POLLUTION PREVENTION IN PERMITTING PILOT (P4) PROJECT
CYTEC INDUSTRIES INC. PROJECT AT REGION I
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT
Prepared by
Cytec Industries Inc.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
EPA Region I
Industrial Economics, Inc.
SCI-TECH, INC.
June 23, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT OVERVIEW:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Introduction: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Project's Background: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Project Goals:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Importance of this permit:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Permit Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Participants and Objectives:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Source Description: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
Flexibility Needs and Regulatory Impediments: . . . . . . .5
Permit Solutions: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
How This Permit Promotes P2: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
PERMIT SECTION DESCRIPTION:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Emissions Unit Section: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Applicable Requirements Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Emissions Reduction Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Emissions Quantification Section: . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Emissions Monitoring Section: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Pre-approved Modification Section: . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Like-Kind Replacement Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
PAL:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Permit P2 Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Remedial Activities Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Permit Notification Section:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Permit Recordkeeping Section: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Permit Reporting Section: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
PERMIT IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
PROJECT OVERVIEW:
Introduction:
This document provides an explanation of the Title V permit developed for Cytec Industries Inc.,
(Cytec) Wallingford, CT. The document includes a description of the terms and conditions
contained within the Title V permit and an explanation of how these terms and conditions were
derived. The permit was developed as part of the national Pollution Prevention in Permitting Pilot
(P4) project. The Region I participants were Cytec, EPA Region I, EPA's Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS), and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP). This document describes specific terms and conditions that are innovative but are
intended to be replicable and applicable to other facilities.
Project Background:
The Cytec/DEP/EPA Region I project builds on the successful original P4 project (P4-Phase I)
conducted by the Intel Corporation, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, EPA, and
the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Research Center. The Intel project identified
opportunities to create incentives for pollution prevention (P2), instead of traditional end-of-pipe
controls, by accommodating Intel's need to make frequent operational changes to its facility
without reopening and modifying its Title V permit. The permit promotes P2 and proactive
environmental management strategies, ensures full regulatory compliance, and achieves a high
standard of environmental protection, while being responsive to Intel's operational flexibility
needs.
In P4-Phase II, the participants intended to explore further opportunities to advance P2 and
permit flexibility. In proposing to develop a Title V permit through this effort, the Region I
participants sought to repeat and to expand upon the process used in the Intel project, i.e., to
develop a Title V permit within the current regulatory framework for Cytec. Ultimately, the final
goal is a Title V permit template consisting of P2 and operational flexibility elements that are
replicable and transferable to other State permitting programs.
The DEP and EPA used several criteria to evaluate potential sources for participation in the P4
project including:
the source's complexity as to number and different types of emissions points.
the growth potential of the source over and beyond the duration of the permit term.
the commitment of the source to this project.
the environmental record of the source, from a multimedia perspective.
After considering many potential sources, the agencies determined that Cytec was the best source
for the project.
Project Goals:
The objectives of the project were:
To produce an integrated draft Title V operating permit that promotes P2 and operational
flexibility;
To identify opportunities for and barriers to P2 and operational flexibility within the
confines of the current rules, and to use this information in the development of national
rulemaking efforts and;
To provide opportunities for business growth without compromising the current
regulatory requirements.
Importance of this permit:
This permit develops replicable permit provisions that promote P2, streamline permitting
requirements and provide sources additional operational flexibility. In this permit, the term
"operational flexibility" applies to the permit provisions that streamline and reduce Title V permit
modification process requirements. Generally, permit authorities are required to modify Title V
permits whenever the source changes its emissions due to an equipment/process change, method
of operation, or becomes subject to a new applicable requirement. Permit modifications do not all
require the same level of review and processing. The level of permit review and processing
depends on the type of action triggering the modification or the degree of specificity contained in
the permit. This Title V permit provides conditions that reduce or eliminate the level of permit
review and processing by using facility-wide applicability limits, conditional pre-approved
applicable requirements, and self implementing compliance mechanisms. The final product is a
permit that anticipates and adapts to the needs of the facility and reduces the time and man hours
associated with processing permit modifications.
Operational flexibility is particularly important for facilities that, due to their products and/or
processes, frequently have to change or install new equipment to remain competitive and to grow
their business. Constant reopening of Title V permits requires considerable resources from both
the State and the applicant. Without flexible Title V permits that anticipate and adapt to
operational needs, State and local permitting authorities would be required to continually process
Title V permits for companies such as Cytec that frequently change operations and products. This
situation may discourage companies from installing new, more efficient equipment, delay
implementation of Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements and consume valuable time and resources
from State agencies.
This permit is designed to anticipate the needs of Cytec through a set of self-implementing permit
provisions. These provisions include mechanisms that allow Cytec to implement anticipated
requirements without the need for significant permit modifications. These mechanisms generally
rely on preapproving the compliance terms and conditions for new requirements that Cytec
anticipates triggering during the life of the permit. Some examples of requirements preapproved
into the permit include: 1) generic and specific classes of changes proposed for the facility, 2)
compliance requirements for anticipated applicable requirements, and 3) alternative compliance
requirements. In addition, the permit establishes a plantwide applicability limit (PAL) for Cytec's
VOC emissions. The PAL caps Cytec's VOC emissions at historical actual emission levels. The
quid pro quo is that to grow and remain below the PAL, Cytec will be required to implement P2
techniques that improve overall operational efficiency and reduce pollutants on a unit basis. Pre-approved operational changes, emissions PALs, and P2 techniques are all components of
operational flexibility.
Permit Accomplishments:
The Cytec permit accomplishes several key elements:
integrates P2, operational flexibility and pre-approved New Source Review (NSR)
construction permit terms and conditions into one document.
anticipates future applicable requirements and allows for these requirements to be
implemented without requiring significant permit modification.
recognizes the benefits that can be derived from P2 efforts and creates incentives for
generation of enforceable emissions credits that could be used to satisfy regulatory
obligations.
recognizes that companies competing in a global marketplace need the ability to make
frequent changes without delay.
Each of these four elements is important. However, as to significance, this permit acknowledges
that P2 is a mainstream activity for the regulatory agency and the source. Historically, P2 has
been treated as a voluntary activity. This permit clearly establishes a framework that links P2 to
operational flexibility. The DEP and EPA state that the agencies will provide Cytec options to
reduce administrative burdens and streamline permitting procedures in return for commitments to
implement a premise wide P2 program. The P4 model and the conceptual program changes that it
encourages emphasize that regulatory agencies streamline certain administrative requirements that
trigger substantial costs to both the source and the permitting authority. In turn, the agency is
enabling the source to follow through with their commitments to operate more effectively. This
trust is explicit in the permit condition that allows Cytec to limit PTE using P2 activities and
implicit in the requirement to develop a P2 plan.
From this mutual commitment, the Cytec permit begins to transcend traditional command and
control model to an enhanced approach to environmental management. However, we should
emphasize that this permit does not relax environmental requirements. The following can explain
the difference between prior air permits and Cytec's: prior to the P4 project, agencies
traditionally established the emissions limits and instructed the source, in enforceable permit terms
and conditions, how it was to achieve these limits. That is, the State agency sets the "bar" (the
overall air quality goals) and tells the source what tools are used to meet it. In this permit, the
State is still setting the "bar" but allows the source the flexibility in how best to achieve it.
Participants and Objectives:
The participants in the Region I project include:
- Cytec Industries Inc., a specialty chemical manufacturer,
- SCI-TECH, INC., an environmental consulting firm contracted by Cytec
- Title V/NSR personnel from the DEP and;
- Title V/NSR and regional counsel personnel from the EPA Region I office.
In addition, the project coordinator, EPA Region X, contracted with the consulting firm,
Industrial Economics, to provide expertise and to facilitate various aspects of the project process.
The key objectives for each participant are outlined below:
Cytec:
Maximize operational flexibility to accommodate growth opportunities, to respond quickly
to market demands, and to provide incentives to comply with applicable requirements
through alternative means such as P2.
Streamline the permit process to expedite operational changes and to reduce future delays
and complications in the permitting process.
DEP:
"Road test" the State's Title V program .
Identify barriers in State rules that discourage P2 and other innovative environmental
solutions.
Streamline procedures to encourage effective, efficient and productive implementation of
the State regulations.
Develop a P2 permitting process "template" for use in developing future permits.
Identify and address issues/concerns that would significantly increase resource
commitments following issuance of the Title V permit.
Develop a Title V permit shell that can be applied to other Connecticut sources.
EPA:
Identify barriers in Federal rules that discourage P2 and other innovative environmental
solutions.
Create a working partnership with the DEP that encourages innovative environmental
solutions.
Communicate the key P4 issues to EPA Headquarters and incorporate the resolutions to
these issues into national policies and standards.
Transfer the lessons learned from the project to other State and National agencies.
Source description:
Cytec, previously part of American Cyanamid Co., is headquartered in Garrett Mountain, New
Jersey. Cytec develops, manufactures and markets specialty chemicals, specialty materials, and
building block chemicals. These serve a broad group of end users including the water treatment,
paper, mining, coatings, plastics, aerospace and automotive industries. Cytec has operations in
the United States, Great Britain, Netherlands, Canada and Mexico. Cytec employs approximately
600 people at the 250-acre Wallingford site. The Wallingford facility, considered critical to
Cytec's core business, manufactures three distinct types of products from three separate
production departments:
Resin products for paint, adhesives, water treatment chemicals and paper products;
Thermoset molding compounds for dinnerware and electrical devices;
Thermoplastics for the automotive, medical devices and food packaging industries
Besides the three manufacturing areas, Cytec operates a waste water treatment plant that treats
effluent from the three manufacturing areas and a boiler house that supplies steam for the facility.
Cytec uses several types of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the manufacturing of its
products and these materials represent the main source of emissions from the facility. Overall,
most of the VOC used is consumed by the final product or captured and recycled. However,
some VOCs are lost to the environment. In 1990, by using EPA or DEP approved monitoring
and emission quantifications methods, Cytec estimated total actual VOC emissions from the
manufacturing lines at approximately 320 tons per year (TPY). Other emission points for VOCs
at Cytec include the waste water treatment plant, liquid storage vessels, the boiler house and a
sludge incinerator. Besides VOCs, Cytec emits other criteria pollutants including NOx, SO2, CO
and PM10. These pollutants are primarily emitted from combustion sources. PM10 is also emitted
during processing at the manufacturing lines.
Cytec is located within a serious nonattainment area for ground level ozone and, therefore, subject
to the following regulatory requirements:
DEP permits and orders, including: VOC RACT order, NOx RACT order and several
minor NSR construction/operating permits;
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS);
MACT standards under development for Polymers and Resins and the Miscellaneous
Organic NESHAP (MON);
Connecticut New Source Review requirements (major and minor);
Other Connecticut SIP requirements including: particulate emissions standards, VOC
emissions limitations and;
State-only enforceable requirements including control of hazardous air pollutants and
odors
Flexibility Needs and Regulatory Impediments:
To respond to fluctuating market demands and to remain competitive, Cytec anticipates making
the following changes at its facility:
- expanding capacity and installing new state-of-the-art manufacturing equipment,
- replacing and/or upgrading existing equipment and;
- changing material formulations and/or product process lines.
From an analysis of its anticipated operational requirements, Cytec developed a list of operational
flexibility needs.
Desired Operational Flexibility Needs:
Make equipment changes to manufacturing processes without delay and without
reopening the Title V permit.
Make material formulation changes associated with manufacturing without delay.
Construct and operate new projects without delay including: pilot plants, new boiler,
storage tanks and new control equipment.
Perform remedial activities without delay or reopening the Title V permit.
Use P2 techniques either alone or in combination with add-on controls to meet emission
standards.
Make process/equipment changes/modifications that trigger a new applicable requirement
without reopening the Title V permit, or requiring additional approvals under NSR.
Conduct inter-RACT emissions trading across Control Technology Guidelines (CTG)
categories.
Allow applicability modification determinations using actual-to-future actual emissions
comparison.
The regulatory impediments to operational flexibility and their potential impact on Cytec are
discussed below:
Regulatory Impediments and Potential Impacts
Title V rules:
Typically, regulatory agencies are required to reopen Title V permits for the following reasons:
1) the source triggers an applicable requirement due to a voluntary action taken at the facility;
2) EPA promulgates a new applicable standard within two years of permit issuance;
3) the source implements practically enforceable limits for the purpose of "netting out" of a major
NSR action and;
4) the source wants to make changes that are inconsistent with the terms of the permit.
Constant reopening and modification of Title V permits could create potential problems for both
business and regulatory agencies. The time delays associated with permit modifications may
produce disincentives for businesses to expand operations or to implement new, less polluting
technologies. For regulatory agencies, the time and personnel required to process routine Title V
permit modifications could monopolize scarce resources.
Major/Minor NSR rules:
Since Cytec is located in a serious ozone nonattainment area, major modifications of NOx or
VOC emissions are subject to the Federal provisions for LAER and emission offsets. In addition,
the DEP's minor NSR regulations currently require sources to comply with the State hazardous
air pollutant regulations and to install Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for all minor
modifications that result in a potential emissions increase above the State minor NSR threshold
levels. The State may also require an air quality impact analysis, depending upon the increase in
criteria air pollutant emissions.
The DEP's construction regulations are also different from the federal construction rules. For
example, the DEP does not allow modifications to "net out" of major NSR applicability. The
DEP's regulation also contains a complex set of NSR applicability requirements similar to the
federal de minimis requirements. These minor NSR regulations could be more or less stringent as
compared with the federal rule depending on the specifics circumstances of the modification.
RACT/Averaging Plans and HAPs:
The current DEP regulations do not have a generic RACT averaging method that allows sources
to use emissions averaging as an alternative compliance mechanism without the need for the State
to submit a single source SIP revision. In addition, the State regulations require an analysis of any
alternative averaging compliance method to ensure that the alternative method does not result in
increased emissions of a "more toxic" HAP.
RACT/BACT/MACT and P2:
Cytec anticipates triggering several proposed MACT standards once EPA promulgates these
standards. Cytec would like the opportunity to generate enforceable emissions credits from P2
activities across the facility as a means to comply with these standards. Cytec understands that if
the MACT standard does not explicitly allow P2 as an alternative compliance method, then P2
opportunities are limited. Therefore, the project participants requested that EPA consider P2
when developing all future MACT standards.
Cytec also wants to use P2 to demonstrate compliance with applicable RACT and BACT
standards. EPA currently allows the use of P2 to comply with RACT standards provided that the
terms and conditions for P2 are explicitly stated in a federal document and are practically
enforceable. For BACT requirements, the DEP allows P2 for minor NSR BACT determinations
on a case-by-case basis. EPA allows P2 for major NSR BACT determinations if the P2
conditions are federally enforceable and occur at the affected emission unit.
Practical Enforceability and Potential to Emit (PTE):
When determining an emission unit's PTE, EPA allows sources to take credit for emission limits
achieved by pollution control equipment provided these terms and conditions for the controls are
contained within a document which is enforceable as a practical matter. Previously, EPA required
the controls to be federally enforceable. However, this requirement is the subject of litigation and
has not been resolved as of June 1997. In any case, if Cytec proposed to construct a new unit
with uncontrolled emissions above major modification threshold levels but with controlled levels
below the State's minor NSR level, EPA would require Cytec to obtain an NSR permit to make
controlled emission levels practically enforceable.
Like-kind equipment replacement:
Cytec intends to replace some of its existing equipment, such as its sludge incinerator, with similar
equipment. State and federal regulations define such changes as modifications subject to all
applicable NSR requirements. Both agencies require the actual-to-potential methodology to
determine the emission increase resulting from modifications. If the existing equipment is
underutilized and its actual emissions are below the design capacity, this test may result in either
the State imposing major/minor NSR for the new equipment or the source accepting additional
operational limits to avoid NSR. Either result may discourage Cytec from pursuing facility
upgrades that would increase efficiency and decrease emissions.
To provide incentives for sources to replace outmoded, less efficient, higher polluting equipment
with newer, more efficient units, this permit includes a placeholder that allows Cytec to determine
NSR applicability for like-kind replacements using the actual-to-future actual test proposed by
EPA in the NSR reform package. For this section, like-kind replacement means that the new unit
has the same throughput, capacity and utilization factor as the old unit but may have a different
manufacturer.
Remedial Activities:
Cytec conducts voluntary remedial activities. While these activities are environmentally
beneficial, they do have the potential of emitting VOCs. As stated previously, Cytec is intending
to accept a VOC PAL for its facility. If Cytec includes the VOC emissions from remedial
activities when determining PAL compliance, Cytec may lose operational capacity.
Permit Solutions:
The DEP, EPA and Cytec agreed on the following approaches to operational flexibility:
NSR preapprovals
Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) for VOC
Emissions Reduction Section and P2
NSR and Title V minor permit modifications
Like-kind equipment replacement
VOC RACT emissions averaging
Remedial Activities
The following describes these approaches:
Pre-approved Minor NSR :
During the life of the permit, Cytec anticipates installing and operating new equipment that would
trigger the State minor NSR requirements. To expedite the minor NSR permitting process, the
Title V permit includes the compliance terms and conditions for the anticipated equipment. This
concept is known as pre-approved NSR. Pre-approved NSR allows Cytec to respond to market
demands by reducing delays and complications associated with permit modifications. By
including all projected applicable State minor NSR requirements up-front into the Title V permit,
Cytec is allowed to purchase, construct and/or install the equipment during the term of this permit
without triggering the Title V significant permit modification requirements.
To develop these conditions, Cytec first provided DEP with information about the anticipated
projects. The DEP then performed the necessary technical review, including a BACT analysis,
and incorporates the relevant emissions limits, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements in the appropriate sections of the permit. In effect, the DEP reviewed and approved
into the permit the terms and conditions of anticipated projects as if Cytec was
constructing/installing those projects at permit issuance.
To implement pre-approved NSR, Cytec simply notifies the DEP and EPA by letter of the
modification. The letter specifies the exact process and operating parameters that correspond to
the pre-approved compliance terms and conditions. The letter is physically attached to the permit
and becomes part of its enforceable terms and conditions.
The pre-approved NSR provisions allow Cytec to construct and operate equipment with
capacities no greater than those referenced in the pre-approval section of the permit. For
example, the permit provides all the terms and conditions for Cytec to construct and operate a
boiler with a rated heat input of no greater than 99 MMBtu/hr. Cytec, if it so chooses, may
construct and operate a boiler with a lower heat input. However, since the DEP's technical
analysis and BACT review were based upon the 99 MMBTU/hr value, the new boiler would still
be subject to the conditions approved for the 99 MMBTU/hr value boiler.
In contrast, by pre-approving an NSR project, the permitting authority can take the appropriate
time before construction commences to perform a thorough technical review. NSR preapproval
assures the source that the project has been approved and that it can move forward on its own
schedule. The public is also afforded greater access to the permitting process since all projected
company activities are accounted for during the Title V permit approval process. In summation,
conducting the NSR review process within the same schedule as the Title V permit is more
efficient for the permitting agency and the source.
PAL:
A PAL is an emissions cap established for a particular pollutant(s). The PAL provides the key
permit condition that encourages P2 activities. The idea for the PAL is simple: Cytec can make
modifications that affect its VOC emissions without the need to obtain a NSR construction permit
provided Cytec's actual emissions remain below the PAL. In addition, if Cytec's Title V permit
contains the monitoring and emissions quantification requirements for a proposed modification,
Cytec may implement the modification through the permit's notification process.
A PAL equals the facility's actual emissions baseline that represents the facility's normal
operations plus the applicable NSR modification threshold level. The PAL is adjusted to account
for any new applicable requirement(s). The PAL offers facilities the flexibility to offset emissions
from expansions through either traditional end-of-pipe controls, operational limits or P2 activities.
The PAL provides companies the incentive to decrease emissions rates and to become more
efficient so as to maintain maximum operational flexibility.
The key to creating a PAL that encourages P2 activities is to set the baseline on the facility's
actual emissions from a period that accurately reflects the facility's normal operations. For this
project, the team determined that Cytec's 1990 operations represented the facility's normal
operations. Therefore, the PAL was established using the facility's 1990 actual emissions
adjusted to account for any further reductions achieved by new applicable requirements (e.g.,
MACT, RACT). The permit also includes a mechanism that adjusts the PAL baseline if Cytec
triggers any future applicable requirement during the life of the permit or if a new, more accurate
method to quantify emissions is developed. Existing CAA provisions require Cytec to operate a
full range of control devices on their operations including scrubbers, chillers and
capture/recirculation controls. With a PAL based on actual emissions and with the facility already
operating numerous control devices, P2 remains the most viable option that Cytec can use to
expand operations and/or to comply with future applicable requirements. Cytec anticipates
making operational improvements that achieve P2 through implementation of "design for the
environment" program and other P2 techniques.
In addition to promoting P2, the PAL mechanism provides a permitting authority with an effective
tool to manage air quality. Under the current rules, older grandfathered facilities and newer
facilities with generous allowable emissions are allowed to emit at rates far exceeding their current
actual emissions with few regulatory repercussions. This situation makes it difficult for a State to
manage its air shed since these facilities may increase emissions to a point where currently
approved air strategies are no longer adequate. By limiting plant emissions to past actual
emissions, States are ensured that the long term emissions from current facilities will not alter
significantly. This ensures that a State's long term air strategies and attainment demonstrations
remain adequate. The PAL also provides the States with increased source compliance and
enforcement capabilities that ensure source emissions are consistent with State attainment
demonstrations.
Emissions Limitation Section:
A unique feature of this permit is a section that identifies classes of air pollution control
equipment, operational limitations and P2 measures that Cytec use, or anticipates it will use,
during the permit term. By cross referencing with other sections of this permit, this section
creates a mechanism to makes specific emission control projects and P2 measures practically
enforceable. By approving the practically enforceable conditions for specific types of emission
limiting measures, Cytec can take advantage of the lower potential emissions provided by the
control measure without the need to obtain a preconstruction permit or to modify its Title V
permit.
The section is divided into three general methods to limit emissions: 1) new air pollution control
equipment, 2) operational limits and, 3) P2 measures. Cytec can elect to implement an emissions
limitation using the administrative amendment provision provided in the notification section of this
permit.
Permit P2 Section:
This section includes conditions that require Cytec to develop and implement its P2 program. In
addition, the section establishes a procedure to allow the use of P2 to meet future State BACT
limits. The key issue regarding the procedure is the requirement that the emission reductions
achieved by P2 are quantifiable and practically enforceable.
NSR Reform Package:
In August 1996, EPA proposed to revise parts of 40 CFR parts 51 and 52; the sections that
address the Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment NSR
programs. These revisions, referred to as the NSR Reform Package, will give permitting agencies
greater flexibility to administer their permitting programs, particularly in respect to major
NSR/PSD applicability.
The permit attempts to anticipate the flexibility offered by the reform package by providing
placeholders that incorporate the current language found in the reform package. For example, the
like-kind replacement section incorporates the use of the proposed actual-to-future actual
methodology test. The reform package also outlines the use of PALs. However, regarding
PALs, the DEP and EPA believe that the underlying authority exists to establish PALs in Title V
and NSR permits. In both cases, the permit team recognizes that, before final issuance of the
permit, all permit terms and conditions must comply with the current underlying State/Federal
requirements.
Title V Minor Permit Modifications:
CT's Title V program currently does not contain provisions for a minor permit modification
process. This means that virtually all changes would be incorporated into Cytec's Title V permit
using the significant modification process. CT is in the process of revising its Title V rules to
include a minor permit modification process. The minor permit modification process, with the
various preapproved requirements of this permit, will allow CYTEC to limit the instances where it
must incorporate new requirements using the significant modification process.
Like-Kind Equipment Replacement:
The permit establishes streamlined procedures that allow for the replacement of emission sources
with identical equipment. This provision acts a placeholder for anticipated changes contained
within EPA's proposed NSR reform package.
VOC RACT Emissions Averaging:
The permit provides a replicable mechanism for Cytec to determine and implement emission
averaging (bubbling) as an alternative means to show compliance with applicable RACT
standards. This provision allows Cytec the opportunity to over control specific emission units or
to implement P2 activities as a means to show compliance with RACT standards.
Remedial Activities:
An issue at Cytec concerns whether remedial activity is related to Cytec's primary business
activity. If the remedial activity is related to the primary activity, the emissions from the activity
are included in all compliance requirements. Current EPA interpretation provides that if the
source of the contamination is not part of the site's primary activity, the emissions from any
subsequent remedial activity are not included in the source's emissions inventory for modification
determination. Cytec will evaluate the origin of the remedial activity at its site to determine how
they relate to current activities at the site.
How This Permit Promotes P2:
The permit contains three provisions that promote P2:
PAL
Emission Reduction Section, P2 subsection
Permit P2 section and management plan
As described previously, the PAL is the key enforceable provision that encourages P2. By
limiting facility emissions to historic actual emissions, the PAL compels Cytec to respond to
growth opportunities and market demands by improving operational efficiency or changing to less
polluting formulations and processes. Cytec has indicated that many of these operational
improvements will be achieved through P2 and "design for the environment" techniques.
To facilitate P2 credit, the permit contains the P2 emission limitation subsection that allows Cytec
to take advantage of emission limits through the implementation of preapproved P2 projects. The
P2 emission subsection provides the enforceable terms and conditions that make the P2 emission
limits practically enforceable.
In addition, the permit describes the process that allows Cytec the use of P2 to meet the State
BACT emission limits. The key to this process is the condition that requires P2 emission credits
to be quantifiable and practically enforceable.
The permit also contains a P2 operation and management plan for Cytec. Under this plan, Cytec
is required to implement several P2 programs and activities including:
Employee training and recognition program
P2 review procedures for new and existing operations
Community outreach
Product/Stewardship/customer and supplier outreach recognition program
Environmental review and audit
P2 bench marks/key P2 plant performance indicators
P2 reporting and tracking procedures
PERMIT SECTION DESCRIPTION:
This permit uses an integrated permit design: each permit section relies on other portions of the
permit to fully implement the P2 and operational flexibility requirements. Due to this integrated
design, the intent and purpose of each permit section may not be self-evident. This chapter of the
TSD explains the goals and the design aspects of each of the permit sections and where
applicable, how each section is implemented. Included at the end of this TSD is an example
illustrating how the source and the State will use the innovative conditions of the permit to
process a typical modification.
Emission Unit Section:
Goal: This section will contain the terms and conditions that ensure that each emission unit at
Cytec is in compliance with all applicable requirements.
Discussion: Cytec is developing the section and will submit it as part of their formal Title V
submittal. As with all title V permits, Cytec's permit will contain the terms and conditions that
ensure that each emission unit is in compliance with all applicable requirements. At permit
issuance, this section will contain all the compliance terms and conditions for each emission unit at
Cytec. During the life of the permit, Cytec may trigger one or more of the permit's innovative
preapproval/applicability provisions. These provisions require Cytec to submit a notice that
includes the new compliance terms and conditions of any new or existing emission unit affected by
the innovative provision(s). If the DEP does not disapprove these changes, the terms and
conditions contained in the notice will become the compliance requirements for the specific
emission unit and, in the case of existing emission units, supersede the compliance requirements
found in this section.
Specific: Once developed, the compliance requirements contained in the emission unit section
will be incorporated into the monitoring and emission quantification sections of the permit. The
preapproval/applicability sections of the permit will refer to the monitoring and emissions
quantification sections to establish the necessary compliance terms and conditions.
Applicable Requirements Section:
Goal: Forty CFR Part 70 and RCSA 22a-174-33 require the DEP to identify and incorporate all
applicable requirements into the Title V permit. This section includes currently applicable
requirements and requirements that Cytec anticipates it may trigger during the initial permit term.
Discussion: This section is composed of subsections that correspond to the general Clean Air Act
and SIP requirements (example: 40 CFR part 60, 61, 63 etc.). Within each subsection, the permit
identifies either currently applicable requirements or requirements that Cytec anticipates being
subject to during the life of the permit. In addition, for each identified standard/applicable
requirement, the section references the specific Federally required citation or the Connecticut SIP
citation that contains the compliance terms and conditions.
By identifying future applicable requirements in this permit, the permit reduces the number of
future significant permit modifications that Cytec's permit would require over its life. Typically,
any change made by a source would trigger case by case minor NSR determination/review and/or
a significant Title V modification. Either process is slow and cumbersome, hinders the ability of a
source to conduct its business and consumes State and Federal resources for routine transactions.
By including the compliance requirements for all potentially applicable requirements in the permit,
Cytec can implement these requirements using the minor permit modification process. EPA also
requires States to reopen Title V permits if EPA promulgates new applicable requirements within
two years of permit issuance. To keep from reopening permits for this reason, the permit contains
the terms and conditions for proposed Federal regulations that may affect Cytec. If EPA
promulgates these standards within two years of permit issuance and if the final regulation
contains no substantive differences from the permit provisions, then Cytec could comply with
those terms and conditions using the minor permit modification process.
Please note, the permit only referenced the primary, replicable compliance requirements for
potentially applicable standards. The permit did not approve alternate compliance requirements
that require extensive case-by-case determination unless the specific alternate compliance
mechanism was developed and approved within the construct of the permit.
Specifics:
The following Clean Air Act and SIP requirements were identified:
112(g) modifications pursuant to the extent that EPA has proposed standards
Currently promulgated MACT standards (40 CFR part 63)
Currently promulgated NSPS and NESHAP standards (40 CFR part 60 and 61,
respectively)
VOC RACT State standards (40 CFR part 52)
Federally enforceable requirements of the Connecticut SIP
State only enforceable requirements (e.g. 22a-174-29)
As stated previously, the use of an alternative compliance mechanism would require a significant
permit modification unless those terms and conditions are clearly stated within the permit. An
example of an alternative compliance requirement specifically developed within the permit is the
option for RACT emissions averaging. Besides the traditional compliance requirements specified
by the batch processes and industrial wastewater Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)
documents, the permit provides a replicable mechanism to determine an alternate compliance
mechanism, i.e., emissions averaging (bubble). The provision includes unit emissions averaging
equations that clearly define a replicable means to determine the emissions averaging
requirements. If Cytec elects to implement this provision, Cytec defines the emission units
involved, the emissions monitoring and emissions quantification used for each unit, and the
recordkeeping required to show compliance. Cytec then submits the information to the State as
required by the State's minor permit modification procedure.
Emission Limitation Section:
Goal: This section provides a mechanism that makes emission limits established by emission
limitation projects practically enforceable.
Discussion: Sources cannot take credit for emission limits to calculate PTE if the emission limits
are not practically enforceable. This section describes a mechanism that allows Cytec to receive
credit from emission reduction projects (e.g., new control equipment/operational limitations, P2
measures) by specifying the conditions that make the associated emission limits practically
enforceable.
If, during the life of the permit, Cytec elects to limit emissions associated with a project, the
section prescribes a sequence of directions that Cytec must follow to make the emissions limits
practically enforceable. The sequence of operations is as follows: 1) identify the project; 2)
identify the appropriate emission quantification method; 3) calculate the allowable emissions from
emission unit taking into account the enforceable emission limits from the project; 4) identify the
appropriate monitoring method and; 5) submit the required information to the DEP using the
permit notification procedure.
Emission Quantification Section:
Goal: This section provides the method to determine the applicable quantification method used to
quantify air pollutant rates for emission units.
Discussion: Various sections of this permit preapprove CAA requirements or provide the
mechanism to show that a requirement is not applicable. This section contains the mechanism to
establish the emission quantifications methods used to show compliance with an applicable CAA
requirement or to show that a requirement is not applicable. The section contains: 1) a
description of emission sources categories present at Cytec; 2) a description of the emission
quantification method associated with each category; 3) a description of control equipment
present or anticipated to be installed at Cytec; 4) a methodology used to determine the
appropriate emission quantification method for each type of control equipment; 5) a hierarchy
used to determine the quantification method for new sources or control equipment not described
in other portions of this section.
Specific: The sequence of operations Cytec must follow to establish the emission quantification
method required to show compliance to any provision contained within this permit is outlined
below:
For New Control Equipment:
Implemented using notification section
A) Method established by applicable requirement; if none specified then;
B) Method established by emission unit section if a comparable control device is present; if not
then;
Implemented using minor permit modification procedure:
C) Method determined using the test methods established in the permit:
1. Data from Continuous Emissions Monitors (CEMs)
2. Data from stack testing
3. Mass balance equations
4. AP-42 Data (only with emission factors A, B or C if emissions exceed minor NSR
applicability levels)
D) If the permit does not establish the method, Cytec will use the significant modification
procedure to establish the method.
Note: If more than one quantification method is defined by an applicable requirement for the
control equipment or emission unit, then Cytec is required to implement the method that is the
least uncertain.
For New Emission Source Categories:
Implemented using notification section:
A) Method established by applicable requirement, if not specified then;
B) Method established by selecting the general class of emission unit that best describes the new
emission unit and employing the associated quantification method. If no comparable class of
emission unit exists then;
Implemented using minor permit modification procedure:
C) Method established according to the following hierarchy:
1. Data from CEMs
2. Data from stack testing
3. Mass balance calculations
4. AP-42 (only with emission factors A, B or C if emissions exceed minor NSR
applicability levels)
D) If the permit does not establish the method, Cytec will use the significant modification
procedure to establish the method.
Emission Monitoring Section:
Goal: This section provides the method to determine the applicable monitoring method used to
monitor air pollutant rates for emission units.
Discussion: Various sections of this permit preapprove CAA requirements or provide the
mechanism to show that a requirement is not applicable. This section identifies the appropriate
emission monitoring method to ensure that Cytec is complying with an applicable CAA
requirement or to demonstrate that a requirement is not applicable. This section performs the
following functions: 1) describes the source categories present at Cytec; 2) identifies the
monitoring method for each source category; 3) describes a hierarchy to determine the emissions
monitoring method where necessary.
Specific: The sequence of operations Cytec must follow to establish the monitoring method
required to show compliance to any provision contained within this permit is outlined below:
For New Control Equipment:
Implemented using notification section:
A) Method established by applicable requirement; if none specified then;
B) Method established by emission unit section if a comparable control device is available; if none
available then;
Implemented using minor permit modification procedure:
C) Method determined using the generic monitoring methods establish for each general type of
control equipment:
D) If the permit does not establish the method, Cytec will use the significant modification
procedure to establish the method.
Note: If more than one monitoring method is defined by an applicable requirement for the new
control equipment or emission unit; then Cytec is required to implement the method that is the
most precise, accurate and continuous.
For New Emission Source Categories:
Implemented using notification section:
A) Applicable requirement, if not specified then;
B) Method established by selecting the general class of emission unit that best describes the new
emission unit and employing the associated monitoring method. If no comparable class of
emission unit exists then;
Implemented using minor permit modification procedure:
C) Method established according to the following hierarchy:
1. Data from CEMS
2. Data from stack testing and records of the operational parameters during the test
3. Recordkeeping of the operational throughput used in the mass balance calculations
to quantify emissions
4. Recordkeeping of the operational throughput used with the AP-42 factor to quantify emissions
D) If the permit does not establish the method, Cytec will use the significant modification
procedure to establish the method.
Pre-approved Modification Section:
Goal: This section provides the compliance terms and conditions for minor NSR permit
requirements for specific sources and categories of sources that Cytec anticipates installing during
the life of the permit.
Discussion: Cytec anticipates constructing a new boiler and additional above ground storage
tanks at its facility. The PAL will allow Cytec to avoid NSR permitting for VOC emission
increases generated by these modifications. Non-VOC pollutant emissions will still be subject to
the DEP's minor NSR requirements, including minor source BACT and ambient impact analysis.
This section provides the terms and conditions, including BACT, which satisfy the DEP's minor
NSR requirements. This section also includes a provision that allows Cytec to register under any
NSR general permit issued by the DEP.
Specifics: The current permit contains approval for a specific boiler project and generic
conditions for liquid storage vessels and includes the specific compliance requirements, i.e., the
emissions monitoring and emissions quantification method.
Like-Kind Replacement Section:
Goal: This section allows Cytec to use the actual-to-future actual methodology to determine NSR
applicability for the replacement emission units with similar equipment.
Discussion: This section acts as a placeholder for EPA's proposed change to the methodology
used to determine the emissions increase from modifications. EPA is taking comment on a
proposal to allow the actual-to-future actual methodology to determine the emission increase
from a modification. If EPA approves this change to the methodology, modifications involving
the replacement of existing equipment with similar equipment could take advantage of the new
methodology.
PAL:
Goal: This section establishes a federal and State enforceable VOC emissions limitation for all
VOC emitting activities at Cytec that comply with the requirements of Connecticut's SIP
approved rules for PALs. Once established, Cytec will not require an NSR permit for subsequent
physical or operational changes that effect VOC emissions provided these changes are made
consistent with the PAL requirements.
Discussion:
The PAL allows Cytec to construct new VOC emission units or to modify existing VOC emission
units without the need for Cytec to obtain a major NSR preconstruction permit so long as Cytec's
actual emissions remain below the PAL. In addition, in lieu of obtaining a State minor NSR
permit, Cytec may use the permit notification mechanism to establish the monitoring and
emissions quantification methods required to show compliance with the PAL if these methods are
preapproved within the permit. If the permit does not contain the requirements to accurately
monitor and quantify the emissions from the new or modified unit, then Cytec must establish the
compliance requirements through the State's minor NSR program.
Specifics:
The section contains the following:
A mechanism to establish the PAL baseline
A mechanism to adjust the PAL in the event Cytec becomes subject to a new applicable
requirement that impacts VOC emissions or, if Cytec develops new, more accurate VOC
emissions quantification methods
Requirements for Cytec to comply with the PAL on a twelve month rolling average
Compliance requirements in the event that Cytec's actual VOC emissions increase above
the established PAL baseline
Permit P2 Section:
Goal: The section requires Cytec to develop and submit its P2 plan to the State. In addition, the
permit establishes a procedure for Cytec to use P2 to meet a State Minor NSR BACT
requirement.
Discussion: Cytec will submit the P2 plan to the DEP for review and comment. The permit
requires Cytec to implement the P2 plan. The specific plan elements are off-permit and are not
enforceable.
This section also provides a procedure that allows the use of P2 to establish or meet a BACT
limit. To implement, Cytec must ensure that the P2 reductions are practically enforceable.
Specifics:
The P2 plan contains the following elements:
corporate statement of commitment
employee training and recognition
existing and new process P2 review procedures
community outreach
product stewardship/customer and supplier outreach and recognition program
environmental reviews/audits
bench marking
Remedial Activities Section:
Goal: This section describes how the emissions from remedial activities emissions will be
addressed if it is determined that the remedial activities are a distinct source separate from Cytec's
other operations.
Discussion: If remedial activities are considered part of Cytec's operations, then Cytec must
include the emissions from the activities when evaluating compliance with its VOC PAL. EPA is
developing a policy for determining if remedial activities are unrelated and, therefore, separate
from the primary source. As envisioned, if Cytec remediates contaminants resulting from
operations that are unrelated to current operations, then the remedial activities would be
considered separate from Cytec's operations premise. The remedial activity itself must meet all
applicable air permitting requirements.
Specifics: The section provides provisions requiring Cytec to quantify emissions and to retain
documentation needed to show compliance with any applicable requirement.
Permit Notification Section:
Goals: This section describes when and how to notify DEP and EPA that a preapproved permit
condition has been triggered.
Discussion: The notice provides the detailed compliance information that ensures that all
affected emission units are in compliance with all underlying requirements. If the DEP does not
object to the contents of the notice, the notice is attached to the title V permit. The terms and
conditions contained in the notice then become enforceable conditions of the Title V permit.
Please note that all requirements for record keeping necessary to show compliance with any
condition in the notice are found in the record keeping section of the permit.
Specific:
The section is divided into two categories: seven-day notice and thirty-day notice.
Seven-day notice: Applicable to all pre-approved requirements that are replicable and do
not contain specific notification schedules.
Thirty-day notice: Applicable to all pre-approved requirements that are replicable and do
contain specific notification schedule and/or that require opportunity for DEP review.
The section identifies the specific elements that Cytec must include in each notice. In addition,
the notification section states that all new requirements triggered by Cytec that are not pre-approved within the permit are subject to the applicable Title V modification requirement.
Permit Recordkeeping Section:
Goal: This section identifies the specific recordkeeping requirements that Cytec needs to
demonstrate compliance with an applicable requirement or to demonstrate that a specific
requirement is not applicable.
Discussion: The section identifies the specific recordkeeping needs of currently applicable
requirements, each pre-approved condition that Cytec may trigger, and/or any pre-approved
compliance mechanisms that Cytec may implement.
Specific: The section identifies the recordkeeping needs for the following requirements:
VOC RACT order 8012
Batch Process ACT
Emission Averaging
Nox RACT order 8114
Emissions Limitation Registration
Emission Quantification
Emissions Monitoring
Like-Kind Replacement
PAL
and all other requirements
Permit Reporting Section:
Goal: This section identifies the types and frequency of reports Cytec is required to submit to
show compliance with this permit.
Discussion: This section identifies the reports required by compliance schedules, if applicable,
and/or any monitoring requirements referenced by any subsection of this permit.
Specific: The section:
Provides compliance schedule requirements and progress reports, if applicable.
Provides annual certification compliance requirements
Requires Cytec to notify DEP within seven days upon discovering a deviation of any
permit condition
PERMIT IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLE
The following example illustrates how this permit is intended to work:
To develop new products, Cytec intends to install a new batch reactor. The new reactor will be a
minor source for VOC and HAP (< 10 tons per year) and an insignificant source of PM10.
Emissions from the reactor will be controlled using a condenser such as those used for other
reactors at Cytec. No SOCMI chemicals will be produced. Emission quantifications and
monitoring protocols will also be similar to protocols used for existing units.
Step 1: Determine if Cytec triggers any new applicable requirements
Source is subject to Batch Processes ACT per IV(d) of the applicable requirements
section
Source is subject to RCSA 22a-174-23 [odors] and -29 [HAP] [State-only enforceable]
Step 2: Determine emissions quantification methods [p 23]
The applicable requirements do not define the emissions quantification method.
Therefore, per II (b)(ii) of this section, use material balance or engineering calculations or
test data to quantify emissions.
Condensers, at (c)(iv) of the emissions quantification section, describes current equipment
and matches description of proposed equipment
Emissions from existing equipment can be quantified using the calculation methodology
described in the emissions unit section of this permit. Proposed equipment meets
description of existing equipment. Therefore, emissions from proposed equipment will be
quantified in the same manner using engineering calculations.
Step 3: Determine emissions monitoring
Per II (b)(ii) of the emissions monitoring section, emissions will be monitored on a per
batch basis. Proper condenser operation will be monitored using a thermocouple to
measure exit temperature within 2 F on a continuous basis.
Step 4: Evaluate compliance with applicable requirements
The new reactor meets the cost effectiveness criteria defined at IV(d)(ii) of the applicable
requirements section. The condenser is determined to reduce emissions by 95 percent,
which exceeds the 90 percent requirement.
Compliance with RCSA 22a-174-29 is shown.
Step 5: Determine effect on PAL
The PAL section is triggered for all modifications involving VOC emissions units.
Are emissions quantifications defined in permit and approved ? Yes.
Are emissions monitoring methods defined in permit and approved ? Yes.
For pollution control devices, are there any changes to existing controls ? No.
Step 6: Determine notification section requirements
Cytec will provide 7 day notice since the new reactor meets the cost effectiveness criteria
of the Batch Processes ACT.
Cytec will submit the following information as required by Paragraph III of the notification
section:
a. Equipment identification and description
b. Emission unit identification and description
c. Location of new emission unit
d. Anticipated date of completion
e. Anticipated date of commencement
f. Compliance methodology
g: Quantification method: Engineering calculations
h. Monitoring method: Condenser temperature
I Recordkeeping: Batch type and number, condenser temperature
j. Reporting: Instances of failure to maintain necessary condenser temperature k. Anticipated emissions of each pollutant: Calculated using quantification method from (g) and assuming continuous operation
l. Citations of the specific proposed MACT standards Cytec is using as the basis
for the 112(g) MACT determination and with which Cytec shall comply (not
applicable)
m. Like-kind replacement (not applicable)
Step 7: Determine recordkeeping requirements
Requirements provided in Batch Processes ACT
a. ID and description of emission point
b. ID and description of the emission
c : Monitoring data and calculations showing 90 percent control effectiveness
Emissions quantification section-applicable:
a. Emission source ID and description
b. Emission unit ID and description
c: Control device ID and description
d: Emissions quantification method: Engineering calculations
e. Date, place and time of sampling or measurements
f. Dates analysis of such samples or measurements were performed
g. Name of entity that performed the analysis
h. Analytical technique or method used for the analysis
I. Results from the analysis
j. Operation conditions at time of such sampling or measurement
k: All calibration and maintenance records related to the instrumentation used in such sampling or measurements, all original strip-chart recordings or computer printouts generated by continuous monitoring instrument, and copies of all reports required
Emissions monitoring section-applicable:
a. Emission source ID and description
b. Emission unit ID and description
c. Control devise ID and description
d: Type of monitoring, including any recordkeeping, used to obtained data: thermocouple with high level alarm
e. Date, place and time of sampling or measurements
f. Dates analysis of such samples or measurements were performed
g. Name of entity that performed the analysis
h. Analytical technique or method used for the analysis
I. Results from the analysis
j. Operation conditions at time of such sampling or measurement
k: All calibration and maintenance records related to the instrumentation used in such sampling or measurements, all original strip-chart recordings or computer printouts generated by continuous monitoring instrument, and copies of all reports required.
PAL- applicable:
a. Emission source ID and description
b. Emissions unit ID and description
c. The 12-month rolling average emission rate of each VOC emitted
d: The cumulative 12 month average emission rate of all VOC emitted from Cytec
Step 8: Include information from step 7 in notice to DEP and Cytec complies with applicable
requirements.
Step 9: Unless DEP objects, the notification with the attached information (including
recordkeeping) is physically attached to the terms and conditions contained within the Title V
permit and become enforceable terms and conditions of the permit.
Please e-mail any comments or questions to the Clean Air Act Information Network.
Return to the Clean Air Act
Information Network Home Page