
(2) Annual reports. Any entity that uses a class I controlled
substance as a process agent must provide by February 14 of each year
an annual report for the previous control period containing the
following information for each use of the class I controlled substance
as a process agent:
(i) For each facility, contact information including email address
and phone number for a primary and alternate contact person;
(ii) For each facility, the name and amount of each class I
controlled substance initially introduced into the process agent
application for use as a process agent, specified independently for
paragraphs (ee)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) of this section by whether the
class I controlled substance was:
(A) Obtained as virgin;
(B) Obtained as used;
(C) Produced by the entity;
(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer;
(E) Imported;
(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a different use; and
(G) Reclaimed by another entity;
(iii) For each facility, the name and amount of each class I
controlled substance used as a process agent and reused or recycled for
use by the entity for continued use in the same process agent
application at the same facility;
(iv) For each facility, the name and amount of each class I
controlled substance used as a process agent that was ultimately:
(A) Transformed;
(B) Reused or recycled for use in a different process agent
application; or
(C) Destroyed by approved destruction technologies;
(v) For each facility, the total air, fugitive air, and stack point
air emissions of each class I controlled substance used as a process
agent;
(vi) For each facility, the names and amounts of each product and
byproduct manufactured in the process agent application during the
previous control period, including amounts destroyed or used as a
feedstock;
(vii) For each facility, a description of emission reduction
actions for class I controlled substances used as a process agent taken
since the last one-time or annual report, planned, or currently under
evaluation; and
(viii) For each entity, any process agent application changes
anticipated to result in increases for the next annual report, as
compared to the previous control period and the average of the three
previous control periods, of the following magnitude must be specified
in a report submitted to EPA at least 180 days prior to implementing
the change:
(A) Greater than 20 percent of the amount of class I controlled
substance initially introduced for use as a process agent; or
(B) At least one metric ton and 20 percent of the amount emitted
during use as a process agent.
(3) Recordkeeping. Every entity who uses a class I controlled
substance as a process agent during a control period must maintain the
following records, as applicable:
(i) Dated records of the quantity of each class I controlled
substance initially introduced at each facility into the process
application for use as a process agent;
(ii) Dated records of the quantity of each class I controlled
substance produced at each facility for use as a process agent;
(iii) Records identifying the producer or importer of the class I
controlled substance received at each facility for use as a process
agent by the entity;
(iv) For each facility, copies of the invoices or receipts
documenting the sale or other transfer of ownership of each class I
controlled substance for use as a process agent to the entity;
(v) Dated records identifying the quantity of each product
manufactured within each facility by using a class I controlled
substance as a process agent;
(vi) For each facility, records of the date and the estimated
quantity of any spill or release of each class I controlled substance
used as a process agent that equals or exceeds 100 pounds;
(vii) For each facility, a description of the methodology used to
measure and calculate emissions, and dated records of equipment
parameters, measured data, supporting calculations, and other rationale
used to validate reported emission quantities;
(viii) For each facility, dated records of the quantity of each
class I controlled substance used as a process agent which is
subsequently transformed or destroyed;
(ix) In the case where class I controlled substances used as a
process agent were ultimately transformed by an entity other than the
entity which last used the class I controlled substances as a process
agent, a copy of the Internal Revenue Service Certificate showing that
the purchaser or recipient of the controlled substance, in the United
States or in another country that is a Party, certifies the intent to
transform the controlled substance, or sell the controlled substance
for transformation; and
(x) In the case where class I controlled substances used as a
process agent were ultimately destroyed by an entity other than the
entity which last used the class I controlled substances as a process
agent, a copy of the destruction verification (as in paragraph (k) of
this section), showing that the purchaser or recipient of a controlled
substance, in the United States or in another country that is a Party,
certifies the intent to destroy the controlled substance, or sell the
controlled substance for destruction.
(4) Request for extension. Any entity that uses a class I
controlled substance as a process agent may request an extension to
comply with paragraph (ee)(1) of this section.
(i) This request must include the following information:
(A) Name of the facility submitting the request, contact
information for a
[[Page 82432]]
person at the facility, and the address of the facility;
(B) An explanation of the reasons that an extension is necessary
and the timeline that would be practicable; and
(C) Supporting documentation of the circumstances.
(ii) The Administrator will review the request and, within five
working days of receiving a complete request, provide notification of
whether the request is granted and when the report is due.
(5) Notification that use has ceased. Reports are no longer
required for process agent use starting in the year after an entity
notifies the Administrator that they have permanently ceased use of all
class I controlled substances as a process agent, but the entity must
continue to comply with all applicable recordkeeping requirements.
Sec. 82.14 [Amended]
0
4. Amend Sec. 82.14, in paragraph (a), by adding the words ``or
another format specified by EPA'' after the words ``Central Data
Exchange.''
0
5. Amend Sec. 82.24 by:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1), adding the words ``or another format specified
by EPA'' after the words ``Central Data Exchange''; and
0
b. Adding paragraph (g).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 82.24 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements for class II
controlled substances.
* * * * *
(g) Process agents. Any entity that uses a class II controlled
substance as a process agent must comply, in addition to the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements in Sec. 82.25, with the
following recordkeeping and reporting requirements for each facility
that uses a class II controlled substance as a process agent:
(1) Reporting--one-time report. By February 7, 2025, or within 120
days of the date that an entity first uses a class II controlled
substance as a process agent, whichever is later, any entity that uses
a class II controlled substance as a process agent must submit to the
Administrator a report containing the following information for each
use of a class II controlled substance as a process agent:
(i) The name and address of each facility and plant, and each
responsible person's name, email address, and phone number;
(ii) The name, purpose, and final product manufactured of each
process agent application that uses a class II controlled substance;
(iii) The start-up date of each facility and the start-up date of
each plant that uses a class II controlled substance as a process
agent;
(iv) For each facility, the names and amounts of each product and
byproduct manufactured in the process agent application during the
previous control period, including amounts destroyed or used as a
feedstock;
(v) For each facility, the total air, fugitive air, and stack point
air emissions of class II controlled substances used as a process agent
during the previous control period;
(vi) For each facility, a description of technologies currently
being used and actions taken or currently under evaluation to minimize
use or emissions of class II controlled substances used as process
agents (including estimated emissions reductions associated with each);
and
(vii) For each facility, a description that includes details of the
percentages of class II controlled substances used as a process agent
and:
(A) Retained within the process agent application;
(B) Consumed in the process agent application;
(C) Recovered after the process agent application;
(D) Emitted; and
(E) Entrained in the final product.
(2) Annual reports. Any entity that uses a class II controlled
substance as a process agent must provide by February 14 of each year
an annual report for the previous control period containing the
following information for each use of the class II controlled substance
as a process agent:
(i) For each facility, contact information including email address
and phone number for a primary and alternate contact person;
(ii) For each facility, the name and amount of each class II
controlled substance initially introduced into the process agent
application for use as a process agent, specified independently for
paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) of this section by whether the
class II controlled substance was:
(A) Obtained as virgin;
(B) Obtained as used;
(C) Produced by the entity;
(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer;
(E) Imported;
(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a different use; and
(G) Reclaimed by another entity;
(iii) For each facility, the name and amount of each class II
controlled substance used as a process agent and reused or recycled for
use by the entity for continued use in the same process agent
application at the same facility;
(iv) For each facility, the name and amount of each class II
controlled substance used as a process agent that was ultimately:
(A) Transformed;
(B) Reused or recycled for use in a different process agent
application; or
(C) Destroyed by approved destruction technologies;
(v) For each facility, the total air, fugitive air, and stack point
air emissions of each class II controlled substance used as a process
agent;
(vi) For each facility, the names and amounts of each product and
byproduct manufactured in the process agent application during the
previous control period, including amounts destroyed or used as a
feedstock;
(vii) For each facility, a description of emission reduction
actions for class II controlled substances used as a process agent
taken since the last one-time or annual report, planned, or currently
under evaluation; and
(viii) For each entity, any process agent application changes
anticipated to result in increases for the next annual report, as
compared to the previous control period and the average of the three
previous control periods, of the following magnitude must be specified
in a report submitted to EPA at least 180 days prior to implementing
the change:
(A) Greater than 20 percent of the amount of class II controlled
substance initially introduced for use as a process agent; or
(B) At least one metric ton and 20 percent of the amount emitted
during use as a process agent.
(3) Recordkeeping. Every entity who uses a class II controlled
substance as a process agent during a control period must maintain the
following records, as applicable:
(i) Dated records of the quantity of each class II controlled
substance initially introduced at each facility into the process
application for use as a process agent;
(ii) Dated records of the quantity of each class II controlled
substance produced at each facility for use as a process agent;
(iii) Records identifying the producer or importer of the class II
controlled substance received at each facility for use as a process
agent by the entity;
(iv) For each facility, copies of the invoices or receipts
documenting the sale or other transfer of ownership of each class II
controlled substance for use as a process agent to the entity;
(v) Dated records identifying the quantity of each product
manufactured within each facility by using a class II controlled
substance as a process agent;
(vi) For each facility, records of the date and the estimated
quantity of any spill or release of each class II
[[Page 82433]]
controlled substance used as a process agent that equals or exceeds 100
pounds;
(vii) For each facility, a description of the methodology used to
measure and calculate emissions, and dated records of equipment
parameters, measured data, supporting calculations, and other rationale
used to validate reported emission quantities;
(viii) For each facility, dated records of the quantity of each
class II controlled substance used as a process agent which is
subsequently transformed or destroyed;
(ix) In the case where class II controlled substances used as a
process agent were ultimately transformed by an entity other than the
entity which last used the class II controlled substances as a process
agent, a copy of the entity's transformation verification as provided
under paragraph (e)(3) of this section; and
(x) In the case where class II controlled substances used as a
process agent were ultimately destroyed by an entity other than the
entity which last used the class II controlled substances as a process
agent, a copy of the entity's destruction verification, as provided
under paragraph (e)(5) of this section.
(4) Request for extension. Any entity that uses a class II
controlled substance as a process agent may request an extension to
comply with paragraph (g)(1) of this section.
(i) This request must include the following information:
(A) Name of the facility submitting the request, contact
information for a person at the facility, and the address of the
facility;
(B) An explanation of the reasons that an extension is necessary
and the timeline that would be practicable; and
(C) Supporting documentation of the circumstances.
(ii) The Administrator will review the request and, within five
working days of receiving a complete request, provide notification of
whether the request is granted and when the report is due.
(5) Notification that use has ceased. Reports are no longer
required for process agent use starting in the year after an entity
notifies the Administrator that they have permanently ceased use of all
class II controlled substances as a process agent, but the entity must
continue to comply with all applicable recordkeeping requirements.
0
6. Add Sec. 82.25 to read as follows:
Sec. 82.25 Emissions of controlled substances from industrial
sources.
(a) Source applicability. The requirements specified in this
section apply to every entity which engages in any of the following
activities:
(1) Use of a controlled substance as a process agent.
(2) [Reserved]
(b) Emissions of controlled substances to report. Every entity that
engages in any activity listed in paragraph (a) of this section must
report, for each applicable facility, emissions of the controlled
substances in paragraph (b)(1) of this section from the processes
listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(1) Emissions of controlled substances. For purposes of reporting
emissions under this section, the term ``controlled substance'' applies
to the following controlled substances:
(i) Each controlled substance used as a process agent.
(ii) [Reserved]
(2) Processes. For purposes of this section, the term ``process''
applies to the following activities:
(i) Each activity listed in paragraph (a) of this section;
(ii) Each separation process for the reuse or recycling of the
controlled substance;
(iii) Each transformation process of the controlled substance,
where the controlled substance is produced at the facility and used in
processes resulting in its transformation at the same facility;
(iv) Each transformation process of the controlled substance at the
facility, where one or more of the controlled substances transformed at
the facility is produced at another facility; and
(v) Each destruction process of the controlled substance.
(c) Calculating emissions for controlled substances. For every
activity listed in paragraph (a) of this section, each entity must
calculate emissions of the controlled substances from each process
using the emission factor, emission calculation factor, or mass balance
method specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section, as
appropriate. The mass balance method may only be used for batch
operations without on-site production or transformation of controlled
substances. For destruction processes that destroy controlled
substances, the entity must calculate emissions using the procedures in
paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
(1) Emission factor and emission calculation factor methods. To use
the method in this paragraph (c)(1) for batch processes, each entity
must use the methods in either paragraph (c)(1)(iii) (Emission Factor
approach) or (iv) (Emission Calculation Factor approach) of this
section. To use the method in this paragraph (c)(1) for continuous
processes, the entity must first make a preliminary estimate of the
emissions from each individual continuous process vent under paragraph
(c)(1)(i) of this section. If the entity's continuous process operates
under different conditions as part of normal operations, that entity
must also define the different operating scenarios and make a
preliminary estimate of the emissions from the vent for each operating
scenario. Then, compare the preliminary estimate for each continuous
process vent (summed across operating scenarios) to the criteria in
paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section to determine whether the process
vent meets the criteria for using the emission factor method described
in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section or whether the process vent
meets the criteria for using the emission calculation factor method
described in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. For continuous
process vents that meet the criteria for using the emission factor
method described in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section and that have
more than one operating scenario, compare the preliminary estimate for
each operating scenario to the criteria in paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(B) of
this section to determine whether an emission factor must be developed
for that operating scenario.
(i) Preliminary estimate of emissions by process vent. Each entity
must estimate the annual emissions of the controlled substance for each
process vent within each operating scenario of a continuous process
using the approaches specified in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) or (B) of this
section, accounting for any destruction as specified in paragraph
(c)(1)(i)(C) of this section. The entity must determine emissions of
controlled substances by process vent by using measurements, by using
calculations based on chemical engineering principles and chemical
property data, or by conducting an engineering assessment. The entity
may use previously conducted measurements, calculations, or assessments
if they represent current process operating conditions or process
operating conditions that would result in higher controlled substance
emissions than the current operating conditions and if they were
performed in accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of
this section, as applicable. The entity must document all data,
assumptions, and procedures used in the calculations or engineering
assessment and keep a record of the emissions determination as required
by paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
(A) Engineering calculations. For process vent emission
calculations, each entity may use any of paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A)(1),
(2), or (3) of this section.
[[Page 82434]]
(1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Inventory
Improvement Program, Volume II: Chapter 16, Methods for Estimating Air
Emissions from Chemical Manufacturing Facilities, August 2007, Final
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(2) Each entity may determine the controlled substance emissions
from any process vent within the process using the procedures specified
in Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3)(i)(B) of this chapter, except as
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section. For the purposes of this section, use of the term ``HAP'' in
Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3)(i)(B) of this chapter means
``controlled substance.''
(i) To calculate emissions caused by the heating of a vessel
without a process condenser to a temperature lower than the boiling
point, each entity must use the procedures in Sec.
63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(3) of this chapter.
(ii) To calculate emissions from depressurization of a vessel
without a process condenser, each entity must use the procedures in
Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(D)(10) of this chapter.
(iii) To calculate emissions from vacuum systems, the terms used in
equation 33 to Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(E) of this chapter are defined as
follows. Psystem means the absolute pressure of the
receiving vessel. P\i\ means the partial pressure of the controlled
substance determined at the exit temperature and exit pressure
conditions of the condenser or at the conditions of the dedicated
receiver. Pj means the partial pressure of condensables
(including controlled substances) determined at the exit temperature
and exit pressure conditions of the condenser or at the conditions of
the dedicated receiver. MWcontrolled substance means the
molecular weight of the controlled substance determined at the exit
temperature and exit pressure conditions of the condenser or at the
conditions of the dedicated receiver.
(iv) To calculate emissions when a vessel is equipped with a
process condenser or a control condenser, each entity must use the
procedures in Sec. 63.1257(d)(3)(i)(B) of this chapter, except as
follows. Each entity must determine the flow rate of gas (or volume of
gas), partial pressures of condensables, temperature (T), and
controlled substance molecular weight
(MWcontrolled substance) at the exit temperature and exit
pressure conditions of the condenser or at the conditions of the
dedicated receiver. Each entity must assume that all of the components
contained in the condenser exit vent stream are in equilibrium with the
same components in the exit condensate stream (except for
noncondensables). Each entity must perform a material balance for each
component, if the condensate receiver composition is not known. For the
emissions from purging, the term for time, t, must be used in equation
12 to Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) of this chapter. Emissions from empty
vessel purging must be calculated using equation 36 to Sec.
63.1257(d)(2)(i)(H) of this chapter and the exit temperature and exit
pressure conditions of the condenser or the conditions of the dedicated
receiver.
(3) Commercial software products that follow chemical engineering
principles (e.g., including the calculation methodologies in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i)(A)(1) and (2) of this section).
(B) Engineering assessments. For process vent emissions
determinations, each entity may conduct an engineering assessment to
calculate uncontrolled emissions. An engineering assessment includes,
but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Previous test results, provided the tests are representative of
current operating practices of the process.
(2) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data representative of the
process operating conditions.
(3) Maximum flow rate, controlled substance emission rate,
concentration, or other relevant parameters specified or implied within
a permit limit applicable to the process vent.
(4) Design analysis based on chemical engineering principles,
measurable process parameters, or physical or chemical laws or
properties.
(C) Impact of destruction for the preliminary estimate. If the
process vent is vented to a destruction unit, each entity may reflect
the impact of the destruction unit on emissions. In the emissions
estimate, account for the following:
(1) The demonstrated destruction efficiencies of the device for the
controlled substance in the vent stream for periods when the
destruction device is in use.
(2) Any periods when the process vent is not vented to the
destruction unit.
(D) Use of typical recent values. In the calculations in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section, the values used for the
expected process activity and for the expected fraction of that
activity, whose emissions will be vented to the properly functioning
destruction unit, must be based on either typical recent values for the
process or values that overestimate emissions from the process, unless
there is a compelling reason to adopt a different value (e.g.,
installation of a destruction unit for a previously uncontrolled
process). If there is such a reason, it must be documented in the
monitoring plan.
(ii) Method selection for continuous process vents. (A) Based on
the calculations under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, as well as
any subsequent measurements and calculations under this section, rank
the process vents based on controlled substance emissions, upstream of
any destruction unit, summed across all operating scenarios, from
largest to smallest estimated annual emissions of controlled
substances. The continuous process vents that comprise the top quartile
of estimated annual emissions of controlled substances must use the
method in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section (Emission Factor
approach). The process vent emissions will be based on the past 3 years
for the ranking analysis.
(B) The remaining continuous process vents that comprise the bottom
three quartiles of estimated annual emissions of controlled substances
may use either the emission factor method specified in paragraph
(c)(1)(iii) of this section (Emission Factor approach) or a method
specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section (Emission Calculation
Factor approach).
(1) Each entity must conduct emission testing for process-vent-
specific emission factor development upstream of the destruction unit.
(2) The emission testing for process-vent-specific emission factor
development may be conducted on the outlet side of a wet scrubber in
place for acid gas reduction, if there is no appreciable reduction in
the controlled substance by the wet scrubber.
(iii) Process-vent-specific emission factor method. For each
process vent, each entity must conduct an emission test according to
the procedures in paragraph (d) of this section and measure the process
activity, such as the feed rate, production rate, or other process
activity rate, during the test as described in this paragraph
(c)(1)(iii). All emissions test data and procedures used in developing
emission factors must be documented according to paragraph (f) of this
section. If more than one operating scenario applies to the process
that contains the subject process vent, each entity must use the method
in either paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(A) or (B) of this section.
(A) Conduct a separate emissions test for operation under each
operating scenario.
(B) Conduct an emissions test for the operating scenario that is
expected to have the largest emissions of controlled substances
(considering both activity
[[Page 82435]]
levels and emission calculation factors) on an annual basis. Also
conduct an emissions test for each additional operating scenario for
which the emission calculation factor differs by 15 percent or more
from the emission calculation factor of the operating scenario that is
expected to have the largest emissions(or of another operating scenario
for which emission testing is performed), unless the difference between
the operating scenarios is solely due to the application of a
destruction unit to emissions under one of the operating scenarios. For
any other operating scenarios, adjust the process-vent specific
emission factor developed for the operating scenario that is expected
to have the largest emissions (or for another operating scenario for
which emission testing is performed) using the approach in paragraph
(c)(1)(iii)(G) of this section.
(C) Each entity must measure the process activity, such as the
process feed rate, process production rate, or other process activity
rate, as applicable, during the emissions test and calculate the rate
for the test period, in kg (or another appropriate metric) per hour.
(D) For continuous processes, each entity must calculate the hourly
emission rate of each controlled substance using equation 1 to this
paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(D) and determine the hourly emission rate of each
controlled substance per process vent (and per operating scenario, as
applicable) for the test run.
Equation 1 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(D)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.000
Where:
EContPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from
process vent v from process i, operating scenario j, during the
emission test during test run r (kg/hr).
CPV = Concentration of controlled substance p during test
run r of the emission test (ppmv).
MW = Molecular weight of controlled substance p (g/g-mole).
QPV = Flow rate of the process vent stream during test
run r of the emission test (m3/min).
SV = Standard molar volume of gas (0.0240 m\3\/g-mole at 68 [deg]F
and 1 atm).
1/10\3\ = Conversion factor (1 kilogram/1,000 grams).
60/1 = Conversion factor (60 minutes/1 hour).
(E) Each entity must calculate a site-specific, process-vent-
specific emission factor for each controlled substance for each process
vent and each operating scenario, in kg of controlled substance per
process activity rate (e.g., kg of feed or production), as applicable,
using equation 2 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(E). For continuous
processes, divide the hourly controlled substance emission rate during
the test by the hourly process activity rate during the test runs.
Equation 2 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(E)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.001
Where:
EFPV = Emission factor for controlled substance p emitted
from process vent v during process i, operating scenario j (e.g., kg
emitted/kg activity).
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i, operating scenario j, during the emission
test during test run r, for either continuous or batch (kg emitted/
hr for continuous, kg emitted/batch for batch).
ActivityEmissionTest = Process feed, process production,
or other process activity rate for process i, operating scenario j,
during the emission test during test run r (e.g., kg product/hr).
r = Number of test runs performed during the emission test.
(F) If emissions testing is conducted upstream of the destruction
unit, apply the destruction efficiencies of the device that have been
demonstrated for the controlled substance in the vent stream to the
controlled substance emissions for the process vent (and operating
scenario, as applicable), using equation 3 to this paragraph
(c)(1)(iii)(F). Each entity may apply the destruction efficiency only
to the portion of the process activity during which emissions are
vented to the properly functioning destruction unit (i.e., controlled).
Equation 3 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(F)
EPV = EFPV-U * (Activityu + Activityc * (1-DE))
Where:
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i, operating scenario j, for the year,
considering destruction efficiency (kg).
EFPV-U = Emission factor (uncontrolled) for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j (kg emitted/kg product).
ActivityU = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j, during
the year for which the process vent is not vented to the properly
functioning destruction unit (e.g., kg product).
ActivityC = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j, during
the year for which the process vent is vented to the properly
functioning destruction unit (e.g., kg product).
DE = Demonstrated destruction efficiency of the destruction unit
(weight fraction).
(G) For process vents from processes with multiple operating
scenarios, use equation 4 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(G) to develop
an adjusted process-vent-specific emission factor for each operating
scenario whose emission calculation factor differs by less than 15
percent from the emission calculation factor of the operating scenario
that is expected to have the largest emissions (or of another operating
scenario for which emission testing is performed).
Equation 4 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(G)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.002
Where:
EFPVadj = Adjusted process-vent-specific emission factor
for an untested operating scenario.
ECFUT = Emission calculation factor for the untested
operating scenario developed under paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
ECFT = Emission calculation for the tested operating
scenario developed under paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
EFPV = Process vent specific emission factor for the
tested operating scenario.
(H) Sum the emissions of each controlled substance from all process
vents in each operating scenario and all operating scenarios in the
process for the year to estimate the total process vent emissions of
each controlled substance from the process, using equation 5 to this
paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(H).
Equation 5 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(H)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.003
Where:
EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from
process vents for process i for the year (kg).
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i,
[[Page 82436]]
operating scenario j, for the year, considering destruction
efficiency (kg).
v = Number of process vents in process i, operating scenario j.
o = Number of operating scenarios for process i.
(iv) Process-vent-specific emission calculation factor method. For
each process vent within an operating scenario, determine controlled
substances emissions by calculations and determine the process activity
rate, such as the feed rate, production rate, or other process activity
rate, associated with the emission rate.
(A) Each entity must calculate uncontrolled emissions of controlled
substances by individual process vent, EPV, by using
measurements, by using calculations based on chemical engineering
principles and chemical property data, or by conducting an engineering
assessment. Use the procedures in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) or (B) of this
section, except paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B)(3) of this section. The
procedures in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) and (B) of this section may be
applied either to batch process vents or to continuous process vents.
The uncontrolled emissions must be based on a typical batch or
production rate under a defined operating scenario. The process
activity rate associated with the uncontrolled emissions must be
determined. The methods, data, and assumptions used to estimate
emissions for each operating scenario must be selected to yield a best
estimate (expected value) of emissions rather than an over- or
underestimate of emissions for that operating scenario. All data,
assumptions, and procedures used in the calculations or engineering
assessment must be documented according to paragraph (f) of this
section.
(B) Each entity must calculate a site-specific, process-vent-
specific emission calculation factor for each process vent each
operating scenario, and each controlled substance, in kg of controlled
substance per activity rate (e.g., kg of feed or production) as
applicable, using equation 6 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(B).
Equation 6 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(B)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.004
Where:
ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j (e.g., kg emitted/kg product).
EPV = Average mass of controlled substance p emitted,
based on calculations, from process vent v from process i, operating
scenario j, during the period or batch for which emissions were
calculated, for either continuous or batch (kg emitted/hr for
continuous, kg emitted/batch for batch).
Activity Representative = Process feed, process production, or other
process activity rate corresponding to average mass of emissions
based on calculations (e.g., kg product/hr for continuous, kg
product/batch for batch).
(C) Each entity must calculate emissions of each controlled
substance for the process vent (and for each operating scenario, as
applicable) for the year by multiplying the process-vent-specific
emission calculation factor by the total process activity, as
applicable, for the year, using equation 7 to this paragraph
(c)(1)(iv)(C).
Equation 7 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(C)
EPV = ECFPV * Activity
Where:
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i, operating scenario j, for the year (kg).
ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j (kg emitted/activity) (e.g., kg emitted/kg product).
Activity = Process feed, process production, or other process
activity for process i, operating scenario j, during the year.
(D) If the process vent is vented to a destruction unit, apply the
demonstrated destruction efficiency of the device to the controlled
substance emissions for the process vent (and operating scenario, as
applicable), using equation 8 to this paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(D). Apply
the destruction efficiency only to the portion of the process activity
that is vented to the properly functioning destruction unit (i.e.,
controlled).
Equation 8 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(D)
EPV = ECFPV * (Activityu + Activityc * (1-DE))
Where:
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i, operating scenario j, for the year
considering destruction efficiency (kg).
ECFPV = Emission calculation factor for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j (e.g., kg emitted/kg product).
ActivityU = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j, during
the year for which the process vent is not vented to the properly
functioning destruction unit (e.g., kg product).
ActivityC = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j, during
the year for which the process vent is vented to the properly
functioning destruction unit (e.g., kg product).
DE = Demonstrated destruction efficiency of the destruction unit
(weight fraction).
(E) Sum the emissions of each controlled substance from all process
vents in each operating scenario and all operating scenarios in the
process for the year to estimate the total process vent emissions of
each controlled substance from the process, using equation 9 to this
paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(E).
Equation 9 to Paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(E)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.005
Where:
EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from
process vents for process i for the year (kg).
EPV = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from process
vent v from process i, operating scenario j, for the year,
considering destruction efficiency (kg).
v = Number of process vents in process i, operating scenario j.
o = Number of operating scenarios in process i.
(2) Calculate emissions for equipment leaks (EL). If activity is
covered under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, each entity must
calculate the emissions from pieces of equipment associated with
processes covered under this section. If conducting monitoring of
equipment in controlled substance service, monitoring must be conducted
for those in light liquid and in gas and vapor service. If conducting
monitoring of equipment in controlled substance service, the entity may
exclude from monitoring each piece of equipment that is difficult-to-
monitor, that is unsafe-to-monitor, that is insulated, or that is in
heavy liquid service; the entity may exclude from monitoring each pump
with dual mechanical seals, agitator with dual mechanical seals, pump
with no external shaft, agitator with no external shaft; the entity may
exclude from monitoring each pressure relief device in gas and vapor
service with upstream rupture disk, each sampling connection system
with closed-loop or closed-purge systems, and any pieces of equipment
where leaks are routed through a closed vent system to a destruction
unit. The entity must estimate emissions using another approach for
those pieces of equipment excluded from monitoring. Equipment that is
in controlled substance service for less than 300 hr/yr, equipment that
is in vacuum service, pressure relief devices that are in light liquid
service, and instrumentation systems are exempted from the requirements
in this paragraph (c)(2).
[[Page 82437]]
(i) The emissions from equipment leaks must be calculated using any
of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(2)(i)(A), (B), (C), or (D) of this
section.
(A) Use of Average Emission Factor Approach in EPA protocol for
equipment leak emission estimates. The emissions from equipment leaks
may be calculated using the default Average Emission Factor Approach in
EPA-453/R-95-017 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(B) Use of Other Approaches in EPA protocol for equipment leak
emission estimates in conjunction with EPA Method 21. The emissions
from equipment leaks may be calculated using one of the following
methods in EPA-453/R-95-017 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
82.27): The Screening Ranges Approach; the EPA Correlation Approach; or
the Unit-Specific Correlation Approach. If it is determined that EPA
Method 21 in appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 is appropriate for
monitoring a controlled substance, and if the instrument is calibrated
with a compound different from one or more of the controlled substances
or surrogates to be measured, each entity must develop response factors
for each controlled substance or for each surrogate to be measured
using EPA Method 21. For each controlled substance or surrogate
measured, the response factor must be less than 10. The response factor
is the ratio of the known concentration of a controlled substance or
surrogate to the observed meter reading when measured using an
instrument calibrated with the reference compound.
(C) Use of Other Approaches in EPA protocol for equipment leak
emission estimates in conjunction with site-specific leak monitoring
methods. The emissions from equipment leaks may be calculated using one
of the following methods in EPA-453/R-95-017 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 82.27): The Screening Ranges Approach; the EPA
Correlation Approach; or the Unit-Specific Correlation Approach. Each
entity may develop a site-specific leak monitoring method appropriate
for monitoring controlled substances or surrogates to use along with
these three approaches. The site-specific leak monitoring method must
meet the requirements in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of this section.
(D) Use of site-specific leak monitoring methods. The emissions
from equipment leaks may be calculated using a site-specific leak
monitoring method. The site-specific leak monitoring method must meet
the requirements in paragraph (d)(5)(i) of this section.
(ii) Each entity must collect information on the number of each
type of equipment, the service of each piece of equipment (gas, light
liquid, heavy liquid), the concentration of each controlled substance
in the stream, and the time period each piece of equipment was in
service (e.g., hours per year). Depending on which approach followed,
the entity may be required to collect information for equipment on the
associated screening data concentrations for greater than or equal to
10,000 ppmv and associated screening data concentrations for less than
10,000 ppmv; associated actual screening data concentrations; or
associated screening data and leak rate data (i.e., bagging) used to
develop a unit-specific correlation.
(iii) Calculate and sum the emissions of each controlled substance
in kilograms per year for equipment pieces for each process,
EELp, annually. Each entity must include and estimate
emissions for types of equipment that are excluded from monitoring,
including difficult-to-monitor, unsafe-to-monitor and insulated pieces
of equipment, pieces of equipment in heavy liquid service, pumps with
dual mechanical seals, agitators with dual mechanical seals, pumps with
no external shaft, agitators with no external shaft, pressure relief
devices in gas and vapor service with upstream rupture disk, sampling
connection systems with closed-loop or closed purge systems, and pieces
of equipment where leaks are routed through a closed vent system to a
destruction unit.
(3) Calculate total controlled substance emissions for each process
and for production or transformation processes at the facility. (i)
Estimate annually the total mass of each controlled substance emitted
from each process, including emissions from process vents in paragraphs
(c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section, as appropriate, and from
equipment leaks in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, using equation 10
to this paragraph (c)(3)(i).
Equation 10 to Paragraph (c)(3)(i)
Ei = EPpi + EELpi
Where:
Ei = Total mass of each controlled substance p emitted
from process i, annual basis (kg/year).
EPpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from all
process vents and all operating scenarios in process i, annually
(kg/year, calculated in equation 5 or 9 to this section, as
appropriate).
EELpi = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from
equipment leaks for pieces of equipment for process i, annually (kg/
year, calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section).
(ii) Estimate annually the total mass of each controlled substance
emitted at the facility from each applicable process listed in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section using equation 11 to this paragraph
(c)(3)(ii). Develop separate totals for each applicable process listed
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
Equation 11 to Paragraph (c)(3)(ii)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.006
Where:
E = Total mass of each controlled substance p emitted from all
processes listed in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section, as appropriate (kilograms).
Ei = Total mass of each controlled substance p emitted
from each process listed in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of
this section, annual basis (kg/year, calculated in equation 10 to
paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section).
z = Total number of processes listed in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through
(iv) of this section, as appropriate.
(4) Mass balance method. Before using the mass balance approach to
estimate your controlled substance emissions from a process, you must
ensure that the process and the equipment and methods used to measure
the process meet either the error limits described in this paragraph
(c)(4) and calculated under paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section or the
requirements specified in paragraph (d)(4)(viii) of this section. If
you choose to calculate the error limits, you must estimate the
absolute and relative errors associated with using the mass balance
approach on that process using equations 12 through 15 to this section
in conjunction with equations 16 through 21 to this section. You may
use the mass-balance approach to estimate emissions from the process if
this calculation results in an absolute error of less than or equal to
one metric ton of controlled substance per year or a relative error of
less than or equal to 10 percent of the estimated controlled substance
emissions. If you do not meet either of the error limits or the
requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(viii) of this section, you must use
the emission factor approach detailed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3)
of this section to estimate emissions from the process.
(i) To perform the calculation, you must first calculate the
absolute and relative errors associated with the quantities calculated
using either equations 18 through 21 to this section
[[Page 82438]]
or equation 28 to paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section. Alternatively,
you may estimate these errors based on the variability of previous
process measurements (e.g., the variability of measurements of stream
concentrations), provided these measurements are representative of the
current process and current measurement devices and techniques. Once
errors have been calculated for the quantities in these equations,
those errors must be used to calculate the errors in equations 16 and
17 to this section. You may omit the errors associated with equations
22 through 24 to this section.
(A) Where the measured quantity is a mass, the error in the mass
must be equated to the accuracy or precision (whichever is larger) of
the flowmeter, scale, or combination of volumetric and density
measurements at the flow rate or mass measured.
(B) Where the measured quantity is a concentration of a stream
component, the error of the concentration must be equated to the
accuracy or precision (whichever is larger) with which you estimate the
mean concentration of that stream component, accounting for the
variability of the process, the frequency of the measurements, and the
accuracy or precision (whichever is larger) of the analytical technique
used to measure the concentration at the concentration measured. If the
variability of process measurements is used to estimate the error, this
variability shall be assumed to account both for the variability of the
process and the precision of the analytical technique. Use standard
statistical techniques such as the student's t distribution to estimate
the error of the mean of the concentration measurements as a function
of process variability and frequency of measurement.
(C) Equation 12 to this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(C) provides the general
formula for calculating the absolute errors of sums and differences
where the sum, S, is the summation of variables measured, a, b, c, etc.
(e.g., S = a + b + c).
Equation 12 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(C)
eSA = [(a * ea)\2\ + (b * eb)\2\ + (c * ec)\2\]\1/2\
Where:
eSA = Absolute error of the sum, expressed as one half of
a 95 percent confidence interval.
ea = Relative error of a, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
eb = Relative error of b, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
ec = Relative error of c, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
(D) Equation 13 to this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(D) provides the general
formula for calculating the relative errors of sums and differences.
Equation 13 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(D)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.007
Where:
eSR = Relative error of the sum, expressed as one half of
a 95 percent confidence interval.
eSA = Absolute error of the sum, expressed as one half of
a 95 percent confidence interval.
a+b+c = Sum of the variables measured.
(E) Equation 14 to this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(E) provides the general
formula for calculating the absolute errors of products (e.g., flow
rates of controlled substances calculated as the product of the flow
rate of the stream and the concentration of the controlled substance in
the stream), where the product, P, is the result of multiplying the
variables measured, a, b, c, etc. (e.g., P = a*b*c).
Equation 14 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(E)
ePA = (a * b * c)(e\2\a + e\2\b + e\2\c)\1/2\
Where:
ePA = Absolute error of the product, expressed as one
half of a 95 percent confidence interval.
ea = Relative error of a, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
eb = Relative error of b, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
ec = Relative error of c, expressed as one half of a 95
percent confidence interval.
(F) Equation 15 to this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F) provides the general
formula for calculating the relative errors of products.
Equation 15 to Paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.008
Where:
ePR = Relative error of the product, expressed as one
half of a 95 percent confidence interval.
ePA = Absolute error of the product, expressed as one
half of a 95 percent confidence interval.
a*b*c = Product of the variables measured.
(G) Calculate the absolute error of the controlled substance
emissions estimate by performing a preliminary estimate of the annual
controlled substance emissions of the process using the method in
paragraph (c)(4)(i)(H) of this section. Multiply this result by the
relative error calculated for the mass of halogen emitted from the
process in equation 15 to paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F) of this section.
(H) To estimate the annual controlled substance emissions of the
process for use in the error estimate, apply the methods set forth in
paragraphs (c)(4)(ii) through (vii) and (ix) through (xvi) of this
section to representative process measurements. If these process
measurements represent less than one year of typical process activity,
adjust the estimated emissions to account for one year of typical
process activity. To estimate the terms FERd, FEP, and FEBk for use in
the error estimate for equations 22, 23, and 24 to this section, you
must either use emission testing, monitoring of emitted streams, and/or
engineering calculations or assessments.
(ii) The total mass of each controlled substance emitted annually
from each controlled substance process must be estimated by using
equation 16 to this paragraph (c)(4)(ii).
Equation 16 to Paragraph (c)(4)(ii)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.009
Where:
EContp = Total mass of each controlled substance p
emitted annually from process i (metric tons).
ERp-FContp = Total mass of controlled
substance reactant p emitted from production process i over the
period t (metric tons, calculated in equation 22 to paragraph
(c)(4)(ix) of this section).
EPp-FContp= Total mass of the controlled
substance product p emitted from production process i over the
period t (metric tons, calculated in equation 23 to paragraph
(c)(4)(x) of this section).
EBp-FContp = Total mass of controlled
substance byproduct p emitted from production process i over the
period t (metric tons, calculated in equation 24 to paragraph
(c)(4)(xi) of this section).
n = Number of concentration and flow measurement periods for the
year.
(iii) The total mass of halogen emitted from process i over the
period t must be estimated at least monthly by calculating the
difference between the total mass of halogen in the reactant(s) (or
inputs, for processes that do not involve a chemical reaction) and the
total mass of halogen in the product (or outputs, for processes that do
not involve a chemical reaction), accounting for the total mass of
halogen in any destroyed or recaptured streams that contain reactants,
products, or byproducts (or inputs or outputs). This calculation must
be performed using equation 17 to this paragraph (c)(4)(iii). An
element other than a halogen may be used in the mass-balance equation,
provided the element occurs in all of the controlled substances fed
into or generated by the process. In this case, the mass fractions of
the element in the
[[Page 82439]]
reactants, products, and byproducts must be calculated as appropriate
for that element.
Equation 17 to Paragraph (c)(4)(iii)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.010
Where:
EH = Total mass of halogen emitted from process i over
the period t (metric tons).
Rd = Total mass of the halogen-containing reactant d that
is fed into process i over the period t (metric tons).
P = Total mass of the halogen-containing product produced by process
i over the period t (metric tons).
MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d,
calculated in equation 25 to paragraph (c)(4)(xii) of this section.
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product,
calculated in equation 26 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section.
FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured
streams from process i containing halogen-containing reactants,
products, and byproducts over the period t, calculated in equation
18 to paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section.
v = Number of halogen-containing reactants fed into process i.
(iv) The mass of total halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams
containing halogen-containing reactants, products, and byproducts must
be estimated at least monthly using equation 18 to this paragraph
(c)(4)(iv) unless you use the alternative approach provided in
paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section.
Equation 18 to Paragraph (c)(4)(iv)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.011
Where:
FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured
streams from process i containing halogen-containing reactants,
products, and byproducts over the period t.
Pj = Mass of the halogen-containing product removed from
process i in stream j and destroyed over the period t (calculated in
equation 19 or 20 to this section).
Bkj = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct k removed from
process i in stream j and destroyed over the period t (calculated in
equation 19 or 20 to this section).
Bkl = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct k removed from
process i in stream l and recaptured over the period t.
Rdj = Mass of halogen-containing reactant d removed from
process i in stream j and destroyed over the period t (calculated in
equation 19 or 20 to this section).
MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d,
calculated in equation 25 to paragraph (c)(4)(xii) of this section.
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product,
calculated in equation 26 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section.
MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in byproduct k,
calculated in equation 27 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section.
q = Number of streams destroyed in process i.
x = Number of streams recaptured in process i.
u = Number of halogen-containing byproducts generated in process i.
v = Number of halogen-containing reactants fed into process i.
(v) The mass of each controlled substance removed from process i in
stream j and destroyed over the period t (i.e., Pj,
Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable) must be estimated by
applying the destruction efficiency of the device that has been
demonstrated for the controlled substance p to controlled substance f
using equation 19 to this paragraph (c)(4)(v).
Equation 19 to Paragraph (c)(4)(v)
MFcontpj = DEContp * Ccontrpj * Sj
Where:
MFContpj = Mass of controlled substance p removed from
process i in stream j and destroyed over the period t. (This may be
Pj, Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable.)
DEContp = Destruction efficiency of the device that has
been demonstrated for controlled substance p in stream j (fraction).
CContpj = Concentration (mass fraction) of controlled
substance p in stream j removed from process i and fed into the
destruction device over the period t. If this concentration is only
a trace concentration, cContrpj is equal to zero.
Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process i and fed into the
destruction device over the period t (metric tons).
(vi) The mass of each halogen-containing compound that is not a
controlled substance and that is removed from process i in stream j and
destroyed over the period t (i.e., P>j, B>kj, or
R>dj, as applicable) must be estimated using equation 20 to
this paragraph (c)(4)(vi).
Equation 20 to Paragraph (c)(4)(vi)
Mhcgj = CHCgj * Sj
Where:
MHCgj = Mass of non-controlled substance halogen-
containing compound g removed from process i in stream j and
destroyed over the period t. (This may be Pj,
Bkj, or Rdj, as applicable.)
CHCgj = Concentration (mass fraction) of non-controlled
substance halogen-containing compound g in stream j removed from
process i and fed into the destruction device over the period t. If
this concentration is only a trace concentration, cHCgj
is equal to zero.
Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process i and fed into
the destruction device over the period t (metric tons).
(vii) The mass of halogen-containing byproduct k removed from
process i in stream l and recaptured over the period t must be
estimated using equation 21 to this paragraph (c)(4)(vii).
Equation 21 to Paragraph (c)(4)(vii)
Bkl = CBkl * Sl
Where:
Bkl = Mass of halogen-containing byproduct k removed from
process i in stream l and recaptured over the period t (metric
tons).
cBkl = Concentration (mass fraction) of halogen-
containing byproduct k in stream l removed from process i and
recaptured over the period t. If this concentration is only a trace
concentration, cBkl is equal to zero.
Sl = Mass removed in stream l from process i and
recaptured over the period t (metric tons).
(viii) To estimate the terms FERd, FEP, and FEBk for equations 22,
23, and 24 to this section, you must account for the total mass of
halogen emitted, EF, estimated in equation 17 to paragraph (c)(4)(iii)
of this section. These emission characterization measurements must meet
the requirements in paragraph
[[Page 82440]]
(c)(4)(viii)(A), (B), or (C) of this section, as appropriate. The sum
of the terms must equal 1. You must document the data and calculations
that are used to speciate individual compounds and to estimate FERd,
FEP, and FEBk. Exclude from your calculations the halogen included in
FD. For example, exclude halogen-containing compounds that are not
controlled substances and that result from the destruction of
controlled substances by any destruction devices (e.g., the mass of HF
created by combustion of a chlorofluorocarbon). However, include
emissions of controlled substance that survive the destruction process.
(A) If the calculations under paragraph (b)(1)(viii) of this
section, or any subsequent measurements and calculations under this
subpart, indicate that the process emits 0.1 metric tons controlled
substance or more, estimate the emissions from each process vent,
considering controls, using the methods in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this
section. You must characterize the emissions of any process vent that
emits 0.1 metric tons controlled substance or more as specified in
paragraph (d)(4)(iv) of this section.
(B) For other vents, including vents from processes that emit less
than 0.1 metric tons of controlled substance, you must characterize
emissions as specified in paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section.
(C) For halogen emissions that are not accounted for by vent
estimates, you must characterize emissions as specified in paragraph
(d)(4)(vi) of this section.
(ix) The total mass of halogen-containing reactant d emitted must
be estimated at least monthly based on the total halogen emitted and
the fraction that consists of halogen-containing reactants using
equation 22 to this paragraph (c)(4)(ix). If the halogen-containing
reactant d is not a controlled substance, you may assume that
FERd is zero.
Equation 22 to Paragraph (c)(4)(ix)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.012
Where:
ER-it = Total mass of halogen-containing reactant d that
is emitted from process i over the period t (metric tons).
FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
the halogen-containing reactant d.
EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from process i over
the period t (metric tons), calculated in equation 17 to paragraph
(c)(4)(iii) of this section.
FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of the halogen-
containing product.
FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
halogen-containing byproduct k.
MFFRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d,
calculated in equation 25 to paragraph (c)(4)(xii) of this section.
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product,
calculated in equation 26 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section.
MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in byproduct k,
calculation in equation 27 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section.
u = Number of halogen-containing byproducts generated in process i.
v = Number of halogen-containing reactants fed into process i.
(x) The total mass of halogen-containing product emitted must be
estimated at least monthly based on the total halogen emitted and the
fraction that consists of halogen-containing products using equation 23
to this paragraph (c)(4)(x). If the halogen-containing product is not a
controlled substance, you may assume that FEP is zero.
Equation 23 to Paragraph (c)(4)(x)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.013
Where:
EP-it = Total mass of halogen-containing product emitted
from process i over the period t (metric tons).
FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of the halogen-
containing product.
EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from process i over
the period t (metric tons), calculated in equation 17 to paragraph
(c)(4)(iii) of this section.
FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
halogen-containing reactant d.
FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
halogen-containing byproduct k.
MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d,
calculated in equation 25 to paragraph (c)(4)(xii) of this section.
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product,
calculated in equation 26 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section.
MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in byproduct k,
calculation in equation 27 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section.
u = Number of halogen-containing byproducts generated in process i.
v = Number of halogen-containing reactants fed into process i.
(xi) The total mass of halogen-containing byproduct k emitted must
be estimated at least monthly based on the total halogen emitted and
the fraction that consists of halogen-containing byproducts using
equation 24 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xi). If halogen-containing
byproduct k is not a controlled substance, you may assume that
FEBk is zero.
Equation 24 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xi)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.014
Where:
EBk-it = Total mass of halogen-containing byproduct k
emitted from process i over the period t (metric tons).
FEBk = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
halogen-containing byproduct k.
FERd = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of
halogen-containing reactant d.
[[Page 82441]]
FEP = The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of the halogen-
containing product.
EH = Total mass of halogen emissions from process i over
the period t (metric tons), calculated in equation 17 to paragraph
(c)(4)(iii) of this section.
MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d,
calculated in equation 25 to paragraph (c)(4)(xii) of this section.
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product,
calculated in equation 26 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiii) of this section.
MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in byproduct k,
calculation in equation 27 to paragraph (c)(4)(xiv) of this section.
u = Number of halogen-containing byproducts generated in process i.
v = Number of halogen-containing reactants fed into process i.
(xii) The mass fraction of halogen in reactant d must be estimated
using equation 25 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xii).
Equation 25 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xii)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.015
Where:
MFHRd = Mass fraction of halogen in reactant d (fraction).
MHRd = Moles halogen per mole of reactant d.
AWH = Atomic weight of halogen.
MWRd = Molecular weight of reactant d.
(xiii) The mass fraction of halogen in the product must be
estimated using equation 26 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xiii).
Equation 26 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xiii)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.016
Where:
MFHP = Mass fraction of halogen in the product
(fraction).
MHP = Moles halogen per mole of product.
AWH = Atomic weight of halogen.
MWP = Molecular weight of the product produced.
(xiv) The mass fraction of each applicable halogen in byproduct k
must be estimated using equation 27 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xiv).
Equation 27 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xiv)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.017
Where:
MFHBk = Mass fraction of halogen in the product (fraction).
MHBk = Moles halogen per mole of byproduct k.
AWH = Atomic weight of halogen.
MWBk = Molecular weight of byproduct k.
(xv) As an alternative to using equation 18 to paragraph (c)(4)(iv)
of this section as provided in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, you
may estimate at least monthly the total mass of halogen in destroyed or
recaptured streams containing halogen-containing compounds (including
all halogen-containing reactants, products, and byproducts) using
equation 28 to this paragraph (c)(4)(xv).
Equation 28 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xv)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.018
Where:
FD = Total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured
streams from process i containing halogen-containing reactants,
products, and byproducts over the period t.
DEavgj = Weighted average destruction efficiency of the
destruction device for the halogen-containing compounds identified
in destroyed stream j under paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(B) and
(d)(4)(v)(B) of this section (calculated in equation 28 to this
paragraph (c)(4)(xv)) (fraction).
cTHj = Concentration (mass fraction) of total halogen in
stream j removed from process i and fed into the destruction device
over the period t. If this concentration is only a trace
concentration, cTHj is equal to zero.
Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process i and fed into
the destruction device over the period t (metric tons).
cTHl = Concentration (mass fraction) of total halogen in
stream l removed from process i and recaptured over the period t. If
this concentration is only a trace concentration, cBkl is
equal to zero.
Sl = Mass removed in stream l from process i and
recaptured over the period t.
q = Number of streams destroyed in process i.
x = Number of streams recaptured in process i.
(xvi) For purposes of equation 28 to paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this
section, calculate the weighted average destruction efficiency
applicable to a destroyed stream using equation 29 to this paragraph
(c)(4)(xvi).
Equation 29 to Paragraph (c)(4)(xvi)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.019
Where:
DEavgj = Weighted average destruction efficiency of the
destruction device for the halogen-containing compounds identified
in destroyed stream j under paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(B) or (d)(4)(v)(B)
of this section, as appropriate.
DEContp = Destruction efficiency of the device that has
been demonstrated for controlled substance p in stream j (fraction).
cContpj = Concentration (mass fraction) of controlled
substance p in stream j removed from process i and fed into the
destruction device over the period t. If this concentration is only
a trace concentration, cContpj is equal to zero.
cHCgj = Concentration (mass fraction) of non-controlled
substance halogen-containing compound g in stream j removed from
process i and fed into the destruction device over the period t. If
this concentration is only a trace concentration, cHCgj
is equal to zero.
Sj = Mass removed in stream j from process i and fed into
the destruction device over the period t (metric tons).
MFHContp = Mass fraction of halogen in controlled
substance p, calculated in equation 25, 26, or 27 to this section,
as appropriate.
MFHHCg = Mass fraction of halogen in non-controlled
substance halogen-containing compound g, calculated in equation 25,
26, or 27 to this section, as appropriate.
w = Number of controlled substances in destroyed stream j.
y = Number of non-controlled substance halogen-containing compounds
in destroyed stream j.
(5) Calculate controlled substance emissions from destruction of
controlled substances. Estimate annually the total
[[Page 82442]]
mass of controlled substances emitted annually from destruction of
controlled substances using equation 30 to this paragraph (c)(5):
Equation 30 to Paragraph (c)(5)
ED = RED * (1-DE)
Where:
ED = The mass of controlled substances emitted annually
from destruction of controlled substances (kilograms).
RED = The mass of controlled substances that are fed
annually into the destruction unit (kilograms).
DE = Destruction efficiency of the destruction unit (fraction).
(6) Effective destruction efficiency for each process. If using the
emission factor or emission calculation factor method to calculate
emissions from the process, use equation 31 to this paragraph (c)(6) to
calculate the effective destruction efficiency for the process,
including each process vent:
Equation 31 to Paragraph (c)(6)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10OC24.020
Where:
DEEffective = Effective destruction efficiency for
process i (fraction).
EPVp = Mass of controlled substance p emitted from
process vent v from process i, operating scenario j, for the year,
calculated in equation 3, 7, or 8 to this section (kg).
ECFPV-Up = Emission calculation factor for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j, as used in equation 7 or 8 to this section (kg emitted/
activity) (e.g., kg emitted/kg product), denoted as
``ECFPV'' in those equations.
EFPV-Up = Emission factor (uncontrolled) for controlled
substance p emitted from process vent v during process i, operating
scenario j, as used in equation 3 to paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(F) of
this section (kg emitted/activity) (e.g., kg emitted/kg product),
denoted as ``EFPV-U'' in that equation.
ActivityU = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j during
the year, for which the process vent is not vented to the properly
functioning destruction unit (i.e., uncontrolled).
ActivityC = Total process feed, process production, or
other process activity for process i, operating scenario j during
the year, for which emissions are vented to the properly functioning
destruction unit (i.e., controlled).
o = Number of operating scenarios for process i.
v = Number of process vents in process i, operating scenario j.
w = Number of controlled substances emitted from the process.
(d) Monitoring and QA/QC requirements--(1) Initial scoping
speciation to identify controlled substances from transformation
processes. Each entity that transforms controlled substances must
conduct an initial scoping speciation to identify all controlled
substances that may be generated or emitted from transformation
processes that are subject to this section. The entity is not required
to quantify emissions under this initial scoping speciation. Only
controlled substance products and byproducts that occur in greater than
trace concentrations in at least one stream must be identified under
this paragraph (d)(1).
(i) Procedure. To conduct the scoping speciation, select the
stream(s) (including process streams or destroyed streams) or process
vent(s) that would be expected to individually or collectively contain
all of the controlled substance byproducts of the process at their
maximum concentrations and sample and analyze the contents of these
selected streams or process vents. For example, if controlled substance
byproducts are separated into one low-boiling-point and one high-
boiling-point stream, sample and analyze both of these streams.
Alternatively, each entity may sample and analyze streams where
controlled substance byproducts occur at less than their maximum
concentrations, but the entity must ensure that the sensitivity of the
analysis is sufficient to compensate for the expected difference in
concentration. For example, if the entity samples and analyzes streams
where controlled substance byproducts are expected to occur at one half
their maximum concentrations elsewhere in the process, that entity must
ensure that the sensitivity of the analysis is sufficient to detect
controlled substance byproducts that occur at concentrations of 0.05
percent or higher. The entity does not have to sample and analyze every
stream or process vent, i.e., the entity does not have to sample and
analyze a stream or process vent that contains only controlled
substances that are contained in other streams or process vents that
are being sampled and analyzed. Sampling and analysis must be conducted
according to the procedures in paragraph (d)(5) of this section.
(ii) Previous measurements. If testing of streams (including
process streams or destroyed streams) or process vents were conducted
less than 5 years before November 12, 2024, and the testing meets the
requirements in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, each entity may
use the previous testing to satisfy this requirement.
(2) Emission factor testing. If controlled substance emissions are
determined using the site-specific process-vent-specific emission
factor, each entity must meet the requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)
through (vii) of this section.
(i) Process vent testing. Conduct an emissions test that is based
on representative performance of the process or operating scenario(s)
of the process, as applicable. For process vents for which each entity
performed an initial scoping speciation, include in the emission test
any controlled substance that was identified in the initial scoping
speciation. For process vents for which the entity did not perform an
initial scoping speciation, include in the emission test any controlled
substance that occurs in more than trace concentrations in the vent
stream or, where a destruction unit is used, in the inlet to the
destruction unit. The entity may include startup and shutdown events if
the testing is sufficiently long or comprehensive to ensure that such
events are not overrepresented in the emission factor. Malfunction
events must not be included in the testing. If the entity does not
detect a controlled substance that was identified in the scoping
speciation or that occurs in more than trace concentrations in the vent
stream or in the inlet to the destruction unit, assume that controlled
substance was emitted from the process vent, or from the destruction
unit, at a concentration of one third of the detection limit.
(ii) Number of runs. For continuous processes, sample the process
vent for a minimum of three runs of 1 hour each. If the relative
standard deviation (RSD) of the emission factor calculated based on the
first three runs is greater than or equal to 0.15 for the emission
factor, continue to sample the process vent for an additional three
runs of 1 hour each.
(iii) Process activity measurements. Determine the mass rate of
process feed, process production, or other process
[[Page 82443]]
activity as applicable during the test using flow meters, weigh scales,
or other measurement devices or instruments with an accuracy and
precision of 1 percent of full scale or better. These
devices may be the same plant instruments or procedures that are used
for accounting purposes (such as weigh hoppers, belt weigh feeders,
combination of volume measurements and bulk density, etc.) if these
devices or procedures meet the requirement. For monitoring ongoing
process activity, use flow meters, weigh scales, or other measurement
devices or instruments with an accuracy and precision of 1
percent of full scale or better.
(iv) Sample each process. If process vents from separate processes
are manifolded together to a common vent or to a common destruction
unit, each entity must follow paragraph (d)(2)(iv)(A), (B), or (C) of
this section.
(A) Each entity may sample emissions from each process in the ducts
upstream from the point where the emissions are combined.
(B) Each entity may sample in the common duct or at the outlet of
the destruction unit when only one process is operating.
(C) Each entity may sample the combined emissions and use
engineering calculations and assessments as specified in paragraph
(c)(1)(iv) of this section to allocate the emissions to each manifolded
process vent, provided the sum of the calculated controlled substance
emissions across the individual process vents is within 20 percent of
the total controlled substance emissions measured during the manifolded
testing.
(v) Emission test results. The results of an emission test must
include the analysis of samples, number of test runs, the results of
the RSD analysis, the analytical method used, determination of
emissions, the process activity, and raw data and must identify the
process, the operating scenario, the process vents tested, and the
controlled substances that were included in the test. The emissions
test report must contain all information and data used to derive the
process-vent-specific emission factor, as well as key process
conditions during the test. Key process conditions include those that
are normally monitored for process control purposes and may include but
are not limited to yields, pressures, temperatures, etc. (e.g., of
reactor vessels, distillation columns).
(vi) Emissions testing frequency. Each entity must conduct
emissions testing to develop the process-vent-specific emission factor
under paragraph (d)(2)(vi)(A) or (B) of this section, whichever occurs
first:
(A) 5-year revision. Conduct an emissions test every 5 years. In
the calculations under paragraph (c) of this section, apply the revised
process-vent-specific emission factor to the process activity that
occurs after the revision.
(B) Operating scenario change that affects the emission factor. For
planned operating scenario changes, each entity must estimate and
compare the emission calculation factors for the changed operating
scenario and for the original operating scenario whose process vent
specific emission factor was measured. Use the calculation methods in
paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. If the emission calculation
factor for the changed operating scenario is 15 percent or more
different from the emission calculation factor for the previous
operating scenario (this includes the cumulative change in the emission
calculation factor since the most recent emissions test), the entity
must conduct an emissions test to update the process-vent-specific
emission factor, unless the difference between the operating scenarios
is solely due to the application of a destruction unit to emissions
under the changed operating scenario. Conduct the test before February
14 of the calendar year that immediately follows the change. In the
calculations under paragraph (c) of this section, apply the revised
process-vent-specific emission factor to the process activity that
occurs after the operating scenario change.
(vii) Previous measurements. If an emissions test was conducted
less than 5 years before November 12, 2024, and the emissions testing
meets the requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (vii) of this
section, the entity may use the previous emissions testing to develop
process-vent-specific emission factors. For purposes of paragraph
(d)(2)(vi)(A) of this section, the date of the previous emissions test
rather than November 12, 2024, shall constitute the beginning of the 5-
year re-measurement cycle.
(3) Emission calculation factor monitoring. If controlled substance
emissions were determined using the site-specific process-vent-specific
emission calculation factor, each entity must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Operating scenario. Perform the emissions calculation for the
process vent based on representative performance of the operating
scenario of the process. If more than one operating scenario applies to
the process that contains the subject process vent, you must conduct a
separate emissions calculation for operation under each operating
scenario. For each continuous process vent that contains more than
trace concentrations of any controlled substance and for each batch
process vent that contains more than trace concentrations of any
controlled substance, develop the process-vent-specific emission
calculation factor for each operating scenario. For continuous process
vents, determine the emissions based on the process activity for the
representative performance of the operating scenario. For batch process
vents, determine emissions based on the process activity for each
typical batch operating scenario.
(ii) Process activity measurements. Use flow meters, weigh scales,
or other measurement devices or instruments with an accuracy and
precision of 1 percent of full scale or better for
monitoring ongoing process activity.
(iii) Emission calculation results. The emission calculation must
be documented by identifying the process, the operating scenario, and
the process vent(s). The documentation must contain the information and
data used to calculate the process-vent-specific emission calculation
factor.
(iv) Operating scenario change that affects the emission
calculation factor. For planned operating scenario changes that are
expected to change the process-vent-specific emission calculation
factor, each entity must conduct an emissions calculation to update the
process-vent-specific emission calculation factor. In the calculations
under paragraph (c) of this section, apply the revised emission
calculation factor to the process activity that occurs after the
operating scenario change.
(v) Previous calculations. If an emissions calculation was
performed for the process vent and operating scenario less than 5 years
before November 12, 2024, and the emissions calculation meets the
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)(iv)(A) and (B) of this section and in
paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, each entity may use
the previous calculation to develop the site-specific process-vent-
specific emission calculation factor.
(4) Mass balance monitoring. If you determine controlled substance
emissions from any process using the mass balance method under
paragraph (c)(4) of this section, you must estimate the total mass of
each controlled substance emitted from that process at least monthly.
Only streams that contain greater than trace concentrations of halogen-
containing reactants, products, or byproducts must be monitored under
this paragraph (d)(4).
(i) Mass measurements. Measure the following masses on a monthly or
more
[[Page 82444]]
frequent basis using flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of
volumetric and density measurements with accuracies and precisions that
allow the facility to meet the error criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of
this section:
(A) Total mass of each halogen-containing product produced. Account
for any used halogen-containing product added into the production
process upstream of the output measurement as directed at Sec. Sec.
98.413(b) and 98.414(b) of this chapter.
(B) Total mass of each halogen-containing reactant fed into the
process.
(C) The mass removed from the process in each stream fed into the
destruction device.
(D) The mass removed from the process in each recaptured stream.
(ii) Concentration measurements for use with paragraph (c)(4)(iv)
of this section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section to
estimate the mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams,
measure the following concentrations at least once each calendar month
during which the process is operating, on a schedule to ensure that the
measurements are representative of the full range of process conditions
(e.g., catalyst age). Measure more frequently if this is necessary to
meet the error criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Use
equipment and methods (e.g., gas chromatography) that comply with
paragraph (d)(5) of this section and that have an accuracy and
precision that allow the facility to meet the error criteria in
paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Only halogen-containing reactants,
products, and byproducts that occur in a stream in greater than trace
concentrations must be monitored under this paragraph (d)(4)(ii).
(A) The concentration (mass fraction) of the halogen-containing
product in each stream that is fed into the destruction device.
(B) The concentration (mass fraction) of each halogen-containing
byproduct in each stream that is fed into the destruction device.
(C) The concentration (mass fraction) of each halogen-containing
reactant in each stream that is fed into the destruction device.
(D) The concentration (mass fraction) of each halogen-containing
byproduct in each stream that is recaptured (cBkl).
(iii) Concentration measurements for use with paragraph (c)(4)(xv)
of this section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section to
estimate the mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams,
measure the concentrations listed in paragraphs (d)(4)(iii)(A) and (B)
of this section at least once each calendar month during which the
process is operating, on a schedule to ensure that the measurements are
representative of the full range of process conditions (e.g., catalyst
age). Measure more frequently if this is necessary to meet the error
criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Use equipment and
methods (e.g., gas chromatography) that comply with paragraph (d)(5) of
this section and that have an accuracy and precision that allow the
facility to meet the error criteria in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this
section. Only halogen-containing reactants, products, and byproducts
that occur in a stream in greater than trace concentrations must be
monitored under this paragraph (d)(4)(iii).
(A) The concentration (mass fraction) of total halogen in each
stream that is fed into the destruction device.
(B) The concentration (mass fraction) of total halogen in each
stream that is recaptured.
(iv) Emissions characterization: process vents emitting 0.1 metric
tons or more. To characterize emissions from any process vent emitting
0.1 metric tons of controlled substances or more, comply with
paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(A) through (E) of this section, as appropriate.
Only halogen-containing reactants, products, and byproducts that occur
in a stream in greater than trace concentrations must be monitored
under this paragraph (d)(4)(iv).
(A) Uncontrolled emissions. If emissions from the process vent are
not routed through a destruction device, sample and analyze emissions
at the process vent or stack or sample and analyze emitted streams
before the process vent. If the process has more than one operating
scenario, you must either perform the emission characterization for
each operating scenario or perform the emission characterization for
the operating scenario that is expected to have the largest emissions
and adjust the emission characterization for other scenarios using
engineering calculations and assessments as specified in paragraph
(c)(1)(iv) of this section. To perform the characterization, take three
samples under conditions that are representative for the operating
scenario. Measure the concentration of each halogen-containing compound
in each sample. Use equipment and methods that comply with paragraph
(d)(5) of this section. Calculate the average concentration of each
halogen-containing compound across all three samples.
(B) Controlled emissions using paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this
section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section to estimate
the total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, and if
the emissions from the process vent are routed through a destruction
device, characterize emissions as specified in paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(A)
of this section before the destruction device. Apply the destruction
efficiency demonstrated for each controlled substance in the destroyed
stream to that controlled substance. Exclude from the characterization
halogen-containing compounds that are not controlled substances.
(C) Controlled emissions using paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this
section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section to estimate
the mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, and if the
emissions from the process vent are routed through a destruction
device, characterize the process vent's emissions monthly (or more
frequently) using the monthly (or more frequent) measurements under
paragraphs (d)(4)(i)(C) and (d)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
Apply the destruction efficiency demonstrated for each controlled
substance in the destroyed stream to that controlled substance. Exclude
from the characterization halogen-containing compounds that are not
controlled substances.
(D) Emissions characterization frequency. You must repeat emission
characterizations performed under paragraphs (d)(4)(iv)(A) and (B) of
this section under paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(D)(1) or (2) of this section,
whichever occurs first:
(1) 5-year revision. Repeat the emission characterization every 5
years. In the calculations under paragraph (c) of this section, apply
the revised emission characterization to the process activity that
occurs after the revision.
(2) Operating scenario change that affects the emission
characterization. For planned operating scenario changes, you must
estimate and compare the emission calculation factors for the changed
operating scenario and for the original operating scenario whose
process vent specific emission factor was measured. Use the engineering
calculations and assessments specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this
section. If the share of total halogen-containing compound emissions
represented by any controlled substance changes under the changed
operating scenario by 15 percent or more of the total, relative to the
previous operating scenario (this includes the cumulative change in the
emission calculation factor since the last emissions test), you must
repeat the emission characterization. Perform the emission
characterization before
[[Page 82445]]
February 14 of the year that immediately follows the change. In the
calculations under paragraph (c) of this section, apply the revised
emission characterization to the process activity that occurs after the
operating scenario change.
(E) Subsequent measurements. If a process vent with controlled
substance emissions less than 0.1 metric tons, per paragraph (c)(1)(ii)
of this section, is later found to have controlled substance emissions
of 0.1 metric tons or greater, you must perform an emission
characterization under this paragraph (d)(4)(iv)(E) during the
following year.
(v) Emissions characterization: process vents emitting less than
0.1 metric tons. To characterize emissions from any process vent
emitting less than 0.1 metric tons, comply with paragraphs (d)(4)(v)(A)
and (B) of this section, as appropriate. Only halogen-containing
reactants, products, and byproducts that occur in a stream in greater
than trace concentrations must be monitored under this paragraph
(d)(4)(v).
(A) Uncontrolled emissions. If emissions from the process vent are
not routed through a destruction device, emission measurements must
consist of sampling and analysis of emissions at the process vent or
stack, sampling and analysis of emitted streams before the process
vent, previous test results, provided the tests are representative of
current operating conditions of the process, or bench-scale or pilot-
scale test data representative of the process operating conditions.
(B) Controlled emissions using paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this
section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section to estimate
the total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, and if
the emissions from the process vent are routed through a destruction
device, characterize emissions as specified in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A)
of this section before the destruction device. Apply the destruction
efficiency demonstrated for each controlled substance in the destroyed
stream to that controlled substance. Exclude from the characterization
halogen-containing compounds that are not controlled substances.
(C) Controlled emissions using paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this
section. If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section to estimate
the mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, and if the
emissions from the process vent are routed through a destruction
device, characterize the process vent's emissions monthly (or more
frequently) using the monthly (or more frequent) measurements under
paragraphs (d)(4)(i)(C) and (d)(4)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
Apply the destruction efficiency demonstrated for each controlled
substance in the destroyed stream to that controlled substance. Exclude
from the characterization halogen-containing compounds that are not
controlled substances.
(vi) Emissions characterization: emissions not accounted for by
process vent estimates. Calculate the weighted average emission
characterization across the process vents before any destruction
devices. Apply the weighted average emission characterization for all
the process vents to any halogen emissions that are not accounted for
by process vent estimates.
(vii) Impurities in reactants. If any halogen-containing impurity
is fed into a process along with a reactant (or other input) in greater
than trace concentrations, this impurity shall be monitored under this
section and included in the calculations under paragraph (c) of this
section in the same manner as reactants fed into the process, fed into
the destruction device, recaptured, or emitted, except the
concentration of the impurity in the mass fed into the process shall be
measured, and the mass of the impurity fed into the process shall be
calculated as the product of the concentration of the impurity and the
mass fed into the process. The mass of the reactant fed into the
process may be reduced to account for the mass of the impurity.
(viii) Alternative to error calculation. As an alternative to
calculating the relative and absolute errors associated with the
estimate of emissions under this paragraph (d)(4), you may comply with
the precision, accuracy, and measurement and calculation frequency
requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(viii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Mass measurements. Measure the masses specified in paragraph
(d)(4)(i) of this section using flowmeters, weigh scales, or a
combination of volumetric and density measurements with accuracies and
precisions of 0.2 percent of full scale or better.
(B) Concentration measurements. Measure the concentrations
specified in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) or (iii) of this section, as
applicable, using analytical methods with accuracies and precisions of
10 percent or better.
(C) Measurement and calculation frequency. Perform the mass
measurements specified in paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section and the
concentration measurements specified in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) or (iii)
of this section, as applicable, at least weekly, and calculate
emissions at least weekly.
(5) Emission and stream testing, including analytical methods.
Select and document testing and analytical methods as follows:
(i) Sampling and mass measurement for emission testing. For
emission testing in process vents or at the stack, use methods for
sampling, measuring volumetric flow rates, non-controlled substance gas
analysis, and measuring stack gas moisture that have been validated
using a scientifically sound validation protocol.
(A) Sample and velocity traverses. Acceptable methods include but
are not limited to EPA Method 1 or 1A in appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part
60.
(B) Velocity and volumetric flow rates. Acceptable methods include
but are not limited to EPA Method 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G in
appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60. Alternatives that may be used for
determining flow rates include Other Test Method 24 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 82.27) and ALT-012 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 82.27).
(C) Non-controlled substance gas analysis. Acceptable methods
include but are not limited to EPA Method 3, 3A, or 3B in appendix A-1
to 40 CFR part 60.
(D) Stack gas moisture. Acceptable methods include but are not
limited to EPA Method 4 in appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60.
(ii) Analytical methods. Use a quality-assured analytical
measurement technology capable of detecting the analyte of interest at
the concentration of interest and use a sampling and analytical
procedure validated with the analyte of interest at the concentration
of interest. Where calibration standards for the analyte are not
available, a chemically similar surrogate may be used. Acceptable
analytical measurement technologies include but are not limited to gas
chromatography (GC) with an appropriate detector, infrared (IR),
Fourier transform infrared (FTIR), and nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR). Acceptable methods for determining controlled substances include
EPA Method 18 in appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60, EPA Method 320 in
appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, EPA 430-R-10-003 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 82.27), ASTM D6348-03 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 82.27), or other analytical methods validated using EPA
Method 301 at appendix A to 40 CFR part 63. The validation protocol may
include analytical technology manufacturer specifications or
recommendations.
(iii) Documentation in the monitoring plan. Describe the sampling,
measurement, and analytical method(s) used under paragraphs (d)(5)(i)
and (ii)
[[Page 82446]]
of this section in the monitoring plan. Identify the methods used to
obtain the samples and measurements listed under paragraphs
(d)(5)(i)(A) through (D) of this section. At a minimum, include in the
description of the analytical method a description of the analytical
measurement equipment and procedures, quantitative estimates of the
method's accuracy and precision for the analytes of interest at the
concentrations of interest, as well as a description of how these
accuracies and precisions were estimated, including the validation
protocol used.
(6) Emission monitoring for pieces of equipment. If conducting a
site-specific leak detection method or monitoring approach for pieces
of equipment, each entity must follow paragraph (d)(6)(i) or (ii) of
this section and follow paragraph (d)(6)(iii) of this section.
(i) Site-specific leak monitoring approach. Each entity may develop
a site-specific leak monitoring approach. The entity must validate the
leak monitoring method and describe the method and the validation in
the monitoring plan. To validate the site-specific method, the entity
may, for example, release a known rate of the controlled substances or
surrogates of interest, or may compare the results of the site-specific
method to those of a method that has been validated for the controlled
substances or surrogates of interest. In the description of the leak
detection method and its validation, include a detailed description of
the method, including the procedures and equipment used and any
sampling strategies. Also include the rationale behind the method,
including why the method is expected to result in an unbiased estimate
of emissions from equipment leaks. If the method is based on methods
that are used to detect or quantify leaks or other emissions in other
regulations, standards, or guidelines, identify and describe the
regulations, standards, or guidelines and why their methods are
applicable to emissions of controlled substances or surrogates from
leaks. Account for possible sources of error in the method, e.g.,
instrument detection limits, measurement biases, and sampling biases.
Describe validation efforts, including but not limited to any
comparisons against standard leaks or concentrations, any comparisons
against other methods, and their results. If using the Screening Ranges
Approach, the EPA Correlation Approach, or the Unit-Specific
Correlation Approach with a monitoring instrument that does not meet
all of the specifications in EPA Method 21 in appendix A-7 to 40 CFR
part 60, then explain how and why the monitoring instrument, as used at
the facility, would nevertheless be expected to accurately detect and
quantify emissions of controlled substances or surrogates from process
equipment, and describe how accuracy was verified. For all methods,
provide a quantitative estimate of the accuracy and precision of the
method.
(ii) EPA Method 21 monitoring. If it is determined that EPA Method
21 in appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 is appropriate for monitoring a
controlled substance, conduct the screening value concentration
measurements using EPA Method 21 to determine the screening range data
or the actual screening value data for the Screening Ranges Approach,
EPA Correlation Approach, or the Unit-Specific Correlation Approach.
For the one-time testing to develop the Unit-Specific Correlation
equations in EPA-453/R-95-017 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
82.27), conduct the screening value concentration measurements using
EPA Method 21 and the bagging procedures to measure mass emissions.
Concentration measurements of bagged samples must be conducted using
gas chromatography following analytical procedures in EPA Method 18 in
appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60 or other method according to this
paragraph (d)(6). Use methane or other appropriate compound as the
calibration gas.
(iii) Frequency of measurement and sampling. If estimating
emissions based on monitoring of equipment, each entity must conduct
monitoring at least annually. Sample at least one-third of equipment
annually (except for equipment that is unsafe-to-monitor, difficult-to-
monitor, insulated, or in heavy liquid service, pumps with dual
mechanical seals, agitators with dual mechanical seals, pumps with no
external shaft, agitators with no external shaft, pressure relief
devices in gas and vapor service with an upstream rupture disk,
sampling connection systems with closed-loop or closed purge systems,
and pieces of equipment whose leaks are routed through a closed vent
system to a destruction unit), changing the sample each year such that
at the end of three years, all equipment in the process (that is not
subject to the above-listed exceptions) has been monitored. If
estimating emissions based on a sample of the equipment in the process,
ensure that the sample is representative of the equipment in the
process. If there are multiple processes that have similar types of
equipment in similar service, and that perform activities on similar
controlled substances (in terms of chemical composition, molecular
weight, and vapor pressure) at similar pressures and concentrations,
then the entity may annually sample all of the equipment in one third
of these processes rather than one third of the equipment in each
process.
(7) Destruction unit performance testing. If venting or otherwise
feeding controlled substances into a destruction unit and apply the
destruction efficiency of the device to one or more controlled
substances in paragraph (c) of this section, each entity must conduct
emissions testing to determine the destruction efficiency for each
controlled substance to which the destruction efficiency was applied.
The entity must either determine the destruction efficiency for the
most-difficult-to-destroy controlled substance fed into the device (or
a surrogate that is still more difficult to destroy) and apply that
destruction efficiency to all the controlled substances fed into the
device or alternatively determine different destruction efficiencies
for different groups of controlled substances using the most-difficult-
to-destroy controlled substance of each group (or a surrogate that is
still more difficult to destroy).
(i) Destruction efficiency testing. Each entity must sample the
inlet and outlet of the destruction unit for a minimum of three runs of
1 hour each to determine the destruction efficiency. The entity must
conduct the emissions testing using the methods in paragraph (d)(5) of
this section. To determine the destruction efficiency, emission testing
must be conducted when operating at high loads reasonably expected to
occur (i.e., representative of high total controlled substance load
that will be sent to the device) and when destroying the most-
difficult-to-destroy controlled substance (or a surrogate that is still
more difficult to destroy) that is fed into the device from the
processes subject to this section or that belongs to the group of
controlled substances for which destruction efficiency is to be
established. If the outlet concentration of a controlled substance that
is fed into the device is below the detection limit of the method, the
entity may use an outlet concentration of one-third the detection limit
to estimate the destruction efficiency.
(A) For all other controlled substances that are vented to the
destruction unit in any stream in more than trace concentrations, each
entity must test and determine the destruction efficiency achieved for
the most-difficult-to-destroy controlled substance or surrogate vented
to the destruction unit. Examples of acceptable surrogates include the
Class 1 compounds (ranked 1 through 34) in Appendix D, Table D-
[[Page 82447]]
1 of ``Guidance on Setting Permit Conditions and Reporting Trial Burn
Results; Volume II of the Hazardous Waste Incineration Guidance
Series,'' January 1989, EPA Publication EPA 625/6-89/019. A copy of
this publication can be obtained by contacting the Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460,
(202) 272-0167, https://www.epa.gov.
(B) [Reserved]
(ii) Destruction efficiency testing frequency. Each entity must
conduct emissions testing to determine the destruction efficiency as
provided in paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section, whichever
occurs first:
(A) Conduct an emissions test every 5 years. In the calculations
under paragraph (c) of this section, apply the updated destruction
efficiency to the destruction that occurs after the test.
(B) Destruction unit changes that affect the destruction
efficiency. If making a change to the destruction unit that would be
expected to affect the destruction efficiency, each entity must conduct
an emissions test to update the destruction efficiency. Conduct the
test before February 14 of the year that immediately follows the
change. In the calculations under paragraph (c) of this section, apply
the updated destruction efficiency to the destruction that occurs after
the change to the device.
(iii) Previous testing. If an emissions test was conducted within
the 5 years prior to November 12, 2024, and the emissions testing meets
the requirements in paragraph (d)(7)(i) of this section, each entity
may use the destruction efficiency determined during this previous
emissions testing. For purposes of paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) of this
section, the date of the previous emissions test rather than November
12, 2024, shall constitute the beginning of the 5-year re-measurement
cycle.
(iv) Hazardous waste combustor testing. If a destruction unit used
to destroy a controlled substance is subject to testing under subpart
EEE of part 63 of this chapter or any portion of parts 260 through 270
of this chapter, each entity may apply the destruction efficiency
specifically determined for controlled substances under that test if
the testing meets the criteria in paragraph (d)(7)(i)(A) of this
section. If the testing of the destruction efficiency under subpart EEE
of part 63 was conducted more than 5 years ago, the entity may use the
most recent destruction efficiency test provided that the design,
operation, and maintenance of the destruction unit has not changed
since the last destruction efficiency test in a manner that could
affect the ability to achieve the destruction efficiency, and the
hazardous waste is fed into the normal flame zone.
(8) Mass of previously produced controlled substances fed into a
destruction unit. Each entity must measure the mass of each controlled
substance that is fed into the destruction unit in more than trace
concentrations. Such controlled substances include but are not limited
to quantities that are shipped to the facility by another facility for
destruction and quantities that are returned to the facility for
reclamation but are found to be irretrievably contaminated and are
therefore destroyed. The entity must use flowmeters, weigh scales, or a
combination of volumetric and density measurements with an accuracy and
precision of 1 percent of full scale or better. If the
measured mass includes more than trace concentrations of materials
other than the controlled substance being destroyed, the entity must
measure the concentration of the controlled substance being destroyed.
The entity must multiply this concentration (mass fraction) by the mass
measurement to obtain the mass of the controlled substance fed into the
destruction unit.
(9) Emissions due to malfunctions of destruction unit. In their
estimates of the mass of controlled substances destroyed, facilities
that destroy controlled substances must account for any temporary
reductions in the destruction efficiency that result from any
malfunctions of the destruction unit, including periods of operation
outside of the operating conditions defined in operating permit
requirements and/or outside of the destruction unit's manufacturer's
specifications.
(10) Emissions due to process startup, shutdown, or malfunctions.
For each process listed in paragraph (b) of this section, each entity
must account for emissions of controlled substance that occur at each
facility as a result of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions, either
recording controlled substance emissions during these events, or
documenting that these events do not result in significant controlled
substance emissions. Facilities may use the calculation methods in
paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section to estimate emissions during
startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions.
(11) Development of initial parameters. Initial scoping
speciations, emissions testing, emission factor development, emission
calculation factor development, emission characterization development,
and destruction efficiency determinations must be completed by February
7, 2025, for processes and operating scenarios that operate between
October 10, 2024, and November 12, 2024. For other processes and
operating scenarios, initial scoping specifications, emissions testing,
emission factor development, emission calculation factor development,
emission characterization development, and destruction efficiency
determinations must be complete by February 14 of the year following
the year in which the process or operating scenario commences or
recommences.
(12) Calibration for volumetric and density measurements. Calibrate
all flow meters, weigh scales, and combinations of volumetric and
density measures using monitoring instruments traceable to the
International System of Units (SI) through the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) or other recognized national
measurement institute. Recalibrate all flow meters, weigh scales, and
combinations of volumetric and density measures at the minimum
frequency specified by the manufacturer. Use any of the following
applicable flow meter test methods or the calibration procedures
specified by the flow meter, weigh-scale, or other volumetric or
density measure manufacturer.
(i) ASME MFC-3M-2004 Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using
Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
82.27).
(ii) ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed 2016) Measurement of Gas Flow by
Turbine Meters (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(iii) ASME-MFC-5M-1985, (Reaffirmed1994) Measurement of Liquid Flow
in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(iv) ASME MFC-6M-1998 Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using
Vortex Flowmeters (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(v) ASME MFC-7M-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992) Measurement of Gas Flow by
Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 82.27).
(vi) ASME MFC-9M-1988 (Reaffirmed 2001) Measurement of Liquid Flow
in Closed Conduits by Weighing Method (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 82.27).
(vii) ASME MFC-11M-2006 Measurement of Fluid Flow by Means of
Coriolis Mass Flowmeters (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(viii) ASME MFC-14M-2003 Measurement of Fluid Flow Using Small Bore
Precision Orifice Meters (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 82.27).
(13) Calibration for concentration determinations. All analytical
[[Page 82448]]
equipment used to determine the concentration of controlled substances,
including but not limited to gas chromatographs and associated
detectors, IR, FTIR, and NMR devices, must be calibrated at a frequency
needed to support the type of analysis specified in the monitoring plan
as required under paragraph (d)(5)(iii) of this section. Quality
assurance samples at the concentrations of concern must be used for the
calibration. Such quality assurance samples must consist of or be
prepared from certified standards of the analytes of concern where
available; if not available, calibration must be performed by a method
specified in the monitoring plan.
(e) Data reporting requirements--(1) All facilities. In addition to
the information required by Sec. 82.13, for class I controlled
substances, and Sec. 82.24, for class II controlled substances, each
entity must report the information in paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) through
(iv) of this section according to the schedule in paragraph (e)(1)(i)
of this section.
(i) Frequency of reporting under this paragraph (e)(1). The
information in paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) through (v) of this section must
be reported annually, as applicable.
(ii) Process identification. For each process listed in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, each entity must provide:
(A) A description and identification of the process listed in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(B) A description and number, letter, or other identifier for each
process vent associated with the process. This identifier must be a
consistent name reported from year to year.
(C) The type of method(s) (i.e., process-vent-specific emission
factor, process-vent-specific emission calculation factor, or mass
balance) and each applicable analytical approach (e.g., compliance
options under paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (d)(4) of this section) used to
determine the mass emissions from each process vent associated with the
process.
(D) The type of method(s) (e.g., site-specific leak monitoring
approach or EPA Method 21 monitoring) and each applicable analytical
approach (e.g., compliance options under paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and
(d)(4) of this section) used to determine the mass emissions from
equipment leaks associated with the process.
(iii) Process emissions. For each controlled substance, each entity
must report the total mass in kilograms of the controlled substance
emitted from the processes listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(iv) Effective destruction efficiency. For each process and
controlled substance, report the effective destruction efficiency,
DEeffective, calculated for that process using equation 31
to paragraph (c)(6) of this section.
(v) Monitoring plan. The monitoring plan, as specified in paragraph
(f)(6) of this section, including any revisions since the prior year's
submission as applicable.
(2) Reporting for emission factor and emission calculation factor
approach. For processes whose emissions are determined using the
emission factor approach under paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section or
the emission calculation factor under paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this
section, each entity must report the following for each process.
(i) The identity and quantity of the process activity used to
estimate emissions (e.g., tons of product produced or tons of reactant
consumed) for each process vent associated with the process.
(ii) The site-specific, process-vent-specific emission factor(s) or
emission calculation factor for each process vent associated with the
process.
(iii) For each controlled substance, the mass emitted from each
process vent associated with the process, in kilograms.
(iv) For each controlled substance, the total mass emitted from
equipment leaks, in kilograms.
(3) Reporting for mass balance approach. For processes whose
emissions are determined using the mass-balance approach under
paragraph (c)(4) of this section, you must report the information
listed in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (xiii) of this section for each
process on an annual basis. Identify and separately report controlled
substance emissions from transformation processes where the controlled
substance reactants are produced at another facility. If you use an
element other than a halogen in the mass-balance equation pursuant to
paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, substitute that element for the
halogen in the reporting requirements of this paragraph (e)(3).
(i) If you calculate the relative and absolute errors under
paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section, the absolute and relative errors
calculated under paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section, as well as the
data (including quantities and their accuracies and precisions) used in
these calculations.
(ii) The balanced chemical equation that describes the reaction
used to manufacture the controlled substance product and each
controlled substance transformation product.
(iii) The mass and chemical formula of each controlled substance
reactant emitted from the process in metric tons.
(iv) The mass and chemical formula of the controlled substance
product emitted from the process in metric tons.
(v) The mass and chemical formula of each controlled substance
byproduct emitted from the process in metric tons.
(vi) The mass and chemical formula of each controlled substance
reactant that is fed into the process (metric tons).
(vii) The mass and chemical formula of each halogen-containing
product produced by the process (metric tons).
(viii) If you use paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section to estimate
the total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, report
the following.
(A) The mass and chemical formula of each halogen-containing
product that is removed from the process and fed into the destruction
device (metric tons).
(B) The mass and chemical formula of each halogen-containing
byproduct that is removed from the process and fed into the destruction
device (metric tons).
(C) The mass and chemical formula of each halogen-containing
reactant that is removed from the process and fed into the destruction
device (metric tons).
(D) The mass and chemical formula of each halogen-containing
byproduct that is removed from the process and recaptured (metric
tons).
(E) The demonstrated destruction efficiency of the destruction
device for each controlled substance fed into the device from the
process in greater than trace concentrations (fraction).
(ix) If you use paragraph (c)(4)(xv) of this section to estimate
the total mass of halogen in destroyed or recaptured streams, report
the following.
(A) The mass of halogen in each stream that is fed into the
destruction device (metric tons).
(B) The mass of halogen that is recaptured (metric tons).
(C) The weighted average destruction efficiency of the destruction
device calculated for each stream under paragraph (c)(4)(xvi) of this
section.
(x) The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of each halogen-
containing reactant.
(xi) The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of the halogen-
containing product.
(xii) The fraction of the mass emitted that consists of each
halogen-containing byproduct.
(xiii) The method used to estimate the total mass of halogen in
destroyed or recaptured streams (specify paragraph (c)(4)(iv) or (xv)
of this section).
[[Page 82449]]
(4) Reporting of destruction unit excess emission data. Each
facility that destroys a controlled substance must report the excess
emissions that result from malfunctions of the destruction unit, and
these excess emissions must be reflected in the controlled substance
estimates in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Such excess emissions
would occur if the destruction efficiency was reduced due to the
malfunction.
(5) Reporting of destruction unit testing. By February 7, 2025, or
by February 14 of the year immediately following the year in which it
begins controlled substance destruction, each facility that destroys
controlled substances must submit a report containing the information
in paragraphs (e)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section. This report is
one-time unless a change is made to the destruction unit that would be
expected to affect its destruction efficiencies.
(i) Chemical identity of the controlled substance(s) used in the
performance test conducted to determine destruction efficiency,
including surrogates, and information on why the surrogate is
sufficient to demonstrate the destruction efficiency for each
controlled substance, consistent with requirements in paragraph
(d)(7)(i) of this section, vented to the destruction unit.
(ii) Date of the most recent destruction unit test.
(iii) Name of all applicable Federal or State regulations that may
apply to the destruction process.
(6) Reporting for destruction. Each facility that destroys
controlled substances must report, separately from the controlled
substance emissions reported under paragraph (e)(2) of this section,
the following for each previously produced controlled substance
destroyed:
(i) The mass of the controlled substance emitted from the
destruction unit (kilograms).
(ii) [Reserved]
(7) Reporting of controlled substance products of incomplete
combustion (PICs) of controlled substances. Each facility that destroys
controlled substances must submit a one-time report by February 7,
2025, or by February 14 of the year immediately following the year in
which it begins controlled substance destruction, that describes any
measurements, research, or analysis that it has performed or obtained
that relate to the formation of products of incomplete combustion that
are controlled substances during the destruction of controlled
substances. The report must include the methods and results of any
measurement or modeling studies, including the products of incomplete
combustion for which the exhaust stream was analyzed, as well as copies
of relevant scientific papers, if available, or citations of the
papers, if they are not. No new testing is required to fulfill the
requirement of this paragraph (e)(7).
(f) Records that must be retained. Each entity must retain the
dated records specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (6) of this
section, as applicable, and be able to provide such information to EPA
within 5 business days of the date the records are requested.
(1) Process information records. (i) Identify all processes subject
to this section. Include the unit identification as appropriate, the
process identification reported for the process under paragraphs
(e)(1)(ii)(A) through (B) of this section, and the product with which
the process is associated.
(ii) Monthly and annual records, as applicable, of all analyses and
calculations conducted as required under paragraph (c) of this section,
including the data monitored under paragraph (d) of this section, and
all information reported as required under paragraph (e) of this
section.
(2) Scoping speciation. Retain records documenting the information
collected under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(3) Emission factor and emission calculation factor method. Retain
the following records for each process for which the emission factor or
emission calculation factor method was used to estimate emissions.
(i) Identify all continuous process vents with emissions of
controlled substances that are included in the top 25 percent of
continuous process vents, and all continuous process vents in the
remaining group (i.e., 75 percent of continuous process vents with
lower emissions of controlled substances). Include the data and
calculation used to develop the preliminary estimate of emissions for
each process vent.
(ii) Identify all batch process vents.
(iii) For each vent, identify the method used to develop the factor
(i.e., emission factor by emissions test or emission calculation
factor).
(iv) The emissions test data and reports (see paragraph (d)(2)(v)
of this section) and the calculations used to determine the process-
vent-specific emission factor, including the actual process-vent-
specific emission factor, the average hourly emission rate of each
controlled substance from the process vent during the test and the
process feed rate, process production rate, or other process activity
rate during the test.
(v) The process-vent-specific emission calculation factor and the
calculations used to determine the process-vent-specific emission
calculation factor.
(vi) The annual process production quantity or other process
activity information in the appropriate units, along with the dates and
time period during which the process was operating and dates and time
periods the process vents are vented to the destruction unit. As an
alternative to date and time periods when process vents are vented to
the destruction unit, a facility may track dates and time periods that
process vents by-pass the destruction unit.
(vii) Calculations used to determine annual emissions of each
controlled substance for each process and the total controlled
substance emissions for all processes, i.e., total for facility.
(4) Mass-balance method. Retain the following records for each
process for which the mass-balance method was used to estimate
emissions. If you use an element other than a halogen in the mass-
balance equation pursuant to paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section,
substitute that element for the halogen in the recordkeeping
requirements of this paragraph (f)(4).
(i) The data and calculations used to estimate the absolute and
relative errors associated with use of the mass-balance approach.
(ii) The data and calculations used to estimate the mass of halogen
emitted from the process.
(iii) The data and calculations used to determine the fractions of
the mass emitted consisting of each reactant (FERd), product (FEP), and
byproduct (FEBk), including the preliminary calculations in paragraph
(c)(4)(viii)(A) of this section.
(5) Destruction efficiency testing. A facility that destroys
controlled substances and reflects this destruction in paragraph (c) of
this section must retain the emissions performance testing reports
(including revised reports) for each destruction unit. The emissions
performance testing report must contain all information and data used
to derive the destruction efficiency for each controlled substance
whose destruction the facility reflects in paragraph (c) of this
section, as well as the key process and device conditions during the
test. This information includes the following:
(i) Destruction efficiency (DE) determined for each controlled
substance whose destruction the facility reflects in paragraph (c) of
this section, in accordance with paragraph (d)(7)(i)(A) of this
section.
(ii) Chemical identity of the controlled substance(s) used in the
performance test conducted to determine destruction efficiency,
[[Page 82450]]
including surrogates, and information on why the surrogate is
sufficient to demonstrate destruction efficiency for each controlled
substance, consistent with requirements in paragraph (d)(7)(i)(A) of
this section, vented to the destruction unit.
(iii) Mass flow rate of the stream containing the controlled
substance or surrogate into the device during the test.
(iv) Concentration (mass fraction) of each controlled substance or
surrogate in the stream flowing into the device during the test.
(v) Concentration (mass fraction) of each controlled substance or
surrogate at the outlet of the destruction unit during the test.
(vi) Mass flow rate at the outlet of the destruction unit during
the test.
(vii) Test methods and analytical methods used to determine the
mass flow rates and controlled substance (or surrogate) concentrations
of the streams flowing into and out of the destruction unit during the
test.
(viii) Destruction unit conditions that are normally monitored for
device control, such as temperature, total mass flow rates into the
device, and CO or O2 levels.
(ix) Name of all applicable Federal or State regulations that may
apply to the destruction process.
(6) Equipment leak records. If the equipment is subject to
paragraph (c)(2) of this section, each entity must maintain information
on the number of each type of equipment, the service of each piece of
equipment (gas, light liquid, heavy liquid); the concentration of each
controlled substance in the stream; each piece of equipment excluded
from monitoring requirement; the time period each piece of equipment
was in service, and the emission calculations for each controlled
substance for all processes. Depending on the equipment leak monitoring
approach followed, each entity must maintain information for equipment
on the associated screening data concentrations for greater than or
equal to 10,000 ppmv and associated screening data concentrations for
less than 10,000 ppmv; associated actual screening data concentrations;
and associated screening data and leak rate data (i.e., bagging) used
to develop a unit-specific correlation. If a site-specific leak
detection approach was developed and followed, provide the records for
monitoring events and the emissions estimation calculations, as
appropriate, consistent with the approach for equipment leak emission
estimation in the monitoring plan.
(7) All facilities. Dated records documenting the initial and
periodic calibration of all analytical equipment used to determine the
concentration of controlled substances, including but not limited to
gas chromatographs, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, gas
chromatograph-electron capture detector, FTIR, and NMR devices, and all
mass measurement equipment such as weigh scales, flowmeters, and
volumetric and density measures used to measure the quantities reported
under this section, including the industry standards or manufacturer
directions used for calibration pursuant to paragraphs (d)(5), (6),
(12), and (13) of this section.
(8) Controlled substance monitoring plan. A Controlled Substance
Monitoring Plan must be completed by February 7, 2025, or within 120
days of the date that an entity first meets the criteria in paragraph
(a) of this section.
(i) At a minimum, the monitoring plan shall include the elements
listed in this paragraph (f)(8)(i) of this section.
(A) Identification of positions of responsibility (i.e., job
titles) for collection of the emission data.
(B) Explanation of the processes and methods used to collect the
necessary data for calculations under this section.
(C) Description of the procedures and methods that are used for
quality assurance, maintenance, and repair of all continuous monitoring
systems, flow meters, and other instrumentation used to provide data
for the controlled substances reported under this part.
(ii) The monitoring plan may rely on references to existing
corporate documents (e.g., standard operating procedures, quality
assurance programs under appendix F to 40 CFR part 60 or appendix B to
40 CFR part 75, and other documents) provided that the elements
required by paragraph (f)(8)(i) of this section are easily
recognizable.
(iii) The owner or operator shall revise the monitoring as needed
to reflect changes in production processes, monitoring instrumentation,
and quality assurance procedures; or to improve procedures for the
maintenance and repair of monitoring systems to reduce the frequency of
monitoring equipment downtime.
0
7. Add Sec. 82.26 to read as follows:
Sec. 82.26 Treatment of data submitted under this subpart.
(a) Sections 2.201 through 2.215 and 2.301 of this chapter do not
apply to data submitted under this subpart that EPA has determined
through rulemaking to be either of the following:
(1) Emission data, as defined in Sec. 2.301(a)(2) of this chapter,
determined in accordance with section 114(c) and 307(d) of the Clean
Air Act; or
(2) Data not otherwise entitled to confidential treatment.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (d) of this section
and Sec. Sec. 2.201 through 2.208 and 2.301(c) and (d) of this chapter
do not apply to data submitted under this part that EPA has determined
through rulemaking to be entitled to confidential treatment. EPA shall
treat that information as confidential in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 2.211 of this chapter, subject to paragraph (d) of
this section and Sec. 2.209 of this chapter.
(c) Upon receiving a request under 5 U.S.C. 552 for data submitted
under this part that EPA has determined through rulemaking to be
entitled to confidential treatment, the relevant Agency official shall
furnish the requestor a notice that the information has been determined
to be entitled to confidential treatment and that the request is
therefore denied. The notice shall include or cite to the appropriate
EPA determination.
(d) A determination made through rulemaking that information
submitted under this part is entitled to confidential treatment shall
continue in effect unless, subsequent to the confidentiality
determination through rulemaking, EPA takes one of the following
actions:
(1) EPA determines through a subsequent rulemaking that the
information is emission data or data not otherwise entitled to
confidential treatment; or
(2) The Office of General Counsel issues a final determination,
based on the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), stating that the
information is no longer entitled to confidential treatment because of
change in the applicable law or newly discovered or changed facts.
Prior to making such final determination, EPA shall afford the business
an opportunity to submit comments on pertinent issues in the manner
described by Sec. Sec. 2.204(e) and 2.205(b) of this chapter. If,
after consideration of any timely comments submitted by the business,
the Office of General Counsel makes a revised final determination that
the information is not entitled to confidential treatment, the relevant
agency official will notify the business in accordance with the
procedures described in Sec. 2.205(f)(2) of this chapter.
0
8. Add Sec. 82.27 to read as follows:
Sec. 82.27 Incorporation by reference.
(a)(1) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this
subpart with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved incorporation by
reference (IBR) material is available
[[Page 82451]]
for inspection at EPA and at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). Contact EPA at: U.S. EPA's Air and Radiation
Docket; EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, 202-566-1742. For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations or email [email protected].
(2) The IBR material may be obtained from the sources in the
following paragraphs of this section or from one or more private
resellers listed in this paragraph (a)(2). For material that is no
longer commercially available, contact: U.S. EPA's Air and Radiation
Docket; EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; [email protected].
(i) Accuris Standards Store, 321 Inverness Drive, South Englewood,
CO 80112; phone: (800) 332-6077; website: https://accuristech.com.
(ii) American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd
Street, Fourth Floor, New York, NY 10036-7417; phone: (212) 642-4980;
email: [email protected]; website: www.ansi.org.
(iii) GlobalSpec, 257 Fuller Road, Suite NFE 1100, Albany, NY
12203-3621; phone: (800) 261-2052; website: https://standards.globalspec.com.
(iv) Nimonik Document Center, 401 Roland Way, Suite 224, Oakland,
CA 94624; phone (650) 591-7600; email: center.com">info@document-center.com;
website: www.document-center.com.
(b) American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Two Park
Avenue, New York, NY 10016, phone: 800.843.2763, email:
[email protected]; website: www.asme.org.
(1) ASME MFC-3M-2004, Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using
Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi, issued August 15, 2005; IBR approved for
Sec. 82.25(d).
(2) ASME MFC-4M-1986 (Reaffirmed 2016), Measurement of Gas Flow by
Turbine Meters, reaffirmed 2016, IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(d).
(3) ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 1994), Measurement of Liquid Flow
in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flow Meters, copyright
1985; IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(d).
(4) ASME MFC-6M-1998, Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using
Vortex Flowmeters, July 4, 1998; IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(d).
(5) ASME MFC-7M-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992), Measurement of Gas Flow by
Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles, copyright 1987; IBR approved
for Sec. 82.25(d).
(6) ASME MFC-9M-1988 (Reaffirmed 2001), Measurement of Liquid Flow
in Closed Conduits by Weighing Method, reaffirmed 2001; IBR approved
for Sec. 82.25(d).
(7) ASME MFC-11M-2006, Measurement of Fluid Flow by Means of
Coriolis Mass Flowmeters, issued March 30, 2007; IBR approved for Sec.
82.25(d).
(8) ASME MFC-14M-2003, Measurement of Fluid Flow Using Small Bore
Precision Orifice Meters, issued April 17, 2003; IBR approved for Sec.
82.25(d).
(c) ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428; phone: 610.832.9500; email: [email protected];
website: www.astm.org/.
(1) ASTM D6348-03 Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous
Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform Infrared
(FTIR) Spectroscopy, approved October 1, 2003, IBR approved for Sec.
82.25(d).
(2) [Reserved]
(d) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20460; phone: 202.272.0167; website: www.epa.gov.
(1) Approved Alternative Method 012: An Alternate Procedure for
Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Determination (Tracer Gas) (ALT-012),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Emission Measurement Center, May
23, 1994, IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(d).
(2) Emissions Inventory Improvement Program, Volume II: Chapter 16,
Methods for Estimating Air Emissions from Chemical Manufacturing
Facilities, August 2007, Final, IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(c).
(3) Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates, EPA-453/R-95-
017, November 1995 (EPA-453/R-95-017), IBR approved for Sec. 82.25(c)
and (d).
(4) Protocol for Measuring Destruction or Removal Efficiency (DRE)
of Fluorinated Greenhouse Gas Abatement Equipment in Electronics
Manufacturing, Version 1, EPA-430-R-10-003, March 2010 (EPA 430-R-10-
003), IBR approved for Sec. 82.25 (d).
(5) Tracer Gas Protocol for the Determination of Volumetric Flow
Rate Through the Ring Pipe of the Xact Multi-Metals Monitoring System,
also known as Other Test Method 24 (Tracer Gas Protocol), Eli Lilly and
Company Tippecanoe Laboratories, September 2006, IBR approved for Sec.
82.25(d).
[FR Doc. 2024-22380 Filed 10-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P