| Gossman Consulting, Inc |
GCI TECH NOTES©
Volume 8, Number 2 A Gossman Consulting, Inc. Publication February 2003
Dave Constans, Gossman
Consulting, Inc.
Also
be sure to visit the RegRef
on
O&M Plans
The EPA requires, in 40CFR Subpart LLL, that
an
Operation and Maintenance Plan and a Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction
Plan be
written for each cement production facility.
The regulations that detail the O&M and SSM plan
requirements were
written prior to 1994. They have been
revised somewhat since then, but have not been significantly changed. Consequently, these requirements, like a lot
of what the cement industry saw with respect to the BIF regulations and
the
early HWC MACT proposals, have the feel of regulations more applicable
to
purpose built incinerators or boilers than the complex processing
attributable
to cement production. The EPA uses the classification of “area” and
“major” source to determine the extent of the provisions of the
regulations
over the various operational equipment in the facility.
Frequently the major source category is
triggered by emissions such as HCl/Cl2 or Formaldehyde. This classification as a major source then
requires the facility to institute a number of testing, monitoring and
operations practices, including the O&M and SSM plans, on all
parts
of the facility. This means extensive
monitoring and operational requirements for all sources of particulate
emissions, i.e. the raw mill, clinker cooler, finish mill and transfer,
bin
storage or bagging systems. How such a
particulate emissions control scheme is required, when a facility is
deemed a
major source due to HCl/Cl2 or Formaldehyde emissions, is
not
evident. If the major source facility
sold its clinker to an off-site facility for processing, would that
cement
grinding facility have to implement the major source requirements for
its
process? Not as long as it could
demonstrate that it was otherwise an area source. It’s
not fair, but “that’s life”. For newer facilities with integrated process
control
computer systems meeting the monitoring requirements for a major source
facility, while troublesome, is a manageable problem.
For older facilities without an integrated computer control
system, and frequently with a number of smaller processing units rather
than
the large roller mills typical of newer technology, monitoring the
startup,
shutdown, malfunctions and O&M plan requirements for every dust
emissions
source, no matter how small or infrequently used, becomes extremely
burdensome
if not intrinsically impossible. Add to this the propensity for state agencies
to
have the attitude that the more verbose the plan the better and one can
easily
see a “fine meter” clicking off the dollars for every miss-step waiting
on the
day an enforcement agent stops by to collect the fee. This is of
course the worst scenario. It need not be
this way. There are a number of things
that can be
done to minimize the burden and the potential for fines.
The operations and maintenance plan and
startup,
shutdown and malfunction plan requirements are detailed in 40CFR
63.6(e). In addition 40CFR 63.1350(a)
requires that
the application for a part 70 permit include specific information
pertaining to
a written operation and maintenance plan.
Certainly 63.1350(a) does not supercede 63.6(e), but 63.1350(a)
does
clearly focus the cement facility’s effort on meeting the emission
limits and
operating/maintaining the pollution control equipment rather than the
entire
process as implied by the more broadly written operations and
maintenance plan
requirements of 63.6(e). Nor does
63.1350(a) reinforce the requirements of 63.6(e) (the O&M plan
requirements) by specifically referencing 63.6(e).
Clearly PC MACT’s focus is on the affected sources and air
pollution control devices not whether or not a written procedure has
been
followed and documented to start or stop an individual conveyor.
In
addition, the EPA definition for a “malfunction” is certainly very
different
from that of a cement plant engineer: “Malfunction means any
sudden,
infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air pollution
control
monitoring equipment, process equipment, or a process to operate in a
normal or
usual manner. Failures that are caused
in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions.”