[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 13, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55332-55359]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-22653]



[[Page 55331]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Paper and 
Other Web Coating; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 13, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 55332]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-6854-7]
RIN 2060-AG58


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper 
and Other Web Coating

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are proposing a standard to limit hazardous air pollutant 
(HAP) emissions from facilities that coat paper and other web 
substrates and are major sources of HAP emissions. The standard is 
being proposed under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), as 
amended on November 15, 1990, to protect public health and the 
environment by reducing HAP emissions from new and existing facilities. 
The CAA requires these sources to achieve the maximum degree of 
reduction in emissions of HAP that is achievable. The proposed standard 
would eliminate approximately 80 percent of nationwide HAP emissions 
from major sources.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before November 13, 
2000.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us by September 27, 2000 to 
request to speak at a public hearing, we will hold a hearing at 10 a.m. 
on October 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Send comments (in duplicate if possible) to: Air 
and Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), Attention Docket 
Number A-99-09, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. You may also send comments and data 
by electronic mail (e-mail) to: [email protected]. (See 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below, for more on file formats.) Be sure to 
include the docket number, A-99-09, on your comment.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing 
by the required date (see DATES), a public hearing will be held at our 
Office of Administration Auditorium in Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina. You should contact Ms. Janet Eck, Coatings and Consumer 
Products Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; 
telephone number (919) 541-7946 to request to speak at a public hearing 
or to find out if a hearing will be held.
    Docket. Docket No. A-99-09 contains information about the proposed 
rule. You can read and copy it between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday (except Federal holidays) at our Air and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center (6102), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. Go to Room M-1500, Waterside Mall 
(ground floor). The docket office may charge a reasonable fee for 
copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Paul Almodovar, Coatings and 
Consumer Products Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711; telephone number (919) 541-0283; facsimile number (919) 541-
5689; e-mail address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments. Comments and data may be submitted 
by e-mail to: [email protected]. Electronic comments must be 
submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special characters and 
encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks in 
WordPerfect version 5.1, 6.1, or Corel 8 file format. All 
comments and data submitted in electronic form must note the docket 
number: A-99-09. No confidential business information (CBI) should be 
submitted by e-mail. Electronic comments may be filed online at many 
Federal Depository Libraries.
    Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for 
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other 
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such 
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to 
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not 
inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: Mr. Paul Almodovar, c/o 
OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room 740B), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Durham, NC 27711. The EPA 
will disclose information identified as CBI only to the extent allowed 
by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of 
confidentiality accompanies a submission when it is received by EPA, 
the information may be made available to the public without further 
notice to the commenter.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. 
Janet Eck (see ADDRESSES above) at least 2 days in advance of the 
public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing 
should also call Ms. Eck (see ADDRESSES above) to verify the time, 
date, and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide 
interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments 
concerning these proposed emission standards.
    Docket. The docket for this regulatory action is A-99-09. The 
docket is an organized and complete file of all the information we 
consider in developing this rule. It is a dynamic file because material 
is added throughout the rulemaking process. The docketing system allows 
you to readily identify and find documents so you can participate in 
rulemaking. Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their 
preambles, contents of the docket will serve as the record in case of 
judicial review (see section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA). The regulatory 
text and other materials related to this rulemaking are available for 
review in the docket or copies may be mailed on request from the Air 
Docket by calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be charged for 
copying docket materials.
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of this proposed rule is also available on the WWW 
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a 
copy of the rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page 
for newly proposed or promulgated rules http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. 
The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas 
of air pollution control. If more information regarding the TTN is 
needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
    Plain Language. In compliance with President Clinton's June 1, 1998 
Executive Memorandum on plain language in government writing, this 
preamble is written using plain language. Thus, the use of ``we'' and 
``us'' in this document refers to EPA. The use of ``you'' refers to the 
reader, and may include industry; State, local, and tribal governments; 
environmental groups; and other interested individuals.
    Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action include those listed on the following table.
    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but is just a guide to 
entities likely to be regulated by final action on this proposal. It 
lists the types of entities that may be regulated, but you should 
examine the applicability criteria in section II of this preamble and 
in

[[Page 55333]]

Sec. 63.3290 of the proposed rule to decide whether your facility is 
likely to be regulated by final action on this proposal. If you have 
any questions about whether your facility will be subject to the 
standard, call the person listed in the preceeding FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

                           Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Examples of
           Category               SIC      NAICS   potentially regulated
                                 codes     codes          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paper and Other Web Coating..      2653    322211  Those facilities with
                                   2657    322212   web coating
                                \a\2671    322221   operations\b\ that
                                   2672    322222   coat substrate used
                                \a\2673    322223   in products
                                \a\2674    322224   including, but not
                                   2675    322225   limited to:
                                   2679    322226   corrugated and solid
                                \a\2754    322299   fiber boxes; folding
                                   2761    323111   paperboard boxes,
                                   3074    323116   including sanitary;
                                   3081    325992   flexible packaging
                                   3083    326111   (packing paper and
                                   3291    326112   plastics film,
                                \a\3497    326113   coated and
                                   3861     32613   laminated); pressure
                                   3955    326192   sensitive tape and
                                \a\3996     32791   labels, coated and
                                           332999   laminated paper, not
                                           339944   elsewhere classified
                                                    (nec); plastics,
                                                    foil, and coated
                                                    paper bags; bags:
                                                    uncoated paper and
                                                    multiwall; die-cut
                                                    paper and board;
                                                    converted paper and
                                                    paperboard products,
                                                    nec (gift wrap,
                                                    paper wallpaper,
                                                    cigarette paper);
                                                    commercial printing,
                                                    gravure; manifold
                                                    business forms;
                                                    plastic aseptic
                                                    packaging;
                                                    unsupported plastics
                                                    film and sheet;
                                                    laminated plastics
                                                    plate, sheet, and
                                                    profile shapes;
                                                    abrasive products;
                                                    laminated aluminum
                                                    (metal) foil and
                                                    leaf, flexible
                                                    packaging;
                                                    photographic
                                                    equipment and
                                                    supplies; carbon
                                                    paper and inked
                                                    ribbons; linoleum,
                                                    asphalted-felt base,
                                                    and other hard
                                                    surface floor
                                                    coverings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Facilities in these SIC codes are expected to be primarily covered
  under the printing and publishing national emission standards for
  hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP).
\b\ Web coating operations refer to the continuous application of a
  layer of material across the entire length of the usable substrate to:
  provide a covering, finish, or protective layer to the substrate;
  provide adhesion between two substrates for lamination; and where the
  continuous web substrate is flexible enough to be wound or unwound as
  rolls.

    Background Information Document. The Background Information 
Document (BID) for the proposed standard may be obtained from the TTN; 
the paper and other web coating docket (A-99-09); the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Library (MD-35), Research Triangle 
Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-2777; or the 
National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, 
Springfield, Virginia 22161, telephone (703) 487-4650. Please refer to 
``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper and 
Other Web Coating--Background Information for Proposed Standards'' 
(EPA-453/R-00-002).
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. What are the subject and purpose of this proposed rule?
II. Does this proposed rule apply to me?
III. What is the proposed emission standard?
IV. When do I show initial compliance with the proposed rule?
V. What testing and monitoring must I do?
VI. What notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements 
must I follow?
VII. What are the environmental, energy, and economic impacts of 
this proposed rule?
VIII. What is the basis for selecting the level of the proposed 
standards?
IX. What is the basis for selecting the format of the proposed 
standards?
X. Administrative requirements

I. What Are the Subject and Purpose of This Proposed Rule?

    The CAA requires us to establish standards to control HAP emissions 
from source categories identified under section 112(c) of the CAA. An 
initial source category list was published in the Federal Register on 
July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576). The source category list identifies 
``Paper and Other Web Coating (Surface Coating)'' as a source category 
because it contains major sources. Under the CAA, a major source is 
defined as ``* * * any stationary source or group of stationary sources 
located within a contiguous area and under common control that emits or 
has the potential to emit, considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 
tons per year (tpy) or more of any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of any 
combination of HAP.'' We have estimated that there are over 400 
existing paper and other web coating facilities, with approximately 210 
estimated to be major sources.
    The purpose of the proposed rule is to reduce emissions of HAP from 
paper and other web coating major sources. The source category is for 
major sources only. Area sources are not included in this source 
category and therefore are not subject to the proposed standards. We 
estimate that annual baseline organic HAP emissions from this source 
category are approximately 35,000 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (39,000 
tpy). The proposed rule would eliminate approximately 29,000 Mg/yr 
(32,000 tpy) of these organic HAP emissions (about an 80 percent 
reduction).
    The organic HAP emitted from the paper and other web coating 
process include toluene, methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, xylenes, 
phenol, methylene chloride, ethylene glycol, glycol ethers, hexane, 
methyl isobutyl ketone, cresols and cresylic acid, dimethylformamide, 
vinyl acetate, formaldehyde, and ethyl benzene. These pollutants can 
cause reversible or irreversible toxic effects following sufficient 
exposure. The potential toxic effects include eye, nose, throat, and 
skin irritation, and blood cell, heart, liver, and kidney damage.
    The degree of adverse effects to human health from exposure to HAP 
can range from mild to severe. The extent and degree to which the human 
health effects may be experienced are dependent upon (1) The ambient 
concentration observed in the area (as influenced by emission rates, 
meteorological conditions, and terrain); (2) the frequency and duration 
of exposures; (3) characteristics of exposed individuals (genetics, 
age, preexisting health conditions, and lifestyle), which vary 
significantly with the population; and (4) pollutant-specific 
characteristics

[[Page 55334]]

(toxicity, half-life in the environment, bioaccumulation, and 
persistence).

II. Does This Proposed Rule Apply to Me?

A. What Facilities are subject to This Proposed Rule?

    The paper and other web coating source category includes any 
facility located at a major source and engaged in the coating of paper, 
plastic film, metallic foil, and other web surfaces. The source 
category does not include printing operations covered under the 
printing and publishing national emission standards for hazardous air 
pollutants (NESHAP) (40 CFR part 63, subpart KK). The source category 
does not include coil coating, i.e., the application of an organic 
coating to the surface of any metal strip at least 0.15 millimeter 
(0.006 inch) thick that is packaged in a roll or coil, which is being 
regulated as a separate source category. Fabric coating is also being 
regulated as a separate source category. However, we identified 
facilities in the paper and other web coating source category that also 
apply coatings to fabric, sometimes on the same coating lines. We are 
proposing that such coating lines be part of the paper and other web 
coating source category and not subject to the future fabric coating 
NESHAP. Paper and other web coating may be simply referred to as ``web 
coating'' since paper is one of several web substrates in the paper and 
other web coating source category.
    The proposed rule applies to you if you own or operate any web 
coating lines at a facility that is a major source of HAP emissions. 
This means that the coating lines at a major source would be subject to 
the proposed standard without regard to the relative proportion of HAP 
emissions from the web coating lines to total HAP emissions at the 
source.
    If your facility is a nonmajor (area) source, i.e., actual and 
potential annual emissions are less than 10 tons of any single HAP and 
less than 25 tons of all HAP combined, you would not be subject to this 
proposed rule.
    If your facility is a major source, you would be required to meet 
the proposed emission limits for all the web coating lines at your 
facility. We have defined a web to be a continuous substrate (e.g., 
paper, plastic film, foil) that is capable of being rolled at any point 
during the coating process. We have defined a web coating line to be 
any number of work stations, of which one or more applies a layer of 
coating material along the length of a continuous web substrate, and 
any associated drying equipment between an unwind (or feed station) and 
a rewind (or cutting station). Printing presses subject to the printing 
and publishing NESHAP are not web coating lines.

B. What Is the Affected Source?

    We define an affected source as a stationary source, group of 
stationary sources, or part of a stationary source to which a specific 
NESHAP applies. Within a source category, we select the specific 
emission sources (emission points or groupings of emission points) that 
will make up the affected source for that category. To select these 
emission sources, we mainly consider the constituent HAP and quantity 
emitted from individual or groups of emission points.
    For the paper and other web coating NESHAP, the affected source is 
proposed to be the collection of all the web coating lines at a 
facility. We are not proposing requirements for operations related to 
coating line and parts cleaning, coating mixing and storage, film 
formation, and wastewater.
    Coating lines and equipment that are not in the source category, 
and thus, not in the affected source, include those that perform both 
coating and printing and comply with the national emission standards 
for the printing and publishing industry; those that coat coil, even if 
only part of the time, and therefore, are in the coil coating source 
category; and those that coat only fabric and are in the fabric 
coating, printing, and dyeing source category (but if both fabric and 
other web coating is performed on a coating line, the line is included 
in the paper and other web coating affected source).
    Many industrial facilities perform both coating and printing 
operations. Within the printing industry, the product and packaging 
rotogravure and wide-web flexographic industry segment (that includes 
the flexible packaging industry as a major subsector) does the most 
coating, with material use distributed almost equally between inks and 
other types of coatings. Printing operations are covered under the 
NESHAP for the printing and publishing industry. The printing and 
publishing NESHAP also includes an option for facilities that perform 
both printing and coating to include certain coating operations. 
Therefore, many facilities that could potentially be subject to the 
proposed NESHAP for the paper and other web coating industry may have 
coating lines already subject to the printing and publishing NESHAP. 
Such web coating lines included in compliance demonstrations under the 
printing and publishing NESHAP are not subject to this standard. A 
detailed discussion of the printing and publishing industry is included 
in the BID for that industry (Docket No. A-92-42, National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Printing and Publishing 
Industry--Background Information for Proposed Standards (EPA-453/R-95-
002a)).

III. What Is the Proposed Emission Standard?

A. Proposed Limits

    In the proposed rule, you would be able to choose any one of three 
options to limit organic HAP emissions at existing and new sources and 
meet the allowable level. The HAP emission limits are based on emission 
capture and control technology that can reduce total organic HAP 
emissions by 95 percent at existing sources and 98 percent at new 
sources. The emission limits reflect this level of control by limiting 
organic HAP emissions to no more than 5 percent and 2 percent of the 
organic HAP applied each month at existing and new sources, 
respectively; and by limiting emissions based on the weight of the 
solids part of your coating or the weight of your total coating. As 
discussed in section VIII of this preamble, we believe expressing 
emission limits in this way is appropriately based on the maximum 
achievable control technology (MACT) level of control and offers 
flexibility to reduce emissions through the use of control technology, 
pollution prevention, or a combination of the two.
    The three HAP emission limits proposed for existing sources are: 
(1) Limit emissions to no more than 5 percent of the organic HAP 
applied for the month; (2) limit the total amount of organic HAP in 
your coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more 
than 20 weight percent of the total solids applied to web substrates in 
a month; or (3) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, 
or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 4 weight 
percent of the total mass of coating material applied to the web 
substrate in a month.
    The three HAP emission limits proposed for new sources are: (1) 
Limit emissions to no more than 2 percent of the organic HAP applied 
for the month; (2) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your 
coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 8 
weight percent of the total solids applied to web substrates in a 
month; or (3) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, 
or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 1.6 weight 
percent of the

[[Page 55335]]

total mass of coating material applied to the web substrate in a month.
    In submitting comments, please specify whether the comment pertains 
to one or all of the emission limitation options of the proposed 
standard. We will further evaluate the proposed standard based on our 
review of public comments and other information we may receive. The 
final rule may reflect any one of the proposed options to limit organic 
HAP emissions, a combination of the proposed options, or all three 
options.
    The General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) would also apply 
to you. The General Provisions codify procedures and criteria we use to 
carry out all part 63 NESHAP promulgated under the CAA. The General 
Provisions contain administrative procedures, preconstruction review 
procedures, and procedures for conducting compliance-related activities 
such as notifications, recordkeeping and reporting, performance 
testing, and monitoring. The proposed rule refers to individual 
sections of the General Provisions that we believe will be of 
particular interest to you. However, unless specifically overridden in 
table 1 of the proposed rule, all of the General Provisions 
requirements would apply to you.

B. Interaction With Other Regulations

    You may be subject to both the paper and other web coating NESHAP 
and other future or existing rules, such as new source performance 
standards (NSPS) and State rules requiring reasonably available control 
technology limits on volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions. You 
must comply with all rules. Duplicative recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements and differences in emission limitations may be resolved 
through your title V permit.

C. What Pollutants Are Limited by This Proposal?

    Today's proposed rule would limit total organic HAP emissions from 
coating lines. We did not identify inorganic HAP as pollutants emitted 
by this source category.

IV. When Do I Show Initial Compliance With the Proposed Rule?

    Existing sources would have to comply with the final rule no later 
than 3 years after the effective date of the final rule. The effective 
date is the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal 
Register. New or reconstructed sources would have to comply upon start-
up of the affected source or the effective date of the final rule, 
whichever is later. Details of compliance requirements can be found in 
the General Provisions, as outlined in table 1 of the proposed rule.
    Before your initial compliance demonstration, you would choose one 
of the three emission limit options for your affected source. In your 
initial compliance certification, you would notify the Administrator of 
your choice, and after that you would monitor and report compliance 
results accordingly. If you decide to change to another emission 
limitation option, you are also required to notify the Administrator, 
as with other changes at the facility, discussed in section VI.

V. What Testing and Monitoring Must I Do?

    In addition to the specific testing and monitoring requirements 
specified below for the affected source, the proposed rule adopts the 
testing requirements specified in Sec. 63.7 and specifies that 
performance tests at existing sources must be conducted by the 
compliance date.

A. Test Methods and Procedures

    You may comply with the proposed standards by applying materials 
meeting the organic HAP emission rate limits, by using capture and 
control equipment to reduce organic HAP emissions by 95 percent at 
existing sources and by 98 percent at new sources, or by using a 
combination of low organic HAP materials and capture and control 
equipment to meet the organic HAP emission rate limits.
    If you demonstrate compliance based on the coating materials 
applied on your coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP 
content of materials applied. To make this determination, you may 
either use EPA Method 311 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, use an 
alternative method for determining the organic HAP content (but only 
after obtaining EPA approval), or use the volatile organic content of 
the coating materials applied as the value for the organic HAP content. 
The volatile organic content must be determined by EPA Method 24 of 
appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 (or an approved alternative method). If 
you are demonstrating compliance by applying coating materials that 
meet the emission limit based on coating solids applied, the solids 
content of the materials must be determined using EPA Method 24. You 
may rely on manufacturer's data to determine the organic HAP content or 
volatile matter and solids content when these data are equivalent to 
those obtained from Method 311 (or an approved alternative method) and 
Method 24 (or an approved alternative method), respectively. You must 
also determine the mass of each coating material applied using company 
records. You must calculate the organic HAP content and mass of all 
coating materials applied on the coating lines for each monthly period. 
However, only changes in a material formulation would require a 
redetermination of total organic HAP weight fraction for that material. 
To demonstrate compliance, you must calculate the average mass of 
organic HAP in coating materials applied and show that it is less than 
the organic HAP emission limits specified.
    If you use an emission capture and control system to comply with 
the proposed standard, you must demonstrate that the overall control 
efficiency reduces total organic emissions by at least 95 percent at 
existing sources and 98 percent at new sources. Alternatively, you may 
use capture and control equipment in combination with low organic HAP 
materials and demonstrate you meet the organic HAP emission limit 
specified. To comply using the combined approach, you must determine 
the overall control efficiency of the equipment and the organic HAP and 
solids content of the materials applied. These values must be 
determined for each monthly period.
    The overall control efficiency for a capture and control system 
would be demonstrated based on emission capture and reduction 
efficiency. To determine the capture efficiency, you would either 
verify the presence of a permanent total enclosure using EPA Method 204 
of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M, in which case you could assume 100 
percent capture; or use EPA Method 204A through F, or Appendix A of 40 
CFR part 63, Subpart KK, to measure capture efficiency.
    You must determine the emission reduction efficiency of a control 
device by conducting a performance test or using a continuous emission 
monitoring system (CEMS). If you use CEMS, you must determine the inlet 
and outlet concentration to calculate the control efficiency. The CEMS 
must comply with performance specification 8 or 9 in 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix B.
    If you conduct a performance test, we are proposing that the 
removal efficiency of a control device be determined based on three 
runs, each run lasting 1 hour. Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A, must be used for selection of the sampling sites. Method 2, 
2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to 
determine the gas volumetric flow rate. Method 3, 3A or 3B, of 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix A, must be used for gas

[[Page 55336]]

analysis to determine dry molecular weight. Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A, must be used to determine stack moisture. Method 25 or 25A 
of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine organic 
volatile matter concentration. Alternatively, any other test method or 
data that have been validated according to the applicable procedures in 
Method 301 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, may be used if approved by 
the Administrator.
    If you use a solvent recovery system, you may alternatively 
determine the overall control efficiency using a liquid-liquid material 
balance. If you demonstrate compliance with the material balance, you 
must measure the amount of all materials applied during each month and 
determine the volatile matter content of these materials. You must also 
measure the amount of volatile matter recovered by the solvent recovery 
system during the month and calculate the overall solvent recovery 
efficiency.
    The test methods we propose to require, as discussed above, are 
existing EPA methods that are familiar to the industry, readily 
available, and appropriate to the device or the parameter being 
measured. The tests selected are expected to establish adequately 
whether the facility is complying with the standard.

B. Monitoring Requirements

    According to paragraph (a)(3) of section 114 of the CAA, monitoring 
of stationary sources is required to determine the compliance status of 
the sources, and whether compliance is continuous or intermittent. For 
affected sources complying with the proposed standard with capture and 
control systems, initial compliance is determined through an initial 
performance test and ongoing compliance through continuous monitoring. 
We are proposing the parameters to be monitored for certain types of 
control devices now used in the industry. You must set the values of 
these parameters that correspond to compliance with the proposed 
standard during your initial performance test. These values are your 
``operating limits.'' If future monitoring shows that capture and 
control equipment is operating outside the range of values established 
during the initial performance test, then you are deviating from the 
operating limits.
    If you use a capture and control system to meet the proposed 
standard, you are required to submit a plan identifying the operating 
limit and monitoring procedures for the capture system. You must 
monitor in accordance with your plan unless we require an alternate 
monitoring procedure.
    If you use a thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you must monitor 
temperature using a continuous parameter monitoring system. If you use 
a thermal oxidizer, you must establish the average combustion 
temperature recorded during the performance test as the operating 
limit. If you use a catalytic oxidizer, you must establish as the 
operating limits the average gas temperatures recorded during the 
performance test both upstream and downstream of the catalyst bed. The 
time-weighted average of the values recorded during the performance 
test shall be computed to establish the parameter value(s). For 
catalytic oxidizers, temperature monitors are placed immediately before 
and after the catalyst bed. For thermal oxidizers, the temperature 
monitor is placed in the firebox or in the duct immediately downstream 
of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange occurs.
    If you use a solvent recovery system, you must conduct monthly mass 
balances or operate continuous emission monitors as described in the 
performance test section.
    If you use a combination of capture and control devices and low-HAP 
materials, you are required to monitor the parameters of the capture 
and control devices as indicated above. In addition, you must record 
data on the HAP and solids content of the materials applied to 
determine the HAP emission rate as described in the performance test 
section.
    The proposed rule specifies the types of parameters that must be 
monitored for common types of control devices: temperature monitoring 
for oxidizers and either continuous emission monitor systems or mass 
balance measurements for solvent recovery. These parameters were 
selected because they are good indicators of control device 
performance, and because continuous parameter monitoring 
instrumentation is available at a reasonable cost. You must install, 
calibrate, maintain, and operate all monitoring equipment as specified 
in the proposed rule. If you use control devices other than those 
identified in the proposed standard, you must submit the operating 
parameters to be monitored to the Administrator for approval. You could 
be approved, on a case-by-case basis, to monitor parameters not 
specifically listed in the proposed standards. The authority to approve 
the parameters to be monitored is retained by the Administrator and is 
not delegated.

VI. What Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements 
Must I Follow?

    The proposed rule requires you to comply with notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, generally as described in 
the General Provisions (see table 1 of the proposed rule) and 
specifically as designed to support demonstration of compliance with 
this proposed rule. We believe that these requirements are necessary 
and sufficient to ensure that you comply with the requirements in the 
proposed subpart JJJJ.

A. Initial Notification

    If the NESHAP apply to you, you must send an initial notification 
to the EPA Regional Office in the region where your facility is located 
and to your State agency. If you have an existing source, you must 
submit the initial notification no later than 1 year before the 
required compliance date for the standard. If you have a new or 
reconstructed source, you must submit the notification no later than 
120 days after either the date of initial start-up or the effective 
date of the final rule, whichever is later.
    The Initial Notification Report notifies us and your State agency 
that you have an existing facility that is subject to the proposed 
standard or that you have constructed a new facility. Thus, it allows 
you and the Federal or State enforcement agency to plan for compliance 
activities. The General Provisions for NESHAP specifies the information 
you must include in the initial notification and other reporting 
requirements for new or reconstructed sources.

B. Notification of Performance Tests

    If the NESHAP apply to you, you will have several options for 
demonstrating compliance. If you demonstrate compliance by using a 
capture and control system to reduce emissions of HAP, you must conduct 
a performance test as described above. Prior to conducting the 
performance test, you must notify us or the delegated State or local 
agency at least 60 calendar days before the performance test is 
scheduled to begin, as indicated in the General Provisions for NESHAP.

C. Notification of Compliance Status

    You are required to send a notice of compliance status within 180 
days after the compliance date as specified in the General Provisions 
for NESHAP. This report must include your compliance certification, the 
results of any performance tests and monitoring, and a description of 
how you will demonstrate continuing compliance.

[[Page 55337]]

    The notification of compliance status must specifically identify 
whether low-HAP materials, emission capture and control systems, or a 
combination of low-HAP materials and capture and control systems were 
used to comply with this regulation. For capture and control systems, 
it must also identify the operating limits established during the 
performance test. Specific reporting requirements are dependent upon 
how you choose to comply with the proposed rule.

D. Recordkeeping Requirements

    To comply with the proposed standard based on organic HAP content 
or organic HAP emissions on a weight basis, records must be maintained 
of the organic HAP, volatile organic content and solids content of each 
coating applied, and the amount of each coating applied on paper and 
other web coating lines each month.
    If capture and control technology is used, you are required to keep 
records of the equipment monitoring parameter measurements specified in 
the proposed rule that are discussed in section V above. You must also 
develop a start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan. You would have to 
make the plan available for inspection if the Administrator requests to 
see it. It would stay in your records for the life of the affected 
source or until the source no longer must meet the standard in the 
proposed rule.

E. Periodic Reports

    Each reporting year is divided into two semiannual reporting 
periods. If no deviations occur during a semiannual reporting period, 
you would submit a semiannual compliance report stating that the 
affected source has been in compliance. A deviation is any instance in 
which you fail to meet any requirement or obligation of the proposed 
standard or any term or condition adopted to meet the proposed 
standard. The following semiannual compliance reports would be required 
under this proposal when deviations occur:
     If you are complying by using oxidizers, report all 
deviations from the oxidizer operating parameters.
     If you are complying by using solvent recovery systems and 
liquid-liquid mass balance, report mass balance calculations for all 
months when the material balances deviated from the emission limit.
     If you are complying by using oxidizers or solvent 
recovery systems with continuous emission monitors, report all 
deviations from the operating parameter values established for the 
capture system and all deviations of the emission limit.
     If you are complying by using low-HAP coating materials, 
report all deviations from the emission limit.
     If you are complying by using a combination of capture and 
control systems with low-HAP coating materials, report all deviations 
from the emission limit and all deviations from operating parameters 
described above.
    You would also have to send us reports for each semiannual 
reporting period in which the following occur:
     A change occurs at your facility or within your process 
that might affect its compliance status.
     A change from what was reported in the initial notice 
occurs at your facility or within your process.
     You decide to change to another emission limitation 
option.

VII. What Are the Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts of 
This Proposed Rule?

    We developed model plant facilities to represent the industry based 
on the data we collected. We estimated environmental, energy, and 
economic impacts based upon what these facilities must do to meet the 
proposed rule. There are several options for demonstrating compliance 
with these standards, and each facility has flexibility to adopt the 
compliance option which has the least economic impact for their 
individual situation. Most of the existing major source facilities in 
this industry apply solvent-based coatings and utilize thermal 
oxidation to reduce emissions. Therefore, in estimating the impacts 
associated with the proposed rule, we assumed that most facilities 
would install a permanent total enclosure and either install a new 
thermal oxidizer or improve an existing one. If a facility complies 
with the proposed rule by applying coatings that meet the proposed 
emission limitation, the capital and operating costs and other impacts 
would be lower than estimated. Hence, the estimates presented below may 
overestimate the costs and other impacts as some facilities may comply 
with the proposed rule by applying low-HAP coatings.

A. Emission Reductions

    For existing affected sources in the paper and other web coating 
industry (approximately 210 major sources), the nationwide baseline 
organic HAP emissions are estimated to be 35,000 Mg/yr (39,000 tpy). We 
estimate that implementation of the final rule would reduce emissions 
from major sources by approximately 29,000 Mg/yr (32,000 tpy), or 
approximately 80 percent.
    We have projected the growth of the paper and other web coating 
industry and anticipate 32 new affected sources will be constructed 
over the next 5 years. These sources will need to comply with NSPS in 
40 CFR part 60 for VOC and, therefore, we estimated baseline emissions 
using a 90 percent reduction of organic HAP as the existing level of 
control. We estimated that nationwide organic HAP baseline emissions 
from new sources will be about 2,875 Mg/yr (3,170 tpy). We estimate 
that implementation of the final rule would reduce emissions from new 
affected sources by about 2,300 Mg/yr (2,535 tpy), or approximately 80 
percent.

B. Secondary Environmental Impacts

    Secondary environmental impacts are considered to be any air, 
water, or solid waste impacts, positive or negative, associated with 
the implementation of the final standard. These impacts are exclusive 
of the direct organic HAP air emissions reductions discussed in the 
previous section.
    We estimate that more than 99 percent of the organic HAP emissions 
from paper and other web coating are VOC. Therefore, the capture and 
control of organic HAP that are presently emitted will result in a 
decrease in VOC emissions. Consequently, we estimate the current 
nationwide VOC emissions from the paper and other web coating source 
category to be at least 35,000 Mg/yr (39,000 tpy), the nationwide 
organic HAP estimate. The proposed emission controls for organic HAP 
will reduce non-HAP VOC emissions as well. Emissions of VOC have been 
associated with a variety of health and welfare impacts. The VOC 
emissions, together with nitrogen oxides, are precursors to the 
formation of ground-level ozone, or smog. Exposure to ambient ozone is 
responsible for a series of public health impacts, such as alterations 
in lung capacity and aggravation of existing respiratory disease. Ozone 
exposure can also damage forests and crops.
    The use of newly installed or upgraded control devices to meet the 
proposed standard would result in greater electricity consumption (see 
section VII of this preamble). Increases in emissions of nitrogen 
oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide, as well as 
certain HAP, from electric utilities could result. The operation of 
newly installed or upgraded control devices would also require 
combustion of supplemental fuel, typically natural gas (see section VII 
of this preamble), resulting in

[[Page 55338]]

additional emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and carbon 
dioxide.
    It is expected that some paper and other web coating facilities 
will comply with the proposed standard by substituting non-HAP 
materials for organic HAP presently in use. In some cases, the non-HAP 
materials may be VOC, however, in other cases, non-VOC materials (e.g., 
water) may be used. Facilities converting to waterborne materials as a 
means or partial means of compliance may have reduced Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act hazardous waste disposal if the status of 
the waste material changes from hazardous to nonhazardous. An increase 
in wastewater discharge may then occur if this waste material and 
waterborne wash up materials are discharged to publicly owned treatment 
works. However, we do not expect any significant increases in 
wastewater discharge to result from the proposed rule.
    New and upgraded catalytic oxidizers will require catalysts. 
Catalyst life is estimated to be more than 10 years. Spent catalysts 
will represent a small amount of solid waste, and sometimes the spent 
catalyst will be regenerated by the manufacturer for reuse. Activated 
carbon used in solvent recovery systems is returned to the manufacturer 
at the end of its useful life and converted to other salable products. 
Little solid waste impact is expected from this source.

C. Energy Impacts

    The operation of new and upgraded control devices will require 
additional energy. Capture of previously uncontrolled solvent-laden air 
will require fan horsepower. Operation of oxidizers, particularly 
thermal oxidizers, may require supplemental fuel (typically natural 
gas) to increase the combustion temperature and improve destruction 
efficiency.
    The total additional electrical energy required to meet the 
proposed standard is estimated to be 313 million kilowatt-hours per 
year. Fuel requirements total 3.7 billion British thermal units per 
year. These fuel impacts are based on a ``worst-case'' scenario, that 
is the use of thermal oxidizers at all facilities, which is the control 
scenario expected to result in the highest energy impacts.

D. Cost Impacts

    The total nationwide capital and annualized costs (1998 dollars) 
attributable to compliance with the proposed standard have been 
estimated for existing and new sources. Costs are based on the use of 
permanent total enclosures, thermal oxidizers, and monitoring 
equipment. The capital costs with other methods of control (e.g., 
applying low-HAP coatings) are expected to be significantly lower.
    It is expected that any new facility using solvent-based coatings 
will install control systems to comply with applicable State and 
Federal regulations for reducing VOC emissions from the various sectors 
of this source category (e.g., the standards of performance for new 
stationary sources in 40 CFR part 60). The data we gathered on this 
industry indicate that thermal oxidation is the most common control 
technology installed to meet the requirements of the existing 
regulations. Thermal oxidation is capable of achieving a 98 percent 
reduction of HAP emissions. Therefore, the additional costs to a new 
facility resulting from this proposed standard were estimated based on 
the costs of constructing a permanent total enclosure to deliver all 
HAP emissions to the existing thermal oxidizer.
    Capital costs would be incurred by installing capture and control 
systems at existing facilities presently without capture and control 
systems, and upgrading capture and control systems at existing 
facilities that do not meet the proposed standard. Additionally, we 
estimated the cost for the purchase of monitoring equipment needed as a 
capital investment to meet the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of the proposed rule. Total nationwide capital costs are 
estimated to be $210 million with the cost for existing sources and new 
sources estimated to be $198 million and $12 million, respectively.
    Total nationwide annual costs of the proposed standard have been 
estimated at $68 million with the annual cost for existing and new 
sources estimated to be $63 million and $5 million, respectively. These 
costs include capital recovery over a 10-year period, operating costs 
for the newly installed and upgraded capture and control systems, and 
costs for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. These are net costs 
after taking into account the costs presently being incurred for the 
baseline control level.

E. Economic Impacts

    The economic impact analysis (EIA) shows that the expected price 
increases for affected output would range from only 0.1 to 1.1 percent 
as a result of the proposed standard. The expected change in production 
of affected output is a reduction of 0.1 to 1.1 percent as a result of 
the proposed standard. There are three plant closures predicted out of 
169 facilities included in the economic model. Although any facility 
closure is cause for concern, it should be noted that the baseline 
economic condition of the facilities predicted to close affects the 
closure estimate provided by the economic model. Facilities which are 
already experiencing adverse economic conditions for reasons 
unconnected to this rule are more vulnerable to the impact of any new 
costs than those that are not. The facilities predicted to close appear 
to have low profitability levels currently. While the rule may 
adversely impact the three facilities predicted to close, we do not 
predict an adverse economic impact to the industry as a whole.

VIII. What Is the Basis for Selecting the Level of the Proposed 
Standards?

A. Source of Authority for Standards Development

    Section 112(c) of the CAA directs us to develop a list of all 
categories of major sources and appropriate area sources that emit one 
or more of the 188 HAP listed under section 112(b) of the CAA. Paper 
and other web coating is a listed source category because of its 
organic HAP emissions that include, but are not limited to, toluene, 
methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, xylenes, phenol, methylene chloride, 
ethylene glycol and glycol ethers, hexane, methyl isobutyl ketone, 
cresols and cresylic acid, dimethylformamide, vinyl acetate, 
formaldehyde, and ethyl benzene. Section 112(d) of the CAA then directs 
us to promulgate regulations establishing standards for each category 
or subcategory of major and area sources of HAP listed pursuant to 
section 112(c). Those emission standards are to reflect the application 
of MACT.

B. What Is the Basis for Defining the Affected Source?

    In selecting the affected source(s) for MACT standards, our primary 
goal is to ensure that MACT is applied to all the HAP-emitting 
equipment within the source category or subcategory being regulated. 
The affected source also defines where new source MACT applies under a 
particular standard. Specifically, the General Provisions define the 
terms ``construction'' and ``reconstruction'' with reference to the 
term ``affected source'' (Sec. 60.2) and provide that new source MACT 
applies when construction and reconstruction occur (Sec. 60.5). The 
collection of equipment evaluated in determining MACT (including the 
MACT floor) is usually the collection of equipment used in defining the 
affected source.
    In defining the affected source for the paper and other web coating 
proposed NESHAP, we considered available information on HAP emissions, 
control

[[Page 55339]]

configurations, industry practices, products produced, and the impacts 
of other standards. In general, paper and other web coating facilities 
are covered by the SIC codes listed in the Regulated Entities table. 
However, facilities classified under other SIC codes may be subject to 
the proposed standard if the facility meets the definition of a major 
source and conducts paper and other web coating (see section II of this 
preamble).
    Although the industry manufactures an extensive list of products, 
the coating processes used by the different segments of the industry 
are very similar. Typically, the web substrate is put on a web coating 
line where it is unwound, coated, rewound and/or cut to size, and 
packaged. Alternatively, a web may be unwound, coated, and combined 
with another material by lamination (either before or instead of being 
rewound). The web coating line may include one work station or multiple 
work stations which apply the coating to the web. Each work station 
typically uses a single type of coating applicator (e.g., reverse roll, 
knife roll, gravure cylinder, dip, and squeeze). When there are 
multiple work stations on a single web coating line, each station may 
use a different type of applicator depending on the needs of a specific 
product. Typically, a drying oven immediately follows each work 
station.
    The primary organic HAP emission source in web coating is the 
solvent used in the coatings. The solvent acts as a vehicle for the 
material that is used to coat the web. Once the coating is on the web, 
the solvent is usually evaporated in dryers or otherwise converted to 
another material some time during the coating process.
    In the various segments of the paper and other web coating 
industry, the same primary organic HAP emission sources can be found. 
Dryer organic HAP emissions can represent more than 90 percent of the 
total organic HAP emissions from coating operations. Some emitted 
organic HAP are not captured in the dryer exhaust. This uncaptured or 
fugitive organic HAP include that which evaporate from the coatings 
into the coating room during application, and that which evaporate from 
the web in the dryers but are then swept out of the dryer as the web 
travels toward the succeeding work station. Most, if not all, of the 
solvent emitted can be collected if capture equipment is installed to 
collect fugitive solvent vapors.
    Dryer exhaust and fugitive emissions can be vented to control 
devices such as oxidizers or solvent recovery systems. Organic HAP may 
escape destruction or recovery by the control system, as they may be 
retained in the coated web. Organic HAP that remains in the web after 
removal from the coating line may leave the facility in the coated web 
product or may evaporate during additional processing (e.g., slitting, 
folding, stitching, etc.).
    Coating application and drying/curing are the largest emission 
sources of organic HAP emissions for all segments of the paper and 
other web coating industry. Because these emission points are on the 
web coating lines, the web coating lines are the largest emission 
source. Therefore, the proposed affected source is broadly defined as 
the collection of all web coating lines at a facility (see section II 
of this preamble). This broad definition was selected to provide 
sources with flexibility for compliance demonstrations, i.e., averaging 
emissions from all web coating lines rather than demonstrating 
compliance for each individual line.

C. What Is the MACT Floor That Is the Basis for the Proposed Standard?

    Data were obtained from 268 paper and other web coating facilities. 
Facility data were obtained through survey instruments, facility 
visits, and data reported to EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval 
System.
    Of the 268 facilities, 210 were estimated to have the potential to 
be major sources. These 210 facilities were analyzed to identify the 
top performing facilities in terms of emission limitations from coating 
lines. The best controlled facilities used capture and control systems 
to reduce HAP emissions. Capture technology included work station hoods 
and total enclosures around the coating lines. Control technology 
included catalytic and thermal oxidation, as well as solvent recovery 
systems using carbon adsorption or condensation units.
    In many cases, existing control devices were originally designed 
and operated to control VOC emissions. We assumed that the performance 
of these control devices with respect to VOC and organic HAP is 
equivalent because the organic HAP commonly used in this industry are 
also VOC.
    Of the 210 facilities in the MACT floor database, 119 used capture 
and control systems. The same types of capture and control systems were 
used by these facilities even though the types of coatings, web-
substrates and products varied widely. All of the facilities were 
ranked by the percent overall emissions reductions achieved for the 
collection of all the coating lines at each facility. The average 
reduction achieved by the best controlled 12 percent of the facilities 
was 95 percent. Consequently, we identified 95 percent overall control 
of organic HAP emissions as the MACT floor for existing sources.
    We also determined that new sources employing permanent total 
enclosures with new destruction or recovery systems can be designed to 
achieve 98 percent overall control of organic HAP emissions. This is 
the anticipated level of control for new sources using the emission 
capture and control technologies used by the best controlled sources in 
the category. Although some facilities reported more than 98 percent 
overall control of organic HAP emissions, this higher level of control 
may not be achievable on a continuous basis under all normal operating 
conditions applicable to new sources. Consequently, 98 percent overall 
control of organic HAP emissions is the MACT floor for new sources.

D. What Are the Control Options Beyond the MACT Floor?

    We did not identify any control equipment capable of achieving 
emissions reductions beyond the MACT floor for new sources. We 
identified and considered one control level more stringent than the 
MACT floor for existing sources. The more stringent level for existing 
sources would require 98 percent overall control of organic HAP 
emissions from coating lines. In evaluating this control option to 
select the most appropriate MACT level, we calculated the additional 
costs and emissions reductions associated with requiring existing 
sources to achieve this more stringent level of control. While many 
existing sources can improve upon existing capture and control systems 
to achieve a 98 percent overall control of organic HAP emissions from 
coating lines, we believe that most of these same facilities would need 
to fully replace existing capture and control systems to achieve the 
more stringent level of control.
    We calculated the cost effectiveness (i.e., cost for each ton of 
HAP reduced) for reducing HAP emissions at existing sources meeting the 
MACT floor and the more stringent level of control. Requiring existing 
sources to meet the MACT floor level results in estimated emissions 
reductions of 28,700 Mg/yr (31,600 tpy) at an estimated cost of $63 
million per year or $1,990 per ton of HAP reduced. We determined that 
the incremental cost for the more stringent level of control ($84.5 
million) compared to the incremental emissions reductions (3,766 tpy) 
(an incremental cost effectiveness of $22,433 per ton of HAP reduced) 
did not warrant going beyond the MACT floor. Therefore, we

[[Page 55340]]

did not select the more stringent control option as the basis for the 
standard.

E. What Is the Proposed MACT Standard?

    For reasons discussed above, we selected the MACT floors for 
existing and new paper and other web coating lines as the appropriate 
level of control for this source category. The proposed level of 
control for existing sources is 95 percent overall control of organic 
HAP emissions from coating lines, alternatively stated as limiting 
emissions to no more than 5 percent of the organic HAP applied. The 
proposed level of control for new sources is 98 percent overall control 
of organic HAP emissions from coating lines, alternatively stated as 
limiting emissions to no more than 2 percent of the organic HAP 
applied.
    Paper and other web coating facilities may be able to reduce the 
HAP content of the coatings applied on their coating lines. We consider 
such HAP reductions as pollution prevention and believe pollution 
prevention is a desirable outcome. To encourage further pollution 
prevention, we are also proposing emission limitations in two formats 
that reflect the MACT level of control, but would not require sources 
to use add-on controls to achieve that level.
    Coating formulations and organic HAP content vary depending on the 
coating characteristics required for the products being produced. We 
evaluated the coating data available to us to establish a baseline 
organic HAP content for the coatings currently used in this source 
category. For existing sources, we reduced the baseline organic HAP 
content of coatings by 95 percent to establish the emission limitations 
of 0.20 kilograms (kg) of HAP emitted per kg of coating solids applied 
and 0.04 kg of HAP emitted per kg of coating applied. Similarly, for 
new sources, we reduced the baseline organic HAP content by 98 percent 
to establish the emission limitations of 0.08 kg HAP emitted per kg of 
coating solids applied and 0.016 kg of HAP emitted per kg of coating 
applied.
    We believe these emission limitations, expressed in the proposed 
standard as both a HAP content limit and a HAP emission limit, are 
appropriately based on the MACT level of control. Compliance with the 
HAP content limits and equivalent HAP emission limits must be 
determined using the monthly average HAP applied on a mass solids or 
mass coating basis. Sources operating capture and control systems can 
comply with these emission limitations by determining the organic HAP 
content of the coatings applied on all their coating lines and 
factoring in the capture and control efficiency such that the monthly 
average controlled organic HAP emissions from the affected source meet 
these limits.

IX. What Is the Basis for Selecting the Format of the Proposed 
Standards?

    The proposed format for the emission standard is an overall percent 
reduction of emissions, taking into account both capture and control 
system efficiencies. Data available to us regarding the efficiency of 
capture and control systems used in this industry indicate that overall 
efficiency is typically determined by a performance test for capture 
systems and oxidizers and liquid-liquid material balance for solvent 
recovery systems. The proposed standard allows for determining overall 
control efficiency through a variety of mechanisms to be consistent 
with industry practices. We selected this format because it reflects 
MACT at all facilities and allows flexibility in the method selected 
for achieving the percent reduction limit.
    The use of an allowable concentration of emissions in the exhaust 
gases discharged to the atmosphere was also considered. The major 
disadvantage of this format is its inability to identify the overall 
control efficiency of the capture and control system, and thus, the 
overall percent reduction of organic HAP emissions. The concentration 
of emissions in exhaust gases could be decreased by increasing dilution 
air through the capture and control system. Thus, we do not believe an 
exhaust gas concentration limit is appropriate for demonstrating the 
overall percent reduction of emissions.
    To encourage the use of low- and no-HAP materials, two additional 
formats are proposed. These formats limit emissions to either mass of 
HAP per mass of coating solids applied, or mass of HAP per mass of 
coating material applied (both solids and liquid). Affected sources can 
use either low- or no-HAP coating materials to meet these limits or 
capture and control systems, or a combination of the two. These formats 
do not establish any certain percent reduction requirement for capture 
and control systems but do accurately reflect application of MACT. 
Thus, they can provide flexibility for a source to combine add-on 
control with use of low-HAP materials to achieve the emissions 
reductions.

X. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive 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, or 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 entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation 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.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because none of the listed criteria apply to this action. Consequently, 
this action was not submitted to OMB for review under Executive Order 
12866.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the

[[Page 55341]]

process of developing the proposed regulation. The EPA also may not 
issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts 
State law, unless the Agency consults with State and local officials 
early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, the requirements of 
section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this proposed rule. 
Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this 
proposed rule, EPA did consult with State and local officials to enable 
them to provide timely input in the development of this proposed rule.

C. Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, 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 OMB, in a separately identified section 
of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of 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 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.''
    Today's proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. No tribal governments own or 
operate paper and other web coating lines. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
this action.

D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the EPA 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.
    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology 
performance and not on an assessment of health or safety risks. 
Furthermore, this rule has been determined not to be ``economically 
significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 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 by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 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 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation 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.
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule 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 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of this 
proposed rule for any year has been estimated to be about $68 million. 
Thus, today's proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of 
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, the EPA has determined 
that this proposed rule contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it contains 
no requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations 
upon them. Therefore, today's proposed rule is not subject to the 
requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601, et 
seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute 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 organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business 
ranging from 500 to 750 employees; (2) a small governmental 
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school 
district, or special district with a population of less than 50,000; 
and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise 
which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its 
field.

[[Page 55342]]

    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. In accordance with 
the RFA, EPA conducted an assessment of the proposed standard on small 
businesses within the paper and other web coating industry. Based on 
SBA size definitions for the affected industries and reported sales and 
employment data, EPA identified 50 of the 103 companies owning affected 
facilities as small businesses. Although small businesses represent 49 
percent of the companies within the source category, they are expected 
to incur only 25 percent of the total industry compliance costs of $63 
million. There are only six small firms with compliance costs equal to 
or greater than 3 percent of their sales. In addition, there are only 
four small firms with cost-to-sales ratios between 1 and 3 percent.
    The EPA performed an EIA to estimate the changes in product price 
and production quantities for the firms affected by this proposed rule. 
The analysis shows that of the 54 facilities owned by affected small 
firms, only one would be expected to shut down rather than incur the 
cost of compliance with the proposed rule. Although any facility 
closure is cause for concern, it should be noted that the baseline 
economic condition of the facility predicted to close affects the 
closure estimate provided by the economic model. Facilities which are 
already experiencing adverse economic conditions for reasons 
unconnected to this rule are more vulnerable to the impact of any new 
costs than those that are not. The facility predicted to close appears 
to have low profitability levels currently. The EPA also notes that, 
while economies of scale will require individual small firms to pay a 
somewhat higher proportion of revenues than large firms for compliance, 
the burden on most small firms is quite low nevertheless. The median 
compliance cost is well below 1 percent of sales for both small and 
large firms affected by the proposed standard (0.16 and 0.03 percent of 
sales for small and large firms, respectively).
    In summary, this analysis supports today's certification under the 
RFA because, while a few small firms may experience significant 
impacts, there will not be a substantial number incurring such a 
burden. For more information, consult the docket for this project.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA has nonetheless 
worked aggressively to minimize the impact of this rule on small 
entities, consistent with our obligations under the CAA. We solicited 
input from small entities during the data-gathering phase of the 
proposed rulemaking. Section VIII of this preamble further describes 
the information we obtained. Many small entities, like other affected 
paper and other web coating sources, currently comply with regulations 
limiting emissions of VOC. These facilities currently limit VOC 
emissions using add-on control equipment or pollution prevention 
coatings (coatings with little VOC content). Some small entities raised 
concerns regarding potential overlap between VOC regulations and the 
NESHAP. To address these concerns and be consistent with the current 
VOC control techniques, our proposed compliance options, test methods, 
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements would allow small entities 
to comply with the proposed regulation using most of their existing VOC 
compliance procedures. We believe this will significantly reduce the 
compliance burden for small entities, thereby mitigating potential 
impacts and preventing any duplication of effort. In addition, we are 
proposing compliance options which give small entities flexibility in 
choosing the most cost-effective and least-burdensome alternative for 
their operation. For example, a facility could purchase and use low-HAP 
coatings (i.e., pollution prevention) that meet the proposed standard 
instead of using add-on capture and control systems. This method of 
compliance can be demonstrated with minimum burden by using already-
maintained purchase and usage records. No testing of materials would be 
required, as the facility owner could show that their coatings meet the 
emission limits by providing formulation data supplied by the 
manufacturer. We are also proposing that compliance demonstrations be 
conducted monthly, rather than on a daily basis. We believe this will 
reduce the amount of records needed to demonstrate compliance with the 
rule. Furthermore, we are proposing the minimum monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements specified in the general 
provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). We continue to be interested in 
the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and 
welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 
44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. An Information Collection Request (ICR) 
document has been prepared by the EPA (ICR No. 1951) and a copy may be 
obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at the Office of Environmental 
Information, Collection Strategies Division (2822), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460, 
by e-mail at [email protected], or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy 
may also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The 
information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
    The information requirements are based on notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all 
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114 
of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant 
to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of 
confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to Agency policies set 
forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
    The annual monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting burden for this 
collection (averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of 
the rule) for existing web coating facilities is estimated to be 155 
labor hours per facility at a total annual cost of $14,414 per 
facility. This estimate includes a one-time submission of a start-up, 
shutdown, and malfunction plan with semiannual reports for any event 
when the procedures in the plan were not followed; semiannual excess 
emission reports; notifications; and recordkeeping. The total capital/
start-up cost component (including purchase of services component) 
annualized over its expected useful life is $121,000. The operation and 
maintenance costs component is $35,000 per year.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and

[[Page 55343]]

requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of 
information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of 
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
    Comments are requested on EPA's need for this information, the 
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods 
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the 
Director, Collection Strategies Division (2822), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, 
and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503 marked 
``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any 
correspondence. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the 
ICR between 30 and 60 days after September 13, 2000, a comment to OMB 
is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by October 
13, 2000. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on 
the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note), directs all Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus 
standards (VCS) instead of government-unique standards in their 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. The VCS are technical 
standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling and 
analytical procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or 
adopted by one or more VCS bodies. Examples of organizations generally 
regarded as VCS bodies include the American Society for Testing and 
Materials, the National Fire Protection Association, and the Society of 
Automotive Engineers. The NTTAA requires Federal agencies like EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, with explanations when an agency decides 
not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. Therefore, 
during the proposed rulemaking process, EPA searched for VCS that might 
be applicable. The search for emissions monitoring procedures 
identified 18 VCS that appeared to have possible use in lieu of EPA 
standard reference methods. However, after reviewing the available 
standards, EPA determined that ten of the candidate consensus standards 
(ASME C00031 or PTC 19-10-1981), ASTM D3154-91, ASTM 3271-87, ASTM 
D3464-96, ASTM D3796-90, ASTM E337-84, and EN 1093-4:1996, EN 
12619:1999, ISO 9096:1992, and ISO 10780:1994) identified for measuring 
emissions of HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in the 
proposed rule would not be practical due to lack of equivalency, 
documentation, and validation data. Seven of the remaining candidate 
consensus standards (ASME/BSR MFC 12m, ASME/BSR MFC 13m, ASTM Z6871Z, 
ISO PWI 17895, ISO/DIS 11890-1, ISO/DIS 11890-2 and ISO/FDIS 14965) are 
under development or under EPA review. The EPA plans to follow, review 
and consider adopting these standards after their development and 
further review by EPA are completed.
    The ASTM 3960-98 is practical for use in measuring the VOC content 
of surface coatings for this proposal. This standard uses the same 
techniques, equipment, and procedures as Method 24. Since this proposal 
allows the measurement of VOC content as a surrogate for HAP using 
Method 24, this is an acceptable method alternative to EPA Method 24 
for VOC. Therefore, ASTM 3960-98 will be incorporated by reference into 
40 CFR 63.14 by the EPA.
    Six consensus standards: ASTM D1475-90, ASTM D2369-95, ASTM D3792-
91, ASTM D4017-96a, ASTM D4457-85 (Reapproved 91), and ASTM D5403-93 
are already incorporated by reference in EPA Method 24 and five 
consensus standards: ASTM D1979-91, ASTM D3432-89, ASTM D4747-87, ASTM 
D4827-93, and ASTM PS 9-94 are incorporated by reference in EPA Method 
311.
    The EPA takes comment on proposed compliance demonstration 
requirements proposed in this rulemaking and specifically invites the 
public to identify potentially-applicable voluntary consensus 
standards. Commentors should also explain why this proposed rule should 
adopt these VCS in lieu of EPA's standards. Emission test methods and 
performance specifications submitted for evaluation should be 
accompanied with a basis for the recommendation, including method 
validation data and the procedure used to validate the candidate method 
(if method other than Method 301, 40 CFR part 63, appendix A was used).
    Section 63.3360 of the proposed standard lists the EPA's testing 
methods and performance standards included in the proposed rule. Most 
of the standards have been used by States and industry for more than 10 
years. Nevertheless, Sec. 63.3360 allows for any State or source to 
apply to EPA for permission to use an alternative method in place of 
any of the EPA testing methods or performance standards listed in 
Sec. 63.3360.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: August 14, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as 
follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C., 7401, et seq.

    2. Part 63 is amended by adding a subpart JJJJ to read as follows:

Subpart JJJJ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

63.3280   What is in this subpart?
63.3290   Does this subpart apply to me?
63.3300   Which of my emission sources are affected?
63.3310   What definitions are used in this subpart?

Emission Standards and Compliance Dates

63.3320   What emission standards must I meet?
63.3330   When must I comply?

General Requirements for Compliance with the Emission Standards and for 
Monitoring and Performance Tests

63.3340   What general requirements must I meet?
63.3350   If I have a control device, what monitoring must I do?
63.3360   What performance test methods must I conduct?

Requirements for Showing Compliance

63.3370   How do I demonstrate compliance with the emission 
standards?

[[Page 55344]]

Reports and Records

63.3400   What reports must I submit?
63.3410   What records must I keep?

Delegation of Authority

63.3420   What authorities may be delegated to the States?
63.3420--63.3479   [Reserved]

Tables

Table 1 to Subpart JJJJ--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63 General 
Provisions to Subpart JJJJ

What This Subpart Covers


Sec. 63.3280  What is in this subpart?

    This subpart describes the actions you must take to reduce 
emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from paper and other web 
coating. Paper is one of several web substrates to which coatings are 
applied using a web coating line. This subpart establishes emission 
standards for web coating lines and specifies what you must do to 
comply if you own or operate a facility with web coating lines that is 
a major source of HAP. Certain requirements apply to all who must 
follow the subpart; others depend on the means you use to comply with 
an emission standard.


Sec. 63.3290  Does this subpart apply to me?

    The provisions of this subpart apply to each new and existing 
facility that is a major source of HAP, as defined in Sec. 63.2, at 
which web coating lines are operated.


Sec. 63.3300  Which of my emission sources are affected?

    (a) The affected source subject to this subpart is the collection 
of all web coating lines at your facility, except:
    (1) Web coating lines that are stand-alone coating equipment under 
40 CFR part 63, subpart KK, and the owner or operator includes such 
coating lines in its compliance demonstration under subpart KK.
    (2) Web coating lines which are used for coating coil.
    (3) Web coating lines which are research or laboratory equipment as 
defined in Sec. 63.3310.
    (b) [Reserved]


Sec. 63.3310  What definitions are used in this subpart?

    (a) All terms used in this subpart that are not defined below have 
the meaning given to them in the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and in 
subpart A of this part.
    Always-controlled work station means a work station associated with 
a dryer from which the exhaust is delivered to a control device with no 
provision for the dryer exhaust to bypass the control device. Sampling 
lines for analyzers and relief valves needed for safety purposes are 
not considered bypass lines.
    As-applied means the condition of a coating at the time of 
application to a substrate, including any added solvent.
    As-purchased means the condition of a coating as delivered to the 
user.
    Capture efficiency means the fraction of all organic HAP emissions 
generated by a process that is introduced to a control device, 
expressed as a percentage.
    Capture system means a hood, enclosed room, or other means of 
collecting organic HAP emissions into a closed-vent system that 
exhausts to a control device.
    Car-seal means a seal that is placed on a device that is used to 
change the position of a valve or damper (e.g., from open to closed) in 
such a way that the position of the valve or damper cannot be changed 
without breaking the seal.
    Coating materials means all inks, varnishes, adhesives, primers, 
solvents, reducers, and other solids-containing materials applied to a 
substrate via a web coating line. Materials used to form a substrate 
are not considered coating materials.
    Coil means a continuous metal substrate where the metal is greater 
than 0.006 inch thick.
    Control device means a device such as a solvent recovery device or 
oxidizer which reduces the organic HAP in an exhaust gas by recovery or 
by destruction.
    Control device efficiency means the ratio of organic HAP emissions 
recovered or destroyed by a control device to the total organic HAP 
emissions that are introduced into the control device, expressed as a 
percentage.
    Day means a 24-consecutive-hour period.
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source, subject 
to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation 
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard;
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limitation (including any operating 
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during start-up, 
shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is 
permitted by this subpart.
    Fabric means any of the substrates knotted, woven and nonwoven 
yarn, thread, and textiles; fiberglass; cord; and carpet.
    Facility means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under 
common ownership or control, including properties that are separated 
only by a road or other public right-of-way.
    Formulation data means data on the organic HAP weight fraction, 
volatile matter weight fraction, or solids weight fraction of a 
material that is generated by the manufacturer or means other than a 
test method specified in this subpart or an approved alternative 
method.
    HAP means hazardous air pollutants.
    HAP applied means the organic HAP content of all coating materials 
applied to a substrate by a coating line affected source.
    Intermittently-controllable work station means a work station 
associated with a dryer with provisions for the dryer exhaust to be 
delivered to or diverted from a control device depending on the 
position of a valve or damper. Sampling lines for analyzers and relief 
valves needed for safety purposes are not considered bypass lines.
    Month means a calendar month or a pre-specified period of 28 days 
to 35 days to allow for flexibility in recordkeeping when data are 
based on a business accounting period.
    Never-controlled work station means a work station which is not 
equipped with provisions by which any emissions, including those in the 
exhaust from any associated dryer, may be delivered to a control 
device.
    New source means any affected source the construction or 
reconstruction of which is commenced after September 13, 2000.
    Overall organic HAP control efficiency means the total efficiency 
of a capture and control system.
    Research or laboratory equipment means any equipment for which the 
primary purpose is to conduct research and development into new 
processes and products, where such equipment is operated under the 
close supervision of technically trained personnel and is not engaged 
in the manufacture of products for commercial sale in commerce, except 
in a de minimis manner.
    Uncontrolled coating line means a coating line consisting of only 
never controlled work stations.
    Unwind or feed station means a unit from which substrate is fed to 
a web coating line.
    Web means a continuous substrate (e.g., paper, film, foil) which is 
flexible

[[Page 55345]]

enough to be wound or unwound as rolls. Fabric and coil are not 
considered web substrates for purposes of this subpart.
    Web coating line means any number of work stations, of which one or 
more applies a layer of coating material along the length of a 
continuous web substrate, and any associated drying equipment between 
an unwind or feed station and a rewind or cutting station. Printing 
presses subject to subpart KK of this part are not web coating lines.
    Work station means a unit on a web coating line where material is 
deposited onto a web substrate.
    (b) The symbols used in equations in this subpart are defined as 
follows:
    (1) Cahi = the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP 
content of coating material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, 
kilogram (kg)/kg.
    (2) Casi = the monthly average, as-applied, solids 
content, of coating material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, kg/kg.
    (3) Cavi = the monthly average, as-applied, volatile 
organic content of coating material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, 
kg/kg.
    (4) Cc = the concentration of organic compounds as 
carbon, parts per million by volume (ppmv).
    (5) Chi = the organic HAP content of coating material, 
i, as-purchased, expressed as a weight fraction, kg/kg.
    (6) Chij = the organic HAP content of material, j, added 
to as-purchased coating material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, 
kg/kg.
    (7) Csi = the solids content of coating material, i, 
expressed as a weight fraction, kg/kg.
    (8) Csij = the solids content of material, j, added to 
as-purchased coating material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, kg/
kg.
    (9) Cvi = the volatile organic content of coating 
material, i, expressed as a weight fraction, kg/kg.
    (10) Cvij = the volatile organic content of material, j, 
added to as-purchased coating material, i, expressed as a weight 
fraction, kg/kg.
    (11) E = the organic volatile matter control efficiency of the 
control device, percent.
    (12) CE = the organic volatile matter capture efficiency of the 
capture system, percent.
    (13) Gi = the mass fraction of each coating material, i, 
which was applied at 20 weight percent or greater solids content, on an 
as-applied basis, kg/kg.
    (14) Ha = the monthly allowable organic HAP emissions, 
kg.
    (15) He = the total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
    (16) HL = the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP 
content of all coating materials applied, expressed as kg organic HAP 
per kg of coating material applied, kg/kg.
    (17) Hm = the total monthly organic HAP applied, kg.
    (18) Hs = the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP 
to solids ratio, kg organic HAP/kg solids applied.
    (19) Hsi = the as-applied, organic HAP to solids ratio 
of coating material, i.
    (20) L = the mass organic HAP emitted per mass of solids applied, 
kg/kg.
    (21) MBi = the sum of the mass of coating material, i, 
as-applied on intermittently-controllable work stations operating in 
bypass mode and the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on never-
controlled work stations, in a month, kg.
    (22) Mci = the sum of the mass of coating material, i, 
as-applied on intermittently-controllable work stations operating in 
controlled mode and the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on 
always-controlled work stations, in a month, kg.
    (23) Mf = the total organic volatile matter mass flow 
rate, kg/hour (h).
    (24) Mfi = the organic volatile matter mass flow rate at 
the inlet to the control device, kg/h.
    (25) Mfo = the organic volatile matter mass flow rate at 
the outlet of the control device, kg/h.
    (26) Mi = the mass of as-purchased coating material, i, 
applied in a month, kg.
    (27) Mij = the mass of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, in a month, kg.
    (28) MLj = the mass of non-solids-containing coating 
material, j, added to solids-containing coating materials which were 
applied at less than 20 weight percent solids content, on an as-applied 
basis, in a month, kg.
    (29) Mvr = the mass of volatile matter recovered in a 
month, kg.
    (30) n = the number of organic compounds in the vent gas.
    (31) p = the number of different coating materials applied in a 
month.
    (32) q = the number of different materials added to the coating 
material.
    (33) Qsd = the volumetric flow rate of gases entering or 
exiting the control device, as determined by Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, 
or 2G, dry standard cubic meters/hour (dscm)/h.
    (34) R = the overall organic HAP control efficiency, percent.
    (35) Rv = the organic volatile matter collection and 
recovery efficiency, percent.
    (36) S = the mass organic HAP emitted per mass of material applied, 
kg/kg.
    (37) 0.0416 = conversion factor for molar volume, kg-moles per 
cubic meter (mol/m\3\) (@ 293 Kelvin (K) and 760 millimeters of mercury 
(mmHg)).
    (38) 12.0 = the molecular weight of carbon.

Emission Standards and Compliance Dates


Sec. 63.3320  What emission standards must I meet?

    (a) If you own or operate any paper and other web coating affected 
source that is subject to the requirements of this subpart, you must 
comply with these requirements on and after the compliance dates as 
specified in Sec. 63.3330.
    (b) You must limit emissions to:
    (1) No more than 5 percent of the organic HAP applied for the month 
at existing sources, and no more than 2 percent of the organic HAP 
applied for the month at new sources; or
    (2) No more than 4 percent of the mass of coating materials applied 
for the month at existing sources, and no more than 1.6 percent of the 
mass of coating materials applied for the month at new sources; or
    (3) No more than 20 percent of the mass of solids applied for the 
month at existing sources, and no more than 8 percent of the solids 
applied for the month at new sources.
    (c) You must demonstrate compliance with this standard by following 
one of the procedures in Sec. 63.3370.


Sec. 63.3330  When must I comply?

    (a) If you own or operate an existing affected source subject to 
the provisions of this subpart, you must comply by the compliance date. 
The compliance date is [3 years after publication of the final rule in 
the Federal Register]. You must complete any performance test required 
in Sec. 63.3360 prior to the compliance date.
    (b) If you own or operate a new affected source subject to the 
provisions of this subpart, you must comply immediately upon start-up 
of the affected source, or after [the date of publication of the final 
rule in the Federal Register], whichever is later.
    (c) If you own or operate a reconstructed affected source subject 
to the provisions of this subpart, you must comply immediately upon 
start-up of the affected source, or after [the date of publication of 
the final rule in the Federal Register], whichever is later. Affected 
sources which have undergone reconstruction as defined in Sec. 63.2 are 
subject to the requirements for new affected sources. The costs 
associated with the purchase and installation of air pollution control 
equipment are not considered in determining whether the affected source 
has been reconstructed.

[[Page 55346]]

Additionally, the costs of retrofitting and replacing of equipment that 
is installed specifically to comply with this subpart are not 
considered reconstruction costs.

General Requirements for Compliance With the Emission Standards and 
for Monitoring and Performance Tests


Sec. 63.3340  What general requirements must I meet?

    Table 1 of this subpart specifies the provisions of subpart A of 
this part that apply to you if you are subject to this subpart.


Sec. 63.3350  If I have a control device, what monitoring must I do?

    (a) A summary of monitoring you must do follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If you operate a web coating
line, and have the following:                Then you must:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Intermittently-controlled  Record parameters related to possible
 work stations.                 exhaust flow bypass of control device
                                and coating use (paragraph (c) of this
                                section).
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
(2) Solvent recovery unit....  Operate continuous emission monitoring
                                system (CEMS) and perform quarterly
                                audits or measure volatile matter
                                recovered and conduct a liquid-liquid
                                material balance (paragraph (d) of this
                                section).
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
(3) Oxidizer.................  Operate continuous parameter monitoring
                                system (CPMS) (paragraph (e) of this
                                section).
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
(4) Capture system...........  Monitor capture system operating
                                parameter (paragraph (f) of this
                                section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Following the date on which the initial performance test of a 
control device is completed, to demonstrate continuing compliance with 
the standard, you must monitor and inspect each capture system and each 
control device used to comply with Sec. 63.3320. You must install and 
operate the monitoring equipment as specified in paragraphs (c) through 
(f) of this section.
    (c) Bypass and coating use monitoring. If you own or operate 
coating lines with intermittently-controlled work stations, you must 
monitor bypasses of the control device and the mass of each coating 
material applied at the work station during any such bypass. You must 
demonstrate that any coating material applied on an uncontrolled-work 
station or an intermittently-controlled work station operated in bypass 
mode is allowed in your compliance demonstration according to 
Sec. 63.3370(n) through (o). The bypass monitoring must be conducted 
using at least one of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) 
of this section for each work station and associated dryer.
    (1) Flow control position indicator. Install, calibrate, maintain, 
and operate according to the manufacturer's specifications a flow 
control position indicator that provides a record indicating whether 
the exhaust stream from the dryer was directed to the control device or 
was diverted from the control device. The time and flow control 
position must be recorded at least once per hour, as well as every time 
the flow direction is changed. A flow control position indicator must 
be installed at the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the 
exhaust stream away from the control device to the atmosphere.
    (2) Car-seal or lock-and-key valve closures. Secure any bypass line 
valve in the closed position with a car-seal or a lock-and-key type 
configuration; a visual inspection of the seal or closure mechanism 
must be performed at least once every month to ensure that the valve or 
damper is maintained in the closed position, and the exhaust stream is 
not diverted through the bypass line.
    (3) Valve closure continuous monitoring. Ensure that any bypass 
line valve or damper is in the closed position through continuous 
monitoring of valve position when the control device is in operation. 
The monitoring system must be inspected at least once every month to 
verify that the monitor will indicate valve position.
    (4) Automatic shutdown system. Use an automatic shutdown system in 
which the coating line is stopped when flow is diverted away from the 
control device to any bypass line when the control device is in 
operation. The automatic system must be inspected at least once every 
month to verify that it will detect diversions of flow and will shut 
down operations.
    (d) Solvent recovery unit. If you own or operate a solvent recovery 
unit to comply with Sec. 63.3320, you must meet the requirements in 
either paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section depending on how control 
efficiency is determined.
    (1) Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). If you are 
demonstrating compliance with the standard in Sec. 63.3320 through 
continuous emission monitoring of a control device, you must install, 
calibrate, operate, and maintain CEMS to measure the total organic 
volatile matter concentration at both the control device inlet and the 
outlet such that the reduction efficiency can be determined. Each 
continuous emission monitor must comply with performance specification 
8 or 9 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, as appropriate. The requirements 
of procedure 1, appendix F, of 40 CFR part 60 must also be followed. In 
conducting the quarterly audits of the monitors as required by 
procedure 1, appendix F, you must use compounds representative of the 
gaseous emission stream being controlled.
    (2) Liquid-liquid material balance. If you are demonstrating 
compliance with the standard in Sec. 63.3320 through liquid-liquid 
material balance, you must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate 
according to the manufacturer's specifications a device that indicates 
the cumulative amount of volatile matter recovered by the solvent 
recovery device on a monthly basis. The device must be certified by the 
manufacturer to be accurate to within  2.0 percent by mass.
    (e) Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS). If you are using 
an oxidizer to comply with the standard in Sec. 63.3320, you must 
install and operate CPMS according to paragraphs (e)(1) through 
(6)(vii) of this section:
    (1) Each CPMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of operation for 
each successive 15-minute period. You must have a minimum of four 
successive cycles of operation to have a valid hour of data.
    (2) You must have valid data from at least 90 percent of the hours 
during which the process operated.

[[Page 55347]]

    (3) You must determine the hourly average of all recorded readings. 
Provided all of the recorded readings clearly demonstrate continuous 
compliance with the standard that applies to you, then you are not 
required to determine the hourly average of all recorded readings.
    (4) You must determine the rolling 3-hour average of all recorded 
readings for each operating period.
    (5) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration, 
and validation check.
    (6) For each temperature monitoring device, you must also:
    (i) Locate the temperature sensor as specified in 
Sec. 63.3360(e)(3).
    (ii) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.2 
degrees Celsius or 0.75 percent of the temperature value, whichever is 
larger.
    (iii) Shield the temperature sensor system from electromagnetic 
interference and chemical contaminants.
    (iv) If a chart recorder is used, it must have a sensitivity in the 
minor division of at least 20 degrees Fahrenheit.
    (v) Perform an electronic calibration at least semiannually 
according to the procedures in the manufacturer's owners manual. 
Following the electronic calibration, you must conduct a temperature 
sensor validation check in which a second or redundant temperature 
sensor placed nearby the process temperature sensor must yield a 
reading within 16.7 degrees Celsius of the process temperature sensor's 
reading.
    (vi) Conduct calibration and validation checks any time the sensor 
exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature 
range or install a new temperature sensor.
    (vii) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity and 
all electrical connections for continuity, oxidation, and galvanic 
corrosion.
    (f) Capture system monitoring. If you are complying with the 
standard in Sec. 63.3320 through the use of a capture system and 
control device, you must submit a monitoring plan containing the 
information specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section. You 
must monitor the capture system in accordance with paragraph (f)(3) of 
this section. You must submit the monitoring plan to the Administrator 
with the compliance status report required by Sec. 63.9(h).
    (1) The monitoring plan must:
    (i) Identify the operating parameter to be monitored to ensure that 
the capture efficiency measured during the initial compliance test is 
maintained; and
    (ii) Discuss why this parameter is appropriate for demonstrating 
ongoing compliance; and
    (iii) Identify the specific monitoring procedures.
    (2) The monitoring plan must specify the operating parameter value, 
or range of values, that demonstrate compliance with the standards in 
Sec. 63.3320. The specified operating parameter, or range of values, 
must represent the conditions present when the capture system is being 
properly operated and maintained.
    (3) You must conduct monitoring in accordance with the plan 
submitted to the Administrator unless comments received from the 
Administrator require an alternate monitoring scheme.


Sec. 63.3360  What performance test methods must I conduct?

    (a) The performance test methods you must conduct are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you control organic HAP on
  your web coating lines by:                   You must:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Limiting organic HAP or    Determine the organic HAP or volatile
 volatile matter content of     matter and weight solids content of
 coatings.                      coating materials according to
                                procedures in paragraphs (c) and (d) of
                                this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Using a capture and        Conduct performance tests to determine:
 control system..               (i) the destruction efficiency of
                                oxidizers according to paragraph (e) of
                                this section; and (ii) the capture
                                efficiency of capture systems according
                                to paragraph (f) of this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) If you are using a control device to comply with the 
requirements of Sec. 63.3320, you are not required to conduct a 
performance test to demonstrate compliance if one or more of the 
criteria in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section are met.
    (1) The control device is equipped with continuous emission 
monitors for determining inlet and outlet total organic volatile matter 
concentration, and capture efficiency has been determined in accordance 
with the requirements of this subpart, such that an overall organic HAP 
control efficiency can be calculated, and the continuous emission 
monitors are used to demonstrate continuous compliance in accordance 
with Sec. 63.3350; or
    (2) You have met the requirements of Sec. 63.7(h) (for waiver of 
performance testing); or
    (3) The control device is a solvent recovery system, and you comply 
by means of a monthly liquid-liquid material balance.
    (c) Organic HAP content. If you own or operate a paper and other 
web coating facility, you must determine the organic HAP weight 
fraction of each coating material ``as-purchased,'' Chi, by 
following one of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of 
this section, and determine the organic HAP weight fraction of each 
coating material ``as-applied,'' Cahi, by following the 
procedures in paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
    (1) Method 311. You may test the coating material in accordance 
with Method 311 of appendix A of part 63. The Method 311 determination 
may be performed by the manufacturer of the coating material and the 
results provided to the owner or operator. The organic HAP content must 
be calculated according to the criteria and procedures in paragraphs 
(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. If the HAP content values are 
not determined using Method 311, the owner or operator must submit an 
alternative test method for determining their values for approval by 
the Administrator. The recovery efficiency of the test method must be 
determined for all of the target organic HAP and a correction factor, 
if necessary, must be determined and applied.
    (i) Count each organic HAP measured to be present at greater than 
or equal to 0.1 weight percent for carcinogens and greater than or 
equal to 1.0 weight percent for noncarcinogens.
    (ii) The weight fraction of each organic HAP shall be expressed as 
a value truncated four places after the decimal point.
    (iii) Calculate the weight fraction of organic HAP in the tested 
material by summing the counted individual organic HAP weight 
fractions. The total HAP content shall be expressed as a value 
truncated three places after the decimal point.

[[Page 55348]]

    (2) Method 24. The owner or operator may determine the volatile 
organic content (i.e., the weight fraction of nonaqueous volatile 
matter) of the coating material in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(d)(1) 
and use this value for the organic HAP content for all compliance 
purposes.
    (3) Formulation data. The owner or operator may use formulation 
data to calculate the organic HAP weight fraction of a coating 
material. Formulation data may be provided to the owner or operator by 
the manufacturer of the material. In the event of an inconsistency 
between Method 311 of appendix A of part 63 test data and a facility's 
formulation data and the Method 311 test value is higher, the Method 
311 data will govern. Formulation data may be used provided that the 
information represents all organic HAP present at a level equal to or 
greater than 0.1 percent for carcinogens and equal to or greater than 
1.0 percent for noncarcinogens in any raw material used, weighted by 
the mass fraction of each raw material used in the coating material's 
formulation.
    (4) As-applied organic HAP weight fraction, Cahi. If the 
as-purchased coating material is applied to the web without any solvent 
or other material added, then the as-applied organic HAP weight 
fraction, Cahi, is equal to the as-purchased organic HAP 
weight fraction, Chi. Otherwise, the as-applied organic HAP 
weight fraction, Cahi, must be calculated using Equation 3a 
of Sec. 63.3370.
    (d) Volatile organic and solids content. If you own or operate a 
paper and other web coating facility, you must determine the as-
purchased volatile organic content, Cvi, and solids content, 
Csi, of each coating material applied by following the 
procedures in paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section, and the as-
applied volatile organic content, Cavi, and solids content, 
Casi, of each coating material by following the procedures 
in paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
    (1) Method 24. You must determine the volatile organic and solids 
weight fraction of each coating material applied using Method 24 of 40 
CFR part 60, appendix A. The Method 24 determination may be performed 
by the manufacturer of the material and the results provided to the 
owner or operator. If these values cannot be determined using Method 
24, the owner or operator must submit an alternative technique for 
determining their values for approval by the Administrator.
    (2) Formulation data. You may determine the volatile organic 
content of materials based on formulation data and may rely on volatile 
organic content data provided by material suppliers. In the event of 
any inconsistency between the formulation data and the results of Test 
Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, the results of Test Method 24 
will govern.
    (3) As-applied volatile organic content, Cavi, and 
solids content, Casi. If the as-purchased coating material 
is applied to the web without any solvent or other material added, then 
the as-applied volatile organic content, Cavi, is equal to 
the as-purchased volatile content, Cvi, and the as-applied 
solids content, Casi, is equal to the as-purchased solids 
content, Csi. Otherwise, the as-applied volatile organic 
content, Cavi, must be calculated using Equation 3b of 
Sec. 63.3370 and the as-applied solids content, Casi, must 
be calculated using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.3370.
    (e) Destruction efficiency of oxidizer. If you are using an 
oxidizer to comply with the standard in Sec. 63.3320, you must conduct 
a performance test to establish the destruction efficiency of the 
oxidizer according to the methods and procedures in paragraphs (e)(1) 
and (2) of this section. You must establish the associated combustion 
zone temperature for a thermal oxidizer and the associated catalyst bed 
inlet and outlet temperatures for a catalytic oxidizer according to the 
procedures in paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
    (1) An initial performance test to establish the destruction 
efficiency of an oxidizer must be conducted such that oxidizer inlet 
and outlet testing is conducted simultaneously, and the data are 
reduced in accordance with the reference methods and procedures in 
paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (ix):
    (i) Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used for 
sample and velocity traverses to determine sampling locations.
    (ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, 
must be used to determine gas volumetric flow rate.
    (iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be 
used for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight.
    (iv) Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to 
determine stack gas moisture.
    (v) The gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, and stack 
gas moisture must be determined for each run specified in paragraph 
(e)(1)(vii) of this section.
    (vi) Method 25 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to 
determine volatile organic compound concentration, except as provided 
in paragraphs (e)(1)(vi)(A) through (C) of this section. You must 
submit notice of the intended test method to the Administrator for 
approval along with notice of the performance test required under 
Sec. 63.7(c). You may use Method 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; if
    (A) An exhaust gas volatile organic compound concentration of 50 
ppmv or less is required to comply with the standards of Sec. 63.3320; 
or
    (B) The volatile organic compound concentration at the inlet to the 
control system and the required level of control are such that result 
in exhaust gas volatile organic compound concentrations of 50 ppmv or 
less; or
    (C) Because of the high efficiency of the control device, the 
anticipated volatile organic compound concentration at the control 
device exhaust is 50 ppmv or less, regardless of inlet concentration.
    (vii) Except as provided in Sec. 63.7(e)(3), each performance test 
must consist of three separate runs; each run conducted for at least 1 
hour under the conditions that exist when the affected source is 
operating under normal operating conditions. For the purpose of 
determining volatile organic compound concentrations and mass flow 
rates, the average of the results of all the runs will apply.
    (viii) Organic volatile matter mass flow rates must be determined 
for each run specified in paragraph (e)(1)(vii) of this section using 
Equation 1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.022

    (ix) Emission control device efficiency must be determined using 
Equation 2:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.023


[[Page 55349]]


    (2) You must record such process information as may be necessary to 
determine the conditions in existence at the time of the performance 
test. Operations during periods of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction 
will not constitute representative conditions for the purpose of a 
performance test.
    (3) For the purpose of determining the value of the oxidizer 
operating parameter that must demonstrate continuing compliance, the 
average of the values recorded during the performance test must be 
computed according to the procedures in this paragraph (e)(3). For an 
oxidizer other than catalytic oxidizer, the owner or operator must 
establish as the operating parameter the minimum combustion temperature 
in the combustion chamber. This must be accomplished by locating the 
temperature sensor in the combustion zone. For a catalytic oxidizer, 
the owner or operator must establish as the operating parameters the 
minimum gas temperature at the inlet and the temperature rise across 
the catalyst bed. This must be accomplished by locating temperature 
sensors at both the inlet and outlet of the catalyst bed. You must 
collect temperature data every 15 minutes during the entire period of 
the 3-hour performance test and determine the average temperature over 
the 3-hour performance test by computing the average of all of the 15-
minute readings.
    (f) Capture efficiency. If you are using an oxidizer to comply with 
the standard in Sec. 63.3320, you must determine capture efficiency of 
the capture system using the procedures in paragraph (f)(1),(2), or (3) 
of this section, as applicable.
    (1) You may assume your capture efficiency, CE, equals 100 percent 
if your capture system is a permanent total enclosure. You must confirm 
that your capture system is a permanent total enclosure by 
demonstrating that it meets the requirements of section 6 of EPA Method 
204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M, and that all exhaust gases from the 
enclosure are delivered to a control device.
    (2) You may determine capture efficiency, CE, according to the 
protocols for testing temporary total enclosures that are specified in 
Methods 204 and 204A through F of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M. You may 
exclude never-controlled work stations from such capture efficiency 
determinations.
    (3) You may use any capture efficiency protocol and test methods 
that satisfy the criteria of either the Data Quality Objective or the 
Lower Confidence Limit approach as described in appendix A of subpart 
KK of this part. The owner or operator may exclude never-controlled 
work stations from such capture efficiency determinations.

Requirements for Showing Compliance


Sec. 63.3370  How do I demonstrate compliance with the emission 
standards?

    (a) A summary of how you must demonstrate compliance follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If you choose to demonstrate
        compliance by:              Then you must demonstrate that:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Use of ``as-purchased''    (i) Each coating material used at an
 compliant coating materials.   existing source does not exceed 0.04 kg
                                organic HAP per kg coating material
                                (i.e., 4 weight percent) and each
                                coating material used at a new source
                                does not exceed 0.016 kg organic HAP per
                                kg coating material (i.e., 1.6 weight
                                percent) as-purchased (paragraph (b) of
                                this section); or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               (ii) Each coating material used at an
                                existing source does not exceed 0.2 kg
                                organic HAP per kg solids (i.e., 20
                                weight percent solids) and each coating
                                material used at a new source does not
                                exceed 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids
                                (i.e., 8 weight-percent solids) as-
                                purchased (paragraph (b) of this
                                section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Use of ``as-applied''      (i) Each coating material used at an
 compliant coating materials.   existing source does not exceed 0.04 kg
                                organic HAP per kg coating material
                                (i.e., 4 weight percent) and each
                                coating material used at a new source
                                does not exceed 0.016 kg organic HAP per
                                kg coating material (i.e., 1.6 weight
                                percent) as-applied on a monthly average
                                basis (paragraph (c)(1) of this
                                section); or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               (ii) Each coating material used at an
                                existing source does not exceed 0.2 kg
                                organic HAP per kg solids (i.e., 20
                                weight-percent solids) and each coating
                                material used at a new source does not
                                exceed 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids
                                (i.e., 8 weight percent) as-applied on a
                                monthly average basis (paragraph (c)(2)
                                of this section); or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               (iii) Monthly average of all materials
                                used at an existing source does not
                                exceed 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg
                                coating material (i.e., 4 weight
                                percent) and monthly average of all
                                materials used at a new source does not
                                exceed 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg
                                coating material (i.e., 1.6 weight
                                percent) as-applied on a monthly average
                                basis (paragraph (c)(3) of this
                                section); or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               (iv) Monthly average of all coating
                                material used at an existing source does
                                not exceed 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg
                                solids and monthly average of all
                                coating materials used at a new source
                                does not exceed 0.08 kg organic HAP per
                                kg solids as-applied on a monthly
                                average basis (paragraph (c)(4) of this
                                section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Tracking total monthly     Total monthly organic HAP applied does
 HAP applied.                   not exceed the calculated limit based on
                                emission limitations (paragraph (d) of
                                this section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 55350]]

 
(4) Use of a control device..  Overall organic HAP control efficiency is
                                equal to 95 percent at an existing
                                source and 98 percent at a new source,
                                on a monthly basis (paragraph (e) of
                                this section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Use of a combination of    (i) Average equivalent emission rate does
 compliant coatings and         not exceed 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg
 control devices, and           solids at an existing source and 0.08 kg
 maintain an acceptable         organic HAP per kg solids at a new
 equivalent emission rate.      source on a monthly average as-applied
                                basis (paragraph (f) of this section);
                                or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               (ii) Average equivalent emission rate
                                does not exceed 0.04 kg organic HAP per
                                kg coating material at an existing
                                source and 0.016 kg organic HAP per
                                coating material at a new source on a
                                monthly average as-applied basis
                                (paragraph (g) of this section); or
                               (iii) Average equivalent emission rate
                                does not exceed the calculated limit
                                based on emission limitations (paragraph
                                (h) of this section).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) As-purchased ``compliant'' coating materials. (1) If you comply 
by using coatings that individually meet the limits in 
Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) or (3), you must demonstrate that each coating 
material applied during the month at an existing source contains no 
more than 0.04 weight fraction organic HAP or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg 
solids, and that each coating material applied during the month at a 
new source contains no more than 0.016 weight fraction organic HAP or 
0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids, on an as-purchased basis, as 
determined in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(c).
    (2) You are in compliance with emission limits in 
Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) and (3) if each coating material applied at an 
existing source is applied as-purchased and contains no more than 0.04 
kg organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg 
solids, and each coating material applied at a new source is applied 
as-purchased and contains no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg 
coating material or 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids.
    (c) As-applied ``compliant'' coating materials. If you comply by 
using coatings that meet the limits in Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) or (3) as-
applied, you must demonstrate compliance by following one of the 
procedures in paragraph (c)(1) through (4) of this section. Compliance 
is determined in accordance with paragraph (c)(5) of this section.
    (1) Each coating material as-applied meets the weight fraction of 
coating standard (Sec. 63.3320(b)(2)). You must demonstrate that each 
coating material applied at an existing source during the month 
contains no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating material 
applied, and each coating material applied at a new source contains no 
more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg coating material applied on a 
monthly average as-applied basis as determined in accordance with 
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (ii) of this section. You must calculate 
the as-applied organic HAP content of as-purchased materials which are 
reduced, thinned, or diluted prior to application.
    (i) Determine the organic HAP content or volatile organic content 
of each coating material applied on an as-purchased basis in accordance 
with Sec. 63.3360(c).
    (ii) Calculate the monthly average as-applied organic HAP content, 
Cahi, of each coating material using Equation 3a:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.024

    or calculate the monthly average as-applied volatile organic 
content, Cavi, of each coating material using Equation 3b:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.025

    (2) Each coating material as-applied meets the weight fraction of 
solids standard (Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). You must demonstrate that each 
coating material applied at an existing source contains no more than 
0.20 kg of organic HAP per kg of solids applied, and each coating 
material applied at a new source contains no more than 0.08 kg of 
organic

[[Page 55351]]

HAP per kg of solids applied on a monthly average as-applied basis. You 
must demonstrate compliance in accordance with paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and 
(ii) of this section.
    (i) Determine the as-applied solids content of each coating 
material following the procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d). You must calculate 
the monthly average as-applied solids content of materials which are 
reduced, thinned, or diluted prior to application, using Equation 4:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.026

    (ii) Calculate the as-applied organic HAP to solids ratio, 
Hsi, using Equation 5:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.027

    (3) Monthly average organic HAP content of all coating materials 
as-applied is less than weight percent limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(2)). 
Demonstrate that the monthly average as-applied organic HAP content, 
HL, of all coating materials applied at an existing source 
is less than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg of material applied, and all 
coating materials applied at a new source are less than 0.016 kg 
organic HAP per kg of material applied, as determined by Equation 6:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.028

    (4) Monthly average HAP content of all coating materials, as-
applied, is less than weight fraction of solids limit 
(Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). Demonstrate that the monthly average as-applied 
organic HAP content on the basis of solids applied, HS, of 
all coating materials applied at an existing source is less than 0.20 
kg organic HAP per kg solids applied, and all coating materials applied 
at a new source are less than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids 
applied, as determined by Equation 7:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.029

    (5) The affected source is in compliance with emission limits in 
Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) and (3) if:
    (i) The organic HAP content of each coating material as-applied at 
an existing source is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating 
material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg solids, and the organic HAP 
content of each coating material as-applied at a new source contains no 
more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.08 kg 
organic HAP per kg solids; or
    (ii) The monthly average organic HAP content of all as-applied 
coating materials at an existing source are no more than 0.04 kg 
organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg 
solids, and the monthly average organic HAP content of all as-applied 
coating materials at a new source are no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP 
per kg coating material or 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids.
    (d) Monthly allowable HAP mass. Demonstrate that the total monthly 
organic HAP applied, Hm, as determined by Equation 8, is 
less than the calculated equivalent allowable organic HAP, 
Ha, as determined by paragraph (l) of this section:

[[Page 55352]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.030

    (e) Capture and control to reduce emissions to no more than 
allowable limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(1)). Operate a capture system and 
control device and demonstrate an overall organic HAP control 
efficiency of at least 95 percent at an existing source and at least 98 
percent at a new source for each month. Unless either of the cases 
described in paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section applies to the 
affected facility, you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with 
the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section when emissions from the 
affected source are controlled by a solvent recovery device, or the 
procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when emissions are 
controlled by an oxidizer.
    (1) If the affected source has only always-controlled work stations 
and operates more than one capture system or more than one control 
device, you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the 
provisions of either paragraph (n) or (p) of this section.
    (2) If the affected source operates one or more never-controlled 
work stations or one or more intermittently-controllable work stations, 
you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions of 
paragraph (n) of this section.
    (f) Capture and control to achieve weight fraction of solids 
applied limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). Operate a capture system and 
control device and limit the organic HAP emission rate from an existing 
source to no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP emitted per kg solids 
applied, and from a new source to no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP 
emitted per kg solids applied as determined on a monthly average as-
applied basis. If the affected source operates more than one capture 
system, more than one control device, one or more never-controlled work 
stations, or one or more intermittently-controllable work stations, 
then you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions 
of paragraph (n) of this section. Otherwise, you must demonstrate 
compliance following the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section 
when emissions from the affected source are controlled by a solvent 
recovery device, or the procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when 
emissions are controlled by an oxidizer.
    (g) Capture and control to achieve weight fraction limit 
(Sec. 63.3320(b)(2)). Operate a capture system and control device and 
limit the organic HAP emission rate to no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP 
emitted per kg coating material applied at an existing source, and no 
more than 0.016 kg organic HAP emitted per kg coating material applied 
at new sources as determined on a monthly average as-applied basis. If 
the affected source operates more than one capture system, more than 
one control device, one or more never-controlled work stations, or one 
or more intermittently-controllable work stations, then you must 
demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 
(n) of this section. Otherwise, you must demonstrate compliance 
following the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section when emissions 
from the affected source are controlled by a solvent recovery device, 
or the procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when emissions are 
controlled by an oxidizer.
    (h) Capture and control to achieve allowable emission rate, 
Ha. Operate a capture system and control device and limit 
the monthly organic HAP emissions to less than the allowable emissions 
as calculated in accordance with paragraph (l) of this section. If the 
affected source operates more than one capture system, more than one 
control device, one or more never-controlled work stations, or one or 
more intermittently-controllable work stations, then you must 
demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 
(n) of this section. Otherwise, the owner or operator must demonstrate 
compliance following the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section 
when emissions from the affected source are controlled by a solvent 
recovery device, or the procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when 
emissions are controlled by an oxidizer.
    (i) Solvent recovery device compliance demonstration. If you use a 
solvent recovery device to control emissions, you must show compliance 
by following the procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (2) of this 
section:
    (1) Liquid-liquid material balance. Perform a liquid-liquid 
material balance for each and every month as specified in paragraphs 
(i)(1)(i) through (v) of this section and use the applicable equations 
in paragraphs (i)(1)(vi) through (ix) of this section to convert the 
data to units of the selected compliance option in paragraphs (e) 
through (h) of this section. Compliance is determined in accordance 
with paragraph (i)(1)(x) of this section.
    (i) Measure the mass of each coating material applied on the 
coating line or group of coating lines controlled by a common solvent 
recovery device during the month.
    (ii) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied, organic HAP emission rate based 
on material applied, or emission of less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of each coating material 
as-applied, Cahi, during the month following the procedure 
in Sec. 63.3360(c).
    (iii) Determine the volatile organic content, Cavi, of each coating 
material as-applied during the month following the procedure in 
Sec. 63.3360(d).
    (iv) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied or emission of less than the 
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the solids content of each 
coating material applied during the month following the procedure in 
Sec. 63.3360(d).
    (v) Measure and monitor the amount of volatile organic matter 
recovered for the month according to the procedures in 
Sec. 63.3350(d)(2).
    (vi) Recovery efficiency, Rv. Calculate the volatile 
organic matter collection and recovery efficiency, Rv, using Equation 
9:

[[Page 55353]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.031

    (vii) Organic HAP emitted, He. Calculate the organic HAP 
emitted during the month, He, using Equation 10:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.032

    (viii) Organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L. 
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, 
using Equation 11:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.033

    (ix) Organic HAP based on materials applied, S. Calculate the 
organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, using Equation 
12:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.034

    (x) You are in compliance with the emission limitations in 
Sec. 63.3320(b) if:
    (A) The volatile organic matter collection and recovery efficiency, 
Rv, is 95 percent or greater at an existing source and 98 
percent or greater at a new source; or
    (B) The organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, is no 
more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at an existing 
source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at a 
new source; or
    (C) The organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, is 
no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg material applied at an existing 
source and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg material applied at 
a new source; or
    (D) The organic HAP emitted during the month, He, is 
less than the calculated allowable organic HAP, Ha, as 
determined using paragraph (l) of this section.
    (2) Continuous emission monitoring of capture system and control 
device performance. Demonstrate initial compliance through a 
performance test on capture efficiency and continuing compliance 
through continuous emission monitors and continuous monitoring of 
capture system operating parameters following the procedures in 
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (vii) of this section. Use the applicable 
equations specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(viii) through (x) of this 
section to convert the monitoring and other data into units of the 
selected compliance option in paragraphs (e) through (h) of this 
section. Compliance is determined in accordance with paragraph 
(i)(2)(xi) of this section.
    (i) Recovery efficiency, E. Continuously monitor the gas stream 
entering and exiting the control device to determine the total organic 
volatile matter mass flow rate (e.g., by determining the concentration 
of the vent gas in grams per cubic meter, and the volumetric flow rate 
in cubic meters per second, such that the total organic volatile matter 
mass flow rate in grams per second can be calculated), such that the 
percent control efficiency, E, of the control device can be calculated 
for each month using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3360.
    (ii) Capture efficiency monitoring. Whenever a coating line is 
operated, continuously monitor the operating parameter established in 
accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f) to ensure capture efficiency.
    (iii) Determine the percent capture efficiency, CE, in accordance 
with Sec. 63.3360(f).
    (iv) Control efficiency, R. Calculate the overall organic HAP 
control efficiency, R, achieved for each month using Equation 13:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.035

    (v) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied, organic HAP emission rate based 
on materials applied, or emission of less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, measure the mass of each coating material applied on the 
coating line or group of coating lines controlled by a

[[Page 55354]]

common control device during the month.
    (vi) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied, organic HAP emission rate based 
on material applied or emission of less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of each coating material 
as-applied, Cahi, during the month following the procedure 
in Sec. 63.3360(c).
    (vii) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied or emission of less than the 
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the solids content of each 
coating material as-applied, Casi, during the month following the 
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d).
    (viii) Organic HAP emitted, He. Calculate the organic 
HAP emitted during the month, He, for each month using 
Equation 14:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.036

    (ix) Organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L. 
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, 
using Equation 11 of this section.
    (x) Organic HAP based on materials applied, S. Calculate the 
organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, using Equation 
12 of this section.
    (xi) Compare actual performance to performance required by 
compliance option. The affected source is in compliance with the 
emission limitations in Sec. 63.3320(b) if the capture system operating 
parameter is operated at an average value greater than or less than (as 
appropriate) the operating parameter value established in accordance 
with Sec. 63.3350(f); and
    (A) The organic volatile matter collection and recovery efficiency, 
Rv, is 95 percent or greater at an existing source and 98 
percent or greater at a new source; or
    (B) The organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, is no 
more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at an existing 
source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at a 
new source; or
    (C) The organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, is 
no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg material applied at an existing 
source and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg material applied at 
a new source; or
    (D) The organic HAP emitted during the month, He, is 
less than the calculated allowable organic HAP, Ha, as 
determined using paragraph (l) of this section.
    (j) [Reserved]
    (k) Oxidizer compliance demonstration procedures. If you use an 
oxidizer to control emissions, you must show compliance by following 
the procedures in paragraph (k)(1) of this section. Use the applicable 
equations specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this section to convert the 
monitoring and other data into units of the selected compliance option 
in paragraph (e) through (h) of this section. Compliance is determined 
in accordance with paragraph (k)(3) of this section.
    (1) Demonstrate initial compliance through performance tests of 
capture efficiency and control device efficiency and continuing 
compliance through continuous monitoring of capture system and control 
device operating parameters as specified in paragraphs (k)(1)(i) 
through (vi) of this section:
    (i) Determine the oxidizer destruction efficiency, E, using the 
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(e).
    (ii) Determine the capture system capture efficiency, CE, in 
accordance with Sec. 63.3360(f).
    (iii) Capture and control efficiency monitoring. Whenever a coating 
line is operated, continuously monitor the operating parameters 
established in accordance with Sec. 63.3350(e) and (f) to ensure 
capture and control efficiency.
    (iv) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied, organic HAP emission rate based 
on materials applied, or emission of less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, measure the mass of each coating material applied on the 
coating line or group of coating lines controlled by a common oxidizer 
during the month.
    (v) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied, organic HAP emission rate based 
on material applied, or emission of less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of each coating material 
as-applied, Casi, during the month following the procedure 
in Sec. 63.3360(c).
    (vi) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP 
emission rate based on solids applied or emission of less than the 
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the solids content of each 
coating material applied during the month following the procedure in 
Sec. 63.3360(d).
    (2) Convert the information obtained under paragraph (k)(1) of this 
section into the units of the selected compliance option using the 
calculation procedures specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (iv) 
of this section.
    (i) Control efficiency, R. Calculate the overall organic HAP 
control efficiency, R, achieved using Equation 13 of this section.
    (ii) Organic HAP emitted, He. Calculate the organic HAP 
emitted during the month, He, using Equation 14 of this 
section.
    (iii) Organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L. 
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, for 
each month using Equation 11 of this section.
    (iv) Organic HAP based on materials applied, S. Calculate the 
organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, using Equation 
12 of this section.
    (3) You are in compliance with the emission limitations in 
Sec. 63.3320(b) if the oxidizer is operated such that the average 
operating parameter value is greater than the operating parameter value 
established in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(e) for each 3-hour period, 
and the capture system operating parameter is operated at an average 
value greater than or less than (as appropriate) the operating 
parameter value established in accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f); and
    (i) The overall organic HAP control efficiency, R, is 95 percent or 
greater at an existing source and 98 percent or greater at a new 
source; or
    (ii) The organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, is 
no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at an existing 
source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg solids applied at a 
new source; or
    (iii) The organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, 
is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg material applied at an 
existing source and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg material 
applied at a new source; or
    (iv) The organic HAP emitted during the month, He, is 
less than the calculated allowable organic HAP, Ha,

[[Page 55355]]

as determined using paragraph (l) of this section.
    (l) Monthly allowable HAP emissions. This paragraph (l) provides 
the procedures and calculations for determining monthly allowable 
organic HAP emissions, Ha, for use in demonstrating 
compliance in accordance with paragraph (d), (h), (i)(1)(xi)(D), 
(i)(2)(xi)(D), or (k)(1)(xi)(D) of this section. You will need to 
determine the amount of material applied at 20 weight 
percent solids and the amount of material applied at 20 weight percent 
solids. The allowable organic HAP limit is then calculated based on 
material applied at 20 weight percent solids complying with 
0.2 kg organic HAP per kg solids at existing sources or 0.08 kg organic 
HAP per kg solids at new sources, and material applied at 20 weight 
percent solids complying with 4 weight percent organic HAP at existing 
sources and 1.6 weight-percent organic HAP at new sources, as follows:
    (1) Determine the as-purchased mass of each coating material 
applied each month, Mi.
    (2) Determine the as-purchased solids content of each coating 
material applied each month, in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(d)(1), 
Csi.
    (3) Determine the as-purchased mass fraction of each coating 
material which was applied at 20 weight percent or greater solids 
content, on an as-applied basis, Gi.
    (4) Determine the total mass of each solvent, diluent, thinner, or 
reducer added to coating materials which were applied at less than 20 
weight percent solids content on an as-applied basis each month, 
Mij.
    (5) Calculate the monthly allowable organic HAP emissions, 
Ha, using Equation 15a for existing sources:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.037

or Equation 15b for new sources:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.038

    (m) [Reserved]
    (n) Combinations of capture and control. If you operate more than 
one capture system, more than one control device, one or more never-
controlled work stations, or one or more intermittently-controllable 
work stations, you must calculate HAP emissions according to the 
procedures in paragraphs (n)(1) through (4) of this section, and use 
the calculation procedures specified in paragraph (n)(5) of this 
section to convert the monitoring and other data into units of the 
selected control option in paragraphs (e) through (h) of this section. 
Use the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(7) of this section to 
demonstrate compliance.
    (1) Solvent recovery system using liquid-liquid balance compliance 
demonstration. If you choose to comply by means of a liquid-liquid mass 
balance for each solvent recovery system used to control one or more 
coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP emissions for those 
coating lines controlled by that solvent recovery system either:
    (i) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iii) and (v) 
through (vii) of this section if the coating lines controlled by that 
solvent recovery system have only always-controlled work stations; or
    (ii) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(1)(ii) and (iii), (v) and 
(vi), and (o) of this section if the coating lines controlled by that 
solvent recovery system have one or more never-controlled or 
intermittently-controllable work stations.
    (2) Solvent recovery system using performance test compliance 
demonstration and CEMS. To demonstrate compliance through an initial 
test of capture efficiency, continuous monitoring of a capture system 
operating parameter, and a CEMS on each solvent recovery system used to 
control one or more coating lines, you must:
    (i) For each capture system delivering emissions to that solvent 
recovery system, monitor the operating parameter established in 
accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f) to ensure capture system efficiency; 
and
    (ii) Determine the organic HAP emissions for those coating lines 
served by each capture system delivering emissions to that solvent 
recovery system either:
    (A) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii), (v) and 
(vi), and (viii) of this section if the coating lines served by that 
capture and control system have only always-controlled work stations; 
or
    (B) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii), (vi), 
and (o) of this section if the coating lines served by that capture and 
control system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-
controllable work stations.
    (3) Oxidizer. To demonstrate compliance through performance tests 
of capture efficiency and control device efficiency, continuous 
monitoring of capture system, and CPMS for control device operating 
parameters for each oxidizer used to control emissions from one or more 
coating lines, you must:
    (i) Monitor the operating parameter established in accordance with 
Sec. 63.3350(e) to ensure control device efficiency; and
    (ii) For each capture system delivering emissions to that oxidizer, 
monitor the operating parameter established in accordance with 
Sec. 63.3350(f) to ensure capture efficiency; and
    (iii) Determine the organic HAP emissions for those coating lines 
served by each capture system delivering emissions to that oxidizer 
either:
    (A) In accordance with paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (v) and (vii) 
of this section if the coating lines served by that capture and control 
system have only always-controlled work stations; or
    (B) In accordance with paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (iii), (v), and 
(o) of this section if the coating lines served by that capture and 
control system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-
controllable work stations.
    (4) Uncontrolled coating lines. If you own or operate one or more

[[Page 55356]]

uncontrolled coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP applied 
on those coating lines using Equation 8 of this section. The organic 
HAP emitted from an uncontrolled coating line is equal to the organic 
HAP applied on that coating line.
    (5) Convert the information obtained under paragraphs (n)(1) 
through (4) of this section into the units of the selected compliance 
option using the calculation procedures specified in paragraphs 
(n)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
    (i) Organic HAP emitted, He. Calculate the organic HAP 
emissions for the affected source for the month by summing all organic 
HAP emissions calculated according to paragraphs (n)(1), (2)(ii), 
(3)(iii), and (4) of this section.
    (ii) Solids applied, Casi. If demonstrating compliance 
on the basis of organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied or 
emission of less than the calculated allowable organic HAP, the owner 
or operator must determine the solids content of each coating material 
applied during the month following the procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d).
    (iii) Organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L. 
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on solids applied, L, for 
each month using Equation 11 of this section.
    (iv) Organic HAP based on materials applied, S. Calculate the 
organic HAP emission rate based on material applied, S, using Equation 
12 of this section.
    (6) Compliance. The affected source is in compliance with the 
emission limitations in Sec. 63.3320(b) for the month if all operating 
parameters required to be monitored under paragraphs (n)(1) through (3) 
of this section were maintained at the values established under 
Secs. 63.3350 and 63.3360; and
    (i) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source 
based on solids applied, L, is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg 
solids applied at an existing source, and no more than 0.08 kg organic 
HAP per kg solids applied at a new source; or
    (ii) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source 
based on material applied, S, is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per 
kg material applied at an existing source, and no more than 0.016 kg 
organic HAP per kg material applied at a new source; or
    (iii) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source 
during the month, He, is less than the calculated allowable 
organic HAP, Ha, as determined using paragraph (l) of this 
section; or
    (iv) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source 
was not more than 5 percent of the total mass of organic HAP applied 
for the month at an existing source, and no more than 2 percent of the 
total mass of organic HAP applied for the month at a new source. The 
total mass of organic HAP applied by the affected source in the month 
must be determined by the owner or operator using Equation 8 of this 
section.
    (o) Intermittently-controllable and never-controlled work stations. 
If you have been expressly referenced to this paragraph by paragraphs 
(n)(1)(ii), (n)(2)(ii)(B), or (n)(3)(iii)(B) of this section for 
calculation procedures to determine organic HAP emissions for your 
intermittently-controllable and never-controlled work stations you 
must:
    (1) Determine the sum of the mass of all coating materials as-
applied on intermittently-controllable work stations operating in 
bypass mode and the mass of all coating materials as-applied on never-
controlled work stations during the month, MBi.
    (2) Determine the sum of the mass of all coating materials as-
applied on intermittently-controllable work stations operating in a 
controlled mode and the mass of all coating materials applied on 
always-controlled work stations during the month, MCi.
    (3) Liquid-liquid compliance demonstration. For each coating line 
or group of coating lines for which you use the provisions of paragraph 
(n)(1)(ii) of this section, you must calculate the organic HAP emitted 
during the month using Equation 16:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.039

    (4) Performance test to determine capture efficiency and control 
device efficiency. For each coating line or group of coating lines for 
which you use the provisions of paragraph (n)(2)(ii)(B) or 
(n)(3)(iii)(B) of this section, you must calculate the organic HAP 
emitted during the month, He, using Equation 17:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13SE00.040

    (p) Always-controlled work stations with more than one capture and 
control system. If you operate more than one capture system or more 
than one control device, and only have always-controlled work stations, 
then you are in compliance with the emission limitation in 
Sec. 63.3320(b)(1) for the month if for each coating line or group of 
coating lines controlled by a common control device:
    (1) The volatile matter collection and recovery efficiency, 
Rv, as determined by paragraphs (i)(1)(i), (iii), (v), and 
(vi) of this section, is at least 95 percent at an existing source and 
at least 98 percent at a new source; or
    (2) The overall organic HAP control efficiency as determined by 
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (v) of this section for each coating line 
or group of coating lines served by that control device and a common 
capture system is at least 95 percent at an existing source and at 
least 98 percent at a new source; or
    (3) The overall organic HAP control efficiency as determined by 
paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (iii) and (k)(2)(i) of this section for 
each coating line or group of coating lines served by that control 
device and a common capture system is at least 95 percent at an 
existing source and at least 98 percent at a new source.

Reports and Records


Sec. 63.3400  What reports must I submit?

    (a) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this 
subpart must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (b) through (h) 
of this section to the Administrator:

[[Page 55357]]

    (b) You must submit an initial notification as required by 
Sec. 63.9(b).
    (1) Initial notification for existing sources must be submitted no 
later than 1 year before the compliance date specified in 
Sec. 63.3330(a).
    (2) Initial notification for new and reconstructed sources must be 
submitted as required by Sec. 63.9(b).
    (3) For the purpose of this rule, a title V or part 70 permit 
application may be used in lieu of the initial notification required 
under Sec. 63.9(b), provided the same information is contained in the 
permit application as required by Sec. 63.9(b), and the State to which 
the permit application has been submitted has an approved operating 
permit program under part 70 of this chapter and has received 
delegation of authority from EPA to implement and enforce this subpart.
    (4) If you are using a permit application in lieu of an initial 
notification in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the 
permit application must be submitted by the same due date specified for 
the initial notification.
    (c) You must submit a semi-annual compliance report according to 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Compliance report dates.
    (i) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on 
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in 
Sec. 63.3330(a) and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is 
the first date following the end of the calendar half immediately 
following the compliance date that is specified for your source in 
Sec. 63.3330(a).
    (ii) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no 
later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the 
calendar half immediately following the compliance date that is 
specified for your affected source in Sec. 63.3330(a).
    (iii) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual 
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual 
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
    (iv) Each subsequent compliance report must be postmarked or 
delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the 
first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period.
    (v) For each affected source that is subject to permitting 
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71, and the permitting 
authority has established dates for submitting semiannual reports 
pursuant to Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or Sec. 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may 
submit the first and subsequent compliance reports according to the 
dates the permitting authority has established instead of according to 
the dates in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section.
    (2) The compliance report must contain the following information in 
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section:
    (i) Company name and address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the 
report.
    (iii) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the 
reporting period.
    (iv) If there are no deviations from any emission limitations 
(emission limit or operating limit) that apply to you, a statement that 
there were no deviations from the emission limitations during the 
reporting period, and that no continuous monitoring system (CMS) was 
inoperative, inactive, malfunctioning, out-of-control, repaired, or 
adjusted.
    (v) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit 
or operating limit) that applies to you that occurs at an affected 
source where you are not using a CEMS to comply with the emission 
limitations in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the 
information in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section, and:
    (A) The total operating time of each affected source during the 
reporting period.
    (B) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations 
(including unknown cause), if applicable, and the corrective action 
taken.
    (C) Information on the number, duration, and cause for CPMS 
downtime incidents, if applicable, other than downtime associated with 
zero and span and other daily calibration checks.
    (vi) For each deviation from an emission limit occurring at an 
affected source where you are using a CEMS to comply with the emission 
limit in this subpart, you must include the information in paragraphs 
(c)(2)(i) through (iii) and (vi)(A) through (J) of this section.
    (A) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (B) The date and time that each CEMS and CPMS, if applicable, was 
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
    (C) The date and time that each CEMS and CPMS, if applicable, was 
out-of-control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
    (D) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and 
whether each deviation occurred during a period of start-up, shutdown, 
or malfunction or during another period.
    (E) A summary of the total duration (in hours) of the deviation 
during the reporting period, and the total duration as a percent of the 
total source operating time during that reporting period.
    (F) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting period into those that are due to start-up, shutdown, control 
equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other 
unknown causes.
    (G) A summary of the total duration (in hours) of CEMS and CPMS 
downtime during the reporting period, and the total duration of CEMS 
and CPMS downtime as a percent of the total source operating time 
during that reporting period.
    (H) A breakdown of the total duration of CEMS and CPMS downtime 
during the reporting period into periods that are due to monitoring 
equipment malfunctions, nonmonitoring equipment malfunctions, quality 
assurance/quality control calibrations, other known causes, and other 
unknown causes.
    (I) The date of the latest CEMS and CPMS certification or audit.
    (J) A description of any changes in CEMS, CPMS, or controls since 
the last reporting period.
    (d) You must submit a Notification of Performance Tests as 
specified in Secs. 63.7 and 63.9(e) if you are complying with the 
emission standard using a control device and you are required to 
conduct a performance test. This notification, and the site-specific 
test plan required under Sec. 63.7(c)(2), must identify the operating 
parameters to be monitored to ensure that the capture efficiency of the 
capture system and the control efficiency of the control device 
measured during the performance test is maintained. Unless EPA objects 
to the parameter or requests changes, you may consider the parameter 
approved.
    (e) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status as 
specified in Sec. 63.9(h).
    (f) You must submit performance test reports as specified in 
Sec. 63.10(d)(2) if you are using a control device to comply with the 
emission standard, and you have not obtained a waiver from the 
performance test requirement or you are not exempted from this 
requirement by Sec. 63.3360(b). The performance test must be submitted 
as part of the notification of compliance status required in 
Sec. 63.3400(i).
    (g) You must submit start-up, shutdown, and malfunction reports as 
specified in Sec. 63.10(d)(5), except that the provisions in subpart A 
of this part

[[Page 55358]]

pertaining to start-ups, shutdowns, and malfunctions do not apply 
unless a control device is used to comply with this subpart.
    (1) If actions taken by an owner or operator during a start-up, 
shutdown, or malfunction of an affected source (including actions taken 
to correct a malfunction) are not completely consistent with the 
procedures specified in the source's start-up, shutdown, and 
malfunction plan required by Sec. 63.6(e)(3), the owner or operator 
must state such information in the report. The start-up, shutdown, or 
malfunction report must consist of a letter containing the name, title, 
and signature of the responsible official who is certifying its 
accuracy and must be submitted to the Administrator.
    (2) Separate start-up, shutdown, or malfunction reports are not 
required if the information is included in the report specified in 
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section.


Sec. 63.3410  What records must I keep?

    (a) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this 
subpart must maintain the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1) 
through (3) of this section on a monthly basis in accordance with the 
requirements of Sec. 63.10(b)(1):
    (1) Records specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(2) of all measurements 
needed to demonstrate compliance with this standard, including:
    (i) Continuous emission monitor data in accordance with the 
requirements of Sec. 63.3350(d);
    (ii) Control device and capture system operating parameter data in 
accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3350(c), (e), and (f);
    (iii) Organic HAP content data for the purpose of demonstrating 
compliance in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3360(c);
    (iv) Volatile matter and solids content data for the purpose of 
demonstrating compliance in accordance with the requirements of 
Sec. 63.3360(d);
    (v) Overall control efficiency determination using capture 
efficiency test and oxidizer destruction efficiency test in accordance 
with the requirements of Sec. 63.3360(e) and (f); and
    (vi) Material usage, HAP usage, volatile matter usage, and solids 
usage and compliance demonstrations using these data in accordance with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.3370(b), (c), and (e).
    (2) Records specified in Sec. 63.10(c) for each continuous 
monitoring system operated by the owner or operator in accordance with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.3350(b).
    (b) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this 
subpart must maintain records of all liquid-liquid material balances 
performed in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3370. The 
records must be maintained in accordance with the requirements of 
Sec. 63.10(b).

Delegation of Authority


Sec. 63.3420  What authorities may be delegated to the States?

    (a) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority to a 
State under 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities contained in 
paragraph (b) of this section must be retained by the Administrator and 
not transferred to a State.
    (b) Authority which will not be delegated to States: 
Sec. 63.3360(c), approval of alternate test method for organic HAP 
content determination; Sec. 63.3360(d), approval of alternate test 
method for volatile matter determination.


Secs. 63.3421-63.3479  [Reserved]

Tables

    Table 1 to Subpart JJJJ.--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63 General
                       Provisions to Subpart JJJJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Applicable to subpart
 General provisions reference            JJJJ             Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  63.1(a)(1)-(4)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(a)(5)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.1(a)(6)-(8)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(a)(9)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.1(a)(10)-(14)........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(b)(1)..............  No...................  Subpart JJJJ
                                                        specifies
                                                        applicability.
Sec.  63.1(b)(2)-(3)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(c)(1)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(c)(2)..............  No...................  Area sources are
                                                        not subject to
                                                        emission
                                                        standards of
                                                        subpart JJJJ.
Sec.  63.1(c)(3)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.1(c)(4)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(c)(5)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.1(d).................  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.1(e).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.2....................  Yes..................  Additional
                                                        definitions in
                                                        subpart JJJJ.
Sec.  63.3(a)-(c).............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.4(a)(1)-(3)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.4(a)(4)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.4(a)(5)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.4(b)-(c).............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(a)(1)-(2)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(b)(1)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(b)(2)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.5(b)(3)-(6)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(c).................  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.5(d).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(e).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.5(f).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(a).................  Yes..................  Applies only when
                                                        capture and
                                                        control system
                                                        is used to
                                                        comply with the
                                                        standard.
Sec.  63.6(b)(1)-(5)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(b)(6)..............  No...................  Reserved.

[[Page 55359]]

 
Sec.  63.6(b)(7)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(c)(1)-(2)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(c)(3)-(4)..........  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.6(c)(5)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(d).................  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.6(e).................  Yes..................  Provisions
                                                        pertaining to
                                                        start-ups,
                                                        shutdowns,
                                                        malfunctions,
                                                        and CMS do not
                                                        apply unless an
                                                        add-on control
                                                        system is used.
Sec.  63.6(f).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(g).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(h).................  No...................  Subpart JJJJ does
                                                        not require
                                                        continuous
                                                        opacity
                                                        monitoring
                                                        systems (COMS).
Sec.  63.6(i)(1)-(14).........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(i)(15).............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.6(i)(16).............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.6(j).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.7....................  Yes..................  Except Sec.
                                                        63.3330
                                                        specifies that
                                                        performance
                                                        tests at
                                                        existing sources
                                                        must be
                                                        conducted by the
                                                        compliance date.
Sec.  63.8(a)(1)-(2)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.8(a)(3)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.8(a)(4)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.8(b).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)-(3)..........  Yes..................  Sec.  63.8(c)(1)(
                                                        i) & (ii) only
                                                        apply if you use
                                                        capture and
                                                        control systems
                                                        and are required
                                                        to have a start-
                                                        up, shutdown,
                                                        and malfunction
                                                        plan.
Sec.  63.8(c)(4)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.8(c)(5)..............  No...................  Subpart JJJJ does
                                                        Not require
                                                        COMS.
Sec.  63.8(c)(6)-(c)(8).......  Yes..................  Provisions for
                                                        COMS are Not
                                                        applicable.
Sec.  63.8(d)-(f).............  Yes..................  Sec.  63.8(f)(6)
                                                        only applies if
                                                        you use CEMS.
Sec.  63.8(g).................  Yes..................  Only applies if
                                                        you use CEMS.
Sec.  63.9(a).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(b)(1)..............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(b)(2)..............  Yes..................  Except Sec.
                                                        63.3400(b)(1)(i)
                                                        requires
                                                        submittal of
                                                        initial
                                                        notification for
                                                        existing sources
                                                        no later than 1
                                                        year before
                                                        compliance date.
Sec.  63.9(b)(3)-(5)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(c)-(e).............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(f).................  No...................  Subpart JJJJ does
                                                        not require
                                                        opacity and
                                                        visible
                                                        emissions
                                                        observations.
Sec.  63.9(g).................  Yes..................  Provisions for
                                                        COMS are not
                                                        applicable.
Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(3)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(h)(4)..............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.9(h)(5)-(6)..........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(i).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.9(j).................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(a)................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(b)(1)-(3).........  Yes..................  Sec.  63.10(b)(2)
                                                        (i) through (v)
                                                        only apply if
                                                        you use a
                                                        capture and
                                                        control system.
Sec.  63.10(c)(1).............  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(c)(2)-(4).........  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.10(c)(5)-(8).........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(c)(9).............  No...................  Reserved.
Sec.  63.10(c)(10)-(15).......  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(d)(1)-(2).........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(d)(3).............  No...................  Subpart JJJJ does
                                                        not require
                                                        opacity and
                                                        visible
                                                        emissions
                                                        observations.
Sec.  63.10(d)(4)-(5).........  Yes..................
Sec.  63.10(e)(1)-(2).........  Yes..................  Provisions for
                                                        COMS are not
                                                        applicable.
Sec.  63.10(e)(3).............  No...................
Sec.  63.10(f)................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.11...................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.12...................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.13...................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.14...................  Yes..................
Sec.  63.15...................  Yes..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-22653 Filed 9-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P