2026-13550: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through

Deregulation C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

A. Executive Summary

In this final rule, the EPA is amending the PCWP NESHAP in response to multiple actions: the partial remand and vacatur of the 2004 final rule that promulgated the ``2004 rule'', the petition for reconsideration of the 2020 RTR, and to address previously unregulated HAP in the PCWP source category.1 2 This final rule establishes new emission limitations and work practices as appropriate that reflect MACT for HAP emitted by process units that are part of the PCWP source category. This action is an amendment to the previous technology review, not a new technology review as required under CAA section 112(d)(6). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 69 FR 45944 (July 30, 2004). \2\ 85 FR 49434 (Aug. 13, 2020). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The EPA promulgated the PCWP NESHAP on July 30, 2004. In the 2004 rule, for several process units, the EPA concluded that the MACT floors were represented by no emission reduction (or ``no-control'' emission floors). In 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated and remanded those portions of the 2004 rule.\3\ On August 13, 2020, the EPA took final action on the RTR of the PCWP NESHAP as required by Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2). The EPA acknowledged in the preamble to the proposed RTR that there were unregulated sources with ``no-control'' MACT determinations in the PCWP source category, and we stated our plans to address those units in a separate action subsequent to the RTR.\4\ The EPA also received a petition for reconsideration following promulgation of the 2020 RTR, which argued that the EPA failed to set limits for unregulated HAP, among other issues. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ NRDC v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1364 (D.C. Cir. 2007). \4\ 84 FR 47077-78 (Sept. 6, 2019). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On May 18, 2023, the EPA proposed revisions to the PCWP NESHAP (``May 2023 proposal'') to set MACT standards for total HAP (including acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, propionaldehyde), MDI, and combustion-related HAP. The proposed standards for combustion related HAP include non-Hg HAP metals, mercury, HCl, PAH, and D/F).\5\ We proposed setting total HAP and MDI standards for sources with previously vacated no-control floor determinations, MDI standards for processes that use MDI resins and coatings, and standards to limit combustion-related HAP from direct wood- and other fuel-fired dryers. See section II.C of this preamble for additional details and other proposed changes that were included in the May 2023 proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ 88 FR 31856 (May 18, 2023). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The public comment period for the May 2023 proposal closed on July 18, 2023. We summarize some of the more significant comments we timely received regarding the proposed rule and provide our responses in section III of this preamble. A summary of all other public comments on the proposal and the EPA's responses to those comments is available in the docket for this rulemaking along with a redline strikeout version of the regulatory language that incorporates the changes.6 7 The EPA is finalizing MACT standards largely as proposed to address sources with previously vacated no-control floor determinations and unregulated HAP in the PCWP source category. Changes from the proposed rule are listed in Table 1 and include setting D/F emission limitations for direct wood-fired green rotary dryers, adding a definition for PAH, technical corrections to emissions data analyses, refinement to work practice standards for sources including lumber kilns, fiber washers, log vats, and wastewater operations to address comments on technical feasibility or clarity, and other changes to improve clarity such as revising the definition for non-HAP resin. Section III.G.4 of this preamble contains our responses to the issues raised by the petition for reconsideration that the EPA received on the 2020 RTR final rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD), Response to Public Comments on May 18, 2023 Proposed Amendments, available in the docket for this rulemaking. \7\ Final Regulation Edits for 40 CFR part 63 Subpart DDDD National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The EPA estimates that this final rule will result in the reduction of approximately 720 tons per year (tpy) HAP and 8,500 tpy volatile organic compounds (VOC) at a total annualized cost of $53 million (2024 dollars) to 219 affected major source facilities. Section IV of this preamble describes in more detail the final costs, emissions reductions, and economic impacts of this final rule. [[Page 41412]] Table 1--Summary of Final Amendments ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Action Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Finalize standards for lumber Establishes work practice standards kilns. to limit emissions of organic HAP, combustion-related HAP, and VOCs from lumber kilns. Finalize standards for organic HAP Establishes numeric standards for emitted by process units with organic HAP for new and existing previous ``no-control'' MACT atmospheric refiners and heated determinations. zones of existing fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers; establishes work practice standards for new and existing resinated material handling process units, stand-alone digesters, fiber washers, and log vats; and defines mixed PCWP process emissions streams subject to the NESHAP. Finalize standards for previously Establishes numeric standards for unregulated resin-related HAP. MDI emissions for reconstituted wood products presses, tube dryers that blow-line blend MDI resin, and miscellaneous coating operations. Finalize standards for previously Establishes numeric standards for unregulated combustion-related emissions of combustion-related HAP HAP. for new and existing direct wood- fired dryers; establishes work practice standards to limit emissions of combustion-related HAP, including D/F, by requiring burner tune-ups for burners associated with direct wood-fired and direct natural gas-fired dryers and by requiring continuous monitoring of an indicator of combustion unit bypass stack usage associated with PCWP dryers and lumber kilns. Other updates and revisions....... Establishes performance testing requirements for new and existing source emission limits; establishes monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements; removes obsolete rule language including the emissions averaging compliance option for existing affected sources, dates, and startup/ shutdown provisions that are no longer in effect; and updates and clarifies electronic reporting requirements. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Does this action apply to me?

Regulated entities. Table 2 of this preamble presents categories and entities that this action potentially regulates. Table 2--NESHAP and Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Final Action ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NESHAP and source category NAICS \1\ code ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 321113, 321211, 321212, 321215, CFR part 63, subpart DDDD). 321219, and 321999. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ North American Industry Classification System. The EPA does not intend table 2 of this preamble to be exhaustive but rather to provide a guide for readers regarding the entities that this final action is likely to affect. To determine if this action affects your facility, you should examine the applicability criteria in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 63, subpart DDDD. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of this NESHAP, please contact the appropriate person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related

information? In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this action is available on the internet. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a brief summary of this rulemaking may be found at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243. Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this final action at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/plywood-and-composite-wood-products-manufacture-national-emission. Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version of the final rule and key technical documents at this same website.

D. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration

Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final action is available only by filing a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) by September 4, 2026. CAA section 307(b)(2) prohibits a party from challenging this final rule separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA for enforcement. CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) further provides that only an objection to a rule or procedure that was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment (including any public hearing) may be raised during judicial review. This section also requires the EPA to reconsider the rule if the person raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was impracticable to raise such objection within the period for public comment or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule. Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, WJC South Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

E. Severability

This final rule contains several discrete components, which the EPA views as severable as a practical matter (i.e., they are functionally independent and will operate in practice independently of the other components). These discrete components are detailed in sections III.A through III.G of this preamble and [[Page 41413]] the technical memoranda available in the docket. For example, the final requirements for direct-fired PCWP dryers, lumber kilns, process units that use MDI resins or coatings, monitoring of process unit bypass stacks, and performance testing generally function independently of one another and would not be impacted if a reviewing court were to vacate one or more of the other final provisions. In addition, as this final rule revises an existing NESHAP, the EPA notes that if a reviewing court were to vacate one or more of the standards finalized here, the affected standards will revert to those present in the 2020 RTR final rule.

A. What is the statutory authority for this action?

CAA section 112, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7412) provides the statutory authority for this action. CAA section 112 establishes a two-stage regulatory process to develop standards for emissions of HAP from stationary sources. Generally, the first stage involves establishing technology-based standards that reflect MACT or an appropriate alternative.\8\ The second stage involves evaluating those standards within eight years to determine whether additional standards are needed to address any remaining risk associated with HAP emissions.\9\ The EPA commonly refers to this second stage as the ``residual risk review.'' In addition to the residual risk review, CAA section 112 also requires the EPA to review the standards at least every eight years and ``revise as necessary'' taking into account ``developments in practices, processes, or control technologies.'' \10\ This review, commonly referred to as the ``technology review,'' is the subject of this final rule. The discussion that follows identifies the most relevant CAA section 112 statutory sections and briefly explains the contours of the methodology used to implement these statutory requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(1)-(4). \9\ Id. 7412(f)(2). \10\ Id. 7412(d)(6). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the first stage, the EPA promulgates technology-based standards under CAA section 112(d) for categories of sources identified as emitting one or more of the HAP listed in CAA section 112(b). ``Major sources'' are those that emit, or have the potential to emit, any single HAP at a rate of 10 tpy or more, or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP.\11\ For major sources, these standards are commonly referred to as MACT standards; CAA section 112(d)(2) provides that these must reflect the maximum degree of emission reductions of HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy requirements, and non-air quality health and environmental impacts). In developing MACT standards, CAA section 112(d)(2) directs the EPA to consider the application of measures, processes, methods, systems, or techniques, including, but not limited to, those that reduce the volume of or eliminate HAP emissions through process changes, substitution of materials, or other modifications; enclose systems or processes to eliminate emissions; collect, capture, or treat HAP when released from a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; are design, equipment, work practice, or operational standards; or any combination of the above. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ Id. 7412(a)(1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAA section 112(d)(3) establishes a minimum control level for MACT standards, known as the MACT ``floor,'' based on emission controls achieved in practice by the best performing sources. For new sources, the MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission control achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source. The MACT standards for existing sources can be less stringent than floors 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 five sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30 sources). In certain instances, as provided in CAA section 112(h), the EPA may set work practice standards in lieu of numerical emission standards. Under CAA section 112(h), the EPA may adopt a work practice standard in lieu of a numerical emission standard if it is ``not feasible in the judgment of the Administrator to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of a hazardous air pollutant or pollutants.'' \12\ CAA section 112(h)(2) defines the phrase ``not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard'' to mean any situation where the Administrator either determines that a HAP or HAPs ``cannot be emitted through a conveyance designed and constructed to emit or capture such pollutant, or that any requirement for, or use of such a conveyance would be inconsistent with any Federal, State or local law'' \13\ or determines that ``the application of measurement methodology to a particular class of sources is not practicable due to technological and economic limitations.'' \14\ The EPA considers a measurement to be not technologically practicable within the meaning of CAA section 112(h)(2)(B) if the majority of the measurements are below the detection limit. Such measurements raise issues of questionable reliability, feasibility, and enforceability. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ Id. 7412(h)(1). \13\ Id. 7412(h)(2)(A). \14\ Id. 7412(h)(2)(B). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The EPA also considers control options that are more stringent than the floor and may establish standards more stringent than the floor, based on the consideration of the cost of achieving the emissions reductions, any non-air quality health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.\15\ Standards more stringent than the floor are commonly referred to as ``beyond-the-floor'' standards. In the second stage of the regulatory process, the CAA section 112(d)(6) requires the EPA to undertake a technology review no less frequently than every eight years. Under the technology review, the EPA must review the technology-based standards and revise them ``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices, processes, and control technologies).'' \16\ In conducting this review, the EPA is not required to recalculate the MACT floors that were established in earlier rulemakings.\17\ The EPA may consider cost in deciding whether to revise the standards pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6).\18\ Following the D.C. Circuit's decision in Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) v. EPA,\19\ the EPA also reviews available data to determine if there are unregulated HAP within the source category and evaluate these data for use in developing new emission standards. The D.C. Circuit held in LEAN that the EPA is required to address unregulated HAP from a major source category when the Agency conducts a technology review of a NESHAP that previously left such HAP unregulated.\20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ Id. 7412(d)(2). \16\ CAA section 112(d)(6). CAA section 112 is codified at 42 U.S.C. 7412. \17\ Ass'n of Battery Recyclers, Inc. v. EPA, 716 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2013); NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1084 (D.C. Cir. 2008). \18\ 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(2), (6); Ass'n of Battery Recyclers, 716 F.3d at 673-74. \19\ 955 F.3d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2020). \20\ The Agency is proposing elsewhere, see e.g., 91 FR 21672 (Apr. 22, 2026), that the D.C. Circuit's decision in LEAN did not address the separate question whether the statute is best read as mandating that the EPA address any unregulated emission points during the next available technology review. Rather, as proposed, the EPA retains discretion to evaluate whether and at what time to expand the regulatory scope of the NESHAP to include additional emission points, including whether it is appropriate to regulate such additional emission points in the NESHAP for the particular source category at issue or instead as part of a different or new source category. In this final rule, the EPA is regulating emission points excluded from the 2004 rule in response to the D.C. Circuit's 2007 remand in NRDC, which held that the Agency had wrongfully excluded these emission points in the first instance from the 2004 rule that established standards for the PCWP source category. Doing so at this time is consistent with the EPA's obligations on remand from NRDC and with the EPA's discretion to address unregulated emission points when appropriate and in an appropriate manner. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 41414]] In the 2004 rule, the EPA concluded that the MACT floors for several process units were represented by no emission reduction (or ``no control'' emission floors) and declined to set standards for those units. In 2007, the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA's use of ``no- control'' emission floors to avoid setting emissions standards in another source category was unlawful.\21\ In response, the EPA requested a voluntary remand and vacatur of the portions of the 2004 rule that included these ``no-control'' emission floor determinations.\22\ The D.C. Circuit remanded and vacated those portions of the 2004 rule to the EPA to set emission standards for those units to replace the unlawful ``no-control'' floor determinations.\23\ On August 13, 2020, the EPA took final action on the RTR of the PCWP NESHAP as required by CAA sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2). The EPA acknowledged in the preamble to the proposed RTR that there are unregulated sources with ``no-control'' MACT determinations in the PCWP source category, and we stated our plans to address those units in a separate action subsequent to the RTR.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875, 883 (D.C. Cir. 2007). \22\ NRDC, 489 F.3d at 1371. \23\ See id. at 1375. . \24\ 84 FR 47077-78 (Sept. 6, 2019). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This final rule responds to the partial remand and vacatur of the 2004 rule, the petition for reconsideration of the 2020 RTR, and addresses previously unregulated HAP in the PCWP source category. This final rule establishes new standards that reflect MACT for HAP emitted by process units that are part of the PCWP source category, pursuant to CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) and, where appropriate, CAA section 112(h). The EPA is setting ``total HAP'' standards (defined in the PCWP NESHAP as acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde) for sources with previously vacated ``no-control'' MACT determinations. In addition to total HAP, the EPA is setting standards for previously unregulated HAP present in the PCWP source category, including non-Hg HAP metals, Hg, HCl, PAH, and D/F as a result of combustion in direct-fired dryers and MDI from processes that use MDI resins and coatings.

B. What is the PCWP source category and how does the current NESHAP

regulate its HAP emissions? The EPA originally promulgated the PCWP NESHAP on July 30, 2004.\25\ The standards are codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD. The PCWP industry consists of facilities engaged in the production of PCWP or kiln-dried lumber. PCWP are manufactured by bonding wood material (fibers, particles, strands, etc.) or agricultural fiber, generally with resin under heat and pressure, to form a structural panel or engineered wood product. PCWP manufacturing facilities also include facilities that manufacture dry veneer and lumber kilns located at any facility. PCWP includes (but are not limited to) plywood, veneer, particleboard, oriented strand board (OSB), hardboard, fiberboard, medium density fiberboard (MDF), laminated strand lumber, laminated veneer lumber (LVL), wood I-joists, kiln-dried lumber, and glue-laminated beams. There are currently 219 major source facilities that are subject to the PCWP NESHAP, including 93 facilities manufacturing PCWP and 126 facilities producing kiln-dried lumber. A major source of HAP is a plant site that emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons) or more, or any combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more per year from all emission sources at the plant site. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ 69 FR 45944 (July 30, 2004). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The affected source under the PCWP NESHAP is the collection of dryers, refiners, blenders, formers, presses, board coolers, and other process units associated with the manufacturing of PCWP. The affected source includes, but is not limited to, green end operations, refining, drying operations (including any combustion unit exhaust stream routinely used to direct fire process unit(s)), resin preparation, blending and forming operations, pressing and board cooling operations, and miscellaneous finishing operations (such as sanding, sawing, patching, edge sealing, and other finishing operations not subject to other NESHAP). The affected source also includes onsite storage and preparation of raw materials used in the manufacturing of PCWP, such as resins; onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing; and miscellaneous coating operations. The affected source includes lumber kilns at PCWP manufacturing facilities and at any other kind of facility. The PCWP NESHAP contains several compliance options for process units subject to the standards: (1) installation and use of emissions control systems with an efficiency of at least 90 percent; (2) production-based limits that restrict HAP emissions per unit of product produced; and (3) emissions averaging that allows control of emissions from a group of sources collectively (only at existing affected sources). These compliance options apply for the following process units: fiberboard mat dryer heated zones (at new affected sources); green rotary dryers; hardboard ovens; press predryers (at new affected sources); pressurized refiners; primary tube dryers; secondary tube dryers; reconstituted wood product board coolers (at new affected sources); reconstituted wood product presses; softwood veneer dryer heated zones; rotary strand dryers; and conveyor strand dryers (zone one at existing affected sources, and zones one and two at new affected sources). In addition, the PCWP NESHAP includes work practice standards for dry rotary dryers, hardwood veneer dryers, softwood veneer dryers, veneer redryers, and group 1 miscellaneous coating operations (defined in 40 CFR 63.2292). The 2020 RTR found that the risk associated with air emissions from the PCWP manufacturing industry (including those from lumber kilns and other process units and HAP for which we had not yet responded to the 2007 partial remand and vacatur) are acceptable and that the current PCWP NESHAP provides an ample margin of safety to protect public health. In the 2020 RTR, the EPA concluded that there were no developments in practices, processes, or control technologies that would warrant revisions to the specific standards already promulgated in 2004. In addition to conclusions with respect to the RTR, the 2020 action contained amendments to remove exemptions from the standards during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). The 2020 RTR amendments added work practices so there would be standards in place of the former startup and shutdown exemptions for three specific events that occur during PCWP production: safety-related shutdowns, pressurized refiner startup/shutdown, and softwood veneer dryer gas- burner relights. Lastly, the 2020 RTR amendments included provisions requiring electronic reporting and repeat emissions testing. In the 2020 RTR, the EPA did not address and reached no conclusions regarding unregulated HAP. The 2020 RTR did not address [[Page 41415]] establishing MACT emissions limits or work practices for the process units or HAP that were the subject of the 2007 D.C. Circuit's partial remand and vacatur of the 2004 rule's ``no-control'' MACT determinations. Consequently, this is the first rulemaking in which the EPA has addressed emission limits and work practices for these process units and HAP, since the 2007 ruling.

C. What changes did we propose for the PCWP source category in our May

18, 2023, proposal? On May 18, 2023, the EPA published a proposal in the Federal Register for the PCWP NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD to set MACT standards for total HAP, MDI, and combustion-related HAP including non- Hg HAP metals, Hg, HCl, PAH, D/F. Total HAP limits were proposed for fiberboard mat dryers at existing sources, hardboard press predryers at existing sources, and atmospheric refiners at existing and new sources. Limits for non-Hg HAP metals in the form of particulate matter (PM), Hg, HCl, and PAH were proposed for direct wood- and other fuel-fired dryers at existing and new sources. MDI limits were proposed for reconstituted wood product presses using MDI, tube dryers blow-line blending MDI, and miscellaneous coating operations. The proposed rule also included the addition of burner tune-up requirements for all direct-fired PCWP dryers, direct-fired lumber kilns, and associated combustion unit bypass stacks. Work practice standards were also proposed for lumber kilns, stand-alone digesters, fiber washers, log vats, wastewater operations, and resinated material handling (RMH) units, including resin tanks, blenders, formers, reconstituted wood products board coolers at existing sources, plywood presses, engineered wood product presses and curing chambers, finishing sanders, finishing saws, panel trim chippers, humidifiers, and wastewater operations. The proposed rule included the removal of the emissions averaging compliance option for existing affected sources (not available for new affected sources). The proposed rule also included a requirement for mixed PCWP process streams at existing sources currently meeting the compliance options present in Table 1B of this subpart to continue doing so. Additionally, the proposed rule included a requirement to monitor process unit bypass stack usage at all times; plus, the proposal added emissions testing; monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements relevant to the standards being added. The proposal incorporated a revised definition of ``pressurized refiner'' to clearly distinguish between stand-alone digesters and pressurized refiners. Lastly, the proposed rule included the removal of obsolete date language associated with amendments finalized on August 13, 2020, that are now implemented.

A. Analytical Procedures

The MACT standards finalized in this action were developed pursuant to CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) or, when appropriate, CAA section 112(h). When developing MACT standards, the ``MACT floor'' for existing sources is calculated based on the average performance of the best performing units in each category or subcategory and on a consideration of the variability of HAP emissions from these units. The MACT floor for new sources is based on the emissions levels that are achieved by the best performing similar source, with a similar consideration of variability. For existing sources, the MACT floor is based on the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of sources (for which the EPA has emissions information) for source categories or subcategories with 30 or more sources, or the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing five sources (for which the EPA has or could reasonably obtain emissions information) for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30 sources. The EPA does not consider costs when determining the MACT floor. To account for variability in PCWP manufacturing operations and resulting emissions, we calculated the MACT floors using the 99 percent Upper Prediction Limit (UPL) using performance data collected from two CAA section 114 surveys of PCWP facilities in 2017 and 2022.\27\ We note that the MACT floors for certain existing and new units are based on limited data sets.\28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ For more information regarding the general use of the UPL and why it is appropriate for calculating MACT floors, see Use of Upper Prediction Limit for Calculating MACT Floors (UPL Memo), available in the docket for this rulemaking. \28\ See the memorandum entitled Revised Approach for Applying the Upper Prediction Limit to Limited Datasets, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Once the UPL is calculated for a pollutant, the representative detection limit (RDL) for the pollutant measurement method is considered, if necessary. The RDL is representative of the laboratory instrument sensitivity and lowest industry-standard method detection limits (MDL) achieved when analyzing air pollutant samples. Consideration of the RDL is necessary when pollutants are measured near or below the detection limit of the analysis method, which was the case for some HAP measured in the 2022 survey. The EPA compares a value of three times the RDL (3xRDL) of the pollutant to UPL [[Page 41416]] values to ensure that the calculated MACT floors account for measurement variability.\29\ If the 3xRDL value exceeds the MACT floor UPL, the 3xRDL value is substituted as the MACT floor emission limit to ensure that the standard is set no lower than the minimum level at which emissions can reliably be measured. We applied an established procedure for cases where we had low detection data to handle below detection level (BDL) data and develop RDL data when setting MACT emission limits.\30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ The factor of three used in the 3xRDL calculation is based on a scientifically accepted definition of level of quantitation-- simply stated, the level where a test method performs with acceptable precision. The level of quantitation has been defined as 10 times the standard deviation of seven replicate analyses of a sample at a concentration level close to the MDL units of the emission standard. That level is then compared to the MACT floor value to ensure that the resulting emission limit is in a range that can be measured with reasonable precision. In other words, if the 3xRDL value were less than the calculated floor (e.g., calculated from the UPL), we would conclude that measurement variability has been adequately addressed by the calculated floor; if it were greater than the calculated floor, we would adjust the emissions limit to comport with the 3xRDL value to address measurement variability. \30\ Westlin, P. & Merrill, R. (2012). Data and procedure for handling below detection level data in analyzing various pollutant emissions databases for MACT and RTR emissions limits, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition, under CAA section 112(d)(2), the EPA must examine more stringent ``beyond-the-floor'' regulatory options to determine MACT. Unlike the floor minimum stringency requirements, the EPA must consider various impacts of the more stringent regulatory options in determining whether MACT standards are to reflect beyond-the-floor requirements. These impacts include the cost of achieving additional emissions reduction beyond that achieved by the MACT floor, any non-air quality health and environmental impacts that would result from imposing controls beyond the floor, and energy requirements of such beyond floor measures. If the EPA concludes that the more stringent regulatory options have unreasonable impacts, the EPA selects the MACT floor as MACT. However, if the EPA concludes that impacts associated with beyond-the-floor levels of control are reasonable considering additional HAP emissions reductions achieved, the EPA selects those beyond-the-floor levels as MACT. For some process types, it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce a numerical emission standard using the MACT floor and MACT determination approach described in CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3). According to CAA section 112(h)(1), MACT standards may take the form of design, equipment, work practice, or operational standards if it is not feasible in the judgment of the Administrator to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of HAP. To support a determination that it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of HAP, CAA sections 112(h)(2)(A) and (B) require the EPA to determine that either: (A) a HAP or pollutants cannot be emitted through a conveyance designed and constructed to emit or capture such pollutant, or that any requirement for, or use of, such a conveyance would be inconsistent with any Federal, State or local law, or (B) the application of measurement methodology to a particular class of sources is not practicable due to technological and economic limitations.

B. MACT Standards for Direct-Fired PCWP Dryers

As proposed, the EPA is finalizing standards for two subcategories of PCWP direct-fired dryers: (1) wood and other fuel-fired dryers; and (2) natural gas fuel-fired dryers. We subcategorized PCWP direct-fired dryers by fuel type because wood and other fuel-fired dryers have different design and combustion-related HAP emissions profiles from those firing natural gas (or propane). We are finalizing the addition of the following definitions to the PCWP NESHAP to delineate the different types of direct-fired PCWP dryers: PCWP dryer, Direct wood- fired PCWP dryer, and Direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryer. In addition, we are finalizing the same definition of natural gas used in the NESHAP codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD (``Boiler MACT''). As proposed, the EPA is finalizing a work practice standard requiring annual burner tune-ups for the combustion unit(s) that fire new and existing direct-fired PCWP dryers. The purpose of the annual burner tune-ups is to control all combustion-related HAP that may be emitted from direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryers and control D/F emissions from direct wood-fired dryers. In addition to requiring annual burner tune-ups for all direct-fired dryers, we are also finalizing the proposed requirement for new and existing direct-fired PCWP dryers to continuously monitor an indicator of their combustion unit bypass stack usage such as flow damper position or temperature to address any HAP emitted from combustion bypass stacks associated with direct-fired PCWP dryers. As explained in the preamble, work practice standards for direct-fired dryer bypass stacks are justified because emissions are not technically and feasibly measurable.

1. What combustion HAP standards did we propose for direct wood-fired

dryers? For direct wood-fired PCWP dryers, emission limits for combustion HAP were developed following the approach described in section III.A. The MACT emission limits were developed in mass per production and concentration units to provide compliance options for the various dryer configurations subject to the standards. Mass per production units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet (lb/MSF) for softwood veneer dryers and pounds per oven dried ton (lb/ODT) for all other dryer types. Concentration units include grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) for PM and milligrams per dry standard cubic meter (mg/ dscm) for non-PM pollutants. The EPA proposed MACT standards for combustion-related HAP (non-Hg metals, Hg, HCl, PAH, and D/F) from direct wood-fired PCWP dryers, which include rotary strand dryers, green rotary dryers, dry rotary dryers, tube dryers, softwood veneer dryers (heated zones), fiberboard mat dryers (heated zones), and hardboard ovens. The EPA proposed PM numerical limits to serve as a surrogate to control non-Hg metals and proposed numerical limits for both mercury and HCl. Additionally, the EPA proposed PAH numerical limits for all direct wood-fired dryers based on an aggregate of 19 PAH compounds which serve as a surrogate for all PAHs in the PCWP source category. Lastly, the EPA proposed a D/ F work practice to address D/F emissions from direct wood-fired dryers in the PCWP source category. Some, but not all, changes to the direct- fired standards from the May 2023 proposal are discussed in the remainder of this section.\31\ A complete discussion of changes is provided in the RTC document and a docketed memorandum.\32\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ 88 FR 31861-67 (May 18, 2023). \32\ Revised Regulatory Options for Combustion-related HAP from Plywood and Composite Wood Products Direct-Fired Dryers, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What comments did we receive on combustion HAP standards for direct

wood-fired dryers? Comment: The EPA received comments on specific data and production values used in our calculations of the proposed PM emission limit for green rotary dryers. EPA Response: After reevaluating the production values used in the PM UPL calculations for green rotary dryers, and [[Page 41417]] reviewing the technical errors raised by commenters, the EPA agreed with commenters and found that the new and existing source limits for PM required correction due to technical errors. See section 3 of the RTC document located in the docket for this rulemaking for these specific comments and our responses regarding revisions. Comment: With regards to the proposed PAH limits for wood-fired dryers, commenters argued that data quality issues with the PAH data collected in the 2022 survey render the data unsuitable for setting these limits. The commenters requested that the EPA remove the PAH limits based on the collected data and instead rely on the annual burner tune-up work practice to control PAH emissions. The commenters noted the annual burner tune-up work practice to reduce D/F formation would also reduce the formation of PAH. EPA Response: The EPA agrees, in part, with the commenter's concern over data quality. The EPA has reevaluated the PAH data and concluded the data were acceptable for setting MACT limits after two adjustments. First, we removed one 3-run test with excessive contamination from the final MACT analysis (in addition to a single test run with lab analysis problems we had already removed from the proposed MACT analysis). Second, we removed naphthalene from the MACT floor analysis and from the rule specific definition of PAH at 40 CFR 63.2292 to preemptively address naphthalene contamination issues in future compliance demonstrations.\33\ The EPA received sufficient data in the 2022 survey to demonstrate that the remaining 18 PAH congeners serve as an appropriate surrogate for polycyclic organic matter and naphthalene, the listed HAP that PAH standards are intended to regulate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \33\ See the RTC document and memorandum entitled Revised Regulatory Options for Combustion-related HAP from Plywood and Composite Wood Products Direct-Fired Dryers, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment: Some commenters argued that our proposal to use the 3xRDL value of 3.3E-05 mg/dscm as the PAH limit for wood-fired softwood veneer dryers in the absence of PAH test data was arbitrary and capricious. EPA Response: The EPA agrees that we lacked adequate data to establish a numerical MACT limit for softwood veneer dryers. Performance data were not collected from direct-wood fired softwood veneer dryers in the CAA section 114 survey because softwood veneer dryers were not expected to have the same potential for formation of detectable PAH emissions as direct wood-fired rotary and tube dryers, which operate at higher temperatures under more turbulent conditions. Upon further consideration in response to these comments, we are not finalizing the proposed 3xRDL limit for wood-fired softwood veneer dryers and instead are relying on the burner tune-up standards included in the rule to limit the potential for PAH emissions from wood-fired softwood veneer dryers. However, we require that wood-fired softwood veneer dryers conduct performance testing for PAH emissions along with the compliance tests required for other combustion-related HAPs. Although we do not expect to find detectable PAH emissions, if PAH are detected, these test results could be used during the next eight-year technology review to determine if revision to a numerical standard is warranted. Comment: One commenter questioned our analysis of D/F toxic equivalency (TEQ) emissions data and proposed that a work practice is justified for D/F from wood-fired dryers because emissions cannot reliably be measured due to the prevalence of non-detects in more than 55 percent of TEQ runs.\34\ The commenter suggested that the EPA reevaluate the RDL as a result of D/F test method improvements in recent years and questioned if the EPA should have compared detected TEQ to the 3xRDL value as was done for the proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ TEQ of dioxin and furan congeners is relative to the toxicity of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlordibenzo-p-dioxin. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA Response: We maintain that use of the current RDL is appropriate for this rulemaking. The EPA may consider updating the RDL as additional lab experience and data sets become available for a broader set of emission sources using the revised EPA Method 23, which was not finalized at the time of the PCWP CAA section 114 data collection. However, the EPA agrees with commenters that the RDL is not the appropriate detection value when determining the number of non- detect TEQ runs. We updated our analysis of the detected TEQ to compare to the estimated detection limit (EDL) of 1.8E-02 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (ng/dscm) instead of 3xRDL to adhere to guidance for evaluating when to establish numerical MACT limits versus establishing work practices.\35\ Upon reanalysis, the percentage of non-detect TEQ runs remained the same as proposed for wood-fired rotary strand dryers (100 percent non-detect), dry rotary dryers (100 percent non-detect), and tube dryers (80 percent non-detect). We no longer found that a substantial majority of green rotary dryer TEQ runs were non-detect upon comparison with the EDL. As a result, we are revising the rule to add a numerical limit for D/F from direct wood-fired green rotary dryers based on the emissions data sets available at proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \35\ See the June 5, 2014 memorandum entitled Determination of ``non-detect'' from EPA Method 29 (multi-metals) and EPA Method 23 (dioxin/furan) test data when evaluating the setting of MACT floors versus establishing work practice standards, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emissions data for D/F (in terms of TEQ) are available for three out of six direct wood-fired green rotary dryer systems. The UPL MACT floor calculations for existing sources were based on all three systems because fewer than 30 direct wood-fired green rotary dryer systems exist. The UPL MACT floor calculation for new sources was based on the best performing system. The TEQ MACT floor for existing direct wood- fired green rotary dryer systems is 1.3E-09 lb/ODT or 1.7E-01 ng/dscm based on the UPL. The TEQ MACT floor for new direct wood-fired green rotary dryers is 4.4E-10 lb/ODT or 3.7E-02 ng/dscm based on 3xRDL. The 3xRDL value was substituted for the UPL in the new source MACT floor to ensure that the standards are established at the minimum level at which emissions can be measured reliably. The TEQ MACT floors are based on dryers that already have PM and organic HAP controls in series. The burner tune-up requirements required for all direct-fired PCWP dryers are expected to help with meeting the TEQ MACT floors. No options more stringent than the MACT floors were identified for existing or new sources. No reductions in TEQ emissions were estimated for existing or new wood-fired green rotary dryer systems because they are expected to meet the MACT floor with baseline controls and proper tuning.

3. What Combustion HAP Standards Are We Finalizing for Direct Wood-

Fired Dryers Table 3 of this preamble summarizes the MACT emission limits being finalized for direct wood-fired PCWP dryers. [[Page 41418]] Table 3--Final Emission Limits for Combustion-Related HAP for Direct Wood-Fired PCWP Dryers \e\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PM (non-Hg HAP PCWP Dryer metal) limit \a\ Hg limit \a\ HCl limit \a\ PAH limit \a\ \b\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rotary strand dryer--existing... 9.9E-02 lb/ODT or 1.7E-05 lb/ODT or 5.8E-03 lb/ODT or 1.1E-04 lb/ODT or 3.6E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 1.5E-01 mg/dscm. 9.9E-03 mg/dscm. Rotary strand dryer--new........ 5.6E-02 lb/ODT or 1.7E-05 lb/ODT or 1.7E-03 lb/ODT or 1.8E-05 lb/ODT or 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 1.5E-03 mg/dscm. Green rotary dryer--existing.... 2.9E-01 lb/ODT or. 1.5E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-02 lb/ODT or 3.2E-04 lb/ODT or 5.2E-03 gr/dscf... 1.3E-03 mg/dscm. 1.7 mg/dscm. 4.2E-02 mg/dscm. Green rotary dryer--new......... 3.7E-02 lb/ODT or 1.1E-05 lb/ODT or 2.9E-03 lb/ODT or 6.2E-05 lb/ODT or 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 2.9E-03 mg/dscm. Dry rotary dryer--existing...... 6.5E-01 lb/ODT or. 1.0E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-03 lb/ODT or 4.6E-05 lb/ODT or 9.8E-02 gr/dscf... 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 4.1E-03 mg/dscm. Dry rotary dryer--new........... 6.0E-01 lb/ODT or 1.0E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-03 lb/ODT or 2.2E-05 lb/ODT or 4.6E-02 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 2.1E-03 mg/dscm. Primary tube dryer or secondary 3.1E-01 lb/ODT or. 3.9E-05 lb/ODT or 6.4E-03 lb/ODT or 3.0E-04 lb/ODT or tube dryer--existing. 3.1E-03 gr/dscf... 1.6E-03 mg/dscm. 7.4E-01 mg/dscm. 1.6E-03 mg/dscm. Primary tube dryer or secondary 9.1E-02 lb/ODT or 3.9E-05 lb/ODT or 4.3E-03 lb/ODT or 3.4E-06 lb/ODT or tube dryer--new. 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 1.8E-06 mg/dscm. Softwood veneer dryer heated 7.2E-02 lb/MSF \3/ 5.8E-05 lb/MSF \3/ (\c\)............. (\d\) zones--existing. 8\'' or 1.5E-02 8\'' or 4.1E-02 gr/dscf. mg/dscm. Softwood veneer dryer heated 7.2E-02 lb/MSF \3/ 5.8E-05 lb/MSF \3/ (\c\)............. (\d\) zones--new. 8\'' or 1.5E-02 8\'' or 4.1E-02 gr/dscf. mg/dscm. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \a\ lb/ODT = pounds per oven dried ton, gr/dscf = grains per dry standard cubic foot, mg/dscm = milligrams per dry standard cubic meter \b\ Naphthalene was not included in the final PAH limits. \c\ HCl was not detected. \d\ A burner-tune up standard applies. See section III.B of this preamble for details. \e\ A burner-tune up standard applies for D/F emissions for all wood-fired PCWP dryers except green rotary dryers which have a numerical D/F limit discussed in section III.B of this preamble. We are modifying the proposed PAH limits to not include naphthalene. We are not finalizing the proposed PAH limits from softwood veneer dryers and instead are requiring PAH testing to be included in the performance tests of these dryers in addition to the burner tune-up standard. In addition to the limits presented in Table 3 of this preamble, we are revising the rule to add D/F limits for direct wood-fired green rotary dryers based on reanalysis of the D/F data. In addition to adjustments stemming from public comments, we removed data from MACT floor calculations if they were collected from systems that ceased operations since the pre-proposal analysis was completed. This adjustment affected some limits and some mass per production based 3xRDL values. We also updated PM 3xRDL values to reflect the most recent revision to these values.

C. MACT Standards for Lumber Kilns

As explained in the May 2023 proposal, the EPA did not identify any lumber kilns with add-on air pollution controls.\36\ We explained that the EPA, as well as State permitting authorities, have evaluated the possibility of capturing and controlling emissions from lumber kilns and in each case concluded that capture and control of lumber kiln emissions is not technically feasible or cost effective for VOC emissions from batch or continuous kilns, and that these previous conclusions are equally relevant for capture and control of HAP. The EPA proposed a work practice standard for lumber kilns based on the criteria in CAA section 112(h), which states that if it is not feasible in the judgment of the Administrator to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of a HAP, the Administrator may, in lieu thereof, promulgate a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard, or combination thereof, which in the Administrator's judgment is consistent with the provisions of CAA section 112(d). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \36\ 88 FR 31867-71 (May 18, 2023). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. What lumber kilns standards did we propose?

To reduce HAP from lumber kilns, we proposed a work practice consisting of four elements: (1) operation and maintenance (O&M) plan for all kilns to maintain the integrity of lumber kiln internal air flow and heat distribution components (e.g., baffles, fans, vents, heating coils, temperature sensors) to provide as uniform a temperature and air flow as reasonably possible; (2) annual burner tune-up for direct-fired kilns to reduce the potential for combustion-related HAP emissions beyond the reduction in these emissions that results from minimizing lumber over-drying; (3) a work practice option in which all kilns limit over-drying by operating below a temperature set point, conducting in-kiln moisture monitoring, or following a site-specific plan (for temperature and lumber moisture monitoring); and (4) minimum kiln-dried lumber moisture content limits below which lumber is considered to be over-dried lumber for all kilns for purposes of the PCWP NESHAP. The May 2023 proposal described each of these elements in detail.\37\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \37\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Development of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Emission Standards for Lumber Drying Kilns, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What comments did we receive on the proposed lumber kiln standards?

Comment: One commenter argued that the EPA has not shown infeasibility to justify work practice standards over numeric standards for limiting over-drying of lumber at lumber kilns. Other commenters agreed with the EPA's determination that it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce emissions standards for lumber kilns. EPA response: The EPA determined work practice standards are appropriate because the total volume of emissions cannot be emitted through a conveyance that is designed and constructed to emit or capture HAP emissions. Furthermore, direct measurement of flow rate from batch kilns is not technically feasible because of the numerous vents and changing flow direction. Similarly, continuous dry kilns (CDKs) have fugitive emissions from their openings that cannot be eliminated while allowing for lumber to enter and exit the kiln. Therefore, the EPA maintains work practice standards for kilns are justified and establishing numerical limits for kilns is not feasible. The work practices included in the final rule are justified under CAA section 112(h) and reflect the maximum degree of emission reduction achieved by existing lumber [[Page 41419]] kilns and the degree of reduction that is achievable based on the EPA's review and analysis of available information. Comment: Commenters supported the inclusion of O&M plans for kilns but suggested edits to plan requirements. Commenters noted components covered by the O&M plan should not be limited to those listed in the May 2023 proposal; objected to the proposed charge optimization practices to promote uniformity in lumber charged into the kiln (e.g., sizing, sorting, stickering, conditioning); requested to be allowed additional time to complete corrective actions; and requested that the annual kiln inspection be conducted within 13 months of the previous inspection. Similarly, a commenter requested that the EPA allow burner tune-ups to be performed every 13 months instead of every 12 months to help with process operation or personnel scheduling issues. The commenter also requested that additional language be added to 40 CFR 63.2271(c)(2) to specify that any cleaning, repairs, or replacements must be initiated within 30 days, to remove any interpretation that corrective action must be initiated immediately. This timeframe is consistent with 40 CFR 63.2253(a)(3)(ii) for initiation of the corrective actions identified during the annual lumber kiln integrity inspection in the O&M plan. The commenter did not propose a specific completion timeframe. EPA response: The EPA agrees that facilities may need an additional month to perform corrective action and in the burner tune-up compliance schedule to accommodate process operations and personnel scheduling issues. In response to these comments, the EPA revised the O&M plan language. We also revised the rule to allow inspections to occur no later than 13 months after the previous inspection and added language for allowing submittal of a written request to the delegated authority for completing corrective actions after 180 days In response to the commenter's requests, the EPA revised the final rule to allow annual tune-ups and burner/grate inspections to be performed no more than 13 months after the previous tune-up, instead of every 12 months. To address the commenter's concerns regarding the current rule language being silent on the required timeframe of corrective actions and potential delays due to availability of parts, the EPA revised 40 CFR 63.2271(c)(2) to clarify that any corrective action taken as part of the tune-up/inspection must be initiated within 30 days and completed within 180 days following the annual tune-up/inspection identifying the need for the corrective action. The EPA also added language specifying if additional time is necessary to complete corrective actions, an extension request may be submitted through the delegated authority consistent with the O&M requirements. Comment: Commenters stated that the ``temperature set point'' option under the proposed work practices should be referred to as the ``temperature limit'' option. According to the commenter, the EPA has proposed these temperature limits as ``temperature set points'' but compliance with the proposed temperature set point option would be based on the actual kiln dry bulb temperature readings according to 40 CFR 63.2269(m) and 40 CFR 63.2270(h)(1). Commenters also requested that compliance with the maximum dry bulb temperatures under this work practice option be demonstrated with a longer averaging period of at least 24 hours, daily or batch to accommodate temperature variation instead of with a three-hour block average as proposed. The commenters noted that shorter averaging periods are impacted by routine temperature fluctuations in the kiln, such as temperature increases during fan reversals, which are a normal part of kiln operation and not indicative of over-drying. They also noted that facilities hold title V operating permits with 24-hour averaging periods for temperature monitoring. Commenters requested that the EPA replace the ``in-kiln moisture measurement'' option with a hybrid option involving both temperature and moisture measurement. The commenters stated that most facilities monitor lumber moisture content after the lumber exits the kiln and cools, per industry guidance. The commenters suggested a hybrid option could apply to most lumber kilns conducting higher temperature drying such as those in the U.S. Southeast. The commenters recommended maximum dry bulb temperature limits of 240 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) for batch indirect-fired kilns, 250 [deg]F for batch direct-fired kilns, and 260 [deg]F for indirect- and direct-fired continuous kilns. Because the hybrid work practice option would include higher temperature limits, commenters suggested that facilities could also monitor moisture content to meet the minimum moisture content limits in the rule. However, under the hybrid option, the moisture content could be measured either in the kiln or after the lumber has exited the kiln (e.g., at the planer). EPA response: As a result of these comments, to avoid confusion and clarify intent of the proposed standard, the EPA modified the name of this option in the final rule to refer to a ``temperature limit'' rather than a ``temperature set point''. The EPA is revising the final rule to require a batch cycle average for batch kilns and a daily (24- hour) block average for continuous kilns for the maximum dry bulb temperature to demonstrate compliance with the work practice standard. The EPA also agrees with the commentator's request for a hybrid compliance option involving both temperature and moisture measurement. Using the large amount of monitoring data generated at the planer, along with kiln dry bulb temperature is a robust approach to reduce over-drying and is consistent with practices in place at lumber mills. Therefore, we revised the final rule to replace the in-kiln moisture measurement option with the requested hybrid option. Comment: Relative to the ``site-specific plan'' work practice option, commenters requested that the EPA extend the deadline to submit site-specific plans from the 180 days (as proposed) to 18 months to allow time for facilities to properly develop an effective site- specific plan and gather data to support the elements of the plan. One commenter noted that developing a site-specific plan for lumber kilns could reasonably take more than 12 months. EPA response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that 18 months will allow facilities to properly develop a site-specific plan, therefore, the deadline is being extended to 18 months versus the proposed 180 days (6 months) in the final rule. The EPA acknowledges this extension will shorten the period for delegated authorities to review and approve the plans for over 140 lumber kilns in operation. Comment: One commenter supported the EPA's general methodology of defining over-dried lumber through the proposed lumber minimum moisture content limits of the proposed Table 11 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 11''). The commenter also agreed with the EPA's description of maximum lumber moisture grade in principle but requested that the term ``moisture specification'' be used throughout the rule rather than ``moisture grade.'' EPA response: The EPA agreed and changed the term ``moisture grade'' to ``moisture specification'' to eliminate potential confusion. [[Page 41420]]

3. What lumber kiln standards are we finalizing?

After considering comments,\38\ we are finalizing work practice standards for lumber kilns in 40 CFR 63.2241(e) to reduce HAP emissions by minimizing lumber over-drying. The final work practice consists of four elements: (1) O&M plan for all kilns; (2) annual burner tune-up for direct-fired kilns; (3) a choice of three work practice options including a temperature limit option, hybrid option involving higher temperature limit and lumber moisture monitoring, or site-specific plan for temperature and lumber moisture monitoring; and (4) minimum kiln- dried lumber moisture content limits below which lumber is considered to be over-dried lumber for all kilns for purposes of the PCWP NESHAP. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ See National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD), Response to Public Comments on May 18, 2023 Proposed Amendments, available in the docket for this rulemaking for a complete list of comments and responses. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. MACT Standards for Process Units With Organic HAP Emissions

The EPA is finalizing MACT standards for organic HAP emissions from process units that had ``no-control'' MACT determinations in the 2004 rule that were vacated in 2007. In addition to lumber kilns, these process units include various RMH process units, atmospheric refiners, stand-alone digesters, fiber washers, fiberboard mat dryers at existing sources, hardboard press predryers at existing sources, and log vats. Some of these process units are already subject to new source HAP standards in the PCWP NESHAP, including fiberboard mat dryers, hardboard press predryers, and reconstituted wood product board coolers (which are a type of RMH unit) at new and reconstructed sources. Therefore, limits for these new and reconstructed sources do not need to be established in response to the partial remand and vacatur. Mixed PCWP process streams routed to HAP control devices subject to the current HAP emission limits in Table 1B are also already subject to the PCWP NESHAP. Sections III.D.1 through 6 summarize the final standards for process units with unregulated organic HAP emissions that were subject to the partial remand and vacatur, the key comments received and our responses, and our final decisions and rationale on the standards for this final action.\39\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ See the RTC document and the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Development of Emission Standards for Remanded Process Units Under the Plywood and Composite Wood Products NESHAP, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. RMH Process Units

RMH process units within the PCWP affected source include resin tanks, softwood and hardwood plywood presses, engineered wood product presses and curing chambers, blenders, formers, finishing saws, finishing sanders, panel trim chippers, reconstituted wood product board coolers (at existing affected sources), hardboard humidifiers, and onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing. These process units handle resin or resinated wood material downstream of the point in the PCWP process where resin is applied. The potential for HAP emissions from RMH process units relates to the material being processed (i.e., resin and wood). a. What RMH standards did we propose? As explained in the proposal, RMH process units are not designed and constructed in a way that allows for HAP emissions capture or measurement. Therefore, the EPA proposed work practice standards for RMH process units under CAA section 112(h) to address their resin- related emissions and wood-related emissions. We proposed work practice standards to require new and existing facilities with RMH process units to (i) use only a non-HAP resin,\40\ or (ii) use a resin with a maximum true vapor pressure of less than or equal to 5.2 kilopascals (kPa), which is equal to 0.75 pounds per square inch absolute (psia),\41\ or (iii) use a combination of resins meeting either (i) or (ii). Facilities with RMH process units would also be required to process wood material that was purchased pre-dried to a moisture content of no more than 30 percent (weight percent, dry basis) or that has been dried in a dryer located at the PCWP facility. The proposed requirement to process dried wood did not apply for wet formers and wastewater operations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \40\ Defined in 40 CFR 63.2292. \41\ Defined in 40 CFR 63.2292. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- No options more stringent than the RMH process unit work practices were identified for resin tanks, softwood and hardwood plywood presses, engineered wood product presses and curing chambers, blenders, formers, finishing saws, finishing sanders, panel trim chippers, or hardboard humidifiers at new or existing affected sources, or for reconstituted wood product board coolers at existing affected sources. Reconstituted wood product board coolers at new affected sources are already subject to standards under the PCWP NESHAP, so were not addressed by our proposal. For RMH wastewater operations, the EPA proposed a work practice in addition to the process unit work practice standards that would require facilities with wastewater operations to implement one of the following measures: Follow the plan required in 40 CFR 63.2268 for wet control devices used as the sole means of reducing HAP emissions from PCWP process units; or Reduce the volume of wastewater to be processed by reusing or recirculating wastewater in the PCWP process or air pollution control system; or Store wastewater in a closed system; or Treat the wastewater by using an onsite biological treatment system, or by routing the wastewater to an offsite POTW or industrial wastewater treatment facility. b. What comments on our proposed RMH standards did we receive? Comment: One commenter questioned the justification of work practice standards for RMH process units. EPA response: We maintain that work practices developed under CAA section 112(h) are legally justified and are the appropriate format of standard for RMH process units, because it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for RMH process units.42 43 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \42\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Development of Emission Standards for Remanded Process Units Under the Plywood and Composite Wood Products NESHAP, available in the docket for this rulemaking. \43\ 88 FR 31871-76 (May 18, 2023). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment: Other commenters agreed that work practices are justified under CAA section 112(h) but expressed significant concern about the proposed definition of ``non-HAP resin.'' To reduce implementation uncertainty, the commenters stated that the EPA should focus application of the weight percent limits (0.1 percent for carcinogens and 1 percent for non-carcinogens) on known resin-related HAP and clarify that the limits, which are based on OSHA hazard communication thresholds for reporting, are not cumulative. One commenter also requested that the EPA apply the tiered approach from the amino/ phenolic resin NESHAP (based on storage tank capacity) for purposes of setting the vapor pressure limits in the PCWP NESHAP. The commenters asserted that these changes are needed to properly scope the standards to avoid unintended consequences and unaccounted for [[Page 41421]] market impacts to upstream suppliers of resins. Commenters also requested whether the process under 40 CFR 63.6(g) for approval of an alternative non-opacity emission standard could be used in specific situations where it is not feasible to use a non-HAP resin or a resin that meets the vapor pressure standards.\44\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \44\ For a complete list of comments and responses on this subject see National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD), Response to Public Comments on May 18, 2023 Proposed Amendments, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA response: The EPA agrees that the definitions around non-HAP resin and the resin requirements require further clarification. The EPA also agrees that the vapor pressure requirements should account for different tank sizes, as suggested by commenters. In this final action we are clarifying the definition of ``non-HAP resin'' and ``maximum true vapor pressure'' and incorporating a tiered limits for vapor pressure based on resin tank size. Comment: We received numerous comments opposing the proposed wastewater work practice options. Among other issues, commenters asserted that the definition of ``wastewater operations'' as proposed goes beyond the PCWP affected source, the EPA did not account for the costs associated with this overly broad definition, and the EPA lacked emissions information to justify the wastewater work practice. EPA response: The EPA also agrees that, given the broad set of operations included under the proposed wastewater work practice, most of which are not part of the affected source as defined in the current rule, we lacked the authority to impose requirements beyond the defined affected source. c. What RMH standards are we finalizing? As a result of the comments, we are updating the proposed definition of ``non-HAP resin'' in the final rule to focus on the known resin-related HAP and to clarify how the weight percent limits are to be applied. In the final rule, non-HAP resin is defined as ``a resin that contains less than 0.1 percent by mass of formaldehyde and less than 1.0 percent by mass each of phenol, methanol, and MDI.'' Using this definition and following the intent of the May 2023 proposal for the weight percentages to be applied for each HAP, an example resin with 0.5 weight percent phenol and 0.7 weight percent methanol would be considered a non-HAP resin because the 1.0 weight percent threshold is applied to each HAP. Under the vapor pressure option, the final standard contains tiered limits for vapor pressure based on resin tank size consistent with the amino/phenolic resin NESHAP and updating the definition of ``maximum true vapor pressure'' for the final rule.\45\ The final vapor pressure limits for resins received at the PCWP facility are 5.2 kPa (0.75 psia) for resins stored in resin tanks with capacity greater than or equal to 40,000 gallons and 13.1 kPa (1.9 psia) for resins stored in one or more resin tanks with capacity less than 40,000 gallons. Finally, we note that under the PCWP NESHAP facilities can already request approval of an alternative standard following the process set forth under 40 CFR 63.6(g).\46\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \45\ 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOO. \46\ See 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD, table 10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Considering the EPA's proposed overly broad definition of wastewater operations that extends beyond the affected source and that no HAP emission reductions are estimated to be achieved with the wastewater work practices, the EPA is not finalizing the four work practice options for ``wastewater operations'' that were proposed in addition to the work practice standards for RMH process units. For the final rule, the term ``wastewater operations'' is being replaced with the wording from the definition of affected source ``onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing,'' in the definition of RMH process units. The resin-related RMH process unit standards apply for ``onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing.''

2. Atmospheric Refiners

Atmospheric refiners operate with continuous infeed and outfeed of wood material and under atmospheric pressure for refining (rubbing, grinding, or milling) wood material into fibers or particles used in particleboard or dry formed hardboard production. Atmospheric refiners are further characterized based on their placement before or after dryers in the PCWP production process. In addition to a definition of ``atmospheric refiner,'' we proposed definitions of ``dried wood atmospheric refiner'' and ``green wood atmospheric refiner'' to distinguish atmospheric refiners following dryers in the PCWP process (e.g., dried wood atmospheric refiners) from other atmospheric refiners (e.g., green wood atmospheric refiners). a. What atmospheric refiner standards did we propose? We proposed numerical emission limits for existing and new atmospheric refiners of each type developed pursuant to CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) using performance data collected from the CAA section 114 survey of PCWP facilities in 2022. The proposed standards were based on the MACT floor. More-stringent beyond-the-floor options were analyzed and rejected due to the high costs relative to the emission reductions that would be achieved, energy usage, and other non-air quality environmental impacts. Although the more stringent beyond-the- floor options were not proposed, we proposed to include a provision in 40 CFR 63.2240(d)(6) to give facilities the option of complying with the more stringent limits in Table 1B in place of the proposed limits in the proposed Table 1C to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 1C'') if they choose to meet the more stringent option. b. What comments on the proposed atmospheric refiner standards did we receive? Comment: We received several comments noting that the numerical standards were not necessary and suggested using a work practice. Commenters also requested a concentration-based compliance option as well as revisions to the proposed definitions and classifications for atmospheric refiners. EPA response: The EPA maintains that work practice standards cannot be established for atmospheric refiners under CAA section 112(h) because emissions can be captured, conveyed, and measured. However, the EPA agrees that an additional concentration-based compliance option and clarifying language is needed to reduce uncertainty and confusion with the proposed atmospheric refiner standards. c. What atmospheric refiner standards are we finalizing? Due to the requirement for EPA to establish emission standards for atmospheric refiners under CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3), we are finalizing the numerical standards for atmospheric refiners as proposed. In response to comments received, we are adding concentration-based standards, in addition to the lb/ODT standards. We are modifying the proposed definition for atmospheric refiners to remove reference to wet-formed hardboard and fiberboard. We are also redefining the proposed ``green wood atmospheric'' and ``dried wood atmospheric refiner,'' [[Page 41422]] terms as ``multipurpose atmospheric refiner'' and ``post-dryer atmospheric refiner,'' respectively, to eliminate confusion surrounding references to ``green'' and ``dried'' wood when the distinction to be made hinges on placement of a subset of refiners after dryers in the PCWP process. In the revised rule, all atmospheric refiners that are not ``post-dryer atmospheric refiners'' are defined as ``multipurpose atmospheric refiners.'' These definitional changes do not alter the proposed MACT floors for green and dried wood atmospheric refiners because they are consistent with how the MACT floors and MACT were determined. The final total HAP standards for multipurpose atmospheric refiners are 1.2E-01 lb/ODT or 15 parts per million volume, dry (ppmvd) for existing units and 2.4E-03 lb/ODT or 3.3 ppmvd for new units. The final standards for existing post-dryer atmospheric refiners are 4.1E-03 lb/ ODT or 8.5E-01 ppmvd, and 3.3E-03 lb/ODT or 6.5E-01 ppmvd for new units.\47\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \47\ More information on development of these standards can be found in the memorandum entitled Revised Development of Emission Standards for Remanded Process Units Under the Plywood and Composite Wood Products NESHAP, available in the docket for this rulemaking, and in our responses to comments in the RTC document, also available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Stand-Alone Digesters and Fiber Washers

Stand-alone digesters are used to steam or water soak wood chips so that they may be easily rubbed apart or ground into fibers in atmospheric separate refiners that operate downstream from the digesters. Stand-alone digesters have batch operating cycles that differ from pressurized refiner steaming vessels (sometimes called ``digesters'') used to preheat wood chips prior to pressurized refining. Pressurized refiner steaming vessels have continuous infeed and outfeed without pressure release between the steaming vessel and refiner part of the pressurized refiner. Fiber washers are units in which water-soluble components of wood (hemicellulose and sugars) that have been produced during digesting and refining are removed from the wood fiber before the fiber is used in fiberboard or hardboard production. In a fiber washer, wet fiber leaving a refiner is further diluted with water and then passed over a filter, leaving the cleaned fiber on the surface. One wet/dry process hardboard facility operated a batch stand-alone digester and a fiber washer at the time of the May 2023 proposal. This facility has since ceased operations. No PCWP affected sources are expected to operate stand-alone digesters or fiber washers, but the possibility cannot be entirely ruled out. Thus, standards for these process units are being finalized in this action. Both process units meet the criteria under CAA section 112(h)(2)(B) for establishing a work practice standard because there are technological and economic limitations to measuring emissions. a. What standards for stand-alone digesters and fiber washers were proposed? The potential for HAP emissions from stand-alone digesters is reduced when: (1) clean steam from the boiler is used for the digestion process (as opposed to steam potentially contaminated with HAP being reused from another process); and (2) HAP-containing or wood pulping chemicals \48\ are not added to the digestion process. Thus, we proposed a work practice requiring clean steam to be used in the digesters and prohibiting addition of HAP-containing or wood pulping chemicals to the digestion process. No regulatory options more stringent than the work practice were identified for further consideration for existing or new stand-alone digesters. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \48\ Wood pulping chemicals added to dissolve lignin in wood include sodium sulfide (Na2S) in combination with sodium hydroxide (NaOH), sulfurous acid (H2SO3) compounds, or sodium sulfite (Na2SO3) in combination with sodium carbonate (Na2CO3). Lignin removal is not necessary in the hardboard industry where natural lignin helps bind wood fibers in processes where synthetic resins are not used. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We proposed a work practice for PCWP fiber washers to use fresh water for washing and processing fiber without addition of wood pulping or HAP-containing chemicals. b. What comments on the proposed stand-alone digester and fiber washer standards did we receive? Comment: One commenter explained their wet end process uses a large amount of water, which is recycled to optimize the volume of water discharged from the process and balance pH. The commenter requested the EPA eliminate the requirement to use only fresh water for washing because it is technically infeasible. EPA response: The EPA agrees with the commentator's argument that using fresh water is infeasible due to process design and the increase in volume of wastewater that would result. Therefore, we are not finalizing the requirement to use only fresh water for washing in the work practice standards for fiber washers. c. What standards for stand-alone digesters and fiber washers are we finalizing? We are finalizing the proposed definition of ``stand-alone digester'' and an amendment to the definition of ``pressurized refiner'' in 40 CFR 63.2292 to distinguish between these two process units. Pressurized refiners are already subject to emission standards in the PCWP NESHAP. We are amending the current definition of pressurized refiner to state that: ``Pressurized refiners include steaming vessels that operate under pressure to continuously feed and vent through the pressurized refiner.'' We are finalizing the stand- alone digester work practice requiring clean steam to be used in the digesters and prohibiting addition of HAP-containing or wood pulping chemicals to the digestion process. Initial and continuous compliance with the stand-alone digester work practice must be demonstrated through recordkeeping. We are finalizing the work practice requirement to process fiber without addition of HAP-containing or wood pulping chemicals. Initial and continuous compliance with the fiber washer work practice must be demonstrated through recordkeeping. No regulatory options more stringent than the work practice were identified for further consideration for existing or new fiber washers. No new fiberboard or hardboard mills are projected. Therefore, no new PCWP affected sources are expected to use fiber washers.

4. Fiberboard Mat Dryers and Press Predryers at Existing Sources

Fiberboard mat dryers are conveyor-type dryers used to dry wet- formed fiber mats. Press predryers are used in the wet/dry hardboard process to remove additional moisture from the hardboard mat after it exits the fiberboard mat dryer before the mat enters the hardboard press. The PCWP NESHAP already contains standards for fiberboard mat dryers (heated zones) and hardboard press predryers at new sources. a. What Fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers did we propose for existing sources? The EPA proposed standards for the heated zones of existing fiberboard mat dryers and hardboard press predryers. For the fiberboard mat dryer (heated zones), the proposed MACT floor is 4.9E-02 lb total HAP per MSF on a 1/8-inch thickness basis. The MACT floor [[Page 41423]] for the press predryer is 8.0E-02 lb total HAP per MSF on a 1/8-inch thickness basis. The emission limit for each dryer was calculated using HAP test data collected in 2022 through a CAA section 114 survey. These MACT floor calculations were based on limited data sets.\49\ The units that were tested in the 2022 survey were at the same wet/dry hardboard facility discussed in section III.D.3, which has ceased operations since the May 2023 proposal was published. The EPA considered beyond- the-floor regulatory options for both dryers, but these options were rejected because of the high costs relative to the HAP emission reduction that could be achieved, energy usage, and other non-air quality environmental impacts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \49\ See the memorandum entitled Approach for Applying the Upper Prediction Limit to Limited Datasets, available in the docket for this rulemaking, for details on the EPA's review of the data sets and conclusions regarding appropriateness of the proposed MACT floors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- b. What comments did the EPA receive on the proposed standards for Fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers? Comment: The EPA received comments supporting and opposing the proposed emission limits for fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers. One commenter recommended that the EPA rely on data from sources with controls that have ceased operation to set MACT standards instead of data from the only remaining units in operation at the time of proposal, which were uncontrolled. The commenter argued that the EPA contravenes the CAA by setting weaker standards using data from this single source when previously existing sources were better performing. A different commenter supported the proposed MACT analysis and emission limits and requested a change to the definition of fiberboard mat dryer to clarify applicability for units producing wet/dry hardboard. Another commenter asked the EPA to specify the emission standards for existing fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers in Table 1C on both a 1/8- inch and 1/2-inch basis for consistency with Table 1A to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 1A'') and asked the Agency to clarify the dates in Table 1C. EPA Response: We disagree with the commenter's statement that development of these limits contravenes the CAA. According to CAA section 112(d)(3)(B), the MACT floor for existing sources is the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing five sources (for which the Administrator has or could reasonably obtain emissions information) in a category or subcategory with fewer than 30 sources. The D.C. Circuit has affirmed that CAA section 112 ``says nothing about what data the Agency should use to calculate emission standards.'' \50\ The EPA followed the law when developing the MACT floors for fiberboard mat dryers and hardboard press predryers based on the emission data from the source remaining in operation at the time of the 2022 section 114 survey.\51\ The most complete and relevant data on fiberboard mat dryer and press predryer emissions were collected during this survey. As noted in this section, the EPA did consider beyond-the- floor measures for both the fiberboard mat dryer and press predryer based on control technology and rejected these options for both dryers because of the high costs relative to the HAP emission reduction that could be achieved, energy usage, and other non-air quality environmental impacts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \50\ Nat'l Lime Ass'n v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 632-33 (D.C. Cir. 2000). \51\ The Agency is proposing elsewhere to rely on information from the time of the original NESHAP rulemaking to avoid unfairly subjecting previously unregulated emission points to more stringent standards than would have been adopted if the EPA had set MACT floors in the 2004 rule. See 91 FR 21672 (Apr. 22, 2026). This rulemaking does not raise the same equity concerns because sources are not subject to more stringent standards than would have been adopted in 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- c. What standards for Fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers are we finalizing? After considering comments, we are finalizing the proposed standards for existing source fiberboard mat dryers and press predryers as proposed. We modified the proposed Table 1C to include the 1/8-inch limits converted to equivalent values in terms of 1/2-inch. We added a footnote to the table to clarify that the existing source limits are not applicable to new sources, which have their own limits from the 2004 rule in Tables 1A or 1B to Subpart DDDD of Part 63. Regarding the other changes requested by commenters, we clarified the definition fiberboard mat dryer applies to dryers in the wet/dry hardboard process.

5. Log Vats

Log vats are used to condition logs before they are cut into veneer or wood strands. Hot water vats in which logs are immersed are often open to the atmosphere. In log steaming or ``chest'' vats, logs are placed in the vat in batches, the door is closed, and steam (which condenses in the vat) along with hot water sprays are used to condition the logs for a specified time before the logs are removed for veneer production. The EPA is finalizing the proposed definition for ``log vat'' in 40 CFR 63.2292 that applies to both hot water and log steaming vats. a. What log vat standards did the EPA propose? We proposed a work practice standard based on CAA section 112(h)(2)(A) and (B) for log vats at existing or new sources because log vats have neither the proper emissions capture and conveyance ductwork nor stacks where emissions testing could be conducted. The proposed work practice standard would require facilities to: (a) operate each vat using a site-specific target log temperature that does not exceed 212 [deg]F, measured in the water used to soak the logs or in the wood cut at the lathe or stranders; and (b) operate each vat to reduce the potential for fugitive emissions by either: (1) covering at least 80 percent of the vat hot water surface area for soaking vats in which logs are submerged; or (2) keeping doors closed while steam or hot water showers are being applied inside log steaming vats. b. What comments on the proposed log vat standards did we receive? Comment: One commenter opposed distinguishing between hot water vats and log steaming vats and questioned the EPA's justification for using work practice standards over numeric standards for log vats. Other commenters agreed log vats are eligible for work practice standards but recommended changes in the proposed work practice standards pertaining to the potential for fugitive emissions. The commenters stated that covering logs in log vats can create health and safety concerns and hinder operations. They noted operators with steam vats already close the doors during steaming/spraying as standard procedures, making this requirement redundant. EPA Response: As discussed in a docketed memorandum, the EPA has concluded that work practice standards for log vats are justified given the technical limitations and measurement infeasibilities.\52\ The EPA has also noted the safety concerns raised by commenters, and agrees that requiring an 80 percent log vat cover would interfere with operations and potentially lead to health and safety concerns. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \52\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Development of Emission Standards for Remanded Process Units Under the Plywood and Composite Wood Products NESHAP, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 41424]] c. What log vat standards are we finalizing? As a result of the concerns raised by commenters on the proposed work practice standards, we are finalizing the temperature limitation work practice but not the requirement to cover at least 80 percent of the hot water surface or keep doors of log steaming vats closed. This change also eliminates the distinction in hot water and steaming vats.

6. Mixed PCWP Process Streams Regulated at Existing Sources

Some PCWP facilities route emission streams from multiple process units of the same or different types into one shared HAP control system such as a regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO), regenerative catalytic oxidizer (RCO), biofilter, or process incineration system to meet the compliance options in Table 1B. In a few mixed process arrangements, an emissions stream from a remanded unit was mixed at the inlet to a HAP control device and co-controlled with other process units listed in Table 1B such that the combined emission stream became subject to the Table 1B limits when the control system was initially installed to meet the PCWP NESHAP or as part of the PCWP plant design. Due to the mixing of emissions from each individual type of process unit, the PCWP process stream cannot be distinguished at the inlet or outlet of the control device. a. What standards did we propose for mixed process streams? We proposed a requirement that mixed PCWP process streams from remanded units meeting the compliance options in Table 1B be treated as a separate type of emission stream that remains subject to the Table 1B limits. Mixed PCWP process streams are defined in 40 CFR 63.2292 as an emission stream from a process unit subject to the final amendments that was commingled with emissions stream(s) from process unit(s) subject to the compliance options in Table 1B before July 6, 2026 at an affected source that commenced construction (or reconstruction) on or before May 18, 2023. The definition of ``mixed PCWP process stream'' refers specifically to a ``stream'' as opposed to a whole process unit because there can be uncaptured or uncontrolled emissions from a remanded process unit in addition to the captured emission stream from the remanded unit that is routed to the HAP control device as part of a mixed PCWP process stream. b. What comments on the proposed mixed PCWP process stream limits did we receive? Comment: Two commenters agreed with the EPA's proposal that mixed PCWP process streams continue to meet compliance options in Table 1B. One commenter requested the Notice of Compliance Status (NOCS) for mixed PCWP process streams be due within a short timeframe after publication in the Federal Register (e.g., 30 or 60 days) rather than on the date of publication. EPA Response: We acknowledge commenters support for the proposed requirement that mixed PCWP process streams comply with options in Table 1B. We agree that 30 days would allow facilities the necessary time to create and submit their NOCS. c. What mixed PCWP process stream limits are we finalizing? In response to these comments, we are finalizing requirements for the mixed PCWP process streams as proposed with the exception that the NOCS shall be due no later than 30 days after the date of publication.

E. MACT Standards for Process Units With MDI Emissions

The EPA is finalizing standards to regulate MDI emissions from reconstituted wood product presses using MDI, tube dryers that blow- line blend MDI resin, and miscellaneous coating operations. Sections III.E.1 through 3 summarize the final standards, the key comments received and our responses, and our final decisions and rationale on the standards for this final action. A complete discussion of changes from the May 2023 proposal can be found in the RTC document and a docketed memorandum.\53\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \53\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Regulatory Options for MDI Emissions from Plywood and Composite Wood Products Reconstituted Wood Products Presses, Tube Dryers, and Miscellaneous Coating Operations, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Reconstituted Wood Product Presses

a. What reconstituted wood product press MDI standards did we propose? The EPA proposed MDI emission standards for reconstituted wood product presses that produce OSB and for reconstituted wood product presses that produce particleboard or MDF (PB/MDF). We developed separate standards because product differences affect MDI emissions. For OSB presses, the proposed MACT standards for both new and existing sources are based on 3xRDL for MDI, which exceeded the calculated MACT floor. The 3xRDL values were substituted for the calculated MACT floor to ensure that the standards are established at the minimum level at which emissions can be measured reliably. The proposed MACT standards for new and existing OSB presses are 2.5E-04 lb MDI/MSF 3/4'' (1.3E-04 lb/MSF 3/8'') or 2.7E-02 mg MDI/dscm. The proposed MACT floor for existing PB/MDF presses using MDI is 8.4E-04 lb/MSF 3/4'' or 2.0E-01 mg MDI/dscm. For new sources, the 3xRDL values exceeded the calculated MACT floor concentration and emission rate. Therefore, the 3xRDL values were used in place of the calculated MACT floor for new source PB/MDF presses using MDI to ensure that the standards are established at the minimum level at which emissions can be measured reliably. For new PB/MDF presses the MDI proposed MACT limit based on the 3xRDL values is 2.3E-04 lb MDI/MSF 3/4'' or 2.7E-02 mg MDI/dscm. Considering the low levels of MDI emitted and that reconstituted wood product presses already meet HAP limits in the PCWP NESHAP using robust HAP controls, no regulatory options more stringent than the existing or new source MACT floors for MDI were identified for OSB or PB/MDF reconstituted wood product presses. b. What comments on the proposed MDI reconstituted wood product press standards did we receive? Comment: The EPA received comments supporting and opposing subcategorization of reconstituted wood product presses for purposes of limiting MDI. EPA response: The EPA maintains subcategorizing reconstituted wood product presses using MDI by product is within the EPA's authority in CAA section 112(d)(1), which states, ``The Administrator may distinguish among classes, types, and sizes of sources within a category or subcategory in establishing standards.'' The manner and type of press operation are distinct between products. Depending on the product type (i.e., OSB, or PB/MDF), presses require different operating temperatures (e.g., OSB is pressed at higher temperature) and feed stocks (e.g., OSB are created with larger wood strands), which affect emission rates. Therefore, subcategorizing by product is appropriate. Comment: The EPA also received a comment stating that it is unnecessary for the EPA to set numerical standards for MDI, and that MDI emissions would be more appropriately regulated under [[Page 41425]] the work practice for RMH process units. EPA response: We maintain that the EPA is required to set standards for HAP such as MDI that are known to be emitted from reconstituted wood products presses. Reconstituted wood products presses do not meet the criteria under CAA section 112(h) for establishing work practices. c. What MDI reconstituted wood product press standards are we finalizing? The EPA is finalizing the proposed MDI MACT limits for reconstituted wood product presses. The EPA is maintaining the designated subcategorization based on the product type, as described above. Reconstituted wood product presses operating HAP controls are expected to meet the MACT floor for existing and new sources. However, it is currently unknown whether presses at two particleboard facilities that meet the PCWP production-based compliance option (PBCO) using pollution prevention measures would meet the MDI MACT floor.54 55 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \54\ Table 1A to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 contains the PBCO total HAP limits. \55\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled Revised Cost, Environmental, and Energy Impacts of Subpart DDDD Regulatory Options, available in the docket for this rulemaking, for additional discussion the on impact of this action. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Tube Dryers

Primary tube dryers often incorporate blow-line blending in which resin is added to wood fibers as they enter the primary tube dryer. The resin and wood fibers mix with the turbulent conditions in the primary tube dryer as the wood fiber is dried. Primary and secondary tube dryers are often co-controlled. Primary tube dryers may also be co- controlled with a reconstituted wood product press. a. What MDI standards did the EPA propose for tube dryers? The proposed MACT standard for MDI from new and existing tube dryers is 1.7E-02 lb/ODT or 0.68 mg MDI/dscm. This standard is based on the MACT floor. No regulatory options more stringent than the MACT floor were identified for tube dryers that blow-line blend MDI. b. What comments on the proposed MDI standard for tube dryers did we receive? Comment: One commenter indicated MDI standards for tube dryers are not necessary because all tube dryers with blow-line blending MDI resin are equipped with HAP emissions controls and the standard will only serve to incur an additional cost of emissions testing every five years with no environmental benefit. EPA response: The EPA disagrees with the commenters claim that MDI standards for tube dryers are not necessary. Tube dryers blow-line blending MDI were identified as one of the primary sources of MDI emissions in the PCWP source category in the 2020 RTR.\56\ Further, source testing in 2022 identified MDI emissions from an RTO-controlled tube dryer to be above the detection limit. For these reasons, establishing standards for tube dryers is appropriate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \56\ 85 FR 49434 (Aug. 13, 2020). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- c. What MDI standards are we finalizing for tube dryers? The EPA is finalizing the proposed MACT standard for MDI from new and existing tube dryers. The MACT standard for tube dryers is 1.7E-02 lb/ODT or 0.68 mg MDI/dscm.

3. Miscellaneous Coatings Operations

a. What MDI standards did we propose for miscellaneous coatings operations? The EPA proposed MDI emission standards for miscellaneous coating operations in which MDI moisture sealants are applied to engineered wood products such as parallel strand lumber or LVL. b. What comments did the EPA receive on the proposed MDI standards for miscellaneous coatings operations? Comment: Commenters questioned the necessity of the MDI numerical limit and requested reduced testing frequency for the MDI coating operation. EPA response: The EPA maintains the standard is required to ensure MDI is properly regulated across miscellaneous coatings operations. Emissions from this source are measurable and capturable; therefore, they do not meet the criteria under CAA section 112(h) for establishing a work practice. See section III.F for an explanation of EPA's performance testing, monitoring, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements c. What MDI standards did we finalize for miscellaneous coatings operations? The final MACT limit for existing and new sources is 1.9E-03 lb MDI emitted/lb sealant applied, or 1.4E-05 lb MDI/ft\2\ surface area coated based on coating HAP content. The limit is based on the MACT floor. No options more stringent than the MACT floor emission level were identified for further analysis. The EPA is finalizing the five-year testing frequency, as proposed.

1. Performance Testing

No comments were received on the proposed emission test methods included in Table 4 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 4''). We are finalizing the proposed methods without change. The final emissions test methods for total HAP include EPA Method 320,\57\ NCASI Method IM/ CAN/WP-99.02,\58\ NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.0,\59\ or ASTM D6348-12e1 \60\ with the conditions discussed in section V.J of this preamble. EPA Method 326 \61\ is required for MDI emissions measurement, in which a minimum sample of 1 dscm must be collected. For PM as a surrogate to HAP metals, either EPA Method 5 \62\ or EPA Method 29 \63\ is required with a minimum sample volume of 2 dscm. For Hg, EPA Method 29 or EPA Method 30B \64\ are required, with a minimum sample volume of 2 dscm for EPA Method 29. EPA Method 26A \65\ was proposed for HCl emissions measurement with a minimum sample volume of 2 dscm. The recently updated EPA Method 23 \66\ is required for PAH and D/F emission measurement with a minimum sample volume of 3 dscm. Consistent with the treatment of non-detect data used to establish the emission standards, we are finalizing a requirement that non-detect data be treated as the MDL in test averages used to demonstrate compliance with the standards in Table 1C, Table 1D to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 1D''), or Table 1E to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 1E''). We are revising the rule to add Table 12 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 12'') to provide the toxic equivalence factors (TEFs) to multiply by the individual D/F congener test results to determine TEQ.\67\ In addition, we are adding EPA Method 9 \68\ to the [[Page 41426]] rule for use in conjunction with pressure drop monitoring across mechanical collectors and other dry control devices. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \57\ Appendix A to 40 CFR part 63. \58\ IBR in 40 CFR 63.14. \59\ IBR in 40 CFR 63.14. \60\ IBR in 40 CFR 63.14. \61\ Appendix A to 40 CFR part 63. \62\ Appendix A-3 to 40 CFR part 60. \63\ Appendix A-8 to 40 CFR part 60. \64\ Appendix A-8 to 40 CFR part 60. \65\ Appendix A-8 to 40 CFR part 60. \66\ Appendix A-8 to 40 CFR part 60. \67\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2013-09/documents/tefs-for-dioxin-epa-00-r-10-005-final.pdf. \68\ Appendix A-4 to 40 CFR part 60. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- a. What performance testing frequency did we propose? For the new and existing source emission limits being added to the PCWP NESHAP, we proposed that performance testing would be required every 5 years (60 months). b. What comments did we receive on the proposed performance testing frequency? Comment: Multiple commenters expressed concern about the proposed five-year frequency of emissions testing. One commenter argued that testing every five years is too infrequent to ensure compliance and recommended semiannual testing or a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). Other commenters requested the EPA allow performance testing of PAH, HCl, and Hg be one time sampling events rather than repeated every five years considering the high costs of testing, complexity of test methods, and lack of laboratory availability for these trace compounds. EPA response: Regarding the assertion that stack testing every five years cannot ensure compliance, we note that demonstration of compliance is not accomplished by performance testing alone but is paired with ongoing parametric monitoring established during performance testing to show compliance with the emission limits. Routine performance testing is necessary to provide periodic verification of the operation of control devices and to ensure the parametric monitoring remains relatable to actual emissions. We maintain that the proposed testing frequency, in combination with required parametric monitoring, is sufficient to ensure compliance and that CEMS are unnecessary for PCWP standards being finalized. c. What performance testing requirements are we finalizing? The final rule requires initial performance tests to be completed within 180 days after the compliance date for the new standards and subsequent performance testing every five years (60 months), thereafter.

2. Parameter Monitoring

The preamble for the May 2023 proposal described the proposed parametric monitoring requirements in detail.\69\ After reviewing public comments, we are finalizing the parametric monitoring requirements substantially as proposed with the following key changes: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \69\ 88 FR 31878-79 (May 18, 2023). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We are allowing the owner or operator to monitor pressure drop weekly opacity observations in lieu of continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) for mechanical collectors (or other dry control devices not otherwise mentioned in Table 2 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 [``Table 2'']) to demonstrate continuous compliance with PM limits. We are clarifying language in Table 10 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 ``Table 10'' to require the notification and reporting requirements for performance evaluations for only COMs and CEMS, although we are retaining the requirement to perform performance evaluations on other continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS). We have corrected typographical errors related to electrified filter bed (EFB) monitoring by clarifying that only voltage monitoring is required for EFB. We changed the semiannual flow sensor calibration to an annual calibration, which is consistent with other calibration requirements throughout the rule. We are amending the rule to include language specifying when pressure drop is to be monitored. For more details and our rationale surrounding these changes and other minor changes to the monitoring requirements, please see the RTC document in the docket for this action. The final monitoring requirements are summarized in this section. Continuous compliance with the standards proposed in Tables 1C, 1D, or 1E must be demonstrated through control device parameter monitoring coupled with the proposed periodic emissions testing described in section III.F.1. The parametric monitoring already required in Table 2 for thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, or biofilters to demonstrate continuous compliance with the compliance options in Table 1B is also required to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the standards in Tables 1C, 1D, or 1E. In addition to the parametric monitoring currently specified for thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, or biofilters, the amendments to Table 2 as revised by this final action include the following parameter monitoring requirements for the types of air pollution control devices (APCDs) that we expect to be used to comply with the standards in Tables 1D or 1E: For wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP), secondary electric power input and liquid flow rate; For dry electrostatic precipitator (ESP), secondary electric power input or opacity; For wet PM scrubbers, liquid flow rate and pressure drop; For wet acid gas scrubbers, liquid flow rate and effluent pH; For EFBs, ionizer voltage or current and pressure drop; and For mechanical collectors (e.g., cyclone or multiclone) or other dry control devices, a choice of opacity monitored using a COMS or pressure drop with weekly opacity observations. The operating limits for these parameters must be established consistently with the existing provisions of 40 CFR 63.2262, as the average of the three test run averages during the performance test. Continuous compliance with the parameters for WESP, dry ESP, wet scrubbers, and EFB must be determined by comparing the three-hour block average parameter average to the limit established during the performance test. Consistent with existing provisions in Table 2, the rule is amended to require that a source owner choosing to rely on a control device other than a thermal oxidizer, catalytic oxidizer, or biofilter used to meet a compliance option in Table 1C petition the Administrator for site-specific operating parameters to be monitored or to maintain the three-hour block average total hydrocarbon (THC) concentration within the limits established during the performance test. The source owner of process units that meet a compliance option in Tables 1C, 1D, or 1E without using a control device must maintain on a daily basis the process unit controlling operating parameter(s) within the ranges established during the performance test or maintain the three-hour block average THC concentration within the limits established during the performance test. For control devices where opacity is used as an operating parameter, a COMS is required, and the 24-hour block average opacity must not exceed 10 percent (or the highest hourly average measured during the performance test). Table 10 indicates that the requirements for opacity standards in 40 CFR 63.6(h)(2) through (9) do not apply because opacity is an operating limit and not an emission standard. Continuous monitoring requirements associated with the work practices in Table 3 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 (``Table 3'') include combustion unit bypass stack usage monitoring (e.g., temperature or bypass damper position), lumber kiln dry bulb temperature [[Page 41427]] monitoring for comparison with the batch average or daily block average dry bulb temperature limit, monitoring of lumber moisture (with semiannual averaging) for comparison to lumber minimum moisture content limits in Table 11, or monitoring of lumber kiln temperature (with 3- hour block averaging) and lumber moisture (with semiannual averaging) for comparison to limits in an approved site-specific plan. We are finalizing as proposed a requirement to continuously monitor process unit bypass stack usage at all times while the process units are operating, including times when the process unit is undergoing startup or shutdown, and during the operating conditions as specified in 40 CFR 63.2250(f)(2) through (4). This requirement is included to ensure that reliable data are available to evaluate continuous compliance with the PCWP NESHAP requirements. Consistent with NESHAP general provisions at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, a source owner is required to operate and maintain the source, its air pollution control equipment, and its monitoring equipment in a manner consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions, to include operating and maintaining equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Owners are required to prepare and keep records of calibration and accuracy checks of the continuous monitoring system (CMS) to document proper operation and maintenance of the monitoring system.

3. Recordkeeping and Reporting

The EPA received no significant comments on the recordkeeping requirements, so they are being finalized as proposed. A source owner is required to submit semi-annual compliance summary reports that document both compliance with the requirements of the PCWP NESHAP and any deviations from compliance with any of those requirements, consistent with existing requirements in the PCWP NESHAP. Owners and operators are required to maintain the records specified by 40 CFR 63.10 and, in addition, are required to maintain records of all monitoring data, in accordance with the PCWP NESHAP.\70\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \70\ 40 CFR 63.2282. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Other Actions

We are finalizing revisions to the PCWP NESHAP to remove obsolete rule language including the emissions averaging compliance option for existing affected sources, dates, and startup/shutdown provisions that are no longer in effect. Removing the outdated language from the PCWP NESHAP streamlines the rule and makes it easier to read. We are also finalizing updates and clarifications of the electronic reporting requirements. In addition, we reviewed issues raised by reconsideration petitioners following the 2020 RTR. The final revisions and rationale are presented in this section.

1. Emissions Averaging

Emissions averaging was included in the 2004 rule as a compliance option for use at existing affected sources. We proposed to remove the emissions averaging compliance option in the May 2023 proposal because no existing facilities are using it, and emissions averaging is not an option for new affected facilities. The only facility to use the option has now ceased PCWP production. Also, the new emission standards being added for process units and HAP subject to the 2007 partial remand and vacatur with this action further diminish opportunities for emissions averaging, and removing the emission averaging language simplifies the rule. Two commenters agreed with removing the emissions averaging option and no commenters objected. Therefore, we are removing the emissions averaging option from the PCWP NESHAP in this final action.

2. Obsolete Dates and Provisions

On August 13, 2020, the EPA published several amendments to the PCWP NESHAP with corresponding compliance dates for transitioning from obsolete provisions that have since passed.\71\ This final rule contains additional amendments with multiple associated dates discussed in section III.H of this preamble. We proposed in the May 2023 proposal to remove the obsolete dates and provisions that are no longer in effect to improve clarity of the PCWP NESHAP, including: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \71\ 85 FR 49434 (Aug. 13, 2020). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In 40 CFR 63.2233(1) through (3), cross-references to specific paragraphs needed to implement the 2020 RTR amendments were proposed to be removed and replaced with a reference to the proposed 40 CFR 63.2233(e), which provides compliance dates for the rule requirements proposed in this action. Paragraphs 40 CFR 63.2250(a) through (c) were proposed to be removed and reserved because their requirements no longer apply. Date language was proposed to be removed in paragraphs 40 CFR 63.2250(f) and (g), which are paragraphs that replaced the obsolete paragraphs 40 CFR 63.2250(a) through (c) in the 2020 RTR amendments. Paragraphs 40 CFR 63.2280(b) and (d) contained dates for when electronic submittal of initial notifications and performance test results became effective. 40 CFR 63.2281(b)(6) contained dates for when electronic submittal of semiannual reports became effective. These dates have passed, and the electronic reporting requirements are in full effect, so we proposed to remove dates to make the rule easier to read. The first part of paragraph 40 CFR 63.2281(c)(4) contains dates for language that was phased out as well as dates for when electronic reporting requirements were phased in. Similarly, 40 CFR 63.2282(a)(2) contains obsolete dates and language intended to phase out some records and phase in other records. We proposed to remove the obsolete language to simplify the rule because the dates have now passed. Row 2 in Table 9 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 was proposed to be removed and reserved because the requirement for an SSM report is no longer in effect. The 2020 RTR amendments added a column to Table 10 to clarify which general provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A applied before and after August 13, 2021, for existing sources. The now obsolete column pertaining to requirements before August 13, 2021, was proposed to be removed. Those amendments pertain to SSM provisions that were removed and to reporting provisions that were added on August 13, 2020. For clarity, we are retaining date language from the 2020 RTR that specified compliance dates for standards and electronic reporting provisions added with that rulemaking. We have also taken care to insert compliance date language for the new standards finalized in this action as discussed further in section III.H of this preamble.\72\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \72\ 40 CFR 63.2240(d) and (e), tables 1C, 1D, 1E to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63, 40 CFR 63.2241(d) through (g), and table 3 to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We received no substantial comments on removal of the obsolete dates and provisions. Therefore, we are finalizing the changes as proposed.

3. Electronic Reporting Updates and Clarifications

On November 19, 2020, the EPA published a final rule incorporating standard electronic reporting language into the general provisions at 40 CFR [[Page 41428]] 63.9(k). We proposed to update the electronic reporting language in 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD, to refer to the provisions in 40 CFR 63.9(k) in addition to other revisions. The proposed revisions are as follows: We proposed to require that initial notifications and notifications of compliance status be submitted in a user-specified format such as PDF in 40 CFR 63.2280(b) and (d) instead of 40 CFR 63.2281(h). General provisions pertaining to submittal of CBI were proposed to be removed from 40 CFR 63.2281(h), (i)(3), and (j)(3). In 40 CFR 63.2281(k), we proposed to replace language pertaining to Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) outageswith additional detailed procedures for submitting CBI in electronic format.\73\ The update provides an email address that source owners and operators can use to electronically mail CBI to the Office of Clean Air Programs (OCAP) CBI Office when submitting compliance reports. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \73\ Now in 40 CFR 63.9(k). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In 40 CFR 63.2281(l), we proposed to remove the provisions related to force majeure claims which are now in 40 CFR 63.9(k). We proposed to remove the provision in 40 CFR 63.2283(d) that states that records submitted to CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format, because 40 CFR 63.10(b)(1) already allows the retention of all records electronically. In Table 10, we proposed to indicate that all of the provisions in 40 CFR 63.9(k) apply to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD. In addition, we proposed to amend 40 CFR 63.2281(c)(4) to clarify the compliance reporting requirements for the work practices in Table 3 (rows 6, 7, or 8). The EPA proposed to clarify that the requirement to report the date, time, and duration of every instance in which one of the work practices is used applies only if that individual work practice is used for more than 100 hours during the reporting period. The EPA's original intent was for the 100-hour reporting threshold to be compared to the semiannual usage of each of the three work practices individually, not for the total usage of all three work practices combined. As stated in 40 CFR 63.2281(c)(4), when one of the work practices is used for less than 100 hours per semiannual reporting period, a summary of the number of instances and total amount of time that work practice was used is required to be reported. As noted in section III.F.2 of this preamble, we also proposed to require continuous monitoring and recording of process unit bypass stack usage at all times including during the operating conditions specified in 40 CFR 63.2250(f)(2) through (4) and Table 3 (rows 6, 7, or 8) to ensure that reliable data are available to evaluate continuous compliance with the PCWP NESHAP requirements. One commenter offered comments on the updated CEDRI reporting template provided with the May 2023 proposal and requested an additional opportunity to review the template before it is finalized.\74\ The commenter's recommendations and the EPA's responses are provided in the RTC located in the docket. The EPA's revised CEDRI reporting template for this final rule is available in the docket but will not be required until implemented in CEDRI.\75\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \74\ 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD--Plywood and Composite Wood Products Semiannual Compliance Reporting Spreadsheet Template. Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243-0417. \75\ 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD--Plywood and Composite Wood Products Semiannual Compliance Reporting Spreadsheet Template (Final ICR Draft, 2026), available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Issues Raised by Petitioners Following the RTR

Following publication of the 2020 RTR,\76\ the EPA received a petition for reconsideration (Petition) from Earthjustice on behalf of Greater Birmingham Alliance to Stop Pollution, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, and Sierra Club (``Petitioners''). The Petitioners asked the EPA to reconsider certain aspects of the 2020 RTR and other amendments under the authority of CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), arguing that the EPA's rationale for four decisions all appeared for the first time in the 2020 RTR and RTC document accompanying the final rule.\77\ This section summarizes the four issues raised by the Petitioners, the EPA's proposed revisions to the PCWP NESHAP to address some of these issues, comments received on the proposed revisions and our responses, and our final decisions and rationale on the issues for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \76\ 85 FR 49434 (Aug. 13, 2020). \77\ National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD) Residual Risk and Technology Review, Final Amendments, Responses to Public Comments on September 6, 2019, Proposal. Document ID No. EPA- HQ-OAR-2016-0243-0244, available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- a. What were the issues raised by the Petitioners and what were our proposed revisions? In the first issue raised, the Petitioners alleged that the EPA failed to set limits for unregulated HAP. Although we do not agree that the Petitioners met their burden under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) to show that it was impracticable to raise this objection during the public comment period for the proposed 2020 RTR, and thereby compel reconsideration of this issue, the May 2023 proposal contained new standards for unregulated HAP that are being finalized in response to the 2007 partial remand and vacatur of the 2004 rule and to address unregulated HAP, such that the Petitioners' concern regarding this issue is resolved with this final action. In the second and third issues raised by the Petitioners, they disagreed with two work practices the EPA finalized on August 13, 2020, for safety-related shutdowns and pressurized refiner startup and shutdowns, and objected to what they perceived to be the EPA's changed or new rationale for these work practices between proposal and finalization of the 2020 RTR, claiming that they did not have an opportunity to raise their objections during the public comment period. The Petitioners disagreed with the EPA's use of CAA section 112(h) to develop work practice standards for safety-related shutdowns and pressurized refiner startup and shutdown events. For safety-related shutdowns, the Petitioners took issue with the EPA's rationale that facilities cannot capture and convey HAP emissions to a control device during these periods for safety reasons, saying that whether emissions can be conveyed to a control device is irrelevant under CAA section 112(h)(2)(A).\78\ In response to this critique, and to ensure that there is a full opportunity for all stakeholders to comment on the EPA's rationale for these work practices, the EPA requested comment in the May 2023 proposal on the relevance of the ability of facilities to capture and convey emissions to a control device to CAA section 112(h)(2)(A), given that CAA section 112(h)(2)(A) explicates CAA section 112(h)(1), which explicitly refers to the EPA's judgment as to when it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of a HAP. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \78\ National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD) Residual Risk and Technology Review, Final Amendments: Response to Public Comments on September 6, 2019 Proposal. Docket ID No. EPA-HQ- OAR-2016-0243-0244 Available in the docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 41429]] Regarding the EPA's rationale under CAA section 112(h)(2)(B) for the safety-related shutdown and pressurized refiner startup and shutdown work practices, the Petitioners expressed discontent with the EPA's conclusion that stack tests (which typically take one to three hours) cannot be conducted for events lasting only minutes. The Petitioners asserted that the EPA should have considered the practicability of other measurement methodologies including CEMS or continuous parameter monitoring. In response to the Petitioners' concerns, in the May 2023 proposal we maintained that stack testing is not feasible for safety-related shutdown events lasting only minutes or for pressurized refiner startup/shutdown events lasting less than 15 minutes. We requested comment in the May 2023 proposal on how the EPA could feasibly prescribe or enforce a numeric emission limit for such short-term events without the ability to conduct stack testing. Further, continuous operation of CEMS on bypass stacks that are unused for the majority of process operating time is not technically (e.g., because of the calibration drift likely to occur while the CEMS goes unused) or economically practicable. The source testing required for conducting a relative accuracy test audit (RATA) of CEMS would not be possible without requiring the use of the bypass during the RATA. Obtaining emissions data to correlate with parameters to establish continuously monitored parameter limits also necessitates stack testing. Although CEMS or specific continuously monitored parameter limits are not an appropriate measurement methodology for safety- related shutdowns and pressurized refiner startups and shutdowns themselves because of technical and economic limitations, in 2023 we proposed additional continuous parameter monitoring of bypass stack usage in addition to the work practices for safety-related shutdowns and pressurized refiner startup/shutdown events to address the Petitioners' concern. As discussed in section III.B of this preamble, we proposed to require continuous monitoring of combustion unit bypass stacks and to require annual tune-ups of combustion units used to direct-fire dryers. As discussed in section III.F of this preamble, we also proposed to require continuous monitoring of process unit bypass stack usage at all times while the process units are operating, including times when the process unit is undergoing startup or shutdown, and during safety-related shutdowns and pressurized refiner startup/shutdown events to ensure that reliable data are available to evaluate continuous compliance with the PCWP NESHAP requirements. The Petitioners also took issue with inclusion of measures that facilities have developed to protect workers and equipment in the safety-related shutdown work practice. The Petitioners argued that the steps an operator takes to protect workers and equipment are not necessarily the steps needed to prevent excess emissions or to remove raw materials and the heat source from the process as expeditiously as possible. We disagree with the Petitioners that the phrase ``to protect workers and equipment'' detracts from the safety-related shutdown work practice requirements to ensure that the flow of raw materials (such as furnish or resin) and fuel or process heat (as applicable) ceases, and that material is removed from the process unit(s) as expeditiously as possible given the system design to reduce air emissions. However, we requested comment in the May 2023 proposal on inclusion of measures facilities developed to protect workers and equipment from the safety- related shutdown provision. We also requested comment on all aspects of the work practice provisions (which appear in Table 3, rows 6 and 7) based on operational experience now that these narrowly defined provisions have been implemented in place of the broader SSM exemptions that were removed from the PCWP NESHAP. In their fourth issue raised, the Petitioners disagreed with the EPA's statement in the September 6, 2019, proposed technology review and 2020 RTR that use of low-HAP resins is a development under CAA section 112(d)(6), claiming the EPA must revise standards for any development identified to require the maximum degree of reduction that is achievable through its application. In the 2019 proposed and 2020 final technology reviews, when noting that low-HAP resins may be a development, the EPA also explained that the EPA did not identify information to suggest that the resin system changes have significantly altered the type of process units or HAP pollution control technologies used in the PCWP industry to date or have led to processes or practices that have not been accounted for in the promulgated PCWP NESHAP compliance options. The Petitioners dismissed as irrelevant the EPA's explanation that there are many types of resin systems used in the manufacture of the various PCWP and that the resin-system solution for one facility's product may not be applicable for another product produced at a different facility. The Petitioners also argued that it is irrelevant the EPA noted in 2020 plans for additional action for the PCWP NESHAP source category with respect to remanded PCWP process units in which the EPA would further consider the effects of resin system changes. Given the Petitioners' objections, we rearticulated in the May 2023 proposal our conclusion from the 2020 RTR. Specifically, we retracted our characterization of low-HAP resins as a ``development'' under CAA section 112(d)(6) with respect to the standards established for the PCWP source category in 2004. As noted in 2020, the EPA did not identify information suggesting that the resin system changes have significantly altered the type of process units or HAP pollution control technologies used in the PCWP industry or have led to processes or practices that were not accounted for in the 2004 rule compliance options. Therefore, we agree with the Petitioners that it may have been inappropriate to describe resin changes as a ``development'' under CAA section 112(d)(6) that occurred after the PCWP NESHAP was promulgated in 2004. Moreover, we disagree with the Petitioners' claim that if resin changes were in fact such a ``development,'' the EPA would be required to establish MACT standards under CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) as a consequence of that development. CAA section 112(d)(6) does not require the EPA to reconduct MACT determinations, as the D.C. Circuit made clear in Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Instead, CAA section 112(d)(6) provides the EPA with the ability to exercise its judgment to determine what revisions to preexisting standards are necessary, after considering such developments. The mere presence of a development does not alone compel the EPA to determine that revising a promulgated MACT standard is necessary. Rather, the EPA is required to review the standard and determine whether to revise the standard after taking into account the development. This preserves the EPA's ability to exercise judgment regarding whether a change to a promulgated standard is necessary. In any event, as discussed in section III.D of this preamble, we proposed work practice standards under CAA section 112(h) for RMH process units for which no emission standards were in place to respond to the 2007 partial remand and vacatur of the 2004 rule. These work practices were based on the use of non-HAP resins or resins with low vapor [[Page 41430]] pressure, which have a low potential for HAP emissions, including resin types that were available at the time of the 2004 rule. b. What comments did we receive on our proposed revisions to address the issues and what were our responses and final decisions? We received comments on the safety-related shutdown and pressurized refiner work practices. One commenter opposed these work practices while another commenter supported them. Upon review of the comments provided, the EPA has reconsidered the work practices for safety- related shutdown and pressurized refiner startup and shutdown events, and the Agency is retaining these work practice standards as promulgated in the 2020 RTR.\79\ The specific comments related to the work practices and our detailed response are in the RTC located in the docket.\80\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \79\ 85 FR 49434 (Aug. 13, 2020). \80\ see National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD), Response to Public Comments on May 18, 2023 Proposed Amendments, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243, available in the docket for this rulemaking --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We also received a comment concerning the EPA's proposed retraction of a finding published in the 2019 proposed technology review.\81\ The EPA stated in the 2019 review that the increased availability of low- HAP resins constituted a ``development'' that must be considered pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6).\82\ Commenters asserted that the EPA's proposed retraction of this finding in the May 2023 proposal is arbitrary. The commenter noted that pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6), the EPA must evaluate whether this development warrants strengthening the MACT standard. A different commenter indicated the EPA correctly determined that the option for facilities to reformulate resins was already contemplated during the development of the 2004 rule. The commenter stated that as an alternative to installing controls to reduce emissions, facilities can utilize the PBCO and meet HAP emission limits for each process unit. Upon review of the comments provided, we are reaffirming our conclusion from the 2020 RTR that no change to the preexisting PCWP NESHAP standards is warranted as a result of resin system changes. The specific comments and our detailed response are in the RTC located in the docket. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \81\ 84 FR 47074 (Sept. 6, 2019). \82\ Id. at 47092. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?

As proposed, the final rule requires affected sources that commence construction or reconstruction on or before May 18, 2023, to comply with the new emission standards within three years after the effective date (i.e., by July 6, 2029). For affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, owners and operators must comply with the new provisions by July 6, 2026 or upon startup, whichever is later. An affected source is the collection of process units at a PCWP facility. Examples of new affected sources are new greenfield PCWP or lumber facilities, existing facilities constructing new PCWP manufacturing process lines in addition to (or as a replacement for) existing process lines, and existing lumber facilities adding (or replacing) lumber kilns in projects that meet the definition of reconstruction. Commenters offered differing opinions on our proposal to provide three years after the effective date of the new provisions for existing affected sources to comply. One commenter argued that three years was too long, while another commenter argued that the three-year compliance period was too short to implement all new requirements. Amendments to the PCWP NESHAP finalized in this rulemaking for adoption under CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3) are subject to the compliance deadlines outlined in the CAA under CAA section 112(i). For existing sources, CAA section 112(i)(3) provides that there shall be compliance ``as expeditiously as practicable, but in no event later than 3 years after the effective date of such standard'' subject to certain exemptions further detailed in the statute. In determining what compliance period is as ``expeditious as practicable,'' we consider the amount of time needed to plan and construct projects and change operating procedures. As provided in CAA section 112(i), all new affected sources would comply with these provisions by the effective date of the final amendments to the PCWP NESHAP or upon startup, whichever is later. The EPA projects that many existing sources will need to make changes (e.g., review operations, assemble documentation, install add- on controls and monitoring equipment) to comply with the finalized limits for various process units in their facility. These sources will require time to develop plans, construct, conduct performance testing, and implement monitoring to comply with the revised provisions. Therefore, the final rule allows three years for existing sources to become compliant with the applicable emission standards finalized in this action.

A. What are the affected sources?

There are currently 219 major source facilities subject to the PCWP NESHAP. We estimated that six new PCWP facilities will be constructed and become subject to the NESHAP in the five years following the May 2023 proposal. A memorandum documenting the revised changes to the facility list since the 2023 proposed rule can be found in the docket for this rulemaking.\83\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \83\ See the June 1, 2026 memorandum entitled ``Revised Updates to List of Plywood and Composite Wood Products Facilities'', available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What are the air quality impacts?

This final action is expected to reduce 721 tpy of directly- regulated HAPs compared to baseline emissions of 7,250 tpy. Additionally, the final rule will result in a decrease of other air emissions that are not regulated by this rule. In comparison to baseline emissions of 58,036 tpy VOC, the EPA estimates VOC emission reductions of approximately 8,504 tpy.\84\ We also estimate that the final action would result in additional reductions of 202 tpy of PM, 144 tpy of PM <2.5 [micro]m in diameter (PM2.5), 132 tpy of NOx, 719 tpy of CO, 12 tpy of SO2.\85\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \84\ Baseline emissions estimates include only those process units for which new standards are being finalized in this action. \85\ More information about the estimated emission reductions and secondary impacts of this final action can be found in the document entitled Revised Cost, Environmental, and Energy Impacts of Subpart DDDD Regulatory Options, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What are the cost impacts?

The EPA estimates that this final action would cost approximately $121 million in total capital costs (distributed across multiple years) and $53 million per year (in 2024 dollars) in total annualized costs.\86\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \86\ More information about the estimated cost of this final action can be found in the document entitled Revised Cost, Environmental, and Energy Impacts of Subpart DDDD Regulatory Options, available in the docket for this rulemaking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. What are the economic impacts?

For the final rule, the EPA estimated the cost of compliance with the final emission limits. This includes the capital costs of installation, subsequent maintenance and operation of the [[Page 41431]] controls, and other one-time and annual costs. To assess the potential economic impacts, the EPA prepared a partial equilibrium analysis modeling impacts to prices, production, and imports and exports. The EPA additionally performed a screening analysis that compared the expected annualized cost of compliance to the total sales revenue for the ultimate owners of affected facilities. For this final rule, the partial equilibrium analysis estimated an expected economic cost to both producers and consumers and accounting for changes to prices and quantities caused by the final amendments equal to $53 million. The expected annualized compliance cost from the screening analysis is $237,680 (on average) for each facility, including 219 existing and six projected new facilities, with an estimated nationwide annualized cost of $53,500,000. The 219 existing affected facilities are owned by 64 parent companies, and the compliance costs associated with the final amendments are expected to be on average about 0.27 percent of annual sales revenue per ultimate owner. Information on our cost and economic impact estimates for the PCWP manufacturing source category is contained in Economic Impact Analysis for the Final National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products Amendments, available in the docket for this rulemaking.\87\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \87\ Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. What are the benefits?

The EPA is obligated to present the Agency's best scientific understanding and the implications of that science when developing policies and regulations. However, the EPA's analytical practices often provided the public with false precision and confidence regarding the monetized impacts of fine PM2.5 and ozone due to changes in emissions of PM2.5 as well as PM2.5 and ozone precursors. In addition, the science regarding the exposure, health effects from exposure, and valuation of reduction in health effect are evolving with better data and methods, especially at low concentrations of PM and ozone. Some of the sources of uncertainties include the set of assumptions used in projecting the health impact of reducing PM. These projections are based on a series of models that take into account emissions changes, resulting distributions of changes in ambient air quality, the estimated reductions in health effects from changes in exposure, and the composition of the population that will benefit from the reduced exposure. Each component includes assumptions, each with varying degrees of uncertainty. In addition, the EPA historically provided point estimates rather than just ranges or only quantifying emissions, which leads the public to believe the Agency has a better understanding of the monetized impacts of exposure to PM2.5 and ozone than it does in reality. Therefore, to address these concerns, the EPA is no longer monetizing benefits from PM2.5 and ozone but will continue to quantify the emissions until the Agency is confident enough in the modeling to properly monetize those impacts. Implementing the final amendments is expected to reduce emissions of HAP and non-HAP pollutants, such as VOC. We estimate that the final amendments would reduce HAP emissions from the source category by approximately 721 tpy. The amendments would regulate emissions of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, propionaldehyde, non-Hg HAP metals, Hg, HCl, PAH, D/F and MDI. Information regarding the health effects of these compounds can be found in Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants \88\ and in the EPA Integrated Risk Information System database.\89\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \88\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (Last updated Nov. 24, 2025). Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants: https://www.epa.gov/haps/health-effects-notebook-hazardous-air-pollutants. \89\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2026). List of Substances on IRIS: https://iris.epa.gov/AtoZ/?list_type=alpha. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The final amendments would reduce emissions of VOC which, in conjunction with NOx and in the presence of sunlight, form ground-level ozone. There are health benefits of reducing VOC emissions in terms of the number and value of avoided ozone-attributable deaths and illnesses. The Integrated Science Assessment for Ozone \90\ found short-term (less than one month) exposures to ozone to be causally related to respiratory effects, a ``likely to be causal'' relationship with metabolic effects, and a ``suggestive of, but not sufficient to infer, a causal relationship'' for central nervous system effects, cardiovascular effects, and total mortality. The ISA reported that long-term exposures (one month or longer) to ozone are ``likely to be causal'' for respiratory effects including respiratory mortality, and a ``suggestive of, but not sufficient to infer, a causal relationship'' for cardiovascular effects, reproductive effects, central nervous system effects, metabolic effects, and total mortality. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \90\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). Integrated Science Assessment for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-20/012: https://www.epa.gov/isa/integrated-science-assessment-isa-ozone-and-related-photochemical-oxidants. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The human health risk estimated for this source category for the 2020 RTR was determined to be acceptable, and the standards were determined to provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health. Specifically, the maximum individual cancer risk was 30-in-1 million for actual and allowable emissions and the noncancer hazard indices for chronic exposure were below 1 (i.e., 0.8 for actual and allowable emissions). The maximum noncancer hazard quotient for acute exposure was 4. These health risk estimates were based on HAP emissions from the source category after addition of air pollution controls used to meet the MACT standards promulgated in 2004, as well as the baseline HAP emissions from process units for which standards are being promulgated in this action. While the 2020 RTR final amendments reduced emissions by an unquantified amount by removing the SSM exemption and adding repeat testing requirements, the changes to the PCWP NESHAP in this final action will reduce emissions by an additional 721 tons of HAP per year and will further improve human health exposures for populations in all demographic groups.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

This action is not an Executive Order 14192 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

The information collection activities in this final rule have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The information collection request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1984.12. You can find a copy of the ICR in the [[Page 41432]] docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The final changes to the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the PCWP NESHAP incorporate the reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated with the MACT standards being added to the rule for multiple HAP from new and existing process units. Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of PCWP or kiln- dried lumber manufacturing plants that are major sources, or that are located at, or are part of, major sources of HAP emissions. Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory.\91\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \91\ 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Estimated number of respondents: On average over the next three years, approximately 219 existing major sources would be subject to these standards. It is also estimated that six additional respondents would become subject to the emission standards over the three-year period. Frequency of response: The frequency of responses varies depending on the burden item (e.g., one-time, semiannual, annual, every five years). Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from the final recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 44,400 hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Total estimated cost: The total annual recordkeeping and reporting cost for all facilities to comply with all the requirements in the NESHAP, including the requirements in this final rule, is estimated to be $10,290,000 per year including $3,870,000 in annualized capital and O&M costs. 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 the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number for the approved information collection activities contained in this rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The small entities subject to the requirements of this action are small businesses as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). The EPA prepared a small business screening analysis to determine if any of the identified affected entities are small entities, as defined by the SBA. This analysis is available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243). The Agency has determined that 18 out of 64 small ultimate PCWP manufacturing parent companies may experience an impact ranging from approximately 0.03 percent to approximately 1.09 percent of annual sales, with three of the 18 ultimate parent companies experiencing an impact of more than one percent of annual sales. The 18 parent companies own 22 affected PCWP facilities. The EPA does not expect a substantial economic impact from these final amendments because only three out of 18 small business ultimate parent owners in the PCWP manufacturing source category face incremental total annualized compliance costs more than one percent but less than three percent of annual sales revenue. Details of this analysis are presented in Economic Impact Analysis for the Final National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products Amendments, located in the docket for this action.\92\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \92\ Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. While this action creates an enforceable duty on the private sector and one facility owned by a Tribal government, the cost does not exceed $100 million or more.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action 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.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian

Tribal Governments This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. 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. There are facilities subject to this rule located on the lands of the Coeur D'Alene Tribe, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation, and the Choctaw Nation. Consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes, the EPA offered consultation opportunities for Tribal officials early in the process of developing this rule to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. The Choctaw Nation requested and received a pre-proposal meeting, a summary of which is available in the docket for this rulemaking. The EPA also offered consultation opportunities to all federally recognized Tribes during the comment period from May 18, 2023, to July 18, 2023, but received no request for consultation.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. In this final action, the EPA is setting emission standards for the PCWP source category. This does not impact energy supply, distribution, or use.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR

Part 51 This action involves technical standards. Therefore, the EPA conducted searches for the PCWP NESHAP through the Enhanced National Standards Systems Network (NSSN) Database managed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). We also conducted a review of voluntary consensus standards (VCS) organizations and accessed and searched their databases. We conducted searches for EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F of appendix A-1 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 2G, 3, 3A, 3B of appendix A-2 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 4, 5 of appendix A-3 to part 60 of this chapter; [[Page 41433]] EPA Test Method 10 of appendix A-4 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Method 18 of appendix A-6 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 23, 25A of appendix A-7 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 26A, 29 of appendix A-8 to part 60 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 204, 204A, 204B, 204C, 204D, 204E, 204F, 205 of appendix M to part 51 of this chapter; EPA Test Methods 308, 316, 320, 326 of appendix A to part 63 of this chapter; and EPA Test Method 0011 (incorporated by reference at 40 CFR 260.11(c)(4)). During the EPA's VCS search, if the title or abstract (if provided) of the VCS described technical sampling and analytical procedures that are similar to the EPA's referenced method, the EPA ordered a copy of the standard and reviewed it as a potential equivalent method. We reviewed all potential standards to determine the practicality of the VCS for this rule. This review requires significant method validation data that meet the requirements of EPA Method 301 for accepting alternative methods or scientific, engineering, and policy equivalence to procedures in the EPA referenced methods. The EPA may reconsider determinations of impracticality when additional information is available for any particular VCS. Detailed information on the VCS search and determination can be found in the memorandum, Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for NEHSAP: Plywood and Composite Wood Products, which is available in the docket for this action.\93\ Two VCS were identified as acceptable alternatives to the EPA test methods for this final rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \93\ Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0243-0415. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The VCS ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 Part 10, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' is an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B manual portions only and not the instrumental portion. This method determines quantitatively the gaseous constituents of exhausts resulting from stationary combustion sources. The manual procedures (but not instrumental procedures) of ASME/ANSI PTC 19.10-1981 Part 10 may be used as an alternative to EPA Method 3B for measuring the oxygen or carbon dioxide content of the exhaust gas. The gases covered in ASME/ ANSI PTC 19.10-1981 are oxygen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, sulfur trioxide, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and hydrocarbons. However, the use in this rule is only applicable to oxygen and carbon dioxide. This VCS may be obtained from American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, telephone (800) 843-2763, https://www.asme.org. The EPA is finalizing our proposal to incorporate by reference (IBR) the VCS ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 Part 10, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B manual portions only and not the instrumental portion. The VCS ASTM D6348-12e1, ``Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform (FTIR) Spectroscopy,'' is an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 320 with certain conditions. The VCS ASTM D6348-12e1 employs an extractive sampling system to direct stationary source effluent to an FTIR spectrometer for the identification and quantification of gaseous compounds. Concentration results are provided. This test method is potentially applicable for the determination of compounds that (1) have sufficient vapor pressure to be transported to the FTIR spectrometer; and (2) absorb a sufficient amount of infrared radiation to be detected. The VCS ASTM D6348-12e1 may be obtained from https://www.astm.org or from the ASTM Headquarters at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 19428-2959. The EPA is finalizing our proposal to IBR the VCS ASTM D6348-12e1, ``Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform (FTIR) Spectroscopy,'' as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 320 in place of ASTM D6348-03. ASTM D6348-03(2010) was determined to be equivalent to EPA Method 320 with caveats. ASTM D6348-12e1 is a revised version of ASTM D6348- 03(2010) and includes a new section on accepting the results from the direct measurement of a certified spike gas cylinder but lacks the caveats placed on the ASTM D6348-03(2010) version. ASTM D6348-12e1 is an extractive FTIR field test method used to quantify gas phase concentrations of multiple analytes from stationary source effluent and is an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 320 at this time with caveats requiring inclusion of selected annexes to the standard as mandatory. When using ASTM D6348-12e1, the following conditions must be met: The test plan preparation and implementation in the Annexes to ASTM D6348-03, sections A1 through A8 are mandatory; and In ASTM D6348-03, Annex A5 (Analyte Spiking Technique), the percent (%) R must be determined for each target analyte.\94\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \94\ Equation A5.5. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In order for the test data to be acceptable for a compound, percent R must be 70 percent <= R <= 130 percent. If the percent R value does not meet this criterion for a target compound, the test data is not acceptable for that compound and the test must be repeated for that analyte (i.e., the sampling and/or analytical procedure should be adjusted before a retest). The percent R value for each compound must be reported in the test report, and all field measurements must be corrected with the calculated percent R value for that compound by using the following equation: Reported Results = (Measured Concentration in Stack)/(percent R) x 100. In addition to the VCS mentioned earlier in this section, we are finalizing our proposal to IBR ASTM D1835-05, ``Standard Specification for Liquefied Petroleum (LP) Gases,'' for use in the definition of natural gas in 40 CFR 63.2292. The VCS ASTM D-1835-05 covers those products commonly referred to as liquefied petroleum gases, consisting of propane, propene (propylene), butane, and mixtures of these materials. This specification is designed to properly define acceptable LP products for domestic, commercial, or industrial uses. This VCS may be obtained from https://www.astm.org or from the ASTM Headquarters at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 19428-2959.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Lee Zeldin, Administrator. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency amends part 63 of title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: [[Page 41434]] PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES 0

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

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart A--General Provisions 0

2. Amend Sec. 63.14 by revising paragraphs (f)(1) and (i)(13), (86),

and (88) to read as follows: Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference. * * * * * (f) * * * (1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus], issued August 31, 1981; Sec. Sec. 63.116(c) and (h); 63.128(a); 63.145(i); 63.309(k); 63.365(b); 63.457(k); 63.490(g); 63.772(e) and (h); 63.865(b); 63.997(e); 63.1282(d) and (g); 63.1426(c); 63.1450(a), (b), (d), (e), (f), and (g); 63.1625(b); table 5 to subpart EEEE; Sec. Sec. 63.3166(a); 63.3360(e); 63.3545(a); 63.3555(a); 63.4166(a); 63.4362(a); 63.4766(a); 63.4965(a); 63.5160(d); table 4 to subpart UUUU; table 3 to subpart YYYY; table 5 to subpart AAAAA; Sec. 63.7322(b); table 5 to subpart DDDDD; Sec. Sec. 63.7822(b); 63.7824(e); 63.7825(b); 63.8000(d); table 4 to subpart JJJJJ; table 4 to subpart KKKKK; Sec. Sec. 63.9307(c); 63.9323(a); 63.9621(b) and (c); table 4 to subpart SSSSS; table 5 of subpart UUUUU; table 1 to subpart ZZZZZ; Sec. Sec. 63.11148(e); 63.11155(e); 63.11162(f); 63.11163(g); table 4 to subpart JJJJJJ; Sec. Sec. 63.11410(j); 63.11551(c); 63.11646(a); 63.11945(d). * * * * * (i) * * * (13) ASTM Method D1835-05, Standard Specification for Liquefied Petroleum (LP) Gases, approved April 1, 2005, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 63.2292, 63.7575, and 63.11237. * * * * * (86) ASTM D6348-03, Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, including Annexes A1 through A8, Approved October 1, 2003, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 63.457(b), 63.997(e), and 63.1349, table 5 to subpart EEEE, table 4 to subpart UUUU, table 4 subpart ZZZZ, and table 8 to subpart HHHHHHH. * * * * * (88) ASTM D6348-12e1, Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, Approved February 1, 2012, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 63.997(e), 63.1571(a), and 63.2354(b), table 4 to subpart DDDD, table 5 to subpart EEEE, table 4 to subpart UUUU, Sec. Sec. 63.7142(a) and (b) and 63.8000(d), and table 4 to subpart SSSSS. * * * * * SUBPART DDDD--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS: PLYWOOD AND COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS 0

3. Amend Sec. 63.2233 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) and (b)

and adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: Sec. 63.2233 When do I have to comply with this subpart? (a) * * * (1) If the initial startup of your affected source is before September 28, 2004, then you must comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements for new and reconstructed sources in this subpart no later than September 28, 2004, except as otherwise specified in paragraph (e) of this section or elsewhere in this subpart. (2) If the initial startup of your affected source is after September 28, 2004, then you must comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements for new and reconstructed sources in this subpart upon initial startup of your affected source, except as otherwise specified in paragraph (e) of this section or elsewhere in this subpart. (b) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements for existing sources no later than October 1, 2007, except as otherwise specified in paragraph (e) of this section or elsewhere in this subpart. * * * * * (e) The compliance dates in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section apply for the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements that became effective on July 6, 2026. The compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements that became effective on July 6, 2026, are listed in paragraph (e)(3) of this section. (1) If construction or reconstruction of your affected source is commenced after May 18, 2023, you must comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements listed in paragraph (e)(3) of this section beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. (2) If construction or reconstruction of your affected source is commenced on or before May 18, 2023, you must comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements listed in paragraph (e)(3) of this section beginning on July 6, 2029, except as otherwise specified for mixed PCWP process streams in Sec. 63.2240(d)(5). (3) The compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements that became effective on July 6, 2026, include the compliance options and operating requirements in Sec. 63.2240(d) and (e) and tables 2 (rows 6 to 12), 1C, 1D, 1E, 4 (rows 12 to 19), 5 (rows 9 to 12), and 7 (rows 8 to 14) to this subpart; and the work practice requirements Sec. 63.2241(d) through (g) and tables 3 (rows 9 to 14), 6 (rows 9 to 14), 8 (rows 9 to 17) and 11 to this subpart. 0

4. Amend Sec. 63.2240 by:

0 a. Revising the introductory text; 0 b. Removing and reserving paragraph (c); and 0 c. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e). The revision and additions read as follows: Sec. 63.2240 What are the compliance options and operating requirements and how must I meet them? You must meet the compliance options and operating requirements described in tables 1A, 1B, and 2 to this subpart by using one or more of the compliance options listed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. You must meet the compliance options in tables 1C through 1E to this subpart according to paragraph (d) of this section. The process units subject to the compliance options are listed in tables 1A through 1E to this subpart and are defined in Sec. 63.2292. You need only to meet one of the compliance options outlined in paragraph (a) or (b) of this section for each process unit. You cannot combine compliance options in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section for a single process unit. (For example, you cannot use a production-based compliance option in paragraph (a) of this section for one vent of a veneer dryer and an add-on control system compliance option in paragraph (b) of this section for another vent on the same veneer dryer. You must use either the production-based compliance option or an add-on control system compliance option for the entire dryer.) * * * * * (d) Additional compliance requirements. After July 6, 2026, you must comply with the compliance [[Page 41435]] options in tables 1C through 1E to this subpart and associated operating limits in table 2 to this subpart as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this section. (1) Process units at an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction on or before May 18, 2023, must comply with the compliance options in table 1C to this subpart on and after July 6, 2029. (2) Process units at an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with the compliance options in table 1C to this subpart beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. (3) Direct-wood fired PCWP dryers at an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction on or before May 18, 2023, must comply with the compliance options in table 1D to this subpart on and after July 6, 2029. In addition to the limits in table 1D to this subpart, direct wood-fired green rotary dryers that commenced construction or reconstruction on or before May 18, 2023, must limit emissions of dioxins and furans toxic equivalency (TEQ) to no more than 1.3E-09 pounds per oven dried ton (lb/ODT) or 1.7E-01 nanogram per dry standards cubic meter (ng/dscm) on and after July 6, 2029. (4) Direct-wood fired PCWP dryers at an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with the compliance options in table 1E to this subpart beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. In addition to the limits in table 1E to this subpart, direct wood- fired green rotary dryers that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must limit emissions of dioxins and furans TEQ to no more than 4.4E-10 lb/ODT or 3.7E-02 ng/dscm on and after July 6, 2029. (5) Mixed PCWP process streams (defined in Sec. 63.2292) complying with the compliance options for add-on control systems in table 1B to this subpart according to paragraph (b) of this section before July 6, 2026, must continue to comply with the compliance options in table 1B to this subpart after July 6, 2026. (6) Affected facilities may choose to comply with the add-on control system compliance options in table 1B to this subpart (and associated operating limits in table 2 to this subpart) instead of the compliance options in table 1C to this subpart for fiberboard mat dryer heated zones, press predryers, post-dryer atmospheric refiners, or multipurpose atmospheric refiners. (e) Process unit bypass stack operating requirement. After July 6, 2026, you must comply with the operating requirement in table 2 to this subpart for process unit bypass stacks (defined in Sec. 63.2292) by the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2233(e). 0

5. Amend Sec. 63.2241 by adding paragraphs (d) through (g) to read as

follows: Sec. 63.2241 What are the work practice requirements and how must I meet them? * * * * * (d) The following combustion unit tune-up and bypass stack monitoring requirements must be conducted for all direct-fired dryers (including direct wood-fired PCWP dryers, direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryers, and direct-fired lumber kilns) by the dates specified in Sec. 63.2233(e) and table 3 to this subpart. You must conduct an annual tune-up of each combustion unit used to directly-fire the PCWP dryer or lumber kiln following the procedures in Sec. 63.2271(c) as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section. You must monitor usage of combustion unit bypass stacks (defined in Sec. 63.2292) following the procedures specified in Sec. 63.2269(k) by the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.2233(e). (1) The initial tune-up must be completed by the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.2233(e). After the initial tune-up, each annual tune-up is required to be completed no more than 13 months after the previous tune-up. (2) If a combustion unit that direct-fires a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln is not operating on the required date for a tune-up, the tune-up must be conducted within 30 calendar days of startup of the combustion unit for the purpose of direct-firing a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln. (3) For combustion units with tune-up requirements in this subpart, you may use documentation (required in Sec. 63.7550(c)(1)) of the tune-up conducted according to Sec. Sec. 63.7515(d) and 63.7540(a)(10), in place of the annual combustion unit tune-up requirements in this paragraph (d) and Sec. 63.2271(c), provided the documentation required in Sec. 63.7550(c)(1) is provided according to the schedule in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section. (e) For each lumber kiln, you must minimize lumber over-drying to reduce HAP emissions by meeting the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section by the dates specified in Sec. 63.2233(e) and table 3 to this subpart. (1) Lumber kiln operation and maintenance (O&M). Develop and maintain onsite an O&M plan for the lumber kilns at the facility. The O&M plan must include the kiln maintenance, charge optimization, inspection, and corrective action elements specified in Sec. 63.2253(a). (2) Lumber kiln burner tune-up. For direct-fired lumber kilns, conduct annual burner tune-ups according to paragraph (d) of this section and Sec. 63.2271(c). (3) Lumber kiln work practice. Minimize lumber over-drying by operating according to one of the work practice options in paragraph (e)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section. (i) Temperature limit option. Operate the lumber kiln with a maximum dry bulb temperature limit of no more than 210 [deg]F for batch indirect fired (IF) kilns, 235 [deg]F for batch direct-fired (DF) kilns, 245 [deg]F for continuous IF kilns, or 245 [deg]F for continuous DF kilns. You must continuously monitor and record the dry bulb temperature during the kiln drying cycle according to Sec. 63.2269(m) and maintain the batch cycle average dry bulb temperature (for batch kilns) or daily block average dry bulb temperature (for continuous kilns) below the maximum limit specified in this paragraph (e)(3)(i) according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(1). (ii) Hybrid option. Operate the lumber kiln according to paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section. (A) Operate the lumber kiln with a maximum dry bulb temperature limit of no more than 240 [deg]F for batch indirect fired (IF) kilns, 250 [deg]F for batch direct-fired (DF) kilns, 260 [deg]F for continuous IF kilns, or 260 [deg]F for continuous DF kilns. You must continuously monitor and record the dry bulb temperature during the kiln drying cycle according to Sec. 63.2269(m) and maintain the batch cycle average dry bulb temperature (for batch kilns) or daily block average dry bulb temperature (for continuous kilns) below the maximum limit specified in this paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(1). (B) Operate the kiln to dry to a semiannual average lumber moisture content (weight percent, dry basis) at or above the minimum limit of moisture content considered to be over-dried lumber as specified in paragraph (e)(4) of this section and table 11 of this subpart. Lumber moisture must be monitored and recorded according to Sec. 63.2269(n). The semiannual average must be determined according to Sec. 63.2270(i). (iii) Site-specific plan option. Develop and operate according to a site-specific plan to minimize lumber over-drying [[Page 41436]] through temperature and lumber moisture monitoring as required in paragraphs (e)(3)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section. The site-specific plan must be submitted to the delegated authority for approval and the site-specific limits from the plan must be incorporated into the facility's operating permit as specified in Sec. 63.2253(b). (A) The site-specific plan must identify one temperature parameter (such as wet or dry bulb temperature, wet bulb depression, or temperature drop across the load) to be continuously monitored during the kiln drying cycle; include a description of how the temperature parameter is measured and used to minimize over-drying of lumber; and include a site-specific limit for the temperature parameter that minimizes over-drying. You must continuously monitor and record the temperature parameter according to Sec. 63.2269(m) and calculate the 3-hour block average for comparison to the site-specific temperature limit according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(2). (B) The site-specific plan must include a method for monitoring lumber moisture content (weight percent, dry basis); specify the location of such monitoring within the lumber manufacturing process (for example, at the kiln unloading track, in lumber storage, or at the planer); specify the minimum kiln-dried lumber moisture content limit based on the lumber moisture specifications produced at the facility based on paragraph (e)(4) of this section and table 11 of subpart DDDD; and adhere to the minimum data and lumber moisture content averaging requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.2269(o) and 63.2270(j). (4) Over-dried lumber. As used in this subpart, the ``maximum lumber moisture specification'' means the upper limit of lumber moisture content (weight percent on a dry basis) that meets the relevant lumber grade standard for a lumber product. For each maximum lumber moisture specification, table 11 to this subpart provides the corresponding minimum kiln-dried lumber moisture content limits below which lumber is considered to be over-dried for purposes of this subpart. (f) By the dates specified in Sec. 63.2233(e) and table 3 to this subpart, you must operate each log vat using a site-specific target log temperature that does not exceed 212 [deg]F measured in the water used to soak the logs or in the wood as it is cut from the log. (g) By the dates specified in Sec. 63.2233(e) and table 3 to this subpart, you must meet the work practice standards in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this section for resinated material handling process units, including resin tanks, softwood and hardwood plywood presses, engineered wood product presses and curing chambers, blenders, formers, finishing saws, finishing sanders, panel trim chippers, and reconstituted wood products board coolers (at existing affected sources), hardboard humidifiers, and onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing. (1) You must meet one of the resin-related requirements in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. (i) Use only a non-HAP resin as defined in Sec. 63.2292; or (ii) Use only a resin with maximum true vapor pressure (defined in Sec. 63.2292) of less than or equal to 13.1 kPa (1.9 psia) if the resin is stored in resin tanks with capacity of less than 40,000 gallons, or use only a resin with maximum true vapor pressure (defined in Sec. 63.2292) of less than 5.2 kPa (0.75 psia) if the resin is stored in one or more resin tanks with capacity of 40,000 gallons or more; or (iii) Use a combination of resins meeting either paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. (2) Process wood material that was purchased pre-dried to a moisture content of no more than 30 percent (weight percent, dry basis), or has been dried in a dryer located at the PCWP facility. This paragraph (g)(2) does not apply for wet formers and onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing. 0

6. Amend Sec. 63.2250 by:

0 a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a) through (c); 0 b. Revising paragraph (f) introductory text and paragraph (f)(6); 0 c. Adding paragraph (f)(7); and 0 d. Revising paragraph (g). The revisions and addition read as follows: Sec. 63.2250 What are the general requirements? * * * * * (f) You must be in compliance with the compliance options, operating requirements, and the work practice requirements in this subpart when the process unit(s) subject to the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements are operating, except as specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (7) of this section. * * * * * (6) The applicable standard during each of the operating conditions specified in paragraphs (f)(2) through (4) of this section are the work practice requirements in table 3 to this subpart for safety-related shutdowns (row 6), pressurized refiner startup and shutdown (row 7), and direct-fired softwood veneer dryers undergoing startup or shutdown of gas-fired burners (row 8). The otherwise applicable compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements (in rows 1 through 5 of table 3 to this subpart) do not apply during the operating conditions specified in paragraphs (f)(2) through (4) of this section, with the exception of the operating requirement in Sec. 63.2240(e) which applies at all times. (7) When using a wet scrubber, electrified filter bed, or mechanical collector (or other dry control device not mentioned elsewhere in table 2 to this subpart), you are not required to meet the minimum limit for pressure drop across the control device during startup or shutdown. Parameter limits other than pressure drop continue to apply during startup and shutdown. (g) You must always operate and maintain your affected source, including air pollution control and monitoring equipment in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions at least to the levels required by this subpart. The general duty to minimize emissions does not require you to make any further efforts to reduce emissions if levels required by the applicable standard have been achieved. Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on information available to the Administrator which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the source. Sec. 63.2252 [Removed and Reserved] 0

8. Under the undesignated center heading ``General Compliance

Requirements'' add Sec. 63.2253 to read as follows: Sec. 63.2253 What are the general requirements for lumber kilns? (a) Lumber kiln O&M plan. The lumber kiln O&M plan must include the elements specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section and be maintained according to paragraph (a)(4) of this section. (1) Procedures for maintaining the integrity of lumber kiln internal air flow and heat distribution components (such as, baffles, fans, vents, heating coils, or [[Page 41437]] temperature sensors) to provide as uniform a temperature and air flow as reasonably possible. (2) Charge optimization practices to reduce over drying. (3) At least annually, you must inspect lumber kiln integrity and review the charge optimization practices used. You must implement corrective actions as needed and maintain records of the inspections and corrective actions taken. (i) The initial inspection of kiln integrity must be completed by the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.2233(e). After the initial inspection, each annual inspection is required to be completed no more than 13 months after the previous inspection. (ii) Corrective actions must be initiated within 30 days after the inspection and completed within 180 days following the inspection identifying the need for the corrective action. If the corrective action cannot be completed within 180 days, a written request for an extension may be submitted to the delegated authority, who may grant an extension if they determine additional time is necessary. (4) After the compliance date in Sec. 63.2233(e), any updates made to the O&M plan maintained onsite must be described in the semiannual compliance report. Delegated authorities may require modification of the O&M plan, as needed, upon review. (b) Lumber kiln site-specific plan approval. If you choose to comply with the work practice option in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii) using a site-specific plan for temperature and lumber moisture monitoring, the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section apply. (1) The site-specific plan must be developed and submitted to the delegated authority by January 6, 2028. (2) The written site-specific plan must be maintained onsite at the facility and is enforceable upon the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.2233. (3) After the compliance date, you must report deviations from the site-specific plan according to Sec. 63.2281. (4) Once the site-specific plan is approved by the delegated authority, the site-specific limits from the plan must be incorporated into the facility's title V permit when the title V permit is next reopened for cause or renewed, as applicable. (5) After the compliance date in Sec. 63.2233(e), any updates made to the site-specific plan must be approved by the delegated authority, and any updates to the site-specific limits from the plan must be incorporated into the facility's title V permit when the title V permit is next reopened for cause or renewed, as applicable. 0

9. Amend Sec. 63.2260 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.2260 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements? (a) To demonstrate initial compliance with the compliance options and operating requirements, you must conduct performance tests and establish each site-specific operating requirement in table 2 to this subpart according to the requirements in Sec. 63.2262 and table 4 to this subpart. Combustion units that accept process exhausts into the flame zone are exempt from the performance testing to show compliance with the compliance options in table 1B or 1C to this subpart and the operating requirements for thermal oxidizers. * * * * * 0

10. Revise Sec. 63.2262 to read as follows:

Sec. 63.2262 How do I conduct performance tests and establish operating requirements? (a) Testing procedures. You must conduct each performance test according to the requirements in paragraphs (b) through (o) of this section and according to the methods specified in table 4 to this subpart. (b) Periods when performance tests must be conducted. You must conduct each performance test based on representative performance (i.e., performance based on representative operating conditions as defined in Sec. 63.2292) of the affected source for the period being tested. Representative conditions exclude periods of startup and shutdown. You may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You must describe representative operating conditions in your performance test report for the process and control systems and explain why they are representative. You must record the process information that is necessary to document operating conditions during the test and include in such record an explanation to support that such conditions are representative. Upon request, you shall make available to the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests. (c) Number and duration of test runs. You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance test required in this section as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3). Each test run must last at least 1 hour except as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) Testing of a temporary total enclosure (TTE) conducted using EPA Methods 204A through 204F of appendix M of part 51 of this chapter, which require three separate test runs of at least 3 hours each; and testing of an enclosure conducted using the alternative tracer gas method in appendix A to this subpart, which requires a minimum of three separate runs of at least 20 minutes each. (2) Test runs longer than 1 hour may be required to meet minimum sample volume requirements specified in table 4 to this subpart. (d) Location of sampling sites. (1) Sampling sites must be located at the inlet (if emission reduction testing or documentation of inlet methanol or formaldehyde concentration is required) and outlet of the control device (defined in Sec. 63.2292) and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. For control sequences with wet control devices (defined in Sec. 63.2292) followed by control devices (defined in Sec. 63.2292), sampling sites may be located at the inlet and outlet of the control sequence and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. (2) Sampling sites for process units meeting compliance options without a control device must be located prior to any releases to the atmosphere. Facilities demonstrating compliance with a production-based compliance option for a process unit equipped with a wet control device must locate sampling sites prior to the wet control device. (3) Sampling sites must be located at the outlet of the control device (defined in Sec. 63.2292), if a control device is used, and prior to any releases to the atmosphere to demonstrate compliance with the compliance options in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart and for compliance with the dioxin and furan limits in Sec. 63.2240(d)(2) and (3). (e) Collection of monitoring data. You must collect operating parameter monitoring system or continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) data at least every 15 minutes during the entire performance test and determine the parameter or concentration value for the operating requirement during the performance test using the methods specified in paragraphs (k) through (o) of this section. (f) Collection of production data. To comply with any of the production-based compliance options in table 1A to this subpart, or compliance options in terms of mass per unit production in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart, you must measure and record the process unit throughput during each performance test. [[Page 41438]] (g) Nondetect data. (1) Except as specified in paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) of this section, all nondetect data (defined in Sec. 63.2292) must be treated as one-half of the method detection limit when determining total HAP, formaldehyde, methanol, or total hydrocarbon (THC) emission rates. (2) When showing compliance with the production-based compliance options in table 1A to this subpart, you may treat emissions of an individual HAP as zero if all three of the performance test runs result in a nondetect measurement, and the method detection limit is less than or equal to 1 parts per million by volume, dry basis (ppmvd). Otherwise, nondetect data for individual HAP must be treated as one- half of the method detection limit. (3) Nondetect data must be treated as the method detection limit when showing compliance with Sec. 63.2240(d)(3) or (4) and the compliance options in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart. When determining 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin toxicity equivalency (TEQ), the value of zero may be used for nondetect results. (h) Calculation of percent reduction across a control system. When determining the control system efficiency for any control system when complying with any of the compliance options based on percent reduction across a control system in table 1B to this subpart, as part of the performance test, you must calculate the percent reduction using the following equation: Equation 1 to Paragraph (h) [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JY26.003 Where: PR = Percent reduction, percent. CE = Capture efficiency, percent (determined for reconstituted wood product presses and board coolers as required in table 4 to this subpart). ERin = Emission rate of total HAP (calculated as the sum of the emission rates of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde), THC, formaldehyde, or methanol in the inlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour. ERout = Emission rate of total HAP (calculated as the sum of the emission rates of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde), THC, formaldehyde, or methanol in the outlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour. (i) Calculation of mass per unit production. To comply with any of the production-based compliance options in table 1A to this subpart, or compliance options in terms of mass per unit production in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart, you must calculate your mass per unit production emissions for each performance test run using the following equation: Equation 2 to Paragraph (i) [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JY26.004 Where: MP = Mass per unit production, pounds per oven dried ton OR pounds per thousand square feet on a specified thickness basis (see paragraph (j) of this section if you need to convert from one thickness basis to another). ERHAP = Emission rate of total HAP (calculated as the sum of the emission rates of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde) or other pollutant in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart being measured in the stack, pounds per hour. P = Process unit production rate (throughput), oven dried tons per hour OR thousand square feet per hour on a specified thickness basis; CE = Capture efficiency, percent (determined for reconstituted wood product presses and board coolers as required in table 4 to this subpart). (j) Thickness basis conversion. Use the following equation to convert from one thickness basis to another: Equation 3 to Paragraph (j) [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JY26.005 Where: MSFA = Thousand square feet on an A-inch basis. MSFB = Thousand square feet on a B-inch basis. A = Old thickness you are converting from, inches. B = New thickness you are converting to, inches. (k) Establishing thermal oxidizer operating requirements. If you operate a thermal oxidizer, you must establish your thermal oxidizer operating parameters according to paragraphs (k)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) During the performance test to meet a compliance option in table 1B or 1C to this subpart (or a PAH limit in table 1D or 1E to this subpart), you must continuously monitor the firebox temperature during each of the required 1-hour test runs. For regenerative thermal oxidizers, you may measure the temperature in multiple locations (e.g., one location per burner) in the combustion chamber and calculate the average of the temperature measurements prior to reducing the temperature data to 15-minute averages for purposes of establishing your minimum firebox temperature. The minimum firebox temperature must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute firebox temperatures monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (2) You may establish a different minimum firebox temperature for your thermal oxidizer by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable compliance options of this subpart. (3) If your thermal oxidizer is a combustion unit that accepts process exhaust into the flame zone, then you are exempt from the performance testing and monitoring requirements specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this section. To demonstrate initial compliance, you must submit documentation with your Notification of Compliance Status showing that process exhausts controlled by the combustion unit enter into the flame zone. (l) Establishing catalytic oxidizer operating requirements. If you operate a catalytic oxidizer, you must establish your catalytic oxidizer operating parameters according to paragraphs (l)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) During the performance test to meet a compliance option in table 1B or 1C to this subpart (or a PAH limit in table 1D or 1E to this subpart), you must continuously monitor during the required 1-hour test runs either the temperature at the inlet to each catalyst bed or the temperature in the [[Page 41439]] combustion chamber. For regenerative catalytic oxidizers, you must calculate the average of the temperature measurements from each catalyst bed inlet or within the combustion chamber prior to reducing the temperature data to 15-minute averages for purposes of establishing your minimum catalytic oxidizer temperature. The minimum catalytic oxidizer temperature must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute temperatures monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (2) You may establish a different minimum catalytic oxidizer temperature by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in this paragraph (l) that demonstrates compliance with the applicable compliance options of this subpart. (m) Establishing biofilter operating requirements. If you operate a biofilter, you must establish your biofilter operating requirements according to paragraphs (m)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) During the performance test to meet a compliance option in tables 1B through 1E to this subpart, you must continuously monitor the biofilter bed temperature during each of the required 1-hour test runs. To monitor biofilter bed temperature, you may use multiple thermocouples in representative locations throughout the biofilter bed and calculate the average biofilter bed temperature across these thermocouples prior to reducing the temperature data to 15-minute averages for purposes of establishing biofilter bed temperature limits. The biofilter bed temperature range must be established as the temperature values 10 percent below the minimum and 10 percent (not to exceed 8 [deg]F) above the maximum 15-minute biofilter bed temperatures monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards. You may base your biofilter bed temperature range on values recorded during previous performance tests provided that the data used to establish the temperature ranges have been obtained using the test methods required in this subpart. If you use data from previous performance tests, you must certify that the biofilter and associated process unit(s) have not been modified subsequent to the date of the performance tests. Replacement of the biofilter media with the same type of material is not considered a modification of the biofilter for purposes of this section. (2) For a new biofilter installation, you will be allowed up to 180 days following the compliance date or 180 days following initial startup of the biofilter to complete the requirements in paragraph (m)(1) of this section. (3) You may expand your biofilter bed temperature operating range by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable compliance options of this subpart. (n) Establishing operating requirements for process units meeting compliance options without a control device. If you operate a process unit that meets a compliance option in table 1A, 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart without the use of a control device, you must establish your process unit operating parameters according to paragraphs (n)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) During the performance test, you must identify and document the process unit controlling parameter(s) that affect HAP emissions during the three-run performance test. The controlling parameters you identify must coincide with the representative operating conditions you describe according to paragraph (b) of this section. For each parameter, you must specify appropriate monitoring methods, monitoring frequencies, and for continuously monitored parameters, averaging times not to exceed 24 hours. The operating limit for each controlling parameter must then be established as the minimum, maximum, range, or average (as appropriate depending on the parameter) recorded during the performance test. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (2) You may establish different controlling parameter limits for your process unit by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the compliance options in table 1A, 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart for an uncontrolled process unit. (o) Establishing operating requirements using THC CEMS. If you choose to meet the operating requirements by monitoring THC concentration instead of monitoring control device or process operating parameters, you must establish your THC concentration operating requirement according to paragraphs (o)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) During the performance test, you must continuously monitor THC concentration using your CEMS during each of the required 1-hour test runs. The maximum THC concentration must then be established as the average of the three maximum 15-minute THC concentrations monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of THC concentration values under different operating conditions. (2) You may establish a different maximum THC concentration by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the compliance options in tables 1A and 1B to this subpart. (p) Establishing wet electrostatic precipitator operating requirements. If you use a wet electrostatic precipitator to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must establish your wet electrostatic precipitator operating requirements according to paragraphs (p)(1) through (3) of this section except as specified in paragraph (p)(4) of this section if you are using a COMS. (1) During the PM or Hg performance test, you must continuously monitor the total secondary electric power during each of the required test runs. The minimum total secondary electric power must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute total secondary electric power values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. (2) During the PM, Hg, or HCl performance test, you must continuously monitor the liquid flow rate to the wet electrostatic precipitator during each of the required test runs. The minimum liquid flow rate must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute liquid flow rate values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. (3) You may establish a different minimum total secondary power or liquid flow rate limits for your wet electrostatic precipitator by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraphs (p)(1) and (2) of this section that demonstrates [[Page 41440]] compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (4) For a WESP followed by a control device with a dry exhaust for which you choose to use a COMS instead of WESP parameter monitoring, you must follow the procedures in paragraph (t) of this section for establishing the opacity operating limit. (q) Establishing dry electrostatic precipitator operating requirements. If you use a dry electrostatic precipitator to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must establish your dry electrostatic precipitator operating requirements according to paragraphs (q)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) During the PM or Hg performance test, you must continuously monitor the total secondary electric power during each of the required test runs. The minimum total secondary electric power must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute total secondary electric power values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the emission limits in this subpart. (2) You may establish a different minimum total secondary power limits for your dry electrostatic precipitator by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (q)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (r) Establishing wet scrubber operating requirements. If you use a wet scrubber to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must establish your wet scrubber operating requirements according to paragraphs (r)(1) through (4) of this section. (1) During the performance test, you must continuously monitor the scrubber liquid flow rate during each of the required test runs. The minimum liquid flow rate must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute liquid flow rate values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the compliance options in table 1D or 1E to this subpart. (2) For a wet PM scrubber, during the PM performance test, you must continuously monitor pressure drop across the scrubber during each of the required test runs. The minimum pressure drop must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute pressure drop values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the PM limit. (3) For wet acid gas scrubber, during the HCl performance test, you must continuously monitor the scrubber effluent pH during each of the required test runs. The minimum effluent pH must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute pH values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the HCl limit. (4) You may establish different minimum liquid flow rate, pressure drop, or pH values for your wet scrubber by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraphs (r)(1) through (3) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (s) Establishing electrified filter bed operating requirements. If you use an electrified filter bed to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must establish your electrified filter bed operating requirements according to paragraphs (s)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) During the PM or Hg performance test, you must continuously monitor the bed voltage and ionizer voltage during each of the required test runs. The minimum bed voltage limit and ionizer voltage limit must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute bed voltage values and ionizer voltage values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance. (2) During the PM or Hg performance test, you must continuously monitor the pressure drop across the electrified filter bed during each of the required test runs. The pressure drop range limits must then be established as the average of the three minimum and three maximum 15- minute pressure drop values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. (3) You may establish different bed voltage and ionizer voltage limits or pressure drop range limits for your electrified filter bed by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (s)(1) and (2) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. (t) Establishing operating requirements using opacity measured with a COMS. If you use a mechanical collector (or other dry control device not listed elsewhere in table 2 to the subpart) or WESP followed by a control device with a dry exhaust (for which you choose to use a COMS) to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must establish your operating requirements according to paragraphs (t)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) During the PM performance test, you must continuously monitor opacity during each of the required test runs. The maximum opacity limit must then be established as either 10 percent opacity, or the highest hourly average computed from the 6-minute opacity values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the PM limit. (2) You may establish different opacity limits by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of opacity values under different operating conditions. (u) Establishing operating requirements based on pressure drop with opacity observations. If you use a mechanical collector (or other dry control device not listed elsewhere in table 2 to this subpart) to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, and you choose to use a combination of pressure drop and opacity observations instead of a COMS to demonstrate continuous compliance, you must establish your operating requirements according to paragraphs (u)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) During the PM performance test, you must continuously monitor pressure drop across the mechanical collector (or other dry control device) during each of the required test runs. The minimum pressure drop limit must then be established as the average of the three minimum 15-minute pressure drop values monitored during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the PM limit. (2) During the PM performance test, you must conduct opacity observations of the control device outlet emissions to the atmosphere using EPA Method 9 of appendix A-4 to part 60 of this chapter. You must establish the maximum opacity operating limit as the average of [[Page 41441]] the 6-minute opacity observations during the three test runs demonstrating compliance with the PM limit, or 10 percent opacity, whichever is greater. (3) You may establish a different pressure drop limit or opacity observation limit by submitting the notification specified in Sec. 63.2280(g) and conducting a repeat performance test as specified in paragraph (u)(1) or (2) of this section that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limits in this subpart. Multiple three-run performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values under different operating conditions. 0

11. Revise Sec. 63.2268 to read as follows:

Sec. 63.2268 Initial compliance demonstration for a wet control device. If you use a wet control device as the sole means of reducing HAP emissions (including total HAP, methanol, or formaldehyde), you must develop and implement a plan for review and approval to address how organic HAP captured in the wastewater from the wet control device is contained or destroyed to minimize re-release to the atmosphere such that the desired emissions reductions are obtained. You must submit the plan with your Notification of Compliance Status. 0

12. Amend Sec. 63.2269 by revising paragraph (c) introductory text and

adding paragraphs (e) through (o) to read as follows: Sec. 63.2269 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and maintenance requirements? * * * * * (c) Wood moisture monitoring. For each furnish or veneer moisture meter, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) and (c)(1) through (5) of this section. This paragraph (c) does not apply for lumber moisture monitoring (covered in paragraphs (n) and (o) of this section) to show compliance with the lumber kilns standards in Sec. 63.2241(e). * * * * * (e) Continuous opacity monitoring systems (COMS). You must install, operate, certify and maintain each COMS according to the procedures in paragraphs (e)(1) through (7) of this section by the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.2233. (1) Each COMS must be installed, operated, and maintained according to Performance Specification 1 at appendix B to part 60 of this chapter. (2) You must conduct a performance evaluation of each COMS according to the requirements in Sec. 63.8(e) and according to Performance Specification 1 at appendix B to part 60 of this chapter. (3) As specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(4)(i), each COMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of sampling and analyzing for each successive 10- second period and one cycle of data recording for each successive 6- minute period. (4) The COMS data must be reduced as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.8(g)(2) and 63.2270(e). (5) You must document procedures and acceptance criteria for operating and maintaining each COMS according to the requirements in Sec. 63.8(d). At a minimum, the documentation must include a daily calibration drift assessment, a quarterly performance audit, and an annual zero alignment audit of each COMS. (6) You must operate and maintain each COMS according to the requirements of Sec. 63.8(e). You must identify periods the COMS is out of control including any periods that the COMS fails to pass a daily calibration drift assessment, a quarterly performance audit, or an annual zero alignment audit. Any 6-minute period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are not available for a required calculation constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements. (7) You must determine and record all the 6-minute averages (and 24-hour block averages as applicable) collected for periods during which the COMS is not out of control. (f) Pressure monitoring. If you have an operating requirement that requires the use of a pressure monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (f)(1) through (6) of this section. (1) Install the pressure sensor(s) in a position that provides a representative measurement of the pressure (e.g., PM scrubber pressure drop). (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating pressure, vibration, and internal and external corrosion consistent with good engineering practices. (3) Use a pressure sensor with a minimum tolerance of 1.27 centimeters of water or a minimum tolerance of 1 percent of the pressure monitoring system operating range, whichever is less. (4) Perform checks at least once each process operating day to ensure pressure measurements are not obstructed (e.g., check for pressure tap pluggage daily). (5) Conduct a performance evaluation of the pressure monitoring system at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (6) If at any time the measured pressure exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating pressure range, conduct a performance evaluation of the pressure monitoring system and confirm that the pressure monitoring system continues to meet the performance requirements. Alternatively, install and verify the operation of a new pressure sensor. (g) pH monitoring. If you have an operating limit that requires a pH monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (g)(1) through (4) of this section. (1) Install the pH sensor in a position that provides a representative measurement of scrubber effluent pH. (2) Ensure the sample is properly mixed and representative of the fluid to be measured. (3) Calibrate the pH monitoring system according to the manufacturer's instructions. Clean the pH probe at least once each process operating day. Maintain on-site documentation that your calibration frequency is sufficient to maintain the specified accuracy of your device. (4) Conduct a performance evaluation (including a two-point calibration with one of the two buffer solutions having a pH within 1 of the pH of the operating limit) of the pH monitoring system at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (h) Liquid flow rate monitoring. If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a flow measurement device, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) through (4) of this section. (1) Locate the flow sensor and other necessary equipment in a position that provides a representative flow. (2) Use a flow sensor with a measurement sensitivity of 2 percent of the flow rate. (3) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal velocity distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances. (4) Conduct a flow sensor calibration check at least annually. (i) Secondary electric power input monitoring. If you have an operating requirement that requires a secondary electric power monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (i)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) Install sensors to measure (secondary) voltage and current to the precipitator collection plates. (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the electric power monitoring at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (j) Electrified filter bed voltage monitoring. If you have an operating [[Page 41442]] requirement that requires a voltage monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (j)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) Install sensors to measure voltage to the electrified filter bed. (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the voltage monitoring at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (k) Combustion unit bypass stack monitoring. If you have a bypass stack in which combustion unit exhaust streams routinely used to direct-fire a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln are temporarily vented to the atmosphere without passing through the direct-fired PCWP dryer or lumber kiln, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (k)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) Install a sensor to continuously monitor an indicator of bypass stack usage such as flow damper position or temperature. (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the bypass stack monitor at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (l) Process unit bypass stack monitoring. If you have a bypass stack that allows a process unit exhaust stream to temporarily vent to the atmosphere while bypassing a control device routinely used to meet the compliance options in table 1B, 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (l)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) Install a sensor to continuously monitor an indicator of bypass stack usage such as flow damper position or temperature. (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the bypass stack monitor at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than annually. (m) Lumber kiln temperature monitoring. Temperature monitors used in lumber kilns must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), and (m)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) For purposes of complying with dry bulb temperature limits in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(i) or (ii), dry bulb temperature monitor(s) must be located in a position to determine the dry bulb temperature of the heated air that exits the lumber. (2) Facilities complying with the site-specific plan in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii) must describe the number and location of temperature monitors in the site-specific plan. (n) Lumber moisture monitoring under hybrid option. The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), and (n)(1) and (2) of this section apply for lumber kilns using the hybrid temperature and lumber moisture monitoring work practice option in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(ii). The lumber moisture content (weight percent, dry basis) must be monitored either within the kiln or at a location after the lumber exits the kiln. (1) For lumber moisture content measured after the lumber exits the kiln, you must obtain at least one lumber moisture content measurement per either twenty thousand board feet (20 MBF or 20,000 BF) of board lumber produced or per 2,000 cubic feet (2,000 CF) of round lumber produced. (2) For lumber moisture content measured in the kiln, lumber moisture measurements must be obtained as follows for each kiln type: (i) For batch kilns with in-kiln moisture monitoring, lumber moisture measurements must be distributed in different areas of the kiln. At least one lumber moisture reading per crib must be obtained. (ii) For continuous kilns with in-kiln moisture monitoring, lumber moisture measurements must be obtained for each crib of lumber dried. (o) Lumber moisture monitoring under site-specific plan. The requirements in paragraphs (a) and (o)(1) and (2) of this section apply for lumber facilities monitoring lumber moisture under the site- specific plan work practice option Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii). (1) The site-specific plan must include a method for monitoring lumber moisture content (weight percent, dry basis) and specify the location of such monitoring within the lumber manufacturing process (for example, at the kiln unloading track, in lumber storage, or at the planer). (2) You must obtain at least one lumber moisture content measurement per twenty thousand board feet (20 MBF or 20,000 BF) of board lumber produced or per 2,000 cubic feet (2,000 CF) of round lumber produced. 0

13. Amend Sec. 63.2270 by revising paragraph (e) and adding paragraphs

(g) through (k) to read as follows: Sec. 63.2270 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous compliance? * * * * * (e) For dry rotary dryer and veneer predryer wood moisture monitoring, dry rotary dryer temperature monitoring, biofilter bed temperature monitoring, biofilter outlet THC monitoring, and continuous opacity monitoring, determine the 24-hour block average of all recorded readings, calculated after every 24 hours of operation as the average of the evenly spaced recorded readings in the previous 24 operating hours (excluding periods described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section). * * * * * (g) The requirements in paragraphs (c) through (f) of this section do not apply for monitoring the usage of process unit bypass stacks or combustion unit bypass stacks as such monitoring must be conducted continuously at all times that the process unit or combustion unit (that routinely direct-fires a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln) is operating. You must record the dates and times when each bypass stack is used and use the recording readings (excluding invalid data described in paragraph (b) of this section) to calculate and report the total duration of bypass stack usage during the semiannual reporting period. (h) For lumber kilns, the following temperature data averaging requirements apply: (1) Temperature limit and hybrid options. You must continuously monitor and record the dry bulb temperature during the kiln drying cycle and record the dry bulb temperature at least once every 15 minutes as specified in Sec. 63.2269(m). The readings from multiple dry bulb temperature monitors positioned to determine the temperature of the heated air that exits the lumber may be averaged together to determine the kiln-wide, dry bulb temperature. (i) For batch kilns, calculate the average from the recorded readings during each batch cycle, and maintain the batch cycle average dry bulb temperature at or below the maximum temperature limits specified in either Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(i) or (ii), whichever applies. (ii) For continuous dry kilns, calculate the daily block average from the recorded readings and maintain the daily block average dry bulb temperature at or below the maximum temperature limits specified in either Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(i) or (ii), whichever applies. (2) Site specific plan option. You must continuously monitor the temperature parameter (such as wet or dry bulb temperature, wet bulb depression, or temperature drop across the load) specified in your site-specific plan. You must record the temperature parameter at least every 15 minutes and calculate the 3-hour block average for comparison to the site-specific temperature limit. (i) For lumber kilns using the hybrid option, the following lumber moisture data averaging requirements must be followed: (1) Using the lumber moisture content measurement data collected according to Sec. 63.2269(n), calculate and record the semiannual average kiln-dried lumber [[Page 41443]] moisture content for lumber with a given moisture specification produced at the facility. (2) Compare the semiannual average lumber moisture content for each moisture specification produced at the facility to the applicable minimum kiln-dried moisture content limits included in table 11 to this subpart to determine compliance. (j) For lumber kilns using the site-specific option, the following lumber moisture data averaging requirements must be followed: (1) Using the lumber moisture content measurement data collected, calculate and record the monthly and semiannual average kiln-dried lumber moisture content. (2) Compare the monthly average lumber moisture content to the minimum kiln-dried lumber moisture content limit included in the site- specific plan based on Sec. 63.2241(e)(4) and table 11 to this subpart. You must take corrective action if the monthly average lumber moisture content determined in paragraph (j)(1) of this section is below the minimum lumber moisture content limit in the site-specific plan. You must maintain records of corrective actions taken and report corrective actions in the semiannual report. (3) Compare the semiannual average kiln-dried lumber moisture content to the minimum lumber moisture content limit included in the site-specific plan based on Sec. 63.2241(e)(4) of this section and table 11 to this subpart to determine compliance. (k) If you observe opacity using EPA Method 9 of appendix A-4 to part 60 of this chapter (in conjunction with pressure drop monitoring) instead of using a COMS for mechanical collectors (or other dry control device not listed elsewhere in table 2 to this subpart) to meet a compliance option in table 1D or 1E to this subpart, you must follow the procedure for demonstrating continuous compliance with the opacity observation limit in paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this section. (1) A qualified observer must conduct two weekly 6-minute opacity observations of the mechanical collector (or other dry control device) exhaust to the atmosphere according to EPA Method 9 of appendix A-4 in part 60 of this chapter and 40 CFR 60.11 to demonstrate the opacity remains below the maximum limit established according to Sec. 63.2262(u). (2) If the average of the two weekly 6-minute opacity observations exceeds the maximum opacity limit established in paragraph (k)(1) of this section, you must take appropriate corrective action to correct the above normal emissions as soon as practicable and within the monitoring period and record the action taken. 0

14. Amend Sec. 63.2271 by revising paragraph (b)(4) and adding

paragraph (c) to read as follows: Sec. 63.2271 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements? * * * * * (b) * * * (4) Instances of safety-related shutdown, pressurized refiner startup and shutdown, and startup and shutdown of direct-fired softwood veneer dryer gas-fired burners subject to the work practice requirements in table 3 to this subpart (rows 6 through 8) must be reported as required in Sec. 63.2281(c)(4). Instances when the work practice requirements in table 3 to this subpart (rows 6 through 8) are used are not considered to be deviations from (or violations of) the otherwise applicable compliance options, operating requirements and work practice requirements (in rows 1 through 5 of table 3 to this subpart) as long as you do not exceed the minimum amount of time necessary for these events and continuously monitor process unit bypass stack usage during the events as required in Sec. 63.2240(e) and table 2 to this subpart. (c) For direct-fired PCWP dryers (including direct wood-fired PCWP dryers and direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryers) and direct-fired lumber kilns, demonstrate compliance with the annual tune-up requirement in Sec. 63.2241(d) and table 3 to this subpart as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (8) of this section. (1) You must conduct the tune-up while burning the type of fuel (or fuels in case of units that routinely burn a mixture) that provided the majority of the heat input to PCWP dryer or lumber kiln over the 12 months prior to the tune-up. (2) Inspect the burner and (if applicable) grates. Clean, repair, or replace any components of the burner and grates as necessary. This work must be initiated within 30 days after the inspection and completed within 180 days following the inspection identifying the need for the corrective action. If the corrective action cannot be completed within 180 days, a written request for an extension may be submitted to the delegated authority, who may grant an extension if they determine additional time is necessary. (3) For direct-fired PCWP dryers with burners in the dryer or separate combustion unit(s), inspect the flame pattern (as applicable) and adjust the burner as necessary to optimize the flame pattern. The adjustment should be consistent with the manufacturer's specifications, if available. (4) For each direct-fired PCWP dryer with a burner in the dryer, cycle the burner through its firing range to ensure the burner functions satisfactorily throughout the operating range. (5) Inspect the combustion air system and system that controls the air-to-fuel ratio to make sure it is functioning properly (according to the manufacturer's guidelines, if available). (6) Inspect the fuel delivery system and, if applicable, the ash removal system to make sure each system is functioning properly (according to the manufacturer's guidelines, if available). (7) Record the results of each inspection and corrective action taken, as required in Sec. 63.2282. (8) The required inspections and any necessary maintenance must be performed annually (no more than 13 months after previous inspection). If inspections are performed more frequently than annually, required equipment maintenance and replacement may be delayed until the next scheduled shutdown of the combustion unit firing a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln. 0

15. Amend Sec. 63.2280 by:

0 a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b) and paragraph (d) introductory text; 0 b. Removing and reserving paragraph (f); 0 c. Revising paragraph (g) introductory text; and 0 d. Removing and reserving paragraph (g)(2). The revisions read as follows: Sec. 63.2280 What notifications must I submit and when? (a) You must submit all of the notifications in Sec. Sec. 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(e) and (f)(4) and (6), 63.9(b) through (e) and (g) and (h) by the dates specified. (b) You must submit an Initial Notification no later than 120 calendar days after September 28, 2004, 120 calendar days after initial startup, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, or after initial startup, whichever is later, as specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2). Initial notifications required in Sec. 63.9(b) must be submitted in a user-specified format such as portable document format (PDF) following the procedure specified in Sec. 63.9(k) except the Confidential Business Information (CBI) should be submitted according to Sec. 63.2281(k). * * * * * [[Page 41444]] (d) If you are required to conduct a performance test, design evaluation, or other compliance demonstration as specified in tables 4 through 6 to this subpart, or a repeat performance test as specified in table 7 to this subpart, you must submit a Notification of Compliance Status as specified in Sec. 63.9(h)(2)(ii). Notifications of Compliance Status must be submitted in a user-specified format such as portable document format (PDF) following the procedure specified in Sec. 63.9(k) except the CBI should be submitted according to Sec. 63.2281(k). * * * * * (g) You must notify the EPA Administrator within 30 days before you take any of the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (3) of this section. * * * * * 0

16. Revise Sec. 63.2281 to read as follows:

Sec. 63.2281 What reports must I submit and when? (a) You must submit each report in table 9 to this subpart that applies to you. (b) Unless the EPA 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 9 to this subpart and as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) 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. 63.2233 ending on June 30 or December 31, and lasting at least 6 months, but less than 12 months. For example, if your compliance date is March 1, then the first semiannual reporting period would begin on March 1 and end on December 31. (2) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31 for compliance periods ending on June 30 and December 31, respectively. (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 for the semiannual reporting period ending on June 30 and December 31, respectively. (5) For each affected source that is subject to permitting regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71, and if the permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual reports pursuant to Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or Sec. 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. (6) Submit all reports following the procedure specified in Sec. 63.9(k) except the CBI should be submitted according to paragraph (k) of this section. (c) The compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (11) of this section. (1) Company name and address. (2) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name, title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness of the content of the report. (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting period. (4) The compliance report must include the number of instances and total amount of time during the reporting period in which each of the work practice requirements in table 3 to this subpart (row 6, 7, or 8) is used in place of the otherwise applicable compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice requirements (in table 3 to this subpart rows 1 through 5). If a work practice in table 3 to this subpart (row 6, 7, or 8) is used for more than a total of 100 hours during the semiannual reporting period, you must report the date, time and duration of each instance when that one work practice exceeding 100 hours was used. (5) A description of control device maintenance performed while the control device was offline and one or more of the process units controlled by the control device was operating, including the information specified in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section. (i) The date and time when the control device was shut down and restarted. (ii) Identification of the process units that were operating and the number of hours that each process unit operated while the control device was offline. (iii) A statement of whether or not the control device maintenance was included in your approved routine control device maintenance exemption developed pursuant to Sec. 63.2251. If the control device maintenance was included in your approved routine control device maintenance exemption, then you must report the information in paragraphs (c)(5)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section. (A) The total amount of time that each process unit controlled by the control device operated during the semiannual compliance period and during the previous semiannual compliance period. (B) The amount of time that each process unit controlled by the control device operated while the control device was down for maintenance covered under the routine control device maintenance exemption during the semiannual compliance period and during the previous semiannual compliance period. (C) Based on the information recorded under paragraphs (c)(5)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section for each process unit, compute the annual percent of process unit operating uptime during which the control device was offline for routine maintenance using the following equation. Equation 1 to Paragraph (c)(5)(iii)(C) [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JY26.006 Where: RM = Annual percentage of process unit uptime during which control device is down for routine control device maintenance. PUp = Process unit uptime for the previous semiannual compliance period. PUc = Process unit uptime for the current semiannual compliance period. DTp = Control device downtime claimed under the routine control device maintenance exemption for the previous semiannual compliance period. DTc = Control device downtime claimed under the routine control device maintenance exemption for the current semiannual compliance period. (6) [Reserved] (7) If there are no deviations from any applicable compliance option or operating requirement, and there are no deviations from the requirements for work practice requirements in table 8 to this subpart, a statement that there were no deviations from the compliance options, operating requirements, or work practice requirements during the reporting period. (8) If there were no periods during which the continuous monitoring system (CMS), including CEMS, COMS, and CPMS, was out-of-control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), a statement that there were no periods during which the CMS was out-of-control during the reporting period. (9) For each combustion unit subject to tune-up requirements, include the date of the most recent burner tune-up [[Page 41445]] and a summary of corrective actions taken. (10) The total time (hours) during the semiannual reporting period that each combustion unit bypass stack or each process unit bypass stack was used. (11) For each lumber kiln, the information specified in paragraphs (c)(11)(i) though (v) of this section. (i) A description of updates to the O&M plan made during the reporting period, as required under Sec. 63.2253(a)(4). (ii) If complying with the dry bulb temperature limit option in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(i), note the applicable maximum dry bulb temperature limit according to kiln type, and report deviations from the dry bulb temperature limit batch cycle average (for batch kilns) or daily block average (for continuous kilns) calculated according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(1). (iii) If complying with a site-specific temperature limit under a site-specific plan in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii)(A), note the site- specific temperature parameter limit, and report deviations from the 3- hour block average temperature parameter limit included in the site- specific plan calculated according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(2). (iv) If complying with the hybrid option in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(ii), note the applicable maximum dry bulb temperature limit according to kiln type, report deviations from the dry bulb temperature limit batch cycle average (for batch kilns) or daily block average (for continuous kilns) calculated according to Sec. 63.2270(h)(1), and report the semiannual average lumber moisture content determined according to Sec. 63.2270(i). (v) If complying with a site-specific approach for monitoring kiln- dried lumber moisture content under a site-specific plan in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii)(B), describe the lumber moisture monitoring method and location and note the site-specific minimum kiln-dried lumber moisture content limit included in the site-specific plan. Report corrective actions taken as a result of monthly lumber moisture content averages (determined according to Sec. 63.2270(g)) that are below the minimum lumber moisture content limit in the site-specific plan. Report the semiannual average kiln-dried lumber moisture content value determined according to Sec. 63.2270(g). (d) For each deviation from a compliance option or operating requirement and for each deviation from the work practice requirements in table 8 to this subpart that occurs at an affected source where you are not using a CMS to comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, or work practice requirements in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section and in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction and routine control device maintenance. (1) The total operating time of each affected source during the reporting period. (2) Information on the date, time, duration, and cause of deviations (including unknown cause, if applicable), as applicable, and the corrective action taken. (e) For each deviation from a compliance option, operating requirement, or work practice requirement occurring at an affected source where you are using a CMS to comply with the compliance options, operating requirements, or work practice requirements in this subpart, you must include the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) and (e)(2) through (13) of this section. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction and routine control device maintenance. (1) [Reserved] (2) The date, time, and duration that each CMS was inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. (3) The date, time, and duration that each CMS was out-of-control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8). (4) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and whether each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction; during a period of control device maintenance covered in your approved routine control device maintenance exemption; or during another period. (5) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the reporting period and the total duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that reporting period. (6) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control system problems, control device maintenance, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes. (7) A summary of the total duration of CMS downtime during the reporting period and the total duration of CMS downtime as a percent of the total source operating time during that reporting period. (8) A brief description of the process units. (9) A brief description of the CMS. (10) The date of the latest CMS certification or audit. (11) A description of any changes in CMS, processes, or controls since the last reporting period. (12) For any failure to meet a compliance option in Sec. 63.2240, including the compliance options in table 1A through 1E to this subpart, provide an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit, and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions. (13) The total operating time of each affected source during the reporting period. (f) [Reserved] (g) Each affected source that has obtained a title V operating permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71 must report all deviations as defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring report required by Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or Sec. 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source submits a compliance report pursuant to table 9 to this subpart along with, or as part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or Sec. 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the compliance report includes all required information concerning deviations from any compliance option, operating requirement, 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 permitting authority. (h) If you are required to submit reports following the procedure specified in this paragraph (h), you must submit reports to the EPA via the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI), which can be accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). For semiannual compliance reports required in this section and table 9 (row 1) to this subpart, you must use the appropriate electronic report template on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri) for this subpart. The date report templates become available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If the reporting form for the semiannual compliance report specific to this subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is due, you must submit the report to the [[Page 41446]] Administrator at the appropriate addresses listed in Sec. 63.13. You must begin submitting all subsequent reports via CEDRI in the first full reporting period after the report template for this subpart has been available in CEDRI for 1 year. The report must be submitted by the deadline specified in this subpart, regardless of the method in which the report is submitted. (i) Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance test required by this subpart, you must submit the results of the performance test following the procedures specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) Data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test. Submit the results of the performance test to the EPA via CEDRI, which can be accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The data must be submitted in a file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT. Alternatively, you may submit an electronic file consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. (2) Data collected using test methods that are not supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the test. The results of the performance test must be included as an attachment in the ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the ERT generated package or alternative file to the EPA via CEDRI. (3) Confidential Business Information (CBI). If you claim some of the information submitted under this paragraph (i) is CBI, you must submit a complete file, including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. The file must be generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the file according to paragraph (k) of this section except it should be sent to the attention of the Branch Supervisor in the Measurement Strategy Branch. (j) Within 60 days after the date of completing each continuous monitoring system (CMS) performance evaluation (as defined in Sec. 63.2), you must submit the results of the performance evaluation following the procedures specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) Performance evaluations of CMS measuring relative accuracy test audit (RATA) pollutants that are supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the evaluation. Submit the results of the performance evaluation to the EPA via CEDRI, which can be accessed through the EPA's CDX. The data must be submitted in a file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT. Alternatively, you may submit an electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. (2) Performance evaluations of CMS measuring RATA pollutants that are not supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the evaluation. The results of the performance evaluation must be included as an attachment in the ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the ERT generated package or alternative file to the EPA via CEDRI. (3) Confidential Business Information (CBI). If you claim some of the information submitted under this paragraph (j) is CBI, you must submit a complete file, including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. The file must be generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the file according to paragraph (k) of this section except it should be sent to the attention of the Branch Supervisor in the Measurement Strategy Branch. (k) For Confidential Business Information (CBI): (1) The preferred method to receive CBI is for it to be transmitted electronically using email attachments, File Transfer Protocol, or other online file sharing services. Electronic submissions must be transmitted directly to the OCAP CBI Office at the email address [email protected], and as described in the preceding sentence, should include clear CBI markings and be flagged to the attention of the Sector Lead, Plywood and Composite Wood Products. If assistance is needed with submitting large electronic files that exceed the file size limit for email attachments, and if you do not have your own file sharing service, please email [email protected] to request a file transfer link. (2) If you cannot transmit the file electronically, you may send CBI information through the postal service to the following address: OCAP Document Control Officer (C404-02), OCAP, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12055, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Sector Lead--Plywood and Composite Wood Products. The mailed CBI material should be double wrapped and clearly marked. Any CBI markings should not show through the outer envelope. (3) All CBI claims must be asserted at the time of submission. Anything submitted using CEDRI cannot later be claimed CBI. Furthermore, under CAA section 114(c), emissions data is not entitled to confidential treatment, and the EPA is required to make emissions data available to the public. Thus, emissions data will not be protected as CBI and will be made publicly available. (4) You must submit the same file submitted to the CBI office with the CBI omitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described in Sec. 63.9(k). (l) [Reserved] 0

17. Amend Sec. 63.2282 by:

0 a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2) introductory text, (a)(2)(iii)(A), and (c) introductory text; and 0 b. Removing and reserving paragraph (d). The revisions read as follows: Sec. 63.2282 What records must I keep? (a) * * * (2) Records related to startup and shutdown, failures to meet the standard, and actions taken to minimize emissions, specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section. * * * * * (iii) * * * (A) For any failure to meet a compliance option in Sec. 63.2240, including the compliance options in tables 1A through 1E to this subpart, record an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions. * * * * * (c) For each CMS, you must keep the following records: * * * * * Sec. 63.2283 [Amended] 0

19. Revise Sec. 63.2292 to read as follows:

Sec. 63.2292 What definitions apply to this subpart? Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA), in Sec. 63.2, and in this section as follows: 1-hour period means a 60-minute period. Affected source means the collection of dryers, refiners, blenders, formers, presses, board coolers, and other process units associated with the [[Page 41447]] manufacturing of plywood and composite wood products. The affected source includes, but is not limited to, green end operations, refining, drying operations (including any combustion unit exhaust stream routinely used to direct fire process unit(s)), resin preparation, blending and forming operations, pressing and board cooling operations, and miscellaneous finishing operations (such as sanding, sawing, patching, edge sealing, and other finishing operations not subject to other NESHAP). The affected source also includes onsite storage of raw materials used in the manufacture of plywood and/or composite wood products, such as resins; onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with plywood and composite wood products manufacturing; and miscellaneous coating operations (defined elsewhere in this section). The affected source includes lumber kilns at PCWP manufacturing facilities and at any other kind of facility. Agricultural fiber means the fiber of an annual agricultural crop. Examples of agricultural fibers include, but are not limited to, wheat straw, rice straw, and bagasse. Atmospheric refiner means a piece of equipment operated under atmospheric pressure for refining (rubbing, grinding, or milling) wood material into fibers or particles for use in particleboard, MDF or dry- process hardboard production. Atmospheric refiners are operated with continuous infeed and outfeed of wood material and atmospheric pressures throughout the refining process. An atmospheric refiner is a process unit. Biofilter means an enclosed control system such as a tank or series of tanks with a fixed roof that contact emissions with a solid media (such as bark) and use microbiological activity to transform organic pollutants in a process exhaust stream to innocuous compounds such as carbon dioxide, water, and inorganic salts. Wastewater treatment systems such as aeration lagoons or activated sludge systems are not considered to be biofilters. Blender means rotary drum or other vessel in which resin and other additives are mixed with wood or agricultural fiber furnish prior to forming into a composite wood product. Blenders do not include mix chests in wet formed fiberboard or hardboard manufacturing. A blender is a process unit. Capture device means a hood, enclosure, or other means of collecting emissions into a duct so that the emissions can be measured. Capture efficiency means the fraction (expressed as a percentage) of the pollutants from an emission source that are collected by a capture device. Catalytic oxidizer means a control system that combusts or oxidizes, in the presence of a catalyst, exhaust gas from a process unit. Catalytic oxidizers include regenerative catalytic oxidizers and thermal catalytic oxidizers. Combustion unit means a dryer burner, process heater, or boiler. Combustion units may be used for combustion of organic HAP emissions. Combustion unit bypass stack means a bypass or abort stack in which a combustion unit exhaust stream routinely used to direct-fire a PCWP dryer or lumber kiln is vented to the atmosphere without first passing through the PCWP dryer or lumber kiln. Control device means any equipment that reduces the quantity of HAP emitted to the air. The device may destroy the HAP or secure the HAP for subsequent recovery. Control devices include, but are not limited to, thermal or catalytic oxidizers, combustion units that incinerate process exhausts, biofilters, and condensers. Control system or add-on control system means the combination of capture and control devices used to reduce HAP emissions to the atmosphere. Conveyor strand dryer means a conveyor dryer used to reduce the moisture of wood strands used in the manufacture of oriented strandboard, laminated strand lumber, or other wood strand-based products. A conveyor strand dryer is a process unit. Conveyor strand dryer zone means each portion of a conveyor strand dryer with a separate heat exchange system and exhaust vent(s). Conveyor strand dryers contain multiple zones (e.g., three zones), which may be divided into multiple sections. Curing chamber means an oven or room surrounded by a wall or heavy plastic flaps that uses heat, infrared, or radio-frequency techniques to cure the resin used to bond the web and flange components of I- joists. A curing chamber is a process unit. 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 compliance option, operating requirement, or work practice requirement; (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 compliance option, operating requirement, or work practice requirement in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by this subpart. A deviation is not always a violation. The determination of whether a deviation constitutes a violation of the standard is up to the discretion of the entity responsible for enforcement of the standards. Direct-fired process unit means a process unit that is heated by the passing of combustion exhaust through the process unit such that the process material is contacted by the combustion exhaust. Direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryer means a direct-fired PCWP dryer (including each dry rotary dryer, green rotary dryer, tube dryer, rotary strand dryer, hardboard oven, press predryer or heated zones from a softwood or hardwood veneer dryer, conveyor strand dryer, or fiberboard mat dryer) in which greater than 90 percent of the direct- fired annual heat input results from natural gas (or propane) combustion. Direct wood-fired PCWP dryer means a direct-fired PCWP dryer in which 10 percent or more of the direct-fired annual heat input results from combustion of wood-derived fuel such as bark, wood residuals, or wood-derived syngas or any other fuel except for natural gas (or propane). Dry forming means the process of making a mat of resinated fiber to be compressed into a reconstituted wood product such as particleboard, oriented strandboard, medium density fiberboard, or hardboard. Dry rotary dryer means a rotary dryer that dries wood particles or fibers with a maximum inlet moisture content of less than or equal to 30 percent (by weight, dry basis) and operates with a maximum inlet temperature of less than or equal to 600 [deg]F. A dry rotary dryer is a process unit. Dryer heated zones means the zones of a softwood veneer dryer or fiberboard mat dryer that are equipped with heating and hot air circulation units. The cooling zone(s) of the dryer through which ambient air is blown are not part of the dryer heated zones. Engineered wood product means a structural wood product made with lumber, veneers, strands of wood, or from other small wood elements that are bound together with resin. Engineered wood products include, but are not limited to, laminated strand lumber, laminated veneer lumber, parallel [[Page 41448]] strand lumber, wood I-joists, and glue-laminated beams. Engineered wood product press means a press that applies heat and/ or pressure to resinated veneer, wood strands, or lumber to bond the resinated wood material into an engineered wood product. An engineered wood product press is a process unit. Fiber means the discrete elements of wood or similar cellulosic material, which are separated by mechanical means, as in refining, that can be formed into boards. Fiber washer means a unit in which water-soluble components of wood (hemicellulose and sugars) that have been produced during digesting are removed from the wood fiber. Typically, wet fiber leaving a refiner is further diluted with water and then passed over a filter, leaving the cleaned fiber on the surface. A fiber washer is a process unit. Fiberboard means a composite panel composed of cellulosic fibers (usually wood or agricultural material) made by wet forming and compacting a mat of fibers. Fiberboard density generally is less than 0.50 grams per cubic centimeter (31.5 pounds per cubic foot). Fiberboard mat dryer means a dryer used to reduce the moisture of wet-formed wood fiber mats used to produce fiberboard or hardboard by applying heat. A fiberboard mat dryer is a process unit. Finishing sander means a piece of equipment that uses an abrasive drum, belt, or pad to impart smoothness to the surface of a plywood or composite wood product panel and to reduce the panel to the prescribed thickness. A finishing sander is a process unit. Finishing saw means a piece of equipment used to trim or cut finished plywood and composite wood products panels to a certain size. A finishing saw is a process unit. Flame zone means the portion of the combustion chamber in a combustion unit that is occupied by the flame envelope. Former or forming system means a series of bins (or forming headers) that distribute resinated furnish into layers onto a conveyor to form a loose mat to be compressed into a reconstituted wood product such as particleboard, oriented strandboard, or medium density fiberboard. Each forming bin (or forming header) adds a layer to the mat beginning with a face furnish layer, then one or more core furnish layers, and ending with a face furnish layer. The forming system includes each of the forming bins (headers) in series, flying cutoff saw (in facilities with batch presses), and pneumatic furnish pick-up points up prior to the press loader or continuous press. Furnish means the fibers, particles, or strands used for making boards. Glue-laminated beam means a structural wood beam made by bonding lumber together along its faces with resin. Glue-laminated beam press means an engineered wood product press that presses resinated stacks of lumber into a beam by application of heat and/or pressure. Green rotary dryer means a rotary dryer that dries wood particles or fibers with an inlet moisture content of greater than 30 percent (by weight, dry basis) at any dryer inlet temperature or operates with an inlet temperature of greater than 600 [deg]F with any inlet moisture content. A green rotary dryer is a process unit. Group 1 miscellaneous coating operations means application of edge seals, nail lines, logo (or other information) paint, shelving edge fillers, trademark/grade stamp inks, and wood putty patches to plywood and composite wood products (except kiln-dried lumber) on the same site where the plywood and composite wood products are manufactured. Group 1 miscellaneous coating operations also include application of synthetic patches to plywood at new affected sources. Hardboard means a composite panel composed of inter-felted cellulosic fibers made by dry or wet forming and pressing of a resinated fiber mat. Hardboard generally has a density of 0.50 grams per cubic centimeter (31.5 pounds per cubic foot) or greater. Hardboard oven means an oven used to heat treat or temper hardboard after hot pressing. Humidification chambers are not considered as part of hardboard ovens. A hardboard oven is a process unit. Hardwood means the wood of a broad-leafed tree, either deciduous or evergreen. Examples of hardwoods include, but are not limited to, aspen, birch, poplar, and oak. Hardwood plywood press means a hot press which, through heat and pressure, bonds assembled hardwood veneers (including multiple plies of veneer and/or a substrate) and resin into a hardwood plywood panel. A hardwood plywood press is a process unit. Hardwood veneer dryer means a dryer that removes excess moisture from veneer by conveying the veneer through a heated medium on rollers, belts, cables, or wire mesh. Hardwood veneer dryers are used to dry veneer with less than 30 percent softwood species on an annual volume basis. Veneer kilns that operate as batch units, veneer dryers heated by radio frequency or microwaves that are used to redry veneer, and veneer redryers (defined elsewhere in this section) that are heated by conventional means are not considered to be hardwood veneer dryers. A hardwood veneer dryer is a process unit. Humidifier or humidification chamber means a process unit used to increase the moisture content of hardboard following pressing or baking in a hardboard oven. Typically, water vapor saturated air is blown over the hardboard surfaces in a cabinet. A humidifier is a process unit. Kiln-dried lumber means solid wood lumber that has been dried in a lumber kiln. Laminated strand lumber (LSL) means a composite product formed into a billet made of thin wood strands cut from whole logs, resinated, and pressed together with the grain of each strand oriented parallel to the length of the finished product. Laminated veneer lumber (LVL) means a composite product formed into a billet made from layers of resinated wood veneer sheets or pieces pressed together with the grain of each veneer aligned primarily along the length of the finished product. Laminated veneer lumber is also known as parallel strand lumber (PSL). Log vat means a process unit that raises the temperature of the logs inside by applying a heated substance, usually hot water or steam, to the outside of the logs by spraying or soaking. A log vat is a process unit. Lumber means boards or planks sawed or split from logs or timber, including logs or timber processed for use as utility poles or other wood components. Lumber can be either green (non-dried) or dried. Lumber is typically either air-dried or kiln-dried. Lumber kiln means an enclosed dryer operated by applying heat to reduce the moisture content of lumber. LVL or PSL press means an engineered wood product press that presses resinated stacks of veneers into a solid billet by application of heat and/or pressure. The billet is cut into laminated veneer lumber or parallel strand lumber after exiting the press. An LVL or PSL press is a process unit. Maximum lumber moisture specification means (for purposes of this subpart) the upper limit of lumber moisture content (weight percent on a dry basis) that meets the relevant lumber grade standard for a lumber product. Maximum true vapor pressure means the equilibrium partial pressure exerted by each HAP that is present in the stored resin in a concentration above the [[Page 41449]] thresholds defining non-HAP resins at the temperature equal to the highest calendar-month average of the liquid storage temperature for liquids stored above or below the ambient temperature, or at the local maximum monthly average temperature as reported by the National Weather Service for liquids stored at the ambient temperature, as determined: (1) From safety data sheets or other technical information provided by the PCWP resin supplier; or (2) Standard reference texts; or (3) Any other method approved by the Administrator. Medium density fiberboard (MDF) means a composite panel composed of cellulosic fibers (usually wood or agricultural fiber) made by dry forming and pressing of a resinated fiber mat. Method detection limit means the minimum concentration of an analyte that can be determined with 99 percent confidence that the true value is greater than zero. Miscellaneous coating operations means application of any of the following to plywood or composite wood products: edge seals, moisture sealants, anti-skid coatings, company logos, trademark or grade stamps, nail lines, synthetic patches, wood patches, wood putty, concrete forming oils, glues for veneer composing, and shelving edge fillers. Miscellaneous coating operations also include the application of primer to oriented strandboard siding that occurs at the same site as oriented strandboard manufacture and application of asphalt, clay slurry, or titanium dioxide coatings to fiberboard at the same site of fiberboard manufacture. Mixed PCWP process stream means an emission stream from a process unit subject to standards effective on July 6, 2026, that was co- mingled with an emissions stream or streams from one or more process units subject to the compliance options in table 1B to this subpart before July 6, 2026, at an affected source that commenced construction (or reconstruction) on or before May 18, 2023. Molded particleboard means a shaped composite product (other than a composite panel) composed primarily of cellulosic materials (usually wood or agricultural fiber) generally in the form of discrete pieces or particles, as distinguished from fibers, which are pressed together with resin. MSF means thousand square feet (92.9 square meters). Square footage of panels is usually measured on a thickness basis, such as \3/8\-inch, to define the total volume of panels. Equation 3 of Sec. 63.2262(j) shows how to convert from one thickness basis to another. Multipurpose atmospheric refiner means an atmospheric refiner that processes wood for use in PCWP and is not a ``post-dryer atmospheric refiner'' as defined in this section. A multipurpose atmospheric refiner is a process unit. Natural gas means: (1) A naturally occurring mixture of hydrocarbon and nonhydrocarbon gases found in geologic formations beneath the earth's surface, of which the principal constituent is methane; or (2) Liquefied petroleum gas, as defined in ASTM D1835-05 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14); or (3) A mixture of hydrocarbons that maintains a gaseous state at ISO conditions. Additionally, natural gas must either be composed of at least 70 percent methane by volume or have a gross calorific value between 35 and 41 megajoules (MJ) per dry standard cubic meter (950 and 1,100 Btu per dry standard cubic foot); or (4) Propane or propane derived synthetic natural gas. Propane means a colorless gas derived from petroleum and natural gas, with the molecular structure C3H8. Nondetect data means, for the purposes of this subpart, any value that is below the method detection limit. Non-HAP coating means a coating with HAP contents below 0.1 percent by mass for Occupational Safety and Health Administration-defined carcinogens as specified in section A.6.4 of appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.1200, and below 1.0 percent by mass for other HAP compounds. Non-HAP resin means a resin that contains less than 0.1 percent by mass of formaldehyde and less than 1.0 percent by mass each of phenol, methanol, and MDI. Oriented strandboard (OSB) means a composite panel produced from thin wood strands cut from whole logs, formed into resinated layers (with the grain of strands in one layer oriented perpendicular to the strands in adjacent layers), and pressed. Oven-dried ton(s) (ODT) means tons of wood dried until all of the moisture in the wood is removed. One oven-dried ton equals 907 oven- dried kilograms. Panel-trim chipper means a piece of equipment that accepts the discarded pieces of veneer or pressed plywood and composite wood products panels that are removed by finishing saws and reduces these pieces to small elements. A panel-trim chipper is a process unit. Parallel strand lumber (PSL) means a composite product formed into a billet made from layers of resinated wood veneer sheets or pieces pressed together with the grain of each veneer aligned primarily along the length of the finished product. Parallel strand lumber is also known as laminated veneer lumber (LVL). Partial wood products enclosure means an enclosure that does not meet the design criteria for a wood products enclosure as defined in this subpart. Particle means a discrete, small piece of cellulosic material (usually wood or agricultural fiber) produced mechanically and used as the aggregate for a particleboard. Particleboard means a composite panel composed primarily of cellulosic materials (usually wood or agricultural fiber) generally in the form of discrete pieces or particles, as distinguished from fibers, which are pressed together with resin. PCWP dryer means each dry rotary dryer, green rotary dryer, tube dryer, rotary strand dryer, hardboard oven, or press predryer; or the heated zones from a softwood or hardwood veneer dryer, conveyor strand dryer, or fiberboard mat dryer. Plywood means a panel product consisting of layers of wood veneers hot pressed together with resin. Plywood includes panel products made by hot pressing (with resin) veneers to a substrate such as particleboard, medium density fiberboard, or lumber. Plywood products may be flat or curved. Plywood and composite wood products (PCWP) manufacturing facility means a facility that manufactures plywood and/or composite wood products by bonding wood material (fibers, particles, strands, veneers, etc.) or agricultural fiber, generally with resin under heat and pressure, to form a panel, engineered wood product, or other product defined in this section. Plywood and composite wood products manufacturing facilities also include facilities that manufacture dry veneer and lumber kilns located at any facility. Plywood and composite wood products include, but are not limited to, plywood, veneer, particleboard, molded particleboard, oriented strandboard, hardboard, fiberboard, medium density fiberboard, laminated strand lumber, laminated veneer lumber, wood I-joists, kiln-dried lumber, and glue- laminated beams. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) means the sum of 2- methylnaphthalene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(e)pyrene, [[Page 41450]] benzo(a)pyrene, perylene, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene. Post-dryer atmospheric refiner means an atmospheric refiner used to process wood for use in PCWP in which 90 percent or more (by weight) of the annual throughput has been previously dried onsite in a dryer at the PCWP affected facility. A post-dryer atmospheric refiner is a process unit. Press predryer means a dryer used to reduce the moisture and elevate the temperature by applying heat to a wet-formed fiber mat before the mat enters a hot press. A press predryer is a process unit. Pressurized refiner means a piece of equipment operated under pressure for preheating (usually by steaming) wood material and refining (rubbing or grinding) the wood material into fibers. Pressurized refiners are operated with continuous infeed and outfeed of wood material and maintain elevated internal pressures (i.e., there is no pressure release) throughout the preheating and refining process. Pressurized refiners include steaming vessels that operate under pressure to continuously feed and vent through the pressurized refiner. A pressurized refiner is a process unit. Primary tube dryer means a single-stage tube dryer or the first stage of a multi-stage tube dryer. Tube dryer stages are separated by vents for removal of moist gases between stages (e.g., a product cyclone at the end of a single-stage dryer or between the first and second stages of a multi-stage tube dryer). The first stage of a multi- stage tube dryer is used to remove the majority of the moisture from the wood furnish (compared to the moisture reduction in subsequent stages of the tube dryer). Blow-lines used to apply resin are considered part of the primary tube dryer. A primary tube dryer is a process unit. Process unit means equipment classified according to its function such as a blender, dryer, press, former, or board cooler. Process unit bypass stack means a bypass or abort stack that allows a process unit exhaust stream to temporarily vent to the atmosphere while bypassing a control device routinely used to meet the compliance options in table 1B, 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart. Process unit(s) subject to standards effective on July 6, 2026, means a softwood plywood press, hardwood plywood press, engineered wood product press, humidifier, atmospheric refiner, stand-alone digester, fiber washer, blender, former, finishing sander, finishing saw, panel trim chipper, log vat, resin tank, onsite wastewater treatment operation specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing, lumber kiln, press predryer (at an existing affected source), fiberboard mat dryer heated zones (at an existing affected source), or reconstituted wood products board cooler (at an existing affected source). Reconstituted wood product board cooler means a piece of equipment designed to reduce the temperature of a board by means of forced air or convection within a controlled time period after the board exits the reconstituted wood product press unloader. Board coolers include wicket and star type coolers commonly found at medium density fiberboard and particleboard plants. Board coolers do not include cooling sections of dryers (e.g., veneer dryers or fiberboard mat dryers) or coolers integrated into or following hardboard bake ovens or humidifiers. A reconstituted wood product board cooler is a process unit. Reconstituted wood product press means a press, including (if applicable) the press unloader, that presses a resinated mat of wood fibers, particles, or strands between hot platens or hot rollers to compact and set the mat into a panel by simultaneous application of heat and pressure. Reconstituted wood product presses are used in the manufacture of hardboard, medium density fiberboard, particleboard, and oriented strandboard. Extruders are not considered to be reconstituted wood product presses. A reconstituted wood product press is a process unit. Representative operating conditions means operation of a process unit during performance testing under the conditions that the process unit will typically be operating in the future, including use of a representative range of materials (e.g., wood material of a typical species mix and moisture content or typical resin formulation) and representative operating temperature range. Representative operating conditions exclude periods of startup and shutdown. Resin means the synthetic adhesive (including glue) or natural binder, including additives, used to bond wood or other cellulosic materials together to produce plywood and composite wood products. Resin tank means a storage tank, container, or vessel connected to plywood and composite wood product production that holds resin. A resin tank is a process unit. Resinated material handling (RMH) process unit means each resin tank, softwood plywood press, hardwood plywood press, engineered wood product press or curing chamber, blender, former, finishing saw, finishing sander, panel trim chipper, hardboard humidifier, and onsite wastewater treatment operations specifically associated with PCWP manufacturing at a new or existing affected source; and each reconstituted wood products board cooler at an existing affected source. Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2. Rotary strand dryer means a rotary dryer operated by applying heat and used to reduce the moisture of wood strands used in the manufacture of oriented strandboard, laminated strand lumber, or other wood strand- based products. A rotary strand dryer is a process unit. Safety-related shutdown means an unscheduled shutdown of a process unit subject to a compliance option in table 1B to this subpart during which time emissions from the process unit cannot be safely routed to the control system in place to meet the compliance options or operating requirements in this subpart without imminent danger to the process, control system, or system operator. Secondary tube dryer means the second stage and subsequent stages following the primary stage of a multi-stage tube dryer. Secondary tube dryers, also referred to as relay dryers, operate at lower temperatures than the primary tube dryer they follow. Secondary tube dryers are used to remove only a small amount of the furnish moisture compared to the furnish moisture reduction across the primary tube dryer. A secondary tube dryer is a process unit. Softwood means the wood of a coniferous tree. Examples of softwoods include, but are not limited to, Southern yellow pine, Douglas fir, and White spruce. Softwood plywood press means a hot press which, through heat and pressure, bonds assembled softwood veneer plies and resin into a softwood plywood panel. A softwood plywood press is a process unit. Softwood veneer dryer means a dryer that removes excess moisture from veneer by conveying the veneer through a heated medium, generally on rollers, belts, cables, or wire mesh. Softwood veneer dryers are used to dry veneer with greater than or equal to 30 percent softwood species on an annual volume basis. Veneer kilns that operate as batch units, veneer dryers heated by radio frequency or microwaves that are used to redry veneer, and veneer redryers (defined elsewhere in this section) that are heated by conventional means are not considered to be softwood veneer [[Page 41451]] dryers. A softwood veneer dryer is a process unit. Stand-alone digester means a pressure vessel used to heat and soften wood chips (usually by steaming) before the chips are sent to a separate process unit for refining into fiber. Stand-alone digesters operate in batch cycles that include filling with wood chips, pressurization, cooking of wood chips under pressure, pressure release (purge) venting, and chip discharge (blow) from the pressure vessel. Venting of emissions from stand-alone digesters is separate from any downstream refining process. A stand-alone digester is a process unit. Startup means bringing equipment online and starting the production process. Startup, initial means the first time equipment is put into operation. Initial startup does not include operation solely for testing equipment. Initial startup does not include subsequent startups (as defined in this section) following malfunction or shutdowns or following changes in product or between batch operations. Initial startup does not include startup of equipment that occurred when the source was an area source. Strand means a long (with respect to thickness and width), flat wood piece specially cut from a log for use in oriented strandboard, laminated strand lumber, or other wood strand-based product. Temporary total enclosure (TTE) means an enclosure constructed for the purpose of measuring the capture efficiency of pollutants emitted from a given source, as defined in EPA Method 204 of appendix M to part 51 of this chapter. Thermal oxidizer means a control system that combusts or oxidizes exhaust gas from a process unit. Thermal oxidizers include regenerative thermal oxidizers and combustion units. Total hazardous air pollutant emissions means, for purposes of this subpart, the sum of the emissions of the following six compounds: acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde. Tube dryer means a single-stage or multi-stage dryer operated by applying heat to reduce the moisture of wood fibers or particles as they are conveyed (usually pneumatically) through the dryer. Resin may or may not be applied to the wood material before it enters the tube dryer. Tube dryers do not include pneumatic fiber transport systems that use temperature and humidity conditioned pneumatic system supply air in order to prevent cooling of the wood fiber as it is moved through the process. A tube dryer is a process unit. Veneer means thin sheets of wood peeled or sliced from logs for use in the manufacture of wood products such as plywood, laminated veneer lumber, or other products. Veneer redryer means a dryer heated by conventional means, such as direct wood-fired, direct-gas-fired, or steam heated, that is used to redry veneer that has been previously dried. Because the veneer dried in a veneer redryer has been previously dried, the inlet moisture content of the veneer entering the redryer is less than 25 percent (by weight, dry basis). Batch units used to redry veneer (such as redry cookers) are not considered to be veneer redryers. A veneer redryer is a process unit. Wet control device means any equipment that uses water as a means of collecting an air pollutant. Wet control devices include scrubbers, wet electrostatic precipitators, and electrified filter beds. Wet control devices do not include biofilters or other equipment that destroys or degrades HAP. Wet forming means the process of making a slurry of water, fiber, and additives into a mat of fibers to be compressed into a fiberboard or hardboard product. Wood I-joists means a structural wood beam with an I-shaped cross section formed by bonding (with resin) wood or laminated veneer lumber flanges onto a web cut from a panel such as plywood or oriented strandboard. Wood products enclosure means a permanently installed containment that was designed to meet the following physical design criteria: (1) Any natural draft opening shall be at least four equivalent opening diameters from each HAP-emitting point, except for where board enters and exits the enclosure, unless otherwise specified by the EPA Administrator. (2) The total area of all natural draft openings shall not exceed 5 percent of the surface area of the enclosure's four walls, floor, and ceiling. (3) The average facial velocity of air through all natural draft openings shall be at least 3,600 meters per hour (200 feet per minute). The direction of airflow through all natural draft openings shall be into the enclosure. (4) All access doors and windows whose areas are not included in item 2 of this definition and are not included in the calculation of facial velocity in item 3 of this definition shall be closed during routine operation of the process. (5) The enclosure is designed and maintained to capture all emissions for discharge through a control device. Work practice requirement means any design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard, or combination thereof, that is promulgated pursuant to CAA section 112(h). 0

20. Add tables 1C through 1E to subpart DDDD of part 63 to read as

follows: Table 1C to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Compliance Options Applicable On and After July 6, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For process units at an affected For process units source that at an affected commenced source that construction or commenced reconstruction construction or after May 18, reconstruction on 2023, you must If you operate a(n) . . . or before May 18, comply with the 2023, you must following comply with the compliance options following \1\ beginning on compliance options July 6, 2026, or \1\ on and after upon initial July 6, 2029 . . . startup, whichever is later . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fiberboard mat dryer heated 4.9E-02 lb total See footnote zones at an affected source HAP/MSF \1/8\'' ``2''. that commenced construction or or 2.0E-01 lb reconstruction on or before total HAP/MSF \1/ January 9, 2003 \2\. 2\''. Press predryer at an affected 8.0E-02 lb total See footnote source that commenced HAP/MSF \1/8\'' ``2''. construction or reconstruction or 3.2E-01 lb on or before January 9, 2003\2\. total HAP/MSF \1/ 2\''. Post-dryer atmospheric refiner.. 4.1E-03 lb total 3.3E-03 lb total HAP/ODT or 8.5E- HAP/ODT or 6.5E- 01 ppmvd total 01 ppmvd total HAP. HAP. Multipurpose atmospheric refiner 1.2E-01 lb total 2.4E-03 lb total HAP/ODT or 15 HAP/ODT or 3.3 ppmvd total HAP. ppmvd total HAP. Reconstituted wood product press 2.5E-04 lb MDI/MSF 2.5E-04 lb MDI/MSF producing OSB using MDI resin. \3/4\'' (1.3E-04 \3/4\'' (1.3E-04 lb/MSF \3/8\'') lb/MSF \3/8\'') or 2.7E-02 mg MDI/ or 2.7E-02 mg MDI/ dscm. dscm. Reconstituted wood product press 8.4E-04 lb MDI/MSF 2.3E-04 lb MDI/MSF producing particleboard or MDF \3/4\'' or 2.0E- \3/4\'' or 2.7E- using MDI resin. 01 mg MDI/dscm. 02 mg MDI/dscm. [[Page 41452]] Primary tube dryer blow-line 1.7E-02 lb MDI/ODT 1.7E-02 lb MDI/ODT blending MDI resin, or primary or 6.8E-01 mg MDI/ or 6.8E-01 mg MDI/ tube dryer blow-line blending dscm. dscm. MDI resin co-controlled with a reconstituted wood products press using MDI resin. Miscellaneous coating operation 1.9E-03 lb MDI 1.9E-03 lb MDI for applying MDI moisture emitted/lb emitted/lb sealant to the surface of an sealant applied sealant applied engineered wood product. or 1.4E-05 lb MDI or 1.4E-05 lb MDI per square foot per square foot of surface area of surface area coated. coated. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ Total HAP, as defined in Sec. 63.2292, includes acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde. MDI is 4,4'-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate (CAS 101-68-8). ug = micrograms; mg = milligrams; dscm = micrograms per dry standard meter; kPa = kilopascals; psia = pounds per square inch absolute; lb/ODT = pounds per oven-dried ton; lb/MSF = pounds per thousand square feet with a specified thickness basis (inches). Section 63.2262(j) shows how to convert from one thickness basis to another. \2\ Fiberboard mat dryer (heated zones) or press predryers at an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction after January 9, 2003, must be in compliance with the compliance options in table 1A or 1B to this subpart beginning on September 28, 2004, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. Table 1D to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Compliance Options Applicable On and After July 6, 2029, for Direct Wood- Fired PCWP Dryers at Affected Sources That Commenced Construction or Reconstruction On or Before May 18, 2023 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the following types of You must meet the direct wood-fired PCWP dryers . PM (HAP metal) You must meet the You must meet the You must meet the . . limit Hg limit HCl limit PAH limit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rotary strand dryer............. 9.9E-02 lb/ODT or 1.7E-05 lb/ODT or 5.8E-03 lb/ODT or 1.1E-04 lb/ODT or 3.6E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 1.5E-01 mg/dscm. 9.9E-03 mg/dscm. Green rotary dryer.............. 2.9E-01 lb/ODT or 1.5E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-02 lb/ODT or 3.2E-04 lb/ODT or 5.2E-03 gr/dscf. 1.3E-03 mg/dscm. 1.7 mg/dscm. 4.2E-02 mg/dscm. Dry rotary dryer................ 6.5E-01 lb/ODT or 1.0E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-03 lb/ODT or 4.6E-05 lb/ODT or 9.8E-02 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 4.1E-03 mg/dscm. Primary tube dryer or secondary 3.1E-01 lb/ODT or 3.9E-05 lb/ODT or 6.4E-03 lb/ODT or 3.0E-04 lb/ODT or tube dryer. 3.1E-03 gr/dscf. 1.6E-03 mg/dscm. 7.4E-01 mg/dscm. 1.6E-03 mg/dscm. Softwood veneer dryer heated 7.2E-02 lb/MSF 3/ 5.8E-05 lb/MSF 3/ NA................ NA. zones. 8'' or 1.5E-02 gr/ 8'' or 4.1E-02 mg/ dscf. dscm. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes: lb/ODT = pounds per oven dried ton, gr/dscf = grains per dry standard cubic foot, mg/dscm = milligrams per dry standard cubic meter. See Sec. 63.2240(d)(3) for dioxin and furan TEQ limit for direct wood-fired green rotary dryers. Table 1E to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Compliance Options Applicable On and After July 6, 2026, for Direct Wood- Fired PCWP Dryers at Affected Sources That Commenced Construction or Reconstruction After May 18, 2023 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the following types of You must meet the direct wood-fired PCWP dryers . PM (HAP metal) You must meet the You must meet the You must meet the . . limit Hg limit HCl limit PAH limit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rotary strand dryer............. 5.6E-02lb/ODT or 1.7E-05 lb/ODT or 1.7E-03 lb/ODT or 1.8E-05 lb/ODT or 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 1.5E-03 mg/dscm. Green rotary dryer.............. 3.7E-02 lb/ODT or 1.1E-05 lb/ODT or 2.9E-03 lb/ODT or 6.2E-05 lb/ODT or 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 2.9E-03 mg/dscm. Dry rotary dryer................ 6.0E-01 lb/ODT or 1.0E-05 lb/ODT or 1.1E-03 lb/ODT or 2.2E-05 lb/ODT or 4.6E-02 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 2.1E-03 mg/dscm. Primary tube dryer or secondary 9.1E-02 lb/ODT or 3.9E-05 lb/ODT or 4.3E-03 lb/ODT or 3.4E-06 lb/ODT or tube dryer. 1.3E-03 gr/dscf. 8.4E-04 mg/dscm. 9.0E-02 mg/dscm. 1.8E-06 mg/dscm. Softwood veneer dryer heated 7.2E-02 lb/MSF 3/ 5.8E-05 lb/MSF 3/ NA................ NA. zones. 8'' or 1.5E-02 gr/ 8'' or 4.1E-02 mg/ dscf. dscm. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes: lb/ODT = pounds per oven dried ton, gr/dscf = grains per dry standard cubic foot, mg/dscm = milligrams per dry standard cubic meter. See Sec. 63.2240(d)(4) for dioxin and furan TEQ limit for direct wood-fired green rotary dryers. 0

21. Revise tables 2 through 10 to subpart DDDD of part 63 to read as

follows: Table 2 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Operating Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you operate a(n) . . . You must . . . Or you must . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Thermal oxidizer............ Maintain the 3- Maintain the 3- hour block hour block average firebox average THC temperature above concentration \1\ the minimum in the thermal temperature oxidizer exhaust established below the maximum during the concentration performance test. established during the performance test. [[Page 41453]] (2) Catalytic oxidizer.......... Maintain the 3- Maintain the 3- hour block hour block average catalytic average THC oxidizer concentration \1\ temperature above in the catalytic the minimum oxidizer exhaust temperature below the maximum established concentration during the established performance test; during the and check the performance test. activity level of a representative sample of the catalyst annually except as specified in footnote ``2'' to this table. (3) Biofilter................... Maintain the 24- Maintain the 24- hour block hour block biofilter bed average THC temperature concentration \1\ within the range in the biofilter established exhaust below the according to Sec. maximum 63.2262(m). concentration established during the performance test. (4) Control device other than a Petition the EPA Maintain the 3- thermal oxidizer, catalytic Administrator for hour block oxidizer, or biofilter used to site-specific average THC meet the compliance options in operating concentration \1\ table 1B or 1C to this subpart. parameter(s) to in the control be established device exhaust during the below the maximum performance test concentration and maintain the established average operating during the parameter(s) performance test. within the range(s) established during the performance test. (5) Process unit that meets a Maintain on a Maintain the 3- compliance option in table 1A, daily basis the hour block 1C, 1D, or 1E to this subpart process unit average THC without the use of a control controlling concentration \1\ device. operating in the process parameter(s) unit exhaust within the ranges below the maximum established concentration during the established performance test during the according to Sec. performance test. 63.2262(n). (6) Wet electrostatic Maintain the 3- For a WESP precipitator used to meet the hour block followed by a compliance options in Sec. average total control device 63.2240(d)(2) and (3) and table secondary with a dry 1D or 1E to this subpart. electric power exhaust, maintain input and liquid the 24-hour block flow rate above average opacity the minimum of no more than limits 10 percent (or established the highest during the hourly average performance test.. measured during the performance test). (7) Dry electrostatic Maintain the 3- Maintain the 24- precipitator used to meet the hour block hour block compliance options in Sec. average total average opacity 63.2240(d)(2) and (3) and table secondary of no more than 1D or 1E to this subpart. electric power 10 percent (or input above the the highest minimum limit hourly average established measured during during the the performance performance test. test). (8) Wet PM scrubber used to meet Maintain the 3- the compliance options in Sec. hour block 63.2240(d)(2) and (3) and average liquid table 1D or 1E to this subpart. flow rate and pressure drop above the minimum limits established during the performance test. (9) Wet acid gas scrubber used Maintain the 3- to meet the compliance options hour block in table 1D or 1E to this average liquid subpart. flow rate and effluent pH above the minimum limits established during the performance test. (10) Electrified filter bed used Maintain the 3- to meet the compliance options hour block in Sec. 63.2240(d)(2) and (3) average ionizer and table 1D or 1E to this voltage and the subpart. bed voltage above the minimum limits established during the performance test; AND maintain the pressure drop within the range established during the performance test. (11) Mechanical collector or Maintain the 24- Maintain the 3- other dry control device (not hour block hour block listed elsewhere in this table) average opacity average pressure used to meet the compliance of no more than drop across the options in Sec. 63.2240(d)(2) 10 percent (or control device and (3) and table 1D or 1E to the highest above the minimum this subpart. hourly average limit established measured during during the the performance performance test test). AND maintain average weekly 6- minute opacity readings below the maximum limit established according to Sec. 63.2262(u). (12) Process unit bypass stack Continuously (defined in Sec. 63.2292) on monitor usage of and after July 6, 2029, except the process unit as noted in footnote ``3'' to bypass stack at this table. all times while the process units are operating. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ You may choose to subtract methane from THC measurements. \2\ You may forego the annual catalyst activity check during the calendar year when a performance test is conducted according to table 4 to this subpart. \3\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with this requirement beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. Table 3 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Work Practice Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the following process units at existing or new affected sources . . . You must . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Dry rotary dryers.................. Process furnish with a 24-hour block average inlet moisture content of less than or equal to 30 percent (by weight, dry basis); AND operate with a 24- hour block average inlet dryer temperature of less than or equal to 600 [deg]F. (2) Hardwood veneer dryers............. Process less than 30 volume percent softwood species on an annual basis. (3) Softwood veneer dryers............. Minimize fugitive emissions from the dryer doors through (proper maintenance procedures) and the green end of the dryers (through proper balancing of the heated zone exhausts). (4) Veneer redryers.................... Process veneer that has been previously dried, such that the 24-hour block average inlet moisture content of the veneer is less than or equal to 25 percent (by weight, dry basis). (5) Group 1 miscellaneous coating Use non-HAP coatings as defined operations. in Sec. 63.2292. (6) Process units and control systems Follow documented site-specific undergoing safety-related shutdown on procedures such as use of and after August 13, 2021, except as automated controls or other noted in footnote ``1'' to this table. measures that you have developed to protect workers and equipment to ensure that the flow of raw materials (such as furnish or resin) and fuel or process heat (as applicable) ceases and that material is removed from the process unit(s) as expeditiously as possible given the system design to reduce air emissions. (7) Pressurized refiners undergoing Route exhaust gases from the startup or shutdown on and after pressurized refiner to its August 13, 2021, except as noted in dryer control system no later footnote ``1'' to this table. than 15 minutes after wood is fed to the pressurized refiner during startup. Stop wood flow into the pressurized refiner no more than 15 minutes after wood fiber and exhaust gases from the pressurized refiner stop being routed to the dryer during shutdown. (8) Direct-fired softwood veneer dryers Cease feeding green veneer into undergoing startup or shutdown of gas- the softwood veneer dryer and fired burners on and after August 13, minimize the amount of time 2021, except as noted in footnote direct gas-fired softwood ``1'' to this table. veneer dryers are vented to the atmosphere due to the conditions described in Sec. 63.2250(d). [[Page 41454]] (9) Direct wood-fired PCWP dryers, Conduct an annual tune-up of direct natural gas-fired PCWP dryers, the combustion unit(s) used to direct-fired lumber kilns, and directly fire each PCWP dryer associated combustion unit bypass or lumber kiln as specified in stacks on and after July 6, 2029, Sec. Sec. 63.2241(d) and except as noted in footnote ``2'' to 63.2271(c); and continuously this table. monitor an indicator of combustion unit bypass stack usage such as flow damper position or temperature according to Sec. 63.2269(l) (10) Lumber kilns on and after July 6, Minimize lumber over-drying to 2029, except as noted in footnote reduce HAP emissions according ``2'' to this table. to Sec. 63.2241(e) by developing and operating according to the O&M plan in Sec. 63.2241(e)(1) and complying with one of the work practice requirements in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3). (11) Stand-alone digesters on and after Use clean steam for injection July 6, 2029, except as noted in into digestion process; AND footnote ``2'' to this table. process fiber without addition of HAP-containing or wood pulping chemicals. (12) Fiber washers on and after July 6, Process fiber without addition 2029, except as noted in footnote of HAP-containing or wood ``2'' to this table. pulping chemicals. (13) Log vats on and after July 6, Meet the work practice 2029, except as noted in footnote requirements specified in Sec. ``2'' to this table. 63.2241(f). (14) Resinated material handling (RMH) Meet the work practice process units on and after July 6, requirements specified in Sec. 2029, except as noted in footnote 63.2241(g). ``2'' to this table, as applicable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after September 6, 2019, must comply with this requirement beginning on August 13, 2020, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. \2\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with this requirement beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. Table 4 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Requirements for Performance Tests ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For . . . You must . . . Using . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Each process unit subject select sampling EPA Method 1 or 1A of to a compliance option in port's location appendix A-1 to part tables 1A through 1E to this and the number 60 of this chapter subpart. of traverse (as appropriate). ports. (2) Each process unit subject determine EPA Method 2 in to a compliance option in velocity and addition to Methods tables 1A through 1E to this volumetric flow 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or subpart. rate. 2G of appendices A-1 and A-2 to part 60 of this chapter (as appropriate). (3) Each process unit subject conduct gas EPA Method 3, 3A, or to a compliance option in molecular weight 3B of appendix A-2 tables 1A through 1E to this analysis. to part 60 of this subpart. chapter (as appropriate). As an alternative to EPA Method 3B for the manual procedures only and not the instrumental procedures, you may use ANSI/ASME PTC 19- 10-1981 Part 10 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14). (4) Each process unit subject measure moisture EPA Method 4 of to a compliance option in content of the appendix A-3 to part tables 1A through 1E to this stack gas. 60 of this chapter; subpart. OR EPA Method 320 of appendix A to this part; OR ASTM D6348- 12e1 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14). (5) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 25A in to a compliance option in of total HAP as appendix A-7 to part table 1B to this subpart for THC. 60 of this chapter. which you choose to You may measure demonstrate compliance using emissions of methane a total HAP as THC compliance using EPA Method 18 option. in appendix A-6 to part 60 of this chapter and subtract the methane emissions from the emissions of total HAP as THC. (6) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 320 of to a compliance option in of total HAP (as appendix A to this table 1A to this subpart. defined in Sec. part; OR the NCASI 63.2292). Method IM/CAN/WP- 99.02 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method ISS/FP- A105.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR ASTM D6348-12e1 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14) provided that the conditions in footnote ``1'' are met. (7) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 308 of to a compliance option in of methanol. appendix A to this table 1B to this subpart for part; OR EPA Method which you choose to 320 of appendix A to demonstrate compliance using this part; OR the a methanol compliance option. NCASI Method CI/WP- 98.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method IM/CAN/ WP-99.02 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method ISS/ FP-A105.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14). (8) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 316 of to a compliance option in of formaldehyde. appendix A to this table 1B to this subpart for part; OR EPA Method which you choose to 320 of appendix A to demonstrate compliance using this part; OR EPA a formaldehyde compliance Method 0011 in option. ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods'' (EPA Publication No. SW-846) for formaldehyde (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method CI/WP-98.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method ISS/FP- A105.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14). (9) Each reconstituted wood meet the design EPA Methods 204 and product press at a new or specifications 204A through 204F of existing affected source or included in the appendix M to part reconstituted wood product definition of 51 of this chapter, board cooler at a new wood products to determine capture affected source subject to a enclosure in efficiency (except compliance option in table 1B Sec. 63.2292; for wood products to this subpart. or. enclosures as determine the defined in Sec. percent capture 63.2292). Enclosures efficiency of that meet the the enclosure definition of wood directing products enclosure emissions to an or that meet Method add-on control 204 requirements for device. a permanent total enclosure (PTE) are assumed to have a capture efficiency of 100 percent. Enclosures that do not meet either the PTE requirements or design criteria for a wood products enclosure must determine the capture efficiency by constructing a TTE according to the requirements of EPA Method 204 and applying EPA Methods 204A through 204F (as appropriate). As an alternative to EPA Methods 204 and 204A through 204F, you may use the tracer gas method contained in appendix A to this subpart. (10) Each reconstituted wood determine the A TTE and EPA Methods product press at a new or percent capture 204 and 204A through existing affected source or efficiency. 204F (as reconstituted wood product appropriate) of board cooler at a new appendix M to part affected source subject to a 51 of this chapter. compliance option in table 1A As an alternative to to this subpart. installing a TTE and using EPA Methods 204 and 204A through 204F, you may use the tracer gas method contained in appendix A to this subpart. Enclosures that meet the design criteria (1) through (4) in the definition of wood products enclosure, or that meet EPA Method 204 requirements for a PTE (except for the criteria specified in section 6.2 of EPA Method 204) are assumed to have a capture efficiency of 100 percent. Measured emissions divided by the capture efficiency provides the emission rate. [[Page 41455]] (11) Each process unit subject establish the Data from the to a compliance option in site-specific parameter monitoring tables 1A and 1B to this operating system or THC CEMS subpart. requirements and the applicable (including the performance test parameter limits method(s). or THC concentration limits) in table 2 to this subpart. (12) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 320 of to total HAP limit in table of total HAP (as appendix A to this 1C to this subpart. defined in Sec. part; OR the NCASI 63.2292). Method IM/CAN/WP- 99.02 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR the NCASI Method ISS/FP- A105.01 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14); OR ASTM D6348-12e1 (IBR, see Sec. 63.14) provided that the conditions in footnote ``1'' are met. Nondetect data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). (13) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 326 of to an MDI limit in table 1C of MDI. appendix A to this to this subpart. part. Nondetect data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). A minimum sample volume of 1 dscm must be collected. (14) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 5 in to a PM HAP metals limit in of PM. appendix A-3 to part table 1D or 1E to this 60 of this chapter; subpart. or EPA Method 29 in appendix A-8 to part 60 of this chapter. Nondetect data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). A minimum sample volume of 2 dscm must be collected. (15) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 29 or 30B to a mercury limit in table of mercury. in appendix A-8 to 1D or 1E to this subpart. part 60 of this chapter. Nondetect data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). For EPA Method 29 a minimum sample volume of 2 dscm must be collected. (16) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 26A in to an HCl limit in table 1D of HCl. appendix A-8 to part or 1E to this subpart. 60 of this chapter. Nondetect data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). A minimum sample volume of 2 dscm must be collected. (17) Each process unit subject measure emissions EPA Method 23 of to a PAH limit in table 1D or of PAH. appendix A-8 to part 1E to this subpart and each 60 of this chapter. direct wood-fired softwood Nondetect data must veneer dryer subject to this be treated according subpart. to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3). A minimum sample volume of 3 dscm must be collected. (18) Each process unit subject observe opacity.. Method 9 of appendix to a PM limit in table 1D or A-4 to part 60 of table 1E to this subpart this chapter. controlled by mechanical Opacity observations collector or other dry must be conducted control device for which during the duration pressure drop and opacity of the PM observations are used to performance test. demonstrate compliance. For weekly observations, two 6- minute readings are required. (19) Each direct wood-fired Measure emissions EPA Method 23 of green rotary dryer subject to of dioxins and appendix A-8 to part a dioxin/furan TEQ limit in furans. 60 of this chapter. Sec. 63.2240(d)(3) or (4). Nondetect and estimated maximum possible concentration (EMPC) data must be treated according to Sec. 63.2262(g)(3) and section 9.1.7.2 of EPA Method 23 procedures for standards promulgated after March 20, 2023. A minimum sample volume of 3 dscm must be collected. For each dioxin and furan congener, multiply the congener concentration by its corresponding toxic equivalency factor specified in table 12 to this subpart to determine the TEQ concentration for each congener. Sum the TEQ concentrations of each congener to obtain the total concentration of dioxins and furans emitted in terms of TEQ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ dscm = dry standard cubic meters. \1\ As an alternative to EPA Method 320 of appendix A to this part, you may use ASTM Method D6348-12e1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), with the caveats that the test plan preparation and implementation in the Annexes to ASTM Method D6348-12el, Sections Al through A8 are mandatory; and in ASTM Method D6348-12e1 Annex A5 (Analyte Spiking Technique), the percent (%) R must be determined for each target analyte (Equation A5.5). In order for the test data to be acceptable for a compound, %R must be 70% <= R <= 130%. If the %R value does not meet this criterion for a target compound, the test data is not acceptable for that compound and the test must be repeated for that analyte (i.e., the sampling and/or analytical procedure should be adjusted before a retest). The %R value for each compound must be reported in the test report, and all field measurements must be corrected with the calculated %R value for that compound by using the following equation: Reported Results = (Measured Concentration in the Stack x 100)/% R. Table 5 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Performance Testing and Initial Compliance Demonstrations for the Compliance Options and Operating Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the following compliance options and You have demonstrated For each . . . operating initial compliance if requirements . . . . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Process unit listed in Meet the The average total HAP table 1A to this subpart. production-based emissions measured compliance using the methods in options listed table 4 to this in table 1A to subpart over the 3- this subpart. hour performance test are no greater than the compliance option in table 1A to this subpart; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (2) Process unit listed in Reduce emissions Total HAP emissions, table 1B to this subpart. of total HAP, measured using the measured as THC, methods in table 4 by 90 percent. to this subpart over the 3-hour performance test, are reduced by at least 90 percent, as calculated using the procedures in Sec. 63.2262; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions were reduced by at least 90 percent. (3) Process unit listed in Limit emissions The average total HAP table 1B to this subpart. of total HAP, emissions, measured measured as THC, using the methods in to 20 ppmvd. table 4 to this subpart over the 3- hour performance test, do not exceed 20 ppmvd; and you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed 20 ppmvd. [[Page 41456]] (4) Process unit listed in Reduce methanol The methanol or table 1B to this subpart. or formaldehyde formaldehyde emissions by 90 emissions measured percent. using the methods in table 4 to this subpart over the 3- hour performance test, are reduced by at least 90 percent, as calculated using the procedures in Sec. 63.2262; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions were reduced by at least 90 percent. (5) Process unit listed in Limit methanol or The average methanol table 1B to this subpart. formaldehyde or formaldehyde emissions to emissions, measured less than or using the methods in equal to 1 ppmvd table 4 to this (if uncontrolled subpart over the 3- emissions are hour performance greater than or test, do not exceed equal to 10 1 ppmvd; AND you ppmvd). have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed 1 ppmvd. If the process unit is a reconstituted wood product press or a reconstituted wood product board cooler, your capture device either meets the EPA Method 204 criteria for a PTE or achieves a capture efficiency of greater than or equal to 95 percent. (6) Reconstituted wood product Compliance You submit the press at a new or existing options in results of capture affected source, or tables 1A and 1B efficiency reconstituted wood product to this subpart. verification using board cooler at a new the methods in table affected source. 4 to this subpart with your Notification of Compliance Status. (7) Process unit listed in Compliance You submit with your table 1B to this subpart options in table Notification of controlled by routing exhaust 1B to this Compliance Status to a combustion unit. subpart. documentation showing that the process exhausts controlled enter into the flame zone of your combustion unit. (8) Process unit listed in Compliance You submit with your table 1B to this subpart options in table Notification of using a wet control device as 1B to this Compliance Status the sole means of reducing subpart. your plan to address HAP emissions. how organic HAP captured in the wastewater from the wet control device is contained or destroyed to minimize re-release to the atmosphere. (9) Process unit listed in Total HAP The average total HAP table 1C to this subpart. compliance emissions measured options in table using the methods in 1C to this table 4 to this subpart. subpart over the 3- hour performance test are no greater than the compliance option in table 1C to this subpart; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (10) Process unit listed in MDI compliance The average total HAP table 1C to this subpart. options in table emissions measured 1C to this using the methods in subpart. table 4 to this subpart over the 3- hour performance test are no greater than the compliance option in table 1C to this subpart; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (11) Direct wood-fired PCWP PM (HAP metal), The average emissions dryer listed in table 1D or Hg, HCl, and PAH measured using the 1E to this subpart. compliance methods in table 4 options in table to this subpart over 1D or 1E to this the 3-hour subpart and performance test are dioxin/furan TEQ no greater than the options in Sec. compliance option in 63.2240(d)(3) tables 1D and 1E to and (4). this subpart; AND you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (12) Mixed PCWP process stream Compliance You identify the as defined in Sec. 63.2292. options in table mixed PCWP process 1B to this stream in your subpart. Notification of Compliance Status and submit documentation showing that the mixed PCWP process stream met a compliance option in table 1B to this subpart on or before the close of business on the 30th calendar day after July 6, 2026. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 6 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Initial Compliance Demonstrations for Work Practice Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the following work practice You have demonstrated For each . . . requirements . . initial compliance if . . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Dry rotary dryer.......... Process furnish You meet the work with an inlet practice requirement moisture content and you submit a less than or signed statement equal to 30 with the percent (by Notification of weight, dry Compliance Status basis) and that the dryer meets operate with an the criteria of a inlet dryer ``dry rotary dryer'' temperature of and you have a less than or record of the inlet equal to 600 moisture content and [deg]F. inlet dryer temperature (as required in Sec. 63.2263). (2) Hardwood veneer dryer..... Process less than You meet the work 30 volume practice requirement percent softwood and you submit a species. signed statement with the Notification of Compliance Status that the dryer meets the criteria of a ``hardwood veneer dryer'' and you have a record of the percentage of softwoods processed in the dryer (as required in Sec. 63.2264). (3) Softwood veneer dryer..... Minimize fugitive You meet the work emissions from practice requirement the dryer doors and you submit with and the green the Notification of end. Compliance Status a copy of your plan for minimizing fugitive emissions from the veneer dryer heated zones (as required in Sec. 63.2265). [[Page 41457]] (4) Veneer redryers........... Process veneer You meet the work with an inlet practice requirement moisture content and you submit a of less than or signed statement equal to 25 with the percent (by Notification of weight, dry Compliance Status basis). that the dryer operates only as a redryer and you have a record of the veneer inlet moisture content of the veneer processed in the redryer (as required in Sec. 63.2266). (5) Group 1 miscellaneous Use non-HAP You meet the work coating operations. coatings as practice requirement defined in Sec. and you submit a 63.2292. signed statement with the Notification of Compliance Status that you are using non-HAP coatings and you have a record showing that you are using non-HAP coatings. (6) Process units and control Follow documented You meet the work systems undergoing safety- site-specific practice requirement related shutdown on and after procedures to and you have a August 13, 2021, except as ensure the flow record of safety- noted in footnote ``1'' to of raw materials related shutdown this table. and fuel or procedures available process heat for inspection by ceases and that the delegated material is authority upon removed from the request. process unit(s) as expeditiously as possible given the system design to reduce air emissions. (7) Pressurized refiners Route exhaust You meet the work undergoing startup or gases from the practice requirement shutdown on and after August pressurized and you have a 13, 2021, except as noted in refiner to its record of footnote ``1'' to this table. dryer control pressurized refiner system no later startup and shutdown than 15 minutes procedures available after wood is for inspection by fed to the the delegated pressurized authority upon refiner during request. startup. Stop wood flow into the pressurized refiner no more than 15 minutes after wood fiber and exhaust gases from the pressurized refiner stop being routed to the dryer during shutdown. (8) Direct-fired softwood Cease feeding You meet the work veneer dryers undergoing green veneer practice requirement startup or shutdown of gas- into the and you have a fired burners on and after softwood veneer record of the August 13, 2021, except as dryer and procedures for noted in footnote ``1'' to minimize the startup and shutdown this table. amount of time of softwood veneer direct gas-fired dryer gas-fired softwood veneer burners available dryers are for inspection by vented to the the delegated atmosphere due authority upon to the request. conditions described in Sec. 63.2250(d). (9) Direct wood-fired PCWP Conduct an annual You submit with your dryers, direct natural gas- tune-up of Notification of fired PCWP dryers, direct- combustion Compliance Status fired lumber kilns, and unit(s) used to documentation of the associated bypass stacks for directly fire initial burner tune combustion unit exhaust each PCWP dryer up conducted streams routinely used to or lumber kiln according to Sec. direct-fire a PCWP dryer or as specified in 63.2241(d); and you lumber kiln on and after July Sec. identify in your 6, 2029, except as noted in 63.2241(d) AND Notification of footnote ``2'' to this table. continuously Compliance Status monitor an the method used to indicator of continuously monitor bypass stack and record the usage. duration of bypass stack usage. (10) Lumber kilns on and after Minimize lumber You submit with your July 6, 2029, except as noted over-drying to Notification of in footnote ``2'' to this reduce HAP Compliance Status table. emissions the O&M plan according to the developed according work practice to Sec. Sec. requirements in 63.2241(e)(1) and Sec. 63.2250(a) and a 63.2241(e). description of the work practice option you will comply with according to Sec. 63.2241(e)(3); and if using the site- specific plan option under Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii) you must submit your site-specific plan to the delegated authority for approval according to Sec. 63.2253(b) by the date specified in Sec. 63.2253(b)(1). (11) Stand-alone digesters on Use clean steam You meet the work and after July 6, 2029, for injection practice requirement except as noted in footnote into digestion and you submit a ``2'' to this table. process; and signed statement process fiber with the without addition Notification of of HAP- Compliance Status containing or that the stand-alone wood pulping digester operates chemicals. according to the work practice. (12) Fiber washers on and Process fiber You meet the work after July 6, 2029, except as without addition practice requirement noted in footnote ``2'' to of HAP- and you submit a this table. containing or signed statement wood pulping with the chemicals. Notification of Compliance Status that the fiber washer operates according to the work practice. (13) Log vats on and after Operate the log You meet the work July 6, 2029, except as noted vat with a practice in footnote ``2'' to this target log requirements and you table. temperature at submit a signed or below 212 statement with the [deg]F as Notification of specified in Compliance Status Sec. with a record 63.2241(f). showing that the target log temperature is at or below 212 [deg]F. (14) Resinated material Work practice You meet the work handling (RMH) process units requirements practice on and after July 6, 2029, specified in requirements and you except as noted in footnote Sec. submit a signed ``2'' to this table. 63.2241(g). statement with the Notification of Compliance Status that resin(s) used are non-HAP resin(s) or have maximum true vapor pressure of less than or equal to the applicable limit in Sec. 63.2241(g)(1)(ii) and that wood material processes meets the requirements in 63.2241(g)(2). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after September 6, 2019, must comply with this requirement beginning on August 13, 2020, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. \2\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with this requirement beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. [[Page 41458]] Table 7 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Continuous Compliance With the Compliance Options and Operating Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the following compliance options and You must demonstrate For . . . operating continuous compliance requirements . . by . . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Each process unit listed Compliance Collecting and in table 1B to this subpart options in table recording the or mixed PCWP process unit 1B to this operating parameter (defined in Sec. 63.2292). subpart and the monitoring system operating data listed in table requirements in 2 to this subpart table 2 to this for the process unit subpart based on according to Sec. monitoring of Sec. 63.2269(a) operating and (b) and 63.2270; parameters. and reducing the operating parameter monitoring system data to the specified averages in units of the applicable requirement according to calculations in Sec. 63.2270; and maintaining the average operating parameter at or above the minimum, at or below the maximum, or within the range (whichever applies) established according to Sec. 63.2262. (2) Each process unit listed Compliance Collecting and in tables 1A and 1B to this options in recording the THC subpart. tables 1A and 1B monitoring data to this subpart listed in table 2 to and the this subpart for the operating process unit requirements in according to Sec. table 2 to this 63.2269(d); and subpart based on reducing the CEMS THC CEMS data. data to 3-hour block averages according to calculations in Sec. 63.2269(d); and maintaining the 3-hour block average THC concentration in the exhaust gases less than or equal to the THC concentration established according to Sec. 63.2262. (3) Each process unit using a Compliance Conducting a repeat biofilter. options in performance test tables 1B to using the applicable this subpart. method(s) specified in table 4 to this subpart \1\ within 2 years following the previous performance test and within 180 days after each replacement of any portion of the biofilter bed media with a different type of media or each replacement of more than 50 percent (by volume) of the biofilter bed media with the same type of media. (4) Each process unit using a Compliance Checking the activity catalytic oxidizer. options in table level of a 1B to this representative subpart. sample of the catalyst at least annually \2\ and taking any necessary corrective action to ensure that the catalyst is performing within its design range. (5) Each process unit listed Compliance Collecting and in table 1A to this subpart. options in table recording on a daily 1A to this basis process unit subpart and the controlling operating operating parameter requirements in data; and table 2 to this maintaining the subpart based on operating parameter monitoring of at or above the process unit minimum, at or below controlling the maximum, or operating within the range parameters. (whichever applies) established according to Sec. 63.2262. (6) Each Process unit listed Compliance Implementing your in table 1B to this subpart options in table plan to address how using a wet control device as 1B to this organic HAP captured the sole means of reducing subpart. in the wastewater HAP emissions. from the wet control device is contained or destroyed to minimize re-release to the atmosphere. (7) Each process unit listed Compliance Conducting a repeat in table 1B to this subpart options in performance test using a control device other tables 1B to using the applicable than a biofilter. this subpart. method(s) specified in table 4 to this subpart \1\ by August 13, 2023, or within 60 months following the previous performance test, whichever is later, and thereafter within 60 months following the previous performance test. (8) Process unit listed in Total HAP The average total HAP table 1C to this subpart. compliance emissions measured options in table using the methods in 1C to this table 4 to this subpart and the subpart over the 3- operating hour performance requirements in test are no greater table 2 to this than the compliance subpart based on option in table 1C monitoring of to this subpart; and operating you have a record of parameters. the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (9) Process unit listed in MDI compliance The average MDI table 1C to this subpart. options in table emissions measured 1C to this using the methods in subpart and the table 4 to this operating subpart over the 3- requirements in hour performance table 2 to this test are no greater subpart based on than the compliance monitoring of option in table 1C operating to this subpart; AND parameters. you have a record of the operating requirement(s) listed in table 2 to this subpart for the process unit over the performance test during which emissions did not exceed the compliance option value. (10) Direct wood-fired PCWP Compliance Collecting and dryer using a wet or dry options in Sec. recording the electrostatic precipitator, 63.2240(d)(2) operating parameter wet scrubber, electrified and (3) and monitoring system filter bed, thermal oxidizer, table 1D or 1E data listed in table catalytic oxidizer, or to this subpart 2 to this subpart biofilter to meet the and the for the process unit standards in table 1D or 1E operating according to Sec. to this subpart. requirements in Sec. 63.2269(a) table 2 to this and (b) and 63.2270; subpart based on and reducing the monitoring of operating parameter operating monitoring system parameters. data to the specified averages in units of the applicable requirement according to calculations in Sec. 63.2270; and maintaining the average operating parameter at or above the minimum, at or below the maximum, or within the range (whichever applies) established according to Sec. 63.2262. (11) Direct wood-fired PCWP Compliance Collecting and dryer using a mechanical options in Sec. recording opacity collector or other dry 63.2240(d)(2) data according to control device (not elsewhere and (3) and Sec. Sec. listed in this table) or a table 1D or 1E 63.2269(e) and WESP followed by a control to this subpart 63.2270; and device with a dry exhaust to and the reducing the opacity meet the standards in table operating data to a 24-hour 1D or 1E to this subpart. requirements in block average table 2 to this according to Sec. subpart based on 63.2270; and continuous maintaining the opacity average opacity at monitoring. or below the maximum established according to Sec. 63.2262. (12) Process unit bypass stack Continuously Continuously (defined in Sec. 63.2292). monitor usage of monitoring and the process unit recording the bypass stack at duration of bypass all times while stack usage the process according to Sec. units are Sec. 63.2269(a) operating, and (l) and 63.2270. undergoing startup or shutdown, and during the operating conditions specified in Sec. 63.2250(f)(2) through (4). [[Page 41459]] (13) Each process unit listed Total HAP and MDI Conducting a repeat in table 1C, 1D, or 1E to limits in table performance test this subpart. 1C to this using the applicable subpart (as method(s) specified applicable), and in table 4 to this the PM, Hg, HCl, subpart\1\ within 60 and PAH limits months following the in table 1D or previous performance 1E to this test. subpart (as applicable), and the dioxin/furan TEQ limits in Sec. 63.2240(d)(2) and (3). (14) Direct wood-fired PCWP Compliance Collecting and dryer using a mechanical options in Sec. recording pressure collector or other dry 63.2240(d)(2) drop and opacity control device (not elsewhere and (3) and observations listed listed in this table) to meet table 1D or 1E in table 2 to this the standards in table 1D or to this subpart subpart according to 1E to this subpart. and the Sec. Sec. operating 63.2269(a) and (f) requirements in and 63.2270; and table 2 to this reducing the subpart based on pressure drop pressure drop monitoring system monitoring and data to the opacity specified averages observations. in units of the applicable requirement according to calculations in Sec. 63.2270; and maintaining the average pressure drop above the minimum established according to Sec. 63.2262; and maintaining the weekly opacity observations at or below the maximum established according to Sec. 63.2262. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ When conducting a repeat performance test, the capture efficiency demonstration required in table 4 to this subpart, row 9 is not required to be repeated with the repeat emissions test if the capture device is maintained and operated consistent with its design as well as its operation during the previous capture efficiency demonstration conducted according to table 4 to this subpart, row 9 as specified in Sec. 63.2267. \2\ You may forego the annual catalyst activity check during the calendar year when a performance test is conducted according to table 4 to this subpart. Table 8 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Continuous Compliance With the Work Practice Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the following work practice You must demonstrate For . . . requirements . . continuous compliance . by . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Dry rotary dryer.......... Process furnish Maintaining the 24- with an inlet hour block average moisture content inlet furnish less than or moisture content at equal to 30 less than or equal percent (by to 30 percent (by weight, dry weight, dry basis) basis) and and maintaining the operate with an 24-hour block inlet dryer average inlet dryer temperature of temperature at less less than or than or equal to 600 equal to 600 [deg]F; and keeping [deg]F. records of the inlet temperature of furnish moisture content and inlet dryer temperature. (2) Hardwood veneer dryer..... Process less than Maintaining the 30 volume volume percent percent softwood softwood species species. processed below 30 percent and keeping records of the volume percent softwood species processed. (3) Softwood veneer dryer..... Minimize fugitive Following (and emissions from documenting that you the dryer doors are following) your and the green plan for minimizing end. fugitive emissions. (4) Veneer redryers........... Process veneer Maintaining the 24- with an inlet hour block average moisture content inlet moisture of less than or content of the equal to 25 veneer processed at percent (by or below of less weight, dry than or 25 percent basis). and keeping records of the inlet moisture content of the veneer processed. (5) Group 1 miscellaneous Use non-HAP Continuing to use non- coating operations. coatings as HAP coatings and defined in Sec. keeping records 63.2292. showing that you are using non-HAP coatings. (6) Process units and control Follow documented Keeping records systems undergoing safety- site-specific showing that you are related shutdown on and after procedures to following the work August 13, 2021, except as ensure the flow practice noted in footnote ``1'' to of raw materials requirements during this table. and fuel or safety-related process heat shutdowns. ceases and that material is removed from the process unit(s) as expeditiously as possible given the system design to reduce air emissions. (7) Pressurized refiners Route exhaust Keeping records undergoing startup or gases from the showing that you are shutdown on and after August pressurized following the work 13, 2021, except as noted in refiner to its practice footnote ``1'' to this table. dryer control requirements during system no later pressurized refiner than 15 minutes startup and shutdown after wood is events. fed to the pressurized refiner during startup. Stop wood flow into the pressurized refiner no more than 15 minutes after wood fiber and exhaust gases from the pressurized refiner stop being routed to the dryer during shutdown. (8) Direct-fired softwood Cease feeding Keeping records veneer dryers undergoing green veneer showing that you are startup or shutdown of gas- into the following the work fired burners on and after softwood veneer practice August 13, 2021, except as dryer and requirements while noted in footnote ``1'' to minimize the undergoing startup this table. amount of time or shutdown of direct gas-fired softwood veneer softwood veneer dryer direct gas- dryers are fired burners. vented to the atmosphere due to the conditions described in Sec. 63.2250(d). (9) Direct wood-fired PCWP Conduct an annual Conducting and dryers, direct natural gas- tune-up of maintaining records fired PCWP dryers, direct- combustion of annual burner fired lumber kilns, and unit(s) used to inspections and associated combustion unit directly fire corrective actions bypass stacks on and after each PCWP dryer taken; and July 6, 2029, except as noted or lumber kiln continuously in footnote ``2'' to this as specified in monitoring and table. Sec. recording the 63.2271(c); AND duration of continuously combustion unit monitor an bypass stack usage indicator of according to Sec. bypass stack Sec. 63.2269(a) usage. and (k) and 63.2270. (10) Lumber kilns on and after O&M plan Operating according July 6, 2029, except as noted developed under to your O&M plan in footnote ``2'' to this Sec. developed under Sec. table. 63.2241(e)(1) 63.2241(e)(1); and involving annual conducting annual inspection of inspection of the lumber kiln integrity of the integrity and lumber kiln internal review of charge air flow and heat optimization distribution practices and components, corrective reviewing charge actions. optimization practices, implementing corrective actions, and maintaining records of corrective actions according to Sec. 63.2241(e)(1)(c). (11) Lumber kilns on and after Temperature limit Operating the kiln July 6, 2029, except as noted option under with a dry bulb in footnote ``2'' to this Sec. temperature limit no table. 63.2241(e)(3)(i). higher than the maximum limit specified in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(i); and continuously monitoring dry bulb temperature; and maintaining records of the batch average or daily block average dry bulb temperature. [[Page 41460]] (12) Lumber kilns on and after Hybrid option Operating the kiln July 6, 2029, except as noted under Sec. with a dry bulb in footnote ``2'' to this 63.2241(e)(3)(ii temperature limit no table. ). higher than the maximum limit specified in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(ii)(A) ; and continuously monitoring dry bulb temperature; and maintaining records of the batch average or daily block average dry bulb temperature and continuously monitoring lumber moisture while drying lumber; and keeping records of the kiln-dried lumber moisture content for determination of the semiannual average according to Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(ii)(B) (13) Lumber kilns on and after Site-specific Operating the kiln July 6, 2029, except as noted plan option for using the approved in footnote ``2'' to this temperature and site specific table. lumber moisture temperature limit monitoring under and site-specific Sec. method for lumber 63.2241(e)(3)(ii moisture monitoring i). under Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii); continuously monitoring, recording, and calculating the 3- hour block average temperature under Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii)(A ); continuously monitoring, recording, and calculating the monthly and semiannual average kiln-dried lumber moisture content under Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii)(B ); and maintaining records and reporting corrective action as required in Sec. 63.2241(e)(3)(iii)(B ). (14) Stand-alone digesters on Use clean steam Continuing to meet and after July 6, 2029, for injection the work practice by except as noted in footnote into digestion using clean steam ``2'' to this table. process; and and processing fiber process fiber without addition of without addition HAP-containing or of HAP- wood pulping containing or chemicals and wood pulping keeping records chemicals. showing that you continue to meet the work practice. (15) Fiber washers on and Process fiber Continuing to meet after July 6, 2029, except as without addition the work practice by noted in footnote ``2'' to of HAP- processing fiber this table. containing or without addition of wood pulping HAP-containing or chemicals. wood pulping chemicals AND keeping records showing that you continue to meet the work practice. (16) Log vats on and after Operate the log Continuing to meet July 6, 2029, except as noted vat with a the work practice by in footnote ``2'' to this target log operating the log table. temperature at vat as specified in or below 212 Sec. 63.2241(f) [deg]F as and keeping records specified in showing that you Sec. continue to meet the 63.2241(f). work practice. (17) Resinated material Work practice Continuing to meet handling (RMH) process units requirements the work practice on and after July 6, 2029, specified in requirements in Sec. except as noted in footnote Sec. 63.2241(g) and ``2'' to this table. 63.2241(g). keeping records showing that you continue to meet the work practice. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after September 6, 2019, must comply with this requirement beginning on August 13, 2020, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. \2\ New or reconstructed affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after May 18, 2023, must comply with this requirement beginning on July 6, 2026, or upon initial startup, whichever is later. Table 9 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Requirements for Reports ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The report must You must submit You must submit a(n) . . . contain . . . the report . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Compliance report........... The information in Semiannually Sec. 63.2281(c) according to the through (g). requirements in Sec. 63.2281(b). (2) [Reserved].................. (3) Performance test report..... The information According to the required in Sec. requirements of 63.7(g). Sec. 63.2281(i). (4) CMS performance evaluation, The information According to the as required for CEMS under Sec. required in Sec. requirements of 63.2269(d)(2) and COMS under 63.7(g). Sec. Sec. 63.2269(e)(2). 63.2281(j). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 10 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to This Subpart ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Citation Subject Brief description Applies to this subpart ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sec. 63.1................. Applicability... Initial applicability Yes. determination; applicability after standard established; permit requirements; extensions, notifications. Sec. 63.2................. Definitions..... Definitions for Yes. standards in this part. Sec. 63.3................. Units and Units and Yes. Abbreviations. abbreviations for standards in this part. Sec. 63.4................. Prohibited Prohibited Yes. Activities and activities; Circumvention. compliance date; circumvention, fragmentation. Sec. 63.5................. Preconstruction Preconstruction Yes. Review and review requirements Notification of section 112(i)(1). Requirements. Sec. 63.6(a).............. Applicability... GP apply unless Yes. compliance extension; GP apply to area sources that become major. Sec. 63.6(b)(1) through Compliance Dates Standards apply at Yes. (4). for New and effective date; 3 Reconstructed years after Sources. effective date; upon startup; 10 years after construction or reconstruction commences for section 112(f). Sec. 63.6(b)(5)........... Notification.... Must notify if Yes. commenced construction or reconstruction after proposal. Sec. 63.6(b)(6)........... [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.6(b)(7)........... Compliance Dates Area sources that Yes. for New and become major must Reconstructed comply with major Area Sources source standards that Become immediately upon Major. becoming major, regardless of whether required to comply when they were an area source. Sec. 63.6(c)(1) and (2)... Compliance Dates Comply according to Yes. for Existing date in subpart, Sources. which must be no later than 3 years after effective date; for section 112(f) standards, comply within 90 days of effective date unless compliance extension. Sec. 63.6(c)(3) and (4)... [Reserved]...... [[Page 41461]] Sec. 63.6(c)(5)........... Compliance Dates Area sources that Yes. for Existing become major must Area Sources comply with major that Become source standards by Major. date indicated in subpart or by equivalent time period (e.g., 3 years). Sec. 63.6(d).............. [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i)........ General Duty to You must operate and No, see Sec. 63.2250 for general duty Minimize maintain affected requirement. Emissions. source in a manner consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(ii)....... Requirement to You must correct No. Correct malfunctions as soon Malfunctions as practicable after ASAP. their occurrence. Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)...... Operation and Operation and Yes. Maintenance maintenance Requirements. requirements are enforceable independent of emissions limitations or other requirements in relevant standards. Sec. 63.6(e)(2)........... [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.6(e)(3)........... Startup, Requirement for SSM No. Shutdown, and and SSMP; content of Malfunction SSMP. Plan (SSMP). Sec. 63.6(f)(1)........... SSM Exemption... You must comply with No. emission standards at all times except during SSM. Sec. 63.6(f)(2) and (3)... Methods for Compliance based on Yes. Determining performance test, Compliance/ operation and Finding of maintenance plans, Compliance. records, inspection. Sec. 63.6(g)(1) through Alternative Procedures for Yes. (3). Standard. getting an alternative standard. Sec. 63.6(h)(1)........... SSM Exemption... You must comply with No. opacity and visible emission standards at all times except during SSM. Sec. 63.6(h)(2) through Opacity/Visible Requirements for No. This subpart specifies opacity as an (9). Emission (VE) opacity and visible operating limit not an emission Standards. emission standards. standard. Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)...... Compliance Procedures and Yes. Extension. criteria for Administrator to grant compliance extension. Sec. 63.6(i)(15).......... [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.6(i)(16).......... Compliance Compliance extension Yes. Extension. and Administrator's authority. Sec. 63.6(j).............. Presidential President may exempt Yes. Compliance source category from Exemption. requirement to comply with rule. Sec. 63.7(a)(1) and (2)... Performance Test Dates for conducting Yes. Dates. initial performance testing and other compliance demonstrations; must conduct within 180 days after first subject to rule. Sec. 63.7(a)(3)........... Section 114 Administrator may Yes. Authority. require a performance test under CAA section 114 at any time. Sec. 63.7(b)(1)........... Notification of Must notify Yes. Performance Administrator 60 Test. days before the test. Sec. 63.7(b)(2)........... Notification of If have to reschedule Yes. Rescheduling. performance test, must notify Administrator as soon as practicable. Sec. 63.7(c).............. Quality Requirement to submit Yes. Assurance/Test site-specific test Plan. plan 60 days before the test or on date Administrator agrees with; test plan approval procedures; performance audit requirements; internal and external QA procedures for testing. Sec. 63.7(d).............. Testing Requirements for Yes. Facilities. testing facilities. Sec. 63.7(e)(1)........... Performance Performance tests No, see Sec. 63.2262(a) and (b). Testing. must be conducted under representative conditions; cannot conduct performance tests during SSM; not a violation to exceed standard during SSM. Sec. 63.7(e)(2)........... Conditions for Must conduct Yes. Conducting according to rule Performance and EPA test methods Tests. unless Administrator approves alternative. Sec. 63.7(e)(3)........... Test Run Must have three test Yes. Duration. runs for at least the time specified in the relevant standard; compliance is based on arithmetic mean of three runs; specifies conditions when data from an additional test run can be used. Sec. 63.7(f).............. Alternative Test Procedures by which Yes. Method. Administrator can grant approval to use an alternative test method. Sec. 63.7(g).............. Performance Test Must include raw data Yes. Data Analysis. in performance test report; must submit performance test data 60 days after end of test with the notification of compliance status; keep data for 5 years. Sec. 63.7(h).............. Waiver of Tests. Procedures for Yes. Administrator to waive performance test. Sec. 63.8(a)(1)........... Applicability of Subject to all Yes. Monitoring monitoring Requirements. requirements in standard. Sec. 63.8(a)(2)........... Performance Performance Yes. Specifications. specifications in appendix B of part 60 of this chapter. Sec. 63.8(a)(3)........... [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.8(a)(4)........... Monitoring with Requirements for NA. Flares. flares in Sec. 63.11 apply. Sec. 63.8(b)(1)........... Monitoring...... Must conduct Yes. monitoring according to standard unless Administrator approves alternative. Sec. 63.8(b)(2) and (3)... Multiple Specific requirements Yes. Effluents and for installing Multiple monitoring systems; Monitoring must install on each Systems. effluent before it is 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 Yes. System system in a manner Operation and consistent with good Maintenance. air pollution control practices. Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i)........ Operation and Must maintain and No. Maintenance of operate CMS in CMS. accordance with Sec. 63.6(e)(1). Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(ii)....... Spare Parts for Must maintain spare Yes. CMS. parts for routine CMS repairs. [[Page 41462]] Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii)...... Requirements to Must develop and No. Develop SSMP implement SSMP for for CMS. CMS. Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)....... Monitoring Must install to get Yes. System representative Installation. emission of parameter measurements; must verify operational status before or at performance test. Sec. 63.8(c)(4)........... CMS Requirements CMS must be operating Yes. except during breakdown, out-of- control, repair, maintenance, and high-level calibration drifts; COMS must have a minimum of one cycle of sampling and analysis for each successive 10-second period and one cycle of data recording for each successive 6-minute period; CEMS must have a minimum of one cycle of operation for each successive 15- minute period. Sec. 63.8(c)(5)........... Continuous COMS minimum Yes. Opacity procedures. Monitoring System (COMS) Minimum Procedures. Sec. 63.8(c)(6) through CMS Requirements Zero and high-level Yes. (8). calibration check requirements; out-of- control periods. Sec. 63.8(d)(1) and (2)... CMS Quality Requirements for CMS Yes. Refer to Sec. 63.2269(a) through Control. quality control, (c) and (f) through (o) for CPMS quality including control procedures to be included in the calibration, etc.. quality control program. Sec. 63.8(d)(3)........... Written Must keep quality No, see Sec. 63.2282(f). Procedures for control plan on CMS. record for 5 years. Keep old versions for 5 years after revisions. May incorporate as part of SSMP to avoid duplication.. Sec. 63.8(e)(1)........... CMS Performance Performance Yes, for CEMS, COMS, and for the CMS in Evaluation. evaluation. Sec. 63.2269(f) and (g) and (i) through (l) Sec. 63.8(e)(2) through CMS Performance Notification, Yes, for CEMS and COMS. (5). Evaluation. performance evaluation test plan, reports. Sec. 63.8(f)(1) through Alternative Procedures for Yes. (5). Monitoring Administrator to Method. approve alternative monitoring. Sec. 63.8(f)(6)........... Alternative to Procedures for Yes, for CEMS. Relative Administrator to Accuracy Test. approve alternative relative accuracy tests for CEMS. Sec. 63.8(g).............. Data Reduction.. COMS 6-minute Yes. averages calculated over at least 36 evenly spaced data points; CEMS 1 hour averages computed over at least 4 equally spaced data points; data that can't be used in average; rounding of data. Sec. 63.9(a).............. Notification Applicability and Yes. Requirements. State delegation. Sec. 63.9(b)(1) and (2)... Initial Submit notification Yes. Notifications. 120 days after effective date; contents of notification. Sec. 63.9(b)(3)........... [Reserved]...... Sec. 63.9(b)(4) and (5)... Initial Submit notification Yes. Notifications. 120 days after effective date; notification of intent to construct/ reconstruct; notification of commencement of construct/ reconstruct; notification of startup; contents of each. Sec. 63.9(c).............. Request for Can request if cannot Yes. Compliance comply by date or if Extension. installed best available control technology/lowest achievable emission rate. Sec. 63.9(d).............. Notification of For sources that Yes. Special commence Compliance construction between Requirements proposal and for New Source. promulgation and want to comply 3 years after effective date. Sec. 63.9(e).............. Notification of Notify the EPA Yes. Performance Administrator 60 Test. days prior. Sec. 63.9(f).............. Notification of Notify the EPA Yes, except notifications are not Visible Administrator 30 required for opacity observations in Emissions/ days prior. Sec. 63.2270(k). Opacity Test. Sec. 63.9(g).............. Additional Notification of Yes. Notifications performance When Using CMS. evaluation; notification using COMS data; notification that exceeded criterion for relative accuracy. Sec. 63.9(h)(1) through Notification of Contents; due 60 days Yes, except notifications are not (6). Compliance after end of required for opacity observations in Status. performance test or Sec. 63.2270(k). 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 Yes. Submittal Administrator to Deadlines. approve change in when notifications must be submitted. Sec. 63.9(j).............. Change in Must submit within 15 Yes. Previous days after the Information. change. Sec. 63.9(k).............. Electronic Electronic reporting Yes. reporting procedures. procedures. Sec. 63.10(a)............. Recordkeeping/ Applies to all, Yes. Reporting. unless compliance extension; when to submit to Federal vs. State authority; procedures for owners of more than one source. Sec. 63.10(b)(1).......... Recordkeeping/ General Requirements; Yes. Reporting. keep all records readily available; keep for 5 years. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)....... Recordkeeping of Records of occurrence No, see Sec. 63.2282(a). Occurrence and and duration of each Duration of startup or shutdown Startups and that causes source Shutdowns. to exceed emission limitation. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)...... Recordkeeping of Records of occurrence No, see Sec. 63.2282(a) for Failures to and duration of each recordkeeping of (1) date, time and Meet a Standard. malfunction of duration; (2) listing of affected source operation or air or equipment, and an estimate of the pollution control quantity of each regulated pollutant and monitoring emitted over the standard; and (3) equipment. actions to minimize emissions and correct the failure. [[Page 41463]] Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii)..... Maintenance Records of Yes. Records. maintenance performed on air pollution control and monitoring equipment. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv) and Actions Taken to Records of actions No. (v). Minimize taken during SSM to Emissions minimize emissions. During SSM. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi), (x), CMS Records..... Malfunctions, Yes. and (xi). inoperative, out-of- control. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii) Records......... Measurements to Yes. through (ix). demonstrate compliance with compliance options and operating requirements; performance test, performance evaluation, and visible emission observation results; measurements to determine conditions of performance tests and performance evaluations. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)..... Records......... Records when under Yes. waiver. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii).... Records......... Records when using Yes. alternative to relative accuracy test. Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)..... Records......... All documentation Yes. supporting initial notification and notification of compliance status. Sec. 63.10(b)(3).......... Records......... Applicability Yes. determinations. Sec. 63.10(c)(1) through Records......... Additional records Yes. (6) and (9) through (14). for CMS. Sec. 63.10(c)(7) and (8).. Records......... Records of excess No. emissions and parameter monitoring exceedances for CMS. Sec. 63.10(c)(15)......... Use of SSMP..... Use SSMP to satisfy No. recordkeeping requirements for identification of malfunction, correction action taken, and nature of repairs to CMS. Sec. 63.10(d)(1).......... General Requirement to report Yes. Reporting Requirements. Sec. 63.10(d)(2).......... Report of When to submit to Yes. Performance Federal or State Test Results. authority. Sec. 63.10(d)(3).......... Reporting What to report and NA. Opacity or VE when. Observations. Sec. 63.10(d)(4).......... Progress Reports Must submit progress Yes. reports on schedule if under compliance extension. Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i)....... Periodic SSM Contents and No, see Sec. 63.2281(d) and (e) for Reports. submission of malfunction reporting requirements. periodic SSM reports. Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii)...... Immediate SSM Contents and No. Reports. submission of immediate SSM reports. Sec. 63.10(e)(1) and (2).. Additional CMS Must report results Yes. Reports. for each CEM on a unit; written copy of performance evaluation; 3 copies of COMS performance evaluation. Sec. 63.10(e)(3).......... Reports......... Excess emission No. reports. Sec. 63.10(e)(4).......... Reporting COMS Must submit COMS data Yes. Data. with performance test data. Sec. 63.10(f)............. Waiver for Procedures for the Yes. Recordkeeping/ EPA Administrator to Reporting. waive. Sec. 63.11................ Control Device Requirements for NA. and Work flares and Practice alternative work Requirements. practice for equipment leaks. Sec. 63.12................ State Authority State authority to Yes. and Delegations. enforce standards. Sec. 63.13................ Addresses....... Addresses where Yes. reports, notifications, and requests are sent. Sec. 63.14................ Incorporations Test methods Yes. by Reference. incorporated by reference. Sec. 63.15................ Availability of Public and Yes. Information and confidential Confidentiality. information. Sec. 63.16................ Performance Requirements for Yes. Track Performance Track Provisions. member facilities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0

22. Add tables 11 and 12 to subpart DDDD of part 63 to read as follows:

Table 11 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Lumber Minimum Moisture Content Limits ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If the maximum lumber moisture The minimum kiln-dried lumber specification (weight percent, dry moisture content (weight percent, basis) is . . . dry basis) is . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 22 or more.......................... 15 19-21............................... 12 18.................................. 11 17.................................. 10 16.................................. 9 15.................................. 8 14.................................. 7 13.................................. 6 10-12............................... 5 9................................... 4.5 8................................... 4 7................................... 3.5 6................................... 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 41464]] Table 12 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Toxic Equivalency Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dioxin/furan congener Toxic equivalency factor ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p- 1 dioxin............................. 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzo-p- 1 dioxin............................. 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo- 0.1 p-dioxin........................... 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated dibenzo- 0.1 p-dioxin........................... 1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo- 0.1 p-dioxin........................... 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated 0.01 dibenzo-p-dioxin................... octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin.... 0.0003 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated 0.1 dibenzofuran....................... 2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorinated 0.3 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated 0.03 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated 0.1 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated 0.1 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated 0.1 dibenzofuran....................... 2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorinated 0.1 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated 0.01 dibenzofuran....................... 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorinated 0.01 dibenzofuran....................... octachlorinated dibenzofuran........ 0.0003 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [FR Doc. 2026-13550 Filed 7-2-26; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P