[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28639-28644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7495]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178; FRL-8171-2]
RIN 2060-AM72


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On December 11, 2003, EPA promulgated national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous 
coating manufacturing. The promulgated rule applies to the manufacture 
of coatings, such as paints, inks, and adhesives. The proposed 
amendments clarify that coating manufacturing means the production of 
coatings using operations such as mixing and blending; not reaction or 
separation processes used in chemical manufacturing.
    The proposed amendments also clarify the compliance date for 
certain equipment that is part of a chemical manufacturing process unit 
that is also used to produce a coating.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before July 3, 2006.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by May 30, 2006, a public hearing will be held on June 
1, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0178, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: (202) 566-1741.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a 
duplicate copy, if possible. We request that a separate copy of each 
public comment also be sent to the contact person listed below (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA, Room B-102, 
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries 
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and 
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0178. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment with any disk 
or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of 
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects 
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation 
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone 
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10 
a.m. at EPA's Environmental Research Center Auditorium, Research 
Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site nearby.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Randy McDonald, Coatings and 
Chemicals Group (E143-01), Sector

[[Page 28640]]

Policies and Programs Division, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 
telephone number: (919) 541-5402; fax number: (919) 541-3470; e-mail 
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. The regulated category 
and entities affected by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Examples of regulated
            Category               NAICS Code*           entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.......................      3255, 3259   Manufacturers of
                                                   paints, coatings,
                                                   adhesives, or inks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers likely to be interested in the revisions to the rule 
affected by this action. To determine whether your facility, company, 
business, organization, etc., is regulated by this action, you should 
carefully examine all of the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7985 
of the rule, as well as in today's amendment to the definitions 
sections. If you have questions regarding the applicability of the 
amendments to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of 
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI on a disk or CD-ROM 
that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and 
then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific 
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version 
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the 
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be 
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked 
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 
40 CFR part 2.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Randy 
McDonald, Coatings and Chemicals Group, Sector Policies and Programs 
Division (E143-01), EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone 
number: (919) 541-5402, e-mail address: [email protected], at 
least two days in advance of the potential date of the public hearing. 
Persons interested in attending the public hearing also must call Mr. 
Randy McDonald to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. A 
public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to 
present data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed amendments.
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of the proposed rule is also available on the WWW 
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a 
copy of the proposed rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and 
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology 
exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
    Organization of this Document. The information presented in this 
preamble is organized as follows:

I. Why are we proposing amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH?
II. How are we proposing to amend 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH?
    A. Definition of Coating and Applicability
    B. Process Unit Groups
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Why are we proposing amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH?

    On December 11, 2003, we promulgated NESHAP for miscellaneous 
coating manufacturing as subpart HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 (68 FR 69164). 
Subpart HHHHH applies to the facilitywide collection of equipment used 
to manufacture coatings. The term ``coating'' is defined as any 
material such as paint, ink, or adhesive that is intended to be applied 
to a substrate. A ``coating'' consists of a mixture of resins, 
pigments, solvents, and/or other additives. Typically, these materials 
are described by the North American Industry Classification System 
(NAICS) codes 3255 and 3259.
    In the preamble to the final subpart HHHHH rule, in response to a 
comment that the definition of coating is too expansive, we discussed 
how to determine whether subpart HHHHH or 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF, 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Miscellaneous 
Organic Chemical Manufacturing, applies. We stated:

    If the product being manufactured is a coating, and the 
manufacturing steps involve blending, mixing, diluting, and related 
formulation operations, without an intended reaction, then the 
process is subject to subpart HHHHH. If a reaction as well as 
various other operations is involved, then the process typically is 
subject to subpart FFFF. However, if the downstream formulation 
operations are distinct from the preceding synthesis process(es), 
(perhaps because the synthesized product is isolated and some of it 
is sold or transferred offsite), then the formulation operations are 
subject to subpart HHHHH, and the synthesis operations are subject 
to subpart FFFF. In the event that equipment used for manufacturing 
products in processes that are subject to subpart FFFF is also used 
for coating manufacturing operations that are subject to subpart 
HHHHH, then the primary use of the equipment determines 
applicability.

    On May 13, 2005 (70 FR 25678), EPA clarified how to determine 
whether subpart FFFF or subpart HHHHH applies when equipment is used to 
produce both subpart FFFF and HHHHH products. We stated:

    Pursuant to subpart FFFF, the primary use of nondedicated 
multipurpose equipment only dictates which regulation governs where 
a process unit group (PUG) has been developed under 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart FFFF, Sec.  63.2535(l), and the primary product is a subpart 
FFFF, a subpart GGG, or a subpart MMM product. Where one of these 
products is the primary product, the primary product determines 
which regulation applies to each miscellaneous organic chemical 
process unit (MCPU). Where a subpart FFFF product is the primary 
product of the PUG, subpart FFFF may be complied with for all 
process units in the PUG in lieu of other 40 CFR part 63 rules.
    Where the primary product of the PUG is subject to regulation 
under any 40 CFR part 63 regulation, other than subpart FFFF, MMM, 
or GGG, then Sec.  63.2535(l)(3)(ii)(C) dictates that subpart FFFF 
applies to ``each MCPU in the PUG.'' Otherwise, the regulation 
applicable to the other product (this would be the primary product 
if there are only two products) applies to the PUG. Accordingly, if 
a PUG has been developed, any process unit that is used to produce 
both a subpart FFFF and subpart HHHHH product must comply with 
subpart FFFF for the MCPU. Where a PUG has not been developed, the 
product of the process

[[Page 28641]]

generally determines applicability, not primary use.

    Because the definition of coating at 40 CFR 63.8105 in subpart 
HHHHH does not specify that coatings are produced only by blending, 
mixing, diluting, and related formulation operations, without chemical 
synthesis or separation, some products of synthetic organic chemical 
manufacturing could be considered coatings. This overly broad 
definition of ``coating'' expands the applicability of subpart HHHHH to 
equipment intended to be covered by subpart FFFF. We are proposing to 
revise the definition of coating such that the applicability of the 
final rule accurately and appropriately reflects the coating 
manufacturing industry and the basis for the maximum achievable control 
technology (MACT) floor.
    Separately, the recent extension of the compliance date for subpart 
FFFF (see 71 FR 10439) raises a timing issue with respect to subpart 
FFFF and subpart HHHHH overlap. The extension for the compliance date 
for subpart FFFF results in the compliance date for subpart HHHHH 
occurring before the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing 
NESHAP compliance date, thus creating a problem for plants with 
equipment subject to both subparts FFFF and HHHHH who opt to develop a 
process unit group (PUG). A PUG may be established and developed under 
subpart FFFF for a process unit that is used to produce both a subpart 
FFFF and subpart HHHHH product. If the primary product is subject to 
subpart FFFF, then the plant may comply with subpart FFFF, and not also 
HHHHH, for all process units in the PUG according to 40 CFR 
63.2535(l)(3)(i). In the preamble to the final subpart FFFF rule, in 
response to a comment that the proposed rule did not go far enough to 
prevent multipurpose equipment from being subject to more than one MACT 
standard, we discuss the basis of the PUG. We stated:

    We recognize that 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF, will affect 
manufacturers of specialty chemicals and other products whose 
multipurpose production processes are subject to other MACT 
standards, creating situations where there are overlapping 
requirements. The challenge is how to consolidate overlapping 
requirements and still maintain the MACT reductions anticipated from 
each of the various standards. Many MACT standards that regulate 
specialty chemicals, pesticide active ingredients (PAI), SOCMI, and 
polymers and resins have specific language relating to overlap. The 
predominant method of addressing possible overlap is by designating 
a primary product and requiring compliance with the final rule that 
applies to the primary product at all times when the flexible 
process unit is operating. The presumption is that the equipment 
should be regulated according to the standard that effectively 
applies for a majority of products produced.
    After considering the provisions in previous rules, we decided 
to include in the final rule a provision that is essentially the 
same as in the PAI rule. This provision is based on developing a PUG 
from a collection of multipurpose equipment, determining the primary 
product for the PUG, and, generally, complying with the rule that 
applies to the primary product for all process units within the PUG.

    Because we have extended the compliance date for subpart FFFF, a 
source that primarily manufactures organic chemicals, but also produces 
a coating product in the same equipment, would not be able to comply 
with subparts FFFF and HHHHH as EPA intended during the period between 
the compliance date for subpart HHHHH (December 11, 2006) and subpart 
FFFF (May 10, 2008). If the source had developed a compliance strategy 
that was based on a PUG according to 40 CFR 63.2535(l)(3)(i), the 
compliance option would no longer be available. The source would have 
to either install and operate interim controls for coating 
manufacturing operations or comply with the requirements of subpart 
FFFF on the compliance date for subpart HHHHH, but before the 
compliance date for subpart FFFF. For the reasons set forth in the 
discussion of the compliance date extension in the preamble to the 
proposed amendments for subpart FFFF (70 FR 73098, December 8, 2005), 
it is unlikely that sources will be able to comply with the revised 
subpart FFFF by the compliance date for subpart HHHHH. Affected sources 
will have to review their compliance strategy due to possible 
significant amendments to subpart FFFF, such as changes to requirements 
for process condensers and changes to the definition of batch process 
vent and wastewater stream. If the source was planning to comply with 
subpart HHHHH by referencing 40 CFR 63.2535(l)(3)(i), it is unlikely 
the source would have enough time to design and install interim 
controls. Thus, relying on the presumption that equipment should be 
regulated according to the standard that effectively applies for a 
majority of products produced, we are proposing to amend the final 
HHHHH rule to reference subpart FFFF requirements for a PUG which 
produces primarily subpart FFFF products. The proposed amendments would 
also clarify that if the source so chooses, equipment that is part of a 
PUG in which a MON product is the primary product must comply with the 
MON by the MON compliance date, not subpart HHHHH by the subpart HHHHH 
compliance date.
    Finally, we are also proposing to clarify what operations by end 
users are exempt from HHHHH. An end user is someone who applies a 
coating to substrate. In the preamble to the final rule we stated the 
final rule does not apply to end user preparation of the coating 
products for application by the end user (68 FR 69164). We are 
proposing to add another exemption for operations that modify a 
purchased coating prior to application at the purchasing facility. This 
exemption would apply only if the purchased product is already a 
coating that an end user could apply as purchased.

II. How are we proposing to amend 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH?

A. Definition of Coating and Applicability

    We are amending the definition of coating to clarify that products 
of reaction and separation, such as polymers, resins, and synthetic 
organic chemicals, are not covered by the final rule. In the final rule 
coating means any material such as a paint, ink, or adhesive that is 
intended to be applied to a substrate and consists of a mixture of 
resins, pigments, solvents, and/or other additives. Almost all affected 
coating manufacturing operations are described by NAICS codes 325510 
(paints and coatings), 325520 (adhesives and sealants), and 325910 
(inks). Coatings are typically a product of mechanical processing, for 
example, paint formulating involves three basic steps: Dispersing of 
raw materials, tinting and thinning, and filling and packaging. 
Miscellaneous coatings do not include coating products described by 
other NAICS codes unless the coating products are produced using mixing 
and blending type of processes. Coating manufacturing uses materials 
that have been manufactured and stored prior to mixing and blending.
    In addition to changing the definition of ``coating,'' we are also 
proposing a change to 40 CFR 63.7985 to clarify the types of operations 
by end users that are exempt. An end user is someone who applies a 
coating to substrate. In section IV.A of the preamble to the final 
rule, we stated: ``the final rule does not apply to activities 
conducted by end users of coating products in preparation for 
application'' (68 FR 69164, December 11, 2003). To implement this 
exemption, we added 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2), which defined ``affiliated 
operations'' at sources that are subject to certain surface coating 
rules (i.e., subparts KK, GG, JJJJ, MMMM, and

[[Page 28642]]

SSSS of 40 CFR part 63). These operations had been examined during the 
development of the five surface coating rules. We also noted in the 
preamble to the final rule that similar operations at sources subject 
to other surface coating rules may be exempt because 40 CFR 
63.7985(a)(4) specifies that subpart HHHHH applies only to operations 
that are not part of an affected source under another subpart of part 
63. The final rule, however, does not specifically exempt any 
operations at sources that are not subject to another subpart of part 
63. Thus, to be consistent with our position that subpart HHHHH does 
not apply to activities conducted by end users of coating products in 
preparation for application, we are proposing to add another exemption 
in 40 CFR 63.7985(d). The proposed paragraph (5) in this section would 
exempt operations that modify a purchased coating prior to application 
at the purchasing facility. This exemption would apply only if the 
purchased product is already a coating that an end user could apply as 
purchased. Operations by an end user to modify such a coating by mixing 
with additives, perhaps to adjust the viscosity or change the color 
tint, would be exempt. Note that the modification operations also must 
be conducted at the source where the modified coating will be applied; 
modifications at a central location with the modified coating being 
shipped to multiple facilities within a company would not be exempt. We 
are specifically requesting comments on the provisions to exempt 
operations conducted by end users. For example, we are interested in 
descriptions of activities conducted by end users that are not subject 
to surface coating rules, including estimates of hazardous air 
pollutant emissions. We are also interested in alternative suggestions 
for rule language to achieve our objective of exempting operations by 
end users that are related to application of premanufactured coating 
rather than coating manufacturing.

B. Process Unit Groups

    In addition, we are amending the final rule to reference the 
requirements of subpart FFFF for subpart HHHHH coating operations 
included in a PUG developed under subpart FFFF. According to 40 CFR 
63.2535(l)(3)(i) of subpart FFFF, if the primary product of the PUG is 
subject to subpart FFFF, then compliance with subpart FFFF for all 
process units in the PUG constitutes compliance with the other part 63 
rule. By referencing subpart FFFF, we are clarifying the compliance 
date for equipment at sources that choose to demonstrate compliance 
with subpart HHHHH through compliance with 40 CFR 63.2535(l)(3)(i) of 
subpart FFFF.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order 
defines a ``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 entitlement, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    It has been determined that the proposed amendments are not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 
12866, and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed amendments impose no new information collection 
requirements on the industry. The proposed amendments clarify 
applicability of the final rule and extend the compliance date for 
owners and operators of certain coating manufacturing equipment. These 
changes have the potential to result in minor reductions in the 
information collection burden, therefore, the Information Collection 
Request (ICR) has not been revised.
    OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements 
contained in the existing regulations under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned OMB 
control number 2060-0535 (EPA ICR number 2115.01). A copy of the OMB 
approved ICR may be obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at the Office of 
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division; EPA (2822T); 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at 
[email protected], or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may also be 
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. Include the ICR 
or OMB number in any correspondence.
    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 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.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act 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 
amendments on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small 
business according to the Small Business Administration; (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.
    For sources subject to this proposed rule, the relevant NAICS and 
associated employee sizes are listed below:


[[Page 28643]]


NAICS 32551--Paint and Coatings Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.
NAICS 32552--Adhesives and Sealants Manufacturing--500 employees or 
fewer.
NAICS 32591--Printing Ink Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.

    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed 
amendments on small entities, I certify that the proposed amendments 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The proposed amendments clarify that coating 
manufacturing means the production of coatings using operations such as 
mixing and blending, not reaction or separation processes used in 
chemical manufacturing. In addition, the proposed amendments will 
clarify the compliance date for certain equipment that is part of a 
chemical manufacturing process unit that is also used to produce a 
coating.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the 
proposed amendments on small entities and welcome comments on issues 
related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or 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 the proposed amendments do 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. Therefore, the proposed amendments are 
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In 
addition, the proposed amendments contain no regulatory requirements 
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments because 
they contain no requirements that apply to such governments or impose 
obligations upon them. Therefore, the proposed amendments are not 
subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (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.''
    The proposed amendments do not have federalism implications. They 
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. None of the affected 
facilities are owned or operated by State or local governments. Thus, 
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed amendments.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' The proposed amendments do not have 
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The 
proposed amendments clarify applicability of the rule and extend the 
compliance date for owners and operators of certain coating 
manufacturing equipment. Therefore, the proposed amendments will not 
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 
apply to the proposed amendments.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health 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, 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.
    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. The proposed amendments are 
not subject to the Executive Order because they are based on technology 
performance and not health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The proposed amendments do not constitute a ``significant energy 
action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 
2001)) because the proposed amendments are not likely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the

[[Page 28644]]

supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have concluded that 
the proposed amendments are not likely to have any adverse energy 
effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113), 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards 
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and 
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The 
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when 
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    During the rulemaking, EPA conducted searches to identify VCS in 
addition to EPA test methods referenced by the final rule. The search 
and review results have been documented and placed in the docket for 
the NESHAP (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178). The proposed 
amendments do not propose the use of any additional technical standards 
beyond those cited in the final rule. Therefore, EPA is not considering 
the use of any additional VCS for the proposed amendments.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: May 11, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
63 of the Code of the 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.

Subpart HHHHH--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.7885 is amended by revising paragraph (d) 
introductory text and by adding paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.7985  Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?

* * * * *
    (d) The requirements for miscellaneous coating manufacturing 
sources in this subpart do not apply to operations described in 
paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
    (5) Modifying a purchased coating in preparation for application at 
the purchasing facility.
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.7995 is amended by adding introductory text to read 
as follows:


Sec.  63.7995  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    Except as specified in Sec.  63.8090, you must comply with this 
subpart according to the requirements of this section.
* * * * *
    4. Section 63.8090 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.8090  What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is 
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) Compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF.
    After the compliance dates specified in Sec.  63.7995, an affected 
source under this subpart HHHHH that includes equipment that is also 
part of an affected source under 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF is deemed 
in compliance with this subpart HHHHH if all of the conditions 
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section are met.
    (1) Equipment used for both miscellaneous coating manufacturing 
operations and as part of a miscellaneous organic chemical 
manufacturing process unit (MCPU), as defined in 40 CFR 63.2435, must 
be part of a process unit group developed in accordance with the 
provisions in 40 CFR 63.2535(l).
    (2) For the purposes of complying with Sec.  63.2535(l), a 
miscellaneous coating manufacturing ``process unit'' consists of all 
coating manufacturing equipment that is also part of an MCPU in the 
process unit group. All miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations 
that are not part of a process unit group must comply with the 
requirements of this subpart HHHHH.
    (3) The primary product for a process unit group that includes 
miscellaneous coating manufacturing equipment must be organic chemicals 
as described in Sec.  63.2435(b)(1).
    (4) The process unit group must be in compliance with the 
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF as specified in Sec.  
63.2535(l)(3)(i) no later than the applicable compliance dates 
specified in Sec.  63.2445.
    (5) You must include in the notification of compliance status 
report required in Sec.  63.8070(d) the records as specified in Sec.  
63.2535(l)(1) through (3).
    5. Section 63.8105 is amended by revising the definition for a 
``Coating'' in paragraph (g) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  63.8105  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    Coating means a material such as paint, ink, or adhesive that is 
intended to be applied to a substrate and consists of a mixture of 
resins, pigments, solvents, and/or other additives, where the material 
is produced by a manufacturing operation where materials are blended, 
mixed, diluted, or otherwise formulated. Coating does not include 
materials made in processes where a formulation component is 
synthesized by chemical reaction or separation activity and then 
transferred to another vessel where it is formulated to produce a 
material used as a coating, where the synthesized or separated 
component is not stored prior to formulation. Typically, coatings 
include products described by the following North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) codes, code 325510, Paint and Coating 
Manufacturing, code 325520, Adhesive and Sealant Manufacturing, and 
code 325910, Ink Manufacturing.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-7495 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P