[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 68 (Friday, April 9, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17460-17464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8779]
[[Page 17459]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories: Amendment for Hazardous Air Pollutants Emissions From
Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Operations; Direct Final Rule and Proposed
Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 68 / Friday, April 9, 1999 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 17460]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[FRL-6321-8]
RIN 2060-AH71
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Categories: Amendment for Hazardous Air Pollutants Emissions
From Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action to amend National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) From Magnetic
Tape Manufacturing Operations, codified as subpart EE to 40 CFR part
63. The existing standards allow facility owners or operators to leave
a limited number of solvent storage tanks uncontrolled if they control
coating operations at a level greater than the standards otherwise
require. EPA is publishing this final amendment to provide another
compliance option for facility owners and operators. If facility owners
or operators increase the control of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions from coating operations beyond what the standards otherwise
require, this final amendment gives them the choice of leaving a
limited number of solvent storage tanks and/or a limited number of
pieces of mix preparation equipment uncontrolled. EPA believes this
final amendment will not decrease the stringency of the existing
standards.
DATES: Effective Date. This final rule amendment is effective on June
8, 1999 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments on
this rulemaking by May 10, 1999 or a request for a hearing concerning
the accompanying proposed rule is received by EPA by April 19, 1999. If
EPA receives timely adverse comment or a timely hearing request, EPA
will publish a withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public
that this direct final rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Interested parties may submit comments on this
rulemaking in writing (original and two copies, if possible) to Docket
No. A-91-31 to the following address: Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center (6102), US Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, S.W., Room 1500, Washington, D.C. 20460. Public comments on
this rulemaking will be accepted until May 10, 1999.
Docket. A docket containing supporting information used in
developing this direct final rule amendment is available for public
inspection and copying at the EPA's docket office located at the above
address in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). The public is
encouraged to phone in advance to review docket materials. Appointments
can be scheduled by phoning the Air Docket Office at (202) 260-7548.
Refer to Docket No. A-91-31. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Aston, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Policy, Planning, and Standards Group, Emission
Standards Division, Mail Drop 13, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
electronic mail address [email protected]; telephone number (919)
541-2363; facsimile number (919) 541-0942.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are publishing this rule amendment
without prior proposal because we consider this to be a
noncontroversial amendment, and we do not expect to receive any adverse
comment. We believe that this change to the previously promulgated rule
will increase compliance flexibility for affected sources without any
adverse environmental consequences. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a
separate document that will serve as the proposal for this amendment,
in the event we receive adverse comment or a hearing request and this
direct final rule is subsequently withdrawn. This final rule amendment
will be effective on June 8, 1999 without further notice, unless we
receive adverse comment on this rulemaking by May 10, 1999 or a request
for a hearing concerning the accompanying proposed rule is received by
EPA by April 19, 1999. If EPA receives timely adverse comment or a
timely hearing request, we will publish a withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that this direct final rule will not take
effect. In that event, we will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule, based on the proposed rule amendment published
in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register document.
The EPA will not provide further opportunity for public comment on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this amendment must do
so at this time.
Regulated entities. Entities potentially regulated by this action
include any facility engaged in the surface coating of magnetic tape.
This includes, but is not limited to, the following magnetic tape
products: audio and video recording tape, computer tape, the magnetic
stripes of media involved in credit cards and toll tickets, bank
transfer ribbons, instrumentation tape, and dictation tape. Regulated
categories and entities are shown in Table 1.
Table 1.--Regulated Categories and Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entity category Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial............................... Any facility that is engaged
in the surface coating of
magnetic tape (SIC 3695 &
2675).
Federal Government: Not affected
State/Local/Tribal Government: Not
affected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table could also be regulated.
Internet. The text of this Federal Register document is also
available on the EPA's web site on the Internet under recently signed
rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/
rules.html. The EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) homepage on the
Internet also contains a wide range of information on the air toxics
program and many other air pollution programs and issues. The OAR's
homepage address is: http://www.epa.gov/oar/.
Electronic Access and Filing Addresses. The official record for
this rulemaking, as well as the public version, has been established
for this rulemaking under Docket No. A-91-31 (including comments and
data submitted electronically). A public version of this record,
including printed, paper versions of electronic comments, which does
not include any information claimed as confidential business
information (CBI), is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to 5:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The official
rulemaking record is located at the address listed in the ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this preamble.
Interested parties may submit comments on this rulemaking
electronically to the EPA's Air and
[[Page 17461]]
Radiation Docket and Information Center at: ``A-and-R-
D[email protected].'' Electronic comments must be submitted as an
ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in
WordPerfect in 6.1 file format or ASCII file format. All comments and
data in electronic form must be identified by the docket number (A-91-
31). No CBI should be submitted through electronic mail. Electronic
comments may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
Outline. The information in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. Authority
II. Background
III. Regulatory Requirements and Performance Standards
A. Original compliance option for solvent storage tanks
B. What information we used to establish the new compliance
option
C. Why we chose to allow the new compliance option
D. How the new compliance option affects you as a manufacturer
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action
Determination''
B. Regulatory Flexibility
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Docket
F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Authority
The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections
101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7401, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601).
II. Background
On December 15, 1994, we published in the Federal Register the
final rule containing national standards for reducing HAP in facilities
that manufacture magnetic tape (see 59 FR 64580). Since then, a
regulated facility has asked us to consider alternative compliance
options for a narrow aspect of the regulation.
This amendment is very similar to the existing provision at 40 CFR
63.703(c)(4), but adds an optional approach for compliance. The new
approach requires the same enhanced control efficiency for coating
operations as required by the provisions published in 1994. We expect
this amendment to protect the environment as well as the rule published
in 1994, while offering the regulated community more flexibility for
compliance.
III. Regulatory Requirements and Performance Standards
A. Original Compliance Option for Solvent Storage tanks
In the final rule published in 1994, we included a compliance
option for owners or operators of facilities that manufacture magnetic
tape (referred to as operators in the rest of this preamble). It allows
them to leave uncontrolled the emissions from certain solvent storage
tanks in return for better controlling the largest emissions source at
their facilities. Through that alternative compliance provision, we
allow operators to vent emissions from these tanks to the atmosphere,
rather than routing them through a control device. (See 40 CFR
63.703(c)(4)--as published December 15, 1994--for this option.) As
explained in the 1994 preamble, we concluded then that added control at
the coating operations would offset emissions from the uncontrolled
storage tanks (see 59 FR 64590-64592, December 15, 1994.)
B. What Information We Used To Establish the New Compliance Option
Since 1994, we've received detailed technical information from a
facility that manufactures magnetic tape (see Docket No. A-91-31). It
compares estimates for HAP emissions from uncontrolled solvent storage
tanks to those for uncontrolled pieces of mix preparation equipment.
The facility asked us to allow more flexibility in the types of
equipment that can be left uncontrolled in exchange for a higher level
of control of the coating operations at the facility. In evaluating
this request, we've generally compared the amount of HAP emissions that
may be uncontrolled under the 1994 published rule's alternative
provision with those HAP emissions that may be uncontrolled under the
added options in today's rule. For this analysis, we incorporate by
reference our rationale for the existing alternative compliance options
which was included in our preamble for the 1994 published rule.
At magnetic tape manufacturing facilities, solvent storage tanks
and mix preparation equipment are typically covered, even if the
headspace vapors aren't vented to a control device. Emissions from a
given solvent storage tank at a manufacturing facility vary depending
on throughput, tank size, solvents stored in the tanks, and other
factors. Emissions from a given piece of mix preparation equipment vary
for similar reasons, and also vary based on the amount that the
temperature of the mix increases during mixing.
The facility's detailed technical information estimates their
maximum potential emissions under process constraints in the milling
operations. The facility's solvent storage tanks and mix preparation
equipment have varying characteristics, including capacity. Their
largest tanks and mix preparation equipement are 20,000 gallons and
1200 gallons, respectively. The solvent storage tanks have fixed roofs
with conservation vents, so the facility used standard calculations for
these tanks to estimate emissions. For solvent recovery tanks, they
believed this method may not be appropriate because they maintain most
tanks at nearly constant levels with a mechanical weir. However, we
don't know of a better way to calculate emissions for these tanks, so
we'd use the same method unless rigorous monitoring ensured a constant
level of liquid in the tank. Therefore, we decided to include tanks
from the solvent recovery unit in our evaluation of the data.
The facility estimated emissions for their mix preparation
equipment using our calculation methods for batch processes, which we
believe is appropriate for this application. In developing the
regulations, we estimated emissions from the entire mix preparation
operation. But their method estimates emissions for pieces of mix
equipment, which requires more detailed information than we had while
developing the regulations. At the same time, we believe this
facility's solvent storage tanks and mix preparation equipment are
representative of the tanks and equipment used by the rest of the
regulated magnetic tape industry, so we used their data to analyze the
requested alternative compliance approach.
C. Why We Chose To Allow the New Compliance Option
The 1994 published rule restricts the capacity of the solvent
storage tanks we allowed to be uncontrolled to 20,000 gallons each but
doesn't restrict other parameters that affect emissions. Therefore, we
believe it's reasonable to use the highest emitting tanks in this
comparison if they don't exceed the capacity restriction. For the
magnetic tape manufacturing facility we studied, we found the maximum
potential HAP emissions from a solvent storage tank and from a piece of
mix preparation
[[Page 17462]]
equipment were 1.6 tons/yr (tpy) and 1.9 tpy, respectively.
Because maximum emissions are similar, we believe it's reasonable
for facility operators to leave uncontrolled some mix preparation
equipment and some solvent storage tanks, if they better control their
coating operations. But they must leave fewer pieces of mix preparation
equipment uncontrolled because the maximum emissions from mix
preparation equipment are greater than those from solvent storage
tanks. Also, some tanks had emissions as low as 0.01 tpy, whereas the
lowest level for mix preparation equipment was 0.1 tpy. Based on all
the data, it's reasonable to allow manufacturers to leave uncontrolled
half as many pieces of mix preparation equipment as of solvent storage
tanks. This 2-to-1 ratio makes up for the wider range of HAP emissions
in the tanks.
As noted above, the 1994 published rule's alternative compliance
approach limits the capacity of solvent storage tanks that can be left
uncontrolled. Our amendment also uses a capacity limit of 1,200 gallons
for each piece of mix preparation equipment that can be left
uncontrolled. We believe the equipment at this facility is
representative of equipment in the industry. In any case, limiting
maximum capacity makes sure the size of uncontrolled mix preparation
equipment is no larger than the size used for the estimates supporting
this amendment.
D. How the New Compliance Option Affects You as a Manufacturer
Today's final rule amendment affects you if, as a facility owner or
operator, you choose to increase the overall control efficiency of your
coating operations for magnetic tape. As the final rule was published
in 1994, 40 CFR 63.703(c) allowed you to leave HAP solvent storage
tanks uncontrolled if you increase the overall control efficiency of
your coating operations. Under today's final rule amendment, you may
still leave uncontrolled 10, 15, or 20 tanks in exchange for
controlling your coating operations to an overall efficiency of 97, 98,
or 99 percent, respectively. Under today's amendment, however, you may
leave uncontrolled one piece of mix preparation equipment in exchange
for two solvent storage tanks left uncontrolled under the 1994 rule.
For example, you could leave uncontrolled six solvent storage tanks and
two pieces of mix preparation equipment if you achieve an overall
efficiency of 97 percent--instead of 10 solvent storage tanks. See the
amendment to 40 CFR 63.703(c)(4) for combinations you may use to comply
with the new alternative provisions.
We believe this amendment will limit HAP emissions from facilities
that manufacture magnetic tape at least as much as provisions in the
1994 rule. Furthermore, the amendment will give you more flexibility to
meet the regulation. We don't expect our amendment to pose any problems
for enforcement or permitting because it's essentially similar to the
1994 rule, which affected facilities are following now. We expect
you'll like this amendment because you may be able to save money and
other resources, compared to the compliance approaches under the 1994
rule. Also, if you decide not to follow the amended provisions, they
won't burden you--they merely give you another option, and the
regulation is otherwise virtually unchanged.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action
Determination'
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety in State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs of the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Because the annualized cost of this final rule amendment would be
significantly less than $100 million and would not meet any of the
other criteria specified in the Executive Order, it has been determined
that this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866, and is therefore not subject to OMB
review.
Executive Order 12866 also encourages agencies to provide a
meaningful public comment period, and suggests that in most cases the
comment period should be 60 days. However, in consideration of the very
limited scope of this amendment, the EPA considers 30 days to be
sufficient in providing a meaningful public comment period for this
rulemaking.
B. Regulatory Flexibility
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. The EPA determined that this amendment to the Magnetic
Tape Manufacturing Operations does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The EPA has also determined that
is not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in
connection with this action.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This amendment does not include or create any information
collection activities subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, and
therefore no information collection request (ICR) will be submitted to
OMB for review in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
[[Page 17463]]
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
As noted above, this amendment is of very narrow scope, and
provides a compliance alternative very similar to one already available
in the promulgated regulation. The EPA has determined that this action
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. EPA has also determined that this
action does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
Thus, today's action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202
and 205 of the UMRA.
E. Docket
The docket includes an organized and complete file of all the
information upon which EPA relied in taking this direct final action.
The docketing system is intended to allow members of the public and
industries involved to readily identify and locate documents so that
they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with
the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, the
contents of the docket, except for certain interagency documents, will
serve as the record for judicial review. (See CAA section
307(d)(7)(A).)
F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, the EPA may not issue a regulation
that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a
State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal government
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs
incurred by those governments, or EPA consults with those governments.
If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to
provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the
extent of the EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected
State, local and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns,
copies of any written communications from the governments, and a
statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,
Executive Order 12875 requires the EPA to develop an effective process
permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local
and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the
development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded
mandates.''
Today's action does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The amendments to the rule do not impose any new or
additional enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to
this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that the EPA determines
(1) economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the
environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This amendment to the National Emissions Standards for Magnetic
Tape Manufacturing Operations is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866, and it does not
address an environmental health or safety risk that would have a
disproportionate effect on children.
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, the EPA may not issue a regulation
that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults
with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order
13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget,
in a separate identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of the EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
This amendment to National Emissions Standards for Magnetic Tape
Manufacturing Operations does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. The amendments to the rule do
not impose any new or additional enforceable duties on these entities.
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084
do not apply to this action.
I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the EPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller general of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This action to amend the currently effective rule is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTA), Public Law 104-113 (March 7, 1996), the EPA is
required to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and
procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) which are adopted by
voluntary consensus standard bodies. Where available and potentially
applicable voluntary consensus standards are not used by the EPA, the
NTTA requires the Agency to provide
[[Page 17464]]
Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such
standards. This action does not put forth any technical standards;
therefore, consideration of voluntary consensus standards was not
required.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Coating operation,
Hazardous air pollutant, Magnetic tape manufacturing, Mix preparation
equipment, Solvent storage tank.
Dated: April 1, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
Chapter I, Part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended
as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart EE--National Emission Standards for Magnetic Tape
Manufacturing Operations
2. Section 63.703 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(4) (i), (ii)
and (iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.703 Standards.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) In lieu of controlling HAP emissions from each solvent storage
tank and piece of mix preparation equipment to the level required by
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, an owner or operator of an affected
source may elect to comply with one of the options set forth in
paragraph (c)(4)(i), (ii) or (iii) of this section.
(i) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an overall
HAP control efficiency of at least 97 percent in lieu of either:
(A) Controlling up to 10 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not
exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not
exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 8 HAP solvent storage tanks
that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 6 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 4 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 2 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity.
(ii) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an
overall HAP control efficiency of at least 98 percent in lieu of
either:
(A) Controlling up to 15 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not
exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not
exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 13 HAP solvent storage tanks
that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 11 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 9 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 7 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 5 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(G) Controlling up to 6 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 3 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(H) Controlling up to 7 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 1 HAP solvent
storage tank that does not exceed 20,000 gallons in capacity.
(iii) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an
overall HAP control efficiency of at least 99 percent in lieu of
either:
(A) Controlling up to 20 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not
exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not
exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 18 HAP solvent storage tanks
that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 16 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 14 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 12 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 10 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(G) Controlling up to 6 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 8 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(H) Controlling up to 7 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 6 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(I) Controlling up to 8 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 4 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(J) Controlling up to 9 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do
not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 2 HAP solvent
storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or
(K) Controlling up to 10 pieces of mix preparation equipment that
do not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-8779 Filed 4-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P