Texas Register, Volume 28, Number 14, Pages 2821-2988, April 4, 2003 Page: 2,895
2821-2988 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
addressed several questions from sources concerning the ap-
plicability of new source standards versus existing source stan-
dards for hazardous waste incinerators by specifying the origi-
nal intent of the rules on these issues. The second part of the
amendment made three technical corrections which addressed
performance testing, the continuous monitoring system evalua-
tion plans, and continuous monitoring system data averaging.
The May 14, 2001 amendment was based on a court decision,
Chemical Manufacturers Association v. EPA, 217 F. 3d 861 (D.C.
Cir. 2000), in which the court vacated the Notice of Intent to
Comply provisions of EPA's rules relating to the standards for
hazardous waste combustors. EPA also filed a motion with the
Washington D.C. Circuit to vacate certain parameter limits of
baghouses and electrostatic precipitators in order to allow ad-
ditional opportunity for notice and comment on the issue (CKRC
v. EPA, no 99-1457, EPA Motion to November 14, 2000).
The July 3, 2001 amendment improved the implementation of the
emission standards associated with the final rule promulgated
on September 30, 1999 (64 FR 52,828), primarily in the areas
of compliance, testing, and monitoring requirements. However,
due to adverse comments received during the public comment
period, on October 15, 2001, EPA withdrew portions of three sec-
tions, including the proposed new definition of the phrase "pre-
heater tower combustion gas monitoring location" from the direct
final rules published on July 3, 2001.
The December 6, 2001 amendment extended the compliance
date for Subpart EEE for one year. This amendment was in
response to the Washington D.C. Circuit 2001 opinion on Ce-
ment Kiln Recycling Coalition v. EPA, 255 F.3d 855, 872 issued
July 24, 2001. The February 13, 2002 amendment revised the
September 1999 emission standards with the issuance of an In-
terim Standards Rule which, while less stringent than the original
rules, achieves most of the emission gains of the original rules.
The interim standards replaced the vacated standards temporar-
ily, until final standards could be promulgated. The February 14,
2002 amendments focused on improving the implementation of
the emissions standards, primarily in the areas of compliance,
testing, and monitoring.
Finally, the December 19, 2002 amendments made the following
technical corrections: 1) sources that comply early are not re-
quired to submit the notice of compliance within 90 days of com-
pleting the comprehensive performance test; 2) the hydrochloric
acid and chlorine gas emission standard for new lightweight ag-
gregate kilns was changed to 600 parts per million by volume;
3) the minimum power requirement for ionizing wet scrubbers
was deleted; 4) the requirement to include a carbon bed test-
ing schedule in the performance test plan was deleted; 5) com-
bustion system leak requirements were added; 6) the compli-
ance date extension requirements were changed; 7) the RCRA
permitting requirements were changed; 8) the limit on waste
feed-rate for compliance with the dioxin/furan emissions stan-
dard was changed; 9) the limit on the maximum ash feed-rate for
incinerators was changed; and 10) and the sampling and analy-
sis requirements were changed.
Section 113.640 - Pharmaceuticals Production (40 CFR 63, Sub-
part GGG)
The commission proposes to amend 113.640 by incorporating
by reference, without change, all amendments to Subpart GGG
made by the EPA since September 21, 1998. During this time
frame, EPA amended Subpart GGG on August 29, 2000 (65 FR
52588); August 2, 2001 (66 FR 401210); and April 2, 2002 (67FR 15486). The August 29, 2000 amendment addressed 12
technical issues and concerns raised by petitioners in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, PhRMA v.
EPA, 98-1551 (D.C. Cir.). The August 2, 2001 amendment pro-
vided additional compliance options for process vent and stor-
age tank emissions, specified additional methods that may be
used to analyze wastewater, shifted one compound from the list
of partially soluble HAPs to the list of soluble HAPs, eliminated
an unintended restriction on the use of enhanced biological treat-
ment, allowed a sewer line between drains and the first down-
stream junction box to be vented, clarified how to assign stor-
age tanks that are shared among pharmaceutical manufacturing
process units and other types of process units, clarified moni-
toring frequency requirements for connectors, clarified and sim-
plified recordkeeping and reporting requirements, eliminated in-
consistencies, and corrected several referencing and typesetting
errors. The April 2, 2002 amendment corrected a reference to
40 CFR 63.1257(d)(3)(iii) and removed an incorrect definition
of the term " " in the calculation of the mass flow rate in waste-
water stream entering combustion treatment processes.
Section 113.650 - Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facil-
ities (40 CFR 63, Subpart HHH)
The commission proposes to amend 113.650 by incorporating
by reference, without change, all amendments to Subpart HHH
made by the EPA since June 17, 1999. During this time frame,
EPA amended Subpart HHH on June 29, 2001 (66 FR 34548);
September 27, 2001 (66 FR 49299); and February 22, 2002 (67
FR 8202). The June 29, 2001 amendment corrected errors and
restated the intent of the standard. The September 27, 2001 and
February 22, 2002 amendments made technical corrections to
the June 29, 2001 amendment.
Section 113.670 - Group IV Polymers and Resins (40 CFR 63,
Subpart JJJ)
The commission proposes to amend 113.670 by incorporating
by reference, without change, all amendments to Subpart JJJ
made by the EPA since June 30, 1999. During this time frame,
EPA amended Subpart JJJ on June 19, 2000 (65 FR 38030); Au-
gust 29, 2000 (65 FR 52319); October 26, 2000 (65 FR 64161);
February 23, 2001 (66 FR 11233); February 26, 2001 (66 FR
11543); July 16, 2001 (66 FR 36924); and August 6, 2001 (66
FR 40903).
The June 19, 2000 amendment addressed numerous technical
issues and concerns with the rules raised by petitioners to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Union
Carbide Corp. v. EPA, 96-413 and Consolidated Cases (D. C.
Cir.). In addition, the amendments updated Subpart JJJ as ne-
cessitated by amendments to the hazardous organic NESHAP
in Subparts F - I.
The August 29, 2000 amendment was a direct final rule that
indefinitely stayed the compliance date for the process contact
cooling tower provisions for existing affected sources producing
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) using the continuous tereph-
thalic acid high viscosity multiple end finisher process. However,
due to adverse comments, on October 26, 2000, EPA withdrew
the August 29, 2000 direct final rule. The February 23, 2001
was another direct final rule that indefinitely stayed the February
27, 2001 compliance date for the process contact cooling tower
provisions for existing affected sources producing poly using the
continuous terephthalic acid high viscosity multiple end finisher
process.PROPOSED RULES April 4, 2003 28 TexReg 2895
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas. Secretary of State. Texas Register, Volume 28, Number 14, Pages 2821-2988, April 4, 2003, periodical, April 4, 2003; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101027/m1/74/: accessed June 6, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.