Federal Register: October 18, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 202)
DOCID: FR Doc 00-26224
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CFR Citation: 40 CFR Part 63
RIN ID: RIN 2060-AG29
FRL ID: [FRL-6874-9]
NOTICE: Part II
DOCUMENT ACTION: Proposed rule.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing
DATES: Comments. Submit comments on or before December 18, 2000.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing by November 7, 2000, a public hearing will be held on November 17, 2000.
This action proposes 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 proposed standards would implement section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all major sources to meet HAP emission standards that reflect the application of maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The primary HAP that would 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).
See Coast Guard; See Federal Aviation Administration; See Customs Service; Environmental Protection Agency,
Comments. Comments and data may be submitted
by electronic mail (email) to: firstname.lastname@example.org. Electronic
comments must be submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special
characters and encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks
Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: OAQPS Document Control Officer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Room 740B, Durham, NC 27701. The EPA will disclose information identified as CBI only to the extent allowed by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies a submission when it is received by the EPA, the information may be made available to the public without further notice to the commenter.
Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. Dorothy Apple, Policy Planning and Standards Group, Emission Standards Division (MD13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 5414487 at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing must also call Ms. Apple to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning these proposed emission standards.
Docket. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file because material is added throughout the rulemaking process. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the public and industries involved to readily identify and locate documents so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, the contents of the docket will serve as the record in the case of judicial review. (See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The regulatory text and other materials related to this rulemaking are available for review in the docket or copies may be mailed on request from the Air Docket by calling (202) 2607548. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this proposed rule is also 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. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 5415384.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action include:
Examples of regulated Category SIC a/NAICS b entities Industry...................... 3011 or 7534/.... Owners or operators of rubber tire manufacturing facilities. a Standard Industrial Classification Code.
b North American Information Classification System.
This table 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 proposed rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Outline. The information in this preamble is organized as follows.
A. What is the source of authority for developing NESHAP?
B. What criteria are used in developing NESHAP?
C. What is the history of the listing and schedule for regulation for the rubber tire manufacturing source category?
D. What are the health effects associated with rubber tire manufacturing?
E. Rubber Manufacturers Association Survey
II. Summary of Proposed Rule
A. What sources are included in the category and subcategories regulated by this rule?
B. What are the primary sources of emissions and what are the emissions?
C. What are the affected sources?
D. What are the emission limits, operating limits, and other standards?
E. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
F. What are the continuous compliance provisions?
G. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements?
III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards
A. How did we select the source category and subcategories?
B. How did we select the affected sources?
C. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed standards for existing and new sources?
D. How did we select the format of the standards?
E. How did we select the compliance, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements?
F. What is the relationship of this subpart to new source
performance standards (NSPS) for the rubber tire manufacturing industry?
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
A. What are the air quality impacts?
B. What are the cost impacts?
C. What are the economic impacts?
D. What are the nonair health, environmental, and energy impacts?
V. Solicitation of Comments and Public Participation
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13045Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
C. Executive Order 13084Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
D. Executive Order 13132Federalism
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 I. Background
A. What Is the Source of Authority for Developing 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. Major sources of HAP are those stationary sources or groups of stationary sources that are located within a contiguous area and under common control that emit or have the potential to emit, considering controls, 10 ton/yr or more of any one HAP or 25 ton/yr or more of any combination of HAP.
B. What Criteria Are Used in Developing 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 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 bettercontrolled and loweremitting sources in each source category or subcategory. For new sources, the MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission control that is achieved in practice by the bestcontrolled 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 bestperforming 12 percent of existing sources in the category or subcategory (or the bestperforming 5 sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30 sources).
In developing MACT, we also consider control requirements that are
more stringent than the floor. We may establish standards more
stringent than the floor based on the consideration of cost of
achieving the emissions reductions, any nonair quality health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
C. What Is the History of the Listing and Schedule for Regulation for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source Category?
1. Establishing the Initial List and Schedule
Pursuant to the various specific listing requirements of section
112(c), we published a list of 174 categories of major and area sources
referred to as the ``initial list'' that would be subject to emission
standards. Following this listing, pursuant to requirements in section
112(e), on December 3, 1993 (58 FR 63941), we published a schedule for
the promulgation of emission standards for each of the 174 listed
source categories. The schedule for standards organized the source
categories into groups of four separate timeframes with promulgation
deadlines of November 15, 1992; November 15, 1994; November 15, 1997; or November 15, 2000.
``Tire Production'' is one of the 174 categories of sources included on the initial list of source categories (63 FR 7155). The ``Tire Production'' category as defined in our report, ``Documentation for Developing the Initial Source Category List,'' EPA450/3910310, July 1992, includes any facility that is a major source and is engaged in producing passenger car and light duty truck tires, heavy duty truck tires, offtheroad tires, aircraft tires, and miscellaneous other tires. The listed ``tire production'' source category name was changed to ``rubber tire manufacturing'' to better reflect the industry that would be regulated under section 112(d)(2) based on information obtained during the MACT standard development process.
2. Listing of the Tire Manufacturing Source Category as a Section 112(c)(6) HAP Source
Section 112(c)(6) of the CAA requires that sources that account for 90 percent of the emissions of seven specified HAP, including hexachlorobenzene (HCB) and polycyclic organic matter (POM), be subject to standards under section 112(d)(2) or (d)(4).
Based on previous information and testing, we estimated that tire production facilities emitted, in aggregate, approximately 395 kilograms (kg) (869 pounds (lbs)), or 29.5 percent, of the total national anthropogenic emissions of HCB per year. Tire production facilities were also estimated to emit, in aggregate, approximately 6,360 kg (14,000 lbs), or 0.03 percent, of the total national anthropogenic emissions of POM per year (63 FR 17838). On April 10, 1998 (63 FR 17838), we listed tire manufacturing as a source category for possible regulation to meet section 112(c)(6) requirements. Because tire manufacturing was already included on the initial major source category list developed to comply with section 112(c), the major source category list did not need to be modified to add it.
The Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA) responded to the listing of tire manufacturing as a section 112(c)(6) emissions source for HCB by sending us a letter that argued that the tire manufacturing process does not have a chemical or physical mechanism to form HCB. The RMA explained that the analytical results that led us to list tire manufacturing as a source of HCB emissions were based on contaminated samples. In response to RMA's comment, we participated in the planning of, and were present at, tests that were conducted to evaluate RMA's claim. These tests were reconstructed based on the conditions of the original tests. Based on our participation and evaluation of these tests, we agree that the original HCB emission information was incorrect. Based on the limitations of the original tests, and the fact that no HCB was measured in the retesting, we concluded that tire manufacturing is a highly unlikely source of HCB emissions. We are addressing the April 10, 1998 listing under section 112(c)(6) of tire manufacturing as an HCB emission source in a separate Federal Register action.
The POM emissions leading to tire manufacturing being listed as a
section 112(c)(6) emission source are due to combustion associated with
the use of steam boilers in the rubber tire manufacturing process.
These boilers will be addressed under the Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boiler and Process Heater NESHAP.
D. What Are the Health Effects Associated With Rubber Tire Manufacturing?
This proposed rule protects air quality and promotes the public health by reducing emissions of some of the HAP listed in section 112(b)(1) of the CAA. The sources of HAP emissions in the rubber tire manufacturing industry are: (1) Rubber processing; (2) the use of cements, solvents and associated mixtures in the tire production; (3) tire cord production; and (4) puncture sealant application. The primary HAP emitted from the rubber tire production process and puncture sealant operations are toluene and hexane. Tire cord operations also emit these HAP, but the more significant emissions from tire cord production are formaldehyde, styrene, and methanol. Exposure to these compounds has been demonstrated to cause adverse health effects.
The HAP that would be controlled with this proposed rule are associated with a variety of adverse health effects. These adverse health effects include chronic health disorders (e.g., effects on the central nervous system and reproductive systems) and acute health disorders (e.g., irritation of eyes, throat, and mucous membranes, headache, nausea, and blurred vision). One of the HAP has been classified as a probable human carcinogen, and another has been classified as a possible human carcinogen.
Acute (shortterm) inhalation exposure of humans to low or moderate levels of toluene has been associated with central nervous system (CNS) dysfunction and narcosis. Symptoms observed include fatigue, sleepiness, headaches, and nausea. Acute inhalation exposure to toluene has also been associated with cardiac arrhythmias (irregular heartbeats). Central nervous system depression and death have occurred at higher levels of exposure to toluene.
Chronic (longterm) inhalation exposure of humans to high levels of toluene has been associated with CNS depression. Symptoms observed include ataxia, tremors, cerebral atrophy, involuntary eye movements, and impaired speech, hearing, and vision. Chronic inhalation exposure of humans to toluene has also been associated with irritation of the upper respiratory tract, eye irritation, sore throat, nausea, skin conditions, dizziness, headaches, and difficulty with sleep. Chronic inhalation exposure to toluene has been associated with adverse effects on the liver, kidney, and lungs. Human studies of solvent vapor abusers indicate that there may be liver and kidney adverse effects resulting from chronic inhalation exposure to toluene, however, these studies are confounded by probable exposure to multiple solvents.
Children of pregnant women exposed to toluene or mixed solvent by inhalation have been observed to have CNS dysfunction, attention deficits, craniofacial and limb anomalies, and developmental and growth retardation.
Acute (shortterm) inhalation exposure of humans to hexane is associated with mild CNS depression and irritation of the mucous membranes. Central nervous system effects include dizziness, giddiness, slight nausea, and headache. Acute exposure to hexane vapors may also cause dermatitis and irritation of the eyes and throat in humans.
Chronic (longterm) exposure of humans to hexane is associated with polyneuropathy in humans, with numbness in the extremities, muscular weakness, blurred vision, headache, and fatigue. Studies of animals chronically exposed to hexane by inhalation indicate neurotoxic effects, and mild inflammatory, erosive, and degenerative lesions in the olfactory and respiratory epithelium of the nasal cavity. 3. Formaldehyde
Both acute (shortterm) and chronic (longterm) exposure to formaldehyde irritates the eyes, nose, and throat, and may cause coughing, chest pains, and bronchitis. Reproductive effects, such as menstrual disorders and pregnancy problems, have been reported in female workers exposed to formaldehyde. Limited human studies have reported an association between formaldehyde exposure and lung and nasopharyngeal cancer. Animal inhalation studies have reported an increased incidence of nasal squamous cell cancer. We consider formaldehyde a probable human carcinogen (Group B2).
Acute (shortterm) or chronic (longterm) exposure of humans to
methanol by inhalation or ingestion may result in blurred vision,
headache, dizziness, and nausea. No information is available on the
reproductive, developmental, or carcinogenic effects of methanol in
humans. Birth defects have been observed in the offspring of rats and
mice exposed to methanol by inhalation. A methanol inhalation study
using rhesus monkeys reported a decrease in the length of pregnancy and
limited evidence of impaired learning ability in offspring. We have not classified methanol with respect to carcinogenicity.
Acute (shortterm) exposure to styrene in humans results in mucous membrane and eye irritation and gastrointestinal effects. Chronic (longterm) exposure to styrene in humans may cause effects on the CNS such as headache, fatigue, weakness, depression, and hearing loss. There is limited evidence that occupational exposure to styrene is associated with an increased frequency of spontaneous abortions and decreased frequency of births and an increased risk of leukemia and lymphoma. We consider this evidence to be inconclusive. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified styrene as a Group 2B, possible human carcinogen. We have not classified styrene with respect to carcinogenicity.
E. Rubber Manufacturers Association Survey
Based on surveys of its member and nonmember companies, the RMA compiled and provided us two comprehensive data bases on HAP emissions and controls at rubber tire and/or tire component producers and tire cord producers.
In 1997, the RMA surveyed the 46 known tire production facilities
in the U.S. Each facility received a questionnaire designed to gather
information on the quantity of HAP emissions and controls within the
industry. The questionnaire requested the following information for calendar year 1996:
Of the 46 facilities receiving the questionnaire, 42 (91 percent) responded, including all the major tire production facilities and parent companies. The RMA estimated that 41 of these facilities produce more than 99 percent of the rubber tires produced in the U.S. Thirty one of the 42 reporting facilities have indicated potential emissions which would qualify the facility as a major source pursuant to section 112 of the CAA. One of the 42 responding facilities does not manufacture rubber tires, but rather mixes rubber compound for distribution to noncontiguous manufacturing facilities. This facility is within the scope of the rubber tire manufacturing source category because it mixes rubber compound, which is a basic material for the manufacturing of specific components of rubber tires.
In 1998, the RMA surveyed the twelve known tire cord production
facilities. Each of these facilities received a questionnaire designed
to gather information on the quantity of HAP emissions and controls
within the tire cord production industry. The questionnaire requested the following information for calendar year 1997:
All twelve facilities responded. Eight of the facilities represent over 90 percent of the domestic tire cord produced in the U.S. At least four of these facilities appear to be major sources based on their reported potential emissions. The RMA survey responses include eleven facilities that reported they did not use or emit HAP associated with cements, solvents, or mixtures.
In order to standardize responses and minimize the collection burden, the RMA questionnaires provided guidance for respondents on how to report usage of HAPcontaining compounds (i.e., cements, solvents and associated mixtures used in the manufacture of rubber tires). In particular, to prevent respondents from having to estimate very small concentrations of HAP in their HAPcontaining materials, the questionnaires focused on collecting information on the significant cements, solvents and associated mixtures (or sealants) used at each facility. The guidance used in these questionnaires was based on the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) de minimis reporting threshold limitations for HAPcontaining compounds. Thus, facilities reported the use of only those solvents, cements or related mixtures having HAP concentrations greater than these de minimis levels.
The SARA de minimis thresholds for reporting for each component in a mixture are 0.1 percent by weight for some selected hazardous chemicals (see table 16 of this proposed rule for a list of these chemicals) and 1.0 percent by weight for all other hazardous chemicals (Sec. 370.28(b) of 40 CFR part 370Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community RightToKnow). This means if the weight percent of a HAP in a cement, solvent or related mixture used was 0.1 percent or less for selected HAP or 1.0 percent or less for all other HAP, it did not have to be accounted for in the emissions information reported in the RMA questionnaire. Thus, if the information reported in the data base indicates that a rubber tire manufacturing facility has ``none or zero potential or actual HAP emissions,'' the facility may still have actual HAP emissions below the accountable quantities in the guidance. Based on this information, a rubber tire manufacturing facility reporting ``none or zero potential or actual HAP emissions'' from cements, solvents and associated mixtures could be using cements, solvents or related mixtures containing up to 0.1 percent of a ``selected'' HAP or 1.0 percent of all other HAP by mass.
Using this de minimis cutoff for accounting of the HAP at a
facility, the companies compiled their annual emissions of HAP on the
basis of HAP use for 1996. In the cases where they reported they did
have HAP, they accounted for the HAP used in the processes (liquids) and then equated the use to 100 percent emissions of HAP.
II. Summary of Proposed Rule
A. What Sources Are Included in the Category and Subcategories Regulated by This Rule?
We have defined the rubber tire manufacturing source category to
include: The construction of rubber tires and 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, and liners.
Other components often associated with rubber tires but not integral to the tire,
such as wheels, valve stems, and inner tubes, are not included in our definition of components of rubber tires and would not be subject to the requirements proposed with today's action. For purposes of regulation, we have subcategorized this source category as follows: (1) Rubber processing, (2) tire production, (3) tire cord production, and (4) puncture sealant application.
B. What Are the Primary Sources of Emissions and What Are the Emissions?
The primary sources of HAP emissions in the rubber tire production industry are: (1) Rubber processing; (2) the use of cements, solvents and associated mixtures for tire production; (3) tire cord production; and (4) puncture sealant application. Other HAP emission sources include storage vessels that contain cements, solvents and associated mixtures, wastewater, and research and development areas.
1. Rubber Processing
Rubber processing consists of the combination and mixing of various ingredients used to make mixed rubber compound, and the processing of the mixed rubber compound into components that make up a tire. The primary source of organic HAP emissions from rubber processing is the initial rubber compounding (e.g., mixing, milling, and extrusion) prior to the application of solvents and cement. During the initial rubber compounding, process materials including natural rubber, synthetic rubber, plasticizers (e.g., oils and waxes), curatives (e.g., sulfur), antioxidants, and reinforcements (e.g., silica, carbon black and resins) are mixed together in large mixers, called ``banburys,'' to make a particular rubber compound. Little or no HAP are added as raw materials to make the rubber compound.
The physical breakdown of synthetic and natural rubber polymers during mixing results in HAP emissions such as styrene and butadiene emissions. Heat generated by the physical nature of compound mixing and added curing agents also causes HAP emissions (e.g., carbon black and sulfur chemically combine to form carbon disulfide). Actual emissions from rubber compounding operations and other mechanical warming of the compounds (e.g., milling) are approximately 829 megagrams per year (Mg/ yr) (914 tons/yr). This is approximately 46 percent of the total annual tire production emissions in 1996.
Six generic rubber compounds are used to manufacture rubber tires. A seventh compound is manufactured for use as bladder material in the curing presses. Manufacturers modify these six compounds into proprietary rubber compounds to meet companyspecified tire performance criteria and functions. We considered whether the use of different compounds, as well as differences in the sequence and nature of some of the intermediate processing steps, affects our overall analysis of the rubber processing operation. We concluded that, despite the use of these proprietary compounds, the overall steps taken to process the rubber and subsequently manufacture the tires are essentially the same across the industry.
2. Tire Production
Various cements, solvents and related mixtures are used in
producing tires and tire components. Tire production processes where
these cements and solvents may be used include extruding, tread stock
cementing, side wall cementing, bead cementing, liner tack operations,
tire building, curing press spray operations, and finishing paint
operations. Cements and solvents are defined in Sec. 63.6015 of the proposed rule as:
* * * the collection of all organic chemicals, mixtures of chemicals, and compounds used in the production of rubber tires, including cements, solvents, and mixtures thereof as process aides in storage tanks, wastewater, and research and development areas. 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, general cleaning solvents, and slab dip mixtures. Cements and solvents do not include coatings used in tire cord production, puncture sealant application, or chemicals and compounds that are not used in the tire production process such as restroom cleaning compounds, office supplies (e.g., dryerase 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 and use by the general public.
We estimate that processes using cements and solvents account for 54 percent of the HAP emissions associated with the tire production industry, including emissions from storage vessels, wastewater, and research and development areas.
Cements and solvents are used for many purposes. For example, they may be used in ``cement'' application to generate a tacky surface for temporary binding of components prior to curing. In addition, they are often used for marking lines on rubber components for identification and component alignment at tire building. They may also be used as constituents in green tire lubricant spray, blemish paint used in tire finishing, and coatings used in white wall protection.
The RMA rubber tire manufacturing survey for the 1996 calendar year
estimated potential HAP emissions from the usage of cements and
solvents and sealants to be 1,280 Mg/yr (1,411 tons/yr). One operation,
treadend cementing, accounted for approximately 30 percent of these
emissions, 383 Mg/yr (422 tons/yr). The 1996 estimated emissions of HAP
associated with cements, solvents and associated mixtures for other operations are presented in table 1 as follows:
Table 1.Estimated Emissions From Cements and Solvents Usage in Tire Production
[1997 RMA tire production survey]
1996 estimated emissions, Operation mg/yr (tons/yr) Treadend cementing......................... 383 (422)
Undertread cement........................... 187 (207)
Bead cementing.............................. 40 (44)
Green tire spray............................ 191 (211)
Cement house................................ 34 (37)
Tanks....................................... 5 (6)
Miscellaneous cement and solvent use........ 439 (484)
3. Tire Cord Production
Tire cord is an integral sidewall component of rubber tires and is used primarily to provide resistance to sidewall flexing. In tire cord production, fibers or fabric are processed into a prepared fabric substrate which is subsequently used to prepare sidewall components. Tire cord production is a separate subcategory for purposes of this proposed rule because the process of tire cord production is significantly different from other tire component and tire manufacturing operations. The process of tire cord production also lends itself to separate and specific HAP controls.
Tire cord is produced by coating a continuous web of woven fabric
by dipping it in an aqueous, latexresin solution and then heating and
drying the coated fabric. This is typically accomplished in a three
step production process. First, the fabric is dipped in the coating
solution. Next, the coated fabric is typically heated and dried. Finally, the coated fabric is subjected to an
elevated temperature to heat set the fabric and polymerize the coating solution. The coating of the fabric ensures that a strong bond is formed between the tire cord fabric and a subsequently applied rubber compound in calendaring.
Tire cord production is an integral part of tire manufacturing because tire cord is a major subcomponent of the sidewall component of the tire manufacturing process. Tire cord production may be, but is not typically, located at a tire production facility. Tire cord is manufactured at twelve facilities in the U.S.
Organic HAP emissions from tire cord production result from the coating solutions used to prepare the fabric. The coating solution used is an aqueous, latexresin adhesive that typically consists of a mixture of resorcinol, formaldehyde, and latex. Actual HAP emissions associated with the tire cord production are estimated to be about 91 Mg/yr (100 tons/yr). However, depending on the formula of the coating solution and the type of fabric, HAP emissions for individual products can be minimal or even zero. The coating solution formulations used at each tire cord production facility are proprietary and have been developed to meet a company's specific requirements for the tires in which the tire cord will be used. In addition to limiting the amount of HAP in coatings, sources may control organic HAP emissions from tire cord production by using various addon pollution control devices (e.g., thermal oxidizers, carbon adsorbers).
4. Puncture Sealant Application
Emissions from puncture sealant application occur from the application of a mixture containing solvent constituents, rubber, and process oil to the inner liner of a completely manufactured tire. The puncture sealant mixture contains organic HAP that volatilize during the application process.
The 1997 RMA survey included one puncture sealant application process. The survey estimated HAP emissions from this puncture sealant application process to be approximately 15 Mg/yr (17 tons/yr). The main HAP emitted is hexane.
The application of the solvent mixture at the one facility occurs
in a spray booth which is reported to meet the requirements of our
definition of a permanent total enclosure (PTE) (40 CFR part 52,
appendix A, Method 204). Approximately 56 percent of the applied
puncture sealant mixture volatile composition is volatilized in the
application booth and captured and sent to the control device. The
remaining 44 percent of the HAP and nonHAP volatile material remains
in the tire. In order for the sealant to work properly over the life of
the tire, nearly all of the volatile compound containing material
remaining (89 percent or more of the remaining 44 percent) must be
retained in the applied puncture sealant mixture. The sealant's purpose
is to seal any future hole which might occur in the tread when an object penetrates the tire.
5. Storage, Transfer and Mixing Vessels Containing Cements and Solvents
Storage, transfer and mixing vessels containing cements and solvents and coatings are a potential source of HAP emissions at rubber tire manufacturing facilities. Separate facilities are used (except in bulk chemical storage) by each of the affected categories and subcategories. The majority of these emissions come from the cement house at tire production facilities (the principle distribution center within a facility), from mixing and storage areas within the tire cord production process areas, and at the point of use for tire production processes. Organic HAP emissions result from evaporative losses from cement and solvent storage and transfer and mixing operations. 6. Wastewater
Wastewater is another potential source of HAP emissions in the rubber tire manufacturing process. The HAP emissions from wastewater are generated during cooling and washing of various rubber tire manufacturing equipment and components.
7. Research and Development Areas
Most tire manufacturing facilities have research and development areas, including laboratories, for the purpose of testing new manufacturing protocols or developing new and improved tire technology. These research and development areas may or may not be at the manufacturing site and may have pilot plants sized to do laboratory scale research. Research and development facilities would be covered by the emission limits in the proposed standards. Research and development areas may use and emit HAP from cements and solvents.
Typically, research and development operations resemble laboratories where formulations of rubber compounds and cements and solvents are analyzed for future applications. The research facilities may also use existing plant equipment to test these newly developed formulations. Typically, several tires (as many as 100) may be produced to evaluate various desired qualities of the compound. The HAP emissions associated with research and development are a relatively small source in comparison to the HAP emissions from other sources at the facility. The majority of these emissions are produced during experimental tire building using the existing equipment normally used for production.
C. What Are the Affected Sources?
An affected source is a stationary source, group of stationary sources, or part of a stationary source regulated by the NESHAP. Within a source category or subcategory, we select the emission sources (emission points or groupings of emission points) that will make up the affected source. Each of these affected sources emits or has the potential to emit one or more of the HAP listed in section 112 of the CAA.
For purposes of this proposed rule, we have divided the rubber tire manufacturing source category into four source subcategories: (1) Rubber processing, (2) tire production, (3) tire cord production, and (4) puncture sealant application.
1. Rubber Processing
The rubber processing affected source is the collection of all primary rubber mixing processes (e.g., banburys and associated drop mills) and 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 affected source. 2. Tire Production
The affected source for the tire production source subcategory is
the collection of all processes that use cements and solvents located
at any rubber tire manufacturing facility. The affected source would
include, but is not limited to: Storage and mixing vessels and the
transfer equipment containing cements and/or solvents; wastewater
handling and treatment operations; research and development operations;
tread end cement operations; tire painting operations; ink and finish
operations; undertread cement operations; general plant cleanup
operations; 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 stripping operations; tire repair
operations; slab dip operations; other tire building operations to the
extent that cements and solvents are used; balance pad operations; component production and
tire manufacturing machinery and plant cleaning; and other cement or solvent application operations in the tire manufacturing process. The tire production affected source does not include processes included in the rubber processing, the tire cord production, or the puncture sealant application source subcategories.
3. Tire Cord Production
The affected source for the tire cord production source subcategory is the collection of all processes engaged in the production of tire cord. The affected source includes, but is not limited to: dipping operations, drying ovens, heatset ovens, bulk storage tanks, mixing facilities, general facility vents, air pollution control devices and warehouse storage vents.
4. Puncture Sealant Application
The affected source for the puncture sealant application source
subcategory is the puncture sealant application booth operation used to
apply puncture sealant to finished tires. For purposes of the proposed
rule, we have defined puncture sealant to mean the mixture of solvent
constituents, rubber, and process oil that is applied to the inner
liner of a finished tire for the purpose of sealing a future hole in the tire.
D. What Are the Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Other Standards? 1. Tire Production
For the tire production affected source, we are proposing to allow sources to choose one of two emission limitation options: (1) existing and new affected sources may choose to limit HAP emissions from the use of cements and solvents to no more than 1,000 grams per megagram of cement or solvent (2 pounds per ton) for each HAP listed in table 16 of the proposed rule, and 10,000 grams per megagram of cement or solvent (20 pounds per ton) for each HAP not listed in table 16; or, (2) existing and new affected sources may limit their total HAP emissions on a mass of total HAP per mass of rubber processed into tires. Specifically, if you own or operate an existing or new facility producing rubber tires, you must reduce the affected source emissions of HAP arising from cementing or solvent application to less than 0.024 grams per megagram (0.00005 pounds per ton) of rubber processed into tires.
The tire production standard options (options 1 and 2) are emission
limitations. The emission limitation in option 1 is based on the
emissions projected if sources used only cements and solvents
containing 0.1 mass percent of selected HAP (see table 16 in the
proposed rule) and 1.0 mass percent for all other HAP. The projected
emissions assume 100 percent of these HAP are emitted. The proposed
rule provides three alternatives for showing compliance with the limitations in option 1:
Option 2 provides the emission limitation corresponding to the emissions of total pounds of HAP (mass emitted) on a mass of rubber processed into tires (tons) over a monthly period. In other words, the emission standard is a monthly emission factor limitation associated with the production of tires. For each monthly period under option 2, you would be required to meet an emission limitation of 0.024 grams per megagram (0.00005 pounds per ton) of rubber processed into tires. Whereas option 1 limits individual HAP content (and therefore emissions), option 2 would limit total HAP content.
There are two compliance alternatives for meeting option 2, listed as follows:
For the tire cord production source subcategory, we are proposing that existing major sources meet a 280 grams per megagram fabric processed (0.56 pounds per ton fabric processed) HAP emission limit. For new major sources, we are proposing a HAP emission limit of 220 grams per megagram fabric processed (0.43 pounds per ton fabric processed).
In order to meet the proposed emission limitations, we are proposing that you meet one of the following two compliance alternatives: (1) Use coating solutions such that the monthly average HAP emissions do not exceed the applicable emission limit; or (2) use a control device to reduce HAP emissions such that the monthly average HAP emissions do not exceed the applicable emission limitation. 3. Puncture Sealant Application
For existing sources in the puncture sealant application source subcategory, we are proposing that you reduce the total organic HAP emissions from all puncture sealant application booths by at least 86 percent by weight. For new sources, you would have to reduce emissions by 95 percent by weight. In addition, you would have to meet specified control and capture device operating limits to ensure the continued proper operation of the equipment.
You would have two compliance alternatives in meeting the proposed standards. The first is an overall control efficiency alternative. To comply with this alternative, you would use an emissions capture system and control device and demonstrate that the application booth emissions meet the specified emission limitations and operating limits. The second alternative is based on use of a permanent total enclosure. To comply with this alternative, you would use a permanent total enclosure that satisfies the Method 204 criteria in 40 CFR part 51 and demonstrate that the control device meets the specified operating limits and reduces at least 86 percent of emissions for existing sources and 95 percent of emissions for new sources.
Table 2 summarizes the emission limitations for the tire
production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant application affected sources.
Table 2.Emission Limitations for Affected Sources Affected sources Pollutant Limit a Existing, new or Selected organic HAP Emissions must not reconstructed tire (See Table 16 of exceed 1,000 grams production facilityOption proposed rule). per megagram (2 1. pounds per ton) of the total cements and solvents. [[Page 62421]]
All other organic Emissions must not HAP. exceed 10,000 grams per megagram (20 pounds per ton) of the total cements and solvents. Existing, new or Total organic HAP... Emissions must not reconstructed tire exceed 0.024 grams production facilityOption per megagram 2. (0.00005 pounds per ton) of rubber processed into tires. Existing tire cord Organic HAP......... Emissions must not production facility. exceed 280 grams per megagram (0.56 pounds per ton) of fabric processed. New or reconstructed tire Organic HAP......... Emissions must not cord production. exceed 220 grams per megagram (0.43 pounds per ton) of fabric processed. New or reconstructed Organic HAP......... Reduce booth puncture sealant emissions by at application booth. least 95 percent. Existing puncture sealant Organic HAP......... Reduce booth application booth. emissions by at least 86 percent. 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 limit for every purchase; and (2) puncture sealant application affected sources must meet the emission reduction limit on a 3hour average.
E. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?
Under the proposed standards, we require that you demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation standard that applies to you not later than 3 years after the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register for existing sources, and no later than 180 days from the date of initial startup of a new or reconstructed source. Existing area sources that subsequently become major sources have 3 years from the date they become a major source to come into compliance.
1. Tire Production
If you have not purchased any materials (cements, solvents, mixtures, etc.) containing individual HAP above the levels prescribed in the HAP constituent emission limitations for tire production, you would be required to demonstrate initial compliance by submitting a Notification of Compliance Status report with a statement certifying that all cements and solvents purchased for use in the production of rubber tires meet the composition requirements specified in the proposed rule. Although you are not required to submit records to substantiate your statement of compliance, you would be required to maintain records that demonstrate that you are in compliance with the composition requirements of the option 1 emission limitation.
Alternatively, if you have cements and solvents containing HAP above the levels prescribed in the emission limitations for tire production but meet the composition requirements specified in the proposed rule when you also consider cements and solvents used that do not contain HAP, you would be required to demonstrate compliance differently. You would be required to demonstrate initial compliance by submitting the Notification of Compliance Status report with a statement certifying that all cements and solvents as applied in the production of rubber tires meet the composition requirements specified in the proposed rule for the monthly (30consecutiveday) period immediately preceding the compliance date of this proposed rule. This certification must include a list of all cements and solvents and mixtures thereof purchased for use for tire production, their quantities, and their individual HAP constituent compositions for the monthly period.
If you use materials containing HAP above the levels prescribed in the emission limitations for tire production, and you use one or more addon control devices to comply with the proposed rule, you would be required to demonstrate initial compliance by submitting the Notification of Compliance Status report that includes the information outlined in the preceding paragraph, along with a statement certifying that your capture systems and control devices are being operated within the parameter values established during the required performance test(s) for demonstrating compliance with the proposed rule for the 30 consecutiveday period immediately preceding the compliance date. This certification would be required to be accompanied with the performance test report(s) and parameter values established during the performance test(s) for continuous compliance monitoring.
If you choose to comply with the emission limitation specified in option 2, you would be required to demonstrate initial compliance by submitting the Notification of Compliance Status report with a statement certifying that the mass of HAP used per mass of rubber processed into tires over the monthly (30consecutive operating day) period preceding the compliance date did not exceed the limits specified. Your records to demonstrate this certification would, at a minimum, include a description of the measures taken (e.g., purchase of lowHAPcontent solvents or cements), the total amount of cements and solvents used, the amount of HAPcontaining solvents and cements used, and the operational status of any control equipment used in achieving some reduction in the HAP emissions.
Depending on the option and compliance alternative selected, you
would be required to perform the following tests to support your demonstrations of compliance:
manufacturing, general facility vents, air pollution control devices, wastewater fugitive emissions, research and development area vents, and warehouse storage vents.
To demonstrate initial compliance with the proposed standards for
tire cord production affected sources, you would be required to submit
a Notification of Compliance Status report with a statement certifying
that for the monthly (30consecutive operating day) period immediately
preceding the compliance date of this proposed rule, your affected
sources met the emission limitations specified in the proposed rule.
You would be required to perform the following tests to support your demonstration:
3. Puncture Sealant Application
To demonstrate compliance with the puncture sealant application standard, you must demonstrate compliance in one of two ways. First, you may choose to demonstrate the overall control efficiency of your emissions reductions system. In this case, you would demonstrate that the emissions capture system efficiency multiplied by the control device efficiency meets the applicable emissions limitation for the application booth emissions, and that your equipment meets the specified operating limits. You would demonstrate these efficiencies by conducting a performance test of the capture system and control device to determine their individual efficiencies. You would also establish operating parameters that you would subsequently monitor to demonstrate continuous compliance with the operating limits.
Alternatively, you could use a permanent total enclosure that satisfies the Method 204 criteria in 40 CFR part 51. Use of a permanent total enclosure certifies 100 percent capture. Then, you would demonstrate that the control device reduces at least 86 percent of emissions for existing sources and 95 percent of emissions for new or reconstructed sources and meets the specified operating limits. As above, you would demonstrate the control device efficiency by conducting a performance test. You would also establish operating parameters that you would subsequently monitor to demonstrate compliance with the operating limits.
F. What Are the Continuous Compliance Provisions?
The proposed standards require that you demonstrate continuous
compliance with each emission limitation that applies to you. For the
tire production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant application
source subcategories, you would be required to demonstrate continuous
compliance by monitoring each of the following as applicable to the
compliance plan of the affected source, in some instances, on a daily basis:
The monitoring data would be used to calculate the monthly average
limits. In the proposed rule, we have provided the necessary algorithms for calculating the monthly averages.
G. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements?
We have incorporated most of the requirements of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) into the proposed rule. Exceptions have been specified, as relevant.
You would be required to submit the following notifications and reports:
You would be required to maintain records for at least 5 years from
the date of each record. You must retain the records onsite for at
least the first 2 years but may retain the records offsite for the
remaining 3 years. In addition to the general recordkeeping
requirements of the General Provisions, you would be required to keep the following records:
A. How Did We Select the Source Category and Subcategories?
We listed tire manufacturing as a category of major sources of HAP on the initial list of major source categories (63 FR 7155). The primary HAP emitted are hexane, toluene, formaldehyde, methanol, and styrene. In gathering and evaluating more extensive information on tire manufacturing, we determined that tire manufacturing actually includes
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
For information concerning the
proposed standards, contact Mr. Anthony Wayne, Policy Planning and Standards Group, Emission Standards Division (MD13), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 5415439, electronic mail address email@example.com.