METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cathy Beahm Technical Assistance Specialist NH DES, Air Resources
Advertisements

SPCC PLAN OVERVIEW - SLIDE 1 OF 45 © Copyright SafetyInstruction 2008 SAFETY TRAINING CORPORATE SAFETY TRAINING © Copyright SafeyInstruction 2008 EPA 40.
Slide 1 Insert your own content. Slide 2 Insert your own content.
HIPAA Security Presentation to The American Hospital Association Dianne Faup Office of HIPAA Standards November 5, 2003.
FOENSwiss Federal Office for the Environment Regional Workshop aimed at Identifying the problems faced by countries in the Central and Eastern European.
© 3M All Rights Reserved. Innovations in Permitting and Flexible Air Permitting as Well as Methods to Improve the Permitting Process Mark Manninen,
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill NSPS/EG Requirements Illinois EPA Bureau of Air Mike Davidson 217/
The Wonderful World of HAP Regulations
MSW NESHAP Control Requirements Contains the same requirements as NSPS/EG. Requires gas collection and control system (GCCS) for same landfill as NSPS/EG.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Surface Coating
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
SUBPART N MACT AMENDMENTS QUESTIONS & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART N.
1 Section 112J: The HAMMER Clause & Title V (CAAPP) What has Illinois been doing about the PART 2; May 15, 2003 Deadline???? Hank Naour ILLINOIS EPA.
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006.
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT OVERVIEW
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006.
DRAFT IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART EEEEE.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July, 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May, CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May, 2006.
METAL COIL SURFACE MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006 May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT CLOSING 40 CFR PART 63 SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
Compliance Dates The final rule was published on January 25, 1995,
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT CLOSING METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT CLOSING 40 CFR PART 63 SUBPART SSSS May CFR PART 63 SUBPART SSSS May 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
Lessons Learned from Financial Management Reviews May 15, 2008 Bruce Robinson FTA Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation.
MACT Vacaturs & Section 112(j) Plywood MACT Vacatur Boiler MACT Vacatur & Section 112(j) rule Section 112(j) applicability Section 112(j) requirements.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 13, 2011 Final Rules to Reduce Air Toxics from Boilers.
Harmonization of Parts 60 and 75
Internal Control–Integrated Framework
KEEA Conference October 2013 Carbon Pollution Standards for Power Plants under Section 111 of the CAA: How Energy Efficiency Can Help States Comply 1 Jackson.
RICE MACT and Oil Analysis
NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR CHROMIUM EMISSIONS FROM HARD & DECORATIVE CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING & CHROMIUM ANODIZING TANKS.
U.S. EPA Regulations Review Update: Subpart W NESHAPS (40 CFR 61) Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings (40 CFR Part 192) Andrea Cherepy, Phil Egidi, Reid.
Regulatory Drivers for Reducing Solvent Emissions Barbara Johnson, PE Kansas State University Kansas Small Business Environmental Assistance Program March.
Tuesday Oct. 7, 2014 Implementation of Permit Exemption Criteria Category No. 38 Tom Corbett, Governor Dana Aunkst, Acting Secretary.
New Emission Rules for IC Engines Presented by Scott Wallace Devon Gas Services, L.P.
New Federal Regulations for Internal Combustion Engines Doug Parce.
April 15, 2015 Betty Gatano, P.E. Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919)
Section 112J: The “HAMMER” Clause What is Illinois Doing about the PART 2; May 15, 2003 Deadline???? & How can P2 Play a Role? Hank Naour ILLINOIS EPA.
NCMA Workshop March 24, 2015 Booker Pullen Supervisor, Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919) Permitting.
NCMA Workshop March 19 and 24, 2015 Betty Gatano, P.E. Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919)
1 Control Techniques Guidelines Joel Leon September 16, 2011.
Managing Air Quality Data 101 Presented by: Chris Bellusci & Claire Lund, PE (Sanborn Head) International Conference for Environmental.
Mustang Watchdog April 22, 2014
EPA Rule 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart HHHHHH “The Refinisher Rule”
Where to find Information About Facilities. Overview of Title V Permits.
Indiana New Source Review Reform Plantwide Applicability Limitations (PALs) IDEM/Office of Air Quality September 7, 2004.
Our Vision – Healthy Kansans living in safe and sustainable environments.
Air Quality 101 Kansas Air Quality Program overview.
| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC Boiler MACT Compliance Plans: Failure to Develop Plans Is Planning to Fail Susie Bowden|
Environmental and Clean Air Regulations M IDSTREAM E NERGY L AW C ONFERENCE : M EETING THE D EMAND FOR I NFRASTRUCTURE H OUSTON, T EXAS December 7, 2012.
Blue Skies Delaware; Clean Air for Life NESHAPs Jim Snead October 8, 2008.
Title V Operating Permit Program 1 Section 1: Intro to Title V Laura McKelvey U.S. EPA.
Compliance Assurance and Title V Monitoring A Summary of Rules and Permitting Issues Peter Westlin, EPA, OAQPS.
HAP Rule 372 Guidance Permitting Division Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
The Paper and Other Web Coating (POWC) MACT – Executive Summary The executive summary is a power point presentation designed to be used for basic education.
Region 9 Title V Permit Review Guidelines Ray Vogel EPA/OAQPS.
Update on Methane Regulations Affecting Landfills Pat Sullivan Senior Vice President SCS Engineers Nov. 10, 2015.
1 Special Information Session on USEPA’s Carbon Rules & Clean Air Act Section 111 North Carolina Division of Air Quality Special Information Session on.
Start Do you own or operate a facility that engages in the coating of paper, plastic film, metallic foil or any other web surfaces? Your facility is not.
Clean Air Act Glossary.
TRTR Briefing September 2013
Kansas Air Quality Seminar March 5, 2008
Presentation transcript:

METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006

Questions/Answers #1 If the facility builds a new building next to a current building, does the new building become a new source?

Questions/Answers #1 The best source to answer this question is the facility’s permitting authority because the decision may rest on site-specific factors.

Q/A #2 If an effected source is using an add-on control device, such as an oxidizer to comply with the rule, is a performance test necessary?

Q/A #2 If an add-on control device is used by the effected source, the source must conduct a performance test to establish the destruction or removal efficiency of the control device or the outlet HAP concentration achieved by the device, according to methods and procedures in §63.5160

Q/A #3 For facilities that are complex or collated with different coating operations, i.e. multiple surface coating operations; chromium and organic HAP coatings, are any consolidation options available to compliance?

Q/A #3 Section 112(d)(2) requires that all major sources within a major source category must meet maximum emission reduction determined to be achievable. Therefore, due to the complexity of allowing such options, none are allowed in the rule, but c/c options can be used on a c/c operation basis. This is particularly true under the Title V process.

Q/A #4 Does a metal coil coating facility have to comply with the emission limitations during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction?

Q/A #4 The effected facility must be in compliance with the emissions limitations, work practice standards, and operation and maintenance requirements in Subpart SSSS at all times.

Q/A #5 Does a Subpart SSSS affected facility have to comply with NSPS requirements?

Q/A #5 Since the NESHAP and NSPS regulations focus on different aspects of an affected facility, organic VOCs, compliance must be achieved with both regulations.

Q/A #6 What are the installation, operation and maintenance requirements for the effected source monitors?

Q/A #6 For each capture system that is subject to Subpart SSSS, the facility must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS according to the requirements in § 63.5150 and63.5160.

Q/A #7 How does the facility demonstrate continuous compliance with the work practice standards that apply to the effected source?

Q/A #7 The facility must maintain records that document continuous compliance noted in § 63.5170

Q/A #8 What are the Health Effects Associated with HAP Emissions From the Surface Coating of Metal Coil?

Q/A #8 Ethylene glycol mono-butyl ether and other glycol ethers, xylenes, hexane, MEK and MIBK account for 95% of the nationwide HAP emissions from the source category. These HAPS are associated with a variety of adverse health effects which include chronic health disorders (e.g., birth defects and effects on the central nervous system, liver, and heart) and acute health disorders (e.g., irritation of the lung, skin, and mucous membranes, effects on the central nervous system and possibly cancer.

Q/A #9 Can a facility be considered in compliance with the Initial Notification requirement if the facility had filed their Section 112J notice on time?

Q/A #9 The Section 112J notice requires additional information above and beyond the Initial Notification requirement. As such, the facility would be considered in compliance with the IN requirement and filing the Initial Notification would be redundant.

Q/A #10 What does a deviation from the rule mean?

Q/A #10 Deviation means any instance in which an affected source fails to meet any obligations required by Subpart SSSS. This is not limited to any emissions limitation, work practice standard, or operation and maintenance requirement; (cont’d. on next slide)

Q/A #10 (Answer continued) The affected source fails to meet any terms or conditions adopted to implement an applicable under Subpart SSSS The affected source fails to meet emissions limitations, including operating limits or work practice standards in this Subpart.

Q/A #11 If a failure to meet the emissions limitation is permitted by Subpart SSSS, is the affected source exonerated from the non-compliant condition?

Q/A #11 Failure to meet the emissions limitation, including the operating limits or work practice standards during startup, shutdown or malfunction is considered a deviation and must be reported as an exceedance under Subpart SSSS.

Q/A #12 How flexible is Subpart SSSS regarding compliance with the rule?

Q/A #12 The effected source can choose from several compliance options in Subpart SSSS to achieve the emission limit that applies to the effected source.

Q/A #13 Do the operating limits apply to all effected source?

Q/A #13 If the effected source reduces emissions by using a capture system and add-on control device( other than a solvent recovery system for which a source conducts a liquid-liquid material balance), the operating limits apply to the source.

Q/A #14 How does an effected source comply with Subpart SSSS of the source demonstrates compliance based on the emissions rates without add-on controls option?

Q/A #14 The source must determine the mass of organic HAP in all coatings and thinners used in each coating type segment each month during the initial compliance period, and the volume fraction of coating solids in all coating type segment used each month during the initial compliance period.

Q/A #15 Does Subpart SSSS cover the processing of metal foil?

Q/A #15 The metal coil rule as promulgated specified that operations performing both foil coating and coil coating on the same equipment would be subject to the metal coil NESHAP only. The 85 per cent primary use provision allows facilities to comply with the NESHAP representing their principal coating activity.