[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 160 (Thursday, August 19, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45187-45196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-20861]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[AD-FRL-6419-5]
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Halogenated Solvent Cleaning
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 2, 1994, the EPA issued the ``National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Halogenated Solvent Cleaning''
(59 FR 61801). Today's action offers compliance options for continuous
web cleaning machines, as well as amendments to the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) that apply to steam-
heated vapor cleaning machines and to cleaning machines used to clean
transformers. The EPA is approving these amendments to ensure that all
owners or operators of solvent cleaning machines have appropriate and
attainable requirements for their cleaning machines.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective on October 18, 1999
without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by
September 20, 1999. If we receive any adverse comment, we will publish
a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if
possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (MC-
6102), Attention Docket Number A-92-39, Room M-1500, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The EPA
requests that a separate copy of each public comment be sent to the
contact person listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the
standards and the proposed changes, contact Mr. Paul Almodovar,
Coatings and Consumer Products Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-
13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0283. For information
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
contact Ms. Acquanetta Delaney, Manufacturing Branch, Office of
Compliance (2223A), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
SW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 564-7061.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and
do not anticipate adverse comment. The changes to the compliance
requirements for continuous web cleaning machines provide the only
reasonable method available to those cleaning machines to comply with
the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) level of control. The
EPA considers these revised requirements to be comparable to the
requirements previously promulgated for other cleaning machines.
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register,
we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal
in the event that adverse comments are filed. This rule will be
effective on October 18, 1999 without further notice unless we receive
any adverse comment by September 20, 1999. If we receive any adverse
comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will not take effect. We will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
Regulated Entities
The following entities are potentially regulated by this direct
final rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category SIC codes Examples of potentially regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................. 33, 34, 36, and 37..... Facilities engaging in cleaning operations using
halogenated solvent cleaning machines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 45188]]
This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. This list includes the types of entities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of
entities not listed could also be affected. To determine whether your
facility, company, or organization is regulated by this direct final
rule, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in
Sec. 63.460 of the promulgated rule. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this direct final rule to a particular
entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Organization of This Document
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. Background
A. Why Is EPA Amending the NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent
Cleaning?
B. What Is the Purpose of This Direct Final Rule?
C. Does This Rule Apply to Me?
D. Do the Changes in Today's Direct Final Rule Apply to My
Machines?
II. New Requirements for Continuous Web Cleaning Machines
A. How Do I Know if My Machine is a Continuous Web Cleaning
Machine?
B. What Changes Impact My Continuous Web Cleaning Machines?
C. How Did EPA Develop These Changes?
D. How Do I Know if My Machine Is ``New'' or an ``Existing''
Continuous Web Cleaning Machine?
E. When Must I Comply With These New Requirements?
III. Other Changes
A. What Change Is EPA Making That Applies to My Transformer
Cleaning Operations?
B. What Changes Impact My Steam-Heated Vapor Cleaning Machines?
IV. Impacts
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
C. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental
Partnerships
D. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Regulatory Flexibility/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Background
A. Why Is EPA Amending the NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning?
The EPA promulgated the halogenated solvent cleaning (HSC) NESHAP
on December 2, 1994. That rule included requirements for batch and in-
line cleaning machines and included both control device and work
practice requirements. A batch cleaning machine is defined in the HSC
NESHAP as ``a solvent cleaning machine in which individual parts or
sets of parts move through the entire cleaning cycle before new parts
are introduced.'' Inherent in some of the requirements is the
understanding that the part or set of parts stops at one or various
points in the machine for cleaning and for removal of cleaned parts. In
contrast, an in-line cleaning machine (or continuous cleaning machine)
is defined in the HSC NESHAP as ``a solvent cleaning machine that uses
an automated parts handling system, typically a conveyor, to
automatically provide a continuous supply of parts to be cleaned.''
After promulgation, several industry groups raised concerns about
how some cleaning machines would be classified under the rule. These
commenters stated that some machines did not clearly and completely fit
into any of the categories of cleaning machines included in the HSC
NESHAP. The machines in question included movie film cleaning machines
and machines used to clean strips, rods, and wire.
After some initial review, the EPA concluded that these issues
warranted additional consideration. On May 5, 1998 (63 FR 24768), the
EPA issued an immediate stay of compliance for the continuous web
cleaning machines until August 3, 1998. In that same action, the EPA
proposed to extend the compliance date for these units for an
additional year, to August 3, 1999, to allow for an equivalency
determination. The EPA received comments on the proposed extension. One
commenter expressed concern that the 1-year extension may not be
sufficient time to review the data, complete the technical analysis,
propose and promulgate an equivalency determination, and allow
sufficient time for facilities to comply with the new requirements. The
EPA agreed with these comments and on December 11, 1998 (63 FR 68397)
extended the compliance date for continuous web cleaning machines to
December 2, 1999.
B. What Is the Purpose of This Direct Final Rule?
This direct final rule does two things. First, it promulgates
alternative compliance requirements for continuous web cleaning
machines. A continuous web cleaning machine is a cleaning machine that
cleans a continuous web part at speeds in excess of 11 feet per minute.
Changes to the rule impacting continuous web cleaning machines are
discussed in section II.A of this direct final rule. Second, this
direct final rule makes two minor changes, discussed in section II.B,
which are the only changes that impact cleaning machines other than
continuous web cleaning machines.
C. Does This Rule Apply to Me?
You are subject to the HSC NESHAP if you are the owner or operator
of a halogenated solvent cleaning machine. A halogenated solvent
cleaning machine is any piece of equipment used to remove soil if the
solvent used in the machine contains more than 5 percent in total of
any of the following halogenated solvents: perchloroethylene; methylene
chloride; 1,1,1-trichloroethane (also known as methyl chloroform);
trichloroethylene; carbon tetrachloride; and chloroform.
D. Do the Changes in Today's Direct Final Rule Apply to My Machines?
The changes contained in today's direct final rule only apply to
you if your machines meet any of the following criteria:
1. Halogenated solvent cleaning machines that are classified as
continuous web cleaning machines. (Changes impacting these machines are
discussed in section II.A.)
2. Halogenated solvent cleaning machines used to clean
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) laden transformers. (A change impacting
these machines is discussed in section II.B.)
3. Halogenated solvent cleaning machines that are steam-heated
vapor cleaning machines. (The definition of continuous web cleaning
machines and a change impacting these machines is discussed in section
II.B.)
II. New Requirements for Continuous Web Cleaning Machines
A. How Do I Know if My Machine Is a Continuous Web Cleaning Machine?
A continuous web cleaning machine is a solvent cleaning machine in
which parts such as film, coils, wire, and metal strips are cleaned at
speeds in excess of 11 feet per minute. Parts are generally uncoiled,
cleaned such that the same part is simultaneously entering and exiting
the solvent application area of the solvent cleaning machine, and then
recoiled or cut. For the purposes of this subpart, all continuous web
cleaning machines are considered to be a subset
[[Page 45189]]
of in-line solvent cleaning machines. These units tend to be used in
two distinct areas: (1) Movie film cleaning and (2) continuous strip,
wire, or rod cleaning.
Movie Film Cleaning
The movie film cleaning industry typically uses a continuous web
cleaning machine to clean the surfaces on large reels of film.
Typically, a reel is loaded onto the machine and the film threaded
through a series of rollers. The film is then either fed into a vat or
past a series of spray nozzles that apply the chlorinated solvent onto
the film. The film is then dried using air jets, cloth pads, or a
combination of both.
Strip, Rod, or Wire Cleaning
This group of continuous web cleaning machines cleans a more
diverse product group, including large flat pieces of metal, metal
rods, and thin wires. The machines can be dip tanks, spray
applications, or a combination. While the EPA has only currently
identified continuous web cleaning machines used to clean metal
products, these machines may clean nonmetal products which would also
be covered by this rule.
The EPA considered both of the above types of continuous web
cleaning machines when developing the changes discussed today.
B. What Changes Impact My Continuous Web Cleaning Machines?
The changes will enable you to comply with all of the requirements
of the HSC NESHAP. The options are similar to the options for other in-
line cleaning machines. The changes are equivalent to those codified at
40 CFR part 63, subpart T, and include new equivalent controls for some
existing requirements and clarifications of the EPA's interpretation of
existing requirements germane to continuous web cleaning machines. The
changes account for the inherent differences between the solvent
cleaning machines that were the basis for the HSC NESHAP promulgated in
1994 and continuous web cleaning machines. The changes to the rule that
apply only to continuous web cleaning machines are:
1. An Alternative to the Requirement for a Maximum Parts Speed of 11
Feet per Minute and the Requirement for a Dwell Time in Some Options
You are not required to meet the speed and dwell requirements if
your continuous web cleaning machine meets other specific requirements.
These requirements include a properly designed, operated, and
maintained system to eliminate visible carryout of solvent on your
continuous web product. In addition, you must comply with the
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for the controls
that replace the hoist speed and dwell requirements.
2. A Change in the Alternative for Continuous Web Cleaning Machines
Venting to a Carbon Adsorber
A properly designed and operated continuous web cleaning machine
can comply with the new or existing source requirements by venting the
exhaust from the enclosed cleaning chamber through a properly operated
and maintained carbon adsorption system instead of one of the equipment
combinations listed in the HSC NESHAP. However, the system used must be
demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction to be equal to the
MACT level of control established for the listed control combinations.
3. A Clarification That There is No Freeboard Ratio Requirement if Your
Continuous Web Cleaning Machine Does Not Have an Exposed Sump
That is, if your continuous web cleaning machine has a remote
reservoir, no freeboard ratio requirement applies.
4. A Clarification That the Ban on the Cleaning of Absorbent Materials
Does Not Apply to Cloth Rollers Used in the Cleaning Process Inside
Your Machine
However, you do have requirements that apply when you remove these
rollers from the machine.
5. A Clarification on the Interpretation of Superheated Vapor
Technology for Continuous Web Cleaning Machines
The new interpretation allows for any technology that raises the
continuous web part above the boiling point of the solvent. A new term,
superheated part technology, has been added to the rule to more clearly
address this situation. Therefore, as with the HSC NESHAP promulgated
in 1994, your specific compliance options in the amended HSC NESHAP
depend on whether your cleaning machines are considered to be new or
existing.
C. How Did EPA Develop These Changes?
The EPA evaluated all data received on continuous web cleaning
machines from the industry. The EPA contacted some facilities for
additional data and identified several facilities for site visits. The
EPA conducted several site visits and was able to gather additional
data on the unique design and operational requirements of continuous
web cleaning machines. Based on these data, EPA evaluated how
continuous web cleaning machines best fit into the HSC NESHAP
promulgated in 1994 and identified changes to be made. The inability of
some continuous web cleaning machines to comply with the rule is a
result of differences between those machines and the cleaning machines
used as the basis for the HSC NESHAP promulgated in 1994.
The first step in EPA's analysis was to determine whether existing
compliance options could be used for continuous web cleaning machines.
The only option available that did not include a maximum hoist speed
requirement was the alternative standard included in Sec. 63.464.
This option has only an overall solvent emission rate, with no
design or work practice requirements. The EPA concluded that the
continuous web cleaning machines were not candidates for the
alternative standard. In addition, the overall solvent emission rates
were established based on an infrequently used solvent cleaning
machine, not on a continuous web cleaning machine. As the name
suggests, continuous web cleaning machines tend to be operated on a
continuous or near-continuous basis. Since compliance with this
alternative standard was not viable, EPA then looked at the primary
standards.
In general, continuous web cleaning machines could be brought into
compliance with the requirements of the HSC NESHAP but for the
following two requirements.
The design requirement of Sec. 63.463(a)(3) that ``each
cleaning machine shall have an automated parts handling system capable
of moving parts or parts baskets at a speed of 11 feet per minute or
less from the initial loading of parts through the removal of cleaned
parts.''
The requirement for a ``dwell'' that is included in two of
the four compliance options available for existing in-line cleaning
machines.
The changes that were needed in the HSC NESHAP were due to
potential issues with the following requirements:
The design requirement of Sec. 63.463(a)(2) that each
``cleaning machine shall have a freeboard ratio of 0.75 or greater.''
The work practice requirement of Sec. 63.463(d)(12) that
``sponges, fabric, wood, and paper products shall not be cleaned.''
The design requirement for superheated vapor technology in
one of the options for existing cleaning machines and two of the
options for new cleaning machines.
[[Page 45190]]
Each of the changes deemed necessary to address these issues is
discussed below.
1. Maximum Hoist Speed and Dwell Requirements
Continuous web cleaning machines are different from other solvent
cleaning machines--they are designed to clean parts traveling at a high
rate of speed. In addition, the ``part'' being cleaned, the continuous
web part, is a long strip of material that is never totally within the
parts cleaning machine. The part moves through the cleaning machine
such that one end of the part exits the machine before the other end
enters. Therefore, there is no opportunity to meet a dwell requirement.
When evaluating equivalency of alternative controls, it is
important to understand the reason for the requirements in the original
HSC NESHAP. Limiting part speed was required for two primary reasons:
To limit liquid carryout on the part being cleaned caused
by improper draining and improper cycle time.
To limit the vapor disturbance or vapor carryout caused by
parts moving through the solvent cleaning machine too quickly.
Similarly, a proper dwell time also limits carryout emissions.
First, dwell allows the part extra time within the freeboard for liquid
or vapor solvent to flash off and/or drain back into the solvent tank.
Stopping below the vapor zone of a vapor cleaner, as required by a
dwell under this rule, also tends to limit the speed that the part is
traveling as it goes through the vapor zone. The dwell is particularly
beneficial when the part has large pieces sticking out that can capture
solvent liquid or vapor and remove it from the machine as the part is
removed.
Based on observations made during the site visits to facilities
with continuous web cleaning machines, EPA has concluded that properly
operated squeegees and/or air knives are capable of controlling
emissions to at least the same degree as a reduced parts speed for
continuous web parts. Air knives and squeegee systems on a continuous
web part remove essentially all of the solvent that remains on the
part. These systems likely exceed the performance of a reduced hoist
speed, in and of itself, because the effectiveness of a reduced hoist
speed on emissions is dependent on other factors, such as the part
shape and orientation. These air knives and squeegees work on
continuous web cleaning machines to a higher efficiency than on
traditional units because the part being cleaned is flat. Therefore,
there is nothing to trap the solvent liquid or vapors.
In order to ensure that all of the emission reductions associated
with reduced parts speed and a dwell are realized, however, you will
need to minimize the openings for part entrance and exit into the
cleaning machine. The EPA observed minimized entry and exit openings in
all cases that were evaluated during the development of these
alternatives.
As with any other control, improperly operated or maintained
squeegees or air knives can quickly eliminate any potential emission
reductions. A part exiting a well-maintained squeegee or air knife
system will be visibly dry. However, a part exiting an improperly
maintained machine would have a thin film of solvent left on the
surface. This film evaporates quickly after exiting the machine, which
results in a much larger solvent loss rate. The new requirements in
this direct final rule include requirements that ensure proper
operation of these carryout reducing devices.
2. Carbon Adsorption Units on Continuous Web Cleaning Machines
When the EPA evaluated continuous web cleaning machines, we noticed
an inherent benefit of these cleaning machines over typical machine
design. This difference was particularly noticeable on film cleaning
machines. The portion of film cleaning machines where solvent is
applied tends to be enclosed and then vented to prevent solvent
contamination of the expensive film. In these machines, the area
surrounding the film take-up reel is also within an enclosed area and
is often vented as well. When solvent is being used, the doors to the
machines are closed. The exhaust from these machines is often vented to
a carbon adsorber. The overall effectiveness of the carbon adsorber in
these applications far exceeded the overall control efficiency
calculated for other solvent cleaning machines during the rule
development. A control efficiency of 65 percent was used for carbon
adsorbers when a machine was actively cleaning parts. When combined
with other controls and accounting for times when the machine was not
operating, the overall control efficiencies that were used as the basis
for existing and new machines was 60 and 70 percent, respectively.
Based on the information gathered on film cleaning machines, the
EPA has concluded that the use of a carbon adsorption system on a
properly operated and maintained unit will ensure emission reductions
that are at least as effective as the controls established as MACT in
the promulgated rule. For example, one continuous web cleaning machine
using a carbon adsorption system observed by the EPA cleaned over 3,500
square feet of product per gallon of solvent used. Therefore, the use
of a carbon adsorption system demonstrated to provide an overall
control effectiveness of 70 percent (i.e., capture efficiency times
removal efficiency) is an alternative to the promulgated options for
continuous web cleaning machines.
3. Freeboard Ratio Requirements for Remote Reservoir Machines
The HSC NESHAP includes a design requirement for a freeboard ratio
of at least 0.75 for all in-line cleaning machines. In two of the
compliance options for new in-line cleaning machines, a freeboard ratio
of 1.0 is required. However, some continuous web cleaning machines do
not have an exposed sump. These remote reservoir continuous web
cleaning machines are more similar to the remote reservoir batch cold
cleaning machines. In the HSC NESHAP, batch cold cleaning machines that
have a remote reservoir are excluded from the freeboard requirement
that other batch cold cleaning machines must have.
The EPA has concluded that the same reasons that justify remote
batch cold cleaning machines not being required to maintain a minimum
freeboard ratio also apply to continuous web cleaning machines. In all
of these machines, the primary cleaning mechanism is from solvent
sprayed on the parts through nozzles. The solvent then typically drains
into a sump that has minimal openings which in many cases are also
covered. In all cases, the opportunity for evaporation and for air
disturbances is minimized. Therefore, EPA has also concluded that the
exclusion from a freeboard requirement should also apply to remote
reservoir continuous web cleaning machines. This exclusion has been
added to the rule.
4. Cleaning of Absorbent Materials
The prohibition on cleaning absorbent materials in a halogenated
solvent cleaning machine may cause problems for some continuous web
cleaning machines. This prohibition was included because any absorbent
materials that were cleaned in the machine would be solvent laden when
removed from the machine. Removal of solvent laden parts would be a
large source of emissions. Some continuous web cleaning machines use
some absorbent materials, such as cloth rollers, in the cleaning
process.
[[Page 45191]]
The EPA did not intend to prohibit the use of absorbent materials
as part of the cleaning mechanism in a machine. Since these absorbent
materials would not be removed from the machine after each cleaning, no
emissions from these materials would occur during each cleaning cycle.
However, once these materials are removed from the cleaning machine,
they would be solvent laden, and emissions would occur if the absorbent
cleaning materials were not properly handled.
The ability to use absorbent materials as part of the cleaning
machine is clarified in today's direct final rule. However, any rollers
or other absorbent materials that are removed from continuous web
cleaning machines must be treated as hazardous waste and disposed of as
required by applicable hazardous waste rules.
5. Superheated Vapor Technology
The purpose of superheated technology is to heat the part(s) to
evaporate even the thin layer of solvent film that can exist after
solvent cleaning. This is typically achieved by the introduction of
superheated vapor into an enclosed portion of a cleaner. The
superheated vapor then heats the part(s) to above the boiling point of
the solvent. Any solvent, even the typical solvent film, on the surface
of a part is virtually eliminated by this process. The remaining
problem for most cleaning machines is the vapor entrainment on the
part(s).
This technique and its effective emission reductions are not
dependent on external forces providing the heating (i.e., vapors
contacting a part to heat it). Therefore, any process that effectively
raises the temperature of the part above the boiling point of the
solvent should achieve the same effect. This would include any physical
process that raises the temperature of the part itself.
For example, some of the continuous materials being cleaned are
metal rods or wires. These parts are often sent through processes that
reduce their circumference, such as through the use of a die. This
process is generally exothermic and the part can become heated to
several hundred degrees. If the temperature of the part is heated to
above the boiling point of the solvent, the same emission reductions
achieved by the superheated vapor technology should be obtained. In
fact, by not reintroducing solvent, the emission reductions may
actually increase. In today's direct final rule, a new term,
superheated part technology, has been added as an alternative to
superheated vapor technology in all options that include a superheated
vapor requirement.
6. Additional Clarification for Primary Condensers
An additional issue arose during the evaluation of the equivalent
control devices. While already included in the promulgated rule, EPA
wishes to clarify a point concerning freeboard refrigeration devices on
continuous web cleaning machines. The purpose of a primary condenser is
to condense vapors that rise out of the boiling sump. On the other
hand, a freeboard refrigeration device creates a cool air blanket to
limit diffusion. Primary coils can serve as a freeboard refrigeration
device under certain conditions for vapor cleaners. However, many
continuous web cleaning machines are not vapor cleaning machines;
therefore, no requirement for a primary condensing coil applies to
these units. Even if the continuous web cleaning machines were vapor
cleaning machines, the rule allows for primary coils to be considered a
freeboard refrigeration device if the required temperature of the air
blanket is created within the freeboard area. Therefore, the ability to
use any type of cooling coils as a freeboard refrigeration device is
emphasized and clarified for continuous web cleaning machines.
D. How Do I Know if My Machine is ``New'' or an ``Existing'' Continuous
Web Cleaning Machine?
Machines are classified as either new or existing based on the HSC
NESHAP proposed on November 29, 1993. Continuous web cleaning machines
on which construction started before November 29, 1993 are existing
affected sources. Machines on which construction started on November
29, 1993 or later are new affected sources.
E. When Must I Comply With These New Requirements?
You must comply with these requirements by December 12, 1999 for
both your new and existing affected sources. This date was established
in a Federal Register notice published on December 11, 1998 (63 FR
68397).
III. Other Changes
A. What Change Is EPA Making That Applies to My Transformer Cleaning
Operations?
The EPA has recently become aware of a potential conflict between
the HSC NESHAP and some specific Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
permits. Some facilities clean transformers contaminated with PCBs
using batch cold halogenated solvent cleaning machines. The cleaning of
these PCB-laden transformers is covered under TSCA permits, which
include requirements to ensure proper draining and proper disposal of
all materials. These transformers often include absorbent materials
(i.e., cardboard). The HSC NESHAP requirements for cold cleaning
machines state that ``Sponges, fabric, wood, and paper shall not be
cleaned.'' (Sec. 63.462(c)(8)).
It is not EPA's intent to prohibit the proper decontamination
operation for PCB-laden transformers. The intent of this requirement in
the HSC NESHAP is to reduce the amount of solvent loss due to improper
cleaning of absorbent materials, such as rags and cloths. The EPA has
reviewed the requirements in an example permit of a facility conducting
decontamination of these transformers and concluded that TSCA permits
should adequately ensure that the intent of the HSC NESHAP is met for
these operations. For example, these permits have sufficient
requirements for proper draining and disposal of the transformers.
Therefore, EPA is adding an exclusion for cleaning absorbent materials
in PCB-laden transformers, in compliance with a permit issued under
TSCA, in this direct final rule.
B. What Changes Impact My Steam-Heated Vapor Cleaning Machines?
Steam-heated vapor cleaning machines will no longer be required to
have a device that shuts off the sump heat if the liquid level drops to
the sump heater coils (Sec. 63.463(a)(4)). This requirement was
included in the HSC NESHAP for all machines. However, since the
promulgation of the HSC NESHAP, EPA has determined that this device is
not necessary for steam-heated machines.
The lowest decomposition temperature of the chlorinated solvents
subject to this rule is 788 degrees Fahrenheit (420 degrees Celsius). A
steam-heated unit will never heat the solvent to 788 degrees Fahrenheit
(420 degrees Celsius). Therefore, a switch that turns off the sump heat
when the solvent layer reaches the heating coils is an unnecessary
expense. Consequently, the requirement for low-level sump turn-off
switches has been removed for steam-heated solvent cleaning machines.
IV. Impacts
The changes contained in this direct final rule are corrections,
clarifications, and equivalent compliance alternatives and do not
change the intended coverage of the HSC NESHAP (subpart T). These
changes will not affect the estimated emission reductions or the
[[Page 45192]]
control costs for these rules. These clarifications and corrections
should make it easier for owners and operators of affected sources, and
for local and State authorities, to understand and implement the
requirements in subpart T. The equivalent compliance alternatives will
make it possible for owners and operators of continuous web cleaning
machines to comply with all requirements of subpart T.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The docket number for this rulemaking is A-92-39. The docket is an
organized and complete file of information compiled by the EPA in the
development of this rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file because
material is added throughout the rulemaking development. The docketing
system is intended to allow members of the public and industries
involved to readily identify and locate documents so that they can
effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with the
proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, the docket
contains the record in the case of judicial review. (See section
307(d)(7)(A) of the Clean Air Act.)
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must submit significant regulatory actions to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review. The Executive Order defines ``significant
regulatory action'' as one that OMB determines is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this direct final rule does not qualify
as a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 and, therefore, is not subject to review by OMB.
C. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships
Under Executive Order 12875, the EPA may not issue a regulation
that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a
State, local, or tribal government unless the Federal government
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs
incurred by those governments or the EPA consults with those
governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875
requires the EPA to provide to OMB a description of the extent of the
EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local,
and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any
written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting
the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires the EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local, and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's direct final rule does not create a mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments. This direct final rule does not impose
any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements
of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this direct
final rule.
D. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, the EPA may not issue a regulation
that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities unless the
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments or the EPA consults
with those governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive
Order 13084 requires the EPA to provide to OMB, in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the
extent of the EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected
tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a
statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,
Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to develop an effective process
permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect
their communities.''
This direct final rule does not impose any duties or compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments. Further, the direct final rule
provided herein does not significantly alter the control standards
imposed by the HSC NESHAP for any source, including any that may affect
communities of the Indian tribal governments. Hence, today's direct
final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of
Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section
3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this direct final rule.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA
to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was
not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for
notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of the EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
[[Page 45193]]
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that this direct final rule does not include
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or
to the private sector in any 1 year, and that this direct final rule
does not significantly or uniquely impact small governments, because it
contains no requirements that apply to such governments or impose
obligations upon them. The EPA has not prepared a budgetary impact
statement or specifically addressed the selection of the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative. In addition,
because small governments will not be significantly or uniquely
affected by this rule, the EPA is not required to develop a plan with
regard to small governments. Therefore, the requirements of the UMRA do
not apply to this direct final rule.
F. Regulatory Flexibility/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996, requires the EPA to give special consideration to the
effect of Federal regulations on small entities and to consider
regulatory options that might mitigate any such impacts. The EPA must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis unless the EPA certifies that
the rule will not have a ``significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities.'' Small entities include small businesses, small
not-for-profit enterprises, and small government jurisdictions.
This direct final rule would not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because it clarifies and makes
corrections to the promulgated HSC NESHAP, but imposes no additional
regulatory requirements on owners or operators of affected sources.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection request (ICR) was submitted to the OMB
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) at the time
this rule was originally promulgated. The amendments to the HSC NESHAP
contained in this direct final rule will have no impact on the
information collection burden estimates made previously. Therefore, the
ICR has not been revised.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the EPA.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, so that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. This direct final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not an
``economically significant'' regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and it is based on technology performance rather than
health or risks that may disproportionately affect children.
I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by
the SBREFA of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take
effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report,
which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a
report containing this direct final rule and other required information
to the United States Senate, the United States House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of this direct final rule in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. This direct final rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995, Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or
adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA
requires the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, with explanations
when the EPA decides not to use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
This action does not involve the proposal of any new technical
standards. The EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the direct final
rule and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such
standards should be used in this regulation.
As part of a larger effort, the EPA is undertaking a project to
cross-reference existing voluntary consensus standards on testing,
sampling, and analysis with current and future EPA test methods. When
completed, this project will assist the EPA in identifying potentially
applicable voluntary consensus standards which can then be evaluated
for equivalency and applicability in determining compliance with future
regulations.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Continuous web
cleaning, Film cleaning, Halogenated solvent cleaning machines,
Hazardous substances.
Dated: August 6, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows.
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart T--National Emission Standards for Halogenated Solvent
Cleaning
2. Amend Sec. 63.461 by adding, in alphabetical order, definitions
for ``air knife system,'' ``remote reservoir continuous web cleaning
machine,'' ``squeegee system,'' and ``superheated
[[Page 45194]]
part technology,'' and by revising the definition of ``continuous web
cleaning machine'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.461 Definitions.
* * * * *
Air knife system means a device that directs forced air at high
pressure, high volume, or a combination of high pressure and high
volume, through a small opening directly at the surface of a continuous
web part. The purpose of this system is to remove the solvent film from
the surfaces of the continuous web part.
* * * * *
Continuous web cleaning machine means a solvent cleaning machine in
which parts such as film, coils, wire, and metal strips are cleaned at
speeds in excess of 11 feet per minute. Parts are generally uncoiled,
cleaned such that the same part is simultaneously entering and exiting
the solvent application area of the solvent cleaning machine, and then
recoiled or cut. For the purposes of this subpart, all continuous web
cleaning machines are considered to be a subset of in-line solvent
cleaning machines.
* * * * *
Remote reservoir continuous web cleaning machine means a continuous
web cleaning machine in which there is no exposed solvent sump. In
these units, the solvent is pumped from an enclosed chamber and is
typically applied to the continuous web part through a nozzle or series
of nozzles. The solvent then drains from the part and is collected and
recycled through the sump, allowing no solvent to pool in the work or
cleaning area.
* * * * *
Squeegee system means a system that uses a series of pliable
surfaces to remove the solvent film from the surfaces of the continuous
web part. These pliable surfaces, called squeegees, are typically made
of rubber or plastic media, and need to be periodically replaced to
ensure continued proper function.
* * * * *
Superheated part technology means a system that is part of the
continuous web cleaning process that heats the continuous web part
either directly or indirectly to a temperature above the boiling point
of the cleaning solvent. This could include a process step, such as a
tooling die that heats the part as it is processed, as long as the part
remains superheated through the cleaning machine.
* * * * *
3. Amend Sec. 63.462 by revising paragraphs (c) introductory text
and (c)(8) and adding paragraph (c)(9) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.462 Batch cold cleaning machine standards.
* * * * *
(c) Each owner or operator of a batch cold solvent cleaning machine
complying with paragraphs (a)(2) or (b) of this section shall comply
with the work and operational practice requirements specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(9) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
(8) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(9) of this section,
sponges, fabric, wood, and paper products shall not be cleaned.
(9) The prohibition in paragraph (c)(8) of this section does not
apply to the cleaning of porous materials that are part of
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) laden transformers if those transformers
are handled throughout the cleaning process, and disposed of in
compliance with an approved PCB disposal permit issued in accordance
with the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
* * * * *
4. Amend Sec. 63.463 by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text,
(c) introductory text, (d) introductory text, (e) introductory text and
(e)(2) introductory text, and by adding paragraphs (e)(2)(viii) through
(e)(2)(x) and paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.463 Batch vapor and in-line cleaning machine standards.
(a) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464 for all cleaning machines and
in paragraph (g)(3) of this section for continuous web cleaning
machines, each owner or operator of a solvent cleaning machine subject
to the provisions of this subpart shall ensure that each existing or
new batch vapor or in-line solvent cleaning machine subject to the
provisions of this subpart conforms to the design requirements
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(7) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464 for all cleaning machines and
in paragraph (g)(3) of this section for continuous web cleaning
machines, each owner or operator of an existing or new in-line solvent
cleaning machine shall comply with paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this
section as appropriate. The owner or operator of a continuous web
cleaning machine shall comply with the requirements of paragraph (g) in
lieu of complying with this paragraph.
* * * * *
(d) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464 for all cleaning machines and
in paragraph (g)(3) of this section for continuous web cleaning
machines, each owner or operator of an existing or new batch vapor or
in-line solvent cleaning machine shall meet all of the following
required work and operational practices specified in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (d)(12) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
(e) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(4) of this section, each
owner or operator of a solvent cleaning machine complying with
paragraph (b), (c), or (g) of this section shall comply with the
requirements specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(4) of this
section.
* * * * *
(2) Determine during each monitoring period whether each control
device used to comply with these standards meets the requirements
specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (e)(2)(x) of this section.
* * * * *
(viii) If a superheated part system is used to comply with the
standards for continuous web cleaning machines in paragraph (g) of this
section, the owner or operator shall ensure that the temperature of the
continuous web part is at least 10 degrees Fahrenheit above the solvent
boiling point while the part is traveling through the cleaning machine.
(ix) If a squeegee system is used to comply with the continuous web
cleaning requirements of paragraph (g)(3)(iii) of this section, the
owner or operator shall comply with the following requirements.
(A) Determine the appropriate maximum product throughput for the
squeegees used in the squeegee system, as described in Sec. 63.465(f).
(B) Conduct the weekly monitoring required by Sec. 63.466(a)(3).
Record both the results of the visual inspection and the length of
continuous web product cleaned during the previous week.
(C) Calculate the total amount of continuous web product processed
since the squeegees were replaced and compare to the maximum product
throughput for the squeegees.
(D) Ensure squeegees are replaced no later than when the maximum
product throughput is attained.
(E) Redetermine the maximum product throughput for the squeegees if
any solvent film is visible on the continuous web part immediately
after it exits the cleaning machine.
(x) If an air knife system is used to comply with the continuous
web cleaning requirements of paragraph (g)(3)(iii) of this section, the
owner or operator shall comply with the following requirements.
[[Page 45195]]
(A) Determine the air knife parameter and parameter value that
demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction that the air knife is
properly operating. An air knife is properly operating if no visible
solvent film remains on the continuous web part after it exits the
cleaning machine.
(B) Maintain the selected air knife parameter value at the level
determined in paragraph (a) of this section.
(C) Conduct the weekly monitoring required by Sec. 63.466(a)(3).
(D) Redetermine the proper (air knife parameter) value if any
solvent film is visible on the continuous web part immediately after it
exits the cleaning machine.
(f) * * *
(g) Except as provided in Sec. 63.464, each owner or operator of a
continuous web cleaning machine shall comply with paragraphs (g)(1)
through (g)(4) of this section for each continuous web cleaning
machine.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(2) of this section,
install, maintain, and operate one of the following control
combinations on each continuous web cleaning machine.
(i) For each existing continuous web cleaning machine, the
following control combinations are allowed:
(A) Superheated vapor or superheated part technology; and a
freeboard ratio of 1.0 or greater.
(B) Freeboard refrigeration device; and a freeboard ratio of 1.0 or
greater.
(C) Carbon adsorption system.
(ii) For each new continuous web cleaning machine, the following
control combinations are allowed:
(A) Superheated vapor or superheated part technology; and a
freeboard refrigeration device.
(B) A freeboard refrigeration device and a carbon adsorber.
(C) Superheated vapor or superheated part technology; and a carbon
adsorber.
(2) If a carbon adsorber system can be demonstrated to the
Administrator's satisfaction to have an overall control efficiency
(i.e., capture efficiency times removal efficiency) of 70 percent or
greater, this system is equivalent to the options in paragraph (g) of
this section. A system that is demonstrated to have an overall control
efficiency of 70 percent or greater can be used in lieu of the control
combinations in paragraph (g)(1) of this section.
(3) In lieu of complying with the provisions of Sec. 63.463(a), the
owner or operator of a continuous web cleaning machine shall comply
with the following provisions:
(i) Each cleaning machine shall be designed or operated to meet one
of the following control equipment or technique requirements:
(A) An idling and downtime mode cover, as described in
Sec. 63.463(d)(1)(i), that may be readily opened or closed, that
completely covers the cleaning machine openings when in place, and is
free of cracks, holes, and other defects.
(B) A reduced room draft as described in Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(ii).
(C) Gasketed or leakproof doors that separate both the continuous
web part feed reel and take-up reel from the room atmosphere if the
doors are checked according to the requirements of Sec. 63.463(e)(iii).
(ii) Each continuous web cleaning machine shall have a freeboard
ratio of 0.75 or greater unless that cleaning machine is a remote
reservoir continuous web cleaning machine.
(iii) Each cleaning machine shall have an automated parts handling
system capable of moving parts or parts baskets at a speed of 3.4
meters per minute (11 feet per minute) or less from the initial loading
of parts through removal of cleaned parts unless the cleaning machine
is a continuous web cleaning machine that has a squeegee system or air
knife system installed, maintained, and operated on the continuous web
cleaning machine meeting the requirements of Sec. 63.463(e).
(iv) Each vapor cleaning machine shall be equipped with a device
that shuts off the sump heat if the sump liquid solvent level drops to
the sump heater coils.
(v) Each vapor cleaning machine shall be equipped with a vapor
level control device that shuts off sump heat if the vapor level in the
vapor cleaning machine rises above the height of the primary condenser.
(vi) Each vapor cleaning machine shall have a primary condenser.
(vii) Each cleaning machine that uses a lip exhaust shall be
designed and operated to route all collected solvent vapors through a
properly operated and maintained carbon adsorber that meets the
requirements of Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(ii).
(4) In lieu of complying with the provisions of Sec. 63.463(d), the
owner or operator of a continuous web cleaning machine shall comply
with the following provisions:
(i) Control air disturbances across the cleaning machine opening(s)
by incorporating one of the following pieces of control equipment or
techniques:
(A) Cover(s) to each solvent cleaning machine shall be in place
during the idling mode and during the downtime mode unless either the
solvent has been removed from the machine or maintenance or monitoring
is being performed that requires the cover(s) in place.
(B) A reduced room draft as described in Sec. 63.463(e)(2)(ii).
(C) Gasketed or leakproof doors or covers that separate both the
continuous web part feed reel and take-up reel from the room atmosphere
if the doors are checked according to the requirements of
Sec. 63.463(e)(iii).
(ii) Any spraying operations shall be conducted in a section of the
solvent cleaning machine that is not directly exposed to the ambient
air (i.e., a baffled or enclosed area of the solvent cleaning machine)
or within a machine having a door or cover that meets the requirements
of paragraph (g)(4)(i)(C) of this section.
(iii) During start-up of each vapor cleaning machine, the primary
condenser shall be turned on before the sump heater.
(iv) During shutdown of each vapor cleaning machine, the sump
heater shall be turned off and the solvent vapor layer allowed to
collapse before the primary condenser is turned off.
(v) When solvent is added or drained from any solvent cleaning
machine, the solvent shall be transferred using threaded or other
leakproof couplings and the end of the pipe in the solvent sump shall
be located beneath the liquid solvent surface.
(vi) Each solvent cleaning machine and associated controls shall be
maintained as recommended by the manufacturers of the equipment or
using alternative maintenance practices that have been demonstrated to
the Administrator's satisfaction to achieve the same or better results
as those recommended by the manufacturer.
(vii) Waste solvent, still bottoms, sump bottoms, and waste
absorbent materials used in the cleaning process for continuous web
cleaning machines shall be collected and stored in waste containers.
The closed containers may contain a device that would allow pressure
relief, but would not allow liquid solvent to drain from the container.
(viii) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(4)(ix) of this section,
sponges, fabric, wood, and paper products shall not be cleaned.
(ix) The prohibition in paragraph (g)(4)(viii) does not apply to
absorbent materials that are used as part of the cleaning process of
continuous web cleaning machines, including rollers and roller covers.
5. Amend Sec. 63.465 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.465 Test methods.
* * * * *
(f) Each owner or operator of a continuous web cleaning machine
using
[[Page 45196]]
a squeegee system to comply with Sec. 63.463(g)(3) shall determine the
maximum product throughput using the method in this paragraph. The
maximum product throughput for each squeegee type used at a facility
must be determined prior to December 2, 1999, the compliance date for
these units.
(1) Conduct daily visual inspections of the continuous web part.
This monitoring shall be conducted at the point where the continuous
web part exits the squeegee system. It is not necessary for the
squeegees to be new at the time monitoring is begun if the following
two conditions are met:
(i) The continuous web part leaving the squeegee system has no
visible solvent film.
(ii) The amount of continuous web that has been processed through
the squeegees since the last replacement is known.
(2) Continue daily monitoring until a visible solvent film is noted
on the continuous web part.
(3) Determine the length of continuous web product that has been
cleaned using the squeegee since it was installed.
(4) The maximum product throughput for the purposes of this section
is equal to the time it takes to clean 95 percent of the length of
product determined in paragraph (f)(3) of this section. This time
period, in days, may vary depending on the amount of continuous web
product cleaned each day.
* * * * *
6. Amend Sec. 63.466 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text
and adding paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.466 Monitoring procedures.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, each owner
or operator of a batch vapor or in-line solvent cleaning machine
complying with the equipment standards in Sec. 63.463(b)(1)(i),
(b)(2)(i), (c)(1)(i), (c)(2)(i), (g)(1), or (g)(2) shall conduct
monitoring and record the results on a weekly basis for the control
devices, as appropriate, specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5)
of this section.
* * * * *
(3) If a squeegee system or air knife system is used to comply with
the requirements of Sec. 63.463(g), the owner or operator shall
visually inspect the continuous web part exiting the solvent cleaning
machine to ensure that no solvent film is visible on the part.
(4) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, if a
superheated part system is used to comply with the requirements of
Sec. 63.463(g), the owner or operator shall use a thermometer,
thermocouple, or other temperature measurement device to measure the
temperature of the continuous web part while it is in the solvent
cleaning machine. This measurement can also be taken at the exit of the
solvent cleaning machine.
(5) As an alternative to complying with paragraph (a)(4) of this
section, the owner or operator can provide data, sufficient to satisfy
the Administrator, that demonstrate that the part temperature remains
above the boiling point of the solvent at all times that the part is
within the continuous web solvent cleaning machine. These data could
include design and operating conditions such as information supporting
any exothermic reaction inherent in the processing.
* * * * *
7. Amend Sec. 63.467 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text
and adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (a)(7) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.467 Recordkeeping requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of a batch vapor or in-line solvent
cleaning machine complying with the provisions of Sec. 63.463 shall
maintain records in written or electronic form specified in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(7) of this section for the lifetime of the machine.
* * * * *
(6) If a squeegee system is used to comply with these standards,
records of the test required by Sec. 63.466(f) to determine the maximum
product throughput for the squeegees.
(7) If an air knife system is used to comply with these standards,
records of the determination of the proper operating parameter and
parameter value for the air knife system.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-20861 Filed 8-18-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
