National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing

[Federal Register: July 9, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 131)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 45587-45625]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09jy02-17]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[FRL-7214-7]
RIN 2060-AG29

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber
Tire Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action finalizes national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for new and existing sources at
rubber tire manufacturing facilities. The EPA has identified rubber
tire manufacturing facilities as major sources of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) emissions. These standards will implement section
112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all such major sources
to meet HAP emission standards that reflect the application of maximum
achievable control technology (MACT). The primary HAP that will be
controlled with this action include toluene and hexane. These HAP are
associated with a variety of adverse health effects including chronic
health disorders (e.g., polyneuropathy, degenerative lesions of the
nasal cavity) and acute health disorders (e.g., respiratory irritation,
headaches).

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 9, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Docket. All information considered by the EPA in developing
this rulemaking, including public comments on the proposed rule and
other information developed by the EPA in addressing those comments
since proposal, is located in Public Docket No. A-97-14 at the
following address: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center
(6102), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. The docket
is located at the above address in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground
floor), and may be inspected from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. Materials related to this rulemaking
are available upon request from the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center by calling (202) 260-7548 or 7549. The FAX number
for the Center is (202) 260-4400. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning
applicability and rule determinations, contact your State or local
regulatory agency representative or the appropriate EPA Regional Office
representative. For information concerning analyses performed in
developing this rule, contact Mr. Anthony Wayne, Policy, Planning and
Standards Group, Emission Standards Division (C439-04), U.S. EPA,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711; telephone number (919)
541-5439; fax number (919) 541-0942; electronic mail address:
wayne.tony@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Judicial Review. Under CAA section 307(b), judicial review of the
final NESHAP is available only by filing a petition for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on or before
September 9, 2002. Only those objections to the NESHAP which were
raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment
may be raised during judicial review. Under section 307(b)(2)of the
CAA, the requirements established by today's final action may not be
challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceeding we bring to
enforce these requirements.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category SIC \a\ NAICS \b\ Regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................... 3011 326211 Rubber tire manufacturing facilities.
7534 326212
2296 314992
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Standard Industrial Classification.
\b\ North American Information Classification System.

This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.5981 of the
rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult your State or local agency (or EPA
Regional Office) described in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of this final rule will also be available on the WWW
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a
copy of the rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page
for newly proposed or promulgated rules http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.
Outline. The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background
A. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?
B. What Criteria Are Used In the Development of NESHAP?
C. How Did the Public Participate in Developing the Rule?
II. Summary of the Final Rule
III. Significant Comments and Changes Since Proposal
A. What Sources Are Subject to the Rule?
B. How Did We Determine MACT?
C. Can EPA Provide a Universal Certification Compliance
Alternative?
D. What Role Should EPA Method 311 Play in Compliance
Determinations?
E. How Should the Tire Cord Compliance Requirements Address
Potential Mixing Reactions?
F. What Data Requirements Should Sources Using Continuous
Parameter Monitoring Systems Meet?
G. Is Compliance Based on Daily Recordkeeping Needed?
H. Has EPA Properly Considered the Cost Impacts of the Rule?
I. What Other Changes Has EPA Made for the Final Rule?
J. What Are the Environmental, Cost, and Economic Impacts of the
Final Rule?
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13045 -Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
C. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
D. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
E. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
J. Congressional Review Act

[[Page 45589]]

I. Background

A. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?

Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list categories and
subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP and to establish
NESHAP for the listed source categories and subcategories. The category
of major sources covered by today's final rule was listed on July 16,
1992 (57 FR 31576). Major source means any stationary source or group
of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common
control that emits or has the potential to emit, considering controls,
10 tons per year (tons/yr) or more of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr or more
of any combination of HAP.

B. What Criteria Are Used in the Development of NESHAP?

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

C. How Did the Public Participate in Developing the Rule?

Prior to proposal, we met with industry representatives and State
regulatory authorities several times to discuss the data and
information used to develop the proposed standards. In addition, these
and other potential stakeholders, including equipment vendors and
environmental groups, had opportunity to comment on the proposed
standards.
The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on October
18, 2000 (65 FR 62414). The preamble to the proposed rule discussed the
availability of technical support documents, which described in detail
the information gathered during the standards development process.
Public comments were solicited at proposal.
We received 19 public comment letters on the proposed rule. The
commenters represent the following affiliations: Rubber tire
manufacturers (4 companies), industrial trade associations (5), and one
State and local agency association. In the post-proposal period, we
talked with commenters and other stakeholders to clarify comments and
to assist in our analysis of the comments. Records of these contacts
are found in docket A-97-14. All of the comments have been carefully
considered, and, where appropriate, changes have been made for the
final rule.

II. Summary of Final Rule

The rule will apply to existing, new and reconstructed rubber tire
manufacturing facilities that are major sources of HAP emissions
standing alone or are major sources due to collocation with other
facilities that emit HAP. We have subcategorized the rubber tire
manufacturing source category into the following four subcategories of
affected sources:

Rubber processing
Tire production
Tire cord production
Puncture sealant application.

Table 1 summarizes the emission limit options for the tire
production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant application
affected sources. There are no emission limits or other requirements
associated with rubber processing affected sources.

Table 1.--Emission Limit Options for Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected source Pollutant Limitaa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing, new or reconstructed tire Selected organic HAP (See Table 16 of final Emissions must not exceed
production facility--Option 1. rule). 1,000 grams per megagram
(2 pounds per ton) of the
total cements and
solvents used.
All other organic HAP.......................... Emissions must not exceed
10,000 grams per megagram
(20 pounds per ton) of
the total cements and
solvents used.
Existing, new or reconstructed tire All organic HAP................................ Emissions must not exceed
production facility--Option 2. 0.024 grams per megagram
(0.00005 pounds per ton)
of rubber used.
Existing tire cord production All organic HAP................................ Emissions must not exceed
facility--Option 1. 280 grams per megagram
(0.56 pounds per ton) of
fabric processed.
New or reconstructed tire cord All organic HAP................................ Emissions must not exceed
production facility--Option 1. 220 grams per megagram
(0.43 pounds per ton) of
fabric processed.
Existing, new or reconstructed tire Selected organic HAP (See Table 16 of final Emissions must not exceed
cord production facility--Option 2. rule). 1,000 grams HAP per
megagram (2 pounds per
ton) of total coatings
used.
All other organic HAP.......................... Emissions must not exceed
10,000 grams HAP per
megagram (20 pounds per
ton) of total coatings
used.

[[Page 45590]]

New or reconstructed puncture All organic HAP (measured as volatile organic Reduce spray booth
sealant application booth--Option compounds (VOC)). emissions by at least 95
1. percent.
Existing puncture sealant All organic HAP (measured as VOC).............. Reduce spray booth
application booth--Option 1. emissions by at least 86
percent.
Existing, new or reconstructed Selected organic HAP (See Table 16 of final Emissions must not exceed
puncture sealant application booth- rule). 1,000 grams HAP per
-Option 2. megagram (2 pounds per
ton) of total puncture
sealants used.
All other organic HAP.......................... Emissions must not exceed
10,000 grams HAP per
megagram (20 pounds per
ton) of total puncture
sealants used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Emission limits are expressed as monthly average emission limits except for: (1) Tire production affected
sources that comply by demonstrating that the cements and solvents that they use comply with the emission
limit for every purchase; and (2) puncture sealant application affected sources that comply by meeting the
overall control efficiency option which requires such sources to meet the emission reduction limit on a 3-hour
average.

The final rule also establishes operating limits for puncture
sealant application affected sources that are complying with the
overall control efficiency standards (i.e., 86 percent emission
reduction or 95 percent emission reduction). The operating limits are
established on a source-specific basis. Once established, sources must
maintain specified control device and capture system operating
parameter(s) within the range(s) established during the performance
test and according to the source's monitoring plan.
The final rule requires demonstrations of initial and ongoing
compliance with the emission limitations. The specific requirements
vary according to the affected source and the compliance alternative
selected by that source. The final rule also establishes compliance
dates, as well as provisions for performance testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting.

III. Significant Comments and Changes Since Proposal

This section includes discussion of significant comments on the
proposed rule, particularly where we have made changes for the final
rule to address those comments. For a complete summary of all the
comments received on the proposed rule and our responses to them, refer
to the ``Technical Document for Promulgation of Standards, National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire
Manufacturing, Comment and Response Summary'' (hereafter called the
``response to comments document'') in docket A-97-14. The docket also
contains the actual comment letters and supporting documentation
developed for the final rule.

A. What Sources Are Subject to the Rule?

We received several comments raising questions on the applicability
of the rule to specific sources at rubber tire manufacturing
facilities. We have clarified the applicability provisions in the final
rule. This section describes in more detail how the rule applies to
various operations at rubber tire manufacturing facilities.
1. Tire Bladders
The final rule applies to manufacturers of rubber tires and
components integral to rubber tires, as well as tire cord producers and
puncture sealant operations. One commenter suggested that EPA clarify
that tire bladders used in the manufacturing process are not
``components integral to rubber tires.'' We agree that tire bladders
are not integral components in a tire because they are used in an
intermediate production process and are not found in the final product.
Their manufacture does not involve the use of cements or solvents.
Therefore, the final rule reflects this exclusion in Sec. 63.5981.
2. Tire Retread Operations
Based on public comments, we reconsidered whether to include tire
retread manufacturing operations in the source category definition. At
the time of proposal, no major tire retread manufacturing sources were
identified that would be subject to the rubber tire manufacturing rule.
However, to the extent that these facilities use cements and solvents
in producing retread tires, and they are a major source (standing alone
or due to collocation), they would have been subject to the proposed
version of the rule because of similarities in the solvents, cements,
and adhesives used and the process used to build tires. In evaluating
comments on this topic, we reconsidered information regarding the
potential for HAP emissions from retreading operations, the
applicability of the proposed rule, and the appropriateness of the tire
production MACT floor for retreading operations.
In both ``new'' tire production and retread tire production, tire
building stations are used to create the pre-cured or pre-vulcanized
tire. Several tire components can be combined for a virgin tire versus
only two to three components for a retread tire. In the latter case,
the carcass has been constructed eliminating those component steps in
tire building for the retreader. The vulcanizing and curing of both the
retread and the ``green'' tire are identical in their use of tire
molds, the time for curing, the temperatures, and the pressures. These
parameters are set in order to meet the tire safety and longevity
specifications of the industry.
The HAP emissions associated with sidewall cementing, tread end
cementing, tire building and retread tire building all use similar
cement and solvent formulations. Specifically, the main component of
the cements and solvents used by both new and retread manufacturers are
hexane and toluene. The primary purpose of these cements and solvents
is as a temporary aid to ensure that the rubber compound surface
remains ``tacky'' during tire building. However, several tire
manufacturers and retreaders have reformulated or eliminated the use of
these toxic compounds in their operations, while presumably still
achieving the desired performance characteristics.
Our review and evaluation of the tire building methods, tire
building machinery, solvent and cement usage and application, and
vulcanizing and curing processes for both new and retread tire
operations has not indicated

[[Page 45591]]

significant differences in production techniques or in the types of
tires being made. Our original conclusion to include retreading in the
tire production subcategory, therefore, has not changed under this
subsequent analysis.
Evaluation of the tire production MACT floor database identified
retreading operations at sources that also manufactured new tires. The
HAP emissions associated with these facilities were minor in comparison
to the overall facility emissions, and compliance with the MACT
standards is anticipated using the facility-wide standards that have
been established for the industry. Therefore, emissions associated with
the retreading operations at facilities included in the Rubber
Manufacturers Association's (RMA's) database are included in the
overall emissions reported from the RMA and the individual companies.
In addition, EPA examined the 1996 National Toxics Inventory (NTI)
data, which revealed only three potential stand-alone major source
facilities for retreading in the U.S. The primary pollutants reported
were hexane and toluene. The 1996 NTI reported that HAP emissions from
these sources ranged from 8 to 16 tons per year. Subsequent contacts
with the permitting agencies for these sources revealed that the
facilities have significantly reduced or eliminated HAP emissions. This
analysis demonstrates the ability of retread facilities to
substantially reduce or eliminate their HAP emissions.
In conclusion, we believe that tread is an integral component of
tires, and retread manufacturers should be subject to the emission
standards for tire producers to the extent that they use cements and
solvents.
3. Fabric Coating Operations
The final rule clarifies the potential overlapping applicability of
MACT standards for tire manufacturers who own and operate cord-treating
facilities that produce tire cord as well as other fabric products,
such as belts and hoses. For example, currently we are developing the
fabric printing, coating, and dyeing NESHAP, which will potentially
address the same cord coating operations as today's rubber tire
manufacturing rule. In order to minimize potentially redundant
requirements at these types of facilities, we have included in the
final rule an exemption for coating activities where the primary
product is a Web substrate other than tire cord, and the activities are
regulated by another NESHAP. In other words, where tire cord is the
primary product, the rubber tire manufacturing NESHAP would apply.
Where it is not, the other NESHAP would apply. Any facility with
potential overlapping applicability would have to determine which
NESHAP apply to the facility by the compliance date of the first
applicable NESHAP.
4. Research and Development Operations
We have also determined that research and development (R&D)
operations should not be subject to the rubber tire manufacturing rule.
At proposal, we included them in the definition of HAP emission
sources. However, we now believe that excluding them is more consistent
with our statements in an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking in
which we suggested that R&D operations should be listed as a separate
source category (62 FR 25877) because including R&D operations in a
rule governing manufacturing operations would be problematic. We are
not aware of any stand-alone major R&D facilities. In fact, R&D is
focused on development of rubber compounds, which should involve
minimal solvent use. For these reasons and because R&D operations were
not necessarily addressed in the MACT floor determination, the final
rule exempts R&D facilities as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the CAA.
An R&D facility is one ``whose primary purpose is to conduct research
and development into new processes and products, where such source is
operated under the close supervision of technically trained personnel
and is not engaged in the manufacture of products for commercial sale
in commerce, except in a de minimis manner.'' See CAA section
112(c)(7).

B. How Did We Determine MACT?

1. Rubber Processing MACT
Commenters said we did not provide data to support our conclusion
that add-on control devices for rubber processing emissions are
feasible but unreasonably expensive. According to the commenters, we
should have considered the use of high-volume low-concentration (HVLC)
technologies, which are available, proven, and cost-effective.
At proposal, we considered beyond-the-floor control options in
establishing MACT for the rubber processing source category based on
regenerative incineration. We concluded that the costs of these
controls, more than $200,000 per ton of HAP controlled, were too high
to require them as the basis of the standard. However, in considering
public comments on the proposed rule, we reviewed information provided
by a commenter to further evaluate the applicability of a specific HVLC
technology to rubber processing operations. The technology is a hybrid
system that incorporates a rotary concentrator with conventional
oxidation (emission reduction) technology. The concentrator provides a
mechanism to concentrate low organic concentration gas streams in order
to make destruction or removal, for example, with a following oxidizer,
a more cost-effective control technique.
As described in the response to comments document, our analysis
showed that using the HVLC technology at a model facility would cost
approximately $40,000 dollars per ton of emission reduction. While this
is an improvement relative to the original cost impact, it is still too
high to be considered a beyond-the-floor technology for existing and
new facilities. Therefore, we have not revised the original MACT
determination for this subcategory.
2. Tire Production MACT
Several commenters said the two emission limit options proposed for
the tire production subcategory are not equivalent, because Option 2
(production-based option) is more stringent than Option 1 (HAP-
constituent option). They said these options should be equivalent
because, otherwise, Option 2 represents a beyond-the-floor requirement.
At a minimum, they thought that Option 2 should be based on the average
emissions of the five best-performing sources.
We disagree with these comments. As described in the proposal
preamble, Option 1 represents the MACT floor and MACT. We developed
Option 2 to represent a second form of the emission limit expressed in
mass of HAP emitted per mass of rubber processed. Option 2 must be at
least as stringent as Option 1, but is not required to be equivalent.
Because the use of Option 2 is not required, it is not a beyond-the-
floor requirement. Instead, it provides sources flexibility in how they
meet the emission limit.
Commenters also said the proposal failed to set an emission limit
with a meaningful control technology option, because the allowable
emission levels in Options 1 and 2 effectively rule out control devices
as a significant compliance option due to achievable capture efficiency
rates in the tire production industry. This is important, commenters
said, because reformulation is not an option in all cases due to the
need for extensive equipment modification, modernization, and

[[Page 45592]]

facility reconfiguration as well as the high costs associated with such
changes (likely exceeding $50 to $100 million per plant according to
commenters).
A central fact in our response to these issues is that Option 1 is
based on the MACT floor determination for tire production affected
sources. Based on data provided by the RMA, we determined that
emissions from these sources are controlled primarily through pollution
prevention measures such as reformulation or other changes in process
operations, which reduce or eliminate HAP. In fact, of the 41 reported
existing tire production facilities, 11 reported no potential for HAP
emissions from cement or solvent use above the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) de minimis reporting threshold limitations
for HAP-containing compounds. No additional information in support of
subcategorizing the source category was provided by the industry.
Because we did not identify any basis for further subcategorizing tire
production sources, this level of performance represents MACT for all
tire production affected sources.
Despite a MACT floor determination based on pollution prevention,
the proposed emission limits were crafted to allow the use of add-on
control technologies as a compliance option because we recognized that
some existing facilities currently use them to control a portion of
their emissions. We also wanted to allow all sources the flexibility to
use add-on controls, as long as the MACT floor requirements were met,
if they found them more attractive than pollution prevention measures
in reducing emissions from certain operations. We believe the result is
a meaningful control technology option. While most facilities would
have to achieve some increased level of pollution prevention to comply
with the final rule, they would have the option to use add-on controls
on any of the emission sources at the facility to provide additional
needed reductions. Assuming sources used add-on controls on all of the
available emission sources, the additional pollution prevention
reductions to meet the emission limits would range from 0 to 54
percent, with 27 percent as the average reduction. Given the tremendous
strides in pollution prevention already achieved by the industry, we
believe the NESHAP limits are achievable and that the control
technology option is viable.
3. Puncture Sealant MACT
Commenters said we overreached in establishing a standard for new
sources that is more stringent than the standard for existing sources.
The new source standard is on a single facility, which is operating a
carbon absorber with a removal efficiency of 86 percent. According to
commenters, we failed to conduct a beyond-the-floor analysis that
includes the cost and technical feasibility to support our
determination.
We determined the new source MACT floor by looking at similar
sources in other industries and found that their carbon absorbers are
achieving better performance than that at the one existing puncture
sealant source. Industries that emit VOC have extensive experience in
using pollution control technologies to control the gaseous pollutants.
Carbon adsorption can typically achieve greater than 90 percent
efficiencies with inlet gaseous pollutant concentrations greater than a
few hundred parts per million by volume (ppmv). At concentrations
greater than 1000 ppmv, efficiencies can exceed 95 percent. The
existing puncture sealant facility shows an inlet stream concentration
of at least 1,400 ppmv. Use of combustion technologies, even at low
pollutant concentrations (less than 100 ppmv), can generally achieve 90
to 95 percent destruction efficiency. At higher concentrations,
destruction efficiencies of 95 to 98 percent are achieved. Therefore,
we believe that control devices at new facilities should be able to
should be able to achieve at least 95 percent efficiency.
Because commenters raised cost concerns, we compared the cost of
installing an 86-percent efficient control device to the cost of a 95-
percent efficient control device at a new facility. Because the driving
factor in the cost analysis is the airflow rate of the inlet stream, it
actually costs less to install a 95-percent efficient carbon adsorber
than an 86-percent efficient one. This is because both units would have
the same total annual cost in the absence of recovery credits, but the
more efficient device would achieve greater product recovery, which
reduces the annual operating cost. Therefore, even if the standard for
new sources were considered a beyond-the-floor standard, the MACT
determination would be the same.

C. Can EPA Provide a Universal Certification Compliance Alternative?

Commenters asked us to develop an alternative standard (and
associated compliance procedures) for tire cord production and/or
puncture sealant operations that would be analogous to the ``HAP
constituent option'' (Option 1) for tire production sources. They said
we should allow tire cord and puncture sealant facilities to certify
annually that formulations used in such operations contain less than
0.1 percent of those HAP specified in Table 16 of the proposed rule and
less than 1 percent of all other HAP, and that this change would
encourage pollution prevention.
We agree that providing a similar HAP-constituent option for tire
cord producers and puncture sealant operations would encourage
pollution prevention. Demonstrating compliance with a HAP-constituent
option would require additional emission reductions beyond those
required by the MACT, but since its use would be optional, it would not
constitute a beyond-the-floor requirement. However, we believe that its
use should be limited to a monthly compliance alternative, reserving
the annual alternative to the purchase of cements and solvents. Most,
if not all, tire cord manufacturers and puncture sealant application
facilities mix their coatings and puncture sealants on-site, which
would require the use of the monthly compliance demonstration. We have
written the final rule to add these compliance options.

D. What Role Should EPA Method 311 Play in Compliance Determinations?

Commenters requested several clarifications regarding the role that
EPA Method 311 (found in Appendix A of 40 CFR part 63) (Analysis of
Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings by Direct
Injection Into a Gas Chromatograph) should play in ongoing compliance
determinations. For example, is an individual Method 311 test required
to verify the HAP content for every batch of solvent or cement? Must
the compliance demonstration determine the precise HAP content of the
tested material, or can the de minimis reporting threshold discussed in
the proposed rule (0.1 percent for certain listed HAP and 1.0 percent
for other HAP) suffice? Can the tire manufacturing facility owner or
operator rely on information provided by suppliers regarding the HAP
content of materials? Can formulation data (material safety data sheets
(MSDS) and certificates of compliance) be used in lieu of Method 311
testing? Commenters stated that use of the MSDS and other data to
screen products for HAP content will eliminate testing of hundreds of
non-HAP containing materials.
We reviewed the use of Method 311 in other recent coating standards
we have proposed or promulgated. In order to be consistent with these
standards and minimize the need for individual facilities to apply for
approval of alternative methods, we have added flexibility to the
process of certifying HAP contents of materials used in the

[[Page 45593]]

tire manufacturing industry. However, the reference test method for
measuring the HAP content of tire manufacturing cements, solvents,
coatings, and puncture sealants will be EPA Method 311. This is an
established method that is appropriate for measuring the types of HAP
used in these materials.
The final rule, therefore, does not require a Method 311 test for
HAP content, nor does it require you to test every shipment of
materials you receive. You will be responsible for verifying, by any
reasonable means such as periodic testing or manufacturer's
certification, the HAP content (at least above the de minimis
thresholds) of materials used at the facility. We may require you to
conduct a test at any time using EPA Method 311 (or any approved
alternative method) to confirm the HAP content reported in the
compliance reports. If there is any inconsistency between the results
of the EPA Method 311 test and any other means of determining HAP
content, the Method 311 results will govern.

E. How Should the Tire Cord Compliance Requirements Address Potential
Mixing Reactions?

Commenters raised the issue of how to treat emissions from tire
cord mixing operations in compliance determinations when reactions
during mixing may affect emissions. For example, at what point in the
mixing process should Method 311 samples (or other analytical means) be
taken? If the analysis is based on the coating after it is mixed,
reacted, and aged, the results will not account for the HAP emitted
from or converted by the mixing process. However, if the analysis is
based on coating collected from the mix tank after the addition of all
the chemicals, but prior to subsequent processing, the analysis could
overestimate the overall HAP emissions from the affected source. This
is because tire cord coatings (``dip formulations'') commonly react
during the mixing and storage operations. During these reactions, a HAP
such as formaldehyde cross-links the polymers contained in the dip
formulation. After this cross-linking reaction occurs, the chemical is
unavailable to be released as an air emission during subsequent
processing steps. For formaldehyde, the chemical conversion rate
typically equals or exceeds 99 percent.
At proposal, we assumed that the amount of HAP used in the tire
cord production process would equal the amount of HAP emitted. We
assumed you would document your material balances using records of the
HAP contents of raw materials delivered to the mixing process.
Alternatively, you could sample the coating mixture to verify HAP
content. However, based on comments, it appears that the issue of
reactive coatings is significant for tire cord production. We are
concerned, however, that the commenters' solution to only address post-
mixing HAP would ignore potential fugitive emission losses from mixers.
In the final rule, we have assumed that you will base your material
balance on the assumption that 100 percent of the HAP added to a
coating mixture is emitted. However, you will be allowed to account for
HAP ``losses'' resulting from chemical reactions, e.g., curing or post-
application reactions. You can calculate these losses based on the
conversion rates of the individual coating formulations, chemistry
demonstrations, or other demonstrations that are verifiable to the
approving agency. You may than use the revised value in your compliance
demonstration. We have written the final rule to add these provisions.

F. What Data Requirements Should Sources Using Continuous Parameter
Monitoring Systems Meet?

1. Deviations
Commenters noted that proposed Sec. 63.5990, which requires
facilities to be in compliance with the MACT standards at all times
regardless of whether a source is using control equipment to comply,
fails to recognize that several factors make it almost inevitable that
the source's emissions will exceed the standards at times. Instead,
sources should be given a chance to quickly correct a deviation from
their operating parameter limits before a violation is registered. This
encourages quick action and is appropriate because emissions may be
underneath the regulatory limit even though the parameter limit is
exceeded.
The monitoring provisions in the final rule are structured to
require a source to establish an individual operating limit (or
operating parameter value) based on a site-specific performance test.
Once established, the source should have the ability to operate as far
as desired and/or necessary on the compliance side of the operating
parameter.
The length of the averaging time for the associated emission limit
is another variable that affects the likelihood of deviations. For
example, cases in which the monitoring data are used to demonstrate
instantaneous compliance are more likely to create the exceedances
suggested by the commenters. This is not the case in the final rule.
Puncture sealant affected sources meeting the overall control
efficiency compliance option are subject to operating limits based on a
3-hour averaging period. Tire producers, tire cord producers, and
puncture sealant applicators choosing to comply with one of the monthly
average compliance options have a month in which to ensure that
deviations from control device monitoring parameters do not affect
their overall compliance status. In summary, we believe the final rule
is based on parameters and averaging times that allow a conscientious
operator to remain in compliance with the standards. Therefore, we have
not made the changes suggested by commenters.
2. Startups, Shutdowns, and Malfunctions
Commenters were concerned that Table 17 to proposed subpart XXXX
indicates that the 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, General Provisions
requirements regarding startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions
(Secs. 63.6(e)(3) and (f)(1)) do not apply to sources that choose to
use control devices to comply with the standards. One commenter cited
precedents regarding the need for ``achievable'' standards and argued
that the final rule should be written to indicate that these sections
do apply to facilities complying through the use of control devices.
We agree that puncture sealant affected sources that are subject to
operating limits should be allowed to use the startup, shutdown, and
malfunction provisions, and have corrected this oversight for the final
rule. We separately considered whether to extend these provisions to
tire production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant affected
sources complying with the monthly average compliance options because
compliance with the monitored parameter is only a trigger that
determines whether the source can use the established emission
reductions of the capture and control system in the compliance
demonstration. Because the overall compliance demonstration is based on
a month's worth of data, we considered whether the startup, shutdown,
and malfunction provisions were needed to ensure an achievable
standard. We determined that for sources relying heavily on the use of
control equipment to meet the overall emission limit, the inability to
exclude periods of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions from the
compliance demonstration could increase their risk of failing to comply
with the emission limit. Therefore, we have written the final rule to
add the startup, shutdown, and malfunction

[[Page 45594]]

provisions for sources complying with the standards through control
devices.
3. Minimum Data Collection Requirements
Commenters said the proposal fails to allow for the loss of even
minimal amounts of test or monitoring data when sources are complying
by using add-on control devices. They suggested adding provisions
similar to those found in the municipal waste combuster MACT standards
issued under section 129 of the CAA.
We have therefore written the final rule to provide information on
these minimum data requirements. We agree that the proposed rule, by
being silent on minimum data requirements, could have caused confusion
for compliance demonstrations. The tradeoff to consider in adding these
requirements is that the monitoring system should be optimized to limit
occurrences when data collection is jeopardized because of system
faults and failures. Therefore, we have clarified in the final rule the
establishment of reasonable minimum data collection requirements,
implemented through the use of a site-specific monitoring plan designed
to optimize system performance.
The final rule requires you, for each operating parameter you
monitor, to install, operate, and maintain each continuous parameter
monitoring system (CPMS) according to the following requirements:
Operate CPMS at all times the process is operating;
Collect data from at least four equally spaced periods
each hour;
For at least 75 percent of the hours in an operating day,
have valid data (as defined in the site-specific monitoring plan) for
at least four equally spaced periods each hour;
For each hour of valid data from at least four equally
spaced periods, calculate the hourly average value using all valid
data;
Calculate the daily average using all of the hourly
averages; and
Record the results for each inspection, calibration, and
validation check as specified in the site-specific monitoring plan.
For each monitoring system required, you must develop and submit
for approval a site-specific monitoring plan that addresses the
following requirements:
Installation of the continuous monitoring system (CMS)
sampling probe or other interface at a measurement location relative to
each affected process unit such that the measurement is representative
of control of the exhaust emissions (e.g., on or downstream of the last
control device);
Performance and equipment specifications for the sample
interface, the pollutant concentration or parametric signal analyzer,
and the data collection and reduction system; and
Performance evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria
(e.g., calibrations).
The plan must also address the following ongoing procedures:
Ongoing operation and maintenance procedures in accordance
with the general requirements of 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1), (3), (4)(ii), (7),
and (8), and 63.5990;
Ongoing data quality assurance procedures in accordance
with the general requirements of 40 CFR 63.8(d); and
Ongoing recordkeeping and reporting procedures in
accordance the general requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(c) and (e)(1) and
(2)(i).

G. Is Compliance Based on Daily Recordkeeping Needed?

Commenters recommended specifying that monthly average compliance
demonstrations should be based on monthly inventory and usage records,
instead of daily ones, for several reasons:
The proposal to require daily records of many parameters
(control devices are the exception) is inconsistent with the
requirement for a monthly average, is very burdensome, and would not
serve any environmental purpose.
Use of monthly data would eliminate the need for proposed
equation 3 of Sec. 63.5997(b)(3) of proposed subpart XXXX.
Monthly records are consistent with other MACT standards,
and it would be arbitrary and capricious to single out the tire
manufacturing standards for daily recordkeeping when it is unnecessary
to show compliance with a monthly averaging period, and other similar
standards require only monthly recordkeeping.
Monitoring the flow of cements and solvents through the
plant's central dispensing area on a monthly basis is less burdensome
than on a daily basis.
The accuracy of a monthly system is significantly better
than individual measurements of hundreds of containers on a daily
basis.
We believe the commenters have overstated the need for complex
recordkeeping systems to implement the rule as proposed. For example,
we believe sources could monitor daily flow of cements and solvents
through one or two central locations instead of at the point of use.
However, upon consideration, we agree that a monthly system of cement,
solvent, and coating use is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with
the emission limitations. Therefore, we have written the final rule to
implement a monthly system. This change simplifies the compliance
equations and should reduce recordkeeping burden without compromising
compliance assurance.

H. Has EPA Properly Considered the Cost Impacts of the Rule?

Commenters felt we underestimated the cost impacts of the proposed
rule by failing to incorporate significant costs associated with
creating systems to track daily material usage. They suggested that
monthly recordkeeping would be more economical, could be more easily
maintained, and would still demonstrate compliance with the standards.
We believe that the commenters misinterpreted the proposed
recordkeeping requirements to require tracking cement, solvent, and
coating use at every single step in the process. Instead, we believe
facilities should be able to monitor a limited number of central
locations (e.g., amount of coating leaving mix area, amount of solvent
distributed from storage), and thereby avoid significant costs.
However, as described above, we have determined that monthly
recordkeeping will be sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the
emission limitations and have written the final rule to allow it.
Commenters also were concerned that we presented the proposed rule
as a nonsignificant regulatory action, when it may force technology
developments that are not incorporated into the analysis presented.
Commenters said reformulation is not an option in every case, and the
lack of a meaningful control technology option will force significant
technology upgrades to comply with the standards. According to one
commenter, this type of modernization costs $50 to $100 million per
plant, and these types of costs are not reflected in the impacts
analysis of the proposed rule.
As earlier described, we believe the rule contains a viable
emission control technology option. In addition to the cost estimate
prepared for the final rule, we also conducted a theoretical cost
analysis using more conservative (i.e., high-end) assumptions regarding
the level of reformulation and the probable capture efficiencies. That
analysis maximized the number of sources installing add-on control
devices, reduced add-on control capture efficiencies, and determined
solvent

[[Page 45595]]

reformulation costs on a facility-specific basis. (See the response to
comments document for more details.) Based on these assumptions, total
annual control costs to all tire producers combined could be as high as
$35 million. Even considering impacts based on these more conservative
(higher end of range) assumptions, the final rule will not trigger the
$100 million criterion used by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), let alone approach the estimate provided by one commenter of $50
to $100 million per plant to meet the emission limits.

I. What Other Changes Has EPA Made for the Final Rule?

We have made several other changes for the final rule. These
changes include the following:
Changes to the compliance equations to clarify them,
address the addition of new compliance options, make them consistent
with monthly recordkeeping, and fix errors.
Revisions or additions to clarify applicability in
definitions (cements and solvents, fabric processed, tire cord, etc.).
Other minor changes to correct editorial and minor
technical errors in the proposal package.

J. What Are the Environmental, Cost, and Economic Impacts of the Final
Rule?

The final rule will eliminate approximately 983 megagrams per year
(Mg/yr) (1,084 tons/yr) (52 percent) of the baseline annual HAP
emissions from this industry. For the tire production source
subcategory, we estimate that the final rule will reduce HAP emissions
by approximately 949 Mg/yr (1,047 tons/yr). For the tire cord
production source subcategory, we estimate that the final rule will
reduce HAP emissions by approximately 34 Mg/yr (37 tons/yr). We also
estimate that the final rule will reduce emissions of VOC by the same
amount.
For the one existing puncture sealant application affected source,
we are not requiring different emissions control than what is currently
done. Therefore, the final rule will not reduce HAP or other emissions
from baseline emissions levels at this facility.
The final rule encourages the adoption of pollution prevention
measures. As a result, we believe that most manufacturers will adopt
these measures and expect minimal, if any, increases in energy
consumption, and minimal reductions in water pollution and solid waste.
Actual compliance costs will depend on each source's existing
cement, solvent, and coating formulations and control equipment, and
the modifications made to comply with the final rule. Table 2 shows the
total annual costs for affected sources to comply with the final rule.
These costs include the estimated costs of reformulating cements,
solvents, and coatings or installation of add-on control devices, as
well as monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping costs.

Table 2.--Total Annual Costs of the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Rule for Tire Production, Tire Cord Production,
and Puncture Sealant Application
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tire production/
puncture
Annual costs sealant Tire cord
application a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control..................................................... $21,359,000 $2,477,000
Monitoring.................................................. 1,161,000 193,000
Recordkeeping and reporting average......................... 597,000 105,000
Total nationwide costs................................ 23,117,000 2,775,000 =$25,892,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Puncture sealant monitoring and reporting recordkeeping costs are included in the tire production costs.

The economic impact analysis (EIA) provides an estimate of the
anticipated regulatory impacts of the rule for rubber tire
manufacturing. The information collected for this rule from rubber tire
manufacturers indicates that there are 14 companies potentially
affected by the rule. States with the largest concentration of
facilities are Alabama, Illinois, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Ohio. None of the facilities manufacturing rubber tires are owned by
companies that are classified as small businesses.
In general, the economic impacts of the rule are expected to be
minimal. A market price increase of less than 1 percent, or $0.03 per
tire, is projected. Domestic producer pre-tax earnings are projected to
decrease by $14 million, or 1.2 percent. The EIA estimates that
domestic tire output will decline by 154,000 tires (0.05 percent),
while imports will increase by 24,000 tires (0.05 percent), resulting
in a net decline of 130,000 tires, or 0.04 percent.
The value of a regulatory action is traditionally measured by the
change in economic welfare that it generates. The final rule's welfare
impacts, or the social costs required to achieve environmental
improvements, will extend to tire consumers and producers alike. The
social costs for existing sources are projected to be approximately $24
million.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory
action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health

[[Page 45596]]

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 EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the
planned rule is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives that we considered.
This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it
is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by
Executive Order 12866. In addition, EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on
health and safety risks, such that the analysis required under section
5-501 of the Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based
on technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
This is because no tribal governments own or operate a rubber tire
manufacturing facility. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132--Federalism

Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of Government.''
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of Government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The standards apply only to
rubber tire manufacturers and do not pre-exempt States from adopting
more stringent standards or otherwise regulate State or local
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this final
rule.
Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
final rule, EPA did consult with State and local officials in
developing this final rule. No concerns were raised by these officials
during this consultation.

E. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we
generally must prepare a written statement, including 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 us 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 us to adopt an alternative with other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if we
publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not
adopted.
Before we establish any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, we 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 our regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
We have determined that this final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of this rule for
any year has been estimated to be less than $26 million. Thus, today's
final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA. In addition, we have determined that this final rule
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments because it contains no regulatory
requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon
them. Therefore, this final rule is not subject to the requirements of
section 203 of the UMRA.

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.

The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the Agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,

[[Page 45597]]

small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business
according to the Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards by
NAICS code (which ranges from 500 to 1,000 employees for the rubber
tire manufacturing industry); (2) a small governmental jurisdiction
that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities. We have
determined that none of the 43 facilities expected to be subject to the
final rule are small entities.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements in this final rule have
been submitted for approval to OMB under the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR No.
1982.01), and a copy may be obtained from Ms. Sandy Farmer by mail at
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Information, Collection Strategies Division (2822), 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001, by e-mail at
farmer.sandy@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may also be
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The information
requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
The final information requirements are based on notifications,
records, and reports required by the General Provisions (40 CFR part
63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all operators subject to
national emission standards. These recordkeeping and reporting
requirements are specifically authorized under section 114 of the CAA
(42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA pursuant to the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to Agency
policies in 40 CFR part 2, subpart, Confidentiality of Business
Information.
The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information (averaged over the first 3 years after the
effective date of the promulgated rule) is estimated to total 12,807
labor hours per year at a total annual cost of $701,337. This estimate
includes notifications, a performance test and report for sources using
control devices to comply with the regulation, semiannual compliance
reports, annual compliance certifications, records of cements and
solvents composition, records of cements and solvents use, records of
HAP use, and records of any required parameter monitoring.
The total estimated annual and capital monitoring, inspection,
reporting and recordkeeping (MIRR) costs for existing and new major
sources to comply with the final standards when an affected source opts
to comply via the use of add-on control equipment are determined based
on the estimated capital costs of equipment required for MIRR
activities. For the rubber tire manufacturing industry, the total
estimated installed capital costs of this equipment is $2.9 million for
existing major sources and $569,558 for new major sources. Annualized
capital MIRR costs for existing and new major sources to comply with
the final standards through the use of add-on controls were estimated
to be $1.6 million and $220,386, respectively.
The total annual estimated operating and maintenance costs (O&M)
were calculated based on: (1) The estimated storage, filing,
photocopying, and postage costs for the estimated total annual
responses associated with the provisions of the rubber tire rule; and
(2) the O&M costs for the equipment required for compliance with these
standards. The total storage, filing, photocopying, and postage cost
per response was $20.67, for an annual estimated average of $1,778.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and
verifying information; process and maintain information and disclose
and provide information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
respond to a collection of information; search existing data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. The OMB
control number(s) for the information collection requirements in this
rule will be listed in an amendment to 40 CFR part 9 or 48 CFR chapter
15 in a subsequent Federal Register document after OMB approves the
ICR.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

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 us to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in our
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) developed or adopted by one or
more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide
Congress, through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when we do
not use available and applicable VCS.
This rulemaking involves technical standards. We are citing the
following methods in this rule: EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F,
2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 25, and 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; EPA
Methods 204 and 204A-F of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M; and EPA Method
311 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. Consistent with the NTTAA, we
conducted searches to identify VCS in addition to these EPA methods. No
applicable VCS were identified for EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 204,
204A-F, and 311. The search and review results have been documented and
are placed in the docket (A-97-14) for this rule.
Five voluntary consensus standards: ASTM D1979-97, ASTM D3432-89,
ASTM D4747-87, ASTM D4827-93, and ASTM PS 9-94 are already incorporated
by reference in EPA Method 311.
The search for emissions measurement procedures identified 14 other
VCS. We determined that 11 of these 14 VCS identified for measuring
emissions of HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in this
rule were impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes
of this rule. Therefore, we do not intend to adopt these VCS. The
reasons for the determinations of these 11 VCS are discussed below.
The VCS ASTM D3154-91 ``Standard Method for Average Velocity in a
Duct (Pitot Tube Method),'' is an impractical

[[Page 45598]]

alternative to EPA Methods 1, 2, 2C, 3, 3B, and 4 for the purposes of
this rulemaking because it lacks in quality control and quality
assurance requirements. Specifically, ASTM D3154-91 (1995) does not
include the following: (1) Proof that openings of standard pitot tubes
have not plugged during the test; (2) if differential pressure gauges
other than inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) are used,
their calibration must be checked after each test series; and (3) the
frequency and validity range for calibration of the temperature
sensors.
The VCS ISO 10780:1994, ``Stationary Source Emissions--Measurement
of Velocity and Volume Flowrate of Gas Streams in Ducts,'' is
impractical as an alternative to EPA Method 2 in this rulemaking. This
standard, ISO 10780:1994, recommends the use of L-shaped pitots, which
historically have not been recommended because the S-type design has
large openings which are less likely to plug up with dust.
The VCS ASTM D3464-96 (2001), ``Standard Test Method Average
Velocity in a Duct Using a Thermal Anemometer,'' is impractical as an
alternative to EPA Method 2 for the purposes of this rulemaking
primarily because applicability specifications are not clearly defined,
e.g., range of gas composition, temperature limits. Also, the lack of
supporting quality assurance data for the calibration procedures and
specifications, and certain variability issues that are not adequately
addressed by the standard limit our ability to make a definitive
comparison of the method in these areas.
Two very similar standards, ASTM D5835-95, ``Standard Practice for
Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for Automated Determination of Gas
Concentration,'' and ISO 10396:1993, ``Stationary Source Emissions:
Sampling for the Automated Determination of Gas Concentrations,'' are
impractical alternatives to EPA Method 3A for the purposes of this
rulemaking because they lack in detail and quality assurance/quality
control requirements. Specifically, these two standards do not include
the following: (1) Sensitivity of the method; (2) acceptable levels of
analyzer calibration error; (3) acceptable levels of sampling system
bias; (4) zero drift and calibration drift limits, time span, and
required testing frequency; (5) a method to test the interference
response of the analyzer; (6) procedures to determine the minimum
sampling time per run and minimum measurement time; and (7)
specifications for data recorders, in terms of resolution (all types)
and recording intervals (digital and analog recorders, only).
Two VCS, EN 12619:1999 ``Stationary Source Emissions-Determination
of the Mass Concentration of Total Gaseous Organic Carbon at Low
Concentrations in Flue Gases--Continuous Flame Ionization Detector
Method'' and ISO 14965:2000(E) ``Air Quality-Determination of Total
Nonmethane Organic Compounds-Cryogenic Preconcentration and Direct
Flame Ionization Method,'' are impractical alternatives to EPA Method
25A for the purposes of this rulemaking because the standards do not
apply to solvent process vapors in concentrations greater than 40 ppm
carbon for EN 12619 and 10 ppm carbon for ISO 14965. Methods whose
upper limits are this low are too limited to be useful in measuring
source emissions, which are expected to be much higher.
Four VCS are impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the
purposes of this rulemaking because they are too general, too broad, or
not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance with EPA regulatory
requirements: ASTM D3796-90 (Reapproved 1996), ``Standard Practice for
Calibration of Type S Pitot Tubes,'' for EPA Method 2; ASME C00031 or
PTC 19-10-1981--Part 10, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' for EPA
Method 3; CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86(1986), ``Method for the Continuous
Measurement of Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur
Dioxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed Combustion Flue Gas
Streams,'' for EPA Method 3A; and ASTM E337-84 (Reapproved 1996),
``Standard Test Method for Measuring Humidity with a Psychrometer (the
Measurement of Wet- and Dry-Bulb Temperatures),'' for EPA Method 4.
Three of the 14 VCS identified in this search were not available at
the time the review was conducted for the purposes of this rulemaking
because they are under development by a voluntary consensus body: ASME/
BSR MFC 13M, ``Flow Measurement by Velocity Traverse,'' for EPA Method
2 (and possibly 1); ASME/BSR MFC 12M, ``Flow in Closed Conduits Using
Multiport Averaging Pitot Primary Flowmeters,'' for EPA Method 2; and
ISO/DIS 12039, ``Stationary Source Emissions--Determination of Carbon
Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, and Oxygen--Automated Methods,'' for EPA
Method 3A.
Sections 63.5993, 63.5994, 63.5997, and 63.6000 to subpart XXXX
list the EPA testing methods in the final rule. Under 40 CFR 63.8 of
subpart A of the General Provisions, a source may apply to obtain
permission to use alternative monitoring in place of any of the EPA
testing methods.

J. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not
a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be
effective on July 9, 2002.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rubber tire
manufacturing.

Dated: May 15, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.

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

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

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

Subpart XXXX--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

63.5980 What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.5981 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.5982 What parts of my facility does this subpart cover?
63.5983 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected Sources

63.5984 What emission limits must I meet for tire production
affected sources?
63.5985 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission limits
for tire production affected sources?

[[Page 45599]]

Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production Affected Sources

63.5986 What emission limits must I meet for tire cord production
affected sources?
63.5987 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission limits
for tire cord production affected sources?

Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant Application Affected Sources

63.5988 What emission limitations must I meet for puncture sealant
application affected sources?
63.5989 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission
limitations for puncture sealant application affected sources?

General Compliance Requirements

63.5990 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?

General Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements

63.5991 By what date must I conduct an initial compliance
demonstration or performance test?
63.5992 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?
63.5993 What performance tests and other procedures must I use?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Tire Production
Affected Sources

63.5994 How do I conduct tests and procedures for tire production
affected sources?
63.5995 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
63.5996 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for tire production affected sources?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Tire Cord Production
Affected Sources

63.5997 How do I conduct tests and procedures for tire cord
production affected sources?
63.5998 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
63.5999 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for tire cord production affected sources?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Puncture Sealant
Application Affected Sources

63.6000 How do I conduct tests and procedures for puncture sealant
application affected sources?
63.6001 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
63.6002 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for puncture sealant application affected sources?

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Tire Production Affected Sources

63.6003 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire production
affected sources?
63.6004 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits for tire production affected sources?

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Tire Cord Production Affected
Sources

63.6005 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire cord
production affected sources?
63.6006 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits for tire cord production affected sources?

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Puncture Sealant Application
Affected Sources

63.6007 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limitations for puncture sealant
application affected sources?
63.6008 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations for puncture sealant application affected
sources?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

63.6009 What notifications must I submit and when?
63.6010 What reports must I submit and when?
63.6011 What records must I keep?
63.6012 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

Other Requirements and Information

63.6013 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
63.6014 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.6015 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Tables to Subpart XXXX of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Emission Limits for Tire
Production Affected Sources
Table 2 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Emission Limits for Tire Cord
Production Affected Sources
Table 3 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Emission Limits for Puncture
Sealant Application Affected Sources
Table 4 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Operating Limits for Puncture
Sealant Application Control Devices
Table 5 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Requirements for Performance
Tests
Table 6 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Initial Compliance with the
Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected Sources
Table 7 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Initial Compliance with the
Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production Affected Sources
Table 8 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Initial Compliance with the
Emission Limits for Puncture Sealant Application Affected Sources
Table 9 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance with the Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected
Sources
Table 10 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with the
Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected Sources
Table 11 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance with the Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production
Affected Sources
Table 12 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with the
Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production Affected Sources
Table 13 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance with the Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant
Application Affected Sources
Table 14 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with the
Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant Application Affected
Sources
Table 15 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Requirements for Reports
Table 16 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Selected Hazardous Air
Pollutants
Table 17 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to This Subpart XXXX

Subpart XXXX--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing

What This Subpart Covers

Sec. 63.5980 What is the purpose of this subpart?

This subpart establishes national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) for rubber tire manufacturing. This subpart
also establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous
compliance with the emission limitations.

Sec. 63.5981 Am I subject to this subpart?

(a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a rubber
tire manufacturing facility that is located at, or is a part of, a
major source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions.
(1) Rubber tire manufacturing includes the production of rubber
tires and/or the production of components integral to rubber tires, the
production of tire cord, and the application of puncture sealant.
Components of rubber tires include, but are not limited to, rubber
compounds, sidewalls, tread, tire beads, tire cord and liners. Other
components often associated with rubber tires but not integral to the
tire, such as wheels, inner tubes, tire bladders, and valve stems, are
not components of rubber tires or tire cord and are not subject to this
subpart.
(2) A major source of HAP emissions is any stationary source or
group of stationary sources within a contiguous area and under common
control that emits or has the potential to emit considering controls,
in the aggregate, any single HAP at a rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons)
or more per year or

[[Page 45600]]

any combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more
per year.
(b) You are not subject to this subpart if the affected source at
your rubber tire manufacturing facility meets either of the conditions
described in paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) You own or operate a tire cord production affected source, but
the primary product produced at the affected source is determined to be
subject to another subpart under this part 63 as of the effective date
of that subpart (publication date of the final rule) or startup of the
source, whichever is later. In this case, you must determine which
subpart applies to your source and you must be in compliance with the
applicable subpart by the compliance date of that subpart. The primary
product is the product that is produced for the greatest operating time
over a 5-year period, based on expected utilization for the 5 years
following the compliance date or following initial startup of the
source, whichever is later.
(2) Your rubber tire manufacturing affected source is a research
and development facility whose primary purpose is to conduct research
and development into new processes and products, where such source is
operated under the close supervision of technically trained personnel
and is not engaged in the manufacture of products for commercial sale
in commerce, except in a de minimis manner.

Sec. 63.5982 What parts of my facility does this subpart cover?

(a) This subpart applies to each existing, new, or reconstructed
affected source at facilities engaged in the manufacture of rubber
tires or their components.
(b) The affected sources are defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section (tire production), paragraph (b)(2) of this section (tire cord
production), paragraph (b)(3) of this section (puncture sealant
application), and paragraph (b)(4) of this section (rubber processing).
(1) The tire production affected source is the collection of all
processes that use or process cements and solvents as defined in
Sec. 63.6015, located at any rubber tire manufacturing facility. It
includes, but is not limited to: Storage and mixing vessels and the
transfer equipment containing cements and/or solvents; wastewater
handling and treatment operations; tread and cement operations; tire
painting operations; ink and finish operations; undertread cement
operations; process equipment cleaning materials; bead cementing
operations; tire building operations; green tire spray operations;
extruding, to the extent cements and solvents are used; cement house
operations; marking operations; calendar operations, to the extent
solvents are used; tire striping operations; tire repair operations;
slab dip operations; other tire building operations, to the extent that
cements and solvents are used; and balance pad operations.
(2) The tire cord production affected source is the collection of
all processes engaged in the production of tire cord. It includes, but
is not limited to: dipping operations, drying ovens, heat-set ovens,
bulk storage tanks, mixing facilities, general facility vents, air
pollution control devices, and warehouse storage vents.
(3) The puncture sealant application affected source is the
puncture sealant application booth operation used to apply puncture
sealant to finished tires.
(4) The rubber processing affected source is the collection of all
rubber mixing processes (e.g., banburys and associated drop mills) that
either mix compounds or warm rubber compound before the compound is
processed into components of rubber tires. The mixed rubber compound
itself is also included in the rubber processing affected source. There
are no emission limitations or other requirements for the rubber
processing affected source.
(c) An affected source is a new affected source if construction of
the affected source commenced after October 18, 2000, and it met the
applicability criteria of Sec. 63.5981 at the time construction
commenced.
(d) An affected source is reconstructed if it meets the criteria as
defined in Sec. 63.2.
(e) An affected source is existing if it is not new or
reconstructed.

Sec. 63.5983 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

(a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, except as
provided in Secs. 63.5982(b)(4) and 63.5981(b)(1), you must comply with
the emission limitations for new and reconstructed sources in this
subpart upon startup.
(b) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the emission limitations for existing sources no later than July 11,
2005.
(c) If you have an area source that increases its emissions or its
potential to emit such that it becomes a major source of HAP, the
affected source(s) must be in compliance with existing source emission
limitations no later than 3 years after the date on which the area
source became a major source.
(d) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.6009
according to the schedule in Sec. 63.6009 and in subpart A of this
part. Some of the notifications must be submitted before the date you
are required to comply with the emission limitations in this subpart.

Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected Sources

Sec. 63.5984 What emission limits must I meet for tire production
affected sources?

You must meet each emission limit in either option 1 or option 2 of
Table 1 to this subpart that applies to you.

Sec. 63.5985 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission limits
for tire production affected sources?

You must use one of the compliance alternatives in paragraphs (a)
through (c) of this section to meet either of the emission limits in
Sec. 63.5984.
(a) Purchase alternative. Use only cements and solvents that, as
purchased, contain no more HAP than allowed by the emission limits in
Table 1 to this subpart, option 1 (HAP constituent option).
(b) Monthly average alternative, without using an add-on control
device. Use cements and solvents in such a way that the monthly average
HAP emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 1 to this
subpart, option 1 or option 2.
(c) Monthly average alternative, using an add-on control device.
Use a control device to reduce HAP emissions so that the monthly
average HAP emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 1 to
this subpart, option 1 or option 2.

Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production Affected Sources

Sec. 63.5986 What emission limits must I meet for tire cord production
affected sources?

You must meet each emission limit in either option 1 or option 2 of
Table 2 to this subpart that applies to you.

Sec. 63.5987 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission limits
for tire cord production affected sources?

You must use one of the compliance alternatives in paragraph (a) or
(b) of this section to meet the emission limits in Sec. 63.5986.
(a) Monthly average alternative, without using an add-on control
device. Use coatings in such a way that the monthly average HAP
emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 2 to this subpart.
(b) Monthly average alternative, using an add-on control device.
Use a control device to reduce HAP emissions so that the monthly
average HAP emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 2 to
this subpart.

[[Page 45601]]

Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant Application Affected Sources

Sec. 63.5988 What emission limitations must I meet for puncture
sealant application affected sources?

(a) You must meet each emission limit in either option 1 or option
2 of Table 3 to this subpart that applies to you.
(b) If you use an add-on control device to meet the emission limits
in Table 3 to this subpart, you must also meet each operating limit in
Table 4 to this subpart that applies to you.

Sec. 63.5989 What are my alternatives for meeting the emission
limitations for puncture sealant application affected sources?

You must use one of the compliance alternatives in paragraphs (a)
through (d) of this section to meet the emission limitations in
Sec. 63.5988.
(a) Overall control efficiency alternative. Use an emissions
capture system and control device and demonstrate that the application
booth emissions meet the emission limits in Table 3 to this subpart,
option 1a or 1b, and the control device and capture system meet the
operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart.
(b) Permanent total enclosure and control device efficiency
alternative. Use a permanent total enclosure that satisfies the Method
204 criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix M. Demonstrate that the
control device meets the emission limits in Table 3 to this subpart,
option 1a or 1b. You must also show that the control device and capture
system meet the operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart.
(c) Monthly average alternative, without using an add-on control
device. Use puncture sealants in such a way that the monthly average
HAP emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 3 to this
subpart, option 2.
(d) Monthly average alternative, using an add-on control device.
Use a control device to reduce HAP emissions so that monthly average
HAP emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 3 to this
subpart, option 2.

General Compliance Requirements

Sec. 63.5990 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?

(a) You must be in compliance with the applicable emission
limitations specified in Tables 1 through 4 to this subpart at all
times, except during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction if
you are using a control device to comply with an emission limit.
(b) Except as provided in Sec. 63.5982(b)(4), you must always
operate and maintain your affected source, including air pollution
control and monitoring equipment, according to the provisions in
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).
(c) During the period between the compliance date specified for
your source in Sec. 63.5983 and the date upon which continuous
compliance monitoring systems (CMS) have been installed and validated
and any applicable operating limits have been set, you must maintain a
log detailing the operation and maintenance of the process and emission
control equipment.
(d) For each affected source that complies with the emission limits
in Tables 1 through 3 to this subpart using a control device, you must
develop and implement a written startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan
according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
(e) For each monitoring system required in this section, you must
develop and submit for approval a site-specific monitoring plan that
addresses the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this
section as follows:
(1) Installation of the CMS sampling probe or other interface at a
measurement location relative to each affected process unit so that the
measurement is representative of control of the exhaust emissions
(e.g., on or downstream of the last control device);
(2) Performance and equipment specifications for the sample
interface, the pollutant concentration or parametric signal analyzer,
and the data collection and reduction system; and
(3) Performance evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria
(e.g., calibrations).
(f) In your site-specific monitoring plan, you must also address
the ongoing procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of
this section as follows:
(1) Ongoing operation and maintenance procedures in accordance with
the general requirements of Sec. 63.8(c)(1), (3), (4)(ii), (7), and
(8), and this section;
(2) Ongoing data quality assurance procedures in accordance with
the general requirements of Sec. 63.8(d); and
(3) Ongoing recordkeeping and reporting procedures in accordance
with the general requirements of Sec. 63.10(c), (e)(1), and (e)(2)(i).

General Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements

Sec. 63.5991 By what date must I conduct an initial compliance
demonstration or performance test?

(a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
conduct each required initial compliance demonstration or performance
test within 180 calendar days after the compliance date that is
specified for your new or reconstructed affected source in
Sec. 63.5983(a). If you are required to conduct a performance test, you
must do so according to the provisions of Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
(b) If you have an existing affected source, you must conduct each
required initial compliance demonstration or performance test no later
than the compliance date that is specified for your existing affected
source in Sec. 63.5983(b). If you are required to conduct a performance
test, you must do so according to the provisions of Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
(c) If you commenced construction or reconstruction between October
18, 2000 and July 9, 2002, you must demonstrate initial compliance with
either the proposed emission limitations or the promulgated emission
limitations no later than January 6, 2003, or within 180 calendar days
after startup of the source, whichever is later, according to
Sec. 63.7(a)(2)(ix).
(d) If you commenced construction or reconstruction between October
18, 2000 and July 9, 2002, and you chose to comply with the proposed
emission limitation when demonstrating initial compliance, you must
conduct a second compliance demonstration for the promulgated emission
limitation no later than January 5, 2006, or after startup of the
source, whichever is later, according to Sec. 63.7(a)(2)(ix).

Sec. 63.5992 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?

If you use a control system (add-on control device and capture
system) to meet the emission limitations, you must also conduct a
performance test at least once every 5 years following your initial
compliance demonstration to verify control system performance and
reestablish operating parameters or operating limits for control
systems used to comply with the emissions limits.

Sec. 63.5993 What performance tests and other procedures must I use?

(a) If you use a control system to meet the emission limitations,
you must conduct each performance test in Table 5 to this subpart that
applies to you.
(b) Each performance test must be conducted according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.7(e)(1) and under the specific conditions
specified in Table 5 to this subpart.
(c) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).

[[Page 45602]]

(d) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance
test required in this section, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1), unless
otherwise specified in the test method. Each test run must last at
least 1 hour.
(e) If you are complying with the emission limitations using a
control system, you must also conduct performance tests according to
the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section as
they apply to you.
(1) Determining capture efficiency of permanent or temporary total
enclosure. Determine the capture efficiency of a capture system by
using one of the procedures in Table 5 to this subpart.
(2) Determining capture efficiency of an alternative method. As an
alternative to constructing a permanent or temporary total enclosure,
you may determine the capture efficiency using any capture efficiency
protocol and test methods if the data satisfy the criteria of either
the Data Quality Objective or the Lower Confidence Limit approach in
appendix A to subpart KK of this part.
(3) Determining efficiency of an add-on control device. Use Table 5
to this subpart to select the test methods for determining the
efficiency of an add-on control device.

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Tire Production
Affected Sources

Sec. 63.5994 How do I conduct tests and procedures for tire production
affected sources?

(a) Methods to determine the mass percent of HAP in cements and
solvents. To determine the HAP content in the cements and solvents used
at your tire production affected source, use EPA Method 311 of appendix
A of this part, an approved alternative method, or any other reasonable
means for determining the HAP content of your cements and solvents.
Other reasonable means include, but are not limited to: a material
safety data sheet (MSDS), provided it contains appropriate information;
a certified product data sheet (CPDS); or a manufacturer's hazardous
air pollutant data sheet. You are not required to test the materials
that you use, but the Administrator may require a test using EPA Method
311 (or an approved alternative method) to confirm the reported HAP
content. If the results of an analysis by EPA Method 311 are different
from the HAP content determined by another means, the EPA Method 311
results will govern compliance determinations.
(b) Methods to demonstrate compliance with the HAP constituent
emission limits in Table 1 to this subpart (option 1). Use the method
in paragraph (b)(1) of this section to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the applicable emission limits for tire
production affected sources using the compliance alternative described
in Sec. 63.5985(a), purchase alternative. Use the equations in
paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section to demonstrate initial and
continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire production
affected sources using the monthly average compliance alternatives
described in Sec. 63.5985(b) and (c).
(1) Determine the mass percent of each HAP in each cement and
solvent according to the procedures in paragraph (a) of this section.
(2) Use Equation 1 of this section to calculate the HAP emission
rate for each monthly operating period when complying by using cements
and solvents without using an add-on control device so that the monthly
average HAP emissions do not exceed the HAP constituent emission limits
in Table 1 to this subpart, option 1. Equation 1 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.000

Where:

(3) Use Equation 2 of this section to calculate the HAP emission
rate for each monthly period when complying by using a control device
to reduce HAP emissions so that the monthly average HAP emissions do
not exceed the HAP constituent emission limits in Table 1 to this
subpart (option 1). Equation 2 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.001

Where:

E_month=mass of the specific HAP emitted per total mass
cements and solvents from all cements and solvents used in tire
production per month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in cement and solvent i, as purchased, determined in
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section for cements and
solvents used in the month in processes that are not routed to a
control device.
TMASS_i=total mass of cement and solvent i used in the
month in processes that are not routed to a control device, grams.
n=number of cements and solvents used in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device.
HAP_j=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in cement and solvent j, as purchased, determined in
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, for cements and
solvents used in the month in

[[Page 45603]]

processes that are routed to a control device during operating days,
which are defined as days when the control system is operating
within the operating range established during the performance test
and when monitoring data are collected.
TMASS_j=total mass of cement and solvent j used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during all
operating days, grams.
EFF=efficiency of the control system determined during the
performance test (capture system efficiency multiplied by the
control device efficiency), percent.
m=number of cements and solvents used in the month that are routed
to a control device during all operating days.
HAP_k=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in cement and solvent k, as purchased, for cements and
solvents used in the month in processes that are routed to a control
device during non-control operating days, which are defined as days
when either the control system is not operating within the operating
range established during the performance test or when monitoring
data are not collected.
TMASS_k=total mass of cement and solvent k used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during all
non-control operating days, grams.
p=number of cements and solvents used in the month that are routed
to a control device during all non-control operating days.

(4) Each monthly calculation is a compliance demonstration for the
purpose of this subpart.
(c) Methods to demonstrate compliance with the production-based
emission limits in Table 1 to this subpart, option 2. Use the methods
and equations in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this section to
demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the production-based
emission limits for tire production affected sources using the
compliance alternatives described in Sec. 63.5985(b) and (c).
(1) Methods to determine the mass percent of each HAP in cements
and solvents. Determine the mass percent of all HAP in cements and
solvents using the applicable methods specified in paragraph (a) of
this section.
(2) Quantity of rubber used. Determine your quantity of rubber used
(megagrams) by accounting for the total mass of mixed rubber compound
that is delivered to the tire production operation.
(3) Compliance without use of an add-on control device. If you do
not use an add-on control device to meet the emission limits, use
Equation 3 of this section to calculate the monthly HAP emission rate
in grams of HAP emitted per megagram of rubber used, using the quantity
of rubber used per month (megagrams), as determined in paragraph (c)(2)
of this section so that the monthly average HAP emission does not
exceed the HAP emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart, option 2.
Equation 3 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.002

Where:

E_month=mass of all HAP emitted per total mass of rubber
used month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
cement and solvent i, as purchased, determined in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section.
TMASS_i=total mass of cement and solvent i used in the
month, grams.
n=number of cements and solvents used in the month.
RMASS=total mass of rubber used per month, megagrams.

(4) Compliance with use of an add-on control device. If you use a
control device to meet the emission limits, use Equation 4 of this
section to calculate the monthly HAP emission rate in grams of HAP
emitted per megagram of rubber used, using the quantity of rubber used
per month (megagrams), as determined in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section so that the monthly average HAP emission does not exceed the
HAP emission limit in Table 1 of this subpart, option 2. Equation 4
follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.003

Where:

E_month=mass of all HAP emitted per total mass rubber used
per month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
cement and solvent i, as purchased, determined in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section for cements and solvents used in the
month in processes that are not routed to a control device.
TMASS_i=total mass of cement and solvent i used in the
month in processes that are not routed to a control device, grams.
n=number of cements and solvents used in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device.
HAP_j=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
cement and solvent j, as purchased, determined in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section, for cements and solvents used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during
operating days, which are defined as days when the control system is
operating within the operating range established during the
performance test and when monitoring data are collected.
TMASS_j=total mass of cement and solvent j used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during all
operating days.
EFF=efficiency of the control system determined during the
performance test (capture system efficiency multiplied by the
control device efficiency), percent.
m=number of cements and solvents used in the month that are routed
to a control device during all operating days.
HAP_k=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in cement and solvent k, as purchased, for cements and
solvents used in the month in processes that are routed to a control
device during non-control operating days, which are defined as days
when either the control system is not operating within the operating
range established during the performance test or when monitoring
data are not collected.
TMASS_k=total mass of cement and solvent k used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during all
non-control operating days, grams.
p=number of cements and solvents used in the month that are routed
to a control device during all non-control operating days.
RMASS=total mass of rubber used per month, megagrams.

(5) Each monthly calculation is a compliance demonstration for the
purpose of this subpart.
(d) Specific compliance demonstration requirements for tire
production affected sources. (1) Conduct any required compliance
demonstration according to the requirements in Sec. 63.5993.
(2) If you are demonstrating compliance with the HAP constituent
option in Table 1 to this subpart, option 1, conduct the compliance
demonstration using cements and solvents that are representative of
cements and solvents typically used at your tire production affected
source.
(3) Establish an operating range that corresponds to the control
efficiency as described in Table 5 to this subpart.
(e) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions from add-on
control devices. If you want to take credit in Equations 2 and 4 of
this

[[Page 45604]]

section for HAP emissions reduced using a control system, you must meet
the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Monitor the established operating parameters as appropriate.
(i) If you use a thermal oxidizer, monitor the firebox secondary
chamber temperature.
(ii) If you use a carbon adsorber, monitor the total regeneration
stream mass or volumetric flow for each regeneration cycle, and the
carbon bed temperature after each regeneration, and within 15 minutes
of completing any cooling cycle.
(iii) If you use a control device other than a thermal oxidizer or
a regenerative carbon adsorber, install and operate a continuous
parameter monitoring system according to your site-specific performance
test plan submitted according to Sec. 63.7(c)(2)(i).
(iv) If you use a permanent total enclosure, monitor the face
velocity across the natural draft openings (NDO) in the enclosure.
Also, if you use an enclosure, monitor to ensure that the sizes of the
NDO have not changed, that there are no new NDO, and that a HAP
emission source has not been moved closer to an NDO since the last
compliance demonstration was conducted.
(v) If you use other capture systems, monitor the parameters
identified in your monitoring plan.
(2) Maintain the operating parameters within the operating range
established during the compliance demonstration.
(f) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions when streams
are combined. When performing material balances to demonstrate
compliance, if the storage of materials, exhaust, or the wastewater
from more than one affected source are combined at the point where
control systems are applied, any credit for emissions reductions needs
to be prorated among the affected sources based on the ratio of their
contribution to the uncontrolled emissions.

Sec. 63.5995 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?

(a) For each operating parameter that you are required by
Sec. 63.5994(e)(1) to monitor, you must install, operate, and maintain
a continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.5990(e) and (f) and in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (6) of this section.
(1) You must operate your CPMS at all times that the process is
operating.
(2) You must collect data from at least four equally spaced periods
each hour.
(3) For at least 75 percent of the hours in an operating day, you
must have valid data (as defined in your site-specific monitoring plan)
for at least four equally spaced periods each hour.
(4) For each hour that you have valid data from at least four
equally spaced periods, you must calculate the hourly average value
using all valid data.
(5) You must calculate the daily average using all of the hourly
averages calculated according to paragraph (a)(3) of this section for
the 24-hour period.
(6) You must record the results for each inspection, calibration,
and validation check as specified in your site-specific monitoring
plan.
(b) For each temperature monitoring device, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) through (8) of this section.
(1) Locate the temperature sensor in a position that provides a
representative temperature.
(2) For a non-cryogenic temperature range, use a temperature sensor
with a minimum measurement sensitivity of 2.2 degrees centigrade or
0.75 percent of the temperature value, whichever is larger.
(3) For a cryogenic temperature range, use a temperature sensor
with a minimum measurement sensitivity of 2.2 degrees centigrade or 2
percent of the temperature value, whichever is larger.
(4) Shield the temperature sensor system from electromagnetic
interference and chemical contaminants.
(5) If a chart recorder is used, it must have a sensitivity in the
minor division of at least 20 degrees Fahrenheit.
(6) Perform an electronic calibration at least semiannually
according to the procedures in the manufacturer's owners manual.
Following the electronic calibration, you must conduct a temperature
sensor validation check in which a second or redundant temperature
sensor placed near the process temperature sensor must yield a reading
within 16.7 degrees centigrade of the process temperature sensor's
reading.
(7) Conduct calibration and validation checks any time the sensor
exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature
range or install a new temperature sensor.
(8) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity and all
electrical connections for continuity, oxidation, and galvanic
corrosion.
(c) For each integrating regeneration stream flow monitoring device
associated with a carbon adsorber, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a) and (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Use a device that has an accuracy of ±10 percent or
better.
(2) Use a device that is capable of recording the total
regeneration stream mass or volumetric flow for each regeneration
cycle.
(d) For any other control device, or for other capture systems,
ensure that the CPMS is operated according to a monitoring plan
submitted to the Administrator with the compliance status report
required by Sec. 63.9(h). The monitoring plan must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) through (3) of this section.
Conduct monitoring in accordance with the plan submitted to the
Administrator unless comments received from the Administrator require
an alternate monitoring scheme.
(1) Identify the operating parameter to be monitored to ensure that
the control or capture efficiency measured during the initial
compliance test is maintained.
(2) Discuss why this parameter is appropriate for demonstrating
ongoing compliance.
(3) Identify the specific monitoring procedures.
(e) For each pressure differential monitoring device, you must meet
the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (e)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Conduct a quarterly EPA Method 2 procedure (found in 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A) on the applicable NDOs and use the results to
calibrate the pressure monitor if the difference in results are greater
than 10 percent.
(2) Inspect the NDO monthly to ensure that their size has not
changed, that there are no new NDO, and that no HAP sources have been
moved closer to the NDO than when the last performance test was
conducted.

Sec. 63.5996 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for tire production affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission
limit that applies to you according to Table 6 to this subpart.
(b) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status
containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.6009(e).

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Tire Cord Production
Affected Sources

Sec. 63.5997 How do I conduct tests and procedures for tire cord
production affected sources?

(a) Methods to determine the mass percent of each HAP in coatings.
(1) To determine the HAP content in the

[[Page 45605]]

coating used at your tire cord production affected source, use EPA
Method 311 of appendix A of this part, an approved alternative method,
or any other reasonable means for determining the HAP content of your
coatings. Other reasonable means include, but are not limited to: an
MSDS, provided it contains appropriate information; a CPDS; or a
manufacturer's HAP data sheet. You are not required to test the
materials that you use, but the Administrator may require a test using
EPA Method 311 (or an approved alternative method) to confirm the
reported HAP content. If the results of an analysis by EPA Method 311
are different from the HAP content determined by another means, the EPA
Method 311 results will govern compliance determinations.
(2) Unless you demonstrate otherwise, the HAP content analysis must
be based on coatings prior to any cross-linking reactions, i.e.,
curing. However, you may account for differences in HAP emissions
resulting from chemical reactions based on the conversion rates of the
individual coating formulations, chemistry demonstrations, or other
demonstrations that are verifiable to the approving agency. Use the
revised value in your compliance demonstration in the relevant
equations in paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Methods to determine compliance with the emission limits in
Table 2 to this subpart, option 1. Use the equations in this paragraph
(b) to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission
limits for tire cord production sources using the compliance
alternatives described in Sec. 63.5987(a) and (b).
(1) Determine mass percent of HAP. Determine the mass percent of
all HAP in each coating according to the procedures in paragraph (a) of
this section.
(2) Compliance without use of an add-on control device. If you do
not use an add-on control device to meet the emission limits, use
Equation 1 of this section to calculate the monthly HAP emission rate
in grams of HAP emitted per megagram of fabric processed at the tire
cord production source to show that the monthly average HAP emissions
do not exceed the emission limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option 1.
Equation 1 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.004

Where:

E_month=mass of all HAP emitted per total mass of fabric
processed in the month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
the coating i, prior to curing and including any application station
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (a) of this
section.
TCOAT_i=total mass of coating i made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month, grams.
n=number of coatings used in the month.
TFAB=total mass of fabric processed in the month, megagrams.

(3) Compliance with use of an add-on control device. If you use a
control device to meet the emission limits, use Equation 2 of this
section to calculate the monthly HAP emission rate in grams of HAP
emitted per megagram of fabric processed to show that the monthly
average HAP emissions do not exceed the HAP emission limit in Table 2
of this subpart, option 1. Equation 2 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.005

Where:

E_month=mass of all HAP emitted per total mass of fabric
processed in the month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
coating i, prior to curing and including any application stations
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (a) of this
section, for coatings used in the month in processes that are not
routed to a control device.
TCOAT_i=total mass of coating i made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device, grams.
n=number of coatings used in the month in processes that are not
routed to a control device.
HAP_j=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
coating j, prior to curing and including any application station
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (a) of this
section, for coatings used in the month in processes that are routed
to a control device during operating days, which are defined as days
when the control system is operating within the operating range
established during the performance test and when monitoring data are
collected.
TCOAT_j=total mass of coating j made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during all operating days, grams.
EFF=efficiency of the control system determined during the
performance test (capture system efficiency multiplied by the
control device efficiency), percent.
m=number of coatings used in the month that are routed to a control
device during all operating days.
HAP_k=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of all HAP in
coating k, prior to curing and including any application station
dilution, for coatings used in the month in processes that are
routed to a control device during non-control operating days, which
are defined as days when either the control system is not operating
within the operating range established during the performance test
or when monitoring data are not collected.
TCOAT_k=total mass of coating k made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during all non-control operating
days, grams.
p=number of coatings used in the month that are routed to a control
device during all non-control operating days.
TFAB=total mass of fabric processed in the month, megagrams.

(4) Each monthly calculation is a compliance demonstration for the
purpose of this subpart.
(c) Methods to determine compliance with the emission limits in
Table 2 of this subpart, option 2. Use the equations in this paragraph
(c) to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission
limits for tire cord production sources using the compliance
alternatives described in Sec. 63.5987(a) and (b).
(1) Determine the mass percent of each HAP in each coating
according to the procedures in paragraph (a) of this section.
(2) Use Equation 3 of this section to calculate the monthly average
HAP emission rate when complying by using coatings without using an
add-on control device to show that the monthly average HAP emissions do
not exceed the emission limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option 2.
Equation 3 follows:

[[Page 45606]]

[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.006

Where:

(3) Use Equation 4 of this section to calculate the monthly average
HAP emission rate when complying by using an add-on control device to
show that the monthly average HAP emissions do not exceed the emission
limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option 2. Equation 4 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.007

Where:

E_month=mass of the specific HAP emitted per total mass of
coatings from all coatings made and used in tire cord fabric
production per month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in coating i, prior to curing and including any
application station dilution, determined in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section, for coatings used in the month in
processes that are not routed to a control device.
TCOAT_i=total mass of coating i made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device, grams.
n=number of coatings used in the month in processes that are not
routed to a control device.
HAP_j=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in coating j, prior to curing and including any
application station dilution, determined in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section, for coatings used in the month in
processes that are routed to a control device during operating days,
which are defined as days when the control system is operating
within the operating range established during the performance test
and when monitoring data are collected.
TCOAT_j=total mass of coating i made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during all operating days, grams.
EFF=efficiency of the control system determined during the
performance test (capture system efficiency multiplied by the
control device efficiency), percent.
m=number of coatings used in the month that are routed to a control
device during all operating days.
HAP_k=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in coating k, prior to curing and including any
application station dilution, for coatings used in the month in
processes that are routed to a control device during non-control
operating days, which are defined as days when either the control
system is not operating within the operating range established
during the performance test or when monitoring data are not
collected.
TCOAT_k=total mass of coating i made and used for
application to fabric at the facility in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during all non-control operating
days, grams.
p = number of coatings used in the month that are routed to a
control device during all non-control operating days.
(4) Each monthly calculation is a compliance demonstration for
the purpose of this subpart.
(d) Specific compliance demonstration requirements for tire cord
production affected sources. (1) Conduct any required compliance
demonstrations according to the requirements in Sec. 63.5993.
(2) Conduct the compliance demonstration using coatings with
average mass percent HAP content that are representative of the
coatings typically used at your tire cord production affected
source.
(3) Establish an operating range that corresponds to the control
efficiency as described in Table 5 to this subpart.
(e) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions from add-on
control devices. If you want to take credit in Equations 2 and 4 of
this section for HAP emissions reduced using a control system, you
must meet the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) Monitor the established operating parameters as appropriate.
(i) If you use a thermal oxidizer, continuously monitor the
firebox secondary chamber temperature.
(ii) If you use a carbon adsorber, monitor the total
regeneration stream mass or volumetric flow for each regeneration
cycle and the carbon bed temperature after each regeneration and
within 15 minutes of completing any cooling cycle.
(iii) If you use a control device other than a thermal oxidizer
or a regenerative carbon adsorber, install and operate a continuous
parameter monitoring system according to your site-specific
performance test plan submitted according to Sec. 63.7(c)(2)(i).
(iv) If you use a permanent total enclosure, monitor the face
velocity across the NDO in the enclosure. Also, if you use an
enclosure, monitor to ensure that the sizes of the NDO have not
changed, that there are no new NDO, and that a HAP emission source
has not been moved closer to an NDO since the last performance test
was conducted.
(v) If you use other capture systems, monitor the parameters
identified in your monitoring plan.
(2) Maintain the operating parameter within the operating range
established during the compliance demonstration.
(f) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions when streams
are combined. When performing material balances to demonstrate
compliance, if the storage of materials, exhaust, or the wastewater
from more than one affected source are combined at the point where
control systems are applied, any credit for emissions reductions
needs to be prorated among the affected sources based on the ratio
of their contribution to the uncontrolled emissions.

Sec. 63.5998 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?

For each operating parameter that you are required by
Sec. 63.5997(e)(1) to monitor, you must install, operate, and maintain
a continuous parameter monitoring system according to the provisions in
Sec. 63.5995(a) through (e).

[[Page 45607]]

Sec. 63.5999 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for tire cord production affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission
limit that applies to you according to Table 7 to this subpart.
(b) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status
containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.6009(e).

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements for Puncture Sealant
Application Affected Sources

Sec. 63.6000 How do I conduct tests and procedures for puncture
sealant application affected sources?

(a) Methods to determine compliance with the puncture sealant
application emission limitations in Table 3 to this subpart. Use the
methods and equations in paragraph (b) of this section to demonstrate
initial and continuous compliance with the overall control efficiency
compliance alternatives described in Sec. 63.5989(a) and (b). Use the
methods and equations in paragraphs (c) through (g) of this section to
demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the HAP constituent
compliance alternative described in Sec. 63.5989(c) and (d).
(b) Methods to determine compliance with the emission limits in
Table 3 to this subpart, option 1. Follow the test procedures described
in Sec. 63.5993 to determine the overall control efficiency of your
system.
(1) You must also meet the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(i) Conduct the performance test using a puncture sealant with an
average mass percent HAP content that is representative of the puncture
sealants typically used at your puncture sealant application affected
source.
(ii) Establish all applicable operating limit ranges that
correspond to the control system efficiency as described in Table 5 to
this subpart.
(2) Use Equation 1 of this section to calculate the overall
efficiency of the control system. If you have a permanent total
enclosure that satisfies EPA Method 204 (found in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix M) criteria, assume 100 percent capture efficiency for
variable F. Equation 1 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.008

Where:

R=overall control system efficiency, percent.
F=capture efficiency of the capture system on add-on control device,
percent, determined during the performance test.
E=control efficiency of add-on control device k, percent, determined
during the performance test.

(3) Monitor the established operating limits as appropriate.
(i) If you use a thermal oxidizer, monitor the firebox secondary
chamber temperature.
(ii) If you use a carbon adsorber, monitor the total regeneration
stream mass or volumetric flow for each regeneration cycle, and the
carbon bed temperature after each regeneration, and within 15 minutes
of completing any cooling cycle.
(iii) For each control device used other than a thermal oxidizer or
a regenerative carbon adsorber, install and operate a continuous
parameter monitoring system according to your site-specific performance
test plan submitted according to Sec. 63.7(c)(2)(i).
(iv) If you use a permanent total enclosure, monitor the face
velocity across the NDO in the enclosure. Also, if you use an
enclosure, monitor to ensure that the sizes of the NDO have not
changed, that there are no new NDO, and that a HAP emission source has
not been moved closer to an NDO since the last performance test was
conducted.
(v) If you use other capture systems, monitor the parameters
identified in your monitoring plan.
(vi) Maintain the operating parameter within the operating range
established during the performance test.
(c) Methods to determine the mass percent of each HAP in puncture
sealants. To determine the HAP content in the puncture sealant used at
your puncture sealant application affected source, use EPA Method 311
of appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, an approved alternative method, or any
other reasonable means for determining the HAP content of your puncture
sealants. Other reasonable means include, but are not limited to: an
MSDS, provided it contains appropriate information; a CPDS; or a
manufacturer's hazardous air pollutant data sheet. You are not required
to test the materials that you use, but the Administrator may require a
test using EPA Method 311 (or an approved alternative method) to
confirm the reported HAP content. If the results of an analysis by EPA
Method 311 are different from the HAP content determined by another
means, the EPA Method 311 results will govern compliance
determinations.
(d) Methods to determine compliance with the emission limits in
Table 3 to this subpart, option 2. Use the equations in this paragraph
(d) to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the HAP
constituent emission limits for puncture sealant application affected
sources using the compliance alternatives described in Sec. 63.5989(c)
and (d).
(1) Use Equation 2 of this section to calculate the monthly average
HAP emission rate when complying by using puncture sealants without
using an add-on control device to show that the monthly average HAP
emissions do not exceed the emission limits in Table 3 to this subpart,
option 2. Equation 2 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.009

Where:

E_month=mass of the specific HAP emitted per total mass of
puncture sealants from all puncture sealants used at the puncture

[[Page 45608]]

sealant affected source per month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in puncture sealant i, including any application booth
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section.
TPSEAL_i=total mass of puncture sealant i used in the
month, grams.
n=number of puncture sealants used in the month.

(2) Use Equation 3 of this section to calculate the monthly average
HAP emission rate when complying by using puncture sealants by using an
add-on control device to show that the monthly average HAP emissions do
not exceed the emission limits in Table 3 to this subpart, option 2.
Equation 3 follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR09JY02.010

Where:

E_month=mass of the specific HAP emitted per total mass of
puncture sealants used at the puncture sealant affected source per
month, grams per megagram.
HAP_i=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP in puncture sealant i, including any application booth
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section for puncture sealants used in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device.
TPSEAL_i=total mass of puncture sealant i used in the
month in processes that are not routed to a control device, gram.
n=number of puncture sealants used in the month in processes that
are not routed to a control device.
HAP_j=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP, in puncture sealant j, including any application booth
dilution, determined in accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section, for puncture sealants used in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during operating days, which are
defined as days when the control system is operating within the
operating range established during the performance test and when
monitoring data are collected.
TPSEAL_j=total mass of puncture sealant j used in the
month in processes that are routed to a control device during all
operating days, grams.
EFF=efficiency of the control system determined during the
performance test (capture system efficiency multiplied by the
control device efficiency), percent.
m=number of puncture sealants used in the month that are routed to a
control device during all operating days.
HAP_k=mass percent, expressed as a decimal, of the
specific HAP, in puncture sealant k, including any application booth
dilution, for puncture sealants used in the month in processes that
are routed to a control device during non-control operating days,
which are defined as days when either the control system is not
operating within the operating range established during the
performance test or when monitoring data are not collected.
TPSEAL_k=total mass of total mass of puncture sealant k
used in the month in processes that are routed to a control device
during all non-control operating days, grams.
p=number of puncture sealants used in the month that are routed to a
control device during all non-control operating days.

(3) Each monthly calculation is a compliance demonstration for the
purpose of this subpart.
(e) Specific compliance demonstration requirements for puncture
sealant application affected sources. (1) Conduct any required
compliance demonstrations according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.5993.
(2) Conduct the compliance demonstration using a puncture sealant
with average mass percent HAP content that is representative of the
puncture sealants typically used at your puncture sealant application
affected source.
(3) Establish an operating range that corresponds to the
appropriate control efficiency described in Table 5 to this subpart.
(f) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions from add-on
control devices. If you want to take credit in Equation 3 of this
section for HAP emissions reduced using a control system, you must
monitor the established operating parameters as appropriate and meet
the requirements in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(g) How to take credit for HAP emissions reductions when streams
are combined. When performing material balances to demonstrate
compliance, if the storage of materials, exhaust, or the wastewater
from more than one affected source are combined at the point where
control systems are applied, any credit for emissions reductions needs
to be prorated among the affected sources based on the ratio of their
contribution to the uncontrolled emissions.

Sec. 63.6001 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?

For each operating limit that you are required by
Sec. 63.6000(b)(3) to monitor or each operating parameter that you are
required by Sec. 63.6000(f) to monitor, you must install, operate, and
maintain a continuous parameter monitoring system according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.5995(a) through (e).

Sec. 63.6002 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limits for puncture sealant application affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission
limit that applies to you according to Table 8 to this subpart.
(b) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status
containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.6009(e).

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Tire Production Affected Sources

Sec. 63.6003 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire production
affected sources?

(a) You must monitor and collect data as specified in Table 9 to
this subpart.
(b) Except for periods of monitoring malfunctions, associated
repairs, and required quality assurance or control activities
(including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and
span adjustments), you must monitor continuously (or collect data at
all required intervals) while the affected source is operating. This
includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction when the
affected source is operating.
(c) In data average calculations and calculations used to report
emission or operating levels, you may not use data recorded during
periods of monitoring malfunctions or associated repairs, or recorded
during required quality assurance or control activities. Such data may
not be used in fulfilling any applicable minimum data availability
requirement. You must use all the data collected during all other
periods in assessing the operation of the control device and associated
control system.

[[Page 45609]]

Sec. 63.6004 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits for tire production affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each applicable
limit in Table 1 to this subpart using the methods specified in Table
10 to this subpart.
(b) You must report each instance in which you did not meet an
emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart. You must also report each
instance in which you did not meet the applicable requirements in Table
10 to this subpart. These instances are deviations from the emission
limits in this subpart. The deviations must be reported in accordance
with the requirements in Sec. 63.6010(e).
(c) You also must meet the following requirements if you are
complying with the purchase alternative for tire production sources
described in Sec. 63.5985(a):
(1) If, after you submit the Notification of Compliance Status, you
use a cement or solvent for which you have not previously verified
percent HAP mass using the methods in Sec. 63.5994(a), you must verify
that each cement and solvent used in the affected source meets the
emission limit, using any of the methods in Sec. 63.5994(a).
(2) You must update the list of all the cements and solvents used
at the affected source.
(3) With the compliance report for the reporting period during
which you used the new cement or solvent, you must submit the updated
list of all cements and solvents and a statement certifying that, as
purchased, each cement and solvent used at the affected source during
the reporting period met the emission limits in Table 1 to this
subpart.

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Tire Cord Production Affected
Sources

Sec. 63.6005 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire cord production
affected sources?

(a) You must monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limits for tire cord production affected
sources as specified in Table 11 to this subpart.
(b) You must monitor and collect data according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.6003(b) and (c).

Sec. 63.6006 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limits for tire cord production affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each applicable
emission limit in Table 2 to this subpart using the methods specified
in Table 12 to this subpart.
(b) You must report each instance in which you did not meet an
applicable emission limit in Table 2 to this subpart. You must also
report each instance in which you did not meet the applicable
requirements in Table 12 to this subpart. These instances are
deviations from the emission limits in this subpart. The deviations
must be reported in accordance with the requirements in
Sec. 63.6010(e).

Continuous Compliance Requirements for Puncture Sealant Application
Affected Sources

Sec. 63.6007 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the emission limitations for puncture
sealant application affected sources?

(a) You must monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the emission limitations for puncture sealant
application affected sources as specified in Table 13 to this subpart.
(b) You must monitor and collect data according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.6003(b) and (c).

Sec. 63.6008 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations for puncture sealant application affected sources?

(a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each applicable
emission limitation in Tables 3 and 4 to this subpart using the methods
specified in Table 14 to this subpart.
(b) You must report each instance in which you did not meet an
applicable emission limit in Table 3 to this subpart. You must also
report each instance in which you did not meet the applicable
requirements in Table 14 to this subpart. These instances are
deviations from the emission limits in this subpart. The deviations
must be reported in accordance with the requirements in
Sec. 63.6010(e).

Notifications, Reports, and Records

Sec. 63.6009 What notifications must I submit and when?

(a) You must submit all of the notifications in Secs. 63.7 (b) and
(c), 63.8(f) (4) and (6), and 63.9 (b) through (e) and (h) that apply
to you by the dates specified.
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before July 9, 2002, you must submit an Initial Notification not
later than November 6, 2002.
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(3), if you startup your new or
reconstructed affected source on or after July 9, 2002, you must submit
an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days after you
become subject to this subpart.
(d) If you are required to conduct a performance test, you must
submit a notification of intent to conduct a performance test at least
60 calendar days before the performance test is scheduled to begin as
required in Sec. 63.7(b)(1).
(e) If you are required to conduct a performance test, design
evaluation, or other initial compliance demonstration as specified in
Tables 5 through 8 to this subpart, you must submit a Notification of
Compliance Status according to Sec. 63.9(h)(2)(ii). The Notification
must contain the information listed in Table 15 to this subpart for
compliance reports. The Notification of Compliance Status must be
submitted according to the following schedules, as appropriate:
(1) For each initial compliance demonstration required in Tables 6
through 8 to this subpart that does not include a performance test, you
must submit the Notification of Compliance Status before the close of
business on the 30th calendar day following the completion of the
initial compliance demonstration.
(2) For each initial compliance demonstration required in Tables 6
through 8 to this subpart that includes a performance test conducted
according to the requirements in Table 5 to this subpart, you must
submit the Notification of Compliance Status, including the performance
test results, before the close of business on the 60th calendar day
following the completion of the performance test according to
Sec. 63.10(d)(2).
(f) For each tire production affected source, the Notification of
Compliance Status must also identify the emission limit option in
Sec. 63.5984 and the compliance alternative in Sec. 63.5985 that you
have chosen to meet.
(g) For each tire production affected source complying with the
purchase compliance alternative in Sec. 63.5985(a), the Notification of
Compliance Status must also include the information listed in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) A list of each cement and solvent, as purchased, that is used
at the affected source and the manufacturer or supplier of each.
(2) The individual HAP content (percent by mass) of each cement and
solvent that is used.
(h) For each tire production or tire cord production affected
source using a control device, the Notification of Compliance Status
must also include the information in paragraphs (h) (1) and (2) of this
section for each operating

[[Page 45610]]

parameter in Secs. 63.5994(e)(1) and 63.5997(e)(1) that applies to you.
(1) The operating parameter value averaged over the full period of
the performance test (e.g., average secondary chamber firebox
temperature over the period of the performance test was 1,500 degrees
Fahrenheit).
(2) The operating parameter range within which HAP emissions are
reduced to the level corresponding to meeting the applicable emission
limits in Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart.
(i) For each puncture sealant application affected source using a
control device, the Notification of Compliance Status must include the
information in paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of this section for each
operating limit in Sec. 63.6000(b)(3) and each operating parameter in
Sec. 63.6000(f).
(1) The operating limit or operating parameter value averaged over
the full period of the performance test.
(2) The operating limit or operating parameter range within which
HAP emissions are reduced to the levels corresponding to meeting the
applicable emission limitations in Table 3 to this subpart.
(j) For each tire cord production affected source required to
assess the predominant use for coating web substrates as required by
Sec. 63.5981(b), you must submit a notice of the results of the
reassessment within 30 days of completing the reassessment. The notice
shall specify whether this subpart XXXX is still the applicable subpart
and, if it is not, which part 63 subpart is applicable.

Sec. 63.6010 What reports must I submit and when?

(a) You must submit each applicable report in Table 15 to this
subpart.
(b) Unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule for
submission of reports under Sec. 63.10(a), you must submit each report
by the date in Table 15 to this subpart and according to the
requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in
Sec. 63.5983 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is
the first date following the end of the first calendar half after the
compliance date that is specified for your source in Sec. 63.5983.
(2) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no
later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the
first calendar half after the compliance date that is specified for
your affected source in Sec. 63.5983.
(3) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
(4) Each subsequent compliance report must be postmarked or
delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the
first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period.
(5) For each affected source that is subject to permitting subparts
pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and if the permitting
authority has established dates for submitting semiannual reports
pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you
may submit the first and subsequent compliance reports according to the
dates the permitting authority has established instead of according to
the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
(c) The compliance report must contain information specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (10) of this section.
(1) Company name and address.
(2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the
report.
(3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting
period.
(4) If you had a startup, shutdown or malfunction during the
reporting period and you took actions consistent with your startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plan, the compliance report must include the
information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).
(5) If there are no deviations from any emission limitations
(emission limit or operating limit) that applies to you, a statement
that there were no deviations from the emission limitations during the
reporting period.
(6) If there were no periods during which the operating parameter
monitoring systems were out-of-control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7),
a statement that there were no periods during which the operating
parameter monitoring systems or CPMS were out-of-control during the
reporting period.
(7) For each tire production affected source, the emission limit
option in Sec. 63.5984 and the compliance alternative in Sec. 63.5985
that you have chosen to meet.
(8) For each tire production affected source complying with the
purchase compliance alternative in Sec. 63.5985(a), and for each annual
reporting period during which you use a cement and solvent that, as
purchased, was not included in the list submitted with the Notification
of Compliance Status in Sec. 63.6009(g), an updated list of all cements
and solvents used, as purchased, at the affected source. You must also
include a statement certifying that each cement and solvent, as
purchased, that was used at the affected source during the reporting
period met the HAP constituent limits (option 1) in Table 1 to this
subpart.
(9) For each tire cord production affected source, the emission
limit option in Sec. 63.5986 and the compliance alternative in
Sec. 63.5987 that you have chosen to meet.
(10) For each puncture sealant application affected source, the
emission limit option in Sec. 63.5988 and the compliance alternative in
Sec. 63.5989 that you have chosen to meet.
(d) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit
or operating limit) that occurs at an affected source where you are not
using a CPMS to comply with the emission limitations in this subpart,
the compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (4) and paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section. This
includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction when the
affected source is operating.
(1) The total operating time of each affected source during the
reporting period.
(2) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations
(including unknown cause, if applicable) and the corrective action
taken.
(e) Each affected source that has obtained a title V operating
permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 must report all
deviations as defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring
report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR
71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source submits a compliance report
(pursuant to Table 10 to this subpart along with, or as part of, the
semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or
40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) which includes all required information
concerning deviations from any emission limitation (including any
operating limit) or work practice requirement in this subpart,
submission of the compliance report shall be deemed to satisfy any
obligation to report the same deviations in the semiannual monitoring
report. However, submission of a compliance report shall not otherwise
affect any obligation the affected source may have to report deviations
from permit requirements to the permit authority.

[[Page 45611]]

(f) Upon notification to the Administrator that a tire production
affected source has eliminated or reformulated cement and solvent so
that the source can demonstrate compliance using the purchase
alternative in Sec. 63.5985(a), future compliance reports for this
affected source may be submitted annually.
(g) If acceptable to both the Administrator and you, you may submit
reports and notifications electronically.

Sec. 63.6011 What records must I keep?

(a) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (3) of this section.
(1) A copy of each notification and report that you submitted to
comply with this subpart, including all documentation supporting any
Initial Notification or Notification of Compliance Status that you
submitted, according to the requirements in Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).
(2) Records of performance tests as required in
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(viii).
(3) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(b) For each tire production affected source, you must keep the
records specified in Table 9 to this subpart to show continuous
compliance with each emission limit that applies to you.
(c) For each tire cord production affected source, you must keep
the records specified in Table 11 to this subpart to show continuous
compliance with each emission limit that applies to you.
(d) For each puncture sealant application affected source, you must
keep the records specified in Table 13 to this subpart to show
continuous compliance with each emission limit that applies to you.

Sec. 63.6012 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

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

Other Requirements and Information

Sec. 63.6013 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

Table 17 to this subpart shows which parts of the General
Provisions in Secs. 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.

Sec. 63.6014 Who implements and enforces this subpart?

(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the United
States Environmental Protection Agency, or a delegated authority such
as your State, local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA has delegated
authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency, in
addition to the U.S. EPA, has the authority to implement and enforce
this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find
out if implementation and enforcement of this subpart is delegated to
your State, local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that cannot be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the requirements in Secs. 63.5981
through 63.5984, 63.5986, and 63.5988.
(2) Approval of major changes to test methods under
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of major changes to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f) and
as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(4) Approval of major changes to recordkeeping and reporting under
Sec. 63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.

Sec. 63.6015 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act and in
Sec. 63.2, the General Provisions. The following are additional
definitions of terms used in this subpart:
As purchased means the condition of a cement and solvent as
delivered to the facility, prior to any mixing, blending, or dilution.
Capture system means a hood, enclosed room, or other means of
collecting organic HAP emissions into a closed-vent system that conveys
these emissions to a control device.
Cements and solvents means the collection of all organic chemicals,
mixtures of chemicals, and compounds used in the production of rubber
tires, including cements, solvents, and mixtures used as process aids.
Cements and solvents include, but are not limited to, tread end
cements, undertread cements, bead cements, tire building cements and
solvents, green tire spray, blemish repair paints, side wall protective
paints, marking inks, materials used to process equipment, and slab dip
mixtures. Cements and solvents do not include coatings or process aids
used in tire cord production, puncture sealant application, rubber
processing, or materials used to construct, repair, or maintain process
equipment, or chemicals and compounds that are not used in the tire
production process such as materials used in routine janitorial or
facility grounds maintenance, office supplies (e.g., dry-erase markers,
correction fluid), architectural paint, or any substance to the extent
it is used for personal, family, or household purposes, or is present
in the same form and concentration as a product packaged for
distribution to and use by the general public.
Coating means a compound or mixture of compounds that is applied to
a fabric substrate in the tire cord production operation that allows
the fabric to be prepared (e.g., by heating, setting, curing) for
incorporation into a rubber tire.
Components of rubber tires means any piece or part used in the
manufacture of rubber tires that becomes an integral portion of the
rubber tire when manufacture is complete and includes mixed rubber
compounds, sidewalls, tread, tire beads, and liners. Other components
often associated with rubber tires such as wheels, valve stems, tire
bladders and inner tubes are not considered components of rubber tires
for the purposes of these standards. Tire cord and puncture sealant,
although components of rubber tires, are considered as separate
affected sources in these standards and are defined separately.
Control device means a combustion device, recovery device,
recapture device, or any combination of these devices used for
recovering or oxidizing organic hazardous air pollutant vapors. Such
equipment includes, but is not limited to, absorbers, carbon adsorbers,
condensers, incinerators (oxidizers), flares, boilers, and process
heaters.
Control system efficiency means the percent of total volatile
organic compound emissions, as measured by EPA Method 25 or 25A (40 CFR
part 60, appendix A), recovered or destroyed by a control device
multiplied by the percent of total volatile organic compound emissions,
as measured by

[[Page 45612]]

Method 25 or 25A, that are captured and conveyed to the control device.
Deviation means any instance in which an affected source, subject
to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
(1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard;
(2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit; or
(3) Fails to meet any emission limitation (including any operating
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during startup,
shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is
permitted by this subpart.
Emission limitation means any emission limit, opacity limit,
operating limit, or visible emission limit.
Fabric processed means the amount of fabric coated and finished for
use in subsequent product manufacturing.
Mixed rubber compound means the material, commonly referred to as
rubber, from which rubber tires and components of rubber tires are
manufactured. For the purposes of this definition, mixed rubber
compound refers to the compound that leaves the rubber mixing process
(e.g., banburys) and is then processed into components from which
rubber tires are manufactured.
Monthly operating period means the period in the Notification of
Compliance Status report comprised of the number of operating days in
the month.
Operating day means the period defined in the Notification of
Compliance Status report. It may be from midnight to midnight or a
portion of a 24-hour period.
Process aid means a solvent, mixture, or cement used to facilitate
or assist in tire component identification; component storage; tire
building; tire curing; and tire repair, finishing, and identification.
Puncture sealant means a mixture that may include, but is not
limited to, solvent constituents, mixed rubber compound, and process
oil that is applied to the inner liner of a finished tire for the
purpose of sealing any future hole which might occur in the tread when
an object penetrates the tire.
Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40
CFR 70.2.
Rubber means the sum of the materials (for example, natural rubber,
synthetic rubber, carbon black, oils, sulfur) that are combined in
specific formulations for the sole purpose of making rubber tires or
components of rubber tires.
Rubber mixing means the physical process of combining materials for
use in rubber tire manufacturing to make mixed rubber compound using
the collection of banburys and associated drop mills.
Rubber tire means a continuous solid or pneumatic cushion typically
encircling a wheel and usually consisting, when pneumatic, of an
external rubber covering.
Rubber used means the total mass of mixed rubber compound delivered
to the tire production operations in a tire manufacturing facility
(e.g., the collection of warm-up mills, extruders, calendars, tire
building, or other tire component and tire manufacturing equipment).
Tire cord means any fabric (e.g., polyester, cotton) that is
treated with a coating mixture that allows the fabric to more readily
accept impregnation with rubber to become an integral part of a rubber
tire.

Tables to Subpart XXXX of Part 63

As stated in Sec. 63.5984, you must comply with the emission
limits for each new, reconstructed, or existing tire production
affected source in the following table:

Table 1 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Emission Limits for Tire Production
Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must meet the following emission
For each . . . limits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1--HAP constituent a. Emissions of each HAP in Table 16 to
option. this subpart must not exceed 1,000 grams
HAP per megagram (2 pounds per ton) of
total cements and solvents used at the
tire production affected source, and b.
Emissions of each HAP not in Table 16 to
this subpart must not exceed 10,000
grams HAP per megagram (20 pounds per
ton) of total cements and solvents used
at the tire production affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Option 2--production-based Emissions of HAP must not exceed 0.024
option. grams per megagram (0.00005 pounds per
ton) of rubber used at the tire
production affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.5986, you must comply with the emission
limits for tire cord production affected sources in the following
table:

Table 2 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Emission Limits for Tire Cord
Production Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must meet the following emission
For each . . . limits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1.a (production- Emissions must not exceed 280 grams HAP
based option)--Existing tire per megagram (0.56 pounds per ton) of
cord production affected fabric processed at the tire cord
source. production affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Option 1.b (production- Emissions must not exceed 220 grams HAP
based option)--New or per megagram (0.43 pounds per ton) of
reconstructed tire cord fabric processed at the tire cord
production affected source. production affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Option 2 (HAP constituent a. Emissions of each HAP in Table 16 to
option)--Existing, new or this subpart must not exceed 1,000 grams
reconstructed tire cord HAP per megagram (2 pounds per ton) of
production affected source. total coatings used at the tire cord
production affected source, and
b. Emissions of each HAP not in Table 16
to this subpart must not exceed 10,000
grams HAP per megagram (20 pounds per
ton) of total coatings used at the tire
cord production affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45613]]

As stated in Sec. 63.5988(a), you must comply with the emission
limits for puncture sealant application affected sources in the
following table:

Table 3 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Emission Limits for Puncture
Sealant Application Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must meet the following emission
For each . . . limit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Option 1.a (percent Reduce spray booth HAP (measured as
reduction option)--Existing volatile organic compounds (VOC))
puncture sealant application emissions by at least 86 percent by
spray booth. weight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Option 1.b (percent Reduce spray booth HAP (measured as VOC)
reduction option)--New or emissions by at least 95 percent by
reconstructed puncture weight.
sealant application spray
booth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Option 2 (HAP constituent a. Emissions of each HAP in Table 16 to
option) Existing, new or this subpart must not exceed 1,000 grams
reconstructed puncture HAP per megagram (2 pounds per ton) of
sealant application spray total puncture sealants used at the
booth. puncture sealant affected source, and
b. Emissions of each HAP not in Table 16
to this subpart must not exceed 10,000
grams HAP per megagram (20 pounds per
ton) of total puncture sealants used at
the puncture sealant affected source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.5988(b), you must comply with the operating
limits for puncture sealant application affected sources in the
following table unless you are meeting Option 2 (HAP constituent
option) limits in Table 3 to this subpart:

Table 4 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Operating Limits for Puncture
Sealant Application Control Devices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each . . . You must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermal oxidizer to which Maintain the daily average firebox
puncture sealant application secondary chamber temperature within the
spray booth emissions are operating range established during the
ducted. performance test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Carbon adsorber a. Maintain the total regeneration mass,
(regenerative) to which volumetric flow, and carbon bed
puncture sealant application temperature at the operating range
spray booth emissions are established during the performance test.
ducted. b. Reestablish the carbon bed temperature
to the levels established during the
performance test within 15 minutes of
each cooling cycle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Other type of control Maintain your operating parameter(s)
device to which puncture within the range(s) established during
sealant application spray the performance test and according to
booth emissions are ducted. your monitoring plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Permanent total enclosure a. Maintain the face velocity across any
capture system. NDO at least at the levels established
during the performance test.
b. Maintain the size of NDO, the number
of NDO, and their proximity to HAP
emission sources consistent with the
parameters established during the
performance test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Other capture system...... Maintain the operating parameters within
the range(s) established during the
performance test and according to your
monitoring plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.5993, you must comply with the requirements
for performance tests in the following table:

Table 5 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the following requirements .
If you are using . . . You must . . . Using . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A thermal oxidizer......... a. Measure total i. Method 25 or (1). Measure total HAP emissions and
HAP emissions, 25A performance determine the destruction efficiency of
determine test and data the control device using Method 25 (40
destruction from the CFR part 60, appendix A). You may use
efficiency of temperature Method 25A (40 CFR part 60, appendix A)
the control monitoring if: an exhaust gas volatile organic
device, and system. matter concentration of 50 parts per
establish a site- million (ppmv) or less is required to
specific firebox comply with the standard; the volatile
secondary organic matter concentration at the inlet
chamber to the control system and the required
temperature level of control are such that exhaust
limit at which volatile organic matter concentrations
the emission are 50 ppmv or less; or because of the
limit that high efficiency of the control device
applies to the exhaust, is 50 ppmv or less, regardless
affected source of the inlet concentration.
is achieved. (2). Collect firebox secondary chamber
temperature data every 15 minutes during
the entire period of the initial 3-hour
performance test, and determine the
average firebox temperature over the 3-
hour performance test by computing the
average of all of the 15-minute reading.

[[Page 45614]]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. A carbon adsorber a. Measure total i. Method 25 or (1). Measure total HAP emissions using
(regenerative). organic HAP Method 25A Method 25. You may use Method 25A, if an
emissions, performance test exhaust gas volatile organic matter
establish the and data from concentration of 50 ppmv or less; or
total the carbon bed because of the high efficiency of the
regeneration temperature control device, exhaust is 50 ppmv or
mass or monitoring less is required to comply with the
volumetric flow, device. standard; the volatile organic matter
and establish concentration (VOMC) at the inlet to the
the temperature control system and the required level of
of the carbon control are such that exhaust VOMCs are
bed within 15 50 ppmv or less; or because of the high
minutes of efficiency of the control device, exhaust
completing any is 50 ppmv or less, regardless of the
cooling cycles. inlet concentration.
The total (2). Collect carbon bed total regeneration
regeneration mass or volumetric flow for each carbon
mass, volumetric bed regeneration cycle during the
flow, and carbon performance test.
bed temperature (3). Record the maximum carbon bed
must be those at temperature data for each carbon bed
which the regeneration cycle during the performance
emission limit test.
that applies to (4). Record the carbon bed temperature
the affected within 15 minutes of each cooling cycle
source is during the performance test.
achieved. (5). Determine the average total
regeneration mass or the volumetric flow
over the 3-hour performance test by
computing the average of all of the
readings.
(6). Determine the average maximum carbon
bed temperature over the 3-hour
performance test by computing the average
of all of the readings.
(7). Determine the average carbon bed
temperature within 15 minutes of the
cooling cycle over the 3-hour performance
test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Any control device other Determine control EPA-approved Conduct the performance test according to
than a thermal oxidizer or device methods and data the site-specific plan submitted
carbon adsorber. efficiency and from the according to Sec. 63.7(c)(2)(i).
establish continuous
operating parameter
parameter limits monitoring
with which you system.
will demonstrate
continuous
compliance with
the emission
limit that
applies to the
affected source.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. All control devices........ a. Select Method 1 or 1A of Locate sampling sites at the inlet and
sampling ports' 40 CFR part 60, outlet of the control device and prior to
location and the appendix A. any releases to the atmosphere.
number of
traverse ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Determine Method 2, 2A, 2C,
velocity and 2D, 2F, or 2G of
volumetric flow 40 CFR part 60,
rate. appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Conduct gas Method 3, 3A, or
analysis. 3B of 40 CFR
part 60 appendix
A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Measure Method 4 of 40
moisture content CFR part 60,
of the stack gas. appendix A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. A permenent total enclosure Measure the face Method 204 of CFR Capture efficiency is assumed to be 100
(PTE). velocity across part 51, percent if the criteria are met
natural draft appendix M.
openings and
document the
design features
of the enclosure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Temporary total enclosure Construct a Method 204 and
(TTE). temporarily the appropriate
installed combination of
enclosure that Methods 204A-
allows you to 204F of 40 CFR
determine the part 51,
efficiency of appendix M.
your capture
system and
establish
operating
parameter limits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.5996, you must show initial compliance with
the emission limits for tire production affected sources according
to the following table:

[[Page 45615]]

Table 6 to Subpart XXXX of Part 62.--Initial Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected
Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission limit You have demonstrated initial compliance if
For . . . . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate for each monthly period that
purchase compliance alternative Table 1 to this subpart, option no cements and solvents were purchased and
in Sec. 63.5985(a). 1. used at the affected source containing HAP
in amounts above the composition limits in
Table 1 to this subpart, option 1,
determined according to the procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a) and (b)(1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative without using a 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
control device in Sec. 1 to this subpart, option 1, determined
63.5985(b). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a) and (b)(2).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative using a control 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
device in Sec. 63.5985(c). 1 to this subpart, option 1, determined
according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a), (b)(3) and (4), and (d)
through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the The production-based option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative without use of a 2. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
control device in Sec. 1 to this subpart, option 2, determined
63.5985(b). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(c)(1) through (3).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Sources complying with the The production-based option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative using a control 2. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
device in Sec. 63.5985(c). 1 to this subpart, option 2, determined
according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(c)(1) and (2), (4) and (5),
and (d) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.5999, you must show initial compliance with
the emission limits for tire cord production affected sources
according to the following table:

Table 7 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production
Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission limit You have demonstrated initial compliance if
For . . . . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the The production-based option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average alternative Table 2 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
without using an add-on control 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
device according to Sec. 2 to this subpart, option 1, determined
63.5987(a). according to the procedures in Sec.
63.5997(a), (b)(1) and (2).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the The production-based option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average alternative Table 2 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
using an add-on control device 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
according to Sec. 63.5987(b). 2 to this subpart, option 1, determined
according to the procedures in Sec.
63.5997(a), (b)(1) and (3) through (4), and
(d) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average alternative Table 2 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
without using an add-on control 2. do not exceed the HAP constituent emission
device according to Sec. limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option
63.5987(a). 2, determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.5997(a) and (c)(1)
and (2).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average alternative Table 2 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
using an add-on control device 2. do not exceed the HAP constituent emission
according to Sec. 63.5987(b). limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option
2, determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.5997(c)(1) and (3)
through (4), and (d) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6002, you must show initial compliance with
the emission limits for puncture sealant application affected
sources according to the following table:

[[Page 45616]]

Table 8 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With the Emission
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission limit You have demonstrated initial compliance if
For . . . . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the The percent reduction option in You demonstrate that you conducted the
overall control efficiency Table 3 to this subpart, option performance tests, determined the overall
alternative in Sec. 63.5989(a). 1. efficiency of your control system,
demonstrated that the applicable limits in
Table 3 to this subpart, option 1, have
been achieved, and established the
operating limits in Table 4 of this subpart
for your equipment according to the
applicable procedures in Sec. 63.6000(b).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the The percent reduction option in You demonstrate that you conducted the
permanent total enclosure and Table 3 to this subpart, option performance tests, determined the
control device efficiency 1. individual efficiencies of your capture and
alternative in Sec. 63.5989(b). control systems, demonstrated that the
applicable limits in Table 3 to this
subpart, option 1, have been achieved, and
established the operating limits in Table 4
of this subpart for your equipment
according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.6000(b).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
monthly average alternative in Table 3 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
Sec. 63.5989(c) without using 2. do not exceed the HAP constituent emission
an add-on control device. limits in Table 3 to this subpart, option
2, determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.6000(c) and (d)(1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in You demonstrate that the monthly average HAP
HAP constituent alternative in Table 3 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
Sec. 63.5989(d) by using an 2. do not exceed the HAP constituent emission
add-on control device. limits in Table 3 to this subpart, option
2, determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.6000(c), (d)(2) and
(3), and (e) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6003, you must maintain minimum data to
show continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire
production affected sources according to the following table:

Table 9 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Production Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . You must maintain . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with a. A list of each cement and solvent as
purchase compliance purchased and the manufacturer or
alternative in Sec. supplier of each.
63.5985(a) that are meeting b. A record of Method 311 (40 CFR part
the HAP constituent emission 60, appendix A), or approved alternative
limit (option 1) in Table 1 method, test results indicating the mass
to this subpart. percent of each HAP for each cement and
solvent as purchased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the a. A record of Method 311, or approved
monthly average compliance alternative method, test results,
alternative without using a indicating the mass percent of each HAP
control device according to for each cement and solvent, as
Sec. 63.5985(b) that are purchased.
meeting emission limits in b. The mass of each cement and solvent
Table 1 to this subpart. used each monthly operating period.
c. The total mass of rubber used each
monthly operating period (if complying
with the production-based emission
limit, option 2, in Table 1 to this
subpart).
d. All data and calculations used to
determine the monthly average mass
percent for each HAP for each monthly
operating period.
e. Monthly averages of emissions in the
appropriate emission limit format.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the a. The same information as sources
monthly average compliance complying with the monthly average
alternative using a control alternative without using a control
device according to Sec. device.
63.5985(c) that are meeting b. Records of operating parameter values
emission limits in Table 1 for each operating parameter that
to this subpart. applies to you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6004, you must show continuous compliance
with the emission limits for tire production affected sources
according to the following table:

Table 10 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Production
Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission limit You must demonstrate continuous compliance
For . . . . . . by . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with The HAP constituent option in Demonstrating for each monthly period that
purchase compliance alternative Table 1 to this subpart, option no cements and solvents were purchased and
in Sec. 63.5985(a). 1. used at the affected source containing HAP
in amounts above the composition limits in
Table 1 to this subpart, option 1,
determined according to the procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a) and (b)(1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45617]]

2. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in Demonstrating that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative without using a 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
control device according to 1 to this subpart, option 1, determined
Sec. 63.5985(b). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a) and (b)(2).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the The HAP constituent option in Demonstrating that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative using a control 1. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
device according to Sec. 1 to this subpart, option 1, determined
63.5985(c). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(a), (b)(3) and (4), and (d)
through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the The production-based option in Demonstrating that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative without using a 2. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
control device according to 1 to this subpart, option 2, determined
Sec. 63.5985(b). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(c)(1) through (3).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Sources complying with the The production-based option in Demonstrating that the monthly average HAP
monthly average compliance Table 1 to this subpart, option emissions for each monthly operating period
alternative using a control 2. do not exceed the emission limits in Table
device according to Sec. 1 to this subpart, option 2, determined
63.5985(c). according to the applicable procedures in
Sec. 63.5994(c)(1) and (2), (4) and (5),
and (d) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6005, you must maintain minimum data to
show continuous compliance with the emission limits for tire cord
production affected sources according to the following table:

Table 11 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production Affected
Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . You must maintain . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the a. A record of Method 311 (40 CFR part
monthly average alternative 63, appendix A), or approved alternative
without using an add-on method, test results, indicating the
control device according to mass percent of each HAP for coating
Sec. 63.5987(a) that are used.
meeting emission limits in b. The mass of each coating used each
Table 2 to this subpart. monthly operating period.
c. The total mass of fabric processed
each monthly operating period (if
complying with the production-based
option in Table 2 to this subpart,
option 1).
d. All data and calculations used to
determine the monthly average mass
percent for each HAP for each monthly
operating period.
e. Monthly averages of emissions in the
appropriate emission emission limit
format.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the a. The same information as sources
monthly average alternative complying with the monthly average
using an add-on control alternative without using a control
device according to Sec. device.
63.5987(b) that are meeting b. Records of operating parameter values
emission limits in Table 2 for each operating parameter that
to this subpart. applies to you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6006, you must show continuous compliance
with the emission limits for tire cord production affected sources
according to the following table:

Table 12 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With the Emission Limits for Tire Cord Production
Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following emission limit You must demonstrate continuous compliance
For . . . . . . by . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the In Table 2 to this subpart...... a. Demonstrating that the monthly average
monthly average compliance HAP emissions for each monthly operating
alternative without using an period do not exceed the emission limits in
add-on control device according Table 2 to this subpart, option 1,
to Sec. 63.5987(a). determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.5997(a) and (b)(1)
and (2).
b. Demonstrating that the monthly average
HAP emissions for each monthly operating
period do not exceed the HAP constituent
emission limits in Table 2 to this subpart,
option 2, determined according to the
applicable procedures in Sec. 63.5997(a)
and (c)(1) and (2).

[[Page 45618]]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the In Table 2 to this subpart...... a. Demonstrating that the monthly average
monthly average compliance HAP emissions for each monthly operating
alternative using an add-on period do not exceed the emission limits in
control device according to Table 2 to this subpart, option 1,
Sec. 63.5987(b). determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.5997(a), (b)(1) and
(3) through (4), and (d) through (f).
b. Demonstrating that the monthly HAP
emissions for each monthly operating period
do not exceed the HAP constituent emission
limits in Table 2 to this subpart, option
2, determined according to the applicable
procedures in Sec. 63.5997(c)(1) and (3)
through (4), and (d) through (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6007, you must maintain minimum data to
show continuous compliance with the emission limitations for
puncture sealant application affected sources according to the
following table:

Table 13 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Minimum Data for Continuous
Compliance With the Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant
Application Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For . . . You must maintain . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sources complying with the Records of the secondary chamber firebox
control efficiency temperature for 100 percent of the hours
alternatives in Sec. during which the process was operated.
63.5989(a) or (b) that are
meeting the percent
reduction emission limits in
Table 3 to this subpart,
option 1, using a thermal
oxidizer to reduce HAP
emissions so that they do
not exceed the operating
limits in Table 4 to this
subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Sources complying with the Records of the total regeneration stream
control efficiency mass or volumetric flow for each
alternatives in Sec. regeneration cycle for 100 percent of
63.5989(a) or (b) that are the hours during which the process was
meeting the percent operated, and a record of the carbon bed
reduction emission limits in temperature after each regeneration, and
Table 3 to this subpart, within 15 minutes of completing any
option 1, using a carbon cooling cycle for 100 percent of the
adsorber to reduce HAP hours during which the process was
emissions so that they do operated.
not exceed the operating
limits in Table 4 to this
subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Sources complying with the Records of operating parameter values for
control efficiency each operating parameter that applies to
alternatives in Sec. you.
63.5989(a) or (b) that are
meeting the percent
reduction emission limits in
Table 3 to this subpart,
option 1, using any other
type of control device to
which puncture sealant
application spray booth HAP
emissions are ducted so that
they do not exceed the
operating limits in Table 4
to this subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the Records of the face velocity across any
permanent total enclosure NDO, the size of NDO, the number of NDO,
compliance alternative in and their proximity to HAP emission
Sec. 63.5989(b) that are sources.
meeting the percent
reduction emission limits in
Table 3 to this subpart,
option 1, using a permanent
total enclosure capture
system to capture HAP
emissions so that they do
not exceed the operating
limits in Table 4 to this
subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Sources complying with the Records of operating parameter values for
overall control efficiency each operating parameter that applies to
alternative in Sec. you.
63.5989(a) that are meeting
the percent reduction
emission limits in Table 3
to this subpart, option 1,
using any other capture
system to capture HAP
emissions so that they do
not exceed the operating
limits in Table 4 to this
subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Sources complying with the a. A record of Method 311 (40 CFR part
monthly average alternative 63, appendix A), or approved alternative
without using an add-on method, test results, indicating the
control device according to mass percent of each HAP for puncture
Sec. 63.5988(a) that are sealant used.
meeting the HAP constituent b. The mass of each puncture sealant used
emission limits in Table 3 each monthly operating period.
to this subpart, option 2. c. All data and calculations used to
determine the monthly average mass
percent for each HAP for each monthly
operating period.
d. Monthly averages of emissions in the
appropriate emission limit format.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45619]]

7. Sources complying with the a. The same information as sources
monthly average alternative complying with the monthly average
using an add-on control alternative that are not using a control
device according to Sec. device.
63.5988(a) that are meeting b. Records of operating parameter values
the HAP constituent emission for each operating parameter that
limits in Table 3 to this applies to you.
subpart, option 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6008, you must show continuous compliance
with the emission limitations for puncture sealant application
affected sources according to the following table:

Table 14 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With the
Emission Limitations for Puncture Sealant Application Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must demonstrate continuous
For . . . compliance by . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each carbon adsorber used a. Monitoring and recording every 15
to comply with the operating minutes the total regeneration stream
limits in Table 4 to this mass or volumetric flow, and the carbon
subpart. bed temperature after each regeneration,
and within 15 minutes of completing any
cooling cycle, and
b. Maintaining the total regeneration
stream mass or volumetric flow, and the
carbon bed temperature after each
regeneration, and within 15 minutes of
completing any cooling cycle within the
operating levels established during your
performance test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Each thermal oxidizer used a. Continuously monitoring and recording
to comply with operating the firebox temperature every 15
limits in Table 4 to this minutes, and
subpart. b. Maintaining the daily average firebox
temperature within the operating level
established during your performance
test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Other ``add-on'' control Continuously monitoring and recording
or capture system hardware specified parameters identified through
used to comply with the compliance testing and identified in the
operating limits in Table 4 Notification of Compliance Status
to this subpart. report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sources complying with the Demonstrating that the monthly average
monthly average compliance HAP emissions for each monthly operating
alternative without using an period do not exceed the HAP constituent
add-on control device emission limits in Table 3 to this
according to Sec. subpart, option 2, determined according
63.5989(c) that are meeting to the applicable procedures in Sec.
the HAP constituent emission 63.6000(c) and (d)(1).
limits in Table 3 to this
subpart, option 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Sources complying with the Demonstrating that the monthly average
monthly average compliance HAP emissions for each monthly operating
alternative by using an add- period do not exceed the HAP constituent
on control device according emission limits in Table 3 to this
to Sec. 63.5989(d) that are subpart, option 2, determined according
the HAP constituent emission to the applicable procedures in Sec.
limits in Table 3 to this 63.6000(c), (d)(2) and (3), and (e)
subpart, option 2. through (g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6010, you must submit each report that
applies to you according to the following table:

Table 15 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Requirements for Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must submit the report
You must submit a(n) The report must contain . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Compliance report............... a. If there are no deviations from any emission Semiannually according to
limitations that apply to you, a statement the requirements in Sec.
that there were no deviations from the 63.6010(b), unless you
emission limitations during the reporting meet the requirements for
period. If there were no periods during which annual reporting in Sec.
the CPMS was out-of-control as specified in 63.6010(f).
Sec. 63.8(c)(7), a statement that there were
no periods during which the CPMS was out-of-
control during the reporting period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. If you have a deviation from any emission Semiannually according to
limitation during the reporting period at an the requirements in Sec.
affected source where you are not using a 63.6010(b), unless you
CPMS, the report must contain the information meet the requirements for
in Sec. 63.6010(d). If the deviation occurred annual reporting in Sec.
at a source where you are using a CMPS or if 63.6010(f).
there were periods during which the CPMS were
out-of-control as specified in Sec.
63.8(c)(7), the report must contain the
information required by Sec. 63.5990(f)(3).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. If you had a startup, shutdown or Semiannually according to
malfunction during the reporting period and the requirements in Sec.
you took actions consistent with your startup, 63.6010(b), unless you
shutdown, and malfunction plan, the compliance meet the requirements for
report must include the information in Sec. annual reporting in Sec.
63.10(d)(5)(i). 63.6010(f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45620]]

2. Immediate startup, shutdown, and a. Actions taken for the event................. By fax or telephone within
malfunction report if you had a 2 working days after
startup, shutdown, or malfunction starting actions
during the reporting period that inconsistent with the
is not consistent with your plan.
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
plan..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. The information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii).... By letter within 7 working
days after the end of the
event unless you have
made alternative
arrangements with the
permitting authority
(Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii)).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must use the information listed in the following table to
determine which emission limit in the HAP constituent options in
Tables 1 through 3 to this subpart is applicable to you:

Table 16 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Selected Hazardous Air Pollutants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAS No. Selected hazardous air pollutants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50000............................. Formaldehyde
51796............................. Ethyl carbamate (Urethane)
53963............................. 2-Acetylaminofluorene
56235............................. Carbon tetrachloride
57147............................. 1,1-Dimethyl hydrazine
57578............................. beta-Propiolactone
58899............................. Lindane (all isomers)
59892............................. N-Nitrosomorpholine
60117............................. Dimethyl aminoazobenzene
62759............................. N-Nitrosodimethylamine
64675............................. Diethyl sulfate
67663............................. Chloroform
67721............................. Hexachloroethane
71432............................. Benzene (including benzene from
gasoline)
75014............................. Vinyl chloride
75070............................. Acetaldehyde
75092............................. Methylene chloride (Dichloromethane)
75218............................. Ethylene oxide
75558............................. 1,2-Propylenimine (2-Methyl
aziridine)
75569............................. Propylene oxide
77781............................. Dimethyl sulfate
79061............................. Acrylamide
79447............................. Dimethyl carbamoyl chloride
79469............................. 2-Nitropropane
88062............................. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
91941............................. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidene
92671............................. 4-Aminobiphenyl
92875............................. Benzidine
95534............................. o-Toluidine
95807............................. 2,4-Toluene diamine
96128............................. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
96457............................. Ethylene thiourea
98077............................. Benzotrichloride
101144............................ 4,4-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline)
101779............................ 4,4-Methylenedianiline
106467............................ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene(p)
106898............................ Epichlorohydrin (l-Chloro-2,3-
epoxypropane)
106934............................ Ethylene dibromide (Dibromoethane)
106990............................ 1,3-Butadiene
107062............................ Ethylene dichloride (1,2-
Dichloroethane)
107131............................ Acrylonitrile
107302............................ Chloromethyl methyl ether
117817............................ Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP)
118741............................ Hexachlorobenzene
119904............................ 3,3-Dimethoxybenzidine
119937............................ 3,3-Dimethyl benzidine
122667............................ 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
123911............................ 1,4-Dioxane (1,4-Diethyleneoxide)
127184............................ Tetrachloroethylene
(Perchloroethylene)
140885............................ Ethyl acrylate
302012............................ Hydrazine
542756............................ 1,3-Dichloropropene

[[Page 45621]]

542881............................ Bis(chloromethyl)ether
680319............................ Hexamethylphosphoramide
684935............................ N-Nitroso-N-methylurea
1120714........................... 1,3-Propane sultone
1332214........................... Asbestos
1336363........................... Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
1746016........................... 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
8001352........................... Toxaphene (chlorinated camphene)
Arsenic Compounds
Chromium Compounds
Coke Oven Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As stated in Sec. 63.6013, you must comply with the applicable
General Provisions (GP) requirements according to the following
table:

Table 17 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions to This Subpart XXXX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to Subpart XXXX?
Brief description of ---------------------------------
Citation Subject applicable sections Using a control Not using a
device control device
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1................... Applicability.. Initial applicability Yes............ Yes.
determination; applicability
after standard established;
permit requirements;
extensions; notifications.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.2................... Definitions.... Definitions for part 63 Yes............ Yes.
standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.3................... Units and Units and abbreviations for Yes............ Yes.
Abbreviations. part 63 standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.4................... Prohibited Prohibited activities; Yes............ Yes.
Activities. compliance date;
circumvention; severability.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.5................... Construction/ Applicability; applications; Yes............ Yes.
Reconstruction. approvals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(a)................ Applicability.. GP apply unless compliance Yes............ Yes.
extension; GP apply to area
sources that become major.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4)......... Compliance Standards apply at effective Yes............ Yes.
Dates for New date; 3 years after effective
and date; upon startup; 10 years
Reconstructed after construction or
Sources. reconstruction commences for
section 112(f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(b)(5)............. Notification... Must notify if commenced Yes............ Yes.
construction or
reconstruction after proposal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)............. [Reserved]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)............. Compliance .............................. No............. No.
Dates for New
and
Reconstructed
Area Sources
that Become
Major.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2)......... Compliance Comply according to date in Yes............ Yes.
Dates for subpart, which must be no
Existing later than 3 years after
Sources. effective date; for CAA
section 112(f) standards,
comply within 90 days of
effective date unless
compliance extension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4)......... [Reserved]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)............. Compliance Area sources that become major Yes............ Yes.
Dates for must comply with major source
Existing Area standards by date indicated
Sources that in subpart or by equivalent
Become Major. time period (for example, 3
years).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(d)................ [Reserved]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45622]]

Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2)......... Operation & Operate to minimize emissions Yes............ Yes.
Maintenance. at all times; correct
malfunctions as soon as
practicable; and operation
and maintenance requirements
independently enforceable;
information Administrator
will use to determine if
operation and maintenance
requirements were met.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)............. Startup, .............................. Yes............ No.
Shutdown, and
Malfunction
Plan (SSMP).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)............. Compliance .............................. Yes............ No.
Except During
SSM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)......... Methods for Compliance based on Yes............ Yes.
Determining performance test; operation
Compliance. and maintenance plans;
records; inspection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)......... Alternative Procedures for getting an Yes............ Yes.
Standard. alternative standard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(h)................ Opacity/Visible .............................. No............. No.
Emission (VE)
Standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(i)................ Compliance Procedures and criteria for Yes............ Yes.
Extension. Administrator to grant
compliance extension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.6(j)................ Presidential President may exempt source Yes............ Yes.
Compliance category from requirement to
Exemption. comply with rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)-(2)......... Performance .............................. No............. No.
Test Dates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)............. CAA section 114 Administrator may require a Yes............ No.
Authority. performance test under CAA
section 114 at any time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(b)(1)............. Notification of Must notify Administrator 60 Yes............ No.
Performance days before the test.
Test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(b)(2)............. Notification of If rescheduling a performance Yes............ No.
Rescheduling. test is necessary, must
notify Administrator 5 days
before scheduled date of
rescheduled date.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(c)................ Quality Requirement to submit site- Yes............ No.
Assurance/Test specific test plan 60 days
Plan. before the test or on date
Administrator agrees with:
test plan approval
procedures; performance audit
requirements; and internal
and external quality
assurance procedures for
testing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(d)................ Testing Requirements for testing Yes............ No.
Facilities. facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)............. Conditions for Performance tests must be Yes............ No.
Conducting conducted under
Performance representative conditions;
Tests. cannot conduct performance
tests during SSM; not a
violation to exceed standard
during SSM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)............. Conditions for Must conduct according to rule Yes............ No.
Conducting and EPA test methods unless
Performance Administrator approves
Tests. alternative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(e)(3)............. Test Run Must have three test runs of Yes............ No.
Duration. at least 1 hour each;
compliance is based on
arithmetic mean of three
runs; and conditions when
data from an additional test
run can be used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(f)................ Alternative Procedures by which Yes............ No.
Test Method. Administrator can grant
approval to use an
alternative test method.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.7(g)................ Performance Must include raw data in Yes............ No.
Test Data performance test report; must
Analysis. submit performance test data
60 days after end of test
with the Notification of
Compliance Status report; and
keep data for 5 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45623]]

Sec. 63.7(h)................ Waiver of Tests Procedures for Administrator Yes............ No.
to waive performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)............. Applicability Subject to all monitoring Yes............ Yes.
of Monitoring requirements in standard.
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(a)(2)............. Performance Performance Specifications in Yes............ No.
Specifications. appendix B of 40 CFR part 60
apply.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)............. [Reserved]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)............. Monitoring with .............................. No............. No.
Flares.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(b)(1)............. Monitoring..... Must conduct monitoring Yes............ Yes.
according to standard unless
Administrator approves
alternative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3)......... Multiple Specific requirements for Yes............ Yes.
Effluents and installing monitoring
Multiple systems; must install on each
Monitoring effluent before it is
Systems. combined and before it is
released to the atmosphere
unless Administrator approves
otherwise; if more than one
monitoring system on an
emission point, must report
all monitoring system
results, unless one
monitoring system is a backup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)............. Monitoring Maintain monitoring system in Applies as No.
System a manner consistent with good modified by
Operation and air pollution control Sec. 63.5990(
Maintenance. practices. e) and (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i).......... Routine and .............................. No............. No.
Predictable
SSM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(ii)......... SSM not in SSMP .............................. No............. No.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii)........ Compliance with How Administrator determines Yes............ Yes.
Operation and if source complying with
Maintenance operation and maintenance
Requirements. requirements; review of
source operation and
maintenance procedures,
records, manufacturer's
instructions,
recommendations, and
inspection of monitoring
system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)......... Monitoring Must install to get Yes............ No.
System representative emission and
Installation. parameter measurements; must
verify operational status
before or at performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)............. Continuous .............................. Applies as No.
Monitoring modified by
System (CMS) Sec. 63.5990(
Requirements. f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)............. Continuous .............................. No............. No.
Opacity
Monitoring
Systems (COMS)
Minimum
Procedures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)............. CMS .............................. Applies as No.
Requirements. modified by
Sec. 63.5990(
e).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8)......... CMS Out-of-control periods, Yes............ No.
Requirements. including reporting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(d)................ CMS Quality .............................. Applies as No.
Control. modified by
Sec. 63.5990(
e) and (f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(e)................ CMS Performance .............................. No............. No.
Evaluation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)......... Alternative Procedures for Administrator Yes............ Yes.
Monitoring to approve alternative
Method. monitoring.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45624]]

Sec. 63.8(f)(6)............. Alternative to .............................. No............. No.
Relative
Accuracy Test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.8(g)................ Data Reduction. .............................. Applies as No.
modified by
Sec. 63.5990(
f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(a)................ Notification Applicability and state Yes............ Yes.
Requirements. delegation.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(5)......... Initial Submit notification 120 days Yes............ Yes.
Notifications. after effective date;
notification of intent to
construct/reconstruct,
notification of commencement
of construct/reconstruct,
notification of startup; and
contents of each.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(c)................ Request for Can request if cannot comply Yes............ Yes.
Compliance by date or if installed best
Extension. available control technology
or lowest achievable emission
rate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(d)................ Notification of For sources that commence Yes............ Yes.
Special construction between proposal
Compliance and promulgation and want to
Requirements comply 3 years after
for New Source. effective date.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(e)................ Notification of Notify Administrator 60 days Yes............ No.
Performance prior.
Test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(f)................ Notification of No............................ No.............
VE/Opacity
Test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(g)................ Additional No............................ No.............
Notifications
When Using CMS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(h)................ Notification of Contents; due 60 days after Yes............ Yes.
Compliance end of performance test or
Status. other compliance
demonstration, except for
opacity/VE, which are due 30
days after; when to submit to
Federal vs. State authority.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(i)................ Adjustment of Procedures for Administrator Yes............ Yes.
Submittal to approve change in when
Deadlines. notifications must be
submitted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(j)................ Change in Must submit within 15 days Yes............ Yes.
Previous after the change.
Information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(a)............... Recordkeeping/ Applies to all, unless Yes............ Yes.
Reporting. compliance extension; when to
submit to Federal vs. State
authority; procedures for
owners of more than 1 source.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)............ Recordkeeping/ General Requirements; keep all Yes............ Yes.
Reporting. records readily available;
and keep for 5 years..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(iv).... Records related Yes........................... No.............
to Startup,
Shutdown, and
Malfunction..
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi) and (x)- CMS Records.... Malfunctions, inoperative, out- Yes............ No.
(xi). of-control; calibration
checks; adjustments,
maintenance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (vii)-(ix). Records........ Measurements to demonstrate Yes............ Yes.
compliance with emission
limitations; performance
test, performance evaluation,
and visible emission
observation results; and
measurements to determine
conditions of performance
tests and performance
evaluations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xii)...... Records........ Records when under waiver..... Yes............ Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xiii)..... Records........ .............................. No............. No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xiv)...... Records........ All documentation supporting Yes............ Yes.
Initial Notification and
Notification of Compliance
Status.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)............ Records........ Applicability determinations.. Yes............ Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45625]]

Sec. 63.10(c)............... Records........ .............................. No............. No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)............ General Requirement to report......... Yes............ Yes.
Reporting
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)............ Report of When to submit to Federal or Yes............ No.
Performance State authority.
Test Results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)............ Reporting .............................. No............. No.
Opacity or VE
Observations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)............ Progress Must submit progress reports Yes............ Yes.
Reports. on schedule if under
compliance extension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)............ Startup, .............................. Yes............ No.
Shutdown, and
Malfunction
Reports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(e)............... Additional CMS .............................. No............. No.
Reports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.10(f)............... Waiver for Procedures for Administrator Yes............ Yes.
Recordkeeping/ to waive.
Reporting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.11.................. Flares......... .............................. No............. No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.12.................. Delegation..... State authority to enforce Yes............ Yes.
standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.13.................. Addresses...... Addresses where reports, Yes............ Yes.
notifications, and requests
are sent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.14.................. Incorporation Test methods incorporated by Yes............ Yes.
by Reference. reference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.15.................. Availability of Public and confidential Yes............ Yes.
Information. information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 02-12771 Filed 7-8-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing

Local Navigation